Armored Infantry Leadership: How 6 Armies Do It

Could you check the German system? And do not forget to discuss the German doctrine of combined arms between IFV and MBT

I wonder if the dutch platoon structure will change now that their land forces have been incorporated into the german Bundeswehr

Would you do a video on the development of the challenger

a Group has 2 dots... a squad one

So to clarify.
Sweden's mech inf platoon f.ex is 4 cv90. The 3 squads and the 4th being from command and staff logistic right?

Becuase im curious how a mech inf company looks when its 2 mech infs and 1 tank platoons in such a company.

my country does not get everything right ( the netherlands) but our aproach here seems good, the more you decentralise the better, because there is more mobility and if one of them dies, you can stil murge the two smaler unit's.
always be prepared for the worst i would say and this covers that in my opinion.
besides that you have to lead infantry before you can lead the larger formation is also good because you wil know how the unit's work and think on the ground meaning you can make better decisons for your troops.

Well Denmark were under the British sector after ww2. So our army and structure is build up around the British structure

Been nearly 50 years and the M113, but of these the Danish and British make the most sense. The Swedes seem top heavy and the US confusing

Outstanding! This is the sort of insight that I find really valuable, particularly as you take the time to make comparisons across military establishments. I would be fascinated to see a deeper dive where these findings are shown in the context of doctrinal differences...

Australia works really well in this area, was in it and we work really well

One more officer in each platoon is a big difference, not sure more officers are the best thing to make an infantry platoon work better, and it also takes those officers away from other duties or they might just be very young and inexperienced... flexibility is the key

During Swedish conscription training with a mechanized 9040 infantry company (3x3 9040s +2 9040 for company commanders, +various support vehicle, no tanks in battalion) we had a Captain as Platoon commander, a 2nd Lieutenant as Deputy Platoon Commander and a conscripted Sergeant as a vehicle commander in the third vehicle (but in practice the Sergeant commanded the first "E" vehicle, 2nd "F" was the Captain and 3rd "G" 2nd Lieutenant, during training without officers the lead vehicle Sergeant assumed platoon commander role). The gunners in each vehicle were deputy vehicle commanders. When the officers commanded (during more applied practice) we had 2 Sergeants to serve as as dismounted commanders.

You cant realy ignore the Bundeswehrs Panzergrenadiers if your talking Armored Infantry. I can supply training material and some of my own knowledge.

Whats the point of mounted combat with the troops? More eyes outside yes but seems like it would be hard to hit anything with the personal weapons on the move and its a bigger risk having the troops inside in case the enemy landing a hit with an AT-4 or similar weapon.

german squads are better

At that level in the British Army junior officers would always be expected to lead their men into combat, the most common order given should be "Follow me".

Sorry but i do not like this style of quick videos with very little information in them.

I missed the bit where Britain was discussed.

I just sud

BLESSED BY THY ALGORITHM. Anyway. Could you find the same out for motorized//light? :)

Yeah man; that might be sop for 🇺🇸
But sometimes they carry soldiers in armored troop carriers interspersed between Bradley’s.
It depends on mission.
Patrols are four Bradley with mixed infantry.
A assault would have extra troops in vehicles and Bradley would have extra supplies in dismount area. Bradley can set security while troops maneuver onto objective with smaller armor vehicles.
It might a nerd debate on tactics, but tactics are everything in armor warfare. Like Sweden has three vehicles compared to four in other armies.
So one squad is one vehicle down; in engagement; but have extra squads for flanking maneuver.
Example there’s exactly same amount of vehicles in area of operation. 4 vehicles with 6 squads is 24.
3 vehicles with 6 squads is 18 vehicle. That’s a big disadvantage on front line.
But if they have exactly 24 vehicles each; Sweden would have 8 squads to maneuver on to 6 enemy squads.
what tactic would win more engagements?

Sorry but the American way of organization seems very poor to scenario of losing a whole bradley from enemy fire, this would leave multiple squads with missing people, and reduce effectiveness of the whole mechanized unit.

The Norwegian is roughly similar to the Danish one, iirc, although my personal experience is only from one of the mechanized battalions, so there might be differences in how a couple of the other mechanized elements are organized because they're organizational/operational role is somewhat different (my battalion was a mix of mechanized and motorized (Sisu) platoons, the other two batallions that come to mind also contain tanks and used the mechanized elements as escorts and flankers, which mine did not.)
I am not entirely sure if we had a dedicated position to command the wagon elements. Instead it was typically a senior wagon driver/gunner (typically a sergeant, but sometimes a second lieutenant/fenrik) who double-tasked as the commander of all four wagons unless the platoon chief (lieutenant) chose to stay onboard and let the platoon second-in-command (a second lieutenant/fenrik) take over the dismounted element/rifle squads.
(We also did some light training in mixed foot-wagon teams, were each dismounted squad worked in close coordination with THEIR respective wagon, which is not quite the Swedish vagnsstrid, but somewhat close. Typically the entirety of the dismounted elements joined together as a regular rifle platoon with whatever support weapons each squad had, and the four wagons drove off providing fire support or maneuvered elsewhere.)

Pls do more of denmark

I think a couple dozen AC130 gunships and a whole mess of John Deere giant bulldozers would do the Ukrainians good. The gunships do an excellent job at mowing, and the tractors can plow the field afterwards.

U should watch the portuguese in the central african republic

So, looking at the comparison, it looks like the Americans would really like having space for 2 extra seats in their transports?
Otherwise, an interesting short.

Why wasn't Norway in this? We also use the CV-90.

Dutch system is more or less same than how Finns operate they armored jaeger platon minus one squad / CV90

good mini ep

Maybe make one about Germany too, since they operate their own vehicles with their own specifications and probably also do things a little different than the other nations

The Danes have 3 squads in 4 vehicles?

I prefer the Platoon leader to dismount with the Platoon in the tradition of "Follow Me" leadership with PSG or an Asst. Platoon leader taking charge of the vehicles. It is better than having leaders telling the troops to go clear/attack a position while they stay back in the security of the vehicle. It is similar to light infantry operations where the leader commands the assault element and the PSG/asst. leader controls the support/base of fire.

IMO the USMC has the best setup: the vehicles have dedicated crews who hold crewman MOSs while the infantry platoon does infantry things. I’ve been in the USMC and the USA and every second an infantryman spends fing around with a vehicle is a second he could be training to do his real job.

i loved this short&sweet thing, ive tried a bunch of times to watch your videos but i'm not great with the technical specificities you tend to cover, i lose focus too fast despite having an interest but this one i could finish all the way! i would be very interested in more of these

Can you do one with the Norwegians? They use the upgraded version of CV9030N with 4 ifv and 8 infantry in each.

Dutch for the win! More leaders means more control and redundancy, as each has less to command and each can beraplaced by another in case of casualies.

In canada, for platoon level the LAV Sgt controls zulu LAVs. The LAV Capt controls the Company LAVs (a Canadian company is commanded by a major)

Does Norway do something similar?

What's important is WHY the Dutch chose the approach of effectively having a double command structure at the platoon level. What happens just after an assault, or other fast mounted move is that the infantry dismounts under command of the dismounted platoon commander and -sergeant. These people then go off to fight on foot.
With having such a capable platform as the CV90, when you then introduce a mounted command structure, is that you can use the four vehicles as a separate manoeuvre element! You just doubled the number of sub-units moving about!!

That doubling is why the Dutch chose the approach they have.

How Brazil deal with this?

In Lithuania's IFV batallions we use similar system as Denmark, thought personally I think Dutch system might be better, we don't have enough officers to be able to achieve it.

the us system seems way to complex for a rapid deployment.

the dutch sytem seems the best but it seems like it could cause a bit of duplication and conflicting orders.

the swedish one seems practical.

I suppose you had to narrow your scope to the platoon level for focus, clarity and brevity. Still, it’s kind of like only discussing the two bump Lego piece. How does this piece “snap into” say the battalion, etc?

"How they do it" they are not doing it, none of these armies have actual real war experience.
They might have some experience policing a failed country in the middle east but that is not real war against an enemy that has similar capabilities and can shoot back.
This is a lot of theory that might or might not survive the test of being in contact with an actual enemy.

In FDF, we have platoon leader and platoon deputy leader. Platoon leader dismounts and deputy leader stays mounted to lead the vehicles.

Rahhh!! I love Mechanized Infantry!!!

do you have anything from brazil? i was in the brazilian army for 7 yiears from 1994 to 2000