Battalion tactical groups in Special Operations
Battalion tactical group - this phrase is now on the lips of journalists describing the events in Ukraine.
Yes, and earlier this expression was constantly heard by the near-war people. And often from someone's mouth flew (and flies) the phrase:
- Yes, there are not enough soldiers in the brigades, so they form battalions on their basis, and call them a beautiful word.
Well what can I say ...
I have noticed more than once that there is such a thing as “fashion for opinion”.
Well, for example, in the West they believe that perestroika was good, or that Russia was the first to attack Georgia. And at least scratch them on the head. After hearing some information, people remember the very first template on this topic in their head and give it out loud without thinking.
There is also a certain “fashion for opinion” on near-war topics. Well, yes, why not? Aren't the military people? We are also human.
Few examples:
- Tanks Soviet development: “... Ah! Their towers fly off when blown up, while the western ones do not ... "
- BMD-4: “... What the hell is she needed! Will we drop under enemy air defense fire?”
- BMPT: “... Some kind of nonsense. Where to apply it? Where to enter the state?
- Octopus-SD: “... Tin can! The money has nowhere to go!”
- Aircraft carrier.
Stop, this is not from that opera, since there are always two mutually opposite opinions. Over time, the “fashion for an opinion” about a certain object changes under various factors.
There are mutual exceptions in one bottle:
- Sprut-SD is not a tank, it's a self-propelled gun! - Get pluses and a chorus of approval.
After few years:
– Sprut-SD is a real light tank! - Get pluses and a chorus of approval.
And so on.
The same thing happened around the phrase "battalion tactical group."
They took real facts, mixed with fiction, flavored with assumptions and got view.
I'll try to tell you what I know about them. Moreover, I had to serve in them, and later to form them.
A tactical group is a military term denoting a certain formation of subunits or units into a single consolidated combat unit to perform a specific combat mission. Accordingly, the TGR is created temporarily and has a kind of “floating” staff.
A simple example. What does a platoon need to capture that high-rise in the middle of a bare field, with the task of capturing a living general?
Walking boots, a flying carpet (to wrap the general) and a couple of TDA-3 machines to create a smoke screen! So the platoon TGr is ready, sharpened for the capture of the general. Yes, "platoon". Why not?
Немного stories.
It makes no sense to go far into the wilds of antiquity. The Wehrmacht during the Second World War was very advanced in the development of new products in the art of war. If I'm not mistaken, it was Guderian who initiated the creation of battle groups (Kampfgruppen, abbreviated as KG or KGr in the Luftwaffe).
Combat-ready motorized infantry units or subunits, tanks, artillery and anti-aircraft guns were brought under one command. And, for example, a regiment commander became a king and a sheikh in his own theater of operations.
Kampfgruppe Graf from the 21st TD of the African Corps.
In the Red Army it was the same, only with different letters. If the battalion was given strength in excess of the organizational schedule, then it became "shock" or "reinforced".
Separate heavy breakthrough tank regiments and assault engineer-sapper brigades (ShISBr) already initially had their own regular structure and did not belong to tactical groups created temporarily around a regular unit to perform specific tasks.
In the post-war period, the Soviet army also practiced the creation of military formations from units and subunits united under a single command. For example, a motorized rifle regiment reinforced by means of a senior commander.
Regimental (brigade) tactical groups
Talk about “scraping troops out of poverty” began during the wars in the Caucasus in the 90s and 2000s. Yes, the devastation then in the army was terrifying, in principle, as well as in the whole country, which cheerfully stomped towards universal light democracy.
The division, squeezing as much as possible, milked out of itself, at best, a combat-ready regiment. So they were called "prefabricated regiments", but we ourselves called them more precisely - "rabble regiments". At that time, people were simply scraped from everywhere, equipment even in storage was partially understaffed due to lack of supply and support. Rarely, but there were separate battalions, but they were called “separate” or “reinforced”.
But still, the main combat unit in the Caucasus was regiment or brigade, which is the same reinforced regiment. Yes, they were collected by the whole world from divisions and armies of military districts. And, as a rule, all of them exceeded their organizational structure, especially in the second campaign. On the second Chechen regiments were equipped deliberately and consciously. The existing staffs expanded, introduced additional forces and means of the division, thus completing a truly reinforced regiment for solving a specific combat mission in the North Caucasus.
This was, in general, a "regimental tactical group" in the modern interpretation.
I will give an example of the saturation of our regiment with artillery - in addition to the fact that each motorized rifle battalion had its own regular mortar battery, the regiment had two self-propelled artillery battalions and a separate anti-tank battery. The chief of artillery could either reassign all these fire capabilities directly to the battalion commanders, or manage them in a single bundle in the interests of the entire regiment.
Why were prefabricated (reinforced) regiments more common in the Caucasus, and not, for example, divisions?
Firstly, each regiment was fed from its own "womb" - divisions, this is a very important feature. It was from her that he received the replenishment of personnel by rotation, new equipment to replace the damaged one, as well as additional weapons necessary to carry out new, newly assigned tasks.
Secondly, the regiment is the minimum tactical and administrative military unit that can all.
Third, a regiment is more mobile than a division.
The regiment can independently lead любые fighting any character. It has all the necessary fire capabilities to conduct an offensive against the enemy and can defend itself from almost all possible enemy strikes. The regiment itself is a division in miniature: it has its own tanks, artillery, anti-aircraft weapons, communications, reconnaissance, sappers, chemists and other military people.
And also the regiment has all the forces and means to heal, feed, repair, maintain and everything else, up to the organization of a completely comfortable PVD (temporary deployment point) in an open field.
The regiment is a self-sufficient mobile universal military machine.
And if it is a reinforced (by means of the division) regiment, which maintains and constantly feeds the division located in the PPD (point of permanent deployment), this is a terrible strike force.
And the most important thing is highly mobile impact force. Because the reinforced regiment does not have heavy and long "tails" of the divisional economy. These "tails" are needed, of course, but not all and not always.
The division can quite quickly, at the request of a remotely operating regiment, provide it with everything necessary to solve current and emerging combat missions, and after solving them, take equipment back to the RPM, which is no longer needed at the moment.
Therefore, a completely correct scheme for the combat use of troops was formed in the North Caucasus. And even if the divisions were fully staffed by 100%, there would be no point in tearing them all out of their permanent deployment point and driving them through all the mountains with all their considerable economy. There would be more stupidity.
These, in principle, were regimental tactical groups (PTGr) with all their signs and attributes - the minimum self-sufficient military unit, additionally equipped and equipped to perform a wide range of combat missions with constant replenishment with everything necessary from the division's permanent deployment point.
Battalion tactical groups
Theoretically, the United States is the ancestor of modern tactical groups. Before the emergence of permanent brigades in large numbers in the early 2000s, the division fielded brigade tactical groups (Brigade Combat Team) to conduct combat operations. And such actions were already laid down in the organizational structure of the division.
If the brigade had any separate task, then 1-2 battalions had to solve it, reinforced for the duration of this task by the firepower of the brigade, i.e., in fact, the armored personnel carrier.
And with the advent of brigades, as one of the main formations of the Ground Forces, the BTG simply registered in the strategy of the American Ground Forces.
Taking into account the experience of the wars in the North Caucasus, as well as the ongoing organizational changes in the structure of the US troops, battalion tactical groups also began to form in the Russian armed forces.
And yes, in the first years of the XNUMXst century, our glorious Red Army was still on the margins of financing and state support, although at that time it brought this state two Victories won solely on the stubbornness, will and spirit of the Fighters with a capital letter.
Both in divisions and in brigades, they began to form battalions of constant combat readiness with the means of strengthening these brigades and regiments. Then in Russia the expression "battalion tactical group" was heard. Yes, they really were collected from the world one by one, scraping off all the most valuable things that were in military units, collecting combat-ready reinforced battalions from people, equipment and weapons.
In the same 58th Army, armored personnel carriers were created on the basis of most units. So they took part in the war on 08.08.08.
Everyone remembers the shock of the Georgians when Russian tanks almost instantly appeared in South Ossetia?
Just not far from the entrance to the Roki Tunnel, a pair of BTG innocently picked mushrooms and smoked bamboo ...
Just a couple of reinforced battalions that were fully equipped and equipped with all the necessary equipment and weapons.
And yes, most importantly, at the exercises that just ended, they produced combat coordination divisions within groups.
What were they doing there? I propose to operate with two phrases “mushrooms-berries” and “we also have intelligence”, they can be decomposed in different interpretations, and there will be a lot of answers.
And it was these two armored personnel carriers that twisted the Georgians "tail on the mane", while the main forces of the 58th army "thoroughly", like those two bulls, entered South Ossetia.
Just two reinforced battalions messed up the entire Georgian plan to seize recalcitrant territories, knocking down "Time H" and the consistency of the occupied lines. I described all this very roughly, but the meaning is clear.
During the reform period of the “furniture specialist”, the brigade became the main tactical unit in the command and control system “Brigade-Operational Directorate-District”. Subsequently, on the basis of logical reasoning that "wars are different", the divisional structure was restored in the Ground Forces system, which coexisted simultaneously with the "brigade concept".
But the experience of using BTG was not only not forgotten, but vice versa - they were taken seriously and closely with the involvement of applied sciences. Why was everyone so interested in the battalion tactical group? And just everyone, and the Americans with all the rabble of NATA, and almost the entire post-Soviet space, led by Russia?
Unique features of the battalion structure as such for conducting super-maneuverable combat operations.
1. A battalion is the smallest military unit with headquarters.
That is, the group has a think tank that can accept the incoming higher order. Analyze it and make a comprehensive "commander's decision" for the implementation of this order. Implement it in the form of well-coordinated management of heterogeneous units. Carry out the necessary regrouping upon receipt of new introductory and additional orders from the higher headquarters.
2. The battalion is more mobile than the regimental structure. Polk is a "mini-city" that has everything. This, I repeat, is a self-sufficient military formation.
The skeleton of the regiment is, figuratively speaking, fighting fists in the form of battalions and divisions, which are served by the "tail" of various support units. And the battalion, accordingly, is a bunch of combat capabilities. This is a boxer in the ring. This is a fighter light, with a machine gun and without a raid backpack. The battalion is just "the one who directly fights."
3. The battalion has heterogeneous units in its structure. He has his own artillery and a platoon to support combat work - signalmen, sappers, grenade launchers, reconnaissance officers (depending on the OSHR on a given theater of operations).
Conclusion:
On the basis of a battalion, it is possible to create a micro-army with minimal intermediary chains between the Headquarters on the one hand and the subunits and firepower actually firing.
Well, since the battalion is so good and fast, and the current wars are not distinguished by a large concentration of troops, maybe it should be used separately, sending them to smash the enemy on their own?
Yes, but not far. The battalion has a certain "combat radius" in which it can conduct a database under the "roof" of the regiment. Because he has, for example, no tanks, no heavy artillery, no good air defense umbrella, no support system.
And if you strengthen the battalion and make it a "mini-regiment", but give it only what is necessary for conducting independent fighting, but without any frills in the form of a regimental barber?
That is, to give a fighter with a machine gun another grenade launcher and a light backpack with additional ammunition and daily rations? Yes. And so a “very toothy” military formation arose - BTGr.
It is completed on the basis of a battalion, motorized rifle or tank.
It will include precisely those forces and means that will be necessary precisely to fulfill a clearly defined combat mission and precisely on a specific theater of operations. Need some serious armor? Hold the tanks. Do you need air defense? Here's a platoon on the Tunguska. Flying carpet and walking boots? No, you won’t take the general prisoner, we cut off everything superfluous so as not to burden him.
Need a stock of BC and products? Here is the reinforcement in the MTO platoon. That is, the battalion is strengthened and equipped in such a way that it can get out from under the "umbrella of the regiment" and work independently without a "mother".
A battalion tactical group is a unit that has all forces and means for self fulfillment of the assigned combat mission, as well as being able to protect themselves from any possible threat.
Here they are, the main features of BTGr.: independence and self-sufficiency of forces, both for attack and for self-defense.
Accordingly, the battalion does not just come out from under the wing of the regiment, but it has an independent radius of action within the limits of the available stocks of material and technical means. In this radius, due to its high mobility, it can carry out both offensive operations and mobile defense.
In addition to the "radius of action", the BTG also has a depth of separation from the regiment. If the databases are maintained in a united front, then this is one distance. If it is completely autonomous, then ... the distance does not matter, since these are the problems of the "womb" (regiment), to establish an uninterrupted life-giving "umbilical cord" with your combat detachment.
I do not write the figures for the range of the BTGr and the depth of its separation during the "frontal" maintenance of the database. At this time, it's completely useless.
What is the composition of BTG?
Depends on specific combat mission. But still, the general skeleton, of course, is:
- three motorized rifle companies,
- tank company
- 1-2 artillery batteries,
- mortar battery
- air defense platoon,
- grenade launchers, anti-tank units,
- a platoon of communications, intelligence, engineering service,
- units of electronic warfare, UAVs,
- repair and evacuation and rear support units.
Features of the use of BTG
Everything will be brief here, again, due to the events taking place on our western borders.
BTGr, as mentioned above, is sharpened to perform specific combat missions and is self-sufficient for attack and defense.
BTGr, in fact, has no weaknesses, except for the radius of application and the depth of use.
Its main advantage is a powerful and striking fist, which is extremely mobile. Its main “thin link” is the need for constant replenishment of the material and technical means of life support from a higher commander.
But there are tasks that BTG is beyond the power of? Certainly. You can't beat a reinforced battalion for a couple of brigades.
So - we need related in execution one several armored personnel carriers or should there be brigade tactical groups? Good question. Let me clarify one point here.
Now armored personnel carriers are being created not due to the fact that there are not enough people in the brigades, but because the concept of using tactical groups (TGr) has been adopted for service. Why and why - described above.
A brigade by itself cannot bring out 3-4 armored personnel carriers. It's impossible. We need means of strengthening the army, which includes a brigade. Therefore, the brigade issues in peacetime (relatively) one armored personnel carrier, ensuring its operation by the method of 100% rotation of equipment and people for an almost unlimited time of its use in combat work.
In the mode of issuing two armored personnel carriers to the surface, the brigade works at the maximum rate of their provision, but not 100% rotation. After a while, the BTG will need to rest and reboot. At least in sequence.
How many of them are formed in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation? Defense Minister General of the Army S. K. Shoigu in August 2021 announced the number of 168.
How many of them are involved in Ukraine? This is an unknown figure, there are only assumptions and "Internet fantasies".
Then what is better to use when a combat mission requires more forces and means than the capabilities of the BTGr? Just a brigade? In the current fleeting, saturated with firepower and highly mobile combined arms battle - no.
Options may vary.
• Coordinated actions of several armored personnel carriers with the means of strengthening the senior commander, for example, an artillery brigade, an anti-aircraft missile battalion and other necessary units.
• The use of brigade TGr, created by the forces of armies and districts on the basis of combined arms brigades.
What are the pros and cons here?
- I will say from experience that during exercises, individual brigades go through the period of combat coordination more difficult than regiments of one division. And for a military man, I will not discover America here. And it seems like a brigade TGr is preferable here.
This is on the one hand. And on the other:
- A combination of several armored personnel carriers operating in concert within the framework of one combat mission and reinforced with the necessary means of a senior commander have greater firepower than a separate brigade tactical group.
The operational formation, structurally consisting of armored personnel carriers, can quickly transform and reorganize under the rapidly changing conditions of the theater of operations. Because the BTG is both independent mini-armies and constructor elements. But the golden mean is always good.
It is the theater of operations that should dictate what it needs for the Victory. Somewhere battalion TGr., Somewhere brigade TGr, and somewhere their symbiosis. The tactics of the Russian Armed Forces in Ukraine are changing, based on the operational current situation.
This is not what it was in the first two weeks, circumstances dictate new conditions.
PS
In Ukraine, in fact, medium-scale hostilities are now being conducted, largely equal in strength of the parties.
Not the level of the Second World War, but far from a regional conflict ...
After completing the assigned tasks and studying the experience of maintaining database data, it is quite possible to change the organizational structure of the units of the Ground Forces of the RF Armed Forces. Brigades of constant readiness can be understaffed to the level of brigade TGr.
In this case, we get a powerful and well-coordinated combat unit operating in serious conflicts. And if necessary, the brigade is "divided" into three full-fledged armored personnel carriers with units of separate weapons and a group for supplying these TGr.
To do this, first of all, it is necessary to increase the number of cannon artillery and air defense in these brigades. And also to create full-fledged (!) Structures using UAVs for reconnaissance purposes, starting from the company-battery link at least.
Information