Assault on Pita's Insurrgent Stronghold

E-Male · 09-14-2008, 12:19 PM

Platoon Leader E-Male's AAR

Squad Leaders

Alpha-1 -- Mosely
Alpha-2 -- Viper
Bravo-1 -- Xmaster

Air Support -- Razor (pilot) and Gogeta (gunner)

Command Support

DeepSix (Medic)
Raine

Our mission was to secure an enemy stronghold in Pita, destroy 2 weapons chache, and eliminate enemy combatants without causing any civilian deaths.

After a ninety minute operation I returned to base via Raptor, civilian vehicle (Sam driving) and finally on foot! Mission was completed.

The initial attack involved placing Alpha-2 in the hills South for overwatch as Alpha-1 secured the Eastern flank (lighthouse) and Bravo-1 secured Pita's northern military compound.

SL's were given the option of taking their vehicles with them or leaving them at the insertion point.

When initial positions were established I instructed Alpha-2 to move to Bravo-1's left flank and secure the buildings in that area, while Alpha-1 moved to Bravo-1's right flank. Alpha-2 encountered heavy infantry presence.

With Mosely (Alpha-1) holding position 50 feet from the enemy stronghold Viper moved Alpha-2 North-West but was killed when his vehicle struck an IED. SpaceCadet took over command of Alpha-2.

Meanwhile Bravo-1 encountered heavy enemy presence and lost SL Xmaster, then replacement SL Sarge went down under enemy fire. Bravo's remaining men where reassigned to Alpha-1.

Air support took out a cache on the roof top of the enemy stronghold after a green light from command. Air also provide critical intel before and during the engagement.

After the city was cleared of enemy we used the remaining vehicle to return to base via the NW road. Unfortunately, the enemy hit us with a rocket, disabled the vehicle and killed SL Grunt. Here I was very sloppy and should have had air support take a close look at the road and should have had infantry on foot in front of the vehicle while we were still in the city limits.

NOTES:

At one point in the mission Alpha-1 was North West of the enemy strong hold. This was fine in itself, but this happened without the PL having full sit rep of A-1's movement into the NW sector. This indicated to me a failure of command and communication.

SpaceCadet and Sarge are commended for immediately informing command upon the loss of their SL and stepping up to take over their squads.

All in all, good comm use by all SLs (I myself made a few channel-use errors).

My apologies to Raine for holding him back with me for much too long.
Special thanks to Command medic Deepsix -- also held back for too long by myself.

Areas of Concern:

There was a feeling expressed by one of the infantry that Air command had eliminated many enemy targets, leaving little for the infantry to deal with. I am not certain if this was the case (and if so it should be noted that Air was not out of order in this regard). Nonetheless, in future in this engagement Air will be restricted to a surviellance-only role.

As all three vehicles were lost to enemy IED's and rockets, in future in this engagement vehicles will be used only to transport troops to the advanced staging area and will remain there for RTB at mission's end. My intention here is to make it harder for infantry so as to challenge our tactical skills.

I was not satisfied with my own command vis a vis the coordinated use of three squads. As things unfolded I failed to combine the use of squads and ended up with three areas of engagement wherein each was not really supported by the other (these are my failures, not the SL's). To address this and to increase tactical coordination between squads in future, in this engagement, I will ensure tighter coordination between squads. I want to establish more 'networked' communication and coordination that produces a shared situation awareness among SLs.

My error lay in too quickly laying siege to the enemy stronghold in stead of coordinating the clearing of the city periphery, sector by sector, building by building.

Summary

A lack of tactical coordination between squads by the PL lead to unacceptably high losses of infanty and vehicles.

There must be a tighter use of all squads as one unit. The PL must take take more time to allow squads to identitfy targets, communicate intell to all SLs, and coordinate overwatch.

On another ArmA server (non-TG) I overhead someone say they lay siege to some town and cleared it within ten minutes. This, of course, is not real-world simulation. Even in a 90 minute operation such as last night's we are collectively moving too fast, not acting as a unified army, and not fully immersing ourselves in the simulation.

Personally, my goal is not to get it done quick, but to get it done right.

Again, thank you for the opportunity to PL.

Davies · 09-14-2008, 01:21 PM

Wow, now that's what i call an AAR! Nice job E-Male.

**Jeepo_SAS** · 09-14-2008, 01:48 PM

Excellent, detailed and informative write up mate, sad to have missed this one!

Gena · 09-14-2008, 05:07 PM

Well done!Emale I think you have a lot of maturity as platoon leader and I think you can just get better over time.I like your calmness and clear detailed description of orders given to your fire teams.And yes I agree with you all the way that time should be taken to plan correctly and get our boys out of the missions alive.

Again.Well done!

BSR_SARGE · 09-14-2008, 08:50 PM

Excellant report E-Male and thanks for the commandation, sorry I took a round shortly after assuming command of Bravo 1. It would have been good to serve under you longer. New to Arma and some of the command elements of Map marking and report situations is one of the reasons I don't volunteer up front to lead a squad. But, listening to you, beita, Grunt, Jeepo, Blackdog, Xmaster, and a few other members I have had the honor of serving under, I am learning by on the job training.

Slots were filled after command took their place first, then after the mission started it would have been good to have the drivers just report to their vehicles only and not mounting them, thus keeping the noise level down so you could give a briefing without interruption. Bravo 1 was tasked to secure and hold the compound, and after that we waited for further instructions. Just shortly after moving out Xmaster, on TS, asked me to take over the squad because his game crashed. I then reported to you we were down our leader and I was assuming command. I had just informed the squad I was now leading and to move out and we started to take fire from our right and I was elimenated.

Over all I thought you did a fine job, you took command, you were relying on your SL to give sitrep's and were giving direct orders. And the airsupport was right on. It did what was needed and took out the roof top gunners. Just because someone wanted to kill more, is no reason to suspend a much needed airsupport.

E-Male · 09-14-2008, 09:34 PM

Sarge,

Good note regarding the Air Support -- I will suspend my earlier decision until it is clear that there is indeed an issue here.

You are correct to note that the vehicle roll out was not handled correctly. Next time I will ensure that engines remain off until all briefing is complete and all SLs report that SMs are in their designated vehicles and units ready to roll.

I myself am looking for a overview of the basic markers for better map briefings.

There is a limit to the degree of complexity (and real-world simulation) possible within ArmA as SOPs and such issues as standardized military(?) map markers are only as useful as they are comprehensible to all involved. Certainly, a consistent use of map markers will help raise the general level of knowledge in this area. I myself have much to learn in this area.

Thank you for the feedback all,

**Gogeta** · 09-15-2008, 12:29 AM

Great write up emale. I was anticipating this thread with great interest after you lead on that mission last night

Good job by all.

ps- edited myself into the gunner slot in the OP

I was holding fire and relaying intel to my pilot, who in turn was relaying the targets to you... as was I for a few calls... My complete intention for any engagement whatsoever was to focus primarily on the 'out of reach' targets such as the RPG gunners and rifleman on the rooftops of the apartment buildings. Thats it. Thats all I fired on and only on after confirmation thru you. It was nice to be able to sit in that seat and make damn sure there wasn't someone just whaling away on the town. Of course once you all started moving in and taking casualties, I then moved to taking out the rifleman on the stairwells and even one thru the windows of the upstairs apt... 0 ground targets until we were cleared to sweep for IEDs.

Great job emale and it's a privilege to have you back my friend.

E-Male · 09-15-2008, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gogeta

I was holding fire and relaying intel to my pilot, who in turn was relaying the targets to you... as was I for a few calls... My complete intention for any engagement whatsoever was to focus primarily on the 'out of reach' targets such as the RPG gunners and rifleman on the rooftops of the apartment buildings. Thats it. Thats all I fired on and only on after confirmation thru you. It was nice to be able to sit in that seat and make damn sure there wasn't someone just whaling away on the town. Of course once you all started moving in and taking casualties, I then moved to taking out the rifleman on the stairwells and even one thru the windows of the upstairs apt... 0 ground targets until we were cleared to sweep for IEDs.

Then job very well done. That is certainly the way it should unfold with air support and I'll make a note to have an SOP for myself in the PL role to inform the Air Support on target priorities and the need for confirmation prior to firing on a target.

The way I would like to see it unfold, in certain but not all instances, is once Air Support has identified a target that is an IMMEDIATE threat, that intell is relayed to the SL(s) in the threat area. The SL would then be given the option of taking out the target or requesting Air Support to take out the target. I would like comments on this from SLs (keeping in mind that my intention is not to take away all target opportunities from Air Support).

BSR_SARGE · 09-15-2008, 10:57 AM

It sure would be nice if everybody could be satisfied, but life isn't always played out that way. If I took a knife to a gunfight I would loose, if I took a gun to a knife fight I would win. Balancing air-support and ground assalt will only come after many trials and errors. Your approach to this topic E-Male will result in more mission completes and less casualties on more of these types of missions. Competent intel from the air, as you were getting from Gogeta , and I think Razorsedge(correct me if I was wrong) was the pilot, will only enhance the PL's command capabilities to complete the mission successfully. I see down the road a good balance between the Goundpounders and Cloudsplitters.

E-Male · 09-15-2008, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BSR_SARGE

Competent intel from the air, as you were getting from Gogeta , and I think Razorsedge(correct me if I was wrong) was the pilot, will only enhance the PL's command capabilities to complete the mission successfully. I see down the road a good balance between the Goundpounders and Cloudsplitters.

Indeed, Razorsedge and Gogeta did a very fine job of Air Support. I look forward to further developing comms and tactics between air and infantry in future engagements.

**Grunt 70** · 09-15-2008, 02:24 PM

As Platoon command I find myself generally delegating responsibilities to a responsible FAC with some general comment about letting the infantry have fun as well. Not very specific I grant you but I'll generally only use air support if someone is logged in the server and is requesting to do it. I'm a ground pounder and consequently am biased towards that end. Successful combined arms operations ARE very rewarding however. I love sending the infantry in as the last bomb explodes.

Sam Hoy · 09-15-2008, 02:42 PM

This was a good run at it, and thus far you guys have really taught a very novice mission marker quite a few things about the human element of game play. I agree with most things said here about the role of CAS, this is very much designed to be an asymmetrical warfare situation (you are assaulting a weaker force, both numerically and technologically) where helicopters have essentially free reign, however, I don't think that the AH-1 should just be able to just hover over the AO with no consequences. So in the most recent version I have replaced the one AH-1 (we were playing an older version with 2 AH-1s) with 2 AH-6s, which should be able to provide a comparable level of reconnaissance without the invulnerability of the AH-1, also if the need should arise they have plenty of armament to deal with anything the insurgents have. I have considered putting a FAC which would ride with the ground troops but be able to comm on group with the pilots, not sure if this is a good idea, wondering what you guys think about it? Moreover, it surprised me the issues we had with IEDs. The IEDs are somewhat randomly spawning, but they are NOT invisible, in fact they are designed to be seen, if you stay alert. It was my intention the inclusion of a small number of IEDs would make it extremely difficult to rambo, but would be of little issue for a well organized bunch.

**tHa_KhAn** · 09-15-2008, 02:43 PM

I think your idea of informing the ground SL's of targets identified by the air support and having the SL's call for the air support creates a much more satisfying situation for all involved. This allows the air support to be more than recon and allows the infantry squads to be involved with the air targets.

I know in my experience it is much more immersing to get pinned down by enemy armor or gun emplacement and forced to call on the flyboys than it is to finally reach your objective and see it in ruins from the aircraft. The net affect is the same, but everyone gets involved which is hte point, after all we do this for enjoyment not to recreate an ideal real life situation.

DeePsix · 09-15-2008, 04:27 PM

Hey E-Male! This mission was my first one with an organized team in ArmA and I really did enjoy it. Do not feel bad if you kept me back with the command elements, as I am more than willing to assist in any capacity. I hold absolutely no qualms about doing the job I volunteered for and I look forward to acting as combat medic some more.

-DeePsix

**Grunt 70** · 09-15-2008, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeePsix

Hey E-Male! This mission was my first one with an organized team in ArmA and I really did enjoy it. Do not feel bad if you kept me back with the command elements, as I am more than willing to assist in any capacity. I hold absolutely no qualms about doing the job I volunteered for and I look forward to acting as combat medic some more.

-DeePsix

Welcome to TG DeePsix. You'll fit in fine here. I can tell already.