| |
March 2nd, 2007
| Post 1 |
| Immunes | Post; Combined Arms: How does it work?What do you do to combine tanks, infantry, artillery, etc. in order to make an effective fighting force? |
|
|
March 2nd, 2007
| Post 2 |
| Primus Pilus | A book could be written about this topic. It is bassically playing each others strength and weaknesses off of each other. Take tanks for example, it is vulnerable alone however an Infantry guy like myself can greatly improve its survivability in a mout envirement. If I get in trouble out on a patrol I can call in an airstrike on an enemy. A ground pounder is needed to plot coordinates for an artillery strike. We are all connected in one way or another and each of us can greatly impact the outcome of a battle. Combined arms creates a synergy, as a whole it is greater then the sum of its parts. Combined arms is a way of getting past the "paper, rock, scissors" of warfare.
__________________ Infantry leads...... Last edited by Big_Z; March 2nd, 2007 at 20:55. |
|
|
|
March 2nd, 2007
| Post 3 |
| Centurion | Another potential OPSEC issue...sigh. But the general question has probably been argued over since the first cave men hunted in groups. 3 words: Battlefield Operating Systems (BOS). I'll leave it at that.
__________________ Trust your hang. |
|
|
|
March 2nd, 2007
| Post 4 |
| Tribuni Angusticlavii | 1) Haji pops up with an RPG 2) Haji gets popped by infantry 3) Tank is happy
__________________ "It will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it." - George Washington |
|
|
|
March 3rd, 2007
| Post 5 |
| Milforum's Bouncer | Peterminator, do a search on the topic. Global Security.org is your friend.
__________________ "The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental." - John Steinbeck |
|
|
 |
