MOUT Training Facility

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2

Yimmy RE:MOUT Training Facility 12/15/2005 1:21:09 PM

The British "Northern Ireland" training village is fantastic as urban peace keeping training goes. It is a good experience to train on it. They are updating it to resemble more of a Middle East atmosphere too.

Quote Reply

Yimmy RE:MOUT Training Facility 12/15/2005 1:29:57 PM

It's a pity, I have a map of the place come to think of it, but don't think I should post it really.

Quote Reply

Horsesoldier RE:MOUT Training Facility 12/15/2005 5:02:52 PM

>>The US Army has the JRTC Shughart-Gordon facility for MOUT training.<< We've got MOUT sites all over the place. Shughart-Gordon is a good one, but certainly not the only one, nor the only good one we have. >>Seems it is laid out like a small American town rather than a rabbit warren of real tight streets and alleys of a 3rd World country?<< The idea with MOUT sites, depending on the era, was either to be as generic as possible, or to look something like Germany. Since the GWOT kicked off, MOUT sites have been built or rebuilt in some locations to more closely approximate Middle Eastern architecture and the like. >>Is there a major facility that real simulates a large area of a big city rat maze.<< How large an area do you mean? MOUT sites vary in size, of course, but is Shughart-Gordon seems small to you, then the answer is probably no.

Quote Reply

ArtyEngineer RE:MOUT Training Facility 12/15/2005 5:10:05 PM

Yuma Proving Ground AZ got a good one. Mainly used to test new equipment for MOUT rather than training troops.

Quote Reply

stbretnco RE:MOUT Training Facility 12/19/2005 1:31:15 AM

Many of the MOUT training sites in the US have been modified to resemble a tight urban area in the middle east. Close off the entrance points, put some burned out wreckage in teh streets, and you'd be surprised how tight the operating environment becomes.

Quote Reply

AlbanyRifles RE:MOUT Training Facility 12/20/2005 11:56:01 AM

Its gone now, but Doughboy City in Berlin was awesome. Also, BONNLAND at the Bundewehr Infantrie Schule in Hammelburg was great too.

Quote Reply

JohnBarry RE:MOUT Training Facility 12/21/2005 1:48:17 PM

Horsesoldier- ?We've got MOUT sites all over the place. Shughart-Gordon is a good one, but certainly not the only one, nor the only good one we have.? ?The idea with MOUT sites, depending on the era, was either to be as generic as possible, or to look something like Germany. Since the GWOT kicked off, MOUT sites have been built or rebuilt in some locations to more closely approximate Middle Eastern architecture and the like.? I didn?t mean to imply that Shughart-Gordon was the only urban training center the US had, I mentioned it because that was the map I was looking at. I can see your point about MOUT site being generic or like Germany but it has been 15 years since the end of the Cold War and 13 years since Mogadishu, shouldn't we have built or modified a site before the GWOT started? ?How large an area do you mean? MOUT sites vary in size, of course, but is Shughart-Gordon seems small to you, then the answer is probably no.? I didn?t mean that it was small for a training area but that it was laid out like a small American town- a fair amount of space between buildings, buildings positioned back from the street, no back alleys. What I was picturing was a site with a lot of buildings right next to each other with back alleys so an enemy can move from one building to the next without being seen. Buildings right on top of the street. For the question on size-- With the ?Three Block War? in mind -Is there a site like a descript that is at least 3 X 3 Blocks, so a unit and commander can be fully test to see if they can juggle the different missions? AlbanyRifles- BONNLAND at the Bundewehr Infantrie Schule in Hammelburg was great too. Was Bonnland the site that used to be a small town and the Bundeswehr bought the whole town as a training center.

Quote Reply

Old Grunt RE:MOUT Training Facility 12/21/2005 3:44:21 PM

One of several options that are being looked at is using a COTS product called the Modular Armored Tactical Combat House (MATCH) for our MOUT training. This is one of many like systems that consists of a configurable/reconfigurable building that can support live fire training. It can be emplaced pretty much anywhere in various groupings of buildings to represent the COE. Buildings can be up to three stories in height and the interiors can be changed between iterations.

Quote Reply

shek RE:MOUT Training Facility 12/21/2005 4:07:08 PM

For the three block war, the physical layout of the MOUT site isn't that important. As long as it is capable of providing a 3D threat environment, then it will suffice. Your battle drill will remain the same, as it still breaks down into enter/secure foothold, clear hallways, stairs, enter/clear rooms, move tactically when outside buildings, etc. Also, I think it's more important that your site allows you to use your vehicles in most scenarios, as this coordination is harder to perfect than a solely dismounted op. The most important part of the urban environment IMO is in crafting the scenario and resourcing the training event with role players that will play the part. This is where JRTC excels at, and you don't have to worry about a beautifully crafted scenario at home station falling apart because some PFC playing OPFOR wants to be a jacka$$ and won't stick to his role. In terms of MOUT sites, S-G is rather small. Look up Leschi Town at Fort Lewis, and you'll see that the next generation of MOUT sites will be bigger, allowing for larger unit exercises. Also, when properly coordinated with local officials, leader off-sites in a local city can provide some valuable insight into how to approach differnt types of built up areas (residential, industrial, city center, etc.).

Quote Reply

Horsesoldier RE:MOUT Training Facility 12/21/2005 6:19:14 PM

>>I didn?t mean to imply that Shughart-Gordon was the only urban training center the US had, I mentioned it because that was the map I was looking at. I can see your point about MOUT site being generic or like Germany but it has been 15 years since the end of the Cold War and 13 years since Mogadishu, shouldn't we have built or modified a site before the GWOT started?<< Shughart-Gordon opened a few years after Mogadishu. I think the general trend has been to make more use of the facilities we have rather than redesign them. As Shek mentioned, I think we get the relevant lessons you need to take away from MOUT training communicated using the sites we have, even if they do not provide an exact match for Middle Eastern urban terrain. At the end of the day, you can only get so much utility out of MOUT training any way, since there are a whole range of weapons systems and tactics we can't simulate very well (or at all), it is quite expensive to try and stock a MOUT site with a full civilian population as well as OPFOR combatants, etc. >>What I was picturing was a site with a lot of buildings right next to each other with back alleys so an enemy can move from one building to the next without being seen. Buildings right on top of the street.<< My current unit conducts a lot of MOUT training primarily using an older and generic sort of sight, and we get a lot of utility and training value out of the site, even if it does impose various restrictions due to size, location, etc. In many ways the wider, western style streets are as much a plus as a liability, since the most dangerous place in urban combat is out in the streets, and those wider streets provide nice, open fields of fire for the OPFOR to demonstrate this point with simunitions. As for concealing OPFOR movements, specifically, this is not hard to do in the older sites. We don't train using free-play force on force sort of engagements where the OPFOR and BLUEFOR both run their own planning and movement, a "dead" soldier on either side is removed from play, etc. That sort of thing just turns into a paintball war with simunitions. Instead, we have OCs running the show -- the good guys get to do their own mission planning and execution, but report to a higher headquarters represented by OCs, who both monitor their radio net and walk with them maintaining eyes on. The OCs also have good radio comms with the OPFOR (usually every guy has a little, cheap, non-milspec handheld radio), so concealed movement is easy -- OCs just steer the bad guys away from places the BLUEFOR are located or observing. Or, especially if BLUEFOR is doing something wrong doctrinally speaking, they can mass the OPFOR onto an element of the BLUEFOR to hammer them, get them moving, etc. Ten bad guys can't really simulate Mogadishu, but if used appropriately can at least complicate, confuse, and interdict BLUEFOR operations and force both the troops and the leadership to contend with 360-degree, three-dimensional threats, etc.

Quote Reply

1 2