Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Infantry Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Pathfinders
jastayme3    11/22/2007 10:41:08 PM
This is a thought I had. Actually it was adapted from a suggestion in a soldiers memoirs. Suppose there was a sort of special-forces trained specifically to be given in penny packets to battalion headquarters. They would be used primarily as specialized patrolers. They would be called "pathfinder units. Some possibilities for there use are: Use them as specialist "points" for patrols made up of of ordinary infantry. Use them to dominate no-mans-land. Even if they are equally skillful, "pathfinders" will be more motivated to look for trouble whereas ordinary infantry might decide life is hard enough. Use them as a sort of "condiment" to spice up raw units. Say the battalion commander would assign them disproportionatly to a company with less experienced men. Some of these functions are of course done by scout/snipers. But the most valueable purpose of the later is to go out far and seek out high value targets. Pathfinders would be designed specifically to improve the quality of routine patrolling.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
Dimitri       11/23/2007 8:18:01 AM
I think that perhaps such long range reconnaissance patrols would be better left to their own devices.
 
Yes, the idea of using them to guide in other forces is a good one, and that is traditionally what recce troops have done for years. Its also what the Mountain Leaders Cadre & Brigade Patrols Troop of the Royal Marines and Pathfinder Platoon of the Parachute Regiment train for today.
 
Yes they can be used on their own for independent action but the role of the mountain leaders is primarily to guide other marines over mountainous terrain that they otherwise would find impassable, so that the whole force is able to attack the enemy from an unexpected direction, gaining surprise. The role of the pathfinders is to deploy ahead of the main jump, and set up beacons on the dropzones so that the aircraft drop the remaining paratroopers in the right location. These troops can then go on to function as the long range recce units for the brigade.
 
These are specialised examples, but recce platoons of infantry battalions do the same concept, just in a different type of operation: they scout ahead, report back, and often plan a route and guide the rest of the troops to the objective - after all, they have been there before.
 
But if you are concerned with LRRPs units perhaps it is better to leave them on their own, as I am not sure that they would neccessarily 'bring up the standard of the whole' as much as the whole might bring the average down, thereby negating the value of these specialised troops. They have a long range recce role, let them fulfil it. If you take unsuited troops along, you risk diluting the effect. I.e. both the pathfinders and the mountain leaders are capable of operating independently for this. Yes, if you want them to lead troops to a location, great. But if you just want to attach other personnel to a LRRP for some reason, I would question why?
 
This is one reason why the 'big army' has been traditionally against special forces, they see their best men siphoned off to different units, therefore they lose their best men that they feel 'bring up the average' of the whole unit. True to an extent I'd say, I mean who hasnt had some far more experienced comrade show us how to do things or act as a bit of inspiration to us when we first started out? But equally you might take the view that the rest of us are holding them back, and they may be better off in dedicated specialised units....
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       11/23/2007 12:31:33 PM
This feels more like a desperation measure to increase the effectiveness of conscript troops with inadequate training.
 
Invest more time and money in realistic training and the added value these pathfinder bring to a unit will drop quickly, while the effectiveness of the total force rises.
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3       11/23/2007 1:50:30 PM
I wasn't thinking of them as Lurps, but more for the close-range recon within walking distance of the camp of a line infantry unit. Line infantry does this sort of thing anyway, I was thinking of this as a way to increase it's efficiency.
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier       11/23/2007 8:01:19 PM

I wasn't thinking of them as Lurps, but more for the close-range recon within walking distance of the camp of a line infantry unit. Line infantry does this sort of thing anyway, I was thinking of this as a way to increase it's efficiency.


Something sort of like this was done by the US Army in both World War 2 and Korea with Ranger units.
In WW2 you had the established Ranger Battalions on the books, but some (though certainly not all) division commanders in the ETO were also impressed with the idea.  A number of them had provisional Ranger companies set up within their divisions on an ad hoc sort of basis.  They were used for the same sort of missions as the WW2 Ranger battalions.
 
In Korea, Ranger Companies were formed and were used like fire brigades, being moved around to points of greatest offensive or defensive action, etc.
 
The main problem encountered, if I'm not mistaken, is that tons of conventional officers had no real concept of how to employ elite forces, with many regarding them as simply another rifle company and others having wildly inflated concepts of their capabilities.  Under and over utilization were common as a result, sometimes with very disastrous results.  Having only a company headquarters meant the assigned officers simply lacked the "blasting power" to scuttle bad missions or misuse of their unit by battalion and higher officers.   
 
That said, various other armies have tried similar approaches with their conventional forces, and have not had very good results.  Motivated soldiers who are highly tactically and technically proficient at their jobs as infantrymen are, generally, of more use to their unit as junior leaders than pulled out of the line units and grouped into a seperate organization.  The seperate elite works when you have a unique or unusual mission -- hence special operations units as well as snipers assigned to line units -- but for routine infantry operations, an average battalion will usually be more effective overall than a sub-par battalion with one really good platoon pulled from its ranks or assigned to it.  
 
Quote    Reply

Dimitri       11/24/2007 4:54:20 PM
Wouldn't that make the provisional ad hoc 'Ranger' units brigade or divisional level assets then? Surely what Jastay describes in his second post indicates that he wants something easily and quickly accessible and organic to the inf bn, without having to make a case to a major general to get it?
 
But if you do want an easily and quickly accessible organic recce asset, EVERY infantry battalion should include a recce platoon for just this purpose.
 
They are specialised in recce; not rifle company troops pressed into the role; recce is their fulltime job.
If they are somehow inadequate for the task, then I'd say you probably need to look at training and standards rather than go and create another super-dooper unit that just duplicates the role.
 
If you DO for some reason require any more specialist recce troops, they are also out there; the Commando Brigade (thats amphibious) has Mountain Leaders of the Royal Marines for this; the Air-Assault Brigade (thats airborne) has Pathfinder Platoon of the Parachute Regiment; I'd like to think EVERY combat brigade had at least a large Patrols Platoon of troops for LRRPs; whatever country you may be from, I'm sure there should be Brigade or Div level recce specialised troops.
 
Even if you give a regular rifle platoon the tasking, they will likely operate their OWN self-selection. A recce patrol isn't just 'take 1 section out'; it is a flexible organisation created ad hoc for that tasking. And recce being a difficult and important job I'd be surprised if the platoon commander didn't select the troops most suited for the task. "Cpl Harper to be patrol commander; he's switched on and was in recce platoon as a private. Take Ptes Hagman, Cooper, and Harris, they are sharp and professional. Leave Pte Tongue, he is uncontrollably trigger happy, and Pte Perkins, he lacks the experience." Apologies for the ripping off of surnames there, but surely ad hoc in that fashion is the way to do this. I'd rather have someone whos switched on but without this extra 'badge' going, than someone who couldnt care less but won a 'badge' years ago automatically selected.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

longrifle       11/25/2007 8:31:40 AM
"But if you do want an easily and quickly accessible organic recce asset, EVERY infantry battalion should include a recce platoon for just this purpose.
 
They are specialised in recce; not rifle company troops pressed into the role; recce is their fulltime job.
If they are somehow inadequate for the task, then I'd say you probably need to look at training and standards rather than go and create another super-dooper unit that just duplicates the role." - Dimitri
 
Exactly: every light infantry battalion already has a scout platoon; if it can't do the job, train it.
 
I was in our battalion's scout platoon for the first half of my service; I was in a rifle company for the last half.  We acted as guides for rifle companies in addition to security and screening.
 
In my day the scout platoon was in the combat support company, along with heavy mortar and anti-armor platoons.  I think it might be a part of the headquarters company these days but I'm not sure about that. 
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       11/25/2007 2:42:04 PM

I was in our battalion's scout platoon for the first half of my service; I was in a rifle company for the last half.  We acted as guides for rifle companies in addition to security and screening.
Thats an interesting way of doing things, and certainly sounds like it has its advantages.  In British infantry support companies, it is normally the more experienced soldiers who fill them, with ranks normally being "one up", so with a Captain commanding a platoon, and a Colour Sgt as the platoon Sgt, with junior NCO's on the weapons etc.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Dimitri       11/25/2007 5:08:47 PM
I can't imagine recce experience being bad for progression when coming back into the rifle world either. Actually I wouldnt be surprised if thats where many of the switched on recce soldiers went after a few years - there are only so many section commanders in a recce pl, but many more in the rifle coys.
 
 
Quote    Reply

stinger       3/16/2008 8:38:39 PM
What are the current pathfinder units in the U.S. ARMY? I think there is 1 in the 101st and 1 in the 82nd, can anyone confirm this thanks..
 
Quote    Reply

stinger       3/18/2008 1:18:32 AM

What are the current pathfinder units in the U.S. ARMY? I think there is 1 in the 101st and 1 in the 82nd, can anyone confirm this thanks..



 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics