Looking for a Reference on Anti Armour in a Mounted Context

MSmith

Guest
Reaction score
4
Points
130
I'm looking for a reference in PAMs/Doctrine on how the Carl G is employed in a mounted context. Cav squadrons (ex-recce sqns) are equipped with the weapon however I cannot find anything talking about how they are actually employed. I've had a peruse through all the normal references; does anyone know where I can find this? Just looking for the name of the PAM, don't need to post exact specifics in here.
 

MSmith

Guest
Reaction score
4
Points
130
Thanks for the suggestion, unfortunately it seems that's focussed exclusively on TOW systems
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
184
Points
680
Sorry for the goose chase. I remember reading about 84's being used for local defense and some lighter vehicles, I thought it was in there. I'll ty and remember where I came across it.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
143
Points
680
In my days each artillery battery had four CGs for dismounted local defence (not to mention six 155mm SPs ... and a ton of vehicle mounted GPMGs and .50s which could be dismounted). The CG had no "mounted role" although it could always be fired out of the back hatch of a stationary M113. :D Personally I would not like to be involved in a fight between an M113 firing a CG out of the back against ... well against anything. It would be better to be either dug in or running away.

🍻
 

MSmith

Guest
Reaction score
4
Points
130
Jarnhammer - No need to be sorry at all, that was my thinking when you suggested it too. I was actually fairly surprised that it wasn't addressed at all in there

FJAG - Local D is actually kind of the context im searching for. Im on a QS board for the new Armoured Troop Leader course and one of the main tasks of armoured officers as dictated by Ottawa is "employ section level anti-armour weapons" - clearly referring to the Carl G, but there is no reference that I can find which actually explains what that is supposed to mean. I imagine them being used as local security for OPs and hides (I guess??) but can't find anything that says one way or another.

I'll check out the arty pams and bring that up, thanks!
 

FJAG

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
143
Points
680
Jarnhammer - No need to be sorry at all, that was my thinking when you suggested it too. I was actually fairly surprised that it wasn't addressed at all in there

FJAG - Local D is actually kind of the context im searching for. Im on a QS board for the new Armoured Troop Leader course and one of the main tasks of armoured officers as dictated by Ottawa is "employ section level anti-armour weapons" - clearly referring to the Carl G, but there is no reference that I can find which actually explains what that is supposed to mean. I imagine them being used as local security for OPs and hides (I guess??) but can't find anything that says one way or another.

I'll check out the arty pams and bring that up, thanks!
I'm not to sure what the current artillery manual is but in my day it was B-GL-371-004/FP-001 Field Artillery Vol 4 Duties at RHQ and the Gun Position (Hopefully that has changed by now since things are quite different) Chapter 3 Section 7 dealt with local defence and after an extensive section on how to use the guns for that in open actions and anti-tank work dealt with other anti-tank weapons and machine guns. The single paragraph that dealt with anti-tank weapons (by which we meant the CG MAWs and M72 LAWs said the following:
158. Anti-Tank Weapons. These weapons are sited to cover
mounted approaches not covered by the guns. An alternative method is to
hold them in a central location and move them to prepared positions to
strengthen a threatened sector. This method necessitates the preparation
of more than one position for each weapon and a thorough knowledge and
rehearsal of the routes to each position.
and for machine guns:
159. Machine Guns. Machine guns should be sited employing the
following principles:
a. fire in pairs for mutual support;
b. deploy in defilade positions to provide enfilade fire;
c. heavy machine guns are sited to exploit their anti -APC
(Armoured Personnel Carrier) and anti-aircraft
capability;
d. other machine guns are sited to cover infantry
approaches. They are normally sited on the flanks in
order to cover the front and rear of the battery/section
area and to ensure mutual support between the gun
positions and the echelon. They may also be deployed
in an anti-aircraft role.
There is other material about planning local defence, rehearsals, range cards, command and control etc but you get the gist of it.

Hope that helps.

🍻
 

Ostrozac

Sr. Member
Reaction score
23
Points
180
I always viewed the 84mm Carl G/SRAAW(M) as more of an offensive weapon than a defensive one. Either in tank hunting teams, as PPCLI Guy mentioned, for raiding, or to bust bunkers on the attack. I never saw too much of a role for it on the defence — an infantry platoon only had one of them so the 84 would inevitably be sited on the wrong axis.

I don’t know what an Armoured unit would use them for — the 84s and their ammo are large and heavy and AFV crews always seem to be short on stowage — M72s would seem to be a better fit.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
183
Points
680
Maybe for local defense of their support troop or a hold over from the recce with Ferrets, Lynxs and Jeeps, in which case the 84mm would be the only anti-armour they had.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
380
Points
880
Being cavalry, perhaps it had something to do with being able to put a wounded vehicle out of its misery :)
 

dangerboy

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
26
Points
530
I employed them in tank hunting teams back in the day....a technique I also used with Milan / LAW 80 when I was with the Brits
For info on Tank Hunting teams look in Infantry Section and Platoon in Operations, B-GL-309-003-FP-001
 

Red_Five

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
7
Points
430
The Assault Troop in the old-school Recce Sqn had 84mm. They could certainly conduct tank-hunting/anti-armour ambushes in close terrain. I think that is were the Carl G DNA strand in the Recce Tp Leader QS comes from. If anyone has the old Recce Sqn in battle it might have some clues.

- I've moved houses and offices several times since I was a Recce Sqn OC: I kept a copy of the old Recce Sqn in Battle to stay grounded. I have a vague idea where it might be...In the meantime, my vintage copy of the 1st Canadian Division Reconnaissance Regiment SOPs (bit of a Coelacanth) has one 84m with each M113 in the Sqns (so four in Assault Troop, four in Ech and one in SHQ).

In a Screen, Assault Troop employing 84mm were the only real viable integral option for counter-reconnaissance. Not that counter-recce was a big deal, but Assault Troop conducting ambushes in close terrain/defiles was a COA.

Hopefully some folks have the old books in their basement barracks boxes.
 
Last edited:

Ostrozac

Sr. Member
Reaction score
23
Points
180
Hopefully some folks have the old books in their basement barracks boxes.
No physical book, but I do have a PDF of Recce Squadron in Battle dated 1979 -- and it barely touches on anti-armour weapons. It does mention that the Squadron is equipped with MAW (read 84mm) and LAW (read M72) but does not explain quantities or tactics. The specialized equipment of the Support Troop (not Assault Troop) is described as ground surveillance radars and APCs with dozer blades.

I do not have a copy of the Recce Troop Leader's Manual. There might be some details in there.
 

MedCorps

Sr. Member
Reaction score
17
Points
230
Also take a look at Lesson 5 - Siting the Eryx During Combat Operations (in B-GL-385-010/PT-001 - ERYX—SHORT RANGE ANTI- ARMOUR WEAPON (HEAVY)).

Although Eryx specific there are some generalities for general employment of man-portable AA weapons.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
380
Points
880
Also take a look at Lesson 5 - Siting the Eryx During Combat Operations (in B-GL-385-010/PT-001 - ERYX—SHORT RANGE ANTI- ARMOUR WEAPON (HEAVY)).

Although Eryx specific there are some generalities for general employment of man-portable AA weapons.

At which point I am compelled to ask tangentially: 'Whatever happened to the ever elusive Eryx (a.k.a. The Baby Milan)?'
 

FJAG

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
143
Points
680
At which point I am compelled to ask tangentially: 'Whatever happened to the ever elusive Eryx (a.k.a. The Baby Milan)?'
Went the way of air defence and self propelled when we stopped being serious about having to fight anyone better equipped than the Taliban.

😠
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
380
Points
880
Went the way of air defence and self propelled when we stopped being serious about having to fight anyone better equipped than the Taliban.

😠
And the Infantry were happy because we didn't have to carry it :)
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
380
Points
880
I know you've had a career in the super fit, under equipped infantry but there are some infantry battalions that do have vehicles, you know.

:p
Well, I wouldn't have called ot a 'career' as much as a 'near miss' ;)
 
Top