7, 8 or 9 men sections?
-
Which do you think is more effective?
After all this many years, I still think 7 men is just a little too few... -
hmmm.... SAF thinks 7 is better....thats y it has evolved into a defence force modeled for everyone to learn from.
-
Well, it doesn't really mean the more people the merrier! WEll, we have the quite common system of 7 person. WEll, I think it is best to include and exclude base on mission.
-
yah! with all the barang barang like what lawtube, parang, chain saw, wire-cutters, this and that, why not have an extra pair of hands.
-
SAF switched to a 7 men section partially due to the drop in birth rates... Using the reason that with superior firepower..
But, one men in the section get injured, two men stretcher.. 7 fighting men down to 4.. That's a drastic cut in number of gun barrels facing the enemy. Think about that.
As for add and minus.. it doesn't work like that. Sections are trained to work as a team. Adding and taking people out can mess up the team dynamics. -
yes true. the sect has trained together for ages. suddenly u add/remove members, would affect the dynamics.
-
SHould introduce 10 men sections...like the US basic fireteam.. can break into half patrol. sgt lead one, 2IC lead the otherOriginally posted by insouciant:SAF switched to a 7 men section partially due to the drop in birth rates... Using the reason that with superior firepower..
But, one men in the section get injured, two men stretcher.. 7 fighting men down to 4.. That's a drastic cut in number of gun barrels facing the enemy. Think about that.
As for add and minus.. it doesn't work like that. Sections are trained to work as a team. Adding and taking people out can mess up the team dynamics. -
The debate on how many men is bound to last as long as Infantry exists.
Even Infantry units in the USA with 9 men sections are asking for more men.
For the record, the US Marines have a 13 men squad. -
The fire team concept with a static fire base is something we have to look to in MOUT or similar missions.
The 7 men section is partly due to manpower shortages and the fact that it is a more mobile solution for jungle fighting. -
I believe most section operation is all about stealth and speed. 7 man section can move faster and more swiftly which is a huge plus point compare to the 13 man section mentioned above..
-
erm... my unit work in 10 man section....
hahaha.. all same market price.. all M16 -
Problem with 7-man section:
1 fella attend B, 1 fella attend C, one fella kena charged and sent to guardhouse..4 fellas left do what??? -
sai kang la.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Problem with 7-man section:
1 fella attend B, 1 fella attend C, one fella kena charged and sent to guardhouse..4 fellas left do what??? -
Just about right for majong.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Problem with 7-man section:
1 fella attend B, 1 fella attend C, one fella kena charged and sent to guardhouse..4 fellas left do what???
Anybody train with the US Marines before? Seen their section and platoons doing fire and movement. -
7 is the best.Originally posted by insouciant:Which do you think is more effective?
After all this many years, I still think 7 men is just a little too few...
can form big dipper formation like Quanzhen Sect.
-
Hello! How does 13 men istead of 7 make a section move slower?Originally posted by tlwa:I believe most section operation is all about stealth and speed. 7 man section can move faster and more swiftly which is a huge plus point compare to the 13 man section mentioned above..
If you tell me 13 men increases the odds of someone being spotted or stepping on a dry twig maybe lah.. But slower??
-
precisely! they can go in group movements, no one-by-one.
13 men breaks into 4 groups, with 1 support fire group/or rear cover group.
The 3 main charging groups can do group fire and movement, not-individual movement...speed is certainly the least thing to think about.
Unless you talk about the control during the movement and firefight? But then all groups have a group IC which is similar to 7 men-section also. -
Most have this idea that the section has to move as one solid group. This is wrong, especially when current warfare realities mean that smaller mobile groups are more effective.Originally posted by nightzip:precisely! they can go in group movements, no one-by-one.
13 men breaks into 4 groups, with 1 support fire group/or rear cover group.
The 3 main charging groups can do group fire and movement, not-individual movement...speed is certainly the least thing to think about.
Unless you talk about the control during the movement and firefight? But then all groups have a group IC which is similar to 7 men-section also. -
add in the fact that 7 man section is the max and i mean really max amount to fit into our new bionix APC,not enough space to fit in even one more guy
-
I find that for offensive infantry based units like guards, it is better to have more men that our traditional section arrangement. Bcos from my experience like for example going to ATEC, after the morning deliberate assault, the number of troops "alive, unwounded"(using the TES laser system). Due to the fact that the defending side has a natural ground avantage, having the original section setup puts the attacking side at a disadvantage.
With increasing urbanisation and fortified positions, I suggest we should introduce a short gun to the section, and let the sec com carry it, increase the section to 8 men. The short gun can be used to blast open doors, and window locks. It is better than those door charged used now. It is also a good FOFO weapons, as during WW2 it is a little known fact that the Americans used them when attacking FOFO grounds. Ppls common conception of the use of bayonets ironically are not veri effective due to long rifle length, difficult to use in cramp position. -
The current 7 men section was a result of shortages in manpower.
Prior to that, the batch before my NS intake had 9 man sections. Also each MG team had 3 men, and each 84mm crew consisted of 3 men. The battation had 4 front line companies plus the support and HQ companies.
There will always be pros and cons a smaller unit. With a larger unit, your first man reaches the FUP but your last man is still 1KM behind for example. With a smaller unit, movement is faster but there is a general shortage of manpower.
Doctrine is also different. The US Marines with more manpower is expected to cover more ground or frontage width. For us I guess, its a smaller area, or covered at a brigade level for larger areas.
I always thought that the SAF would mechanise the infantry and guards units with basic APCs - considering the small 7 men section. In general, only mechanised or armoured infantry units are found with smaller 7-8 man sections around the world. I think only Finland (??) has the same 7 man sections for infantry units. Until now, our infantry and guards are mainly foot infantry with some soft skin vehicles.
I've been on exercise with the US Marines in tekong a long time ago - and yes they sometimes do fire and movement at whole section or whole platoon level. -
But with the increase in birth rates slightly recently, will they revert to the old system?
-
I wouldn't hold my breath.Originally posted by equlus84:But with the increase in birth rates slightly recently, will they revert to the old system?
Altho I think even increasing the infantry and guards section by even 1 man will have significant benefits.
Totally agree on the shotgun idea versus breaching charges.