Soviet Mech Battalion in the Attack**
Battle Type: THIS IS NOT A PLAYABLE SCENARIO*
*
Description:
*
This scenario is meant to be an example of the Soviet BMP mechanised battalion in the attack or advance to contact. You may prefer to examine this scenario in the SCENARIO EDITOR as it will then display the example US defenders. Be sure to have map text ON as it is annotated.
**
This example deployment is taken from Isby, P45, and the subsidiary display at the foot of the map is an example of a single mech rifle company in the combined-arms assault from the diagram on page 47.
**
At the top of the map, we have a mech battalion deployed schematically (terrain is ignored) as it would be in the advance, whether for an advance to contact, hasty attack or assault.
**
>>Battalion Deployment in the advance *(Top half of the map)
**
The forces are the mechanised battalion and its default allocation of support tanks from the regimental tank battalion (tank battalions in mech rifle formations were usually on the 4 tank platoon organisation). Added to that we have the usual "slice" of support troops : An artillery SPA battery, an SPAAA platoon, an  SP-SAM platoon and in the assault, engineer assets would be allocated, and so are shown here.
**
The battalion is deployed for the more usual 2-Echelon attack. Here, the first echelon is formed by 2 mech rifle coys deployed alongside each other, and the second echelon is formed from the third company held as the battalion reserve/exploitation group alongside the battalion HQ in approach march columns in the rear.
**
The engineer assets would follow close behind the first echelon in order quickly to deal with any obstacles found.
**
The battalions support elements would deploy somewhat further back from the first echelon. Here they are shown in approach columns. On contact they would deploy tactically as required to support the first echelon. The AA assets are also in this area, as is the artillery battery.
**
Note that the close support SP artillery battery would be more likely used to fire in direct support mode, over open sights in assault gun mode, as to fire indirect. If used indirect, they would deploy into a covered location first.
**
Third company is held as the reserve to use as a reinforcement or to exploit any breach made by the first echelon. It would be kept in march columns as long as possible for faster movement than if deployed (not modelled in SP).
**
Both of the first echelon companies are shown deployed for the approach to contact. Doctrinally, the attached tank company would be further broken down and one platoon attached directly to each rifle company and is so shown. The tank company HQ is shown here with the battalion HQ. Unless advancing through very close country, the tanks always lead in Soviet doctrine. The tank platoon is shown with a mine plough issued per platoon, for the assault. The supporting tank platoon would spread out to cover the company sector frontage. The mech rifle company is shown in a single line, as is Soviet doctrine, with only the company HQ and weapons held slightly back in reserve. The Soviet company acted much like a Western Section/Squad, deployed in a single line for the attack or formal assault.**

>>Variants:*
In a Single-echelon attack, all 3 rifle companies would be deployed up front in line abreast. There would be no reserve, or possibly one platoon would be held back with the battalion commander is all, or perhaps rarely a mech platoon, plus a tank platoon all put under the tank coy HQ as a reserve combat team. In the single echelon battalion attack, any reserves or exploitation forces would be higher formation echelons following on behind (another battalion perhaps from the regiment).
**
The 3 echelon attack was rarer still, and only used in clearing a restricted zone - for example a road through a forested area, or perhaps to break into a town or village. here the 3 companies would be stacked one behind each other to give a quick 1-2-3 series of "punches" to burst through the defence on a very narrow sector.
**
It was VERY rare for the attached tank company to NOT be split up and attached down to support mech companies. Soviet doctrine preferred mech/motor companies to have close tank support rather than operate "pure". The tanks were seen as a major element of firepower that really should not be removed from the infantry formations except in very special circumstances. In this case the tank company would likely be held back as the exploitation reserve, and it would probably have a mech platoon attached from one of the mech companies platoons (or swapped for one).
***
>>The mech Company Assault *(South of the map)
**
NB - the company shown here is NOT a part of the battalion shown in the approach to contact at the top of the map, but is a single example company shown to illustrate the assault at the point of contact with the enemy defences.
**
Here we are at the point of contact with the enemy rifle platoon. The tanks are slowly advancing and firing, to allow the riflemen to keep up. The APCS have deployed the riflemen at long rifle shot or beyond, and they follow the tanks at about 200 metres or so as a single skirmish line. The empty APCs follow behind to provide covering fires.  The Company commander is in the rear to direct the battle, and any support weapons he might have would be here as well. In close terrain, the tank line would be 50 metres or so behind the rifle skirmish line, between them and the APC support line. Artillery fire would be beating up the area of the enemy platoon - either or all of Bn mortars, the attached SPA (over open sights or indirect) and most likely extra artillery firing a barrage from higher formations (regt or divarty etc) as well. It would be scheduled to start to lift further back and deeper into the enemy positions as the assault hit the target area. 
***
>>Notes:*
This may all look a bit rigid and formalised to a Western viewer. That is because this is an example of the formal attack/assault as practiced in the Soviet system. In the formal assault rigid formations are deliberately used to aid command and control, and the battalion is only a very small cog in the machinery of an attack, a company less so and an individual platoon irrelevant in the big scheme. There will be other battalions beside it, and following up behind it to keep the tempo of the attack up. Deep in the rear will be an Army-level tank-heavy Operational Manoeuvre Group (OMG) waiting to blow through any hole the attack blows in the enemy defensive line. Insertion of the OMG to run riot in the enemy rear is a big part of the Soviet Operational Art of war. The assault is seen as a mechanical and predictable process which can be calculated with tables of "norms of fires" and is an exercise in the mathematically predicted application of artillery firepower to the area of interest.
**
The Soviet assault was based on the artillery arm doing the heavy lifting. The assault troops should be able to sweep up the disrupted and neutralised remnants and so get fairly quickly into the enemy defended localities.
**
If this was an assault on a formally defended position, then the norms would be about one battery for every 50 metre hex of the attacking rifle battalion's entire front. If it was a hasty attack against troops not dug in, then about a battery per 3 or 4 hexes would be adequate. (That does not mean they all fire a solid barrage all along the front. There will be fires in depth as well, batteries firing counter-battery missions and so on). In the meeting engagement then the battalion would have the artillery assets shown here, and if a "point" or advanced guard battalion perhaps a battalion (3 batteries) under command.
**
So there will be MASSIVE artillery fires going on as well here, but the control of these guns is nothing to do with the battalion (A pre-programmed fire plan in tabletop 1/300 wargame rules, but SP only deals with artillery that is 'under command'). He just has to keep up with the firepower plan. The Soviet attack is based on statistics and artillery firepower, and individual thinking - fancy small unit tactics - is not required. 
**
So do not think that this means that Soviet mech and armoured forces could not manoeuvre in "Western" mode, moving individual platoons about. They can and do do this. A BIG part of Soviet doctrine was based on the meeting engagement (not the SP meeting engagement - 2 divisions or higher levels bumping into each other, of which the SP battalion-level game would only be a fraction of the whole mess). In the meeting engagement or any less formal "skirmish" level of operations then Soviet units will manoeuvre as individual platoons. In the defence, platoons are deployed individually and in depth, typically 2 sections up and one back, just like any NATO platoon.
****
Scenario Notes: If  played against the AI the human player should take the Soviet side, and not much will actually happen since there is only the example US defending platoon in the South!. Again - THIS IS NOT A SCENARIO IT IS AN ILLUSTRATION
**
Sources: Weapons and Tactics of the Soviet Army, David C Isby, Jane's 1981 
**
Design by: Andy Gailey
