THE CANADIAN ARMY TROPHY Achieving Excellence in Tank Gunnery

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

THE CANADIAN ARMY TROPHY Achieving Excellence in Tank Gunnery THE CANADIAN ARMY TROPHY Achieving Excellence in Tank Gunnery Robert S. Cameron, Ph.D. About the Cover The cover shows the special logo developed for the Canadian Army Trophy, indicating the com- petition range and year. The six national flags represent the participating nations. The inner circle includes the insignia for HQ AFCENT flanked by CENTAG on the left and NORTHAG on the right, all superimposed over a maple leaf symbolizing the competition’s Canadian origins. (Ron Mihalko) THE CANADIAN ARMY TROPHY Achieving Excellence in Tank Gunnery Robert S. Cameron, Ph.D. U.S. Army Armor Branch Historian U.S. Army Armor School Fort Benning, Georgia 31905 iii iii iv iv Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Forward iii Introduction xi Chapter 1: The Early Years of the Canadian Army Trophy, 1963-1968 1 Evolving U.S. and NATO Policy 1 Competition Origins 3 CAT in the 1960s 5 Belgium’s American Cast-off 6 The German Armored Force Comes of Age 8 British Centurions 13 The Canadian Experience 15 The Netherlands 16 Whither the Americans? 17 Changing CAT 20 Chapter 2: Improving the Canadian Army Trophy, 1970-1979 25 NATO Developments 25 Updating CAT 28 Rule Britannia in 1970 29 The Doldrums of 1973 and 1975 33 Upping the Ante 37 O Canada in 1977 37 CAT 1979 44 The American Thunderbolt in Disarray 48 Reforging the Thunderbolt 53 Chapter 3: The Canadian Army Trophy in the Spotlight, 1981-1985 67 Cold War Background 67 Rules and Conditions 69 National Preparations 71 CAT 1981 75 Preparing for CAT 1983 79 CAT 1983 81 The U.S. Experience 85 Britain’s Challenge 90 CAT 1985 Rules 96 CAT 1985 97 The United Kingdom’s CAT Conundrum 106 v v Table of Contents CAT 1985 Through American Eyes 111 Chapter 4: America First at the 1987 Canadian Army Trophy 127 The Cold War at High Tide 127 The State of American Armor 128 Tank Training Areas and Gunnery Ranges 132 Improving Realism in Gunnery Training 133 To Zero or Not to Zero? 137 Tank Gunnery Skills and the People Factor 142 When Training Standards Became the Enemy 149 A British Challenger 154 The Diplomatic Niceties of CAT 1987 161 Rules and Conditions 166 CAT 1987 169 The Canadian Success in Preparing Not to Win 172 A Challenger’s Debut 175 America Prepares to Win 180 The SIMNET Factor 191 America First 193 Chapter 5: The Canadian Army Trophy’s Final Years 213 End of the Cold War 213 The Training Revolution Continues 216 American Preparations for CAT 1989 219 The Trials and Tribulations of Precision Gunnery 224 German CAT Team Preparation 229 CAT 1989 231 Assessing American Performance 237 A Winning Approach to CAT 1991 242 MRS: To Update or Not to Update? 247 CAT 1991 251 A Different Sort of CAT: Tank Gunnery in the First Gulf War 257 Challenger’s Vindication 266 Endgame 269 Epilogue: The Canadian Army Trophy Legacy 285 The Canadian-American Cup 1997-2003 285 Sullivan Cup 288 Worthington Challenge 291 Nordic Tank Challenge 292 Russian Tank Biathlon 293 Strong Europe Tank Challenge 296 vi vii Table of Contents Note on Sources 307 About the Author 309 Tables CAT 1963 Team Scores 5 CAT Results 1964-1968 6 Tank Gunnery Tables 1964 18 CAT 1970 Results 30 CAT 1973 Results 35 CAT 1975 Results 36 CAT 1977 Results 41 CAT 1979 Scoring 45 CAT 1979 Results 47 Tank Gunnery Tables 1977 57 CAT 1981 Results 76 Final Scores for 1-32 Armor 77 CAT 1983 Scoring 80 CAT 1983 Platoon Scores 82 Company Team Placement for CAT 1983 85 Royal Scots Dragoon Guards CAT 1983 Training Schedule 95 CAT 1985 Scoring 97 CAT 1985 Platoon Scores 98 CAT 1985 Company Team Placement 99 CAT 1985 Performance Statistics 107 CAT 1985 Vehicle Engagement Speed and Accuracy Data 107 Tank Gunnery Tables 1980 130 Tank Gunnery Tables 1984 149 CAT 1987 Scoring 168 CAT 1987 Scores 169 Vehicle Performance at CAT 1987 170 4-32 Armor’s Road to CAT 1989 220 CAT 1989 Scores 233 CAT 1989 Night Firing Scores 235 CAT 1989 Comparative Vehicle Performance 240 Comparison of American and Dutch Performance 240 U.S. CAT 1991 Ammunition Requirement 245 CAT 1991 Scores 255 Illustrations The Canadian Army Trophy 2 A prototype MBT 70 3 The American M47 during training 7 vi vii Table of Contents The special patch worn by Panzer Battalion 33 in 1968 9 American M48s on a firing range in Germany in 1959 10 An early model of the Leopard 1 12 The Centurion 14 A Canadian Centurion in the field 16 The patch worn by the Dutch 41st Tank Battalion team for CAT 1967 16 An American M60A1 on a training exercise in Germany 17 Soviet tank crews mount up 20 The patch worn by Panzer Battalion 33 CAT team members in 1970 26 The lethal Chieftain 28 A Canadian Centurion is serviced in the field 31 Canadian Centurions on a field exercise 35 Canadian Leopard 1 crossing an obstacle 38 Canadian Leopard 1 conducting a CAT battle run 39 The Canadian Leopard 1 40 The competing steeds of CAT 77 43 Contenders for the Canadian Army Trophy in 1979 44 The U.S. M60A1 49 CAT 1979 patch of the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment 51 The M60A1 with its associated tools and cables 53 M60 tank being towed 55 A T72 on parade in the Soviet Union 68 Medal issued for CAT 1981 70 Patch worn by the 1-32 Armor CAT 1981 team 72 The CAT 1981 team patch for Panzer Battalion 294 74 The CAT 1981 patch for the British Queen’s Own Hussars team 78 CAT 1983 Targets 81 The patch worn by the Dutch 11th Tank Battalion team for CAT 1983 83 A German Leopard 1 emerging from a tree 84 The 2-66 Armor team patch for CAT 1983 86 An M1 tank crossing a stream on Fort Knox in 1983 88 Britain’s mighty Chieftain 90 CAT 1985 Target 93 The CAT 1985 patch for the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards 94 The German Leopard 2 101 The CAT 1985 patch worn by the Panzer Battalion 24 team 103 Canadian tankers pose in front of the Leopard 1 105 A British Chieftain in the field 110 The patch worn by the 3-64 Armor CAT team members in 1985 112 2-66 Armor’s decorative CAT 1985 team patch 114 T72s in a movement to contact exercise 128 3rd Armored Division M60A3 tanks in 129 viii ix Table of Contents Grafenwoehr’s Gate 1 entrance 132 Tank from 2-64 Armor on Grafenwoehr’s Range 109 135 Old fashioned boresighting with tape and thread 138 Using the in-bore muzzle boresight device 140 Standard boresight panel 142 M60A1 tanks mired in mud during training exercise 144 An M1 churns its way through a muddy field 146 Soldiers securing a Hoffman tank gunfire simulator to an Abrams 148 Two M60A3 tanks move along a road near Giessen, Germany 151 An M60 tank platoon in echelon 153 Britain’s CAT 1987 hopes—the Challenger 155 Another view of the Challenger 157 A close-up shot of the Challenger 160 CAT 1987 patch worn by NORTHAG team members 162 Patch worn by the Netherlands 43rd Tank Battalion team for CAT 1987 164 CAT 1987 Targets 167 The patch worn by the Belgian 4th Lancers team at CAT 1987 171 Distinctive patch worn by the Panzer Battalion 124 CAT 1987 team 172 Canadian Leopard 1s at CAT 173 Royal Canadian Dragoon CAT 1987 team patch 174 The patch worn by the British Royal Hussars CAT 1987 team 176 British Challenger at CAT 1987 178 Challenger on the gunnery range 179 A tank from the 3rd Infantry Division’s 3-64 Armor CAT 1987 181 A tank belonging to the American 3-64 Armor team at CAT 1987 182 Patch worn by the 2-66 Armor CAT 1987 team 184 Patch worn by the CAT 1987 team from 4-8 Cavalry 186 Tanks lined up on the boresight line 189 The 3-64 Armor CAT 1987 team patch with its pouncing feline 191 A-33, a tank of the 3-64 Armor CAT 1987 194 “Bill the Cat” 195 The first Abrams tank to be drawn from a POMCUS site 214 A column of M1 tanks maneuver during a REFORGER exercise 216 A tank platoon from 3-64 Armor at Hohenfels 218 The CAT team patch worn by the 4-32 Armor team in CAT 1989 222 24th Infantry Division (Mechanized) tanks in NATO exercises 224 Patch worn by the 3-66 Armor CAT 1989 team 226 An Abrams tank of 2-41 Infantry, 2d Armored Division 228 The CAT 1989 patch of the Panzer Battalion 203 team 230 Panzer Battalion 123’s Leopard 2 CAT 1989 patch 232 The patch worn by the Dutch 41st Tank Battalion team at CAT 1989 234 The CAT 1989 patch of the 8th Canadian Hussars tea 236 viii ix Table of Contents 3rd Infantry Division’s 2-64 Armor CAT 1989 team patc 238 CAT 1989 coin 242 Close-up shot of part of the Muzzle Reference System 248 The CAT 1991 team patch for 1-37 Armor 249 The patch worn by the 2-66 Armor CAT 1991 team 251 The all-powerful Committee of Control for CAT 1991 253 CAT 1991 Targets 254 The distinctive patch worn by the Belgian 3rd Lancer’s CAT 1991 team 255 The Dutch 43rd Tank Battalion’s CAT 1991 team patch 256 U.S. armor arrives in Southwest 258 An Iraqi tank burns in the desert 260 U.S.
Recommended publications
  • Unclassified U.S
    UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Navy Master at Arms 1st Class Ekali Brooks (R) coordinates with a U.S. Soldier to provide security while he and his dog Bak search for explosives in nearby classrooms, Sep. 10, 2008. Iraqi soldiers and U.S. Troops from 2nd Squadron, 14th Cavalry Regiment, and Bravo Company, 52nd Anti-Tank Regiment, 25th Infantry Division conducted a cooperative medical engagement at a local elementary school in Hor Al Bosh, Iraq, to provide medical treatment to the local Iraqi people. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Daniel Herrera/Released) 080910-A-8725H-220 UNCLASSIFIED An Iraqi soldier interacts with local children, Sep. 10, 2008. Iraqi soldiers and U.S. Troops from 2nd Squadron, 14th Cavalry Regiment, and Bravo Company, 52nd Anti-Tank Regiment, 25th Infantry Division, conducted a cooperative medical engagement at a local elementary school in Hor Al Bosh, Iraq, to provide medical treatment to the local Iraqi people. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Daniel Herrera/Released) 080910-A-8725H-502 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Army Sgt. Susan McGuyer, 2nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division, searches Iraqi women before they can be treated by medical personnel, Sep. 10, 2008. Iraqi soldiers and U.S. Troops from 2nd Squadron, 14th Cavalry Regiment, and Bravo Company, 52nd Anti-Tank Regiment, 25th Infantry Division conducted a cooperative medical engagement at a local elementary school in Hor Al Bosh, Iraq, to provide medical treatment to the local Iraqi people. (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Daniel Herrera/Released) 080910-A-8725H-335 UNCLASSIFIED Iraqi soldiers conduct a cooperative medical engagement at a local elementary school in Hor Al Bosh, Iraq, Sep.
    [Show full text]
  • Clearance of Depleted Uranium (DU) Hazards
    Technical notes for mine action Technical Note 09.30/ 02 Version 3.0 TNMA 1st February 2015 Clearance of Depleted Uranium (DU) hazards i Technical Note 09.30-02/15 Version 3.0 (1st February 2015) Warning This document is distributed for use by the mine action community, review and comment. Although in a similar format to the International Mine Action Standards (IMAS) it is not part of the IMAS Series. It is subject to change without notice and may not be referred to as an International Mine Action Standard. Recipients of this document are invited to submit, with their comments, notification of any relevant patent rights of which they are aware and to provide supporting documentation. Comments should be sent to [email protected] with a copy to [email protected]. The content of this document has been drawn from open source information and has been technically validated as far as reasonably possible. Users should be aware of this limitation when utilising the information contained within this document. They should always remember that this is only an advisory document: it is not an authoritative directive. ii Technical Note 09.30-02/15 Version 3.0 (1st February 2015) Contents Contents ........................................................................................................................................ iii Foreword ....................................................................................................................................... iv Introduction....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • October 2015
    RUN FOR THE WALL Quarterly Newsletter “We Ride For Those Who Can’t” October 2015 NOTE: Run For The Wall and RFTW are trademarks of Run For The Wall, Inc. The use of Run For The Wall and RFTW is strictly prohibited without the expressed written permission of the Board of Directors of Run For The Wall, Inc. In This Issue: The Editor’s Notes Post-9/11 GI Bill President’s Message New Agent Orange Study 2016 Central Route Coordinator Full Honors for MOH Veteran After 94 Years 2016 Combat Hero Bike Build Angel Fire Reunion Grand Lake Fundraiser for RFTW Kerrville Reunion The Army’s Spectacular Hidden Treasure Pending Legislation Room Bringing Them Home The Story of the Vietnam Wall Sick Call Life in the Navy Taps Mind-Body Treatment for PTSD Closing Thoughts Camp Lejeune Study Released ________________________________________________________________________________________ THE EDITOR’S NOTES About a year ago I talked about the new Veterans Court that had been started up in Lake Havasu City. Veterans Courts were at that time very new, and few people were even aware that such a thing existed. Our Veterans Court has been running for almost two years now, and I am well-entrenched in the Veterans Resource Team that helps find resources for veterans going through Veterans Court system. Representatives from all of our local veterans organizations are on the team, as well as several dozen service agencies, including our local Interagency, the VA, the Vet Center, the Veterans Resource Center, and many more agencies that are instrumental in providing the help that veterans need so that they can once again become good members of society.
    [Show full text]
  • Progress in Delivering the British Army's Armoured
    AVF0014 Written evidence submitted by Nicholas Drummond “Progress in Delivering the British Army’s Armoured Vehicle Capability.” Nicholas Drummond Defence Industry Consultant and Commentator Aura Consulting Ltd. ______________________________________________________________________________ _________ Contents Section 1 - Introduction Section 2 - HCDC questions 1. Does the Army have a clear understanding of how it will employ its armoured vehicles in future operations? 2. Given the delays to its programmes, will the Army be able to field the Strike Brigades and an armoured division as envisaged by the 2015 SDSR? 3. How much has the Army spent on procuring armoured vehicles over the last 20 years? How many vehicles has it procured with this funding? 4. What other capabilities has the Army sacrificed in order to fund overruns in its core armoured vehicles programmes? 5. How flexible can the Army be in adapting its current armoured vehicle plans to the results of the Integrated Review? 6. By 2025 will the Army be able to match the potential threat posed by peer adversaries? 7. Is the Army still confident that the Warrior CSP can deliver an effective vehicle capability for the foreseeable future? 8. To what extent does poor contractor performance explain the delays to the Warrior and Ajax programmes? 9. Should the UK have a land vehicles industrial strategy, and if so what benefits would this bring? 10. What sovereign capability for the design and production of armoured vehicles does the UK retain? 11. Does it make sense to upgrade the Challenger 2 when newer, more capable vehicles may be available from our NATO allies? 12. What other key gaps are emerging within the Army’s armoured vehicle capability? 13.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Exhibits at IWM Duxford
    List of exhibits at IWM Duxford Aircraft Airco/de Havilland DH9 (AS; IWM) de Havilland DH 82A Tiger Moth (Ex; Spectrum Leisure Airspeed Ambassador 2 (EX; DAS) Ltd/Classic Wings) Airspeed AS40 Oxford Mk 1 (AS; IWM) de Havilland DH 82A Tiger Moth (AS; IWM) Avro 683 Lancaster Mk X (AS; IWM) de Havilland DH 100 Vampire TII (BoB; IWM) Avro 698 Vulcan B2 (AS; IWM) Douglas Dakota C-47A (AAM; IWM) Avro Anson Mk 1 (AS; IWM) English Electric Canberra B2 (AS; IWM) Avro Canada CF-100 Mk 4B (AS; IWM) English Electric Lightning Mk I (AS; IWM) Avro Shackleton Mk 3 (EX; IWM) Fairchild A-10A Thunderbolt II ‘Warthog’ (AAM; USAF) Avro York C1 (AS; DAS) Fairchild Bolingbroke IVT (Bristol Blenheim) (A&S; Propshop BAC 167 Strikemaster Mk 80A (CiA; IWM) Ltd/ARC) BAC TSR-2 (AS; IWM) Fairey Firefly Mk I (FA; ARC) BAe Harrier GR3 (AS; IWM) Fairey Gannet ECM6 (AS4) (A&S; IWM) Beech D17S Staggerwing (FA; Patina Ltd/TFC) Fairey Swordfish Mk III (AS; IWM) Bell UH-1H (AAM; IWM) FMA IA-58A Pucará (Pucara) (CiA; IWM) Boeing B-17G Fortress (CiA; IWM) Focke Achgelis Fa-330 (A&S; IWM) Boeing B-17G Fortress Sally B (FA) (Ex; B-17 Preservation General Dynamics F-111E (AAM; USAF Museum) Ltd)* General Dynamics F-111F (cockpit capsule) (AAM; IWM) Boeing B-29A Superfortress (AAM; United States Navy) Gloster Javelin FAW9 (BoB; IWM) Boeing B-52D Stratofortress (AAM; IWM) Gloster Meteor F8 (BoB; IWM) BoeingStearman PT-17 Kaydet (AAM; IWM) Grumman F6F-5 Hellcat (FA; Patina Ltd/TFC) Branson/Lindstrand Balloon Capsule (Virgin Atlantic Flyer Grumman F8F-2P Bearcat (FA; Patina Ltd/TFC)
    [Show full text]
  • Modern Application of Mechanized-Cavalry Groups for Cavalry Echelons Above Brigade by MAJ Joseph J
    Modern Application of Mechanized-Cavalry Groups for Cavalry Echelons Above Brigade by MAJ Joseph J. Dumas The Army faces a dilemma much like it did at the onset of World War II: although the war provided an opportunity to rapidly codify cavalry organizations and doctrine, the Army squandered the opportunity to do so in the period before the war, when the branch bifurcated and the Army’s mounted arm floundered. This bifurcation had repercussions on the United States’ warfighting ability as we entered World War II, as branch identity then – tied to the platform known as the “noble companion” (the horse) – stifled organizational and doctrinal development right up to our nation’s entrance into the war. Consequently, mechanized-cavalry formations entered combat with theoretical concepts about their employment and their vehicle platforms underpowered against the Axis.1 As an example of this mismatch in theoretical concepts, early mechanized-cavalry doctrine peddled stealthy reconnaissance, but combat experience in North Africa during Operation Torch didn’t validate pre-war doctrinal theory.2 However, organization of the mechanized-cavalry groups (MCGs) created effective formations (see Figure 1)3 even if the platforms they fought from were not always optimal. Figure 1. MCG structure in World War II. In spite of these problems, the MCGs’ performance in the European Theater of Operations (ETO) during World War II made a profound impression of operational relevancy on Army senior leaders who fought in the ETO.4 As noted by Armor Branch historian Dr. Robert S. Cameron, MCGs – enabled with combined-arms attachments – became capable combat organizations able to execute a broad range of mission sets for their assigned corps headquarters.5 Like its World War II predecessor, it seems as if today’s Army has some capability gaps and some relevancy concerns regarding cavalry organizations and doctrine.
    [Show full text]
  • A Volunteer from America.Pdf
    1 2 A Volunteer From America By Bob Mack 1ST Signal Brigade Nha Trang, Republic of Vietnam 1967 – 1968 3 Dedicated to those that served ©2010 by Robert J. McKendrick All Rights Reserved 4 In-Country The big DC-8 banked sharply into the sun and began its descent toward the Cam Ranh peninsula, the angle of drop steeper than usual in order to frustrate enemy gunners lurking in the nearby mountains. Below, the impossibly blue South China Sea seemed crusted with diamonds. I had spent the last two months at home, thanks to a friendly personnel sergeant in Germany who’d cut my travel 5 orders to include a 60-day “delay en route” before I was due to report in at Ft. Lewis, Washington for transportation to the 22 nd Replacement Battalion, MACV (Military Assistance Command Vietnam). Now I was twenty-five hours out from Seattle, and on the verge of experiencing the Vietnam War at first hand. It was the fifth of July 1967. Vietnam stunk. Literally. After the unbelievable heat, the smell was the first thing you noticed, dank and moldy, like a basement that had repeatedly flooded and only partially dried. Or like a crypt… The staff sergeant was a character straight out of Central Casting, half full of deep South gruffness and Dixie grizzle, the other half full of shit. He paced back and forth while we stood in formation in the hot sand. “Welcome to II Corps, Republic of Vet-nam,” he said. Then he gave us the finger. “Take a good look at it, boys.
    [Show full text]
  • 1St Infantry Division Post Template
    1A HOME OF THE BIG RED ONE THE 1ST INFANTRY DIVISION POST 1DivPost.com FRIDAY, MAY 1, 2015 Vol. 7, No. 18 FORT RILEY, KAN. Discussion Training Staff Sgt. Jerry Griffis | 1ST INF. DIV. Soldiers of 1st Infantry Division Sustainment Brigade change their unit patches to the “Big Red One” patch April 22 at Cav- alry Parade Field on Fort Riley, Kansas. The changing of the patches was part of an inactivation/activation ceremony and the 1st Infantry Division Sustainment Brigade also uncased new colors for the ceremony. ‘Durable’ Soldiers join Corey Schaadt | 1ST INF. DIV. Gen. David G. Perkins, commander of the United States Army Training and Doctrine Command, leads a training discussion with platoon leaders and platoon sergeants April 20 at Fort Riley. The subject of the lecture was the development of the Army division in wearing Operating Concept. General explains Army Operating ‘Big Red One’ patch By J. Parker Roberts the McCormick Foundation, whose 1ST INF. DIV. PUBLIC AFFAIRS role in part is to sustain the legacy of Concept to ‘Big Red One’ leaders the Big Red One “and that patch you It was a sound like no other as hun- just put on your shoulders,” Wesley dreds of “Durable” Soldiers removed told the Durable Soldiers in forma- By J. Parker Roberts their left arm patches in unison, re- tion on the field. 1ST INF. DIV. PUBLIC AFFAIRS placing them with the “Big Red One” The 1st Sust. Bde. was originally patch worn by their fellow Soldiers formed as Division Trains in 1917 On post to tour Fort Riley across the 1st Infantry Division.
    [Show full text]
  • ARMOR Janfeb2007 Covers.Indd
    The Professional Bulletin of the Armor Branch PB 17-07-1 Editor in Chief Features LTC SHANE E. LEE 7 Not Quite Counterinsurgency: A Cautionary Tale for U.S. Forces Based on Israel’s Operation Change of Direction Managing Editor by Captain Daniel Helmer CHRISTY BOURGEOIS 12 Lebanon 2006: Did Merkava Challenge Its Match? by Lieutenant Colonel David Eshel, IDF, Retired Commandant 15 Teaching and Learning Counterinsurgency MG ROBERT M. WILLIAMS at the Armor Captains Career Course by Major John Grantz and Lieutenant Colonel John Nagl 18 The Challenge of Leadership ARMOR (ISSN 0004-2420) is published bi- during the Conduct of Counterinsurgency Operations month ly by the U.S. Army Armor Center, by Major Jon Dunn ATTN: ATZK-DAS-A, Building 1109A, 201 6th Avenue, Ste 373, Fort Knox, KY 40121-5721. 20 Building for the Future: Combined Arms Offi cers by Captain Chad Foster Disclaimer: The information contained in AR- MOR represents the professional opinions of 23 The Battalion Chaplain: A Combat Multiplier the authors and does not necessarily reflect by Chaplain (Captain) David Fell the official Army or TRADOC position, nor does it change or supersede any information 26 Practical Lessons from the Philippine Insurrection presented in other official Army publications. by Lieutenant Colonel Jayson A. Altieri, Lieutenant Commander John A. Cardillo, and Major William M. Stowe III Official distribution is limited to one copy for each armored brigade headquarters, ar mored 35 Integrating Cultural Sensitivity into Combat Operations cavalry regiment headquarters, armor battal- by Major Mark S. Leslie ion headquarters, armored cavalry squadron 39 Advice from a Former Military Transition Team Advisor head quarters, reconnaissance squadron head- by Major Jeff Weinhofer quar ters, armored cavalry troop, armor com- pany, and motorized brigade headquarters of 42 Arab Culture and History: Understanding is the First Key to Success the United States Army.
    [Show full text]
  • Dispatches Vol
    Dagwood Dispatches Vol. 30-No. 2 April 2020 Issue No. 103 NEWSLETTER OF THE 16th INFANTRY REGIMENT ASSOCIATION Mission: To provide a venue for past and present members of the 16th Infantry Regiment to share in the history and well-earned camaraderie of the US Army’s greatest regiment. News from the Front The 16th Infantry Regiment Association is a Commemorative Partner with the Department of Defense Commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of the Vietnam War Annual membership fees ($30.00) WEre due 1 January 2020. 50 Years Ago . 1-16 IN departs FSB Dakota for Fort Riley No Mission Too Difficult No Sacrifice Too Great Duty First! Governing Board Other Board Officers Association Staff President Board Emeritii Quartermaster Steven E. Clay LTG (R) Ronald L. Watts Bill Prine 307 North Broadway Robert B. Humphries (918) 398-3493 Leavenworth, KS 66048 Woody Goldberg [email protected] (913) 651-6857 [email protected] Honorary Colonel of the Regiment DD Editorial Staff First Vice President Ralph L. Kauzlarich Steve Clay, Editor Bob Hahn 210 Manor Lane (913) 651-6857 St. Johns, FL 32259 11169 Lake Chapel Lane [email protected] (904) 310-2729 Reston, VA 20191-4719 [email protected] (202) 360-7885 Vietnam-Cold War Recruiter [email protected] Honorary Sergeant Major Dee Daugherty (804) 731-5631 Second Vice President Thomas Pendleton [email protected] Bob Humphries 1708 Kingwood Drive 1734 Ellenwood Drive Manhattan, KS 66502 Desert Storm-GWOT Recruiter Roswell, GA 30075 (785) 537-6213 Dan Alix (770) 993-8312 [email protected] (706) 573-6510 [email protected] [email protected] Adjutant Commander, 1st Battalion Erik Anthes LTC Matthew R.
    [Show full text]
  • Cobra Strike! a Reality
    By Spc. Jason Dangel, 4th BCT PAO, 4th Inf. Div. of operations with their ISF counterparts. The 4th Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, Cobra combat support and combat service support units, "Cobras," deployed in late November 2005 in support of the 4th Special Troops Battalion and 704th Support Operation Iraqi Freedom and officially assumed responsibil- Battalion were responsible for command and control for all ity of battle space in central and southern Baghdad from the the units of Task Force Cobra, while simultaneously provid- 4th Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, Jan. 14, ing logistical support for the brigade's Soldiers. 2006. The 3rd Battalion, 67th Armor was attached to the 4th After a successful transition with the 3rd Inf. Div.'s Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division and operat- "Vanguard" Brigade, the Cobra Brigade was ready for its ed from FOB Rustamiyah, located in the northern portion of first mission in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. the Iraqi capital. As the Ivy Division's newest brigade combat team, the The Cobra Brigade oversaw the security of many key events Cobra Brigade, comprised of approximately 5,000 combat- to include the first session of the Iraqi Council of ready Soldiers, was deployed to Forward Operating Base Representatives. Prosperity in Baghdad's International Zone and operated in The Iraqi Council of Representatives, the parliament some of the most dangerous neighborhoods in Baghdad, to elected under the nation's new constitution, convened at the include Al-Doura, Al-Amerriyah, Abu T'schir, Al-Ademiyah Parliament Center in central Baghdad where 275 representa- and Gazaliyah.
    [Show full text]
  • Brazilian Tanks British Tanks Canadian Tanks Chinese Tanks
    Tanks TANKS Brazilian Tanks British Tanks Canadian Tanks Chinese Tanks Croatian Tanks Czech Tanks Egyptian Tanks French Tanks German Tanks Indian Tanks Iranian Tanks Iraqi Tanks Israeli Tanks Italian Tanks Japanese Tanks Jordanian Tanks North Korean Tanks Pakistani Tanks Polish Tanks Romanian Tanks Russian Tanks Slovakian Tanks South African Tanks South Korean Tanks Spanish Tanks Swedish Tanks Swiss Tanks Ukrainian Tanks US Tanks file:///E/My%20Webs/tanks/tanks_2.html[3/22/2020 3:58:21 PM] Tanks Yugoslavian Tanks file:///E/My%20Webs/tanks/tanks_2.html[3/22/2020 3:58:21 PM] Brazilian Tanks EE-T1 Osorio Notes: In 1982, Engesa began the development of the EE-T1 main battle tank, and by 1985, it was ready for the world marketplace. The Engesa EE-T1 Osorio was a surprising development for Brazil – a tank that, while not in the class of the latest tanks of the time, one that was far above the league of the typical third-world offerings. In design, it was similar to many tanks of the time; this was not surprising, since Engesa had a lot of help from West German, British and French armor experts. The EE-T1 was very promising – an excellent design that several countries were very interested in. The Saudis in particular went as far as to place a pre- order of 318 for the Osorio. That deal, however, was essentially killed when the Saudis saw the incredible performance of the M-1 Abrams and the British Challenger, and they literally cancelled the Osorio order at the last moment. This resulted in the cancellation of demonstrations to other countries, the demise of Engesa, and with it a promising medium tank.
    [Show full text]