NATO and 48 hours warning

The new Cold War turned hot wargame from On Target Simulations, now expanded with the Player's Edition! Choose the NATO or Soviet forces in one of many scenarios or two linked campaigns. No effort was spared to model modern warfare realistically, including armor, infantry, helicopters, air support, artillery, electronic warfare, chemical and nuclear weapons. An innovative new asynchronous turn order means that OODA loops and various effects on C3 are accurately modeled as never before.

Moderators: WildCatNL, cbelva, IronManBeta, CapnDarwin, IronMikeGolf, Mad Russian

User avatar
Mad Russian
Posts: 13255
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:29 pm
Location: Texas

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by Mad Russian »

Maybe, they just threatened to pull out of NATO. I know whatever Turkey was involved in was enough to send us to the border on alert status.

No bullets of course. We didn't want anyone to get hurt protecting the Free World.

Good Hunting.

MR
The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.
User avatar
Sabre21
Posts: 7877
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2001 8:00 am
Location: on a mountain in Idaho

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by Sabre21 »

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

Maybe, they just threatened to pull out of NATO. I know whatever Turkey was involved in was enough to send us to the border on alert status.

No bullets of course. We didn't want anyone to get hurt protecting the Free World.

Good Hunting.

MR

It was probably the Greek - Turk fighting over Cyprus in the mid 70's that you might be thinking of. I know that caused a lot of commotion in Nato for quite a few years considering they are both members. I think at several times one or the other threatened to leave Nato due to the other.
Image
JWW
Posts: 1680
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Louisiana, USA

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by JWW »

Yes, the Turkish invasion of Cyprus, 1974. I was stationed in Germany at that time and involved in the preparation for a contingency operation related to that conflict that fortunately never occurred. It was a very dicey time. Among other things, we had tactical nukes deployed in both those nations at the time.
pzgndr
Posts: 3486
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 12:51 am
Location: Maryland

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by pzgndr »

ORIGINAL: Sabre21
Every avenue of approach coming from across the border had been surveyed, every possible kill zone was plotted to the point where primary and alternate battle positions were already created with azimuths and ranges to the target area recorded. We had 45 years to prepare for such a war

While this may have been true for many key border crossing areas, it was not true everywhere. I was in 1AD '87-'90 and our GDP was in the Arzberg-Marktredwitz corridor. Just during that time we had a couple of Task Force changes, change of commanders, and changes in battle positions. Those all took time for recons, coordination of basic plans, and communicating down to squad leader level. It was not perfect. If (big IF) we got 24-48 hours warning, uploaded and deployed, then we might have been ready for Day 1. Day 2 and beyond was even more speculative.

I participated in a VII Corps movement map exercise once where we executed the computer-generated movement schedule of all units from garrison to GDP, and it highlighted a number of issues. And that was for clear weather and no opposition. The whole REFORGER fantasy was the planners' ideal, having 10 days to prepare and 10 US divisions deployed to Germany. The reality would probably have been much less warning and utter chaos. Which is the premise for this game, which is fair enough. Grab your stuff and go, now! Movement to contact, hasty attack...
Bill Macon
Empires in Arms Developer
Strategic Command Developer
User avatar
jds1978
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 12:03 am

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by jds1978 »

I for one don't believe the Western intel services would've gotten the hints in time. They blew the increase in Soviet alert status during ABLE ARCHER 83, the fall of the Berlin Wall, collapse of the Soviet Union and the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

(1st post.....howdy all!)
User avatar
Sabre21
Posts: 7877
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2001 8:00 am
Location: on a mountain in Idaho

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by Sabre21 »

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

ORIGINAL: Sabre21
Every avenue of approach coming from across the border had been surveyed, every possible kill zone was plotted to the point where primary and alternate battle positions were already created with azimuths and ranges to the target area recorded. We had 45 years to prepare for such a war

While this may have been true for many key border crossing areas, it was not true everywhere. I was in 1AD '87-'90 and our GDP was in the Arzberg-Marktredwitz corridor. Just during that time we had a couple of Task Force changes, change of commanders, and changes in battle positions. Those all took time for recons, coordination of basic plans, and communicating down to squad leader level. It was not perfect. If (big IF) we got 24-48 hours warning, uploaded and deployed, then we might have been ready for Day 1. Day 2 and beyond was even more speculative.

I participated in a VII Corps movement map exercise once where we executed the computer-generated movement schedule of all units from garrison to GDP, and it highlighted a number of issues. And that was for clear weather and no opposition. The whole REFORGER fantasy was the planners' ideal, having 10 days to prepare and 10 US divisions deployed to Germany. The reality would probably have been much less warning and utter chaos. Which is the premise for this game, which is fair enough. Grab your stuff and go, now! Movement to contact, hasty attack...

You always have updates to plans, change of commands every couple years, and no doubt a few monkey wrenches thrown into the fray now and then. I was in 3rd ID from 83 to 85 and again 88 to 90, our TOC towns changed periodically. These were the initial assembly areas we would deploy to in time of war. They changed for a number of reasons but mostly for tactical considerations.

The data on the battle positions along with individual vehicle/aircraft firing positions was updated annually and that info was kept in the unit safe. These surveyed areas went from the border for about 40 kilometers deep as far as I know. Some units might not have gone that far, but when I was in an attack helicopter battalion, that's what we had. When I was in the Cav in 3rd ID, it was a different type mission so we didn't have the same requirements as the attack units did.

As for early warning detection, it's kind of hard to move 5 Soviet and 2 East German Armies out of their cantonment areas forward to the border without someone noticing it. Not to mention the trainloads of reinforcements, ammo, and supplies that would be needed for a major confrontation. Then take into account the number of aircraft that would have been moved into Poland and E. Germany. As I mentioned in another thread, an aircraft was monitored the moment it took off from as far away as central Poland. Two to three days would have been the worse case, most likely it would have been 7 to 10 days.

Major field exercises were always known ahead of time by the other side and usually coincided with an exercise of their own. These were always monitored by observers from the other side. This was all part of the post war treaty agreements. Any major movement of forces outside of the known ones would cause the other side to react accordingly.

On a side note, Able Archer was a command and control exercise testing for a nuclear war, not a ground force one. The Soviets new about it ahead of time but they over reacted and started to ready their own nuclear forces. Nato was aware of the WP nuclear capable air units in theatre that were put to a heightened state of alert. Both sides misread one another from a political perspective that caused a rise in tensions. If any major ground forces had been moved by either side, the other would have done the same, but neither side did.

Image
mikeCK
Posts: 565
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 3:26 pm

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by mikeCK »

Turkey joined NATO in 1952 and are still members....not sure if they ever pulled out and re-entered but don't believe so. France did pull out of NATOs joint command as de Gaulle chaffed at the idea of French troops under the command of a non French commander. They remained a partner and pledged to assist in the defense of NATO (which would have been of minimal help frankly since they were outside the command structure....lack of unity of command is usually a mess....but that was de Gaulle
JWW
Posts: 1680
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Louisiana, USA

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by JWW »

I was stationed with the 8th ID in Germany twice, in the 70s as a track driver, and, after returning to finish college and get my commission, as an officer in the 80s. 8th ID was stationed west of the Rhine. The open question was whether we would even make it across the Rhine if the balloon went up.
WABAC
Posts: 490
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 6:40 pm
Location: Where Satan buys hinges

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by WABAC »

Every avenue of approach coming from across the border had been surveyed, every possible kill zone was plotted to the point where primary and alternate battle positions were already created with azimuths and ranges to the target area recorded. We had 45 years to prepare for such a war

It would really be incredibly awesome if this sort of info was condensed into a terrain tip as it is for unit LOS. "If I stand over there, what can I see?"

Short of that I look forward to more topo-style maps.
Tazak
Posts: 1461
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 11:57 am

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by Tazak »

I think the biggest give away would've been an increase in vehicle maintenance. Assuming ammo stocks were kept at reasonable levels (enough for 12-24 hours combat per division), and from what I've read their conscript cycles would have given units up to 25% additional manpower at certain times (give them a AK47 and put them into a APC/IFV and their good to go) which would not have alarmed NATO.

Being conscripts their history of poor vehicle maintenance (using antifreeze to make booze anyone) was well known so any major change in spare parts etc would send up the red flags, but then CIA/MI6 intel reports could've been mistaken this for an increase in tractor spare parts and overlooked, lets face it MI6 & CIA didn't have the best track record in those days and both were riddled with moles who could've misplaced key intel reports.

once they start to move out of their barracks then yes the jig was up but how long would it take them to drive to the border and cross into west Germany....hours
AUCTO SPLENDORE RESURGO
Rob322
Posts: 618
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 8:53 pm

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by Rob322 »

The intel agencies can get it right, but the political leadership needs to accept the data they collect and their interpretations of it. Able Archer is a good example. the Soviet leadership were certain we were going to attack and demanded their agents provide proof. When they couldn't, the leadership didn't believe them at first. OTOH, Stalin was receiving intel the Germans were coming over in 1941 and ignored it. I always wondered how NATO, with multiple governments to convince, would've reacted in their intelligence agencies were telling them of building danger.
Tazak
Posts: 1461
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 11:57 am

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by Tazak »

We had the Iron Lady in charge who took no sh&t from anyone [:D] so theres little doubt the Brits would've been put on alert at the slightest provocation
AUCTO SPLENDORE RESURGO
ComradeP
Posts: 6992
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:11 pm

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by ComradeP »

The most terrifying bit of the fiction in FCRS to me is the ballistic missile attacks against NATO bases. It's such a simple strategy that immediately reveals the problems of centralization. Concentrating large numbers of men in one area might've been practical in peace time, but it's an awful situation to be in when war breaks out. A couple of missiles, possibly with chemicals or tactical nukes, and Soviet special forces pretending to be military policemen at crucial road junctions directing traffic the wrong way would've caused chaos that would be very difficult to control.

The author of the fiction clearly feels my countrymen would've been worth very little in a fight, as a whole Dutch division is pinned in place and destroyed by just 1 air mobile battalion and a frontal attack by tanks.
SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer
Rob322
Posts: 618
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 8:53 pm

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by Rob322 »

I believe NATO planned/hoped for 7-10 days of mobilization to get reforger going, get reserves up and running and do other things like disperse aircraft to various airfields, etc. The rub here is that they weren't given that time. If a real war had happened the way NATO hoped it would then the SSM attack might not have been so damaging.

I was always doubtful about Reforger, so many things had to go right. Plus, to add divisions in the active duty army, they reduced the active duty component of the Reforger units, such that 30-40% of the combat battalions assigned to these units were National Guard. Who knows if they even would've made the flight. In the first Gulf War, the two divisions with such augmentation (1st Cav ans 24th Mech) never saw their round out units in theater.
User avatar
Mad Russian
Posts: 13255
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:29 pm
Location: Texas

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by Mad Russian »

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

The author of the fiction clearly feels my countrymen would've been worth very little in a fight, as a whole Dutch division is pinned in place and destroyed by just 1 air mobile battalion and a frontal attack by tanks.

I have nothing but the highest regard for all of NATO's and the Warsaw Pacts member nations. What I thought would happen is that 'frontal attack by tanks' would be a hammer blow to a minor nation. Any nation not as well supported as the NATO Big Three(UK, US, WG) would have serious issues resisting a main effort Soviet tank attack.


Good Hunting.

MR
The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.
User avatar
bayonetbrant
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 1:11 pm
Location: the rare sane part of the southeastern US
Contact:

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by bayonetbrant »

ORIGINAL: Rob322
In the first Gulf War, the two divisions with such augmentation (1st Cav ans 24th Mech) never saw their round out units in theater.

much of that was political, not based on training status.
=+=+=+=+=
BayonetBrant
Editorial director ~ www.armchairdragoons.com
Host/Producter ~ Mentioned in Dispatches podcast
All around awesome dude & more handsome than I deserve to be with such a sparkling personality

Image
User avatar
bayonetbrant
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 1:11 pm
Location: the rare sane part of the southeastern US
Contact:

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by bayonetbrant »

Here's something that had been discussed elsewhere about the 48th BDE (GAARNG), which was the 24th's roundout BDE
The standard was that they were to be deployable within 90 days of mobilization. They were certified around day 82 or so. They were actualy certified on their METL tasks around day 68-ish, but held for add'l "training" on breaching.
What was really going on was that no one had ever really trained to execute a brigade-level breaching operation before and they had the 48th run through it a few dozen times to figure it out. Some of those were failures, and were interpreted by legions of folks not aware of what was going on as "these guys don't know what they're doing."
The truth was, no one knew what they were doing. You could've sent 1CAV to FICA in the fall of 1990 and it would've taken them 3 weeks to figure out how to execute a brigade-level deliberate breach.

Additionally, there were political winds blowing around as well. If the ARNG roundouts were deployed, and fought well, then it gave the peace dividend budget-cutters a sharper axe to take to the active force. If they fought poorly, you suddenly had 2 dozen body bags all show up in the same town on the same weekend, and everyone pissed off at the Army, gov't, Pentagon, whatever, all at the same time. The Army didn't want to deal with that.

I've talked with folks who were on all 3 sides of the 48th's FICA rotation in '90-'91: OC's, OPFOR, and the guys from SCARNG's 1-263 AR who went out there w/ the 48th (I was in 1-263 from '00-'04). The popular narrative is that the 48th somehow "failed" because they never deployed. They were certified within the published standard at the time, and it was completely irrelevant b/c the Army leadership never had any intention of deploying them.

It's also interesting that no one - I mean no one - ever says word-freakin'-one about the 155th BDE out of Mississippi, who {a}never made it out of Ft Hood during their pre-GW1 train-up, and {b} were never close to being certified within the 90-days mobilization standard. The 155th was a walking train wreck example of how to fail at risk assessments just by even being mobilized, but everyone just perpetuates the myth of the failure of the 48th to be ready to go to war.
=+=+=+=+=
BayonetBrant
Editorial director ~ www.armchairdragoons.com
Host/Producter ~ Mentioned in Dispatches podcast
All around awesome dude & more handsome than I deserve to be with such a sparkling personality

Image
Rob322
Posts: 618
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 8:53 pm

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by Rob322 »

Fascinating, thanks!

Good for the 48th, sounds like chaos for the 155th. Fortunately, we were going up against a third world army and it wasn't necessary. I wonder how all of this would've gone against a real threat.
ORIGINAL: bayonetbrant

Here's something that had been discussed elsewhere about the 48th BDE (GAARNG), which was the 24th's roundout BDE
The standard was that they were to be deployable within 90 days of mobilization. They were certified around day 82 or so. They were actualy certified on their METL tasks around day 68-ish, but held for add'l "training" on breaching.
What was really going on was that no one had ever really trained to execute a brigade-level breaching operation before and they had the 48th run through it a few dozen times to figure it out. Some of those were failures, and were interpreted by legions of folks not aware of what was going on as "these guys don't know what they're doing."
The truth was, no one knew what they were doing. You could've sent 1CAV to FICA in the fall of 1990 and it would've taken them 3 weeks to figure out how to execute a brigade-level deliberate breach.

Additionally, there were political winds blowing around as well. If the ARNG roundouts were deployed, and fought well, then it gave the peace dividend budget-cutters a sharper axe to take to the active force. If they fought poorly, you suddenly had 2 dozen body bags all show up in the same town on the same weekend, and everyone pissed off at the Army, gov't, Pentagon, whatever, all at the same time. The Army didn't want to deal with that.

I've talked with folks who were on all 3 sides of the 48th's FICA rotation in '90-'91: OC's, OPFOR, and the guys from SCARNG's 1-263 AR who went out there w/ the 48th (I was in 1-263 from '00-'04). The popular narrative is that the 48th somehow "failed" because they never deployed. They were certified within the published standard at the time, and it was completely irrelevant b/c the Army leadership never had any intention of deploying them.

It's also interesting that no one - I mean no one - ever says word-freakin'-one about the 155th BDE out of Mississippi, who {a}never made it out of Ft Hood during their pre-GW1 train-up, and {b} were never close to being certified within the 90-days mobilization standard. The 155th was a walking train wreck example of how to fail at risk assessments just by even being mobilized, but everyone just perpetuates the myth of the failure of the 48th to be ready to go to war.
User avatar
Sabre21
Posts: 7877
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2001 8:00 am
Location: on a mountain in Idaho

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by Sabre21 »

The whole notion of using National Guard brigades as the third brigade of active duty divisions was a huge disaster for that time, most of the Guard brigades just never received the funds nor the training to really take on that mission. The 48th was first selected because it was deemed to be the premier National Guard unit of that size, no doubt their were a lot of politics involved. The 256th Brigade that went to the 5th ID was in pretty horrid shape. I had heard some pretty bad things about the 155th as well as the 48th and saw firsthand the condition of the 256th. At one point an entire company went awol after being at Polk for just a month, but eventually the entire brigade was prepped to deploy. The 256th was entrained as well as the rest of the 5th ID and on their way to the port of Beaumont, TX when the war ended ready or not. I was in the 3-1 Cav at the time and we had an extra ground troop of National Guard assigned to us. I would say these guys were pretty good and would have acquitted themselves well, I have my doubts about the rest of the 256th.

Had we had to actually do a Reforger in the face of a Soviet onslaught, I doubt the roundout units would have made it over there when they were supposed to. Many of these units were pretty understrength in personnel. I suspect the 194th and 197th would have been used as filler brigades for the 1st Cav and 5th ID, and then use the Guard units as the 7th Army reserve assets once they got into country. Getting personnel into the country was one thing, but transitioning them into M1A1's and Bradleys when many of the Guard were still using M60's and M113's is another thing altogether.

Following the Gulf War things changed and all of the active duty divisions that survived the drawdown of the 90's had 3 active duty brigades. The Guard brigades were pulled from being active duty round-out units. As time went by, the overall mindset towards the Guard was changing and during the Iraq war many National Guard brigades deployed alongside their active duty brothers and proved themselves to be equals.

By the way, the 24th was never a Reforger unit, it was part of the Rapid Deployment Force and belonged to the XVIIIth Abn Corps at the time. I have no doubt that they would have been sent to Europe, they just didn't have any pre-positioned equipment in theatre and would have had to bring all of their vehicles with them. The main Reforger units were the 1st Cav Div, 2nd Armored Div, 1st, 4th, and 5th Infantry Divisions, 194th Armored Bde, 197th Inf Bde, along with a couple arty brigades and a host of other smaller units.

The plan was to have all of the Reforger units deployed to Germany in 10 days and then add a few more days to get to their GDP positions. Whether they could have actually done it that quick is anyone's guess. If there had only been a 48 hour warning until the first Soviet tanks crossed the frontier there is no way any Reforger unit would have even left the States. One thing is that the Reforger units would have to bring their aviation assets with them along with their smaller vehicles. So while the personnel would have flown over pretty quickly, all the helicopters and hummvees and what not would have taken quite a bit longer. They may have added smaller vehicles to the Pomcus sites later on but I don't think so.
Image
Rob322
Posts: 618
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 8:53 pm

RE: NATO and 48 hours warning

Post by Rob322 »

I heard that the plans were to convert 9th ID into a mech division but that was scrapped with the drawdown; does that sound right?
ORIGINAL: Sabre21

The whole notion of using National Guard brigades as the third brigade of active duty divisions was a huge disaster for that time, most of the Guard brigades just never received the funds nor the training to really take on that mission. The 48th was first selected because it was deemed to be the premier National Guard unit of that size, no doubt their were a lot of politics involved. The 256th Brigade that went to the 5th ID was in pretty horrid shape. I had heard some pretty bad things about the 155th as well as the 48th and saw firsthand the condition of the 256th. At one point an entire company went awol after being at Polk for just a month, but eventually the entire brigade was prepped to deploy. The 256th was entrained as well as the rest of the 5th ID and on their way to the port of Beaumont, TX when the war ended ready or not. I was in the 3-1 Cav at the time and we had an extra ground troop of National Guard assigned to us. I would say these guys were pretty good and would have acquitted themselves well, I have my doubts about the rest of the 256th.

Had we had to actually do a Reforger in the face of a Soviet onslaught, I doubt the roundout units would have made it over there when they were supposed to. Many of these units were pretty understrength in personnel. I suspect the 194th and 197th would have been used as filler brigades for the 1st Cav and 5th ID, and then use the Guard units as the 7th Army reserve assets once they got into country. Getting personnel into the country was one thing, but transitioning them into M1A1's and Bradleys when many of the Guard were still using M60's and M113's is another thing altogether.

Following the Gulf War things changed and all of the active duty divisions that survived the drawdown of the 90's had 3 active duty brigades. The Guard brigades were pulled from being active duty round-out units. As time went by, the overall mindset towards the Guard was changing and during the Iraq war many National Guard brigades deployed alongside their active duty brothers and proved themselves to be equals.

By the way, the 24th was never a Reforger unit, it was part of the Rapid Deployment Force and belonged to the XVIIIth Abn Corps at the time. I have no doubt that they would have been sent to Europe, they just didn't have any pre-positioned equipment in theatre and would have had to bring all of their vehicles with them. The main Reforger units were the 1st Cav Div, 2nd Armored Div, 1st, 4th, and 5th Infantry Divisions, 194th Armored Bde, 197th Inf Bde, along with a couple arty brigades and a host of other smaller units.

The plan was to have all of the Reforger units deployed to Germany in 10 days and then add a few more days to get to their GDP positions. Whether they could have actually done it that quick is anyone's guess. If there had only been a 48 hour warning until the first Soviet tanks crossed the frontier there is no way any Reforger unit would have even left the States. One thing is that the Reforger units would have to bring their aviation assets with them along with their smaller vehicles. So while the personnel would have flown over pretty quickly, all the helicopters and hummvees and what not would have taken quite a bit longer. They may have added smaller vehicles to the Pomcus sites later on but I don't think so.
Post Reply

Return to “Flashpoint Campaigns Classic”