Close Topic Options

Combat Warfare: MOUT

Combat Warfare: MOUT

Based on your experiences what for you was the tactical Combat Warfare: MOUT's environment advantages and disadvantages against the enemy?

MOUT Warfare Combat

Not my field of expertise, but are we speaking of a training program? Or the tactical aspects of urban warfare in general?

Combat Warfare: MOUT History & Civil Business Politics

Advantage if you are in there first, Disavantage if you are going in to take those in there out.

With an urban terrain you can be fighting door to door trying to remove other fighters who are dug in and fighting you from all levels. Trying to get in and finding them to eliminate them is one of the most grueling and hardest things to do.

If you are the forces in the urban terrain you have a great advantage and can have a small force that can take on and maybe even eliminate a large force. It is not a easy fight to take the imbedded fighters out and a smart commander will use his troops wisely by trying to funnel the invading troops into a funnel and therefore a high kill zone.

MOUT Warfare Combat

Daishain,

We are discussing actual military operations conducted in an urban environment.

This is the most difficult terrain to fight in if you are the attacker. Warfare is multi-dimensional in that the enemy can be at street level, above you in multi-story buildings, and a smart enemy will be below you in the sewers too. This allows the enemy to shoot at you from above and at your level and from multiple directions. As you advance, if he the enemy used the sewers he can pop up behind you for a quick hit and run raid. You can be literally receiving fire from all around you. A good defender will have the city set up, through demolishing buildings, use of booby traps, and constructing walls, abattis, and concertina wire to funnel an attacker into kill zones, which can be catastrophic.

Depending on how willing an attacker is to destroy the city and inflict collateral damage it could take a 20 - 1 ration to take a city. The less willing to inflict collateral casualties on the civilian population the higher the ratio. Even at this high ratio an attacker will incur incredibly high losses. Taking a city could easily become a pyrrhic victory. The best was to accomplish this is to hit a small portion of a city fro two directions, from a force on the ground and from another rappelling down from helicopters. Height is critical in a city. If you can get above the defenders it's much easier to push them down and out of a building, and into the fire of the ground force. Also, grenades roll down easier than they are thrown up. Also, strategic placement of snipers for support and recon is critical. Once a section is taken, it must be secured by placing defensive forces in it so the enemy can't work its way back and get in your rear. The sewers need to either be taken or destroyed. Then, move to the next section.

As you can see, this will take a long time and be quite costly in personnel.

Edited: Abnninja on 5th Mar, 2017 - 6:18pm