Self Propelled Gun/Rocket Launcher
- Thread starter FORBIN
- Start date
Recon
by78
General
A very strange answer. I didn't ask you for the how the serial numbers work. I asked you how you know these PHL-03s belong to the 5th battalion. Do you have access to the 77th Group Army's organizational chart?
Furthermore, your answer raises more questions. If 5xxx are recon battalions, then why would a recon battalion be armed with PHL-03s?
I'll ask you again, do you have any sources to back up your claims, or are you making stuff up again? Sinodefence Forum isn't a place for misinformation.
Don't unnecessarily be aggressive. I never said Recon Battalion of 77th Artillery Brigade
I gave an example of a normal Combined Arms Brigade.
Each Group Army Artillery brigade has 6 battalions minimum (combination of 2/4 Howitzer and 4/2 MLRS ). In that, my appreciation is that 5th Battalion is PHLO3 based on the serial numbers on the PHLO3
Please stop being unnecessarily aggressive. There is a method in my assessment. If you don't agree, just say that. Professional discussions are hallmark of any good blog.
I gave an example of a normal Combined Arms Brigade.
Each Group Army Artillery brigade has 6 battalions minimum (combination of 2/4 Howitzer and 4/2 MLRS ). In that, my appreciation is that 5th Battalion is PHLO3 based on the serial numbers on the PHLO3
Please stop being unnecessarily aggressive. There is a method in my assessment. If you don't agree, just say that. Professional discussions are hallmark of any good blog.
by78
General
When your post contains your personal speculation, you need to make it clear that it's speculative. Don't state it as a fact. Use signal phrases such as "I believe", "this might be", and so on.
Why did you give an example of a Combined Arms Brigade when my question was specifically about the Artillery Brigade?
It's interesting that you would equate asking questions with aggression. Please stop beating around the bush. Explain why you think those PHL-03s belong to the 5th battalion. Is it because the vehicle serial (5xxx) starts with number 5? If so, you need to provide evidence that connects the serial numbers to specific battalions. This is literally constructive discussion 101.
What's your source that each artillery brigade has "6 battalions minimum (combination of 2/4 Howitzer and 4/2 MLRS)"? Please provide a link to your source.
Since you sarcastically called me an expert, I will pretend to be an expert for a minute. According to the , each PLA Group Army artillery brigade has four battalions (albeit notionally): one battalion armed with 122mm MLRS, one battalion armed with 300mm MLRS, and two battalions armed with howitzers of various calibers. Therefore, according to Publication ATP 7-100.3, a PLA Group Army artillery brigade is unlikely to contain a 5th battalion, at least not notionally.
Last edited:
Apologies for the lengthy post, but just recently I was analysing Russian and Ukrainian arty units and this piqued my interest. Hopefully it's helpful.
I would also like to see a source for this claim. The structure you described is extremely unusual for an artillery unit. It seems counter-productive from the point of managing operations and executing fire missions.
An artillery brigade is a corps or army level support unit, and with some exceptions as a division level unit - typically division level support units are regiments. However support units don't work the same way as combined arms units (infantry / armor) and they don't grow in size between echelons i.e. an artillery brigade or division (traditional name for army level unit) is not necessarily larger than an artillery regiment. The name indicates its organic level of subordination within the hierarchy of command. An artillery battalion is subordinate to brigade hq and not division or higher. Division hq issues orders to brigade hq and the brigade executes them on its own terms. If division hq has need of artillery support it has its own artillery regiment or brigade. Similarly corps and army have their own organic units for when they need to execute a fire mission or reinforce lower echelon artillery.
Six battalions of artillery is too many units. The logistical train for artillery is massive and every battalion needs a separate train at battalion as well as a train at brigade level.
It's also too much fragmentation of structure.
Typically every battalion has 2 or 3 batteries of 2 or 3 fire platoons each consisting of 2, 3 or 4 individual systems. The structure of each battalion reflects the type of fire mission that any given system performs. For example tube artillery usually has 2 or 4 howitzers per fire platoon and 6 or 8 per battery.
The battery is the actual "fighting unit" of artillery battalions much like company is the actual fighting force of a combined arms battalion. Battalions don't fight and instead they deploy a battery to any single fire mission. The battery has 2 or 3 fire platoons which take turns shooting, relocating and reloading. Every fire platoon has a specific firepower that is calculated by number of shells per salvo and the number of salvoes to execute a fire mission.
The fire missions are traditionally described in artillery tables. The tables list how many shells of a given type are required to destroy, neutralize or suppress a given type of target.
If an artillery brigade has 6 battalions it means it has 12 to 18 batteries managed by a single hq with a single recon/UAV unit.
It's a misconception that if a division consists of three brigades and each brigade has an artillery battalion then divisional artillery must have a battalion per brigade. Divisional artillery only fulfills roles that brigades can't. If the division is in combat then it usually fights with a single brigade forward i.e. with single artillery battalion forward. Divisional artillery doubles that number and there are potentially two more battalions from the two remaining brigades in the rear. If all three brigades are in active combat then they fight with reduced strength to rotate forces - a battalion forward with a battery supporting it, so again divisional artillery has sufficient forces to match.
A support unit only needs to fulfill the necessary tasks that the subordinate units can't fulfill. Once that is achieved it's more useful to pass the assets down the chain of command to lower echelon because they're more effectively used this way. Concentration of assets is inefficient. It only is done when echelons are not competent to execute the tasks on their own.
So if this hypothetical artillery brigade has six battalions worth of assets it would make more sense to consolidate battalions and expand the batteries and fire platoons so the battalions are stronger and pass the remainder to other units. Or better yet it should be split into two arty brigades with three battalions each.
Also the typical structure is: 2 battalions of tube artillery and 1 battalion of rocket artillery or 1 battalion of short-range MLRS and 1 battalion of long-range MLRS if there are two types of systems in service. They're split due to logistics reqs, range and different artillery (damage) tables. The reason why there are two howitzer battalions is because they're slower (towed or tracked self-propelled) and are more easily reduced in effectiveness by losses due to enemy fire. So two battalions are used so that one is always ready for combat.
So to summarize this explanation:
If PLA uses 152/155mm howitzers, 122mm mlrs and 300mm mlrs it will have three battalions - one of each type - split into 2,3 or 4 batteries per requirement, and a "reserve" howitzer battalion to ensure availability of a single battalion.
For six battalions to make sense it would have to be two 122mm tube, two 152/155mm tube and single 122mm mlrs and 300mm mlrs but that doesn't make tactical sense because mixing 122mm tube and 152/155mm tube doesn't make tactical sense. 122mm is regimental artillery - it supports battalions, not brigades or divisions. The range of 15-20km puts it and its logistics too close to the front.
So it would have to be towed 152/155mm for air transport like US Army did in DivArty for divisions with SBCT/IBCT (25th) or ABCT/IBCT (4th). But that makes sense for a specific brigade supporting specific mix of units, not general structure.
In the past - per Soviet doctrine - artillery units had anti-tank artillery battalions and they're still part of Russian artillery groups in brigades but that is one more.
Ukrainian artillery brigades before the war also had 5 battalions each: 4x 152mm long range towed (2A36, 2A65) and 1x 100mm AT (MT-12) but they weren't proper artillery brigades but administrative units that aggregated artillery that would then support individual brigades (AFU brigades only had 2S3 and 2S1 so they were outranged by Russian 2S19) or individual battalions (because AFU brigades were often split into separate battalions fighting in different places). But that was bad planning and bad practice.
I expect PLA to be on Russian/US level of combined arms doctrine and those structures are publicly available online. Both concentrate tube artillery in large numbers but within divisions. Separate arty brigades are small because that's the point.
So if you have a source please link it. Otherwise someone made a mistake and we shouldn't repeat it.
I would also like to see a source for this claim. The structure you described is extremely unusual for an artillery unit. It seems counter-productive from the point of managing operations and executing fire missions.
An artillery brigade is a corps or army level support unit, and with some exceptions as a division level unit - typically division level support units are regiments. However support units don't work the same way as combined arms units (infantry / armor) and they don't grow in size between echelons i.e. an artillery brigade or division (traditional name for army level unit) is not necessarily larger than an artillery regiment. The name indicates its organic level of subordination within the hierarchy of command. An artillery battalion is subordinate to brigade hq and not division or higher. Division hq issues orders to brigade hq and the brigade executes them on its own terms. If division hq has need of artillery support it has its own artillery regiment or brigade. Similarly corps and army have their own organic units for when they need to execute a fire mission or reinforce lower echelon artillery.
Six battalions of artillery is too many units. The logistical train for artillery is massive and every battalion needs a separate train at battalion as well as a train at brigade level.
It's also too much fragmentation of structure.
Typically every battalion has 2 or 3 batteries of 2 or 3 fire platoons each consisting of 2, 3 or 4 individual systems. The structure of each battalion reflects the type of fire mission that any given system performs. For example tube artillery usually has 2 or 4 howitzers per fire platoon and 6 or 8 per battery.
The battery is the actual "fighting unit" of artillery battalions much like company is the actual fighting force of a combined arms battalion. Battalions don't fight and instead they deploy a battery to any single fire mission. The battery has 2 or 3 fire platoons which take turns shooting, relocating and reloading. Every fire platoon has a specific firepower that is calculated by number of shells per salvo and the number of salvoes to execute a fire mission.
The fire missions are traditionally described in artillery tables. The tables list how many shells of a given type are required to destroy, neutralize or suppress a given type of target.
If an artillery brigade has 6 battalions it means it has 12 to 18 batteries managed by a single hq with a single recon/UAV unit.
It's a misconception that if a division consists of three brigades and each brigade has an artillery battalion then divisional artillery must have a battalion per brigade. Divisional artillery only fulfills roles that brigades can't. If the division is in combat then it usually fights with a single brigade forward i.e. with single artillery battalion forward. Divisional artillery doubles that number and there are potentially two more battalions from the two remaining brigades in the rear. If all three brigades are in active combat then they fight with reduced strength to rotate forces - a battalion forward with a battery supporting it, so again divisional artillery has sufficient forces to match.
A support unit only needs to fulfill the necessary tasks that the subordinate units can't fulfill. Once that is achieved it's more useful to pass the assets down the chain of command to lower echelon because they're more effectively used this way. Concentration of assets is inefficient. It only is done when echelons are not competent to execute the tasks on their own.
So if this hypothetical artillery brigade has six battalions worth of assets it would make more sense to consolidate battalions and expand the batteries and fire platoons so the battalions are stronger and pass the remainder to other units. Or better yet it should be split into two arty brigades with three battalions each.
Also the typical structure is: 2 battalions of tube artillery and 1 battalion of rocket artillery or 1 battalion of short-range MLRS and 1 battalion of long-range MLRS if there are two types of systems in service. They're split due to logistics reqs, range and different artillery (damage) tables. The reason why there are two howitzer battalions is because they're slower (towed or tracked self-propelled) and are more easily reduced in effectiveness by losses due to enemy fire. So two battalions are used so that one is always ready for combat.
So to summarize this explanation:
If PLA uses 152/155mm howitzers, 122mm mlrs and 300mm mlrs it will have three battalions - one of each type - split into 2,3 or 4 batteries per requirement, and a "reserve" howitzer battalion to ensure availability of a single battalion.
For six battalions to make sense it would have to be two 122mm tube, two 152/155mm tube and single 122mm mlrs and 300mm mlrs but that doesn't make tactical sense because mixing 122mm tube and 152/155mm tube doesn't make tactical sense. 122mm is regimental artillery - it supports battalions, not brigades or divisions. The range of 15-20km puts it and its logistics too close to the front.
So it would have to be towed 152/155mm for air transport like US Army did in DivArty for divisions with SBCT/IBCT (25th) or ABCT/IBCT (4th). But that makes sense for a specific brigade supporting specific mix of units, not general structure.
In the past - per Soviet doctrine - artillery units had anti-tank artillery battalions and they're still part of Russian artillery groups in brigades but that is one more.
Ukrainian artillery brigades before the war also had 5 battalions each: 4x 152mm long range towed (2A36, 2A65) and 1x 100mm AT (MT-12) but they weren't proper artillery brigades but administrative units that aggregated artillery that would then support individual brigades (AFU brigades only had 2S3 and 2S1 so they were outranged by Russian 2S19) or individual battalions (because AFU brigades were often split into separate battalions fighting in different places). But that was bad planning and bad practice.
I expect PLA to be on Russian/US level of combined arms doctrine and those structures are publicly available online. Both concentrate tube artillery in large numbers but within divisions. Separate arty brigades are small because that's the point.
So if you have a source please link it. Otherwise someone made a mistake and we shouldn't repeat it.
Absolutely valid thoughts. Let me clarify each. Will share each article by digging. It will take some time.
But first understand the unique structure of Artillery in PLA of a standard Group Army by excluding Xinjiang (also 84th GroupArmy) and Tibet Military Regions (also 85th Group Army)
Each Group Army has six Combined Arms Brigades with six supporting Brigades- SOF, Artillery, Army Aviation, Engineers and Chemical Defence, Air Defence and Service Support
Each Combined Arms Brigade has one Artillery Battalion comprising three 122mm Howitzer companies/ batteries, one 122mm MLRS battery, ATGM battery and Support Battery having UAVs & Weapon locating radars (SLC2 / SLC2C). Depending on the type of brigade whether it is light/ mountain/ HIMOB, Medium/Amphibious or Heavy, the 122mm Howitzer or MLRS provided is Wheeled or tracked.
The Group Army Artillery brigade then has to Support & provide long range firepower support for 6 Combined Arms Brigades, SOF brigade etc.
Study of detailed organizational structure requires a lot of dots to be joined. Except US, No country generally put its internal organization structure for all to see on a platter. Please see training videos and then realize that every Group Army Artillery brigade has the following variety of equipment introduced post Mechanisation- PHL03 MLRS (300mm), PCL191 or PHL16 MLRS (variety of pods -300mm, 370mm etc), PCL181 Howitzer (155mm) Before reforms, they had Type66 152 mm and 130 mm etc.
Over the next few days, I will dig out official releases and share here to support the assessment. However, for easy reference, you can download US Army's ATP 7-100 3.0 for their study of artillery
by78
General
Thank you for regurgitating information from publication , a document that I had provided in the first place and which I had read in its entirety. So pardon me, but what's your point exactly? To show that you can copy and paste? You still haven't answered any of our questions.
In fact, clearly contradicts you on the composition of PLA Group Army artillery brigades. According to ATP 7-100.3, Chapter 2, Section 25, each PLA Group Army artillery brigade contains only four battalions, not six (or more) as you claim.
Below is the exact text from the relevant section:
ARTILLERY BRIGADE
2-25. The artillery brigade in the group army employs a variety of towed guns, self-propelled guns (SPGs), light (122-mm) and heavy (300-mm) rocket artillery systems, and antitank and assault vehicles. These systems are employed to mass fires on critical targets, reinforce fires at lower echelons (chiefly the CA-BDE), deter or deny enemy actions, and offset enemy advantages in close combat. Artillery brigade assets may be employed in direct or general support of CA-BDEs. Artillery battalions include organic surveillance and target acquisition assets, including UAS, electronic intelligence (ELINT) systems, and traditional long-range visual forward-observation platforms. It is not clear how effectively the PLAA can task-organize fires; it traditionally preferred to centralize fires in order to maximize the effects of mass, but the movement toward smaller tactical formations and modularization requires that lower echelons be capable of employing effective fire support. In addition to its indirect fire capability, each artillery battalion includes an antitank guided missile (ATGM) company, employing light armored vehicles mounted with ATGMs. Artillery brigade composition varies significantly based on operational requirements and system availability. A notional artillery brigade contains—
Are you saying that Publication ATP 7-100.3 is wrong? If so, please provide evidence and sources to prove it. Stop beating around the bush and going on tangents. Just give us a straightforward answer backed by clear logic and evidence. Seriously, getting information from you is like pulling teeth, when it really shouldn't be this difficult.
Last edited: