Battle Armor Regiments in Light Combat Teams

[ajcbm]

What is the average number of Battle Armor in an LCT? Are they all VTOL transported? How many VTOLs and what kind?

Are the VTOLs integral to the BA regiment or are they part of the armor regiments? If integral, are they a unit themselves... say 2 BA battalions, 1 VTOL battalion? Or are they not included in the TOE, say 3 BA battalions with VTOLs?

[Death by Lasers]

  I did a forum search on this a while back and IIRC the creator of the LCT said that their was on average one VTOL battalion per LCT for the transportation of an LCTs Battle Armor.  Ideally an LCT has a full BA regiment and apparently an AFFS BA regiment has 4 Squads per Platoon, 4 Platoons per Company, 4 Companies per Battalion, and 4 Battalions for Regiment making a paper total of 256 BA squads per Regiment or 1024 suits.

  At least when they were introduced few LCTs had the full BA complement although this may have changed in later eras.

[Hellraiser]

1.  1 AFFC BA Regiment per LCT  =  1,024 BA Suits
2.  Unlikely
3.  For all the rest, I think its Unconfirmed, but, its listed as 2 "Cavalry" Battalions per LCT, of which part of them are likely Vtols.  DbL is probably close at 1 Battalion of Vtols.

[Death by Lasers]

  Found it!  The creator is of LCT is the Welshman and what he has to say on the composition of an LCT is in the link and quote below.  It isn't completely canon because it isn't published but he gives a little more idea on what he intended the average composition of an LCT to be.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=20589.180

Armor/VTOLs- I believe I've provided this in an ask the writers at some point. The "ideal" LCT has two battalions of heavy armor, two of cavalry and two of VTOLs. The VTOLs are a mix of recon/attack and transport for the BA.

[bigmac]

What is the average number of Battle Armor in an LCT? Are they all VTOL transported? How many VTOLs and what kind?

Are the VTOLs integral to the BA regiment or are they part of the armor regiments? If integral, are they a unit themselves... say 2 BA battalions, 1 VTOL battalion? Or are they not included in the TOE, say 3 BA battalions with VTOLs?

This list should answer the last part of your question and provides the Technical Readout where the VTOLs were first introduced:

The following VTOLs are used for transporting battle armor:
TRO 3150
Di Multipurpose VTOL – 25 tons, 4 Battle Armor (Lyran Commonwealth has sold this VTOL to the Federated Suns)
J12A1 Attack VTOL – 25 tons, 4 Battle Armor (Federated Suns design)
TRO 3085
Trieme Infantry Transport (Large VTOL) – 60 tons, 36 Battle Armor
Trieme Infantry Transport Close Support (Large VTOL) – 60 tons, 18 Battle Armor
(the Republic has sold this design to the Federated Suns)

TRO 3058 Upgrades
Karnov UR Transport (Battle Armor) (VTOL) – 30 tons, 8 Battle Armor
(the original Battle Armor VTOL transport)

[Tyler Jorgensson]

Uh JI2A1 is a Hovertank for what it's worth....

[Archangel]

Uh JI2A1 is a Hovertank for what it's worth....

Weren't there rumors that Hogarth was overseeing a project that would allow it to convert from hover mode into VTOL mode and back?   :D

[ajcbm]

Yes. I already checked Sarna and the MasterUnitList. I am amazed so few VTOLs were available.

So realistically, only 144 BA can be combat-dropped per operation.

So are the VTOLs included in the TOE? Or do they not appear at all? 

[wantec]

This list should answer the last part of your question and provides the Technical Readout where the VTOLs were first introduced:

The following VTOLs are used for transporting battle armor:
TRO 3150
Di Multipurpose VTOL – 25 tons, 4 Battle Armor (Lyran Commonwealth has sold this VTOL to the Federated Suns)
J12A1 Attack VTOL – 25 tons, 4 Battle Armor (Federated Suns design)
TRO 3085
Trieme Infantry Transport (Large VTOL) – 60 tons, 36 Battle Armor
Trieme Infantry Transport Close Support (Large VTOL) – 60 tons, 18 Battle Armor
(the Republic has sold this design to the Federated Suns)

TRO 3058 Upgrades
Karnov UR Transport (Battle Armor) (VTOL) – 30 tons, 8 Battle Armor
(the original Battle Armor VTOL transport)

Looks like you're missing a few.

I also have (cargo capacity listed):
Warrior H-10 5 tons
Cavalry (Infantry) 4 tons
Cavalry (Infiltrator) 4 tons
Cavalry (Cadence Rain) 4 tons
Ripper (Infantry) 4 tons
Anhur (BA) 10 tons
Anhur (Std) 7 tons
Crane Heavy Transport 8 tons
Cyrano (Fury) 4 tons
Lamprey 4 tons
Pinto (WoB) 6 tons
Shun 12 tons
Cardinal (RAF) 12 tons
Cardinal (Std) 10 tons

Now I realize not all of those will be available to everyone and a few are XTRO entries, but I wanted to put the full list out there.

[sadlerbw]

Yes. I already checked Sarna and the MasterUnitList. I am amazed so few VTOLs were available.

So realistically, only 144 BA can be combat-dropped per operation.

So are the VTOLs included in the TOE? Or do they not appear at all?

I took a look at the thread linked a few posts earlier to what Welshman said, and it appears the BA Transport VTOL's are largely included in the ranks of VTOL's listed as part of the combat vehicle forces. However, he also mentions that the BA have "some organic ground assets." I would take that to mean there are a number of APC's or something similar that are NOT included in the headline ToE forces. Does that mean there is transport for every BA suit? probably not, but I'd guess a high percentage of whatever BA forces they have do have transport assets available.

If it was me, I'd house-rule it and say each BA unit has sufficient APC's to move its troopers (Heavy tracked/wheeled/hover. Whatever you prefer.) included organically with the command. I would say the VTOL transport, however, is much more limited and attached as-needed for specific operations rather than being permanently assigned to any particular BA command. I would include those transport VTOL's in the combat vehicle commands, not as an unspoken part of the BA commands. Basically, I'd assume a BA regiment automatically includes simple APC's to move nearly the whole unit on the ground that don't show up by name in the ToE.

[ajcbm]

I took a look at the thread linked a few posts earlier to what Welshman said, and it appears the BA Transport VTOL's are largely included in the ranks of VTOL's listed as part of the combat vehicle forces. However, he also mentions that the BA have "some organic ground assets." I would take that to mean there are a number of APC's or something similar that are NOT included in the headline ToE forces. Does that mean there is transport for every BA suit? probably not, but I'd guess a high percentage of whatever BA forces they have do have transport assets available.

If it was me, I'd house-rule it and say each BA unit has sufficient APC's to move its troopers (Heavy tracked/wheeled/hover. Whatever you prefer.) included organically with the command. I would say the VTOL transport, however, is much more limited and attached as-needed for specific operations rather than being permanently assigned to any particular BA command. I would include those transport VTOL's in the combat vehicle commands, not as an unspoken part of the BA commands. Basically, I'd assume a BA regiment automatically includes simple APC's to move nearly the whole unit on the ground that don't show up by name in the ToE.

I am really against invisible units like that. Remember, an APC takes the same space as a Patton.

[Kidd]

Interesting thread.

Based on real-world formations and the observation that no military ever had ALL the assets it strictly needed, I'd postulate a typical LCT BA regiment of 1,024 suits would have something roughly like 25% tactical (squad size, eg Cavalrys and Karnovs) VTOL transports, 25% large VTOL transports (Triremes), 25% organic APCs and 25% footsloggers or cargo trucks (representing hardware shortfalls).

So, something like:
-36 Cavalry VTOLs, as part of the combat vehicle regt
-16 Karnov (BA) VTOLs, and
-8 Trireme VTOLs, and
-64 Heavy APCs, as transports organic to the BA regt.
-and another 256 BAs will be carried in trucks or on foot

I am really against invisible units like that. Remember, an APC takes the same space as a Patton.

Its inevitable. Not even real world military TOEs log every single truck and vehicle - there are inevitably extras and (perhaps more commonly) shortfalls. And Battletech FMs are of the even more abbreviated kind that note only combat units.

[sadlerbw]

I am really against invisible units like that. Remember, an APC takes the same space as a Patton.

Do you feel the same about Motorized and Mechanized infantry in the game? They both, essentially, do the same sort of thing and include invisible, un-statted vehicles that just get rolled into the infantry unit. I mean, you don't need a vehicle bay to transport the APC's for a Mechanized infantry Platoon either.

I do understand where you are coming from, but it boils down to practicality for me. If a house unit has one thousand suits of Battle Armor, I can't believe they wouldn't have some sort of transport assets to move them. Maybe not full-on combat vehicles, but they should at least have trucks or vees as part of the force so 70% of the force doesn't have to walk to the fight. That is actually why I picked the Heavy APC. It is a lightly armored transport with almost no offensive capability or reason to exist besides moving troops around. It is basically the non-abstract version of what Mechanized Infantry in the game use. I supposed I could have said 'invisible unarmored trucks' instead, but I like the idea of using an actual unit that has stats and can be attacked before the BA dismount.

It was REAL tempting to say Karnov's instead of APC's, but for me giving them airborne transport was a little bit too much of a freebie. I know it is the far future and all that, but I still feel like airborne transport should still be more rare than ground transport. I admit that is just a personal thing though.

I guess the bottom line for me is that, if the unit is really nothing but a transport with no other impact to add to a battle, I'm willing to sweep it under the rug and not force it to take up a slot in the headline ToE. That doesn't make it the right way to do things, just what I'm comfortable with.

[wantec]

Why would each BA unit have to have it's own transport? Couldn't they be deployed in two waves? I don't view infantry and most BA as a hard-charging offensive unit, but as a defensive unit. In that sense, having two waves to move them from dropship to battlefield isn't a big deal if they're not getting tossed into combat immediately.

[ColBosch]

I have never seen a truly complete and accurate TO&E for any unit, in history, ever. Just assume the extra vehicles are carried in DropShip cargo space if it's so bothersome.

[Arkansas Warrior]

I am really against invisible units like that. Remember, an APC takes the same space as a Patton.

Not unless you're using Trajans or King Karnovs or something.  Most APCs/IFVs are light vehicles.

[Arkansas Warrior]

Looks like you're missing a few.

I also have (cargo capacity listed):
Warrior H-10 5 tons
Cavalry (Infantry) 4 tons
Cavalry (Infiltrator) 4 tons
Cavalry (Cadence Rain) 4 tons
Ripper (Infantry) 4 tons
Anhur (BA) 10 tons
Anhur (Std) 7 tons
Crane Heavy Transport 8 tons
Cyrano (Fury) 4 tons
Lamprey 4 tons
Pinto (WoB) 6 tons
Shun 12 tons
Cardinal (RAF) 12 tons
Cardinal (Std) 10 tons

Now I realize not all of those will be available to everyone and a few are XTRO entries, but I wanted to put the full list out there.

Don't forget the Maxim(Infantry), with 12 tons of capacity

[wantec]

Don't forget the Maxim(Infantry), with 12 tons of capacity

Of course if you're talking all types of transports, but the initial list I was responding to was just VTOLs that could carry BA.

[snewsom2997]

I would expect VTOL transport for maybe a 1/4 of BA, with APCs/IFV's carrying another quarter or so. So you would have 1/2 foot slogging or waiting for the VTOL to cycle back to base to pick you up for another wave, if you were not hot dropped direct from the dropship.

I would expect the APCs and VTOLs to be stored as cargo, and not even use vehicle Bays, BA you can hot drop, APC's not such a good idea, and IIRC you cannot launch VTOLs unless the Dropship is grounded, and even then I don't see them flying out a hole in the side, but being rolled down a ramp and then launched.

Even the US Army 101st cannot move the entire Brigade at once with integral air assets and they are specifically an Airborne Unit.

I'd imagine a Motorpool or a transportation Regiment, would be tasked with providing transport out side of integral assets everything from Humvee equivalents to Big Oskosh type vehicles, as well as transport and Cargo VTOLS. Something landed in a Mule after the beachhead is secured.

[Arkansas Warrior]

Of course if you're talking all types of transports, but the initial list I was responding to was just VTOLs that could carry BA.

 [metalhealth]   D'oh!

[sadlerbw]

Why would each BA unit have to have it's own transport? Couldn't they be deployed in two waves? I don't view infantry and most BA as a hard-charging offensive unit, but as a defensive unit. In that sense, having two waves to move them from dropship to battlefield isn't a big deal if they're not getting tossed into combat immediately.

Ahh, I DO think of BA as an offensive unit, especially in the context of an LCT, so we probably have different expectations there. I also concede that you are probably correct that some portion of that force is expected to be defensive and doesn't really need dedicated transport. In my mind, that isn't more than 25% though. The transport-in-waves idea has some merit as well. I'm not sure what percentage is reasonable to be available in a single wave, but I can live with the idea that a couple units all share the same transport, at least in terms of VTOL transport. As I said, I thought of the VTOL transport as being limited and included in the headline numbers of combat vehicles. It's really the boring, simple, not-really-armed APC's that I assume to exist outside the normal ToE, and I probably assume a lot more of those than you would.

A lot of that comes from the idea that, while they don't have to lead the charge, BA infantry should at least be able to keep up with the rest of the force. That is absolutely a headcanon thing for me, not anything official. However, as battle is a highly mobile endeavor with mechs and combat vehicles, it just makes sense to me that BA should be able to keep up with the rest of the force when on the move. With little or no mechanized transport and limited VTOL transport, you just can't keep much of your BA in the fight if you are on the offensive. I think of it sort of like a Naval fleet: It is only as fast as the slowest ship. Without transport, your BA becomes the limiting factor in how fast the whole force can move, or your have to leave some potentially large percentage behind when you are on the offense. If you don't then your VTOL assets are split between re-deploying troops already on the field, and heading out to pick up another wave. If mechanized transport is assumed, they can hop back in the APC's when the battle moves and keep up with the rest of the battle line. Still, this is just my personal preference, and how I would envision things. No one else has to do it the same way!

Also, if mag-clamp BA was more prevalent, it would make this whole situation much easier to deal with. Who needs an APC when you can stick yourself to any old combat vehicle!

[Archangel]

Units may also attach additional/replacement transports on a case-by-case basis especially if environmental conditions preclude a certain type of transport be deployed or limits its effectiveness.  For example, most battle armor transports aren't designed for operating in a vacuum while tracked/wheeled vehicles are going to have limited effectiveness if the fighting is taking place on a chain of islands in the middle of the ocean and VTOLs are going to have difficulties flying in environments with a thin atmosphere or high winds.

A unit commander may also choose intentionally not to deploy the entire regiment into the field all at once whether to keep a reserve force/rear area security (ex.: security for artillery/LZ/base) or because some of the battle armor isn't particularly effective for the mission (ex.: Sea Fox battle armor).  Alternatively, he may choose to deploy them in a non-standard fashion such as a combat drop or via boat (which I guess for the Sea Fox could be considered standard although it is debatable whether boats are permanently attached to a LCT).

[wantec]

Ahh, I DO think of BA as an offensive unit, especially in the context of an LCT, so we probably have different expectations there. I also concede that you are probably correct that some portion of that force is expected to be defensive and doesn't really need dedicated transport. In my mind, that isn't more than 25% though. The transport-in-waves idea has some merit as well. I'm not sure what percentage is reasonable to be available in a single wave, but I can live with the idea that a couple units all share the same transport, at least in terms of VTOL transport. As I said, I thought of the VTOL transport as being limited and included in the headline numbers of combat vehicles. It's really the boring, simple, not-really-armed APC's that I assume to exist outside the normal ToE, and I probably assume a lot more of those than you would.

A lot of that comes from the idea that, while they don't have to lead the charge, BA infantry should at least be able to keep up with the rest of the force. That is absolutely a headcanon thing for me, not anything official. However, as battle is a highly mobile endeavor with mechs and combat vehicles, it just makes sense to me that BA should be able to keep up with the rest of the force when on the move. With little or no mechanized transport and limited VTOL transport, you just can't keep much of your BA in the fight if you are on the offensive. I think of it sort of like a Naval fleet: It is only as fast as the slowest ship. Without transport, your BA becomes the limiting factor in how fast the whole force can move, or your have to leave some potentially large percentage behind when you are on the offense. If you don't then your VTOL assets are split between re-deploying troops already on the field, and heading out to pick up another wave. If mechanized transport is assumed, they can hop back in the APC's when the battle moves and keep up with the rest of the battle line. Still, this is just my personal preference, and how I would envision things. No one else has to do it the same way!

Also, if mag-clamp BA was more prevalent, it would make this whole situation much easier to deal with. Who needs an APC when you can stick yourself to any old combat vehicle!

I think of it the same way, but the dropships are the transport ships, the VTOLs/APCs are the landing craft

[Arkansas Warrior]

Also, if mag-clamp BA was more prevalent, it would make this whole situation much easier to deal with. Who needs an APC when you can stick yourself to any old combat vehicle!

the AFFS does have a mag-clamp version of the Infiltrator II that's quite nice, and I suspect is produced in greater numbers than the original variant by 3145.


Edit: Two actually, but I'm thinking of the one named "Magnetic", not the one built for Marine ops.

[Death by Lasers]

Even the US Army 101st cannot move the entire Brigade at once with integral air assets and they are specifically an Airborne Unit.

I'd imagine a Motorpool or a transportation Regiment, would be tasked with providing transport out side of integral assets everything from Humvee equivalents to Big Oskosh type vehicles, as well as transport and Cargo VTOLS. Something landed in a Mule after the beachhead is secured.

  I'm thinking along the same lines, like "We were Soldiers" depicts on screen, or having the BA arrive in cargo trucks behind the lines like motorized infantry.

[pheonixstorm]

Lets not forget that some of these BA will also be transported on Omnimechs as well as Combat, Omni, and Support Vees.

[Arkansas Warrior]

Maybe, but number and type of omnis will vary tremendously and can't really be counted on reliably to fill a certain role.  Support vehicles are fine out of combat, but not nearly as useful at the tactical level.

[BrokenMnemonic]

Its inevitable. Not even real world military TOEs log every single truck and vehicle - there are inevitably extras and (perhaps more commonly) shortfalls. And Battletech FMs are of the even more abbreviated kind that note only combat units.

I have never seen a truly complete and accurate TO&E for any unit, in history, ever. Just assume the extra vehicles are carried in DropShip cargo space if it's so bothersome.

Just to be the naysayer here, I've been working in the vehicles and equipment world supporting the British Army since 1999, and on the first day on the job I was shown what a Unit Equipment Table was - which listed every vehicle required by that unit, at a liability code level, as well as MERLIN, the IT system that tracked every vehicle in service with the armed forces. MERLIN has now been replaced with JAMES, but every unit equipment table is defined and there are paperwork and IT systems for tracking all of the vehicle locations/owning units. There's also an annual census that has to be performed that the National Audit Office mandates must locate 99.8% of all registered vehicles and equipments with Equipment Registration Numbers, and I'm not aware of us ever having missed that target.

Admittedly, the British armed forces are an order of magnitude smaller than the US armed forces, and stuff will go missing, but the system works pretty well. It's become even more important in recent years because of budgetary constraints on vehicle and equipment buys and "whole life" buys of vehicles and equipment.

[Kidd]

Just to be the naysayer here...

Yes, well, all due respect to you and your profession, I do know that there are detailed unit equipment set lists and registers carefully maintained by army quartermasters, but the point of what I was saying is that we players should not expect every last little detail to be meticulously noted in the Field Manuals, it rapidly becomes tedious and pointless.

When I said that not even IRL militaries track units that meticulously, I meant that 1) the TOEs given in BT are the kind that are abbreviated to just key combat units, like some RL examples, and 2) attrition and the vagaries of military budgets render even the most exacting official TOEs inaccurate in short order.

The British Army in particular should be aware of the latter; I understand a lot of vehicle and equipment borrowing takes place pre-deployment to make up the numbers of operational equipment to what they should be on the TOE. (They call it "Whole Fleet Management" nowadays don't they?)

But if any player wants to list every equipment an RCT should carry down to the regimental mascot's dog-cart, they are welcome to do so...

[Nebfer]

I do not think the typical OOBs we see with the manuals are full up ToEs, they do not even list the Techs and other sport staff most of the time. As such I view that many of the OOBs we see in the manuals are rough lists of line combat units only.
Support units and HQ elements are not being typically listed, though some times are to some degree. I.e. I generally believe that all units have separate cmd elements, units that do list them in the OOBs tend to view them as either having more of a combat role or expect them to be engaged in combat operations more often than the ones that do not. This dose not mean that a unit needs a combat (or non combat) element of the correct unit type for it's command unit (I.e. mechs do not need mechs for a HQ or even one that can fight back).