Motorising the PLA's Light Infantry

It will I am sure come as no shock that; in a response to a national emergency, that the majority of reserve and volunteer troops raised would be technically light infantry.

In order however for these units to be effective, let alone integrated into "Informationalisation" they would really need to be motorised and preferably in something rather more substantial that a soft top truck.

I had a look to see what the PLA currently has in its inventory that would be cheap and fast to build enmass and which could also pack a bit of extra punch as well in support. Looking on SinoDefence I was rather bewildered by the wide array of wheeled and tracked APC's IFV's etc.

While the 8 Wheeled future vehicle is no doubt very nice, I suspect that the WZ523 is more likely to represent the vehicle mass produced fort his purpose.
I wonder if anybody has more concise thoughts?

Hi SampanViking

Not really sure just how much more effort it takes to manufacture the WZ551/ZSL92 APC as compared to the WZ523/ZSL93 APC, but it seems that the former is unquestionably superior to the latter for most tactical purposes without becoming very heavy itself (~15 tonnes as opposed to ~12 tonnes). The extra 3 tonnes are probably worth it and don't impose any practical penalties. Still, 8x8 is better than 6x6 for most purposes, and both the aforementioned are 6x6s. Perhaps the question might be to what extent are wheeled armoured vehicles necessary for the purposes you describe.

If the Infantry in question are from Light Infantry Divisions, then they would probably best be transported by trucks for long road marches (or better yet, airlifted to or near their destination). Other than a very limited quantity of armoured vehicles, preferably tracked, to support them in battle, wheeled AFVs in a quantity sufficient to move the entire Division are probably excessive, and would be unable most of the time to operate in the close country that Light Infantry units specialize in.

If the Infantry are from traditional Foot Infantry Divisions, then much the same applies; the question here really is whether the Foot Infantry Divisions of old should be converted to Light Infantry Divisions or to Mechanized Infantry Divisions. In the latter case, long road marches using trucks (or better still, by rail) are preferrable, and a plentiful scale of tracked armoured vehicles for battlefield use.

Hi Norfolk

I was rather hoping to catch your eye

Thanks for your answer which does highlight the number of variables and questions etc that a loose topic is going to open. Maybe if I were to expand a little on what I had in mind would help, especially if I am mislabelling anything or misunderstanding the role of certain infantry designations.

Here goes.

There is a major military emergency involving an an adjacent or close Asian State or States. The PRC is fully mobilising across the board and calling up all reservists and recruiting volunteers.

The immediate requirement of the PLA is to get a large number of troops into the conflict zone and contain it from spreading. TO do this they need to get a huge number of full time and reserve Light Infantry into the zone in order to infiltrate into all unoccupied space, close down the oppositions ability to move freely, reconnoitre enemy deployments, designations and strength, insinuate itself into gaps and ingress through cracks to move about the rear hold strategic choke points, disrupt logistics.

None of this is assault, its about moving fast, taking and holding ground and forcing the enemy to engage and commit maximum forces whilst the Heavy units roll up from behind and using the Recon Intel from the light forces deliver the Hammer Blows.

To do this effectively, you need to be able to move very quickly over both rough terrain and urban environments and be able to quickly dig in and hold on. Air Mobility is fine, but we all know Choppers are expensive and historically in short supply. Soft top trucks are certainly cheap and plentiful but very vulnerable. Even one Assault rifle could cause carnage at first contact.

This is why a cheap and cheerful wheeled APC seems to be the appropriate choice, sporting a bit of extra fire support. To my mind at least, the prospect of a large number of these vehicles sporting a range of different mounted weapons and plugged into the "Informationalization" Command system could form a highly effective system on the ground to combat heavier armour and Ground Attack Aircraft, if only to distract, frustrate and generally tie up allowing greater freedom of movement for your own forces behind your lines etc.

I hope I have covered all the ground I was wanting to cover, anyway after shooting my mouth off, its time for you to rip my quaint notions to shreds

Well, Great Viking across the Waves, I may be doing some shredding; but maybe not too much.

I think I understand what you have in mind, but I'm not sure that most Light Formations operating mainly in close country (and often with relatively few roads) would be well served by being fully equipped with light, wheeled APCs, but perhaps the leading elements would. In the sort of scenario you are describing the lead Battalion or Regiment/Brigade or even Division in each major column (each the remainder of a Regiment/Brigade or Division or a Group Army mounted in trucks for rapid long-distance movement) could be well served by having such wheeled APCs to clear the route for the main follow-on elements.

But, this could fail anyway, and for two different reasons: First, the enemy simply allows the motorized infantry to pass before slamming the door shut behind them and in front of the truck-mounted light infantry - and of course a major, time-consuming fight may ensue to clear the way and reestablish contact between the leading motorized and the following light infantry. Secondly, wheeled APCs are only proof against small arms, and only at longer ranges; you can put some 5.56mm rounds through many wheeled APC hulls at ranges of ~100m or less, never mind what a 7.62mm or light AT weapons will do. The stouter wheeled APCs like Stryker, can still be ripped open by heavy machine guns and grenade launchers. That, and the wheeled APCs would be operating in terrain in which they probably have little or no room to manoeuvre off-road (and being wheeled, aren't very good at off-road anyway much of the time), so unless resistance is light to nil, wheeled APCs may not be a very good way to go.

However, the trick to making this sort of thing work (two of the better examples of which were the Japanese advance through Malaya to Singapore 1941-42, and the British/Indian advance into Burma 1944-45) is to use relatively small amounts of armour and mechanized or motorized infantry to nominally lead the advance, with the light infantry not far behind them dismounting from their trucks to work around the flanks of identified or suspected enemy positions by moving through the mountains/forests/swamps that surround the routes to one's objectives. In practice, this sort of thing has generally prove to be the quickest and most efficient way (besides adding airlift to the mix, which makes things potentially even faster).

Will the PLA be on the offensive or the defensive? if it is on the defensive, like what it planned for a Soviet invasion during the Cold War, reserve and militia units would be raised locally everywhere, and these units would be distributed evenly along the direction of enemy advance, forming lattice defence to absorb the momentum of the Soviet armoured thrust. If the fighting is more limited than that, then those troops would reach the war zone via trains and trucks, and move into position on foot. Either way, tactical mobility is not concern if the PLA is on the defensive, so APC's aren't really necessary.

For offensive, why would reserves and militia be used to attack someone?

I may be doing some shredding; but maybe not too much.

Click to expand...

No, not much shredding just a good mechanised mincing instead

At the heart of this nonsense is me trying to make sense and understand exactly what the PLA means by the published goal of

winning informationized wars by the mid-21st century with milestones at 2010 and 2020

Click to expand...

and the first milestone not far off.

O know its always tempting in this discussions to veer towards the sexy MBT's and other high value weapon systems, but I really want to avoid so doing and concentrate on those things that we can be sure about.

China can raise a lot of troops if it needs them.

Most of them will be Light Infantry of one description or another

which then leads to the question: how can Motorisation or even Light Mechanisation, combined with Informationisation (ie full real time situational awareness) change the way that such troops have been designated and how they undertake combat in the future, from the way that they have in the past. Making full allowance for their position in the order of battle and their interrelationship with the Heavier Assault Mechanised Divisions.

I suppose I have been combining the roles of numerous types of unit, principally Renascence, Rapid Reaction, Air Mobile as well as more traditional Light Infantry roles. I guess I have also been overlooking the role of Medium Infantry. I must confess to me Medium Infantry suggest either beefed up more mobile Light Infantry (a possible description of what I have been trying to talk about) or an Obsolete or Otherwise Lacking Heavy Brigade. If there is a real role definition for Modern Medium Infantry, please do share. I know we have threads on this subject already but a little refresher/summary would be really helpful.

I further guess I am just hooked on the thought of very large numbers of fast moving Infantry with combat capable transports with Full Real Time Situational Awareness and armed with a variety of different weapon systems to provide a wide range of support and cover. I must really be thinking of Small SAM variants as the thought of hundreds or thousands of these scattered across a War Zone and capable of locking on too enemy aircraft via remote guidance links would surely be an underwear changing experience for most fly boys.

Hopefully I am now making myself clearer with the questions I am asking.

Hi King Comm

I don't think it really matters if the war is offensive or Defensive, as the troops I am talking about are not leading assaults or Human Wave attacks. I have to accept that I am probably talking about a mixture of Recon forces, simply defining the lines, defences and identifying enemy units and other more general forces, holding ground or moving around a lot to try and cause as much confusion as possible.

If it is defensive then yes, almost a Classic Soviet posture is a given. the use in an Offensive campaign though is something that strikes me as new and the possibilities worth examining.

I did mention reservists, but I don't think I mentioned militia. Although it does raise a side question. Do the PAP act as Military Police (Red Caps) in a combat zone or are they civil units only?

Perhaps reading Sections F and G (pp. 27-35) of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, DIA, 1984, would be a place to start; as you indicate Sampan, there seems to be some confusion for you with regards to who does what. Although some specifics will have changed since then, the general principles remain much the same - and for all Armies, force and circumstances dependent.

In the same vein, a little clearer - and more recent - reading would be NKA Tactics in the Offense (pp. 54-85) of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, Marine Corps Intelligence Activity, 1997 (Released to public by DIA under FOIA - ie. it is no longer restricted despite its FOUO markings); this will also provide a bit more general information on what is involved.

I would also offer that at present, the role and definition of "Medium Forces" is something that eludes many other Armies right now. Since the virtual demise of the traditional Infantry Division in favour of Light/Mountain/Airborne/Airmobile/Air Assault Brigades/Divisions, Marine/Motorized Infantry Brigades/Divisions, and Mechanized/Armoured Infantry Brigades Divisions, as you can see, there just happens to be a little room for confusion. Generally, besides the old Standard Foot Infantry (as opposed to Light/Mountain Infantry) Divisions (of which the PLA still has ~17), Marine, Motorized, and some Mechanized Infantry Divisions (particularly the PLA-pattern as well as UK 3 Mechanised Division) are "Medium Forces", if you will. This still makes for quite a wide definition of both force and mission. If I could narrow it down to a definition that is not completely useless, then think no lighter than a USMC Marine Division and no heavier than a PLA Mechanized Infantry Division - I would be strongly inclined towards the latter.

To clarify another point, although helicopters are certainly useful and indeed necessary, when I used the term "airflift" I was generally meaning the use of transport planes, especially light tactical transports capable of operating from rough landing strips or suitable roadways.

As to the PAP, they are structured to fight when necessary as Infantry Divisions, more or less as the old Standard Foot-type. And they would indeed perform in the MP-role, after a fashion.

Sir!!!

Will be back when finished set homework

IMO if you equip motorized infantry with APC's and IFV's, that'd probably make them into mechanized infantry.

Somewhere between mechanized infantry and old motorized infantry (on regular trucks), I think there exists a nitch for armored trucks like the Israeli "Golan":



The armored truck platform would have the following attributes:
* Basic passive armor protection against small arms
* Modular "Bolt-on" armor packages, to be installed according to need
* V-shaped hull with basic mine protection
* 2 crew + 10 passengers in basic configuration
* Optional light weapon mount on roof (manual or remote control)
* Ballistic glass windows, run-flat tires, etc.

Depending on the requirement, you could order the basic configuration, which is just a lightly armored truck, to a more heavily protected version with modular armor pack and remote weapon station. The armor packages would vary from inexpensive armor plating to expensive ERA.

If we look at US troops in the Middle East with their "hillbilly bolt on armor", this is basically taking that concept into production. The same platform can be modified for a variety of roles, from communications, medical evac, transport, supplies, to whatever else you can think of. It's a flexible platform, you can add some smoke grenades for self-protection.

The PLA WZ550 platform could be modified for this product. If it can be produced cheaply (the basic model), it'd make a good addition to motorized infantry. It'd be good for peace keeping and low intensive conflict zone deployment. One advantage is that the truck would look less intimidating than tanks and IFV's, which is useful under situations where you want to tread lightly and not with an armored fist.