The armored cavalry regiments are gone in all but name and in the brigade combat teams we made light units that were essentially forward observers to call in firepower. Of course, divisional cavalry squadrons (battalions) died in that reorganization. Will our latest reorganization that is considering restoring division roles for major combat operations restore the divisional cavalry squadron?
Major Jennings discusses the divisional squadron. He highlights something I've mentioned before, after the experience of the Persian Gulf War:
Two years later, even as it downsized, the Army established robust L-series squadrons that included three ground troops containing Abrams and CFV [NOTE: Cavalry Fighting Vehicles, the cavalry version of the Bradley] platoons,along with two air troops with Apaches and Kiowa scouts. After decades of vacillation over whether division cavalry should optimize for stealthy or forceful reconnaissance, it had once again chosen maximal capability.
Yes! I've often mentioned that in peace the urge to lighten up recon elements, supposedly to make them more "agile," has proven to be unstoppable. But in war it is found that recon units need to be heavy enough to fight for information or to screen friendly forces to prevent the enemy from getting information.
Slowing down the enemy is a mission of our cavalry, too, and if cavalry units are strong enough to compel an enemy to deploy rather than overwhelm our cavalry screens from virtually a road march formation, we buy time and information.
Indeed, it frustrates me that the Army clearly misses the capabilities of an armored cavalry regiment because it is trying to build an ersatz armored cavalry regiment without just admitting what we need and building it.
I've mentioned Jennings' effort before. May he find a receptive audience in the Army to restore our damned armored cavalry formations. I don't think recon drones make their missions obsolete. Thin-skinned recon vehicles aren't "agile"--they're just smoking hulks.
