Rules Only: Forward Observer
- Thread starter Supplement Four
- Start date
FO and stealth/fieldcraft are orthogonal to each other.
A combat sniper might be a combination of a skilled marksman and the whole stealth and field craft aspect, but a Police Sniper is someone who is simply a marksman, understanding urban terrain as well and policing and police policy. They don't need to be all stealthy and hidden.
Similar with an FO. A "Drone based" FO doesn't need to know anything about camouflage or stealth.
So I wouldn't pile too much on to the FO skill. Rather, I'd consider a FO character perhaps incomplete without a complementing toolset depending on their deployment domain.
A combat sniper might be a combination of a skilled marksman and the whole stealth and field craft aspect, but a Police Sniper is someone who is simply a marksman, understanding urban terrain as well and policing and police policy. They don't need to be all stealthy and hidden.
Similar with an FO. A "Drone based" FO doesn't need to know anything about camouflage or stealth.
So I wouldn't pile too much on to the FO skill. Rather, I'd consider a FO character perhaps incomplete without a complementing toolset depending on their deployment domain.
Foward Observer include all the general tactical skill needed to be at the place where you actually perform the technical skill.
I never believed that Gun combat acquired by a term in the Army was limited to punching hole in a target.
I served in Royal Cananadian Artillery from 72-76, including fire control. FO can be gunner with all the technical knowledge previously explained and the skill to call in the most sophisticated fire support, make a regimental fire plan for a major assault (the Col. in cmd of the divisionnal arty is responsible for fire support) including the operationnal and logistical issue. It may also be a combat arms foward leader that was instructed how to cal in final protective fire or recon team "sniping" at enemy critical.
I remember a day in the 1st RCHA when we trained the NCO of the RCD in basic fire mission protocol, given pre-assign call-sign on the artillery net and specific troops assign to support them (no big thinking, sophisticated ammo or paterns,no organisationnal or operationnal skills, no fire plan, the equiv of shooting from the hip). That is the "give gps coordinate" equivalent. That level of FO skill would be built in any platoon/troop comander training. On the reverse, "breathe while crawling in the mud" is built in the FO skill. The CT FO skill is what is required to acheive full potential of artillery support.
have fun
Selandia
I never believed that Gun combat acquired by a term in the Army was limited to punching hole in a target.
I served in Royal Cananadian Artillery from 72-76, including fire control. FO can be gunner with all the technical knowledge previously explained and the skill to call in the most sophisticated fire support, make a regimental fire plan for a major assault (the Col. in cmd of the divisionnal arty is responsible for fire support) including the operationnal and logistical issue. It may also be a combat arms foward leader that was instructed how to cal in final protective fire or recon team "sniping" at enemy critical.
I remember a day in the 1st RCHA when we trained the NCO of the RCD in basic fire mission protocol, given pre-assign call-sign on the artillery net and specific troops assign to support them (no big thinking, sophisticated ammo or paterns,no organisationnal or operationnal skills, no fire plan, the equiv of shooting from the hip). That is the "give gps coordinate" equivalent. That level of FO skill would be built in any platoon/troop comander training. On the reverse, "breathe while crawling in the mud" is built in the FO skill. The CT FO skill is what is required to acheive full potential of artillery support.
have fun
Selandia
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
Sorry, I do not see it:
LBB1 said:
As far as I can see it does not include stealth. It only talks about adjusting indirect fire.
Recon skill contains some stealth:
LBB4 said:
A good FO team should have both Recon and FO skill.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
I agree, but in a CT LBB1-3 game then rolling elements of recon into forward obs is the way to avoid skill bloat.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Probably not the intention of its inclusion on the skill list, though.
So what was a FO job like in 1977?
I don't think Marc had drones in mind when he wrote LBB2.
I am not ex-military, but I strongly suspect that FO involves placing a Mk-1 eyeball on a target without getting killed and communicating technical information to a distant gunner. That is the skill set encompassed by a 1977 FO skill.
I would think a good portion is knowing which targets to prioritise while not allowing the enemy FO to spot him, and then passing accurate info to the gunner n a way that isn't detected, hacked or jammed.
Also, given canon depiction of trooper with laser carbine for painting targets, I wonder if a sniper uses a laser guided munition or maybe the sniper paints the target for a remote firing weapon? Hmmmm... spotter/FO and robot sniper...
Also, given canon depiction of trooper with laser carbine for painting targets, I wonder if a sniper uses a laser guided munition or maybe the sniper paints the target for a remote firing weapon? Hmmmm... spotter/FO and robot sniper...
That's them all right.
Painting targets gets the job done, but that only works for precision guided munitions that are looking for a painted target. That said, and in ignorance of the last lot of Striker construction rules, all the rockets in an MRL packet could be guided at an appropriate TL, and in my game the FO would be able to dial the spread of fire from the painted location so being better able to manage the effect sought from the offensive support.
right
Even if laser wpn can be used to "paint" a target for terminal guidance purpose, the ordonnance have to be brought to a point where it could lock on the painted target.
Furthermore, for area effect (meaning here not -single shell- squad size area but Cie or BTN assembly or deployment area) where the fire is from center of firing detachment to center of target, you do not "paint " the target for terminal guidance of single shell. You "paint" it for few seconds, to make sure that every relevent member of the Observation Post (using Optical enhancer) get the Reference Object right. "converge" fire mission (multiple shell on a single critical) may use single marker/multiple shell, but generally, been able to predict accuratly the effect of the various amunnition, formation of impact zone and purpose (destroy, interdict, harass...)over time and space given the number/type(s) of tubes (you may have to work with Btn mortar as well as Div How) and (type/quant) supply of ammo within a fireplan require more training than passing the GPS coordinate to bring a drone in and then painting a target for its missile.
have fun
Selandia
Sometime you succeed in doing things you did not even try...
That creative adaptability is what makes CT such a lovely beast...
have fun
Selandia
Nice. That's the sort of difference there is between a recon specialist and an FO.
We're not far from where an FO is simply pointing out targets on his iPad with a grid overlay from a recent hand launched drone photo mapped to the local lat/long.
But truth is as long at we have "dumb" ordnance (mortars and artillery), you need someone with eyeballs on the beaten zone to correct fire as it's coming in. IMHO this is the real job of the FO. Not so much designating the initial impact, but correcting it once they land since unseen atmospheric effects can adjust fire in unseen ways until the impacts arrive.
But, even then, with radars tracking outgoing missions, the fire teams can correct on the fly. They know where it's supposed to go, the radars tell it where it IS going, and then the computers can provide the corrections necessary to adjust the fire.
Clearly the FO's job varies at TL.
What we've learned, I think, is that money spent on accuracy is well spent. Saves money and lives by getting ordnance exactly where it needs to be. It's a different story against large formations, but even then identifying and taking about key command pockets can be more effective than simply reducing the attackers en masse.
But truth is as long at we have "dumb" ordnance (mortars and artillery), you need someone with eyeballs on the beaten zone to correct fire as it's coming in. IMHO this is the real job of the FO. Not so much designating the initial impact, but correcting it once they land since unseen atmospheric effects can adjust fire in unseen ways until the impacts arrive.
But, even then, with radars tracking outgoing missions, the fire teams can correct on the fly. They know where it's supposed to go, the radars tell it where it IS going, and then the computers can provide the corrections necessary to adjust the fire.
Clearly the FO's job varies at TL.
What we've learned, I think, is that money spent on accuracy is well spent. Saves money and lives by getting ordnance exactly where it needs to be. It's a different story against large formations, but even then identifying and taking about key command pockets can be more effective than simply reducing the attackers en masse.
Presumably, the firing unit has a fair idea of where the FO and the FO's target will be. For artillery, a M712 Copperhead might be used, and at higher tech levels maybe shrink the sensor down to fit in a sniper's bullet, such as project EXACTO in a .50cal round. There were no public mentions of using GPS for this. And maybe drones become part of a FO's kit in the future. There is nothing to say that the FO skill only applies to artillery barrages.
correct. As pointed , it should involve specific skills acccording to TL.
The basic idea remains at all TL: brigning ordonnance on a traget, using a level of skill sophistication that is beyond what an infantry or armor leader would get as part of his general job qualification. Otherwise this would not worth be rated as an independant skill any more then trench digging (would be reserved for CbtEng) or keeping your Feet healty (Medic).
Even with the most sophisticated hardware to make the job easier than at lower TL, you still have to be trained to use properly, hopefully optimally, the potential of the magic gizmo. I can see 6 shells fired at 10 second intervals and a drone with a laser designator switching between target as soon as a shell strike. You would have a surgical strike at the components of an area instead of an attempt at saturating. It still require FO trainning, even if the FO is in a CoPost 50 (or 5,000?) klick away from his target and weather corrections are applied in flight.
have fun
Selandia
okay.
I just want to point out that ordinance might refer to any projectile from any ranged weapon attack, even bows/arrows. And that the tech of the FO might not be the same as the tech of the firing unit.
So, FO might be considered a sort of 'gun combat'-type skill, but for remote fired ranged weapons ( weapons fired by some some mechanism/person in a different location than the one aiming.
I just want to point out that ordinance might refer to any projectile from any ranged weapon attack, even bows/arrows. And that the tech of the FO might not be the same as the tech of the firing unit.
So, FO might be considered a sort of 'gun combat'-type skill, but for remote fired ranged weapons ( weapons fired by some some mechanism/person in a different location than the one aiming.
