How BRITISH Infantry Squads Evolved in 100 Years

Become a Patron to support us & get exclusive perks: / battleorder
Or Sign-Up as a KZbin Member: youtube.com/@BattleOrder/memb...
Check out our merch shop for new prints, apparel and other stuff!: battleorder.myshopify.com/
If you'd like to make a one-time donation to Battle Order: www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted...
Check out our website for more articles, videos, and graphics on military history: www.battleorder.org/
Social Media:
• Twitter: / battle_order
• Instagram: / battle.order
• Facebook: / battle.order
Chapters:
- Intro
- World War 1
- Interwar
- World War 2
- Malayan Emergency
- Ad
- Cold War
- Modern
Main Sources:
[1] Field Service Manual, 1914. Infantry Battalion. (Expeditionary Force.) W.O. 2061. Dated 1st October 1914.
[2] Instructions for the Training of Platoons for Offensive Action. SS143. Dated February 1917.
[3] Frederickson, Lewis (2015) "The Development of Australian Infantry on the Western Front 1916-1918: An Imperial model of training, tactics and technology"
[4] Rankin, Adam (2014). "Montbrehain, 5 October 1918: A case study in tactical operations and battlefield integration"
[5] Section Leading 1923
[6] Section Leading 1928
[7] Infantry Section Leading 1938
As reported by bayonetstrength.uk :
[8] WE II/1931/12B/3, Dated 6 April 1938
[9] WE II/1931/12F/1. Dated 10 April 1940.
[10] 26 Nov 1940 amendment
[11] WE II/1931/12F/2. Dated 4 June 1941.
[12] The Infantry Training, 1937, Supplement (Tactical Notes for Platoon Commanders), dated February 1941
[13] WE II/233/2. Dated 30 April 1943.
[14] Infantry Training, Part VII, Section and Platoon Tactics. Dated 1944.
[15] Infantry Training Volume IV-Tactics-Infantry Section Leading and Platoon Tactics. Dated 22 December 1950.
[16] Lt. T.A. Gibson, The Wiltshire Regiment. “The Malayan War: 1948-?” in Australian Army Journal No. 27, August 1951.
[17] Infantry Training Volume IV-Tactics-The Infantry Platoon in Battle (Provisional). Dated March 1960.
[18] Provisional Pamphlet for The General Purpose Machine Gun, Dated 1962
[19] Film: SECTION FIRE AND MANOEUVRE (1971)
[20] Pamphlet No. 6B, The General Purpose Machine Gun (Sustained Fire) (All Arms). Dated 1968.
[21] Pamphlet No. 45, Part 2. The Infantry Platoon. Dated 1980.
[22] Ford, Matthew (2008). "The British Army and the politics of rifle development, 1880 to 1986"
[23] Pamphlet No. 45, Part 2. The Infantry Platoon. Dated 1975.
[24] Infantry Training Volume IX, Pamphlet No. 45 Part 2 The Infantry Platoon (Basic Tactics). Dated 1986.
[25] Pamphlet No. 1, The Infantry Company Group (The Fundamentals). Dated 1998.
[26] Conversations with Servicemembers

[@jonny-b4954]

6:11 My man just popped up out of nowhere. As you can see, showing off the British Mk1 light camo blanket. Draped over the soldier, it provides near perfect camouflaged from a forward perspective.

[@culloden23]

Predator camouflage

[@FirstDagger]

@@culloden23 ; Missing 411.

[@stephen7571]

It’s great for hiding when the house needs cleaning???

[@kazu9343]

LOL 😭

[@marcs990]

@@stephen7571 😂😂

[@metalmaniac345]

Served with the Brits overseas! They treat their rifle sections like our MG sections with specific fire commands, so you always knew they were in contact when they were absolutely bellowing fire commands

[@tridentuk6885]

Ahem. CHARLIE FIRE TEAM, FUCKING CONTROL YOUR FIRE YA DICKHEADS. YOU'RE ON MY TEAM YA CUNTS. I was a lovely section commander. The lads were awesome. I can still feel my throat leaving the planet. If you have a Brit shouting at you, you are either doing something brilliantly or fucking it up so hard well, they're shouting at you. We have to control the fire as we' feel bad for the 2 I/Cs having to run ammo to all the fucking mad fucks firing off everything they carried. Someone needs to think of the 2 I/Cs and their poor backs.

[@outifyio4496]

do other countries not use fire commands at all in infantry sections then?

[@iatsd]

@@outifyio4496 Properly trained countries do. The Americans don't. They get too excited and lose the ability to think or talk. Or aim.

[@manticore4952]

@@outifyio4496 The US believe it is distracting and a waste of time.

[@Peter-lm3ic]

I well recall in the British Army that small arms weapon training cardres for NCO's always included sessions of fire command sessions sitting in a classroom facing a large wall chart of a varied countryside showing railways, bridges, roads, canals, woods etc and having to shout out fire commands acting as a Section Commander or Bren Group NCO. The Bren Group always having a specific duty relative to the Rifle Group. It was interesting!

[@DrLoverLover]

In the seventies the british squads were starting to be equipped with L1A1 mustasches

[@dermotrooney9584]

And some units still field them.

[@robashton8606]

Correct. And, as footage from the Falklands war shows, by 1982 they were standard issue across the board.

[@sam_uelson]

smashing

[@jamesbussey2911]

The 'taches faded out of service in the early 1990s after the Gulf War, as did the 1970s generation of British squaddies that won our wars for us in those two decades. Now that squaddie 'taches and full-bore rifles are making a comeback, as is the Cold War with Russia. 🤪

[@dermotrooney9584]

@@jamesbussey2911 Life's a Circle, as Belinda Carlisle probably said. 🌟

[@_ob200]

15:05 - pronounced as Ali ( Ally ) as in an alleyway. Originally it ment Airborne Light infantry. Army slang for cool or something with swagger 👍🏻 - look at that ally bastard , that’s some ally kit But yes… 2x GPMG would be pretty ally

[@Luke_Sandy_High_Ground]

Ive heard rumours that it comes from an arabic work from when British troops were out there in the 50s/60s or that story could be all bollocks 🤷. "Legend has it that the 'way-back-when' origin of the word is a slang foreign language term meaning 'shade', probably a regional dialect variation on an Arabic word and discovered in Yemen during British military operations there in the 1950s/60’s, specifically in the Radfan Hills and Aden. During these operations, members of The Parachute Regiment would reshape their berets, pulling them forward so that the style of the beret not only hung over the right ear, but also peaked forward slightly to provide shade over the eyes from the harsh desert sun - this style became known as an “Ally Beret”. The beret was non-conformist (worn in a fashion other than that dictated by army regulations), yet functional, serving a purpose, cool, and an improvement on the standard issue. Eventually ally was used to refer to anything related to battlefield cool e.g an ally beret, an ally war story or 'he looks ally af' (not my words)

[@markfryer9880]

@@Luke_Sandy_High_Ground In the desert and trying to get some shade from a beret? You Mad Dogs and Englishmen should have gone with a sandy coloured giggle hat or some kind of slouch hat. If you need to talk about shade from the sun then talk to your Aussie mates! Mark from Melbourne Australia Ex Army Reserve

[@badgertheskinnycow]

'Originally it ment Airborne Light infantry' - who makes this sh*t up.

[@petemcphee2]

In my day Scots infantry never used Ally as a term. We used "Warry" as in war bunnet... Warfare

[@badgertheskinnycow]

@@petemcphee2 agreed buddy

[@Armitage001]

The production value of these videos just keeps getting better and I love the retro futuristic aesthetic and level of polish. Outstanding work Brendan.

[@tridentuk6885]

As a Brit from NI, served here through to Iraq/Afghan, your breakdown is fantastic and factual. Please save me from the LSW. L129A1 saved the day. Although we used Sig Sauer P226 for a good while before the Glocks came in as side arms.

[@kurousagi8155]

Did you prefer the Glock or the P226?

[@tridentuk6885]

@@kurousagi8155 P226, just felt right, although a shorter barrel. Equally bloody annoying when it's bouncing against your leg when running because of the drop holster. Opted for the chest rig in the end, albeit it wasn't encouraged due to up-blast. I was lucky enough to still be able to decide which side arm to carry and not have it dictated.

[@Ditchy69]

I switched out from SIG to Glock just before I went to Afghan...was weird as it was so easy to clean and the safety was basically a trigger on the trigger >

[@adzthesaint]

I always quite liked the LSW! Makes no sense, but I just did.

[@tridentuk6885]

@@adzthesaint Bloody trouble maker!

[@peaceraybob]

The only thing I might add is a mention of how, once the Bren had been introduced and the Rifle Sections altered to adapt to it, every single rifleman in the Section carried two Bren magazines. You can see this is photos of the period, pretty much giving you a time-line of Bren adoption as their outwards appearance changed.

[@dogsnads5634]

In practice most of the riflemen ended up using their own ammo to keep the Bren going as well.

[@bill-wd7zs]

As a Royal Engineer from the late 70's early 80's a 432 carried a section of 8 men. 6 SLR's, 1 LMG and 2 SMG's. As the driver I carried a Stirling SMG and was also responsible for the mounted LMG, quite a burden. We also carried plenty of beer!

[@Tony2438]

Dont forget the BV

[@A.Steptoe]

@@Tony2438 o7 Salute

[@A.Steptoe]

Salute sir

[@paparoach007]

Thank you for your service sir by a fellow Sapper o7 currently doing my royal engineering training in Kent been here almost 2 months, it's the hardest thing I've ever done but I'm enjoying it.

[@A.Steptoe]

@@paparoach007 JUst stick at it and dont let them mind play you :) it will be worth it mucca :)

[@ashleygoggs5679]

Wow holy shit!!! where did you get the photo at 12:28 this is my grandfather on the left. Was in the Royal Lancers, commanded a few tankies and was one of the people to help usher the challenger into service. Damn crazy

[@Joe-uz7vd]

This is how edu-vids should be, relatively short whilst still keeping the important info, definitely earned a sub from me. Keep it up!

[@A.Steptoe]

If the info is correct yes......thats why my neice thinks stuff has happened when it never did.....and why the woorld is so fecked up right now......"People need to earn my resoect" NO, You should give your respect to everyone....its up to them to loose it....

[@filipinorutherford7818]

Hi as an Aussie I find the topic of UK infNtry section armement alway interesting as it influenses Australian army doctrine as well. As Aussies we look up to the UK as a standard for army ops and we generally follow with local tweaks. You should do an Australian Army vid.

[@unbearifiedbear1885]

🇬🇧🇦🇺❤🍻

[@johnnyjohn-johnson7738]

The Australian Army (along with the Kiwi and Canadian Armies) used to be essentially a "Chapter" of the British Army during the Imperial age so it shouldn't be surprising.

[@filipinorutherford7818]

@@johnnyjohn-johnson7738 Although now that we have a regular rotation of Marines in Australia we will br heavily influenced by them.

[@johnnyjohn-johnson7738]

@@filipinorutherford7818 I think the Australian Army has been influenced by the US Marines for decades now, if you look at Battle Order's website and look at the Section structure used by the Australian Army from the late 80s up until the 2000s you'll notice that they had 3 man fireteams not unlike the Marine Raiders from WW2, also the legacy Auscam pattern is almost identical to the duck hunter pattern uniform used by the USMC during WW2.

[@filipinorutherford7818]

@@johnnyjohn-johnson7738 I would agree with that analysis.

[@godfroi10991]

I was Australian Infantry in the late 90's - early 2000's. We had 9 man Sections broken into three Groups of 3, The Scout Group with Styer AUGs + 1x underslung GL and a Full Cpl Sec Commander in order to have the Sec Comm behind the lead scouts to have better situation awareness and comms. Then there was the Rifle Group (3x Rifleman all Pte's, armed with 2 x AUG's One of which was the Num 2 Gun + 1x Minimi LMG) This was generally the assault group led by a senior Pte with a UGL. Lastly the Gun Group, which contained the Sec 2IC with 1x Minimi Gunner (later changed to the MAG58) + 1x Rifleman/number 2 Gun. I found it to be a good size for most situations we encountered and flexible in most situations. Oh, also there were 2-6 66mm LAWs spread between the Rifleman. Mechanized units sometimes had a slightly different configurations of 2x 4man teams.

[@Horizontalvertigo]

Another great video Brendan, being able to follow the evolution through new doctrine, weapons, environments, and conflicts was a great way to have a surprisingly nuanced overview of the force in question, very well done. Hope your wife has recovered by now, all the best.

[@barryalexander2909]

Excellent video! I was a reservist infantry soldier in late 80s. In our unit the 84mm was passed around the section and all the section carried SLRs. Pl radio operator was the only man issued with SMG as far as I can recall. We switched to SA80 in 1991. Worked with infantry in Afghanistan in 2007, pre-sharpshooter, the recently replaced L96 sniper rifle was given to the best shot in a section as a sharpshooter weapon.

[@johnheath128]

Nicely done! This is a great breakdown of the British Rifle section. I can add to this that during the early 1980's (at least until 1985 - beyond that I don't know) the infantry section in rural operations in Northern Ireland used 2 GPMGs, one per brick. There was also an American M79 Grenade launcher issued to each brick for rural ops. This was not confined to the Parachute Regiment, although they might well have pioneered this idea. This was only for rural patrol ops. The weight was not really as great a factor as stated unless things were getting hairy and people started grabbing every strip of link they could find.

[@tridentuk6885]

Went down to 1 x GPMG and and LSW, then a SAW. Had the delight of carrying 200 link for the shits and giggles anyway. The LSW was dropped for a DM (L129A1) rifle.

[@stevenbreach2561]

I can confirm the M79 ,as I,as L/Cp!I nabbed the M79 as if anyone had a pop,I wanted to ruin their day

[@tridentuk6885]

@@stevenbreach2561 aul bollocks :D before my time. Sorry to do you dirty lol

[@stevenbreach2561]

@@tridentuk6885 1981,Fermanagh👍👍👍🇧🇴

[@tridentuk6885]

@@stevenbreach2561 I was born in 82 buddy :D So yeah, take a +20 years on my comments lol. Same shite, different year, still lads and still brave :) Fair fucks to you :) Love talking to folks in the Legion about stuff before my time tbh. It's hugely interesting. Hope you're safe.

[@VaucluseVanguard]

Great video, and explained a lot of earlier history (1914 to 1938) that I was not aware of. Just one small thing. It is mentioned that when the SLR was introduced, the normal issue was 3 x 20 round mags (total 60 rounds). That was not my experience when I joined the Army in the 80s and we were using 58 pattern webbing. My section typically had a mag on the rifle and 6 mags in the two ammo pouches, so 7 x 20 total 140 rounds. Additionally we carried additional lose ammo for our rifles in our combat jackets, bergens, day sacks or even the old 58 pattern haversack, depending on the situation. It was also normal for every member of the section to carry 100 or 150 rounds of link for the GPMG, which we would give to the gun group when we arrived at the Form Up Point. This was in the immediate post-Falklands period, and I got the impression that we did this: 1. because of genuine lessons from the Falklands and, 2. a bit of willy waving to prove standard line infantry were as hard as the Paras and Royal Marines. I'll admit it all led to me realising I was not cut out to be an infantry soldier!!

[@heofonfyr6000]

Minor point, mate; I was combat infantry from 2004 to 2020 and during that entire time the GPMG was unofficially but usually a section weapon... if an LMG was present so too was a GPMG, it wasn't just one or the other... but the GPMG was the more essential standard. so it didn't come back to make up for the lack of LMG so much as it was always there to begin with, but could be left behind in certain situations like mounted combat or when a dedicated guns group was preffered. maybe on paper it did 'replace' the LMG as section weapon, but the reality is it was never really absent from the section in any solid sense. after basic training I rarely went anywhere on exercise or on operations without every section having a GPMG gunner. hell, even the basic platoon setup for sleeping and admin has a GPMG on each of the three respective sentry positions at the corners of the triangular shaped harbour. I know that 'conventional warfare' doctrine had a Platoon guns group rather than one in each section for the attack, but we do only as much conventional training as we do all the other stuff too... and we mix them up. the point is it was flexible; the sections would each have one and if and when a guns group was required (usually it was for a deliberate and planned Platoon attack) they just pooled those guns and gunners for that attack. In Afghanistan (supposedly not conventional) I rarely went anywhere in less than Multiple strength, except bsck in 2007 'cause we were still kind of cowboys then doing whatever came to mind. The Multiple weapons were; 1 GPMG, 2 LMGs, 1 Sniper, 1 Sharpshooter, and the rest Riflemen with UGL... personalities like the Commander, 2ic and Medic, usually had UGLS.... and those who did not have UGL carried the 2 LASMS. Handguns were usually only carried by the Sniper and Sharpshooter for moving around alleyways and compounds. handguns as protection against potential grey on blue was a behind the wire thing and usually only Officers and people on guard... 'cause let's face it the average British infantry squaddie or NCO is intimidating enough to disarm a would be grey on blue attacker with a stern look... a company operation had 2 to 3 multiples + an HQ multiple, each of course with its own GPMG, and an optional seperate mobile FSG of even more GPMGs and/or Javelins or what have you... bear in mind that was 16 Air Assault, and modern British airborne infantry, conventionally deemed 'light infantry', are ironically the heaviest footsloggers on any battlefield for the sake of staying power behind enemy lines or opening new fronts/going to new places. bottom line; in my fairly long career when a British infantry section/multiple stepped outside the wire it had a GPMG and one or two LMGs.

[@BattleOrder]

Thanks for the info

[@w0rld_d]

Sorry, curious what "grey on blue" means?

[@hobosinamansion]

My dad did 22 in 1RIR and did NI a fair few times, Kosovo, Sierra Leonne, Iraq and Afghan and potentially others I'm forgetting but reading this is like talking to him after he's had a pint and I decide to ask one tactical question haha. Great read. judging by your photo and 16AA were you 5 Scots? I went to a military school down in Kent back in my school days and my best mate's dad and the school tailor among others were both 5 scots; you guys moved into Howe after us if i remember... Much preferred the housing in Inverness when we got there after NI and Canterbury!

[@mr.seaotter-1429]

@@w0rld_d Reference by Red on Blue and Blue on Blue term, It might mean Non-Identify Combatants action on Friendly Troops. During War on Terror era, It hard to distinguish/identify enemy combatants from non-combatant. Grey is represent the status of person in action.

[@scott7892]

@@w0rld_d green on blue , its when partner forces attack our forces for example a rogue Afghan soldier or policemen shoots British or U.S troops for any reason could be an argument , he could be an insider threat or he's being blackmailed by Taliban

[@wessexdruid7598]

As a British Infantryman from the 70s, 80s and 90s, it was always Rifle Group and Gun Group (Gun was MG, either GPMG or LMG) until Fire Teams arrived. And, being tall, I frequently lugged a MAW with an SLR, not an SMG. Good vid!

[@badgertheskinnycow]

Agreed all buddy.

[@jono_cc2258]

Fantastic video, appreciate the effort, thank you!

[@Hughesless4086]

I love content like this, informative interesting and about something as a brit im proud of, our forces!

[@Peter-lm3ic]

When I served in a cold war Infantry Battalion in the early 1950's a Section was: Cpl+6 rifleman+ Bren team of L/Cpl+Nos.1 & 2. Each platoon had three Sections plus one 2 inch Mortar team of L/Cpl +Nos.1 & 2. Plus Radio Operator. Plus Platoon Serjearnt. Plus Platoon Commander. The Battalion Support Company comprised: 6 x 6pdr A/T guns later 17pdr A/T guns, 6 x Vickers .303 Medium Machine Guns, 6 x 3 in Mortars, 6 x Universal Carrier Wasp Flame Throwers and trailer. The towing vehicles was the Universal Carrier(Bren carrier) but for the 17pdr A/T gun the Oxford Carrier was used. All Platoon rifleman carried the Energa Rifle Grenade A/T launcher on the waist belt. The Energa launcher was issued in the Summer of 1951 as I left the Army as a National Serviceman in Jan 1952. Happy days!

[@Michael_OBrian]

Yet another excellent video as always. Keep up the great work!

[@billwilliamson1506]

Love the clear and factual delivery of this channel. I always expect the next video to be better than the last!

[@MrNigzy23]

My father was a lance corporal and served with the Cheshire Regiment over in Ireland during the 70's and was shot for his troubles. He operated the SMG as part of his duties as a radio operator within an infantry section! Also meant he didn't have to help change vehicle tracks, heh. Just a tidbit as to why the Sterling appears within infantry sections (outside the paras.)

[@philldavies7940]

The SMG was a secondary weapon, I think our 84mm (carl gustav) guy carried it, but as that weighed 36lb, your back was already broken. Even our radio operators used the SLR. Only really used when practising house/room clearing, other than that it mostly sat in the armoury. Every round had to be aimed especially important in NI whereas the SMG with its accuracy of about 5 yards didn't allow that. . It was also notoriously unsafe firing off an open bolt .

[@Awwwsktskt]

Imperialists out of Ireland

[@newy2277]

Hi Duckers i served in the Cheshire Regiment from 1980 to 84 HK , was your old man still serving because i recognise the name. I was Acoy from start to finish so you will know what happened in 82. Was your old man Les ??

[@michaelrb9837]

@@AwwwsktsktIrelands a cuck nation

[@Amin-js4en]

I am a simple man. I see a Battle Order video I click.

[@edwardkenway8183]

Am so happy and hyped by music you added in this video as I can hear from Medal of Honor Frontline and Rising Sun perfectly hits to the topic and videos coming in great job !

[@spencerh.4513]

I hope your wife is doing better and you are doing well! I know medical situations can be difficult, but don't forget to take care of yourself too during this! Love your videos, some of my favorite on KZbin, great work!

[@archiegeorge3969]

Great graphics as usual and your production value just keeps getting better

[@richardn3387]

Great music. From the first brass notes, I recognized it as the Medal of Honor soundtrack.

[@macthemec]

Fascinating, i served in Canada and was always made the C9 gunner (minimi/lmg) because i was the tallest, out doctine was i provided cover/supressing fire while the riflemen did the attack. I know the soviet doctrine was having basically 6-8 less accurate AK-47’s doing a section attack and one sniper doing precision attacks not unlike the later British doctrine. Ultimately the best solution is mission specific.

[@legalosmumakilslayer]

I do like the later british doctrine of Marksman and Autorifleman providing area and point suppression though I wonder if one extra man in the support fire team for fire and maneuver would be better served? Thus having the extra bayonet strength as well as fire power for both teams.

[@macthemec]

legalosmumakilslayer i think it would really depend on the theater, the most effective but impractical section would be a bunch of guys with LMG’s, but then your range and patrol time would be severely limited

[@CallMeMrChainmail]

Why does you being tall mean you get the machine gun? I know height was a issue for grenadiers 200 years ago but don't you usually put your machine gun on the ground before you shoot it? Surely, if anything you should give the machine gun to the shortest man because he's marginally closer to the ground and can therefore deploy his weapon slightly faster.

[@macthemec]

@@CallMeMrChainmail it was just handed to me, I didn’t choose it.

[@CallMeMrChainmail]

@@macthemec I know. I just assumed you would have known why since you mentioned it.

[@markaxworthy2508]

A very clear exposition of a complex evolution. Good work.

[@kalliste23]

Great overview, concise and to the point.

[@iainbaker6916]

06:13 I didn’t know we had predator cloaks back then 😜

[@SacClass650]

Great stuff, as ever. I love your presentation.

[@snack-e-chan5394]

Great video. As a former infantry soldier from Canada I can say we are quite similar to the UK set up. For us a fire team is two men. An assault group is two fire teams and a section is two assault groups. The fire teams are identified A through D, C being the most junior. A having the IC and signals, B having one LMG and rifleman. C having two Rifleman and D having the 2IC and second LMG. M203 and other AT kit are scattered through the section as seen fit. This allows for section, group and fire team movement as the situation calls for it.

[@anselmdanker9519]

Thank you for the interesting overview of the development of the British Army infantry organisation.

[@raymondbenedict]

good video, looking forward to an video on the evolution of the organization of British armoured units

[@awsomesauce8011]

The '1914' uniform you used for the thumbnail was ww2 British soldier, you can tell by the 39 pattern webbing and the desert uniform they were wearing. Also the Thompson sub machine gun with stuck magazine.

[@johntait491]

An excellent and informative video. Very interesting footage. Thank you. 👍

[@bullpupgaming708]

I love Battle Orders commentary from 18:55-19:00. He sounds like an accuracy by volume kind of guy lol

[@bullet-catcherhohoho250]

As a army cadet we got to trial the L98A1 Cadet GP Rifle, bolt action in the early 80s, we went to the Royal small arms factory but never got any of them issued to us latter, so we stuck with the 303 Lee Enfield, big old kick for a kid. When i joined the Army, years latter we had the SLR. I remember my last shooting competition at Bisley, where we were firing SLR iron sights against others regiments who had SA 80s with optic sights. And i was also firing the good old LMG iron sights (Its not that light when your are running around with it). Plus with a large metal ammo box against other regiments with the LSW with optic sights. We were told this was fair since these were or issued weapons - Hmmm - Nope we did not win anything. One of the better shooting contests i did was a joint shooting comp. We had to shoot other nations weapons - It was at a German army camp, being run by the Yanks and we had Dutch and another lot there. We were firing the M16, Uzi machine gun and 9m Browning. What was even better but a bit strange was that there was a Beer tent on the range. So in between firing you could get a drink. Anyway we won the 4 man M16 shoot, nice big trophy - The Yanks were alright with it, but we did not let them forget the whole night. We had no luck with the Uzi with one of our SMs firing the whole mag into the ground, but missing all our feet. (Too much time in the beer tent). As for the 9m Browning, we were never given any whilst i was in, but could hit a man target ok, but that could mean the foot on one shot the next being your head, or maybe a ear, kneecap perhaps, but i would hit you so best to run if you see me, and that meant friendly's.

[@MrTangolizard]

I was a rifleman in a rifle platoon and often we would hand in our LSWs for GPMGs and often we would be issued a pistol as well and it wasn’t uncommon for everyone to have a LAW 80

[@regizeelement8511]

Love your videos. Detailed and concise as always… 😊

[@richrumble]

A very informative video. Thank-you.

[@jsuen8415]

Having served in the Singapore army (former British colony), I found the modern infantry squads very similar to the British. During my time around 2010, a section comprised of one Sargent, two saws (lmg), 2 sharpshooters (marksman), and two M203s (grenadiers). The only difference was that the 2IC would be a M203 (I was one of them). So a section would be 7 men instead of 8.

[@paulevans7742]

Thats more like the US Army where the Sergeant is deployed at the section level. The British army deploy them at the platoon level - the equivalent of a section Sergeant in the US Army would be a Corporal in the British army.

[@flyboy22b]

Really enjoyed this - one linguistic point - I think you said ‘ally’ in a context where the British slang pronunciation is ‘allee’ - I think it comes from how cool the Airborne Light Infantry ‘ALI’ looked in ww2 onwards - good stuff Also sig P226/229 we’re the first widely issued sidearm i think. Well I and everyone else had one when I deployed 👍🏻

[@fruitbat4429]

Interesting overview. Thanks for posting it.

[@malkomalkavian]

Simple, clear information, thank you

[@commando552]

Small correction to the 2018- onwards sections, although developed the new grenade launcher for the A3 was not adopted. The problem is that although mounting on the bottom rail makes it more modular, it means that it hangs significantly lower than the UBGL on the A2 to the point where it is the lowest point of the gun so restricts how low you can go in prone. It also feels very ungainly as it moves the weight of the launcher away from the barrel and also slightly farther forward. They have indicated that there is no imminent plan to adopt it as the newer MLOK A3 handguards omit the UBGL mounting clearance hole as people were accidentally touching the barrel through it and burning themselves, although it can still be machined out at a later date. The current situation is that there are A2s still in use for the UBGL role. I believe that the A2s that are used are actually ones that have the improved A3 receiver, as the A3 receiver actually predates the L85A3.

[@mrgingerninjadan]

you fit the UGL to the A3, the handguard and mounting bracket have to be removed, then you put the UGL on like you would a A2 Hangaurd, the A3 gas block may not have a foresight mount, but it does have a the handguard pin hole in it. mounting the UGL to the A3 is done by the Unit Armourer. if a Unit is/has moved over to A3, then A3s will be used

[@mtgAzim]

6:10 For just a second there, I thought that man had the most effective camouflage I've ever seen...

[@MisterBridges]

Top class analysis of the infantry section evolution... Well done!

[@smat2899]

Très bon travail, merci

[@PremeTeamTX]

The stylization through eras is probably one of the coolest things I've ever seen

[@HistoricalWeapons]

Would of been interesting to see from 1500 a.d till ww1

[@petemcphee2]

Very well researched and detailed and clear.

[@saadkhaion9234]

+100 year and the cameraman still alive... What's a legend! Anyway that's a really impressive work you got there. Really need someone to post such information these days

[@chriswerb7482]

A wonderful video - just a couple of additions. Firstly are you sure EY No. 1s were used in Malaya? The No. 94 Energa may have temporarily replaced PIAT's capability, but I don't think PIAT was a section weapon. PiAT was replaced in the early 1950s by the American M20 3.5" launcher which was in turn replaced in the late 60s by the L14A1 Carl Gustav. Prior to Matador there was an interim anti structure munition based on the AT-4 in service. This served alongside Matador in Afghanistan together with I-LAW. I am not sure if M20 was a platoon or section weaponor transitioned from thd former to the latter. X-8 series FALs served in Malaya prior ro L1A1 adoption. Ar15s had been issued in counterinsurgency environments since c 1963, to regular infantry, not just SF. The Glock was preceded by a SIG which was found to be unsatisfactory and was literally scrapped. By the way ALLY is pronounced ALLEY :)

[@BattleOrder]

Hi. For the EYs in Malaya, it's based on an article written by a British Army officer from 1951, and I've seen the EY referenced in other places from around the time. Whether they mean literally the EY cup discharger or it's just a colloquialism for grenade launchers in general I'm not sure. And for the Energa note, I initially thought the Energa came in *slightly* before the 3.5", but re-reading I've just noticed the 1950 manual lists the 3.5" as a Platoon AT weapon. I think the M20 probably stayed as a platoon weapon because pamphlets from the early 1960s specifically reference an anti-tank weapon team in the Platoon HQ with the 3.5" while the Energa was the section AT weapon by that point, and then the Carl Gustav came in the mid-late 1960s. And my mistake on ally, I've only ever seen it written lol

[@dogsnads5634]

The AT4 purchaed were AT4 CS with the HP round (it was purchased initially as an interim anti armour weapon as LAW80 was not safe to use and NLAW wasn't ready). It was fielded under the designation of I-LAW (Interim-Light Anti tank Weapon). AT4 was used but was quickly supplemented by M72A9 made by NAMMO in the LASM configuration (Light Anti Structure Munition). Matador took an age to arrive and was not seen that often. Think the UK has sent most of them into Ukraine (they were the first RGW-90 seen in Ukrainian hands). The SIG pistol were mainly P226, they were bought to replace Browning Hi-Power in Afghanistan due to Green on Blue, but they didn't cope with the dust well and had some issues around the safety I believe.

[@dermotrooney9584]

🌟Ally-Alley all important.🌟 In 1944 NWE many units upped to two Bren per section but seem to have been forced back to one to increase mobility. In Feb 45 some divisions got two Sten per section. I'll dig out refs.

[@shanebisme]

I noticed the Australian army using a 7.62 minimi called maximi which seems like a good idea to get full auto 7.62 down range.

[@guavaburst]

Great video, well researched. 👍

[@BohemianFish]

Fascinating. I've wondered about these details for years.

[@nickdarr7328]

What's important to remember is that the standard infantry load out for a section included 2 clips for the Bren gun along with their Enfield stripper clips. People tend to think the German MG 34 and 42 had such an advantage. But just look at those poor guys on the MG team running around with what looks like very heavy luggage. And the way the MG was such a group effort and focus that if the MG went down the section stopped fighting or ran. But if you had an 8 man section you'll have no problem carrying 600 rounds. And a Bren team might have 2 gunners and a corporal in charge but 1 man could operate it no problem. I'd much rather be in a British section on the Bren rather than a German on the MG. The MG team is the focus of everyone, and not just the enemy. If I have a bad feeling and decide to hide with my Mauser no one's going to notice. But if I get cold feet while I'm supposed to man the MG everyone notices and I have to fight or get shot as a coward

[@muskett4108]

Just read your post on the WW2 British Bren based Section. Germans feared them as the Bren with its accuracy easily suppressed their MG at range; and that left the assault team ample chance to work round and close for grenades. The British just put more firepower out from a greater area from more men firing than a German Section tied and feeding the one position. Doesn't mean the German MGs weren't dangerous, but experienced troops were able to deal with them.

[@nickdarr7328]

@@muskett4108 oh absolutely the MG 34 and 42 were great. Look at the American SAW, squad automatic weapon, the M60. You can see the influence just on sight we took from the German MGs. They might be looking for a new SAW these days but first entered service in 1957. The irony is casual history fans will always think of the Germans when it comes to mechanized, lightning quick strikes involving all sorts of vehicles and storm troopers. But in real life the Germans mostly used horses and pack animals. And almost the entire 10 man section fed the MG position and not just the 4 who were supposed to. The American BAR seems to have sucked. With just 20 round magazines and 5 or 6 magazines it's not making an impact. I'm just impressed by the British equipment and that the standard riflemen load included 150 Enfield rounds and 2 Bren magazines. So everyone is carrying the weight and not lugging crates and heavy ammo belts. Also the lee Enfield and bren used the same round

[@muskett4108]

@@nickdarr7328 I carried a GPMG for over a year so understand the MG concept. In sustained fire role too. It is the feeding of them with dispersed light infantry that is the issue. Have a vehicle then not such a big deal. But infantry tied to vehicles limits their dominance options on the ground. Interestingly the British are going to a Designated Marksman with fully auto select fire Magazine fed 7.62 rifle. Basically a Bren with an optic! Well, accurate deliberate fire over spray and pray. When a contact might take several hours to manoeuvre then accurate fire at a measured rate has far less is ammunition possible expenditure. Less needy. However, the first contact seconds still needs the firefight won, which is all the firepower that can be got. Ha Ho, fun chat.

[@Bullet-Tooth-Tony-]

@@nickdarr7328 I know i'm a bit late but what would the approach be to counter a German machine gun nest, German anti tank guns, artillery and German tanks by a British squad? For MG's for example I have read stuff ranging from the British army using mortars or snipers in order to take out a German machine gun nest.

[@ryan_cdx]

excellent content as always sir. ps do you mind doing a video on the Singapore Armed Forces? I believe it will be informative and I hope interesting

[@jsuen8415]

It will be very similar to @17:13 except that the section commander is a sergeant and the 2IC is also the M203 gunner (grenadier) so a section would be seven instead of eight men.

[@ryan_cdx]

@@jsuen8415 ahh then the l86 will be replaced by the ultimax SAW?

[@jsuen8415]

@@ryan_cdx No the LMG (minimi) will be replaced by the saw. The L86 was the "marksman rifle" that will be replaced by the SAR 21 sharpshooter with 3x zoom instead of the standard 1.5x. The sharpshooter also takes a MATADOOR (anti-tank/door breacher)

[@ryan_cdx]

@@jsuen8415 ah then the squad leader takes the sar21 mms?

[@jsuen8415]

@@ryan_cdx yes the section leader. Squad would be four men

[@PaddyInf]

Patrolling in multiples was ideal in NI. It allowed depth and mutual support. This meant multiple units could cover a fairly big area which made the paramilitaries nervous, as it reduced options for escape after a shoot. It also allowed a couple of multiples to meet up at pre-designated points to create 2x 6 man bricks, an 8 man and 4 man team, throw up impromptu checkpoints etc. This could cause deception to onlookers as it can give the impression of larger numbers of units on the ground.

[@darrenberry2037]

Fantastically done.

[@GeneralCormy]

Love that you used the Royal Fusiliers for the cold war and early modernisation diagrams. They can trace their history back to 1685!

[@notlizard5797]

Best regiment in my opinion other than paras because they have p coy

[@gjfjfk]

@@notlizard5797 p company is overrated battles and wars are won by gun skill and tactics not by who does alot of fitness .

[@Tony2438]

Me too 1RRF

[@nedimharacic1809]

Another great video, keep it up man. Wish you all the best.😃🤌👏

[@elroacho5807]

Been wanting to try and build a game set in a post apocalyptic 1980s Britain and this video has saved me so much research on the weapons used by the British Military. Thank you so much! (Also liked and subscribed!)

[@eccentricbear]

Sick production, great info

[@yigolaski08]

Great video 👍 , its really informative about their evolution of theatre which evolves guns and which evolves the tactics . Also can i ask you to make one for the Turkish Armed Forces , their evolution from the Pre-Republic to Kuvayi Milliye (National Force) to Regular Army and also through Korean War to Operation Attila and to cold war clashes and COIN ops with Northern Iraq operations , ended up with Syria and Libya . Thanks .

[@lb5170]

If you look carefully, in one of the clips of the LSW being fired its being fired by an army cadet. nice to see the representation ( even though I think it was unintentional ) Great video.

[@lb5170]

16:48

[@theltlexay]

Love the leap of logic that the Minimi was too much of a weight burden for not enough effect, so it should be swapped out with an even heavier MAG at a section level. The Maximi is a perfect compromise for that.

[@PaddyInf]

It wasn't so much the weight as the ineffectiveness at doing what was needed, i.e. suppressing at 600m. The cost/benefit of weight vs effectiveness just didn't add up.

[@gilevi]

@@PaddyInf i can easly suppress at 600m. The beaten zone is not much different then a gpmg at that distance

[@PaddyInf]

@@gilevi The L110 used by the Brits was the short barrelled para model of the Minimi. Extensive testing during the platoon weapon mix research programme in 2016 showed that the GPMG is more than twice as accurate than the L110, has a tighter and more predictable beaten zone at all ranges and has considerably better terminal effects round for round. This vid suggests that the decision to remove the L110 was based on the opinion of one officer, however the paper produced by SO2 Lethality used research based on in depth testing as well as after action reports and vignettes from troops who used it.

[@richthompson1234]

I attended the Infantry Firepower Demonstration at Warminster, Wiltshire, UK in 2009. The infantry section also issued a Combat Shotgun to one of the riflemen in addition to his SA80!

[@brettboi2]

17:45 i left in 2017 after 10 yrs but having a sharpshooter rifle in your fire team was a very rare occurrence, the LSW was still used more so, even though we was trained on both. Although you wouldn't want to be picked to be the LSW gunner as its front heavy and awkward to carry on long patrols/Tabs.

[@DevilbyMoonlight]

In my time it was 6 men in the rifle group and 2 mean in the gun group , riflemen carried 6 mag's each for the SLR 120 rds not 60 , 3 in the front left pouch 2 in the front right pouch plus 1 on the weapon the lancejack (l/cpl) was a the gun controller for the jimpy (GPMG) sometimes this could be 2 lmg's with 1 in each fireteam- we were taught to fight in pairs while bounding - later on when the L85s came in why had 1 lsw per fireteam - no-one thought much of it in that role but it found another use as the LSWs were even more accurate than the l85's :/ historically ' Light infantry' has a specific meaning in the British Army - and is different to infantry in the light role - the 2 are not the same, more is expected of one than the other through training - this is one of the things drummed into me as a recruit in 1984 in the light division depot in winchester

[@ratchet2505]

As a Brit I want to say thank you for this video

[@JoinMeInDeathBaby]

Great animations and graphics!

[@TheArmourersBench]

Fantastic overview!

[@notmenotme614]

If you think the platoons changed much. One of the things I noticed the most about serving in the British Military is everytime a new Officer was posted in, they’d change things. Sometimes this years new Officer would change things and then his replacement in 3 years time would change it back to how it was before. The problem was they’d only be in post for 3 years before moving onto becoming Assistant Programme Director for the Regulation and Certification of Purchasing Pencils. So they never had to live with mismanagement.

[@blacklisted4885]

how come this Lewis had so many guns

[@diskopartizan0850]

Did anyone ask him if it was ok to borrow them?

[@dermotrooney9584]

He needed them for his work with Inspector Morse.

[@eddie4324]

I think the best take away point is that the section has to be flexible. Commanders and men have to be trained to alter the platoon/section as required for the task in hand.

[@cg2bx264]

I left the Royal Marines in 2010 and up to them the gpmg never left the section level battle order. Heavy bit of kit but Fantastic weapon.

[@riccardogemme]

I am absolutely biased in asking this, but will you ever cover something relative to the Italian Army? Not sure if there's anything actually interesting to talk about in there since I myself know next to nothing about it.

[@JoinMeInDeathBaby]

+1 on that. Please more less covered topics. America, England, Russia, China are interesting but they are everywhere.

[@itellyouforfree7238]

I agree, it'd be really interesting to learn how the _Alpini_ threw snowballs at the Austrians during WWI

[@barrybeebenson8102]

Bersaglieri regiments would be interesting

[@Will-mj2lr]

The word the British army squaddie uses to mean 'cool,' is pronounced 'al-ee' like 'alley', rhymes with 'happy''. Its not pronounced 'al-eye' though it is often written as 'ally' (British soldiers aren't known for their spelling...)

[@SirZanZa]

But they are known for being incredibly well trained and a nightmare to fight against.

[@liamgoggs3665]

Just came across this video, and hey ho, there's my grandad corporal Dave on the left, at 12.28 the 17th/21st lancers! Grandad this video on the internet has given you immortality! ❤️

[@robertsandiford6223]

Gotta give you a thumbs up for this (very rare). Good job

[@doctorscoot]

the jungle infantry organisation was learned by Australian Army from 1942-45 in New Guinea area not necessarily in Malaya, that'll be where the Brits first encountered it (although they had similar stuff in Burma, not quite like the Malaya Emergency)

[@xcrockery8080]

The British Army in Burma looked very closely at what the Australians had achieved at Milne Bay and Buna Gona as a result of their Jungle Warfare Centre training (setup in 1942) and the first British trainees arrived from India in October 1943.

[@daddust]

Very wrong about the Royal Marines integrating Brens for the Falklands. They already had them. And the Argentinians would have easily suppressed their light firepower. They were told by a Normandy and NE vet to take loads of belt fed guns instead, which they did. Which led to a complete rebuild of British infantry squad tactics.

[@chrisemmett8635]

I don't know which unit it was but the Army took the Bren gun from my school's cadet force to take to the Falklands (and while I'm typing, if one is going to do a video about British units, they're lef-tenants not loo-tenants :) )

[@MaxKingsley72]

He literally said if u open yer ears that they already had it in their inventory as an alternative are u deaf pal

[@rikwilliams6352]

Nicely done.

[@boomtaylor8297]

Really excellent video

[@rabidspatula1013]

Hope your wife feels better soon!

[@mickwful]

The Para in the late 60 early 70 went through a period of platoons being split into 2 fifteen men strike groups, which in turn could be split into three 5 men groups. When serving in Ireland we had two armoured pigs per platoon so platoons were split in two. These formations get adapted to the ops or the men available.

[@dalemckenzie2828]

SLR riflemen in the 80s and 90s (prior to full SA80 uptake across teeth and support arms) carried 6 mag of 20 7.62 and carried 180 rounds in total having 60 boxed as spare for re-org.

[@georgesaint4417]

Very good and very interesting, thank you.

[@gooner72]

In 1988, as a 15 year old Army Cadet, I fired the original .303 calibre Bren gun whilst on exercise and it was absolutely phenomenal. The Bren was changed to 7.62mm but we had the original. 303, I knew it was the older calibre because it had a flared muzzle break on the end of the barrel.

[@fleurdetristesse5218]

Always found it a little funny that often in combat that the rifle section reverts back to its WW2 form. Suppose we and the Jerries got something right. And speaking of which, would you consider doing a similar video on German rifle sections? I reckon such a video would do quite well seeing as how many Deutchesarmee simps there are.

[@thomaskositzki9424]

Really nice to have all my spotty knowledge tied together in a logical timeframe! Having played a lot of "Combat Mission" (WW2 and modern titels) that tactical simulator based on "Advanced Squad Leader", I wonder how much the changes in tactical roles of the 60s-90s made a real impact or were mere busy work? Because the main lesson I found in "Combat Mission" was this: more dudes = good. Because losses don't impair your combat capability that much. if your squad has just 8 men and you lose two severely wounded by a random mortar round you feel that. And you can't afford to lose anyone else anymore. With a 12 man squad you just move on. After losing 2-3 men all tacical finesse goes out the window and you use squads based on the number of dudes still alive and what weapons they might still carry, nothing else. Once a squad gets as low as five men it becomes less and less combat capable, as it can't build up enough weight of fire and thus fire superiority. Gaining fire superiority is your main goal in an infantry fight. So 90% of the time I really don't care about assault or support half-squads, I just used half-squads to minimize losses from artillery barrages and ambushes. These observations apply to full-spectrum warfare only, as combating irregulars is a whole different story.

[@carso1500]

One thing you need to take into account that games like combat mission dont is stuff like your soldiers needing to eat and rest, having too many soldiers can make logistics unmanageable

[@declancable5270]

Great vidoe mate, could you do one on Australian army sections?

[@Avera9eWh1teShark6]

I believe both the evolution of the British army section and the USMC Rifle Squad demonstrated in your videos help lend credence to explain why the US Army is going back to the battle rifle. Everyone looks at the XM5 and the NGSW program as a whole as a step backwards without seeing the big picture.

[@flamingsmore5904]

The funny thing about that, the XM5 is being looked at as one of the rifles, that could replace the L85. In 2025.

[@user-ns3vs3bp3e]

L85A3 is going in 2025 (well it’s being replaced in 2025 with a new rifle contract but the new one likely won’t go to all unit until like 2030 knowing how slow roll outs always are for new shit) I’d imagine it will be a similar weapon to the new US military selection since it was said the choice of round will be influenced by that + the UKSF teams + marines + the new SF support battalion all scrapped the bullpup in exchange for C8’s. Seems there’s a very common “we hate that thing” mentality amongst the elite troops who have the small numbers and budget to buy something else for themselves, I don’t imagine the military will be continuing the bullpup idea any longer but then again when have top brass ever listened to what the people actually using the kit are saying 😂

[@rdjhardy]

Very good video, Sir.

[@StoccTube]

Great video!