How to take a hill?

[Shadow]

I am serving my 2 years national service and is posted to the infantry. I am curious, how do the modern infantry take a well defended hill from the enemy?

BTW I do not know how the actually defend a hill so if anyone have that information please enlight me. If there is any books on modern fighting tatics will be welcome :-)

[Csargo]

They bomb it until it's flat?

[Shadow]

hmm... thats a good idea, but what if we do not have any air or artillary support? Just charge up?

[Warmaster Horus]

Snipers, mortars, machine guns available?

Use mortars and snipers to reduce the number of the enemy. Use smoke grenades if possible, hiding your charge. Then, charge!

To defend, a few well placed machine guns can make a whole lot of difference, in my opinion.

That's just my logic working here. I'm no expert on army tactics.

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Just charge up?

if you want to die easily, you can run right up and say

"Hello, I'm here!!"






Not sure. I won't go up unless I had to.

[GiantMonkeyMan]

kinda off topic, but: i used to have a geography teacher who claimed he was in a night attack against a hill during the falklands wars, he always talked about the best way to use a bayonet... a right weirdo

[Pannonian]

hmm... thats a good idea, but what if we do not have any air or artillary support? Just charge up?

If you're looking purely at infantry tactics, without supporting arms, find a study of the Falklands War.

[econ21]

If you're looking purely at infantry tactics, without supporting arms, find a study of the Falklands War.

Good idea. Here's one such encounter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mount_Tumbledown

Of course, the Brits did have some supporting arms - artillery, naval bombardment, light tanks etc - but not in sufficient numbers to avoid the infantry doing most of the work.

Diversionary tactics, attacking at night, overwhelming weakly defended spots, covering fire etc all played a role, although in the end a lot of it seemed to come down to grit and determination (symbolised by the fixed bayonets).

[Stig]

The fixed bayonet is one hell of a morale buster. If you see 200 men charging at you with fixed bayonets you think twice before you open fire.

In WW2 it was often used by the Brits would they need to get out of situation they would rather not be in. Wolfheze is a good example, where Brigadier Hackett himself led multiple bayonet charges, losing men, but reaching the objective.

If you attack a hill you will lose men anyway, it's a given (atleast against enemies that are as good as you). So you have to use unorthodox tactics.

[Rodion Romanovich]

hmm... thats a good idea, but what if we do not have any air or artillary support? Just charge up?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120863/

[KrooK]

1) Do you really need capture this hill? Maybe you can flank opponents and force them to withdraw?
2)If you need - try to flank opponents - no one fight well with rear on fire.
3)Before attack remember about art and air support - to show opponent that you are not joking.
4)While attacking - try to attack from more than one direction - this will force enemy to divide troops.
5)Remember to use enough men - but do not use too many - remember Americans and Brits at Monte Cassino.
6)During attack use moving art support - art should be 100-150 metres in front of your men. When your soldier capture part of hill, art should turn fire next part.
7)Don't be afraid of using smoke flares, flame throwers, grenades, grenade lauchers.
8)IF YOU REALLY WANT THIS HILL - USE NAPALM TOO :) But remember to use napalm and then infantry. Different using might cause loses.
9)If you have problems call bombers and more art.

[Kalle]

There is no need to put modern artillery on any hill for it to reach longer and hit more accurate.

Forward units report where they want an artbarrage and then they call it in from usually great distance and after the art has fired some rounds they better get moving before the antiart answer comes (if both sides got proper equipment).

Kalle

[Uesugi Kenshin]

There is no need to put modern artillery on any hill for it to reach longer and hit more accurate.

Forward units report where they want an artbarrage and then they call it in from usually great distance and after the art has fired some rounds they better get moving before the antiart answer comes (if both sides got proper equipment).

Kalle

The advantage may be negligible, but hey it'll still give a bit of a boost in range. And iirc most US firebases in Vietnam were on cleared hilltops so there must be some not insignificant advantage. Though artillery has of course advanced in the last thirty years I doubt such significant, and more importantly widely implemented, advances were made between now and then.

[CountArach]

The advantage may be negligible, but hey it'll still give a bit of a boost in range. And iirc most US firebases in Vietnam were on cleared hilltops so there must be some not insignificant advantage.

I would imagine they were on hills in Vietnam because it was harder to ambush and much easier to defend. If you could see even twenty metres in all directions around you, that would have been a good and comforting thing. Also it would make it easier for the Helicopters to see where you are if you need an airlift or support.

[Uesugi Kenshin]

I would imagine they were on hills in Vietnam because it was harder to ambush and much easier to defend. If you could see even twenty metres in all directions around you, that would have been a good and comforting thing. Also it would make it easier for the Helicopters to see where you are if you need an airlift or support.

That's a good point too....Though if you cleared a flat area of jungle your LOS into the jungle wouldn't be much different than if you were on a hill.