Quoted:


Actually no, it wasnt at all.  It wasnt necessarily that of the US Army either, but I'm not trying to be parochial.

The nature of the German tactics  was to create the complementary forces that puts the defender on the horns of a dillemma.  That is basic tactics, and yes, part of USMC doctrine.  And Army.

Most of the time we do it with a SBF that emplaces frontal fire, and a maneuver force that comes from the flank.  If you keep your head down to not get shot by the SBF, the assault forc overruns you. Get up to repel the assault force and you get hit by the SBF. The dillemma is generaly delivered by attacks from two directions.

Bad tactics, like Japanese tactics, is to do a frontal banzai charge with no SBF.  There is no dillemma, it is simply return fire and defeat the attack.

The Germans in WWI sorta couldnt necessarily outflank the enemy all that often, so the dillemma they created was direct and indirect fires.  Grenade launchers at squad level, light weight mortars at platoon.

The Marines in WWII had rifle grenade launchers at squad level, and phased them out.  60mm mortars were a company asset the Platoon commander didnt have.  The Army kept the grenade launchers but used 60mms the same as the USMC.

The big USMC intiatives, as everyone knows, is larger sqauds with three teams and triple the BARs. Which is great, but there was no indirect weapon at platoon or below.  


The trend in the US is to not carry lightweight HE launchers but bring a radio and trust you can get the support from higher. In theory you can be more mobile as you can call for a 105mm rather then hump a 60mm, or 50mm like the Germans had for a little while.  In practice you get the firepower and the mobility but trade away the authority because the PL doesnt own those fires.  My point is the US creates those dillemmas between indirect and direct fire, but NOT at all levels.  Generally at fire team, with 203s, and company, with 60mms, but in between there isnt an asset that SLs and PLs control and own organically.


As to why you should do it that way, as opposed to have mortars at CO level and task them down:  There isnt a good reason if you have the proper weapons.  IMHO the mortar used at company level as the commander's pocket artillery is bulkier then it need to be and a lighter version with less weight and shorter range would be useful in a weapons squad.

You may disagree, but I notice in US discussions the chief debate is over precision rifle vs automatic fie and what is the proper mix, and HE is something conceded to be on the other end of the radio.  Which is fine, and may work the best; but in WWI the German tactics were the lower you could sync it the better, and that was preferable to more firepower synced at a higher level.  Then again, that was the pre-radio era, but still, an interesting observation.

Quoted:
http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt09/pics/german-infantry-squad.jpg

http://cs854.vkontakte.ru/u7175907/95930170/x_c256a4a2.jpg


So, wait, what was the question?  

Quoted:

Often, 60mm teams are attached to PLTs and are under control of the PLT commander. When that isn't the case, Assaultmen bring SMAWs to the PLT, helping to bridge the HE gap. Newer weapon systems, such as the M32, also help.