Home Guard district HV-02's rapid response team Derby joins with KAMP and support squadrons from 2.BN for an urban operations exercise. KAMP is the Norwegian Army's OPFOR unit.
I once explained in a thread about sniper tactics that a light source pointed towards an object conceals objects behind the light's source. Here's a great visual example of what that looks like in practice.
Conscript medics train to counteract chemical exposure.
Making wounds look realistic is a big part of medical training. Soldiers need to get used to how a wound sounds, smells, looks and feels. It's not exactly fun, but it does a great job at preparing you for dealing with actual combat injuries.
Soldiers from the Norwegian Army's Telemark Battalion deployed in Lithuania as part of the NATO Enhanced Forward Presence initiative.
Though it had fallen out of favor of larger throw aways like AT4, the LAW is making a comeback with units such as the United States Army where its small size means a soldier can carry two or three LAW units versus just a single AT4 or Carl Gustav and be able to operate the weapon system without the need for a second soldier to load or steady the firer. Providing good capabilities against light armored vehicles, the LAW really excels against fortifications and emplacements. It's not uncommon to see Norwegian soldiers carrying several laws on their person to supliment Carl Gustav and Javelin launchers and UBGLs to provide a fire team with all-around capabilities against ground targets. Then again, it's not uncommon to see a soldier carrying 2 Javelins either.
Modern LAW launchers come with a variety of options including the ability to detonate the round on a glancing blow, as opposed to most ATGMs and rockets which require a direct impact, back-blast mitigation controls for firing from within an enclosed space and a host of modernized targeting options for greater accuracy over a larger distance.
I only partially agree, unfortunately. There are areas where we've taken care of things nicely, but I can ID several areas of improvement that could further bolster our security.
Air defence is lacking. Our air defence doctrine is predicated on Air Force assets, currently the F-16 and in a few years the F-35, Naval vessels including the Nansen class frigates, armed with ESSM and soon ESSM Block II, and mobile NASAMS batteries, NASAMS II a static launcher and NASAMS III a High Mobility System. This arrangement provides a nice tiered defence system, but is very limited in both range and lethality against more aggressive class designs. There is no capability to defend against ballistic missiles or artillery rockets here and these are a major part of Russian doctrine at sea, in air and on land.
Russia and Norway are both very cold, very snowy nations, though Norway is far more mountainous and its infrastructure around critical junctions more established versus the Russian North and Central parts. Still, we can take some lessons from their asset development with tracked air defence systems for defending our northern regions, where a Russian incursion would be most likely.
UAVs are another area of interest to me and one I ID as a potential issue. We're highly reliant on NATO for tracking Russian assets in the North in the air. At sea is a different story were our P-3C/N and soon P-8A, Ula class submarines and allied vessels and host of AUVs easily eye Russian vessels in the Barents, North and Norwegian seas... for now. UAVs can expand that ID zone at a time when Russia is expanding its fleet to be able to operate further into the thawing arctic. Our submarines can't venture there and neither can our frigates. The P-8A has the range, but that's a long flight.
We spare 5000 personnel for a Cyber Defence force, larger then our Army in manpower, but can't spare a krone or soldier to man UAVs at a time when Russian activity extends further and further away from Norway's shores and eyes and deeper into the Arctic. We have to be able to keep watch on them. Our American friends are quite well regarded for their UAVs and something like the naval oriented Predator Guardian would make for a nice augment to the P-8A and naval vessels for both Norway and allied forces in the Arctic.
Despite the Russians extending their reach, the Arctic is still bottled up and relatively small, certainly within the range of our NSM and JSM cruise and anti-ship missiles. Russia's being belligerent more so then ever and keeping them away from our shores is our entire defence strategy, so why are we fielding NSM at sea only when a coastal launcher not only exists, but is in service with friendly nations like Poland?
Submarine launched JSM, NSM on frigates and JSM on the F-35 and P-8A will push the Russians back and hopefully keep them on their own side of our shared border, but if they break through our screen we need another layer.
While Norway is pockmarked with deactivated coastal defence batteries, right now the only coastal anti-ship weapons in service are Hellfire used by KJK special forces for attacking landing craft and fastboast, which Russia does have in abundance.
Only last area I'm concerned about is our artillery units. We're in the process of acquiring a handful of K9 Thunder from South Korea, but we lack rocket artillery since our M270s were deactivated. They're still in storage, but would take some work to get operational.
A land incursion isn't likely give the terrain that separates Russia and Norway, but Russian Airborne and Marine forces pack some serious armor of their own. Using a system like the M270 with GMLRS rockets or the American ATACMS, which is being developed into an anti-ship ballistic missile, something not seen in a Western nation since the Americans retired Pershing II, would be a nice supplement to our anti-ship capabilities in NSM, JSM and heavyweight torpedoes from our ULA and Type 214 mod submarines.
I have other concerns of course. The Leopard 2 isn't survivable against modern ATGMs, our military put a hold on pistol usage due to funding problems, the Navy can't make up its mind about a frigate or corvette replacement program, but I feel these would make the greatest impact and represent the most pressing deficiency we currently face.