How would you clear and secure a building like this? Brainstorming thread.
> try to secure elevators or avoid them?
> how and where to you establish secure areas
> evacuation of non combatants
> cut power/water or leave it on so you can use it too
> medevac and resupply. Maybe knock out a window and install a temporary crane down the side of the building?
> psychological stress from prolonged room clearing
> manpower issues/rotation
Etc etc etc
How would you do it?
Pump LSD in the vents, blast distorted Britney Spears, N'sync and Backstreet Boys CDs 24/7. Laser dazzlers on all exterior surfaces, constant low level small arms fire. Plumb raw sewage into the water system.
>Fill many R/C car with explosives
>Tie the R/C controller to the car and lock it to maximum speed with a rubber band
>Place them inside all elevators
>Attach the activation mechanism to the elevator
>Choose a floor and quickly close the doors
>Do the same to every R/C car in every elevator
>let hell loose
Good idea I think. But clearing a building of this size is bound to be very manpower intensive and take a long time.
There is a lot of maintenance equipment on the top floors though. Probably a good idea to have guys up there. "Secure the top 5 floors, barricade yourselves and get comfortable. Make sure nobody starts dropping grenades down the elevator shafts."
Buildings like this have security cameras inside and out covering all the lobbies and hallways, so Capturing the security room with the video feeds would probably be a high priority objective.
Bad guys would probably knock them out where ever they can find them. Still, you could watch them as they do this and have a rough idea of where in the building they're holding out. And as soon as they move to a new area you could see them.
That would require keeping the electricity on though, so you couldn't just cut the lights and have your night vision operators go hunting. Or maybe you could, just flip the breakers one floor at a time, working section by section.
Assuming IEDs, flashbangs and such will be a factor, it's probably a good idea to have some dedicated fire fighting capabilities with you too.
Good lord the more I think about this the more of a nightmare its becoming.
Which could take years, and assumes there are no hostages to rescue, no snipers plinking people from the windows, that the bad guys in the building aren't affecting anything else, that PR doesnt matter and nobody minds that a billion dollar piece of real estate in a major city has been taken over, that there is nothing financially or tactically valuable inside, etc.
Lots of reasons clearing a skyscraper might be necessary and under a time limit.
Technically you only need 1 floors worth of guys to secure a single floor at a time with a couple of small teams to block any movement on the stairs. Naturally you cut power to the elevators and clear a single floor at a time.
Shut down water supply chillers for ac and start shutting down essential power to all floors. No ac and sun = glasshouse level pain no water they wont make 3 days. Shut off power to lifts and wait for them to decend.
People greatly underestimate how much is required to keep a high rise building running. No pumps no water, no chillers or boilers no hvac
Power can be selectively shutdown from main feeds in. Water from flusher tanks etc can be drained at basement easily.
Just clear out and hunker down in the bottom floors, shut off all utilities and worry about other things until they give up. Either they all die of hunger/thirst, die from attempting to get out, or just give up.
Yeah. Though this left me thinking, is there a halucigen that can be turned into a chemical weapon? As you said LSD is to fragile to turn into gas, and mescaline and psylocybin not potent enough. Could DMT work? Or one of the more exotic RCs?
I know the USA at some point researched using a horribly powerful synthetic canabinoid as a chemical weapon.
The issue with weaponised drugs are that they have to
a)vaporise easily or be easy to spread
b) be very potent
c) fast acting
d) hard to overdose on (unlike fucking russians who thought fentanyl gas was a good idea)
Most skyscrapers don't really carry any sort of significant food supply, and a quick shutdown of electricity would cause all the perishables to spoil so all you would have left is the doritos in the vending machines.
I've just had an idea. Salvanorin A fits those criteria reasonably well. It'll definately incapacitate someone (freaking out because they've been sucked of reality and have lost their grasp of themselves as an entity), if not for very long. Synthesis would be a real bitch though. And I'm not so sure how effective delivery would be
they really can't. when you get up high enough the air pressure outside is too thin to support normal functions for extended periods. plus the sudden introduction of air which is less dense(outside) would cause an initial loss of breathable air. this would only be further compounded by a lack of air being circulated as was suggested.
You don't under stand how urban fighting works do you?
Urban warfare is high attrition rate game, any cunt with a belt fed in a survival firing position can take down an entire fire team. you're looking at needing Engineer elements to help clear the definite booby traps you'll have. Homies don't realise that even taking a 2 story house can take half a platoon of blokes.
You'll need a Company-Battalion sized group to take a large structure pictured. So much easier to sap underneath it or just blow the fucker away with air support.
I concur, but on the ground I would prefer to cordon and quarantine a 3 block are and bring the fucker down then throw a couple of hundred dudes under the bus and put them in danger. That if the surrounding area is a passive one. Otherwise just sit it out, most commercial buildings don't have generators or large stockpiles of food.
For reference, the 9/11 clean up cost hundreds of millions just to get rid of the rubble, not counting long term effects or all the adjacent buildings that had to be demolished because of collateral. Not counting economic damage, or the health effects from flooding Manhattan with concrete dust, etc.
And I'm assuming that anyone who has the numbers, training, and planning to take over a skyscraper has the foresight to bring some extra food/water/ammo. There's no starving them out.
Holding a skyscraper is retarded. The more men you devote to holding it the bigger target it is and at some point a jdam or a bunker buster or maybe just some 155s are gonna end up in the front lobby and then there goes a platoon or three.
You don't need a great deal of training to overpower a few rent-a-cops. However yes they would be prepared...and probably have the 'last laugh' plan to bring the place down themselves when it all goes south. The amount of hypotheticals here are pretty standard for a 'what if' scenario on /k/.
Why throw people into a possible death trap with an end game possibility much the same as your better course of action?
Well yes, /k/ is retarded. But there is occasionally the diamond in the rough, and once in a while a great conversation happens here.
I don't know man, this is just something that's been on my mind lately. I recently made a thread about urban warfare in a modern megacity. I've been googling but there is surprisingly little info on the interwebs.
Nobody has ever fought this kind of war before. I get the impression that people recoil in horror from the idea, "that would never happen! Cities are irrelevant in warfare! Just nuke 'em!" Etc etc etc
I think people are just sticking their head in the sand. Nobody has ever had to clear a skyscraper (to my knowledge) but it is inevitable sooner or later.
Maybe it'll be domestic terrorists, or ISIS, or vegans, or DPRK infiltrators in downtown Seoul. Or maybe it will be a real war. I think Stalingrad surprised both sides.
Anyway, this shit is interesting. And we need to take it seriously.
I don't know if this is what ispired you, but this is basically all we've got. The US military is mostly just Generals sitting around and thinking "let's make cyberpunk real"
The fact you haven't called me a 'bigger' yet is somewhat of a change.
Kinda got off topic there from my original post where it was stated 'a small group' could take a large area. Look at the examples of the Iraq war where large force elements had to cordon and 'insert other task verb here' huge tracts of urban sprawl. Military processes are a huge undertaking most people on /k/ don't realise and never get to see.
But most have the gist of 'wars will be fought in cities'. This is true, with globalisation influencing cultures worldwide we are seeing a massive influx of people into built up areas. And no more true than developing countries such as India, Pakistan, etc. Most modern militaries are only now playing the catch up game of how to conduct these kinds of operations.
And in reference to 'domestic' terrorism the footprint an attack like this places on an intelligence web is a nightmare. From sourcing weapons to vehicles, planning and training, the traceable evidence and bread crumb trail left behind is huge. The attacks in Cali, Paris and Sydney where examples of people conducting small time attacks in a tight group of people or as lone wolfs. Anymore than 10+ pers and you start to risk leaks etc.
> evacuation of non combatants
Pull the fire alarm.
Then follow up with loudspeakers (or the building's own PA) to warn anyone else to surrender or face the consequences. Then burn the motherfucker down.
>But muh collateral damage!
If the building's that fucking valuable, I secure the elevators and flush out any resistance with teargas and attack dogs.
No such thing exists. Russians used fentanyl once, had hundreds of dead hoatages from overdoses. There is no substance than can knock you out and not kill you with a slightly higher dose
my personal choice would be anything by deathgrips really
My loadout for this op
5 x Islamic Extremists outfitted with Mk1 eyeballs, biceps and legs.
Gear consists of plastic airline knives, Nike T-shirts and Islamic religious calls
Vehicle is a Boeing 767-200 with a payload of 49 SSPs (Sentient Screaming Passengers) with additional armaments of 24,140 Gallons of jet fuel.
The order of battle is to use the vehicle to breach the 89th floor of the building and cause a weakening of the building's structure, allowing the combatants to secure the ensuing rubble.
Eck, you might scrape by with a battalion depending on enemy strength and concentration. If it's this one in particular you will be fighting from bottom to top cause I can't see you achieving break in from the top floors to attempt to flush the enemy out.
Remembering a battalion size combat element will have engineers, cab and armour plus every pouge under the sun you'll have spare bodies to drag the rear and try not to shoot people in the process.
Best option I have is to surround the building with snipers and a few teams with 240s or 50s and clear out literally everything else that you can. Hopefully they will starve. No one wants to starve.
That or a crazy guy inserted on the roof with 1 knife, 1 M9, 4 magazines for M9, and 1 bag, barracks, inside of bag will be 60 M67 grenades, fragmentation.
>go in at night
>shut down all electrical systems (stops elevators)
>send teams up each stairwell
>have teams infiltrate through the roof go down each stairwell
If you have hostages they are fucked unless you try some high speed shit like rappelling down to the floor they are on and busting through the window.
Medevac will probably be from the roof or ground floor. You'll need a helo or ambulance on standby though.
Comms? Normal radio will probably be fine unless it's a fuck-huge building (like largest building in the world). You might need to set up some relays outside. I'd probably do that on surrounding buildings just to be safe.
Stress? It should go fast enough (unless you have firefights on every level) that most of the stress will be physical from all the moving. This will help cut down on mental stress as they will be too busy going up the stairs to worry about the firefight ahead.
Manpower? Dude, if you ain't go the bodies to clear a building, you really need to toss more funds at your SWAT team or something.
Eh but you'll see the same issue that was realised during the Sydney siege where the marksman couldn't verify either the amount of gunmen nor whether his rounds would penetrate the glass....it was a bank before it became a cafe and no gubbermince plans could ascertain if the glass had been replaced.
Fire support weapons are good but remember clearance by fire can only achieve so much. Some poor pleb still has to clear that space. And remember moving to nearby buildings is going to be risky business with enemy pushing your shit in the whole time from possibly already hardened positions.
I much prefer giving the newest guy a shit tin of Coke and vodka as well as your mentioned load out with the promise of hookers and drugs till death eternal.
I meant quarantine until they surrendered on their own or the resources to clear the building became available.
The U.S. could circumvent this by filling our skyscrapers with claymores hidden in the walls 5' off the ground. Lets see them want to take our fucking buildings then. Communist bastards.
Also I had another idea because he mentioned not being able to penetrate.
If urban combat like this became a reality, would we start seeing a lot of weapons like M82s or some other .50 rifle being attached to platoons for shooting through cover, or does the XM25 program have us covered here with the airbursts?
I personally can see some use to having something capable of shooting through walls, but weight, resources, ease of use, etc.
And there are airbursts.
Technically the hostages fell asleep sitting down with their heads tilting forward, causing a lot of them to suffocate to death. Then again gassing the whole fucking compound was overkill
Yeah pretty much the best option is to cordon and hold. The fact that NBC threat, hostages are there is the only thing that could force your hand here.
You should be an architect. Something everyone could get behind.
Most modern units have 7.62 marksman rifles and MMGs anyways and that sharpshooter mentioned only had 5.56. Most heavier weapons are held by support units, shit like .50 QCB and .50 rifles would be used in a Support position to engage 'opportune targets'.
As for the XM25 that's some crazy shit you fucking yanks (in going to assume you are, sorry if not) come up with. Used in the same capacity I would imagine. Only issue is deploying these assets l, they are vulnerable as fuck remember. Fuck lugging a M2 receiver 20 stories up.
A 240 is a megabitch to carry. Been there, done that, not fun. It's a world of hate for who ever is in front of you though.
I know that a lot of different weapons are available in support units to attach to other units, etc. My point is would there be a point in having something like that available organically at the platoon or company level, if this was going to be the day to day. It's easy enough for platoon to get something from company, but going to battalion or higher just makes everything a bitch.
Any one else have any insight on this? XM25s or M107s at platoon level? I assume that the XM25 is meant to be utilized at the squad level.
Light infantry 81 sucked so much dick.
I feels your pain mang.
I reckon there would be, but I feel for the cunt who has to lug the fucking thing. Be asking for a secondary that's for sure.
But I got no idea how you guys plan to implement that shit.
I'm not worried about it. I'm an engineer in a MP reserve unit. I'm just making up ideas on an internet forum, that shit is way above my paygrade.
Gotta say, a 7.62 DMR at squad level wouldn't be terrible. The worst part would be supply and training. That and getting past the meatheads higher up who think that another M4 is more important than a squad DMR. Even in a city I would take a squad DMR over another M4. Although probably not over a SAW.
Fuck too lazy to write my last response again, didn't post.
>Belt Feds clearing rooms sucks dick
>If you can use an M4 you can use a 417-SR25
>having both a 7.62 belt fed and marksman rifle at fire team feels great senpai.
I feel that a 7.62 belt fed and a DMR rifle at the fire team level would be moving far too close to not having enough general riflemen. What's the current layout, 2 rifles, 1 rifle with underslung grenade launcher, and 1 SAW in a fireteam? 2 fireteams and your SL and RT round out for 10? That's the way I was taught at least for a general purpose squad. After that you will probably have a 240 and AG attached depending on what you are doing.
operate differently with 2 fireteams of 4. we have to make up for numbers by packing as much heat as we can. If spare 40mm are left over generally you should endeavour to make sure they replace a bog standard rifle.