U.S. Army Cavalry Leader’s Course

A Report on My Experience as a German Soldier

By Mastersergeant (Officer Candidate) Jobst Hinrich Sielaff, German Army

July 1, 2026 | Armor, Summer 2026 Edition

Read Time: < 12 mins

From August 4th to August 22nd, 2025, I finally had the opportunity to participate in the U.S. Army’s Cavalry Leader’s Course (CLC) at the Maneuver Center of Excellence (MCoE) in Fort Benning, Georgia. My initial interest in participating in the CLC dates back to my time as a reconnaissance patrol leader in the 3rd Armoured Reconnaissance Battalion in Lüneburg, Germany.

First, I would like to explain the composition of the German Cavalry or the Heeresaufklärungstruppe [Army Reconnaissance Force] to the American readers as opposed to the original article in “Der Panzerspähtrupp” where I provided information for the German audience about the United States Cavalry and its terminology, organization, and restructuring efforts to get that audience on track for the information regarding the CLC.

In the German Army the word cavalry is more of an antiquated relict from the history books. The foremost bearer of the Cavalry´s traditions is the Heeresaufklärungstruppe which is the successor of the Panzeraufklärungstruppe [Armored Reconnaissance Force]. To be fair, quite a few of the traditions in the daily life in the German military can trace its roots to the Cavalry of the past. The Heeresaufklärung [Army Reconnaissance] sees itself as the main holder of Cavalry traditions. As cavalry and armor in the German Army had developed differently in comparison to the U.S. Army, the Armor Branch bears pink as the branch color while the reconnaissance still bears the cavalry yellow.

With the creation of the Bundeswehr [German Armed Forces] in 1955, there was discussion from the beginning about the task of the newly created independent armored reconnaissance formations and their role during combat conditions. A dual role was already defined by General Heinz Willhelm Guderian during the second World War: reconnaissance or combat, or reconnaissance through combat. They were mainly responsible for reconnaissance and surveillance of the attacking enemy formations and to hold close contact with the enemy, which required a certain capability to fight for information and delay the enemy if necessary. The first structure was heavily oriented on the armored reconnaissance formations of the Panzer Divisions from 1944. This ultimately led to the hunter-killer “dream team” with the Luchs wheeled armored vehicle partnered with Leopard 2 main battle tanks (MBTs) supported by ground radar systems on the Fuchs armored transport vehicle and even the Marder infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) in certain battalions during the peak of the Cold War.

The lighter Luchs found the enemies weak spot, the Leopards took advantage of the weakness and tied the enemy and were relieved by the main effort of the Panzerdivision. Until 2001 the reconnaissance battalions had already lost all their MBTs by disbanding the heavy platoons within the companies. By 2008 it was decided that the Panzeraufklärungstruppe and the last Fernspähkompanie [Long Range Reconnaissance Company] would be disbanded and amalgamated with the artillery unmanned aerial system (UAS) reconnaissance forces, field intelligence forces, and form the new Heeresaufklärungstruppe.

A reconnaissance battalion of the Heeresaufklärungstruppe cannot be compared and does not have much in common with Panzeraufklärung.

Instead, it is composed of the following:

• Battalion Headquarters
• Headquarters and Support Company
• Reconnaissance Company with six reconnaissance platoons, each with two reconnaissance patrols, each equipped with two Fennek armored reconnaissance vehicles
• Reconnaissance Company with three field human intelligence (HUMINT) platoons and one light reconnaissance platoon
• Technical Reconnaissance Company with one Luna (reconnaissance drone) equipped platoon, one KZO (target acquisition drone) equipped platoon, and one radar platoon

Figure 1. Structure Panzeraufklärungsbataillon mid 1980 with Brigade Reconnaissance Companies attached.

Depending on the battalion, an additional company may be attached as a recruit company, reserve unit, or inactive company.

In the event of war, a battalion will form two mixed reconnaissance companies which includes each type of sensor mentioned above. This means a mixed reconnaissance company has three platoons of Fennek reconnaissance vehicles, one squad of dismounted reconnaissance, one platoon UAS, two squads of radar reconnaissance, plus field HUMINT team (FHT) capabilities available to support its higher headquarters, at brigade or division.

Cavalry Leader’s Course Structure

Figure 2. Spahpanzer Luchs Reconnaissance Vehicle (Sourced from Budasarchiv)

Class instructors are captains with company command experience who have been selected as CLC instructors. In addition, there is an exchange cavalry officer from Australia. The course begins with a written evaluation on reconnaissance and security operations. This consists of thirty questions based on the provided pre-reading list but also assumes knowledge of daily troop operations and regulations. It serves to make an initial assessment and to place course participants into balanced classes. This is followed by a direct debriefing of the evaluation test and a review of the cavalry squadron’s mission within the brigade combat team (BCT) system. Homework is assigned each day of the course, except for late-night sessions. This typically consists of technical articles and/or sections from regulations. Duty hours during the course generally run from 0630 to 1730, including physical training, but excluding homework. On late-night days, it is the responsibility of the course participants to manage their own time, and duty hours can extend well beyond 2000 hours. The entire exercise scenario, Operation Atlantic Resolve, is geographically located in the notional Warmia/Masuria region. In this notional region, the nation of Glasskowski is threatened by its neighbor, Donovia, and is subjected to continuous aggression across the hybrid spectrum, including the open deployment of regular armed forces.¹

Operation Winged Bayonet - Reconnaissance Battalion of an Infantry Brigade Combat Team (IBCT)

Figure 3. LEOPARD 2A4 Main Battle Tank (Sourced from Bundesarchiv)

The first week involves working with the cavalry squadron of an IBCT. The course structure involves the class representing the staff of a squadron and progressing through the military decision-making process (MDMP) up to wargaming. Each course participant represents a staff section. This begins on the second day of the course with developing the planning basis for the deployment of 1-93 CAV of the fictitious 175th Airborne Brigade. During the IBCT week, reconnaissance and security operations are covered equally. Specifically, this includes zone reconnaissance, area reconnaissance, and screen operations to protect the superior unit. After a successful airborne operation, reconnaissance is conducted from the landing zone to provide the commander of the combat brigade with a situational awareness picture and to position the squadron in the best possible way for the next attack. This constitutes the entire work order for the day, which ideally concludes with wargaming. The day ends with 1-93 CAV transitioning into security and surveillance duties to provide the higher command with the necessary operational leeway. The developments in the situation during the night form the basis for the next day of training. Here, too, the planning principles are developed, and the first graded assessment takes place. This means that from 1730 onwards, the course participants are assigned an area of operation within the cavalry squadron and individually develop their operational plan for their troop/company. The participants present this operational plan to their instructor the following day and must then present it to the instructor in a wargaming scenario. The instructor introduces developments in the situation, and participants are expected to react immediately to these developments, according to the principles of reconnaissance and security. A deliberation time of more than one minute is unrealistic. Afterwards, the plan and all the assessment materials are reviewed, and any omissions and inefficiencies are identified. Participants are also expected to recognize shortcomings that originated in the staff planning phase. Participants are also expected to consider the use of aircraft, combat support, and logistics, and to represent this appropriately using the correct military symbols in accordance with Field Manual (FM) 1-02.2, Military Symbols. After completing the exam and debriefing, the training day concludes, except for homework. Following the overview of the course outline, the week concludes with the so-called “Teach Day” on Friday. Here, the fundamentals of reconnaissance and security operations are reviewed and linked to further content through interactive discussions.

Figure 4: Fennek (Image provided by author)

Operation Dragoon Strike - Reconnaissance Battalion of a Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT)

In the second week, the area of operations changes, and participants join the cavalry squadron of a SBCT, specifically the fictional 4th Cavalry Regiment (4/4 CR). Here, too, the planning groundwork is laid. Throughout the week, reconnaissance along approach routes, area security operations to protect friendly forces within a defined area, and the transition from zone reconnaissance to a guard operation—to deprive the main force of enemy reconnaissance and firepower—are conducted. The transition from zone reconnaissance to guard is carried out as an ungraded practical exercise. It is evaluated during the lecture. This can be visualized like a chess tournament where the instructor goes from table to table and expects a reaction to the developing situation within under a minute. The SBCT phase concludes with the squadron’s deployment as a moving flank guard for the brigade on Thursday. The written assessment, which must be passed with at least 70%, takes place on Friday of this week. The assessment consists of 30 questions covering the entire course content, with a focus on regulation FM 3-98, Reconnaissance and Security Operations and, to a lesser extent, Army Techniques Publication (ATP) 2-01, Collection Management and ATP 2-01.3, Intelligence Preparation of the Operational Environment, as well as FM 1-02.2, Military Symbols. The examination criteria are very strict, and it is required that participants be able to reproduce many sections from FM 3-98 verbatim. Not all participants passed this exam; however, there is an opportunity to retake it on Monday of the third and final week. Should this retake also be failed, the participant will be dropped from the course, and their sending unit will be informed.

Figure 5. As with the Cavalry in the U.S. Army, the Heeresaufklärungstruppe of the Bundeswehr is in the process of restructuring. The structure shown above is the current structure.

Operation Iron Fury - Cavalry Squadron of an Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT)

The final week of the course begins with another change of operational area, and participants are now members of a cavalry squadron (1-3 CAV) within the 3rd ABCT, 4th Armored Division (3/4 AD). Here, too, the fundamentals of an ABCT cavalry squadron, including its structure and equipment, are covered. The class has another opportunity to work on their staff skills. This week’s content includes reconnaissance in force and area reconnaissance. These are components of the second graded practical assessment. A combined practical exercise, involving all classes, involves conducting a guard operation for 3/4 AD during a delay in a wargaming scenario. On Tuesday, staff work begins for the second graded tactical decision-making assessment. For this assessment, the class is responsible for assigning their own staff sections. In my class, we had become so well-coordinated by this point that staff work ran smoothly and there were no frictions during the assignment process. Nevertheless, this late-night session lived up to its name. On Thursday, the operational plan for the assigned troop was presented. This time, the examiner was one of the instructors from the other classes. After this exam, the day was over except for the homework. As mentioned before, a final practical exercise conducted across classes, followed on Thursday. Half of the course participants formed the staff of a squadron and were provided with most of the necessary documents, as the focus that day was on the rapid decision and synchronization process (RDSP), i.e., reacting quickly to changing situations. Four course participants were assigned as troop commander and were located in an adjacent room.

Communication between the squadron and troops takes place via radio. During the security operation, the cavalry squadron’s mission is to delay the enemy for at least three hours. The oral final exam takes place on the last day of the course. Prior to this, each of the three training classes selects one participant to represent their class as an honor graduate during this exam. This means that the selected candidate may take their oral exam in front of all instructors and with less time; in return, these three candidates will be the first to complete their exams. Should the oral exam be failed on this day, a retake is offered one hour later. The oral exam consists of eight questions and has a time limit of 30 minutes. The use of a whiteboard is permitted and recommended during this exam. The questions are designed to be linked to and related to other course content. After the oral exam, the classrooms are cleaned and the course participant survey is conducted. This survey takes place online via a link on participants’ personal mobile phones and lasts approximately 15 minutes. Before the actual graduation ceremony, an informal discussion is held with one of the instructors. In this discussion, the instructor does not speak with their own class, but rather with one of the neighbouring classes. Topics include course content, structure, procedures, and how the class perceived their instructor. Openness is highly valued and encouraged. Instructors, especially those pursuing a long-term career in the U.S. Army, are very interested in receiving feedback on their own potential for improvement. The course concluded with the presentation of the course certificates.

Figure 6: Map of the Heeresaufklärungstruppe (source: https://www.heere-saufklaerungstruppe.de)

Epilogue

“To Fight or Not to Fight – The Saga Continues” by Robert S. Cameron, Ph.D. was the title of a professional article in ARMOR Magazine, and another was titled “Trading the Saber for Stealth”.^3,4 For decades, the U.S. Army has been engaged in a lively debate about the structure of its reconnaissance/cavalry forces. This discussion can be traced back to the motorization of the army in the lead-up to World War II. There have been repeated calls to simplify reconnaissance at the expense of combat power. However, unlike the German Army, this never resulted in a complete abandonment of combat-oriented reconnaissance. Unfortunately, no in-depth discussion of this topic is taking place within the U.S. Army’s reconnaissance troops, let alone the German Army as a whole yet. Unfortunately, I have not seen a lot of contribution from other parties to the discussion so far. The focus of the German Army’s reconnaissance force remains unchanged for now; only the weapon systems are being replaced by successors. If there are differing arguments, they tended to suggest that even the Fennek reconnaissance vehicle, or the future Luchs 2, is too heavy and that much lighter options and capabilities are needed instead. This is to say nothing of the premature dismissal of combat vehicles. Personally, I have always advocated the opposite view in the reconnaissance workshops at the Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Armaments Center (CCDC-AC) between 2021 and 2024. Yes, I personally believe that clinging to the current approach is a mistake. In my assessment of the situation, disbanding the Panzeraufklärung as a whole was an error. There were certainly political pressures to take this path, but it is proving inadequate for future challenges. What would have happened if September 11, 2001, and February 24, 2022, had occurred in reverse order? – The discussion is pointless, as shooting over graves has never been productive. However, given the overall situation, appropriate decisions must now be made. Future ground-based reconnaissance must be designed in conjunction with new technologies, but it must also be capable of duel-based combat in order to conduct operations like the ones I was able to plan during the CLC. The reason lies not in my participation in this valuable and instructive course, but rather in the fact that, after studying the now-defunct German Army Service Regulation 241/100 – Das Panzeraufklärungsbataillon [The Armored Reconnaissance Battalion]², I could only find comparable content presented in an U.S. Army course. At least German retired readers should still be familiar with this regulation. With the disbandment of the Panzeraufklärungstruppe, the German Army has withdrawn from these operations and is now relying on concealment on the battlefield, from where intelligence about the enemy can be gathered. How resilient and undetectable in the electromagnetic spectrum will these reconnaissance patrols be? Probably not for very long, or they are positioned in the wrong places, and above all, there are too few of them. On the battlefield, the result will be that the main forces will have to fight the full force of any attack. The army reconnaissance troops will, if anything, be mere observers of major events. The protection of areas, deployment as a delaying force, and further maneuvering within the command structure of the superior unit are necessary and can only be provided by Panzeraufklärer (Cavalry). The necessity of armoured reconnaissance, incorporating electronic warfare and new technologies such as unmanned systems, is beyond question for me.

The Cavalry squadron conducts reconnaissance operations to develop the situation forward or to the flanks of the main body to prevent the BCT commander from fighting at a disadvantage. (FM 3-98; 1-17)

Notes