United States Marine Corps

V

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
Couldnt find a USMC thread and figured the marines deserved there own one, For now I have put it in the army section but not 100% sure where it belong's considering the have similarities and ties to every branch (Air, Naval, Land).

Recently the USMC announced they would be experimenting with the squad size's which currently stand at 13, To my understanding the main experiment has to do with adding a 14th member that for the most part would be a dedicated UAV controller.

Personnaly I like the idea of that, A small man portable drone able to get intel quickly with out waiting on the chain of command is a very valuable capability and one that as an Aussie would like to see the ADF look at too.

My opinion aside, Is this a good or bad thing? I may have recently posted onto solomons SNAFU blog in regards to the future ACV and USMC squad sizes and set him off just a smidge :)

SNAFU!: USMC experimenting with Squad configuration. They're wrecking the ACV plan before its even selected!

Regards, vonnoobie.
 
t68

t68

Well-Known Member
vonnoobie said:
Couldnt find a USMC thread and figured the marines deserved there own one, For now I have put it in the army section but not 100% sure where it belong's considering the have similarities and ties to every branch (Air, Naval, Land).

Recently the USMC announced they would be experimenting with the squad size's which currently stand at 13, To my understanding the main experiment has to do with adding a 14th member that for the most part would be a dedicated UAV controller.

Personnaly I like the idea of that, A small man portable drone able to get intel quickly with out waiting on the chain of command is a very valuable capability and one that as an Aussie would like to see the ADF look at too.

My opinion aside, Is this a good or bad thing? I may have recently posted onto solomons SNAFU blog in regards to the future ACV and USMC squad sizes and set him off just a smidge :)

SNAFU!: USMC experimenting with Squad configuration. They're wrecking the ACV plan before its even selected!

Regards, vonnoobie.
Click to expand...
Just smudge you reckon:dance more like foaming at the mouth, why would anyone want to comment if some say thing they don't agree with.

With only having been in second line transport and not at the coal face, I can see the benifits of a small uav cam copter or similar of such being of value for an quick eye in the sky over you location for a better appretiontion over the Immediate battlefield.but they have to be very robust as they would most certantly get knocked around a it, I reading some time ago can't remember where or who used it but they had something similar wasn't a cam copter looked like the length of a football and fly around dammed if I can remember where I saw that
 
Feanor

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
t68 said:
Just smudge you reckon:dance more like foaming at the mouth, why would anyone want to comment if some say thing they don't agree with.

With only having been in second line transport and not at the coal face, I can see the benifits of a small uav cam copter or similar of such being of value for an quick eye in the sky over you location for a better appretiontion over the Immediate battlefield.but they have to be very robust as they would most certantly get knocked around a it, I reading some time ago can't remember where or who used it but they had something similar wasn't a cam copter looked like the length of a football and fly around dammed if I can remember where I saw that
Click to expand...
But it means 3 per platoon and that's quite a lot. Not only expensive, but how easy will it be for NCOs already directing 12 other marines in combat to also process and make use of this much live video feed. I can see the UAV operator becoming a regular riflemen with the UAV only seeing niche use in a few situations. Or possible one UAV per platoon being used regularly and the other two essentially being backups. I mean if it was my platoon, I'd say yes, all for it, I get 3 more bodies, and UAVs, that's great. But is it the best use of resources?

EDIT: Some more thoughts, I think it might be better to have a company-level UAV section that's attached to headquarters platoon (yes I know that's not supposed to be a thing, but come on they actually do exist). They could be used the same way weapons platoons are used, where they can be deployed together to provide extensive coverage or tasked out to platoons. Maybe have a section of 3 UAV teams, each with two operators and team leader. It would give you maximum flexibility, and the company level is rather close, so the UAVs would still be readily available.
 
ngatimozart

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Bell Boeing are developing a RO/RO aerial refueling capability for the USMC MV-22 Osprey, however they are taking the attitude with the MV-22 that everything is an option. They are also looking at an AEW capability, amongst others, as well which may be of interest to the USN because they apparently no longer have that capability. Both these capability sets may also be of interest to other navies such as the JMSDF, ROKN and I would have thought the RN but apparently they are taking the paring knife to the RM in order to save the RN by cutting costs. Outside chance could interest the RAN. Personally I have thought that the MV-22 would be the better platform for ship based AEW rather than a helicopter, because it offers greater range, speed and altitude.
 
Blue Jay

Blue Jay

Member
ngatimozart said:
Bell Boeing are developing a RO/RO aerial refueling capability for the USMC MV-22 Osprey, however they are taking the attitude with the MV-22 that everything is an option. They are also looking at an AEW capability, amongst others, as well which may be of interest to the USN because they apparently no longer have that capability. Both these capability sets may also be of interest to other navies such as the JMSDF, ROKN and I would have thought the RN but apparently they are taking the paring knife to the RM in order to save the RN by cutting costs. Outside chance could interest the RAN. Personally I have thought that the MV-22 would be the better platform for ship based AEW rather than a helicopter, because it offers greater range, speed and altitude.
Click to expand...
I do recall also hearing about an ASW variant of the Osprey to fly off of the navy's flattops. The military also conducted self-funded tests of mounting a hydra rocket pods on the nose cheeks of the Osprey. I'm not sure how those two materialized, however, as it was a while ago. The platform does seem to be seeing a lot of consideration for a lot of different roles and capabilities.
 
ngatimozart

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The USMC and US Army are testing the ability of suppressed rifles and machineguns (up to and including the M2 HB BMG) being standard issue for infantry. Apparently the suppressors cost around US$700 each so it would be expensive to kit out full battalions. Also they are testing to see how long the suppressors last ; apparently 1,500 -2,000 rounds is the average lifetime at the moment.
The new stealth infantry: How suppressors will change battlefield tactics
 
S

STURM

Well-Known Member
Thanks! That was very interesting reading.

In 'Fry The Brain: The Art of Urban Sniping and Its Role In Modern Guerrilla Warfare '' John West also mentions the possibility of equipping infantrymen [not just snipes and marksmen] with suppressors. He doesn't however look at the possibility of also fitting suppressors to GPMGs and HMGs as the USMC is doing.
 
ngatimozart

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The new Commandant of the USMC has decided that the USMC requires the ability to sink ships helping the USN to secure island bases by providing A2AD in the Pacific much like it did during WW2 with artillery and ground based fighters.

At the Battle of Wake Island in December 1941, on 11/12/41 they sank the IJN destroyer Hayate by gunfire from 5 in guns and the IJN destroyer Kisaragi after a USMC Wildcat fighter dropped a couple of 100 lb (ca. 45 kg) bombs on it, damaged the flagship cruiser Yubari after hitting it with 5 in rounds, killed 200 Japanese troops, damaged several ships, and forced a withdrawal of Japanese forces whilst they called for IJN carrier support. Ultimately the Japanese conquered the island on 23/12/41, but they paid the price for it.

It is that type of strategy and capability that the Commandant wants to reintroduce to the Corp and using the likes of NSM, HIMARS, LRASM, LACM, 155 mm Excalibur rounds etc., shore based F-35B, he believes that he can achieve that. Certainly is a concept well worth investigating and would put the cat amongst the PRC pigeons.

State of the Marine Corps: Inside the Corps’ warplans to sink ships

Further Reading:
The Next Pacific War: Lessons From Wake Island For The PLA
 
Ranger25

Ranger25

Active Member
Staff member
ngatimozart said:
The new Commandant of the USMC has decided that the USMC requires the ability to sink ships helping the USN to secure island bases by providing A2AD in the Pacific much like it did during WW2 with artillery and ground based fighters.

At the Battle of Wake Island in December 1941, on 11/12/41 they sank the IJN destroyer Hayate by gunfire from 5 in guns and the IJN destroyer Kisaragi after a USMC Wildcat fighter dropped a couple of 100 lb (ca. 45 kg) bombs on it, damaged the flagship cruiser Yubari after hitting it with 5 in rounds, killed 200 Japanese troops, damaged several ships, and forced a withdrawal of Japanese forces whilst they called for IJN carrier support. Ultimately the Japanese conquered the island on 23/12/41, but they paid the price for it.

It is that type of strategy and capability that the Commandant wants to reintroduce to the Corp and using the likes of NSM, HIMARS, LRASM, LACM, 155 mm Excalibur rounds etc., shore based F-35B, he believes that he can achieve that. Certainly is a concept well worth investigating and would put the cat amongst the PRC pigeons.

State of the Marine Corps: Inside the Corps’ warplans to sink ships

Further Reading:
The Next Pacific War: Lessons From Wake Island For The PLA
Click to expand...

Agreed. Inline with that strategy the USMC has begun practice one again of seizing remote islands and then quickly setting up offensive weapons and Refueling for the likes of their F35s.

seems like it fits well with their dispersed strategy. Would make it more difficult for The PLAN to find, fix, and destroy USMC operators and make transit of the first island chain a far greater challenge with the likes of HIMARS mounted LRASM/ASHM.



How to Seize Islands, Set Up a Forward Refueling Point: Marine Corps Recipes for Expeditionary Operations - USNI News
 
ngatimozart

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Ranger25 said:
Agreed. Inline with that strategy the USMC has begun practice one again of seizing remote islands and then quickly setting up offensive weapons and Refueling for the likes of their F35s.

seems like it fits well with their dispersed strategy. Would make it more difficult for The PLAN to find, fix, and destroy USMC operators and make transit of the first island chain a far greater challenge with the likes of HIMARS mounted LRASM/ASHM.



How to Seize Islands, Set Up a Forward Refueling Point: Marine Corps Recipes for Expeditionary Operations - USNI News
Click to expand...
Think it would be somewhat of a stretch to mount the LRASM in a HIMARS. It's larger than the NSM.
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
ngatimozart said:
The USMC have taken 13 F-35Bs to sea aboard the USS America (LHA 6) to test their Lightning carrier concept. They use the San Antonio Class LPDs for C4 integration with the F-35s because their capability is far greater than the America's class LHA or the Wasp class LHD C2 capability.

Marines Test 'Lightning Carrier' Concept, Control 13 F-35Bs from Multiple Amphibs - USNI News
Click to expand...
A ship full of F35B's one month and the next loaded with various helicopter types. The month after a mix of both.
Be it a America or a Wasp Class, these are very flexible platforms for a wide range of undertakings.
Good to see the full spectrum of capabilities being explored.
Something other navy's with like platforms may want to consider.

Regards S
 
oldsig127

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
ngatimozart said:
The Commandant of the USMC wants a "light" amphibious ship for the USMC and the USMC has been working closely with the USN to develop such a ship. Top Marine General Wants a New Class of 'Light' Amphibious Warship. This will not replace any of the current amphibs but is intended to be built and deployed in numbers enabling the USMC to move forces quickly and numerously across the Asia Pacific AO.
Click to expand...
Pretty much a repeat of reports last October and even further back concerning the same thing. Here, for those wondering whether the idea has developed further, or is just getting another shot of publicity, are the links posted here back then.

Top Marine's Force Changing Plans Prompt Talk Of Smaller Ships, F-35 Buy Changes

Marines, Navy Both Considering Something Like an Offshore Support Vessel to Supplement Amphibs - USNI News

Oldsig
 
ngatimozart

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
ngatimozart said:
An update on the CH-53K for the USMC. It appears that the program is now on track and is on schedule to complete testing and commence operational deployments in 2023. This is good news for a program that was recently quite troubled.

www.forbes.com

Marine Corps CH-53K King Stallion Helicopter On Track To Become Heaviest Lifter In Joint Force

The new helicopter can lift more than any other rotorcraft in U.S. history.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
Click to expand...
I note the comment about the USMC sticking with their programs, the F-35B, the Osprey, and now the King Stallion. Their commitment to desired kit should be an inspiration to the other services which of late have a somewhat flakey track record.
 
ngatimozart

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The USMC has decided that AShM will be their top priority for the time being To combat the China threat, US Marine Corps declares ship-killing missile systems its top priority. They see it as contributing to USN sea denial capabilities and as a component of the distributed lethality strategy. By having NSM mounted on trucks and being able to quickly set up in areas such as islands, they can deny an area to enemy naval forces quickly. If the USN can field the Tomahawk missile with a warhead that can hit moving targets, then such a missile in USMC hands will be a serious threat to enemy naval forces, especially on a mobile platform. This is another example of USMC thinking outside of the square.
 
Boagrius

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
I expect that this is just the beginning too. You'd have to expect that LRASM would be a good candidate with hypersonic weapons to follow in due course...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top