|
They are acknowledging that any large formation of troops or gear will just get found by UAVs and become missile targets and instead want spread out small teams capable of doing damage independently. Weird way to think about the US Marines but it seems smart:USMC commandant posted:The ascendance of missiles and other long-range precision fires has made our service’s approach to amphibious operations and power projection and previous concepts to support fleet operations anachronistic. To facilitate deterrence, we must turn our adversary’s near seas into mutually denied spaces. Better strategic options depend on our ability to create an integrated maritime defense-in-depth within the arc of adversary long-range precision fires. We must develop the tactics and capabilities to create these conditions.
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 05:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 16:42 |
|
|
There is a logic, even a good logic to doing that and leaving the big forces for the army in case they get into something like we're seeing in Ukraine. So I fully expect the military to reverse course on it. Which I can only hope they do
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 06:59
|
|
|
'so we may be utterly useless in a war but we still have an important duty to those okinawan young mouths'
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 07:40
|
|
|
having independent forward observers/harassment teams seems like an ok idea, but i dunno if you need an entire service branch dedicated to it
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 08:13
|
|
|
Pryor on Fire posted:They are acknowledging that any large formation of troops or gear will just get found by UAVs and become missile targets and instead want spread out small teams capable of doing damage independently. Weird way to think about the US Marines but it seems smart: so the US Marines is now al qaeda
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 08:48
|
|
|
T.C. McCarthy's Subterrene War series looking more prescient by the day
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 08:53
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:so the US Marines is now al qaeda Well insurgencies keep winning so it's not the worst idea.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 09:37
|
|
|
Pryor on Fire posted:They are acknowledging that any large formation of troops or gear will just get found by UAVs and become missile targets and instead want spread out small teams capable of doing damage independently. Weird way to think about the US Marines but it seems smart: People have been saying that since the 1890’s and the “empty battlefield” still requires mass, which means suffering casualties from fires. Politicians don’t want to write those letters home but UAVs and missiles can’t actually take and hold ground.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 13:08
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:The PLA selected a great intermediate cartridge in the 5.8x42, everything after that with exoskeletons or whatever… lol. At least in civilian use, they are mostly used to support logistics, and I would assume it would be more or less the same in military use. In actual combat use then would be useless since it would just make the life of soldiers more complicated and make it harder to go prone etc. At best you would use them help load artillery or something of that caliber.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 13:24
|
|
|
I bet they're going to work great for fighting the Indians in phalanx though
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 13:42
|
|
|
As far as the changes to the Marine Corps, how are you going to be supplying these forces if potentially the other side has an advantage in both the sea and air? You can throw these guys on an island, but what is going to stop them from being more than a nuisance if the other side can simply hit back at the fleet assets supporting them and then bomb them into submission? Perhaps, traditional combined arms divisions are not possible at this point but at the same time, it doesn’t really seem like this is much of a solution since these forces aren’t going to last long if the enemy can find a way to pin them down. Also, are the Navy and the Army going to be given the material to offset the neutering of the Marine Corps? During Iraq, a large percentage of the invading force were marines, is the army going to be told to “do more with less”? Ardennes has issued a correction as of 14:34 on Oct 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 14:17
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:As far as the chances to the Marine Corps, how are you going to be supplying these forces if potentially the other side has an advantage in both the sea and air? well some people just want their glorified overseas holiday resorts, especially those with easy access to unaccountable sexual deviancy
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 14:19
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:As far as the changes to the Marine Corps, how are you going to be supplying these forces if potentially the other side has an advantage in both the sea and air? My read is that this was political manoeuvring to preserve the relevance of the USMC, but it’s not a serious doctrine, for the reasons you outlined. It maintains the budget, in the same way the attempts to rebrand the USMC as urban warfare specialists from 2003-10 did. They were able to trade on Fallujah for a long time in Washington, but it lead to things like the M27 replacing the M249 SAW in the rifle section as the 249 was “too heavy to carry in Fallujah”.  That weapon only makes sense to me as the Marine’s “brand” being tied to Iraqi urban warfare, and then having to pursue that as a doctrine. It kept anyone from questioning their size and budget for a decade but now they cut infantry section firepower in half for the sake of their own mythology.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 14:51
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:My read is that this was political manoeuvring to preserve the relevance of the USMC, but it’s not a serious doctrine, for the reasons you outlined. It maintains the budget, in the same way the attempts to rebrand the USMC as urban warfare specialists from 2003-10 did. They were able to trade on Fallujah for a long time in Washington, but it lead to things like the M27 replacing the M249 SAW in the rifle section as the 249 was “too heavy to carry in Fallujah”.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 15:00
|
|
|
So what the M27 is just a fully auto M4? That seems less than ideal compared to the ammo capacity of the 249, you know the thing you could really use while laying supressive fire
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 15:05
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:My read is that this was political manoeuvring to preserve the relevance of the USMC, but it’s not a serious doctrine, for the reasons you outlined. It maintains the budget, in the same way the attempts to rebrand the USMC as urban warfare specialists from 2003-10 did. They were able to trade on Fallujah for a long time in Washington, but it lead to things like the M27 replacing the M249 SAW in the rifle section as the 249 was “too heavy to carry in Fallujah”. I would say the issue there though is that while it maybe political in impetus, there going to be real results since it isn’t going to be that easy to simply build up the old capabilities of the USMC especially if their equipment is siphoned or sold off. Also at the same time, the Navy has been pushing hard to reduce fleet assets to support the marines, and a lot of those assets aren’t going to be coming back.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 15:06
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:So what the M27 is just a fully auto M4? That seems less than ideal compared to the ammo capacity of the 249, you know the thing you could really use while laying supressive fire i assume a heavier barrel for sustained fire but yeah it does seem to miss the point a bit
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 15:07
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:i assume a heavier barrel for sustained fire but yeah it does seem to miss the point a bit It sounds like they're just redoing a BAR at that point. I can't see how this would be more useful. I guess if your opponents are teenagers with rusty AKs its eaiser to get a higher volume of fire but seems insufficient against say the Russians or the Chinese
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 15:28
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:As far as the changes to the Marine Corps, how are you going to be supplying these forces if potentially the other side has an advantage in both the sea and air? They'll get supplied via Spaceforce ICB container drops, obviously.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 15:29
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:So what the M27 is just a fully auto M4? That seems less than ideal compared to the ammo capacity of the 249, you know the thing you could really use while laying supressive fire Yeah, exactly, but because they were the Fallujah Guys and they said the M249 was too heavy to carry up the stairs of Iraqi apartment buildings, they went ahead with it. Ardennes posted:Also at the same time, the Navy has been pushing hard to reduce fleet assets to support the marines, and a lot of those assets aren’t going to be coming back. I think this is related. The US services are so entrenched, bureaucratized, operating as political institutions as much as military forces, that as they vie for resources, promotions, Joint Commands and whatever else in DC it creates downstream consequences that aren’t really in view of the people making the decisions. Every dollar spent on fleet assets supporting the USMC is a dollar not spent on a surface combatant. I don’t think the relative combat value is a consideration, but which one carries with it a higher rank for the CO, which one allows for the creation of a Surface Task Force and another senior USN position for the TF CO, etc. The Royal Navy had this problem in interwar period where cruiser commanders were captains (OF-5), but only the commanders of destroyer flotillas bore that rank, the ships being led by commanders (OF-4). Minesweepers and smaller ships were led by even lower ranks. The result of which was the navy favoured whichever composition led to the creation of the maximum amount of senior naval officers, not what would actually be the best for fighting a war with, because in peacetime it can take decades to get promoted and they wanted to ensure relative the other services they had the power and prestige as well as facilitating the careers of their protégés. The IAR further differentiated the USMC from the Army and that probably made it worthwhile on top of the Major or Lieutenant Colonel positions created in the development, testing and procurement processes. We may be at the point where some weapons exist to create project managers and others to set services apart. The Army and Marines have separate vehicles on the same hull, designed to carry the same missiles:  
Frosted Flake has issued a correction as of 15:41 on Oct 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2022 15:37
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/BNONews/status/1577426769396858886 lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 00:48
|
|
|
does DPRK have the only competent military in the world?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 01:03
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:does DPRK have the only competent military in the world? probably did their whole nuke + ICBM project at less than the cost of an sole F-35 too
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 01:11
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/snekotron/status/1577438056142888963 I guess the claim passes the sniff test at glance?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 01:12
|
|
|
genericnick posted:I bet they're going to work great for fighting the Indians in phalanx though Exoskeletons gets them classified as large which means they take more damage from spear units like the phalanx.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 01:19
|
|
|
Danann posted:https://twitter.com/snekotron/status/1577438056142888963 Somebody’s been reading my journal submissions!
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 01:30
|
|
|
bring back divisions damnit
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 01:41
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:My read is that this was political manoeuvring to preserve the relevance of the USMC, but it’s not a serious doctrine, for the reasons you outlined. It maintains the budget, in the same way the attempts to rebrand the USMC as urban warfare specialists from 2003-10 did. They were able to trade on Fallujah for a long time in Washington, but it lead to things like the M27 replacing the M249 SAW in the rifle section as the 249 was “too heavy to carry in Fallujah”. The M27 came about mostly from the M249 being a stupid heavy piece of poo poo. It weighs nearly twice as much as an RPK, about the same as a PKM (!) and nearly as much as an M240 in some configurations. There is also the problem that the entire concept of a light machinegun firing an intermediate cartridge optimized for rifles is a compromise that arguably undermines the most important part of an infantry squad. If for some reason you can't bring or don't actually need an M240, you are arguably not that much worse off just giving everyone or a few people an M27 and calling it a day. The solution was always to just make a better light machinegun. The M250, against all odds, actually seems to have produced a pretty excellent result in that regard, but by insisting that the machinegun and rifles must use the same cartridge, the accompanying M5 rifle is hilariously overweight (potentially heavier than the aformentioned RPK, lmao). Morbus has issued a correction as of 01:57 on Oct 5, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 01:51
|
|
|
It seems like a lot of work just to go back to the C2, BAR, Bren, and forget the reason the FN MAG and Minimi were acquired in the first place. Yes they are heavy. That’s it, they’re heavy. They’re lighter than the Vickers or M1919, they provide more firepower than their predecessors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 02:06
|
|
|
I assume nobody wants a large army because nobody wants to deal with the risk of all of those veterans coming home. The Ukrainian separatists that have been fighting for 8 years now are constantly criticizing the failures of the Russian government, and well they already showed that they're willing to fight against the government that pisses them off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 02:24
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:It seems like a lot of work just to go back to the C2, BAR, Bren, and forget the reason the FN MAG and Minimi were acquired in the first place. Yes they are heavy. Fine but if your light squad-organic M249 weighs the same as a loving PKM what exactly have you accomplished? It's not OK for infantry equipment to be egregiously heavier than it needs to be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 02:29
|
|
|
Also if Ukraine is showing us anything, its that combat against a even remotely modern enemy will result in infantry men getting shelled or droned miles before small arms become useful, so this is kind of moot.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 05:39
|
|
|
https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20221004007600325
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 07:38
|
|
|
The Atomic Man-Boy posted:Also if Ukraine is showing us anything, its that combat against a even remotely modern enemy will result in infantry men getting shelled or droned miles before small arms become useful, so this is kind of moot. I think world war 1 tought us that lesson
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 10:07
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:I think world war 1 tought us that lesson The Lewis Gun went a long way to breaking the deadlock though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 12:46
|
|
|
Small arms have their place, especially in urban combat, they just another part of the “bouquet” of a combined arms strategy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 13:09
|
|
|
"why are we keep being forced to
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 13:23
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:There is a logic, even a good logic to doing that and leaving the big forces for the army in case they get into something like we're seeing in Ukraine. So I fully expect the military to reverse course on it. Which I can only hope they do What'll probably happen is that the marines will get all horny for everybody drops everybody fights one man one rifle oorah Then ten seconds later those light low-signature formations get burdened with the XM-99503 Charles Xavier self-propelled metal gear Brought To You By Raytheon and Applebees because that's what brings the MICbucks US doctrine has been so far up Lockheed's rear end for decades that the senior leadership can't even imagine what daylight is at this point
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 17:20
|
|
|
I had no idea anyone still flew the F4, let alone a first-world country like South Korea
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 17:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 16:42 |
|
|
I mean of the 300,000 strong frontline invasion force during Iraq, 75,000 were Marines. Also, the navy is going to handle the fact it is overstretched as it is while providing direct fire support to marines. I guess the assumption is the Solomon Islands won’t put up much of a fight in the first place. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 18:31 on Oct 5, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2022 18:28
|
|