|
Nebakenezzer posted:2020 can serve you up an example of this, and from a kind of carrier, no less: It’s the navy’s ship
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2020 23:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 14:55 |
|
|
Finally a SecDef who will guarantee the troops' freedom to press
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2020 05:28
|
|
|
This is a pretty old book but I still see it on recommended reading lists from time to time: https://mcoepublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/library/ebooks/Soldier%27s%20Load_dated%201980.pdf. It's SLA Marshall, so take that as you will, but its on the weight load carried by soldiers. Also not an infantryman but my perspective from time as a FO; carrying as much as possible. Minimize luxuries, like Cessna said, so you can carry more radios, batteries, and ammo (which includes for weapon systems you aren't even using, to help out the machine gunners and mortar men). Two mindsets: we have a long way to go so we have to carry a lot since we're far from resupply / we don't have a long way to go so we can carry more.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2020 23:57
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Yeah, sorry, I just noticed. The Allies did a lot of this in Burma, where terrain did not facilitate large airborne drops but you could find or make rudimentary air strips to insert and resupply troops in the Japanese rear area. However, they were dedicating large amounts of their force to holding those air strips.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2020 15:55
|
|
|
Back to discussion a few pages ago on combat loads, was in a brief today that claimed the combat load for a marine grunt in 2000 was 75 lbs and in 2015 it was 95 lbs.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2020 22:17
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:I really want the modern military to find an excuse to make giant inflatable armies. I mean many militaries probably still have them although they likely have additional stuff to help look real, like heat generators
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2020 01:46
|
|
|
Can’t imagine Halsey is a big enough name to the average person that they’d be upset if he was portrayed poorly
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2020 02:38
|
|
|
Pryor on Fire posted:I had a friend who went to the marines and explained to me that hearing protection was rarely used in any situation, because the thinking was that you would toughen up your ears and get used to the sound of gunshots. I think it would be a better option to be able to serve in the military without permanent damage but apparently this is the sort of thing a pussy rear end bitch thinks. It’s more how hearing protection makes it hard to hear people talking and dulls other sounds besides shooting. None of my cannoneers ever wore ear pro because it’s kind of important to hear the commands from the FDC and the chief. No one wants to risk shooting out because they didn’t hear the proper command and everyone wants to get rounds out fast as possible. However, they have in the last year started issuing radio headsets and I have noticed the guys actually wear these: they provide hearing protection and facilitate communication.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2020 16:07
|
|
|
I think it’s textbook as a case study of small unit leadership and decision making, not “if you encounter a fortified position execute the Brecourt protocol”
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2020 18:04
|
|
|
Elendil004 posted:That makes a lot of sense, I guess I have heard the story that it's this textbook thing and assumed it meant it was a new way to do stuff not just an amazing execution of the old. One of the best “death by PowerPoint” classes I ever sat through was on decision making and Boyd’s OODA loop, where the instructor used the actual scene and paused it at regular intervals to point out where and how decision making was occurring
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2020 23:19
|
|
|
Cessna posted:Iceland's Althing has been around since 930, and is their parliament today. It’s still a “requirement” these days, as in each day you have to show the coaches that you have it, but I’ve never seen anyone corrected for not actually wearing it on the firing line. Then again most people actually do wear it on the range in my experience.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2020 19:31
|
|
|
“Britain almost lost: if a few more of their ships had been sunk they’d give up” doesn’t sound like Britain almost lost to me
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2020 16:46
|
|
|
Solaris 2.0 posted:While I appreciate the usual glib responses that SA is lovingly known for. I'm being serious. I did not mean my answer to be completely sarcastic. I would still question the idea that Britain almost lost after losing six ships. Was the morale of the troops low enough that mutiny/surrender/refusal to fight was a possibility? Did any of the tactical commanders seriously consider surrender/cease fire or communicate to higher that they were at risk of failing their mission? Did strategic and political leadership seriously discuss surrender or cease fire after losing six ships?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2020 18:03
|
|
|
Ugly In The Morning posted:I got the general story of my grandfather’s time in Korea in his own words Thanks for sharing this, glad he was able to share this with you.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2021 16:42
|
|
|
Reconnaissance is a fundamental task any infantry unit could be called upon to perform; no amount of overhead assets is going to change that. Even with the existence of ground based remote collection assets, like sensors and cameras, that have existed for years there will still be a desire for ground reconnaissance, to include deep in the battle space
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2021 19:52
|
|
|
Multiple sources of Intel are huge as well. Show me a uav pic of a tank and I’ll think it could possibly be a tank. Show me a pic and have a guy on the ground say he sees it, I’ll think it’s probably a tank. Give them thermal optics and the ability to detect communications signals and ill think it’s likely a tank.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2021 21:19
|
|
|
Mustang posted:It is definitely not a fundamental task, reconnaissance is performed by dedicated reconnaissance units with their own training pipelines and schooling. However, I do agree with your overall point that there will always be a need for soldiers on the ground conducting reconnaissance. From the marine corps perspective I disagree and the training&readiness manual directly speaks to the expectation that line infantry regiments and below be prepared to conduct reconnaissance, for reasons that include to inform their own commander and higher commanders. I agree that specialized reconnaissance units are more better at doing it but an infantry battalion has a platoon of scout snipers specifically trained in this, it’s not until you get to the division level that the marine corps has light armored reconnaissance and reconnaissance battalions. A platoon of scout snipers isn’t going to always cut it so the line companies need to be prepared to also conduct recon. I would hope a battalion commander would not lead with his face going into an attack and would instead conduct reconnaissance before hand. This could include his organic assets, like small uas, scout snipers, and/or a simple recon patrol by an infantry squad, in addition to assets from higher such as better uas, signals intelligence, and reporting from reconnaissance units. FastestGunAlive fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Jan 14, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2021 00:53
|
|
|
Mustang posted:In a peer or near peer threat, a simple recon patrol by ye olde infantry squad is absolutely not going to cut it. Most skirmishing by modern reconnaissance units is happening outside of the range of small arms weapons and involves long range optics and indirect fire. Agree to disagree I guess. Reconnaissance occurs at many distances, to include within a battalion’s battle space, where it will not necessarily have these specialized units. Technology will continue to improve and the modern battlefield will become more complex but there will also continue to be value in “simple” methods, in my opinion.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2021 02:08
|
|
|
bewbies posted:I loved this conversation. I don’t disagree with you nor did my initial argument
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2021 16:10
|
|
|
From the book US Marines and Amphibious War by Isley and Crowl:quote:For the first few years practical training of these troops alternated between standard infantry ground maneuvers and landing exercises, with emphasis on the former. This first type consisted mostly of mock battles "fought" on Civil War sites, and these seem to have been designated almost as much for publicity as for practical reasons. In 1921 Brigadier General Smedley D. Butler USMC conducted extensive field maneuvers in the vicinity of the Civil War battlefield at Wilderness Run. The following year Gettysburg was the scene of these exercises which included a historic reproduction of Pickett's last charge for the special benefit of President Warren G. Harding and his party. In the autumn of 1923 the expeditionary brigade marched from Quantico to Newmarket, Virginia, where the battle of Newmarket was reenacted, with the cadet corps of the Virginia Military Institute participating in the demonstration. This was to commemorate the historic occasion when the cadets of V.M.I. volunteered to a man to join the Confederate Army and halt the Yankees' drive up the Shenandoah Valley in June of 1864. The next year field exercises were held near Sharpsburg, culminating on national defense day (September 12) in a demonstration of attack under modern battle conditions on the battlefield of Antietam. Forty thousand spectators and a host of official visitors witnessed this event, and at its close the troops marched back to Quantico via Washington where they were reviewed by the President.41
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2021 17:14
|
|
|
Ugly In The Morning posted:He’s up for questions about Korea and being a Pogue If I've asked too much just chop it down to whichever few you think would be most interesting to hear. What were some of your thoughts on the Koreans you interacted with and their culture? Were there any WWII veterans serving with you? Did their experience help or assist you in Korea? In the original post you mentioned meeting some Brits at a farewell party. What were your thoughts on interacting with them? What is your opinion on MacArthur? edit: my grandpa did supply work in the 24th and 25th ID in Korea FastestGunAlive fucked around with this message at 00:41 on Feb 15, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2021 00:38
|
|
|
Tias posted:MILHIST QUIZ TIME: Slide ruler?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2021 15:39
|
|
|
A grunt unit could move an 81mm mortar by hand over a long distance but it would suck. Everyone is already maxed on weight so spread loading ammo means you’re leaving behind other types of ammo or batteries instead. For distances, a few years ago the marines updated the readiness standards so that grunt units have to do 20mi in a single hike and non grunt units 10 or 12 I think. I believe this is an annual requirement.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2021 04:07
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:Was the blue force tracker a sort of prioritizing friendly fire prevention thing born out of not having to worry too much about the enemy for so long? Or why did they not worry about everyone emitting? 20+ years of not needing to worry about if your adversary (e.g. al qaeda) would be able to collect on that persistent signal. Like bewbies said, it’s been recognized as not ideal for possible future fights. Most marine units have already just stopped using the bft and I believe the service is going to discontinue fielding them.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2021 18:35
|
|
|
Nice to know that the challenges of electronic warfare in a near/peer fight are easily dismissed or solved.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2021 19:29
|
|
|
Thanks for sharing that story, nota
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2021 01:28
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:The two incompetent officers (Captain America and Encino Man) weren't combat infantry officers, but were intelligence officers suddenly thrust into command because 1st recon were reorganised into a hummvee mounted unit in order to pose as a feint - the US military knew that the Iraqis considered Marines 1st Recon an elite unit and so the US advertised their presence to distract attention. You can't really blame the officers here since they were never expecting to do this job. Ground Intel officers can serve in Recon just the same as infantry officers, hold command in the unit FastestGunAlive fucked around with this message at 14:12 on Mar 22, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2021 14:10
|
|
|
I’ve only seen the show but I would say that doesn’t even depict Sobel as effective at training people. Just good at PT. I would think that the dispersed nature of paratroop operations would necessitate good small unit leadership and individual initiative, both things he very much did not train Easy in.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2021 14:59
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:A lot of the stuff that Sobel does that comes off as being a dick actually has good training value. Shared adversity and having a guy everyone can unite around hating is great for building unit cohesion. One scene that really stands out to me is when he goes and revokes everyone's weekend passes for a bunch of minor bullshit. If you've never done basic training that can come off as being completely unreasonable, but that kind of poo poo happens all the time. The secret is they were never going to get weekend passes, Sobel was going to dig until he found enough hits to justify "revoking" them. It's a classic bit. Like Edgar Allen Ho said, the real vindication for the training should be how well they performed in combat. I’ve served in units with toxic leadership and yea, it’s effective in some ways at building camaraderie in opposition to the leader, but it does not make a healthy unit. Units like this I served in were highly skilled, because they had to be, but were far more vulnerable to critically imploding and were more gun shy in fear of being targeted by that toxic personality. The pass thing might be a “classic bit” that flies in basic training but absolutely does not fly when you’re a company commander with leaders and soldiers who want to be treated as grown men and given the opportunity to lead.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2021 20:45
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://mobile.twitter.com/NinjaEconomics/status/1379509214066933764 Oh they didn’t make any changes to it for this map
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2021 01:01
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:The Chinese forces in ww2 liked to use US-supplied 60mm mortars at short ranges but they did this so that they could self-spot more than anything else. Still extremely common at least in the marines. 60s are at the company level and often direct lay, if the terrain is open enough.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2021 04:46
|
|
|
My favorite history channel show as a kid was clash of warriors, the music was iconic to me
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2021 17:49
|
|
|
Yep that’s the song
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2021 18:40
|
|
|
Honestly don’t think I’ve ever walked into the head and not had someone in there taking a poo poo. Was never sure how other officers could stand to brush their teeth or shave in the head rather than use the sink in their room. And absolute condolences to the enlisted who have no other option. I’d be interested to know how low we would need to get the number of crew to guarantee at least one day without a clogged shitter. Step one would be no marines, of course. Some of the things I’ve heard a ships captain note over the 1mc as having been pulled out the shitter include head phones, t shirts, and shaving razors
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2021 05:20
|
|
|
Crab Dad posted:Officers dont use their sink so they dont have to clean it. I was always amazed on how perfect my OIC kept his state room then I found out after he left that he never used the sink or toilet in it and had roll up mattress and slept on the floor in a sleeping bag and left his racks perfectly made for 6 months Yea, we had plenty of condoms and the tiny liquor bottles found in toilets as well. Not sleeping on the rack is just weird! I slept on the bed but I slept on top of the covers with a woobie, not because I was too lazy to make the bed but because the poncho liner is so drat comfy
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2021 22:30
|
|
|
Scratch Monkey posted:They give woobies to sailors? I'm a marine. And yea those blankets they issue are real scratchy
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2021 23:44
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Is there a really good way to tell who is going to be an effective combat commander without seeing the elephant? I realize this is a critical priority for pretty much every military organization ever so I presume that a lot of work has been done on it. In garrison your combat units are spending most their time training for and simulating combat. Additionally if you’re organization adheres to a particular style of leadership or command philosophy, let’s say small unit leadership / decentralized leadership, you can observe that in a garrison environment or in administrative / support actions.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2021 14:36
|
|
|
Valtonen posted:You misspelled “sitting on motor pool watching tanks rust into nonbeing as a tangible example of entropy” when talking about what combat units do in garrison. Fortunately we solved that by just getting rid of tanks here in the marines. No way it comes back to bite us in the rear end.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2021 19:50
|
|
|
I consider myself mostly a believer in the new concept the commandant is pushing - except for the part where we got rid of tanks, reduced the number of tube artillery, and got rid of bridging companies.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2021 20:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 14:55 |
|
|
Tomn posted:Interesting stuff, thanks! Up or out isn’t perfect but it keeps from bottle necking and it forces people to stay competitive, educated, and career relevant. The marine corps has started actually looking at promoting officers early more aggressively (it has been very very rare) just to further incentivize performance and staying in
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2021 01:31
|
|