US Marines

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by Cpl Steiner:

As for the Brit armour, I would imagine Challenger II and Warrior would have to be in, but there is also the Scorpion.

Scorpion's long gone -- at least, the turrets are, the hulls have been combined with Fox turrets to make Sabre. The rest of the CVR(T) family soldier on, re-engined and waiting for the current spasm of studies to be completed on a replacement recce vehicle. Depending on how you count, we are now on the fifth or sixth go at replacing CVR(T).

It's lucky aluminium doesn't rust, isn't it?

All the best,

John.

[flamingknives]

The UK would be excellent. Not that I'm biased or anything.

A British force in 2007 would be formidable - Networked (Bowman) and well fitted out with thermal imagers (BGTI for Warrior and Scimitar and infantry Vipir 2 sets), NLAW and Javelin infantry anti-tank weapons and serious section firepower.

In artillery support, it's possible that the LIMAWS® will have entered service. Not much different to half a regular MLRS, but it looks cool.

The Panther CLV will be in service, although it's hardly a frontline unit.

[Drusus]

What about Finnish? I am sure we could send at least a private with a pointy stick there.

[hellfish]

A Finnish element would give us CV9030s... only problem is it would be hard to justify any other modules. The Finns would have won the war on their own before we could justify a campaign for anyone else.

[Bigduke6]

Why can't the Finns fight on the Syrian side, I heard they like challenges.

[Battlefront.com]

Why can't the Finns fight on the Syrian side, I heard they like challenges.

Because then there would be no fun in the scenarios. Just picture the shock on the faces of NATO troops if they came upon Private Jäärdiikasssissäöövlkaäs with that pointed stick. They would be so dazzled by his name tag and the reflection from his pasty white skin that he could jab dozens of guys in the eye before they fired a single shot. Sure it is against the Geneva Convention, but those Finns don't fight fair! It would be no fun to simulate, that is for sure!

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

BTW, meant to thank you Jarheads for continuing to hound me into making the Marines a priority for CM:SF's Modules. It's oooooo so surprising that you feel that way

Honestly, I think it is a no brainer to go in that direction. The differences in equipment and organization mean a very different experience for the player. Same goes for including other NATO forces.

Steve

[Imperial Grunt]

Originally posted by Nidan1:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by TufenHuden:

When I was active-85-89-G-2/3 3rd plt-at

KMCAS Koneohe-we had this Plt-Sgt-he was

Vietnam vet-and he taught us some good

****-land nav-little stuff-ambush's..

He told us some battles in Nam-Hue was

one he didn't really speak of much-you can

tell they lost allot-but he respected

the NVA-they had the will-if there was

a will to take you out-they did it...

They where the most improvised Army-

they took anything US threw out and made it

destructive-master of camo-I was fortunate

to be in his PLT...

Another was SSGT-J.Johnnson in our

USMCR unit-Bronze star-was in the battle

Ke-Suan-hill 303...he new his **** too...

Talking about weapons-one was the M-60-the

1st version-that was a hell of a MG-had

heavey barrel-heatshield-then they changed it

to M-60E3-lighter barrel-no heatshield-

piece of junk....

I guess the M-240-or FNMag-big brother

of the Saw-been around since Nam to

in NATO-fired a couple times-decent

MG.

That M-16A4 new to me we had M-16A2/203/

SAWS/M-60-old and E3's M-40-sniper rifle...

When this game comes-we need to battle

SIR-2 Jarheads head to Head-lovely

fuken war"Cpt-Dan Dayle" from movie PLT-

USMC retired...=).

Semper Fi...

TufenHuden,

I don't know if would say that I "respected" the NVA and the Viet Cong. The word respect indicates a lot of things. I think your SSGT used that word in hindsight and based on the tempering and aging of his memories over the years.

I hated the little ****s with a passion, I dont think I respected them, probably as a 20 year old I had no idea of what respect was really, or how it was earned or given. All I wanted to do was see them dead, they we trying to kill ME, after all.

The Marine Corps back in those days was given missions far beyond the capabilities or supply structure needed to properly support them. We were always living on a shoe string, stealing gear, hordeing stuff, because you never knew when the next supply mission would come along. We had gear left over from the Korean War, and we were told to make do because we were after all "Marines", we could do anything with nothing. The NVA were better supplied than we were in most cases, and they carried everything down the trail with them.

During 66-67 when I was there, it was always a case of "too little too late" . We would send in companies against battalions with predictible results. We very rarely initiated anything, we reacted to what they were doing. We tramped around in the bush hoping to pin down large NVA units to be pulverized by arty and airpower. It always ended up with us getting ambushed, lose a few guys, and by the time the arty and planes arrived they pulverized the surrounding ground, but no enemy forces.

The Marine Corps held the line in the northern provinces, but we were not geared for that type of mission. In the logic of the day "its the only war we've got" so no way was the Corps to be left out. By the time you learned what you were doing, you were ready to rotate home, or you were in the hospital or worse. There was very little in the way of passing down "lessons learned" If you were lucky you had a decent company commander who put your safety over his own career goals.

Looking at things today, I get the feeling that the Marine Corps is a lot better equipped and supported than it was in my day. Instead of being neglected and misused, there seems to be a little more thought taken before these fine young men are sacrificed, at least I pray that is the case.

BTW, its Capt. Dale Dye, he was a sergeant and a combat correspondent when I knew him, I dont know how he made Captain, but he's a movie star now. </font>

[junk2drive]

Ramble on... I reading it.

[Imperial Grunt]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

BTW, meant to thank you Jarheads for continuing to hound me into making the Marines a priority for CM:SF's Modules. It's oooooo so surprising that you feel that way

Honestly, I think it is a no brainer to go in that direction. The differences in equipment and organization mean a very different experience for the player. Same goes for including other NATO forces.

Steve

Not a problem. Now, make it happen!

Few games that I have seen model the USMC very well. And the Marines have a different warfighting doctrine that is similar, but distinct from the US Army's. US Marines are elite shock troops designed to conduct expeditionary operations. The Army is more tailored for long campaigns. Marines help out with the land campaign, but the Army controls that piece. Of course, the Army and the Marines are very complementary and they can perform each other's mission, in their own ways.

I highly recommend the book "Making the Corps" by Thomas Ricks for those who want a great perspective of the Corps and how it ticks. It is also a very good read.

[Imperial Grunt]

Originally posted by LtCol West:

[TufenHuden]

I'm just saying yes if you fight or

firefight against whoever it may-you

do whatever it takes-but in every

battle/war/conflict even in regular

life-if you fight and that person gives

you a great fight-you do have some type

respect-that's been through out history.

Battle for Thermopylea-You would think

the Persians thought twice about

taking on the Greeks after they held

for 3 days in a pass 225.000 persians

(Iraqi today)in a narrow pass with 300

greeks...

Sometimes enemies do respect each other,

I know that insurgents Respect and FEAR

MARINES....

When I was in the 1st Gulf war one-I don't

if this was true but you know the grapevine...

Some Iraqis really thought we had to

kill a relative to be a Marine.....

Even in our history in WW-1 how we got DevilDog

TeufelHuden-Battle of Belleau Woods-

Germans after that battle-said WTF-who

are they...

North Koreans in the ceasefire treaty

on the Korean War said no GI's in the

(YellowLeggins)Marines wore on there

boots as ankle support-turned yellow when

washed-because the Marines fought like Devils,

That's respect and Fear....

Capt-Dale Dyle from the movie Platoon-

in the begining credits"Cpt D.Dyle ret as

combat advisor"but since you met him in RL

your right!Typo in Hollywood....

M40-whatever version a great Sniper

rifle-7.62 match ball rnd-and the Barret

50 cal snpr-"Boomstick" very lethal....

Well Sir keep on rambling-Permission Granted

Sir...Hand Salute Sir....

Semper Fi

CPL-John C Field

[Nidan1]

LtCol West:

An RCT really must be someting to see, actually I have really no way to reference it compared to the way units were organized in my day. We had organic armor and Arty and such, but never used it in the wayits used today. Actually armor was used as perimeter defence, essentially a pill box.

I can only imagine the thunderous power of modern Marine units, based on whatI have experienced or seen on television as a frame of reference. It must be an awesome thing.

Actually when I went to Vietnam it was with the newly minted 26th Regiment. In the Spring of 1966, the 5th Marine Division was re-activated. The 1st Bn. was created in Camp Pendleton, and we trained and worked together as an entire unit, with supporting units. (I was a 1371, Combat Engineer).

We went over by ship, 3 rifle companies on the USS Iwo Jima and one on the USS Point Defiance, along with the supporting units. The chopper squadron HMM 363 if I recall, met us in the Phillipines.

I was lucking in that regard, to be with a complete unit, and not just a replacement as was the experience of most young Marines back then. Just. We were eventually absorbed by units of the 3rd Mar Div, but the infantry battalions remained intact. Imagine an entire battalion, all MOSs rotating back to the States on the same day...that's the way it worked.

TufenHuden;

I understand where you are coming from, the Corps certainly has a reputation....sometimes one that's hard to live up to when you are in. The stories remain the same however, and like fine spirits, they get better with age, I'm sure

The trick is sometimes to try not to let all that advance publicity get inside your head...remember no one is invincible, and when you are the top dog, everyone is trying to knock you down.

[TufenHuden]

Well said Nidan,

Well like everything-technology improves,

better weapons-information flows faster.

1st Gulf war-we didn't have emails-today

they comunicate better faster-improvement

on Harware-one thing though about Anti-tank

arsenal US has-the Javeline probly a great

weapon-but looks to big&bulky to carry.

The RPG-7-probly the most simplest and respected

weapon-and costs nothing to make-I've always

wondered why we go with big/bulky expenssive-

fire one time and it's done.

When I was in we had the Law/Dragon/Tow/

Smaw/Smaw was reloadable-but was to big

to carry.I know the Army Rangers still

have the CG-84 or Carl Gustov zook...

It's just right to carry-well I'm rambling to much too....

You are right Publicity-don't let it get to you..

[flamingknives]

SMAW now comes in one-shot disposable flavours (SMAW-D), weighing just under 16lbs

Javelin is just under 50lbs all up, but has a 2500m range and kill probability in excess of 90%. The British Army is using it to replace their Milan systems.

The British LAW 80 - probably the epitome of the large, heavy, one-shot job - significantly outperforms the RPG and has the added benefit of requiring zero maintenance.

[imported_Captain_Wacky]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

Javelin is just under 50lbs all up, but has a 2500m range and kill probability in excess of 90%. The British Army is using it to replace their Milan systems.

It also costs something insane like $125,000 for the launcher and $75000 per shot

[Imperial Grunt]

Originally posted by Heil3451:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by flamingknives:

Javelin is just under 50lbs all up, but has a 2500m range and kill probability in excess of 90%. The British Army is using it to replace their Milan systems.

It also costs something insane like $125,000 for the launcher and $75000 per shot </font>

[imported_Captain_Wacky]

Just prior to 9-11 I was a Heavy Guns platoon commander with 2/23 and that was when the Marine Corps was fielding the javelin. I went through the Javelin gunners course. Outstanding weapons system and a far improvement over the dragon missile system. It is bulky and not ergonomic to carry dismounted. But the javelin missile will turn a T-72 inside out, is fire and forget, the warhead can track moving targets while in flight, has an awesome thermal sight on the command launch unit (CLU), etc...It is expensive, but if used againt enemy tanks and helicopters, it pays for itself. In my opinion, if is saves one US casualt y but wiping out a building with enemy inside, then it pays for itself.

How much better are the thermal sights than the ones on the TOW?

The AT-4 is still issued as a munition to fireteams/squads and now there is the re-engineered LAW, with an HE warhead. The new LAW is lighter and actually more effective than the AT-4 against soft targets.

I heard they were bringing back the LAW but are they phasing out the AT-4 as well?

[ January 06, 2006, 08:02 PM: Message edited by: Captain_Wacky ]

[Imperial Grunt]

Originally posted by Heil3451:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Just prior to 9-11 I was a Heavy Guns platoon commander with 2/23 and that was when the Marine Corps was fielding the javelin. I went through the Javelin gunners course. Outstanding weapons system and a far improvement over the dragon missile system. It is bulky and not ergonomic to carry dismounted. But the javelin missile will turn a T-72 inside out, is fire and forget, the warhead can track moving targets while in flight, has an awesome thermal sight on the command launch unit (CLU), etc...It is expensive, but if used againt enemy tanks and helicopters, it pays for itself. In my opinion, if is saves one US casualt y but wiping out a building with enemy inside, then it pays for itself.

How much better are the thermal sights than the ones on the TOW?

The AT-4 is still issued as a munition to fireteams/squads and now there is the re-engineered LAW, with an HE warhead. The new LAW is lighter and actually more effective than the AT-4 against soft targets.

I heard they were bringing back the LAW but are they phasing out the AT-4 as well? </font>

[Sergei]

Originally posted by LtCol West:

One thing about Hollywood and CM portrays incorrectly is the slow time of flight of RPG's/rockets.

Are you comparing the speed of modern AT rockets to those present in CM (Bazooka, Panzerschreck, Panzerfaust)?

[Battlefront.com]

The Javelin's thermal sight is considered top notch. And it just got improved, too. Better resolution and (IIRC) more sensitive. My source, and he is a veeeeeeery good source, for Javelin stuff informs me that the missile's range was held back by the resolution of the CLU (the launcher). The new range is classified as far as I know, but it is much greater than 2500m. In fact, a good gunner, under the right circumstances, could hit things further out than 2500m even with the old CLU. My source says "if the gunner can identify the target, he can hit it". When I asked how far he can see, he said "if it can be seen it can be hit". I'm assuming with the new CLU this means the effective range of the Javelin is more like 4000m and up. Not that this is a likely engagement range in real life.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Oh, and there is another perk to that hefty Javelin price tag. The thermal unit (the CLU) is used for observation and target identification without a missile strapped in. In fact, Stryker vehicle crews have found the Javelin CLU to be in some ways superior to the sights they have on their vehicles (the original ones did not have thermal, though IIRC that is/has changed). So it is a multi-purposed tool. I've seen some great reviews of its usefulness in Afghanistan and Iraq in the non-weapons role.

Steve

[Imperial Grunt]

Concur. And Stryker units carry alot of javelins. Alot more than a Marine unit would carry. But, unless you are in a free-fire environment, target ID is still the kicker.

Here is an real life example of how thermal sights can trick you.

During OIF 1, one of the rifle companies in my BN (not mine), was in a blocking position. Intel had it that there was a slight chance of RG units attacking out from Al Kut into the division's flank as the division oriented along Hwy 6 towards Bahgdad.

About 0300 a TOW critter (TOW gunner) reported that he had a tank in the open along the road leading towards Al-Kut. Keep in mind, we had been operating on 2-4 hours sleep a day and at this point on one meal a day. The FAC with the company called for air and the F-18 ID'd the target as a possible tank and the onslaught ensued. A manuever element was sent out and found...obliterated farm equipment. Oops.

The BN Cmdr went out that next morning to survey the scene with the Co Cmdr. I was glad I was not there.

And there is an example of US Marines ****ing up for all those worried about Marines always saying that they are perfect.

[Battlefront.com]

For all the care that the Corps and Army take with FAC, screw ups still happen. The infamous hits on C Company at An-Nasiriya being the worst Blue on Blue of OIF. And this was the Battalion's own FAC making the bad call, not some adjacent unit either. That FAC got nailed to the wall from what I understand, but the BN HQ's general cluelessness of the situation, the poor communications prior to jump off, and the generally poor management of the battle itself also were major contributing factors.

BTW, this is one of the major advantages that a digital unit has. If that had been a Stryker Battalion at An-Nasiriya, and not a Marine Battalion, the chances of the FAC and BN HQ staff not knowing where C Company was would have been close to none. Still PLENTY of room for screwing things up in other ways, but being unaware of the location of a whole Company for the better part of a day wouldn't have been one of them.

This, BTW, is all about digitization and nothing to do with Stryker, regular Army, or Marine infantry skills. I don't know what the USMC digitization schedule is like, but the Army is moving rapidly to digitize non-Stryker units. I've got a nice PowerPoint slide of the schedule somewhere

Steve

[Imperial Grunt]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

For all the care that the Corps and Army take with FAC, screw ups still happen. The infamous hits on C Company at An-Nasiriya being the worst Blue on Blue of OIF. And this was the Battalion's own FAC making the bad call, not some adjacent unit either. That FAC got nailed to the wall from what I understand, but the BN HQ's general cluelessness of the situation, the poor communications prior to jump off, and the generally poor management of the battle itself also were major contributing factors.

BTW, this is one of the major advantages that a digital unit has. If that had been a Stryker Battalion at An-Nasiriya, and not a Marine Battalion, the chances of the FAC and BN HQ staff not knowing where C Company was would have been close to none. Still PLENTY of room for screwing things up in other ways, but being unaware of the location of a whole Company for the better part of a day wouldn't have been one of them.

This, BTW, is all about digitization and nothing to do with Stryker, regular Army, or Marine infantry skills. I don't know what the USMC digitization schedule is like, but the Army is moving rapidly to digitize non-Stryker units. I've got a nice PowerPoint slide of the schedule somewhere

Steve

Well, as far as digitation goes, the Army is way ahead of the USMC. When I was in Iraq, for both tours, Marine battalions had one to a few Blue Force Trackers, tied in with higher. 3rd ID had them in most of their vehicles. 4th ID is a "digitized" mech division. And the Stryker brigades have this as well.

So when TF Tawara was engaged in An-Nasariyah, only the BN HQ probably had these trackers. And with the confusion of war, bad **** happens.

RCT-1 ran a "gauntlet", or a corridor secured by TF Tarawa through the east side of An-Nasirayah in order to push up Hwy 7. My company got into its first real engagement just north of that city. The scene there was unbelievable and I will never forget.

The other RCTs of 1stMarDiv bypassed.

Aircraft have mistaken friendly forces for enemy throughtout the history of CAS. And digitalization is not a cure all. I wish I could remember the specifics, but during the Gulf War there was a really in-depth new report about a Apache Squadron commander who decided to fly a mission personally and engaged an enemy vehicle after deciding that his GPS must be wrong. That vehicle turned out to be Bradley IFV.

Friction, the term for things that have gone wrong, will always occur in battle.

The Marine Corps wants digitalization, but it has to be salt water proof and practical for dismounted ops. And the whole budget thing rears its ugly head.

The AAAV's are coming on line soon. They will have digital capabilities and will be a significant improvement over the current AAV's. And the 30mm gun and thermal sight will make Marine mech company's much more lethal. At least that aquisition program has been successful.