US Marines

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

Well, I fluked that one by the skin of my teeth.

Peter.

Huh?

wbs

[Peter Cairns]

Michael Dorosh,

I bet that people who fought in WW2 or Korea didn't get the same recognition.

Turns out they did retrospectively, but because I said "marines" and technically they didn't qualify as it was an army thing, I win the bet even though what I though was true wasn't.

Hope you follow that because I am not sure I do.

Peter.

[Splinty]

Just a side note on the Combat Infantry Badge. The badge was created for Infantry personel only, an individual has to have served as an Infantryman in an Infantry unit for 30 days in a combat zone or have been wounded or killed in action to be authorizesd to wear it. The reason the badge was created was the infantry took about 80% of the overall Army combat casualties during WWII and the Army wanted to boost the terrible morale of the mostly draftee infantry corps at the time. The award was made retroactive for all infantrymen who served before it's inception in 1943. No other branch of the Army except the Medical Corps had a similar award until OIF. Now the Army has come out with the Combat Action Badge for the other branches, to earn it soldiers must have been under enemy fire, the other requirements are similar to the C.I.B.

[ironbar]

In the US military the citation to accompany an award is one of the few places you can adequately document an individual's performance in a narrow scope. Annual performance reports, after action reports and such are all subject to editing, consolidation, and in the case of individual's performance report severely space limited.

As a leader and a supervisor there were times when the degree of the award (DFC v. AM v.AAM) lost it's importance to getting the action documented in a format that makes it a public record.

While some bemoan the Army's practice of the ARCOM with V Device, so long as the individual's actions get documented so much the better say I.The actions become a matter of record.

As an middlin' student of military history, I've often thought of the undocumented, and therefore lost to us, acts of courage and selflessness that must have occurred on Wake Island,Bataan and Corregidor and through out that war.

Is the courageous act of an individual lessened since a few minutes or hours later the rest of the aircrew, or unit perished?

In the end, try to look past the award to citation, while some fit, Shughart and Gordon's immediately come to mind, some like The Red Cross Volunteer of the Year also speak volumes to the quality of the man.

[Peter Cairns]

Splinty,

"killed in action to be authorizesd to wear it".

I know what you mean, but somehow I think you could have worded it better.

Peter.

[Imperial Grunt]

Thought this was an interesting article to share:

MARINE CORPS RECRUIT DEPOT SAN DIEGO (March 10, 2006) -- Giving up the fame of the football field at 29 years old, one B Company recruit looked for a glory that was more permanent than any trophy.

At age 13, Pfc. Jeremy Staat was 75 inches tall and weighed 230 pounds. It seemed as if he was built for football, according to Staat.

“I really didn’t have to work hard at it,” said Staat.

Starting as an offensive lineman, Staat grew as a football player and saw his first glimpse of the Marine Corps not long after starting at Arizona State University as an offensive lineman.

Fond memories traced back to his first encounter with the Marine Corps.

“I had a buddy who was a combat photographer in the Marine Corps,” said Staat. “He came back from the desert with pictures of these big C-130s and I said, ‘I want to do what you are doing.’”

Playing football began losing its appeal. Seeing other men and women around the world in their service uniforms kept Staat thinking about those “what-ifs.”

Following his time at the university, Staat moved up to the National Football League, playing with the Pittsburgh Steelers, Oakland Raiders, Seattle Seahawks, St. Louis Rams and one year of arena football with the Los Angeles Avengers.

Early thoughts of leaving the league were deflected after college teammate Pat Tillman influenced Staat to stay in until he could get a retirement plan. Staat and Tillman became good friends while sharing a room at ASU. Over time, Tillman decided to leave the NFL to serve in the U.S. Army before he was killed in action in 2004.

“That was the turning point for Jeremy,” said Janet Goodheart, Jeremy Staat’s mother. “After Pat was killed, he began to dwell on things. He visited me at home and we had a real serious talk. He told me that he was through with football.”

He decided to enlist in the military. Because of his larger-than-life exterior, Staat had to pass a few tests before he could enlist.

His mother said he passed tests everyday.

“He called me and said, ‘Mom, you can’t be any more than 78 inches, 29 years old and 261 pounds,’’’ said Goodheart. “He was all three.”

There were certain reasons for joining that went beyond the passing of Pat Tillman, according to Staat.

“The big reason was because I was just really disgusted with the amount of money entertainers get and what they pay troops overseas,” said Staat. “It didn’t seem right that we pay all those entertainers millions to catch a football and we pay our Marines pennies to a dollar to catch a bullet,” said Staat.

Determined to leave, Staat spoke with a recruiter and left as soon as possible.

“I came in two months early, like ‘Let’s get it on,’” said Staat. “I wanted to be a part of something that is going to live forever instead of getting trophies. What are trophies good for – collecting dust? Most trophies get thrown in the garage. Who knows where they go after that?”

Arriving at the depot, Staat did what he could to keep his past under wraps, but within five hours of his landing, his secret was out.

Staat said a drill instructor asked the 77-inch stack of muscle if he played football. “I played a little in college,” said Staat, who enlisted to become a machine gunner.

The drill instructor kept digging and eventually the truth came out.

“From what I knew of Marine Corps training, drill instructors are extremely professional,” said Staat. “With all the attention I’ve drawn to this platoon, they have done an awesome job being professional.”

When he started training, Staat took a different outlook on his environment than most recruits do during the first phase of boot camp. To him, playing for a team was temporary; being part of a legend was something people wouldn’t forget.

Since entering recruit training, Staat realized he wasn’t used to the strenuous environment.

“I’ve run three miles four times in my life, once at (Military Entrance Processing Station), and three times here,” said Staat.

Besides the physical training, boot camp is aimed to place stress on recruits to prepare them for stressful situations they may encounter on the battlefield.

Stepping away from the life of an entertainer to enjoy the priceless experience of Marine Corps boot camp, Staat said he couldn’t feel more at home.

“I would wake up every day and smile,” said Staat. “Recruits look at me like I am crazy, but I am just happy to be here; to be on a practice field as big as Camp Pendleton is crazy.”

According to Goodheart, the letters Staat sent home during training let her know that her son was doing fine in his training. “He was very happy,” she said.

The only thing that Staat couldn’t grasp about training was the other recruits. He couldn’t understand why 60 recruits would rather to do push-ups in the dirt than sound off when told to by their drill instructors, but Staat never lost his motivation, according to Goodheart.

“If there was something that gave Jeremy any kind of doubt, he would pursue it until he was convinced,” said Goodheart.

“If you change the mindset of what you are doing, you can turn it into a whole new experience,” said Staat. “I looked at field training like I was going camping. They are going to pay me to learn how to train and survive in the field.”

Staat said he found it amusing that people pay for the training that Marines are paid to complete.

“They train you to keep in shape. They put you on a diet,” said Staat. “People pay to do that.”

Staat recalled a day during training when his company ran the obstacle course. There are a number of high walls, logs and bars to get over throughout the course including the rope, which is strung from a high beam of wood to the ground. Staat attempted to climb the rope but failed. He was trained on the proper techniques, he got a second chance.

Staat’s senior drill instructor told him to climb the rope again. One of the many things that are stressed during training is bearing, but when Staat climbed to the top of the rope, he broke his bearing and smiled.

“I asked him what happened the first time and he smiled and said, ‘This recruit didn’t have the technique down, sir,’” said Staff Sgt. Miguel R. Saenz, senior drill instructor, Platoon 1065.

“I was just happy,” said Staat. “I had never climbed a rope before.”

Beyond the training, there were adjustments Staat had to make.

“It was fast,” said Staat. “The sounding off was difficult because I am not used to yelling and screaming.”

Even the combat utility uniforms took some getting used to, according Staat.

“I looked at them as a new uniform,” said Staat. “Instead of having a football helmet, I had a Kevlar. Instead of wearing shoulder pads, I wore a flak jacket.”

Departing the depot as a squad leader, and one of many new Marines graduating from Co. B, Staat plans on leaving a lasting impression in the Marine Corps and maybe watch a few football games on his days off.

[Imperial Grunt]

Here is new weapon that the USMC is fielding in all of its infantry battalions.

Marines Carry Six-Pack Attack

Marine Corps News | Mark Oliva | March 13, 2006

Camp Mercury, Iraq - Arnold Schwarzenegger is going to want one.

Marines with Regimental Combat Team 5, based in Camp Fallujah, test-fired the latest in the Corps’ arsenal of weapons’ improvement, the M-32 Multiple shot Grenade Launcher. It’s a six-barreled, 40 mm beast of weapon that has just about enough attitude for Marines.

“I thought it was pretty bad the first time I saw it,” said Cpl. Jason H. Flanery, a 23-year-old mortarman from St. Louis, Mo., assigned to RCT-5’s Personnel Security Detachment.

The M-32 MGL looks like something straight out of an action movie or a weapon ginned up by designers of futuristic video combat games. It’s a bare-bones, shoulder-fired weapon with a bulging six-barreled cylinder. There’s no bones about it. This thing’s all business when the trade is knocking out bad-guys at a distance.

“You can put six rounds on target in under three seconds,” Flanery said. “I thought this thing was sick.”

Sick might be right for the insurgent on the other end of the sight. The M-32 MGL is step up from the M-203 grenade launcher Marines have used since post-Vietnam days. It fires similar 40 mm grenades and at similar distances. It just puts more rounds on the bad guys faster.

“The ‘203 has been around since the ‘60s,” explained CWO4 Gene A. Bridgman, the regiment’s gunner, or weapons expert. “It keeps improving. This is a progression in the weapons system.”

Flanery put the comparison of the two similar weapons in more simple terms.

“It makes it obsolete,” he said. “It’s that much better.”

The idea to bring M-32 was the brainchild of Marine gunners across the Corps, explained Bridgman, a 43-year-old from Garden City, Kan. During an annual symposium, they decided an improvement was needed over the M-203. One option was to bring back a rifle-grenade. The M-32, won out, however, and now each Marine battalion will field them as an experimental weapon.

Bridgman added the M-32 isn’t a new idea altogether, though. Brazilian, Italian and South African military have carried them in the field for years. Marines, though, took it one step further.

A fore-grip was added and a scope was mounted to the top, eliminating the old leaf sights like that of the M-203. The scope allows a Marine to follow the grenade to the target and immediately adjust and follow up with a lethal volley of indirect fire.

“The ‘203 was on shot at time,” Bridgman said. “The ‘203 became a signal weapon. This is more of an offensive weapon. With this, you shoot, adjust and fire for effect.”

The average Marine said it’s just about that easy to shoot. Lance Cpl. Alexandro R. Raymundo, a 20-year-old from Rancho Cucamonga, Calif., isn’t an infantryman. He’s a network administrator by trade. He shot the M-203 before during initial training, but this was his first time picking up the M-32 MGL.

“I thought it might be like the ‘203,” Raymundo said. “But is shoots more rounds, faster. It’s really simple. I had ‘hands-on’ once. I picked it up really quickly.”

As far as how it felt shooting it, Raymundo said the weapon was about as beefy as it looks.

“I felt like there’s more recoil than the ‘203 and the trigger’s a lot heavier” he explained. “It’s heftier than the ‘203.”

His likes about the weapon included the small scope added to the rail-mount system on top of the weapon.

“The optic was nice,” he added. “It’s a lot easier to sight in.”

Of course, there’s the part about lots of things going “boom” downrange too.

“My favorite part was being able to fire out so many grenades and not have to reload between each shot.”

Sgt. David G. Redford, a 35-year-old from Kennebunkport, Me., has more practical experience when it comes to what grunts like in the field. He’s an infantryman by trade and has logged in his own hours carrying the M-203.

“I didn’t know what to think about it before we came out here, but it’s nice,” Redford said. “It’s easier to shoot. You don’t have to constantly load. If you run into something, you’re already loaded.”

Redford predicted that most infantry Marines will welcome the addition of the six-pack attack weapon.

That’s exactly the reaction Bridgman wants to see. Adding the M-32 MGL could realign the way Marines operate at the small-team level. Fire teams could become more lethal, more mobile and more independent. The idea of a dedicated grenadier might just be reborn.

“Now you have your own indirect fire support right in the fire team,” Bridgman explained. “You have someone who can lay down (high explosive rounds) against someone in a trench. It would be used against enemy in fighting holes or behind cars, because of the indirect nature of the weapon. It’s the only weapon aside from mortars,” at the small team’s disposal.

Still, Bridgman stressed the weapon is only experimental. Marines will be gathering data about its’ effectiveness and durability from experiences on the streets of Fallujah.

For Flanery, though, the M-32 is already welcome.

“I think it’s one of the most simple and effective weapons systems,” he said. “I just want buckshot rounds.”

[MikeyD]

I thought Christoper Walkin played with something much like this (except not made of plastic) in the movie "The Dogs of War" way back in 1981!

[flamingknives]

Didn't something very similar crop up in Predator too?

[Peter Cairns]

Try looking at the chinese W87 I posted elsewhere, it can get off

15 rounds in under 2 secs.

Peter.

[Tagwyn]

PC: Do you believe the Chinese hung the moon? If they demanded Taiwan and you were in control, would you just give it to them. They might turn the awful W87 on your arse?!!!!!! Or, is the BBC that thinks China is the center of the world? Tag

[juan_gigante]

I was reading the article on the M-32, and I was like "This sounds pretty cool", and then I saw the picture, and I was blown away. That thing is so badass. Damn.

[Peter Cairns]

Tagwyn,

Iam not in favour of China, or it invading Taiwan, but I do find it interesting and I do take it seriously.

You might think it is patriotic to talk up your own weapons and capabilities and rubbish potential opponents, but I'd rather take them seriously that be caught by surprise.

I am less concerned about hyping our "KICK ASS" weapons than being prepared for their cheap, abundant, nasty ones....

Peter.

[MikeyD]

"PC: Do you believe the Chinese hung the moon?"

If memory serves, I believe the grenade thrower weapon in the old Christopher Walkin movie was made my Singapore Defense Industries

[Imperial Grunt]

Having the M-32 replace the M-203 at the fireteam level will add a significant amount of firepower to a US Marine rifle squad. That gives the squad three M-32s, a rifle platoon would have nine. Massing them on one target would probably have very good effect in a firefight.

Additionally, the M-32 can have laser designators mounted, so targets can be marked at night, etc...

I would imagine that the Marine carrying an M-32 would be armed with an M-4 vice an M-16A4 once it becomes formally adopted. Add since it can fire so many grenades, everyone in the squad would be carrying a few to spread the load. Just one more thing to carry!

[Peter Cairns]

LtCol West,

I thought the M-32 was afair bit heavier than an M-16, are you suggesting he would carry both. Loaded an m-16 is around 4kg, the loaded m-32 with 6 rounds 7.5kg.

I'd say it's a handy weapon but I would think one per team was a bit heavy if you were to loose the m-16. I'd be more inclined to have one per squad replacing the three single shot 203's.

It would probably give you similiar firepower because of the shorter reload time. depending on ammo it's got an effective range between 150 and 350m, but it is fairly specialised.

When I was looking at the W87, it turns out that there are a lot of these things on the market in various forms and have been for about a decade. So far no one has issued them at anything like one per team.

I'd say it is probably useful in Iraq because of the type of combat but I'd doubt if you could justify dropping 3 M-16's from a squad in most circumstances.

Still I'd probably put a couple in every Stryker, as it would come in handy, but I'd doubt I'd issue them at the same rate as M-203's if I was patrooling Afghan hills on foot.

Peter.

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by LtCol West:

Having the M-32 replace the M-203 at the fireteam level will add a significant amount of firepower to a US Marine rifle squad.

It also gives you a considerable amount of flexibility, considering the number of different ammo natures that could be made available (smoke, illum).

In particular, for less-lethal operations, CS gas and baton rounds would be feasible, as with the old ARWEN 5-round rotary launcher in 38mm, which looks broadly similar.

All the best,

John.

[Imperial Grunt]

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

LtCol West,

I thought the M-32 was afair bit heavier than an M-16, are you suggesting he would carry both. Loaded an m-16 is around 4kg, the loaded m-32 with 6 rounds 7.5kg.

I'd say it's a handy weapon but I would think one per team was a bit heavy if you were to loose the m-16. I'd be more inclined to have one per squad replacing the three single shot 203's.

It would probably give you similiar firepower because of the shorter reload time. depending on ammo it's got an effective range between 150 and 350m, but it is fairly specialised.

When I was looking at the W87, it turns out that there are a lot of these things on the market in various forms and have been for about a decade. So far no one has issued them at anything like one per team.

I'd say it is probably useful in Iraq because of the type of combat but I'd doubt if you could justify dropping 3 M-16's from a squad in most circumstances.

Still I'd probably put a couple in every Stryker, as it would come in handy, but I'd doubt I'd issue them at the same rate as M-203's if I was patrooling Afghan hills on foot.

Peter.

I am sure this is why the Marine Corps is experimenting with the weapon, to see how it should be issued. I just went with the current doctrine as an upgrade. The M-32 would not replace a rifle, the gunner would probably carry an M-16A4 or M-4 as well, just as mortarmen, SMAW team members, and machinegun team members all carry rifles as well.

With the M-203, both weapons are never engaging at the same time, in fact, the 203 sometimes is not used because the Marine carrying it forgot about it in the heat of the moment and was employing his rifle. By carrying the M-32, the natural first responce would be to shoot grenades first, unless the target required a rifle instead. Too ways of looking at it.

Maybe the Marine Corps will keep the 203 at three per squad and add in one or two M-32s per squad as an additional weapon. And in terrian like Afghansitan, the M-32 would be a good weapon for all the dead space in that kind of terrain. But mission requirements can be planned out, especially for patrols. If the mission does not really call for the firepower of a M-32, then it can always be left behind in the armory or with the company gunny.

It makes for a great defensive weapon as well. Paired up with a SAW or M-240G machinegun, it could do alot of damage to enemy forces pinned down. Just like when you pair up a .50 with a MK-19.

[Peter Cairns]

I my thread about the chinese w87, ( which no one responded to, BooHoo), I was intersted in these as Anti-vehicle weapons, as the Chinese claim up to 80mm penetration.

Would the cage on a stricker be effective against a 35mm HE round, would it penetrate the armour. The chinese also claim it as effective angainst low flying aircraft, which I suspect means helicopters.

Given what we have seen with Helicopter damage in Iraq from small arms, and the damage the rare RPG hit can do, three, three round bursts from a light grenade launcher, could bring down any helicopter, within about 600m.

Peter.

[Imperial Grunt]

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

I my thread about the chinese w87, ( which no one responded to, BooHoo), I was intersted in these as Anti-vehicle weapons, as the Chinese claim up to 80mm penetration.

Would the cage on a stricker be effective against a 35mm HE round, would it penetrate the armour. The chinese also claim it as effective angainst low flying aircraft, which I suspect means helicopters.

Given what we have seen with Helicopter damage in Iraq from small arms, and the damage the rare RPG hit can do, three, three round bursts from a light grenade launcher, could bring down any helicopter, within about 600m.

Peter.

Well the 40mm HEDP grenade the US uses supposedly can penetrate up to 2 inches of steel. I recall stories of MK-19s making mincemeat of some Iraqi BMPs but I was not there to see it first hand.

If ANY grenade hit a helo, all I can imagine is that it would be very very bad. But hitting it while in flight would be difficult, hovering or landing, not so hard.

I find the 80mm claim to be a little of a stretch, but you never know until you can get one and experiment. Maybe they got super 35mm grenades.

As far as the cage of a Stryker goes, I would think it would have an added effect of causing the grenades to detonate prematurely and possible causing them to ricochet, depending on the strike angle. It cant hurt to have it.

[Peter Cairns]

Against a moving Helicopter they would be a hard target, but as the Chinese one fires on automatic what would be useful would be a proximity fuse.

Again the Chinese are claiming 25m radius for shrapnel, where as most people talk about 10 to 15m. Still getting a half dozen grenade to go off within 10m of a helicopter could well bring one down.

The issue is that in terms of weight auto GL's tend to be far heavier with the Chinese one (12kg) the closest I've seen to really man portable. Most others tend to be single shot.

I am not sure quiite how the fusing in the proposed new US grenades works. If the designator sets the range just before firing, then it would probably detonate at the right distance, but behind a moving helicopter.

If however you tried to lead, then it would be in about the right place, but wouldn't detonate because the lead point would set detonation at infinity.

It depends on whether you can range on an object and the get it to detonate at that distance on another target.

This of course opens up the option of having a proximity fuse option on something like an AT4, giving you an anti helicopter engagement mode.

I don't know what a thermobaric round 20m from a helicopter in flight would do, but I wouldn't like to be in one to find out. At very least I think you'd lose some glass.....

Peter.

[ March 20, 2006, 06:20 AM: Message edited by: Peter Cairns ]

[Imperial Grunt]

Well, the main problem I see with proximity fuzes against helos, especially in flight, is the pure mechanics.

1) acquiring helo and estimating speed and lead in addition to the range, even to get within 10 meters of the aircraft. Max effective range is 300-400 meters, and helos are moving really fast that close

2) grenades do not have tracers and would be difficult to adjust onto target when firing into the air

3) the GLs would be a decent "golden BB" weapon, like the RPGs, but not an effective AA weapon. Unless you have a horde of aircraft orbiting at low level like during the TF Ranger's battle in Somolia.

Thermobaric rounds would have less effect than standard HE rounds. Thermobaric rounds depend on an enclosed space, like a building or cave to create its effect on the target.

[Nemesis Lead]

Maybe the Marine Corps will keep the 203 at three per squad and add in one or two M-32s per squad as an additional weapon.

I hope not. These should probably be one per squad and then drop the 203's. The weight of all those 40mm rounds is going to be awful. When combined with the higher Rate of Fire of the M-32 plus the fact that the M-32 gunner may have to carry an M-16 as well.....the gunner is going to need a lot of help from the rest of the squad to carry his grenades.

An M-79 grenadier (single shot grenade launcher) in Vietnam carried about 25 grenades (plus or minus 5) and he generally did not carry an M-16 (he had a pistol). An M-32 grenadier should carry approximately the same number of grenades (and no rifle) and other 40mm grenades should be carried by others in the squad.

I cannot believe how much gear our guys are hauling today. A lot of the gear makes perfect sense, but some of it should be dropped. Our infantry is starting to lose its mobility and this has hurt us in Afganistan.

[Imperial Grunt]

Here is a pic of a US Marine rifleman. He is wearing the new side SAPI plate. Each plate is 5 pounds and most guys do not wear them due to the wieght.

Side SAPI

[flamingknives]

Forgive me if I'm being ignorant, but why does he appear to be sighting with his left eye? Should he be doing that?