NEW: Follow the Editorial Staff on
StrategyPage Twitter Link


GROUND COMBAT +

AIR COMBAT +

NAVAL OPERATIONS +

SPECIAL OPERATIONS +

HUMAN FACTORS +

SPECIAL WEAPONS +

WARFARE BY THE NUMBERS +

LOGISTICS +

TOOLS +


Visit StrategyPage's US Cavalry Store



Marines Article Index : Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

USN Naval Infantry School

November 12, 2007: The U.S. Navy is establishing a four week ground combat course for sailors joining its new naval infantry force. This is NECC (Naval Expeditionary Combat Command), which already has nearly 30,000 sailors assigned, and will eventually contain 40,000 troops capable of operating along the coast and up rivers. NECC units are already in Iraq, and ready to deploy anywhere else they are needed. This new navy strategy still comes as a surprise to many people, especially many of those in Congress who get asked to pay for it. It came as a surprise to many NECC sailors as well. The navy called on the marines to provide infantry instructors for the few thousand sailors assigned to riverine (armed patrol boat) units. The navy already had infantry training courses for Seabees (naval construction personnel) and members of EOD (Explosive Ordnance Disposal) teams. Now it's considering combining all that in the new Expeditionary Combat Skills (ECS) course, which will be conducted at a base in Gulfport, Mississippi.

 

NECC was officially established in October, 2005. This organization is to provide the fleet with sailors trained to work, and fight, on land. The U.S. Marine Corps has mixed feelings about this, for the marines have long been the navy's ground combat troops. The navy says that the USMC mission will remain.

 

But in the meantime, several thousand NECC sailors are already serving ashore in Iraq and Afghanistan. There are 7,000 more non-combat sailors, like construction troops (Seabees), medical and other support personnel, overseas. NECC is not exactly replacing the marines, but doing jobs ashore the navy feels it can handle. Some of these support jobs the marines don't even try to do.

 

Also keep in mind that the marines are not part of the navy, as they are often described. Both the navy and marines are part of the Department of the Navy (the Department of the Army and Department of the Air Force each have only one component.) Over the years, the marines obtained more and more autonomy from the navy. When the U.S. Marine Corps began, over two centuries ago, as sailors who were trained and equipped to fight as infantry, they were very much part of the navy, and part of ship crews. This changed radically in the late 19th century, when all-metal steam ships replaced wooden sailing ships. The new "iron ships" really didn't need marines, and there were proposals to eliminate them. The American marines got organized and made themselves useful. For example, the marines performed very well as "State Department Troops" in Latin America for half a century (late 19th century to just before World War II), where American troops were frequently used to deal with civil disorder and nation building. During World War I (1914-18), they provided a brigade for ground combat in Europe, where they demonstrated exceptional combat skills.

 

During the 1930s, as World War II approached, the U.S. Marine Corps really ran with the ball when the navy realized they would have to use amphibious assaults to take heavily fortified Japanese islands. During World War II, the marines formed their first division size units, and ended the war with six divisions, organized into two corps. The Marine Corps was no longer just a minor part of the navy, but on its way to being a fourth service. Over the next half century, it basically achieved that goal. But in doing that, the navy lost control of its ground troops.

 

The navy still wanted and needed land forces. So the navy has created NECC. The navy still considers the marines its primary "infantry force", but the NECC will contain sailors trained and equipped for land operations the navy believes it should be involved in. Some of these are still on the water, like "riverine operations" (small gunboats and troop carriers to control rivers and coastal waters against irregulars), and "naval infantry" to defend navy land bases in hostile territory. Yes, it's all about Iraq, all its rivers and all it's hostile locals wanting to attack sailors there helping with reconstruction.

 

The ESC will draw heavily on the Iraq NECC veterans, as well as the experience of sailors ("augmentees") who served with the army in combat support jobs. These sailors went through a special 17 day army course to familiarize them with the basics of ground combat, and army procedures in general. ECS will train 1,800 sailors next year, 2,500 in 2009 and 5,000 in 2010. The Gulfport training center will be fully operational by 2011.

 

submit to reddit
Send Link to a Friend
Next Article WARPLANES: Indian Air Force Gets Screwed


Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

sjdoc    Sorry, but I don't get it   11/12/2007 8:37:14 AM
--
If the Navy envisions continuing involvement in circumstances where Naval personnel will be exposed to "expeditionary combat" exigencies (even if only functioning in support roles, as has always been the case with FMF hospital corpsmen, Seabees, and amphibious fleet landing craft crewmen), why don't they simply integrate the four-week ECS course as an extension of boot camp and expose every sailor (and officer) to this same training?
 
The NECC enlisted ratings and their officers will undertake continuing and more extensive training (drills, qualifying courses and tests for advancement, etc.) to deepen and sustain their expertise, but just as the Corps maintains "...every Marine a rifleman," the Navy could lay claim to a universal "expeditionary combat force" capability.
 
From what StrategyPage has remarked in recent years, the Navy is looking at the ongoing necessity to restructure its forces at lower manning levels.  The requirement to undergo ECS training could be looked at as yet another winnowing mechanism, with waivers for those ratings with technical skills BuPers wants to retain.
 
 
--
 
Quote    Reply

Dave_in_Pa    And I STILL don't get it   11/12/2007 10:36:22 AM
This NECC really strikes me as the Navy's "Marine Corps Lite".  (And the Marine Corps shouldn't be, as much as they seem to want to be, our "Other Army".)  This identified need is another argument for expansion of the Marines combat forces, SPECIFICALLY for this NAVY-controlled mission, NOT for creation of a "Marine Corps Lite".
 
Quote    Reply

jak267       11/13/2007 2:38:24 AM
The Marine Corps is a seaborne rapid deployment and assault force. They aren't trained or equipped for Riverine actions (though they could support them) and they would be wasted on general security details (also like many Riverine assignments). The Naval Infantry Force allows the Marines to concentrate on what they do best.
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       11/13/2007 12:08:22 PM
Is this new force popularly seen as an up and coming unit, or is it seen as a lame alternative to joining the marines?
 
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       11/18/2007 1:55:26 PM
Anyone?  I would honestly like to hear the opinion of an American, Badnews perhaps?

On the one hand I can imagine marines thinking the new unit a bit of a farce, but on the other riverine operations are quite cool, if you enjoy watching Apocalypse Now...

 
Quote    Reply

SCCOMarine       11/19/2007 12:35:15 PM
I think alot of you are misunderstanding the "Infantry" capabilities of this unit.  They're not a Marine Corps 'lite' they don't conduct infantry ops. 
 
They 'support' infantry and special operations.  They do have a limited ability to control there own Battle Space, but their own BatSpc is actually on the waterways itself and its in a security/deny access vein. 
 
I think many of you misuderstand they're mission thinking it is to:
1) deploy via small craft/boat. 
2) dismount/insert themselves and conduct x-raid or y-mission.
3) extract via small craft. 
 
No, they're mission is support, it is to:
1) conduct waterway security/deny enemy use.
2) embark infantry/SOF, x-raid/y-mission force.
3) secure insertion point, dismount infantry/SOF unit for x-raid/y-mission(surveillance, recon, ambush, QRF, etc).
4) depending on mission withdrawal and move to prep extraction point; or provide continuous security in the area.
5) extract infantry/SOF.
 
SUPPORT  Thats their mission.  In fact they recieve LESS infantry training than Support Marines.
 
I support RS-1 even though they disbanded my unit to make them.  I support their training, they are Sailors, they need it.  Even thought most fr/ the Navy's Security Force, their Sec For training is nothing more than armed Sec Guards and none whaveany field training.  They need this type of training.  But don't confuse they're role or capability.
 
Quote    Reply

SCCOMarine       11/19/2007 12:44:56 PM

On the one hand I can imagine marines thinking the new unit a bit of a farce, but on the other riverine operations are quite cool, if you enjoy watching Apocalypse Now...


Its not a new unit as in a new mission, Small Craft provided all they're capabilities and many they don't have.
I don't think Marines view them as a farce, Marines gave them most of their training they trained on Marine Bases.  Ensuring they were able to handle the mission assigned.
 
Quote    Reply

Dimitri       11/26/2007 4:13:58 PM
I do wish Strategypage would stop referring to this command as US Naval Infantry, it does no one any favours. It supposes that the unit will act, well, as amphibious infantry, as marines do; after all does Russia not term its de facto marines 'Naval Infantry'?
 
If the authors do feel it neccessary to refer to this new command by a new name, how about Riverine Boat Crews? And Naval Force Protection, FP is what the Royal Naval Reserve term their branch for security of ships and facilities against attack. Or how about Naval Security Forces or Naval Security Police, weren' t those the terms in use with USAF for their branch that was to guard airfields and facilities? So how apt for the USN to use those terms for their port guarding branch? Hey, if you are going to do patrols outside the facilities, you may even copy the RAFs force protection terminology and call them the USN Regiment!
 
But please can we have no more references to US Naval Infantry please? It makes me, and many others, think of an assault rifle armed sailor storming a beach against overwhelming odds somewhere, possibly with a PT-76 emerging from an Alligator landing ship to offer a bit of direct fire support! Whereas PBR crew or main gate sentry appears to be more likely and accurate, if a 'less sexy' term.
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       11/27/2007 11:52:56 PM
h**p://www.militarytimes.com/multimedia/video/riverine092506/
 
I think this video is of the new naval infantry.  In any case, it's showing riverine training in preperation for Iraq, and looks awesome to me - I'd seriously consider joining if we had that.
 
Quote    Reply

SCCOMarine       12/10/2007 4:20:39 PM

h**p://www.militarytimes.com/multimedia/video/riverine092506/

 

I think this video is of the new naval infantry.  In any case, it's showing riverine training in preperation for Iraq, and looks awesome to me - I'd seriously consider joining if we had that.


 
The boats are SCCOs old boats.  The one w/the pointy front is a RAC, Riverine Assault Craft; the Bubble front one is the SURC, Small Unit Rivering assault Craft.
 
I know the Instructor shown, SSgt Phillips, personally I served in Iraq w/him.  He was Plt Guide for 1st Platoon Small Craft Company.
 
But they're not naval Infantry.  They sailors w/ some infantry training, no more if not less than Non-Infantry Marines in the Support or Aviation Units.  They recieve some Infantry training; some small arms, land nav, bivouacking, and some patrolling fr/ the Marines. 
 
Quote    Reply

SCCOMarine       12/10/2007 4:26:27 PM


But they're not naval Infantry.  They sailors w/ some infantry training, no more if not less than Non-Infantry Marines in the Support or Aviation Units.  They recieve some Infantry training; some small arms, land nav, bivouacking, and some patrolling fr/ the Marines. 

 
They have no ability to conduct infantry operations on shore, they deliver Infantry and SOF, and patrol the waterways, thats it.  Its all secondary support in nature.
 
If they're consider Infantry w/ that limited training and scope, then you have to put the word Infantry behind all Marine Support & Aviation Units.  Communications Infantry, Helicopter Infantry, Intelligence Infantry, BAND Infantry.  They have as much if not more Infantry training then RS-1.
 
 
There were members of the Marine Corps Band in a Provisional Rifle Company of Support Marines Patrolling the Streets of Ramadi in 2005/6 when it was a real Sh*t Hole, but you don't put infantry after their name.
 
They are the Naval Riverine Squadron that's it, not Naval Infantry Squadron, Naval Infantry Warfighers or whatever.  All land missions are support in nature.

 
Quote    Reply





New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy