Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Marines Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Marines Make The Best Of A Bad Idea
SYSOP    10/19/2014 8:13:13 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
trenchsol       10/19/2014 2:13:15 PM
I noticed that Russia developed high speed landing hovercraft, despite the fact they are not likely to use it ever. I think they scared some people off the beach last year or so with one of them. They even had unsuccessful Ekranoplan project, which could have served the same purpose.
 
 
Quote    Reply

HR    Trenchsol   10/19/2014 4:34:45 PM
I think the Russians do have an use in mind for their landing crafts. In littoral operations next to their coast those type of crafts are very effective. They have some history with em.
 
And I applaude the USMC going this direction. Landings agaist near peer opposition is just out of the question.
 
Quote    Reply

HeavyD       10/19/2014 4:55:29 PM
When is a marine no longer a Marine?  Take away amphibious assault and add armor and they are no different than mechanized infantry.  Yup, I said it.  and recent history backs my argument up:  Look at Iraq and Afghanistan - poor Marines trundling around in their AAV7s, hundreds if not thousands of miles away from any large body of water.
 
OK, sure they are organized as an expeditionary fighting unit, but that's more a matter of logistics and organization than anything else.
 
Ultimately, however, it will be budgetary considerations that will sharply reduce the Marine Corps:  there will come a time then the US simply can't afford to have boatloads of jarheads floating around waiting for some action, or the redundancies of having their own air force (or special demands like the VTOL capabilities for the F35)
 
Already we are seeing that it's cheaper and safer to deploy drones and air sorties against foes like ISIS rather than to "send in the Marines'.
 
The Marines peaked in WWII, and have been facing a long decline since.  Times change, but Semper Fi nevertheless.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Evan       10/19/2014 5:47:21 PM
I suspect we will have Jar Heads around until they can find a suitable replacement. Don't see that happening anytime soon, DARPA may tell you it is just around the next corner but I don't see it.  Those guys go anywhere and do what they are told is the way it should be and it may s--k, but they go there anyway.  I served in Vietnam in 67-68 and 69-70 and though I did not work with them, they kept my USAF butt safe and free.  They seem to get some of the sh-t assignments and just deal with it.
 
In the future I am sure they will come up with something, but a marine is not like an aircraft and building a Marine out of spare parts isn't going to happen anytime soon.
 
My hat is off to the Marines.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Tamerlane       10/19/2014 5:55:47 PM
More like $10B had been spent on the flying armored submarine.  The MC seems chained to the "maneuver from the sea" thing and the Navy keeps moving out the amphib assault distance.  Thus, the asinine "Miss Budwiser" requirements.  The AAFV/EFV/??? program office could not manage a candy store.  
 
"You mean an underwater airplane?"
"No. A flying submarine."
"Cut the kidding," Bud retorted.
"Itís the truth," Tom continued. "Itíll even crawl around if necessary on tractor treads."
"No fooling! What do you call it?"
"A diving seacopter."
 
Not to mention the huge sunk costs on Osprey, its clown car, the rifled mortar, and the Global Combat Support system. 
 
Quote    Reply

Nate Dog    Marines won't disapear   10/19/2014 7:38:07 PM
Doubt we'll see the marines disappear any time soon, 
They may have to modernise their thinking, quit with this storming the beaches nonsense, that was very 20th century, those that keep fighting the last war will keep losing.
The Marines will adept, they have already been dragged into an air cavalry role, leapfrogging using Ospreys, assault helos, etc..
I dont see that trend changing any time soon, if anything, it'll strengthen. There are some marine generals stuck in the 1940's, wanting to ensure they can successfully assault some foreign shores should the need ever arise.
Not sure why they're so dead set against the helicopters being used. Oh well, if they think Helo's supported by the world most powerful airforce are vulnerable during assault, not sure why they think landing craft supported by the worlds most powerful navy won't be. 
 
Quote    Reply

Tamerlane       10/19/2014 7:52:41 PM
More like $10B had been spent on the flying armored submarine.  The MC seems chained to the "maneuver from the sea" thing and the Navy keeps moving out the amphib assault distance.  Thus, the asinine "Miss Budwiser" requirements.  The AAFV/EFV/??? program office could not manage a candy store.  
 
"You mean an underwater airplane?"
"No. A flying submarine."
"Cut the kidding," Bud retorted.
"Itís the truth," Tom continued. "Itíll even crawl around if necessary on tractor treads."
"No fooling! What do you call it?"
"A diving seacopter."
 
Not to mention the huge sunk costs on Osprey, its clown car, the rifled mortar, and the Global Combat Support system. 
 
Quote    Reply

HR    Nate   10/20/2014 3:09:58 PM
"Not sure why they're so dead set against the helicopters being used." - because it cannot move heavy equipment and that will limit their missions. Like so many people have mentioned before the role of Marines was never to constitute a "mini-Army". Some of the new amphibs are already rolling off with no wet well. Next show to fall will be a reduction in its size. That is coming too. Long overdue.
 
Quote    Reply

Nate Dog    HR    10/21/2014 2:06:22 AM
Yes,
Im well aware of the limitations of helicopter transport, wasn't suggesting for a second that was how to conduct operations.
Nor do the marines plan to use these beach assault vehicles to transport the quarter ton per day per trooper needed for operations.
Use the helicopters, capture some marina or shallow/deep sea port, then uses ro-ro ships (Aust navy uses civilian car carriers modified for military use, i noticed the marines are choosing to adopt a similar ship) to supply.
 
What i said was, the idea of an amphibious assault vehicle is horribly outdated, just use a god damned helicopter like everybody else. 
 
Quote    Reply

HR    Nate   10/21/2014 3:34:35 PM
In WW2 the Marines did a lot of landings in isolated islands that could not be reinforced. When you attack any island and its defenders cannot make good their losses you are almost guarantee a victory just by attrition. Those scenarios are not part of the USMC's future. So they are adapting. Marines are light infantry. They travel by sea and do carry some equipment with them. Can project naval power inland as long as they are not facing a well prepared adversary or continental power.
 
Much of the Marine leadership wishes that they had the ability to fight a Pacific War with out the Army... and much of the Army's leadership is afraid that if they are given enough money they will. A lot of money has been spent on equipment and some is very expensive for what it does and some others never managed to conquer the technical obstacles and has been wasted.
 
They are going back to light or better said, semi-light infantry and that is good. It is good.
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics