@Yimmy,

 

You don't read too well do you?  It clearly said in my first post on the topic, "20th Century" - things changed a lot - oil powered ships, automobiles, repeating weapons, aircraft, all that stuff ring any bells?  So yes, "MODERN" would be far different from Viking raiders living off the land.  Hope you can understand that.

 

As to raiders vs. division(+) invasions - you do know the difference between them right?  It has nothing to do with "measuring cocks", its a whole different ballgame.  The USMC played with Raider Battalions during WWII and quickly dropped them after the war, as they are severely limited in what they can achieve in contrast with the cost in material and men they require to function.  A "raid" has nothing to do with an invasion, its an in-and-out operation with no concern for follow-on forces, logistics, vehicles, etc....

 

To try and equate raiding with a divisional amphibious assault is extemely naive.

 

Finally - you've got to be joking with "CAS" doesn't say infantry bit, right?  Again, naive.  Check out some of those aformentioned books on military topics to get a clearer picture of terms and titles.

 

Kammak

 

Okay, I've tried but I can't get over the silliness of your CAS claim Yimmy.  Let's walk through how CAS works (and has worked since WWII) - a pilot shows up near a ground unit (aka infantry) and checks in with the FAC (forward air controller - note the last word - "controller", root "control"), and gets his brief from the FAC on what needs to be hit, where the good guys are, and where the bad guys are.

 

The pilot then verifies that information with the FAC, most likely makes a dummy run to allow the FAC to make certain the pilot is looking at the same target the FAC wants, and then the FAC clears the pilot to engage the target.

 

So what's going on there - the guy on the ground is telling the guy in the air what to destroy with the weapons on the plane...Close (near the good guys) Air (aircraft delivered munitions) Support (helping the guys on the ground).

 

Now, what is BAI?  That is where the dweebs with the JFACC tell the pilot where to go, and the pilot then chooses targets of opportunity or hits pre-briefed targets without any coordination with the guys on the ground.  Not Close, not Supporting.

 

So yes, CAS is airpower delivered where the ground forces want it delivered.  It requires *some* form of communication between the ground guys and the aircraft, be it radio, panels, or marker flares/WP rounds.

 

If the above procedure is different from British CAS, then were are facing a language barrier.  What I described is what the USMC is noted for developing to its fullest throughout the 20th century.

 

The DoD dictionary (97 version) is explicit that CAS requires close coordination with a ground unit, whereas Air Interdiction does not.  CAS delivers the ordnance where the infantry wants it, Air Interdiction delivers it where the air weenies guess it should go.

 

 

 

Nice dodge, Yimmy.  I'll take that as your conceding defeat on the CAS issue.  As to the other remarks, its not just me saying what the USMC is noted for in the 20th Century, its a whole host of military history books as well.  The inferiority complex other services/nations exhibit over any good deeds the USMC has done is entertaining to a point, then just sad.

 

 

For the record, neither SCCO Marine nor myself have ever claimed in this thread "our old unit invented x, y, and z" - doctrinal changes typically come out of Quantico, not any Fleet unit.  Field testing may include FMF forces, but almost all doctrine improvements come from the combat lab, amphibious warfare school, or other educational entities at Quantico.  As for amphibious assault, v-envelopment, and CAS, all those revolutionary changes occurred before I was even born.

 

So its not an issue of "my old unit..." - but rather a historical fact concerning institutional innovation.

Listen Kammak, don't let'm get you so worked up.  They're either screwing w/ you or can't see past their own noses.

 

The "modern" Amphibious Warfare Doctrine was drawn up by the USMC in the '30s after studying how the Brits and Anzacs got their asses handed to them at Gallopolli in WWI. 

 

This was after the rest of he world had said it was IMPOSSIBLE to conduct such a manuever on the modern battlefield.

 

Repeat after me.

Close..... Air...... Support.

Now keep saying that to yourself until you realise there is no mention of what the infantry want.

Hey Genius, 

The "Close" in "Close Air Support" refers to the proximity of delivery to the manuever units on the ground.

 

A coordinated manuever requiring ordinance to be talked on target by a man on the ground.

 

Without the man on the ground & the manuever units request....repeat after me....its just  ASS, Air Support Stupid.

 

Say it to yourself a few times you might finally get it!