The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 19, 2008

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest

Advertisement



New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Squad Battles: Winter War
2.Silent War
3.Manoeuvre
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies

Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
Commandos and Special Operations Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: S.U.S.T.A.I.N....Marines In Spaaace!
SCCOMarine    3/14/2008 4:56:47 PM
The Marine Corps has quietly, over the past 6 or 7yrs, been shaping the Forced Entry and Crisis Response capability of the next millenium w/ NASA and Aero-Space Industries. It's called SUSTAIN-Small Unit Space Transport and Insertion.

By seizing on the emerging SCRAM-Jet technologies they are in early development w/ the Industry towards a series SCRAM-Jets capable of Deploying 13-20 man Squads of Marines.

SCRAM-Jets are Hyper-Sonic Air/Space Craft that break the earth's atmosphere then skim across it at speeds of Mach 4 thru Mach 10.

They will be able to deploy a company-sized Expeditionary Unit of DO Capable Marines anywhere in the world in 2HRs or less.

The list of missions range fr/ Crisis Response and In-Extremis Hostage Rescue to QRF for SOF, capable of re-inforcing Special Operations Missions world wide at a moments notice.
 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

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

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5   NEXT
Horsesoldier       3/14/2008 5:45:56 PM


They will be able to deploy a company-sized Expeditionary Unit of DO Capable Marines anywhere in the world in 2HRs or less.

The list of missions range fr/ Crisis Response and In-Extremis Hostage Rescue to QRF for SOF, capable of re-inforcing Special Operations Missions world wide at a moments notice.

The USMC will lose that fight with SOCOM if/when the technology exists to make it happen.

 
Quote    Reply

SCCOMarine       3/14/2008 6:15:13 PM

Semper Fly: Marines in Space
 
By David Axe  12.18.2006
A proposed suborbital space transport will put boots on the ground anywhere in the world in two hours or less. But can it overcome huge technological-and political-hurdles?

   As any battlefield commander will tell you, getting troops to the fight can be as difficult as winning it. And for modern-day soldiers, the sites of conflict are so far-flung, and the political considerations of even flying over another country so complicated, that rapid entry has become nearly impossible. If a group of Marine Corps visionaries have their way, however, 30 years from now, Marines could touch down anywhere on the globe in less than two hours, without needing to negotiate passage through foreign airspace. The breathtaking efficiency of such a delivery system could change forever the way the U.S. does battle.

   The proposal, part of the Corps' push toward greater speed and flexibility, is called Small Unit Space Transport and Insertion, or Sustain. Using a suborbital transport-that is, a vehicle that flies into space to achieve high travel speeds but doesn't actually enter orbit-the Corps will be able, in effect, to instantaneously deliver Marine squads anywhere on Earth. The effort is led by Roosevelt Lafontant, a former Marine lieutenant colonel now employed by the Schafer Corporation, a military-technology consulting firm working with the Marines. Insertion from space, Lafontant explains, makes it possible for the Marines-typically the first military branch called on for emergency missions-to avoid all the usual complications that can delay or end key missions. No waiting for permission from an allied nation, no dangerous rendezvous in the desert, no slow helicopter flights over mountainous terrain. Instead, Marines could someday have an unmatched element of surprise, allowing them to do everything from reinforce Special Operations Forces to rescuing hostages thousands of miles away.

   Sustain is simply an ability to move Marines very rapidly from one place to another, says Marine colonel Jack Wassink, director of the Corps' Space Integration Branch in Arlington, Virginia, where the program is based. Space lends itself to that role.

   The program is quickly gaining traction. Congress has expressed interest, because of the obvious usefulness of the capability it promises. And the technologies necessary to make it happen, from hypersonic propulsion systems to new composite materials needed to make the vehicle lightweight yet strong, are in advanced development in military labs across the country. The Marines expect to fly a prototype in 15 years, most likely a two-stage system using a carrier aircraft that will launch a lander into orbit from high altitude. Production models could show up around 2030, a date that isn't quite as far away as it seems. Consider that the F-22 Raptor fighter is now entering service after 22 years of development.

   But the whole idea still rings of science fiction, and the question is whether its proponents can corral the various technologies together to make the project possible.  Sustain is not a pipe dream, Lafontant says.  It just needs to gel.
 
   Finding routes through diplomatically friendly airspace and then arranging for timely delivery of U.S. forces are key complications, especially on today's world political stage. Sustain would solve both problems in a single stroke.  According to international agreement, a nation´s airspace extends 50 miles from the Earth's surface, just short of low orbit.  A spacecraft would allow the U.S. to step over other countries and insert forces where they're needed.

   Each Sustain lander is intended to hold a squad of 13 Marines. Mounted on wedge-shaped carrier aircraft, the lander would detach, climb, and accelerate with scramjet engines to 100,000 feet and then fire rocket engines to get above 50 miles, following an arc over hostile countries. Composite shields would absorb or deflect the searing heat of reentry as the vehicles angle for the landing zone.

   Lafontant arrived at this Space Marines vision after years of analyzing military space needs. A 44-year-old Queens, New York, native who joined the Corps in 1984 as an infantry officer and progressed through Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, where he studied space systems operations and joined the small fraternity of Marine Space Operations Officers. In 2001 he took a job in the Pentagon working for the National Reconnaissance Office. He was serving as liaison to the Joint Chiefs of Staff in November 2001 when the Marine Corps launched its deepest air assault ever.

   Five hundred Marines from the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special Operations Capable) prepared to fly 441 miles through the mountains of northern Pakistan in CH-53E Sea Stallion helicopters to capture an airstrip near Kandahar, Afghanistan. It was to be the beginning of the first large offensive against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. If all went well, the Marines were expected to be a linch-pin in cornering Osama bin Laden.

   But political considerations sabotaged the mission. For weeks, the Marines had bobbed on the Indian Ocean aboard two assault ships while State Department officials negotiated with Pakistan for the right to fly through the country's airspace. Pakistan granted access only after winning economic and military concessions that, some say, have reinforced a repressive regime. When U.S. troops finally touched down on November 25, bin Laden's trail was cold.  We ended up selling our soul to the devil to get through, Lafontant says. He grew determined to find a way around that sort of diplomatic entanglement.  What if we don't have to have anybody's permission?  he asked himself.  What if we just go above and drop in?
 
   In April of that year, while Marines were bogged down in bloody cave fighting during the hunt for bin Laden, Lafontant had lunch with fellow space expert Franz Gayl in the Pentagon cafeteria. Gayl, also a former Marine with significant influence in the private sector, brainstorms new technologies for the Corps' Plans, Policies, and Operations Department. Lafontant suggested that a space transport could have allowed Marines to nab bin Laden without a major assault-and before the terrorist leader could disappear into Afghanistan's caves. Gayl was skeptical of its feasibility-the idea of military space transport has been around for decades yet has never been deemed viable enough to enter active development-but he was impressed by the elegance of the solution and its use of military technology that he knew to be in the works.

   Together, Lafontant and Gayl formally presented their concept to Gayl's boss at the Pentagon, brigadier general Richard Zilmer, and then to lieutenant general Emil Bedard, the office's deputy commandant, who endorsed it on July 22, 2002, adding space transport to the Marines' official wish list. But the technology-reusable and advanced propulsion, sophisticated heat shielding-wasn´t ready. Just a year earlier, two joint NASA and Air Force programs to develop similar reusable launch vehicles, or RLVs, had been canceled because of problems with their single-stage engines. The idea was far ahead of the technological curve.

   But Lafontant was patient. He continued to refine and promote the space-transport idea until it was a fixture in the collective imagination of the Marines' space community. Soon Sustain found a home at the Corps' Space Integration Branch in Virginia, where Wassink directs a 100-person team of satellite technicians who connect Marine commanders to operations around the world. Wassink was interested in the Sustain project, but the Marine Corps is a small force under the umbrella of the Navy and receives just 4 percent of military funding. Sustain is certainly not something the Marine Corps would be able to acquire on its own, he admits.

   Zilmer agreed and introduced the Sustain concept to Congress. In an address to a Senate committee in July 2003, he outlined the Marine strategy. We must coordinate and synthesize our technology needs with other Department of Defense and nonmilitary users, Zilmer told the committee. He mentioned NASA as a possible partner. Lafontant also foresaw the Air Force developing the carrier aircraft and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa), the Pentagon's experimental-science arm, overseeing the design of the lander. Zilmer's testimony was part of a broad campaign that Lafontant and the other Sustain advocates launched to sell the idea to Congress, NASA, the Air Force and Darpa, and to the industry partners that would build the hardware. We saw the entire gamut of reactions, Wassink recalls. Some people didn´t get past the giggle factor.

Marines into Space

   The Marines have a history of selling risky but revolutionary concepts. They embraced amphibious assault before it became a deciding factor in World War II. They guarded the versatile V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor plane during its troubled development. And they have championed their share of flops. Their vertical-takeoff AV-8B Harrier crashes more than any other contemporary fighter, and it was the Marine Corps, after all, that seriously investigated attaching incendiary bombs to thousands of bats during World War II.

   Sustain is part of the latest in a long legacy of tough sells. But, as the world stage grows more hostile and the need for rapid, flexible deployment grows more intense, Lafontant insists that the giggle factor is gone now.
 
   The Sustain program is not only risky, it also requires the cooperation of researchers from multiple branches of the armed forces that are currently developing relevant technologies. The Sustain system will consist of two stages: a launch craft and a lander. In recent years, NASA, the Air Force and the Navy have created programs to develop new RLVs that will use multi-stage systems and a combination of rockets and hypersonic air-breathing boost engines. Vehicles now in development that could be adapted for a Marine carrier aircraft-the first-stage launcher that will carry the actual spaceship-include the hypersonic aircraft Falcon, which skirts the upper atmosphere; the Boeing X-51 and Lockheed Martin Rattlrs (Revolutionary Approach to Time-Critical Long-Range Strike) hypersonic engine testbeds; and the supersecret two-stage spacecraft Hot Eagle. It´s this constellation of programs, along with aviation designer Burt Rutan's two-stage spaceplanes, that will ultimately yield Sustain's RLV transport.

   Falcon, a $100-million Air Force program intended for low-orbital operations from a runway, is the centerpiece. The first two Falcon vehicles-long, wedge-shaped craft-are under construction by a Lockheed Martin team in Palmdale, California, and are slated to begin testing in 2008.

Rough Landing

   At the core of Sustain is the lander-the actual vehicle in which a squad of 13 Marines [see photo gallery] and their gear will float through space, reenter the atmosphere, and come down right on top of their adversaries. The closest thing to a Sustain lander actually flying today is Rutan's SpaceShipOne, built by Scaled Composites in Mojave, California. In October 2004, SpaceShipOne piggybacked to 40,000 feet on a carrier aircraft and then boosted to 69 miles up with its own rocket and landed like an airplane. This singular feat, perhaps more than any other accomplishment by industry or researchers, has energized proponents of Sustain.  Just a scaled-up version of that would do this [Sustain] mission, said then Air Force general S. Pete Worden while observing the launch. A lander based on SpaceShipOne would be bigger, tougher and armed-and reconfigured for longer flights, as opposed to the up-and-down trajectory that SpaceShipOne flies-but the basic concept is broadly the same.

   Worden, who had heard one of Lafontant's early Sustain pitches, is now director of the NASA Ames Research Center in California, where he is one of Sustain's biggest allies. It was the avuncular Worden who lobbied Darpa for help with Sustain. Darpa declined to participate; these days, the agency is focused on near-term projects to support fighting in Iraq. But its position could change, Worden thinks.  If the Air Force pursues this and shows more feasibility, Darpa might be a future player, he says.

   Although a fully evolved lander remains far off, key technologies related to propulsion and heat shields for both the carrier and the lander are well-advanced. These aim to make RLVs such as Sustain robust, responsive and reusable.  One of the critical aspects of Sustain is ultimately the ability to access space with aircraft-like operations, says Wassink, who is in charge of investigating technologies that could be adapted for Sustain.  It does us no good to have the ability to get anywhere on the globe within two hours if it takes us days to get ready.

   In addition to quicker prelaunch procedures, the program needs durable, reusable heat shields in place of the space shuttle's fragile ceramic tiles, which require 60 days' preparation. And whereas two stages are a given, which combination of stages is best depends on who you ask. Even with a hypersonic Falcon first-stage craft, there are several different approaches to propulsion, says scientist James Pittman of the NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia.  The use of rockets to boost the vehicle to hypersonic speed is one approach. [Or] you could look at an air-breathing solution from takeoff to hypersonic speed to landing.

   Lockheed's Rattlrs program may provide key breakthroughs. This $100-million initiative is targeted at creating hypersonic missiles for the Navy, using new alloys, composites and ceramics to allow the engines to withstand extreme heat. The resulting high-speed turbine will eventually appear in RLVs, according to Lockheed's Craig Johnston.  The turbine-based combined cycle offers probably the greatest promise, he says, because it allows you to operate in the low-speed regime much the same way that current aircraft operate.

   Taylor Dinerman, a space analyst for Space Review, says that Sustain is feasible, given enough time for R&D. The key, he believes, is to pursue the programs that might feed into a transport-and then have the financial support from Congress to push the project through. But once the technological and financial hurdles are overcome, there's still one that would remain.  Probably the most difficult challenge would be extracting the personnel, Wassink confesses-that is, bringing them home safely at mission's end.
 
   The Marines are, historically, excellent at inserting themselves into trouble. It's the getting out that's hard. Retaining enough fuel for a brief regular-altitude flight to a nearby base or allied nation is one option. Lafontant and his fellow planners have proposed other methods of extraction. The lander might have enough fuel to fly all the way back home under its own power, or, if the vehicle is small enough, it might deploy a parachute and be snagged midair by a cargo aircraft. Finally, because it's the speed of insertion, not the round trip, the extraction might require less urgency. The Marines and the landers could simply be retrieved by more conventional means.

   At this point-in the aftermath-the diplomatic challenge might truly rear its head. Although getting over an altitude of 50 miles officially clears a nation's sovereign airspace, exploiting this loophole is bound to cause political problems, something that is already being foreshadowed in the Bush administration's new space policy, released in October, which declares the administration's intention to exploit space for military purposes. Sustain doesn't solve the diplomatic problems it creates-indeed, the project could simply cause countries to raise the upper limits of their air space-but it unquestionably redefines the notion of rapid insertion.

   Whether or not Sustain ever makes it past the concept stage, it's clear that military planners are looking to increase the mobility of American forces. A Marine space transport-one that would reduce politically charged bureaucratic delays and the potential for mission snafus-might sound impossible, but to Lafontant and others entrusted with imagining the future of war, it is simply the next logical step.

 
Quote    Reply

SCCOMarine    Horse   3/14/2008 6:35:08 PM




They will be able to deploy a company-sized Expeditionary Unit of DO Capable Marines anywhere in the world in 2HRs or less.

The list of missions range fr/ Crisis Response and In-Extremis Hostage Rescue to QRF for SOF, capable of re-inforcing Special Operations Missions world wide at a moments notice.


The USMC will lose that fight with SOCOM if/when the technology exists to make it happen.




I doubt it.  Especially w/ the consetions made btwn the USMC and SOCOM over the last 4yrs establishing who's mission is what, who's the supported and the supporting parties on particular missions, and where to draw the line btwn the 2 Orgs and how they can best work together.
 
Crisis Response and Forced Entry on any scale has always been the purview of General Purpose Forces and is in fact written into the National Security Act.
 
There is also no Unit better suited for Task Organized Expeditionary Operations which is why the MEU(SOC) not SOCOM has been the force of choice for CR missions.
 
You could see SOCOM deploy w/ the units in a joint capacity but the CR/FE mission has and will always be a GFP mission.
 
Quote    Reply

SCCOMarine       3/14/2008 6:52:52 PM
Crisis Response is a short notice, ambiguous, in-extremis mission and has always been assigned to GPF and was part of the discussions btwn the 2 Orgs.
 
Special Operations are charcterized as more heavily planned and coordinated missions requiring a higher level of precision.
 
Like I said you could see them deploy on some mission in a joint capacity but Crisis Response in a GPF mission.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       3/18/2008 7:15:56 AM
I find it very hard to believe that even America will be able to deploy and afford mach 10 aircraft for the purpose of dropping off 13-20 grunts any time remotely soon.
 
Quote    Reply

Wicked Chinchilla       3/18/2008 10:09:13 AM
Sadly I see many of these promising, innovative, and revolutionary programs going by the wayside very soon as the economy gets bludgeoned.
 
That is to say that if this does come about it certainly brings about immense operational possibilities.
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY       3/18/2008 10:31:59 AM
Hat's Off to the USAF for bureaucratic skills...first they propose the Space-based F-111 and get shot down.  So they hunt around for another DoD partner and come up with the space-based UH-1....Points for securing a new partner to lobby for a program.
 
But the program is goody.  Exactly what are 10-13 guys going to do, once they're on the ground?  And how will they do it?  The Spaced UH-1 is going to land at Mogadishu International; and then the 13 Marines are going to fight their way into the city?  The Lander is going to parachute them into Mogadishu?  And then they will be extracted how?  And the people they rescue will be extracted how?  And this lander, it will be able to fly after the landing?  Or we will extract it how?
 
I'm sorry this is a "neat" idea in search of a mission....I think it would be cheaper to keep 12 SEALS on ARG and fly them in in a Pave Low than build this system.
 
Quote    Reply

bob the brit       3/18/2008 2:43:03 PM
there definitely seems to be a problem with economy of transport in realtion to utility and size of force. well that's my boring 2 pence for today.
 
Quote    Reply

Wicked Chinchilla       3/18/2008 6:53:53 PM
Its not that I view the insertion of up to 12 marines or spec ops guys in a very conspicuous manner with no way out as extremely valuable.  Its an extremely interesting capability but, as you two just pointed out, the practicality is doubtful.  

Where I see the value in this program is the window it opens.  Sure, this program is just about one way insertion of 13-20 men.  However, a program must start somewhere.  I am sure that when the airplane was first invented people were not thinking "hmm, I wonder if we could go 1500+ mph some day..."  Right now there is not much use where this would be practical, but it does introduce the concept of orbital insertions and every new tech has to start somewhere.
 
Quote    Reply

bob the brit       3/18/2008 7:06:57 PM

Its not that I view the insertion of up to 12 marines or spec ops guys in a very conspicuous manner with no way out as extremely valuable.  Its an extremely interesting capability but, as you two just pointed out, the practicality is doubtful.  

Where I see the value in this program is the window it opens.  Sure, this program is just about one way insertion of 13-20 men.  However, a program must start somewhere.  I am sure that when the airplane was first invented people were not thinking "hmm, I wonder if we could go 1500+ mph some day..."  Right now there is not much use where this would be practical, but it does introduce the concept of orbital insertions and every new tech has to start somewhere.

i certainly agree with you there, as you said, all tech starts somewhere [imagine if people looked at the tank on the western front and thought 'bugger it, not worth the hassle'] it'll be interesting to see where this technology leads to, and if/when the economy of transport/utility of transported force ratio becomes more of a 1:1 [i'm sure you understand what i mean] this could be a very useful tool for conducting warfare. alas my knowledge of all things space and flight is rather lacking, so i can't really add much more [at least on the technical side].
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       3/18/2008 7:56:48 PM
I don't see what's so special about space.... they even say tourism in space will start soon.... bus so what?  It's space... there's nothing there!
 
Quote    Reply

SCCOMarine       3/19/2008 2:12:52 PM
But the program is goody.  Exactly what are 10-13 guys going to do, once they're on the ground?  And how will they do it?  The Spaced UH-1 is going to land at Mogadishu International; and then the 13 Marines are going to fight their way into the city?  The Lander is going to parachute them into Mogadishu?  And then they will be extracted how?  And the people they rescue will be extracted how?  And this lander, it will be able to fly after the landing?  Or we will extract it how?
I'm sorry this is a "neat" idea in search of a mission....I think it would be cheaper to keep 12 SEALS on ARG and fly them in in a Pave Low than build this system.


I think some of you are missing the point and the mission.  Most deep insertion Helos only carry about 13-20 troops, but nobody sends in just one of them.
CRISIS RESPONSE:
To understand the concept you have to understand the mission, its Crisis Response.  Crisis Response is an Immediate Action Response when the US needs(keyword) forces on the ground(usually small but robust) ASAP flexible enough to react to a mulitple variety of contingencies.
Its not a new mission that ppl are dreaming up, the only thing new is the speed of the response & the transport.
 
The plan is to accommodate a force size of up to Company sized element (my guess would be up to 80 or 100) Marines tailored for the Specific threat. 
 
But thats nothing new, its the same mission already assigned & performed by FAST Co and the MEU(SOC).  Both who can send in a Reinforced Squad on up.  And depending on the mission can tailor it w/
-CI/HET personnel,
-Radio Recon to infiltrate enemy HQ to intercept or disrupt Comm&Data,
-a Weapons section,
-a robust Comm Suite,
-Snipers,
-a DAP element,
 
the list goes on it just depends on the mission, all in a package no bigger than 80. 
 
The point of CR is to react fast & robust enough to avert disaster w/ a small footprint, & if its unavoidable to strike hard enough to buy time.
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    SCCOMarine   3/19/2008 2:32:58 PM
I see so rather than simply a fleet of four space shuttles that cost billions we'll need...u'uuuum lets see, company 80-150 personnel, at 10-13 personnel per vehicle, 6-15 operational hyper-sonic aircraft, and after counting 80% availability we'll need 8 to 19 of these aircraft?  Shuttle program is running at about USD 5 Billion per year, or USD 1.25 Billion per year per shuttle, so we'd get a program cost of  7.5 Billion to USD 23.75 Billion per year?  Pretty pricey for the ability to deliver a light infantry company any where in the world in two hours.
 
 
 And at the end of the day you didn't answer my question(s).
So I'll repeat them, with the proper numbers,
1) Exactly what are 80-150 guys going to do, once they're on the ground?
2) And how will they do it? (Fire support and logistics)
3)  The Space-based UH-1's are going to land at Mogadishu International; and then the 80-150 Marines are going to fight their way into the city?
4)  The Lander is going to parachute them into Mogadishu? 
5) And then they will be extracted how? 
6) And the people they rescue will be extracted how?
7)   And these landers, they will be able to fly after the landing?  Or we will extract it how?
 
It seems that in addition to the space-based light infantry there will need to be CAS and logistics support and then a conventional extraction force of helicopters.  So your USMC MEU(Space) is a fairly expensive addition to the Defense Budget, not a replacement for any portion of it.
 
It's a neat idea, yes, but the economics of it right now, sure make it seem very pricey for the benefits you get.  In your plan we can fight in Iraq and Afghanistan for about 4 months (23.75 Billion as a percentage of the supplemental budget for those campaigns~USD 90 Billion) or we can have a company of the USMC sitting around a launch pad waiting to go on a fleet of hyper-sonic shuttles?  I'm thinking the GWoT and 150,000 troops is the better deal....
 
Quote    Reply

SCCOMarine       3/19/2008 2:53:01 PM

But the program is goody.  Exactly what are 10-13 guys going to do, once they're on the ground?  And how will they do it?  The Spaced UH-1 is going to land at Mogadishu International; and then the 13 Marines are going to fight their way into the city?  The Lander is going to parachute them into Mogadishu?  And then they will be extracted how?  And the people they rescue will be extracted how?  And this lander, it will be able to fly after the landing?  Or we will extract it how?
 
I'm sorry this is a "neat" idea in search of a mission....I think it would be cheaper to keep 12 SEALS on ARG and fly them in in a Pave Low than build this system.


MOGADISHU:
Its interesting you bring up the SEALs & the Mog Embassy mission fr/ mid to late year 1990, as if thats who gets the call in a ARG/MEU(that part was left out) on CR missions.
 
In a ARG/MEU the SEAL Strike Plt is actually in reserve in DA/CR/IHR missions to the DA Plt of the MSPF, so they wouldn't get the call anyway.
 
On the mission you named, the only reason the SEALs were used for the mission was b/c it was during the Op Desert Shield. 
 
The Force Recon/DA Plt was performing Deep Reconnaissance in Kuwait & Southern Iraq and the Amphibious Recon Plt(the R&S Element) was performing near Recon for a Potential Amphib Assualt.

Also when retelling the story the SEALs always leave out that they didn't deploy alone but were accompanied by a Reinforced Squad fr/ the MSPF's Trailer Plt.
 
Quote