B'n FMA: What about the scenario where your unit is deployed for all around
defence? I don't know about anyone else, but I remember seeing my infantry
unit to this both at the Platoon and Company level, and see no reason why it
couldn't be done at higher levels. Thus I think there are conditions where the
rear and flank attack modifiers should be nullified. I'd think you'd be a
right mellonhead of a CO if you didn't watch your flanks and rear.... and be
ready with contingency orders to pivot the line, bend an end around, or
collapse the whole thing into an enclosed perimeter if required.
Captains:
Ship's Captains (the appointment/position) get
the title Captain. I thought other Captains aboard get the rank of "Commodore"
not "Commander" (ie an honorary bump up is okay, bumping down is not). Or is
this not the case in the USN? I also understood if you had Marine Captains
aboard, they'd be referred to as Majors, but that was only what I thought I
recalled.
Oh, and why Marines? A rapidly deployable force where all members are
fundamentally capable of operating as infantry in a pinch and that is capable
of being inserted to take and hold ground while conventional Army forces are
being deployed just seems to make sense. It takes a while to get M1s to a
battlefield. Having a range of deployable options, including MEUs, just makes
sense.
As to sailors with guns (yikes!), that isn't all that bad. In the RCN, the
Bosun usually has a number of sailors trained in boarding party actions which
he can take across. They specialize in securing their own ship, boarding and
searching vessels, and if need be, commandeering those same vessels. They
wouldn't be as good as full fledged Marines in a fight (lesser firepower) and
wouldn't handle themselves as well on landing parties (they are still
swabbies), but they know the sharp end of a rifle and are more than capable of
coping with most boarding actions (defensively or offensively).
But then, Canada has never really had Marines that I can think of, so this
just makes sense for us. If we had Marines aboard, we'd probably
have a use for them boarding-wise. But the
other thing is the Bosun and the other
boarding-trained sailors can do sailor jobs.
Canadian ships tend to be small. If Marines
were aboard, they'd have to also do ship duty -
something like manning the AA guns or close in defenses or maybe running the
depth charge rack. I hear tell that in some time periods, Marines have been
gun crew for secondary batteries on larger battlewagons. That might even make
sense in 2183.
B'n FMA: What about the scenario where your unit is deployed for all around
defence? I don't know about anyone else, but I remember seeing my infantry
unit to this both at the Platoon and Company level, and see no reason why it
couldn't be done at higher levels. Thus I think there are conditions where the
rear and flank attack modifiers should be nullified. I'd think you'd be a
right mellonhead of a CO if you didn't watch your flanks and rear.... and be
ready with contingency orders to pivot the line, bend an end around, or
collapse the whole thing into an enclosed perimeter if required.
Captains:
Ship's Captains (the appointment/position) get
the title Captain. I thought other Captains aboard get the rank of "Commodore"
not "Commander" (ie an honorary bump up is okay, bumping down is not). Or is
this not the case in the USN? I also understood if you had Marine Captains
aboard, they'd be referred to as Majors, but that was only what I thought I
recalled.
Oh, and why Marines? A rapidly deployable force where all members are
fundamentally capable of operating as infantry in a pinch and that is capable
of being inserted to take and hold ground while conventional Army forces are
being deployed just seems to make sense. It takes a while to get M1s to a
battlefield. Having a range of deployable options, including MEUs, just makes
sense.
As to sailors with guns (yikes!), that isn't all that bad. In the RCN, the
Bosun usually has a number of sailors trained in boarding party actions which
he can take across. They specialize in securing their own ship, boarding and
searching vessels, and if need be, commandeering those same vessels. They
wouldn't be as good as full fledged Marines in a fight (lesser firepower) and
wouldn't handle themselves as well on landing parties (they are still
swabbies), but they know the sharp end of a rifle and are more than capable of
coping with most boarding actions (defensively or offensively).
But then, Canada has never really had Marines that I can think of, so this
just makes sense for us. If we had Marines aboard, we'd probably
have a use for them boarding-wise. But the
other thing is the Bosun and the other
boarding-trained sailors can do sailor jobs.
Canadian ships tend to be small. If Marines
were aboard, they'd have to also do ship duty -
something like manning the AA guns or close in defenses or maybe running the
depth charge rack. I hear tell that in some time periods, Marines have been
gun crew for secondary batteries on larger battlewagons. That might even make
sense in 2183.
> --- Thomas Barclay <kaladorn@fox.nstn.ca> wrote:
> Oh, and why Marines?
But the only reason we have them as a seperate branch
of service is as a hold-over from when they performed
real shipboard functions.
Realistically, anything the Marines can do, the Airborne or conventional light
infantry units can do.
> John Atkinson wrote:
> Realistically, anything the Marines can do, the
I believe the USMC response would be, "Just not as well."
;-)
Though that's just what I've heard, mind you - not necessarily MHO.
> --- Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@hotmail.com> wrote:
And roger. The differences between the USMC and USA are simple.
Take WWII organization. Both services had a 13-man
squad. You had your squad leader, your machine gunner, your rifle grenadier,
etc. The difference is in the 13th man. In the Army, he's the assistant squad
leader. In the Marine Corps, he's a combat cameraman.
Taking a bunker: US Army squad comes up, attacks the bunker, looses 2 guys,
calls down a TOT from every tube in range, blows the bunker to hell. Marines:
Fix bayonets and charge into the kill zone, loosing 11 out of the 13 men. Last
two guys get grenades into the bunker.
However, I'll point out that my batallion has a pretty blue streamer
embroidered "Normandy". So I guess amphibious assault isn't that hard.
From: "John Atkinson" <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com>
> However, I'll point out that my batallion has a pretty
...must...supress...urge...to...say..."Self-evidently"...
Whew. Made it.
To all the guys who landed at Gold, Juno, Sword, Utah and Omaha, "You're a
better man than me, Gunga Din". And for that matter, to the guys at Tarawa,
Saipan, and Iwo Jima.
And that *is* Self-evident.
On a lighter note: a NSTRH story about the US Army's amphibious abilities.
During one of the earliest KANGAROO series of exercises in Queensland, a small
recon unit unit (is there any other kind?) of the Australian Army infiltrated
through the FEBA and made their way several hundred kilometres through enemy
territory, deep into the hinterland. This was quite a feat,
as the M113A1/LRVs http://members.iinet.net.au/~spooner/m113.htm
had to carry quite a few spares, track pins, etc as well as POL, Ammo and a
few troopies squished in on top. Anyway, after dodging enemy recon air,
travelling at night and under the forest canopy, the very last serviceable
M113 eventually got to the landing
beach - where we^H^H they drove up and down the sand, yelling "dakka
dakka dakka, you're all dead", behaving like Yahoos and being completely
ignored amidst the organised chaos that is a divisional logistical tail doing
cross-beach supply transfer. No Umpires this far back, either.
But after a short while, during a turn, the M113 threw a tread and sheared
a track-pin, with no more spares to be had.
So the Cpl in charge walked up to a USArmy Beachmaster, who was chomping
on an unlit cee-gar with a PRC in each hand, showed him the broken
track-pin,
> John Atkinson wrote:
> And roger. The differences between the USMC and USA
Ummm... I thought the discussion was regarding the modern era....
> However, I'll point out that my batallion has a pretty
True enough. My uncle had one like it, he was in the Big Red One. My other
uncle, a marine, wasn't there. He was busy at a place called Iwo Jima. I'd
hate to try to rank either over the other for bravery or fighting ability.
My point is, what the Marines do, they do quite well, and it's slightly
different from the job of an airborne or Light Inf div. An MEU is more along
the lines of the "new" Army concept of an interim force, but the marines have
been doing it for some time. Both services have a great record, ar e
professionals at what they do, and have a good reason for existence.