"U.S. Marines Prepare for Future Warfare" Topic

"It is Aug. 10, 2017. A team of unarmed Marines with Special-Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force–South has deployed to Cartagena, Colombia, to begin a two-week security and cooperation training mission with Colombian marines.

Three days into the mission, guerrillas with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia begin attacking government targets, while Venezuelan marines, with Russian advisers and Chinese equipment, launch an amphibious assault near Bahia Tukakas, Colombia; two Marines are wounded in action.

Suddenly, task force leaders have some critical decisions to make: How do they best support their Marines in contact with a force that possesses greater speed and combat power?…"
Full article here
link

Amicalement
Armand

Scroll down a bit, I noticed the same thing.

Adblock Pro, NoScript, and Privacy Badger are your friends, guys.

=====
The real issue here is that MEUs don't have much armor at all. They only pack a single platoon of Abrams for a battalion of infantry! It should probably be a full company of 14 tanks, not a platoon of 4.

The real issue here is that MEUs don't have much armor at all. They only pack a single platoon of Abrams for a battalion of infantry!

But in a sprawling urban environment (which seems to be the focus of this document), does every infantry company really need its own platoon of assault guns? Attaching the one tank platoon to whatever company is the Main Effort seems reasonable.

The real issue here is that MEUs don't have much armor at all. They only pack a single platoon of Abrams for a battalion of infantry!

But in a sprawling urban environment (which seems to be the focus of this document), does every infantry company really need its own platoon of assault guns?

That is how the Army organized Stryker companies. 3 infantry platoons, a mortar section of 2x tubes, and an assault-gun section of 3x MGS. Not that the MGS worked worth a damn, but that was the intention.

Stryker units were intended to be the "light" component of a Heavy Brigade, which means dealing with the towns that the armor bypassed.

But the Army line companies also lack an important Marine weapon: the SMAW, especially with thermobaric rounds. You don't need a 105mm+ gun hanging around every infantry platoon to reduce strongpoints when you have a proper man-portable RPG/recoilless rifle.

Sure it would be "nice to have" but considering the logistical burden and naval transportation footprint required, much harder to make the argument for. But generally speaking I'm a fan of anything that throws HE and blows up buildings. ^_^

For some reason the Army never adopted the SMAW. However, LAWs/AT4s/Javelins could be issued widely to the Squad and Plt. I'd imagine the same could be said about the USMC … plus they have the SMAW as well. But the ARMY has many more Armor units of various types than the USMC. So it may be the Army relies on the Infantry/Tank Tm concept as again they have more tanks/AFVs ?

Since the MGS never did work (a platoon of factory techs and engineers couldn't keep the things working when 25ID deployed their Stryker brigade to Afghanistan), the soldiers ended up using Javelins, AT4s, and even M67 recoilless rifles to bust bunkers and sangars.

So yeah, I do think that the Marines might want to up the number of tanks deployed with a MEU.

The Stryker troop carrier version always seemed under gunned to with just a .50 cal. The Bushmaster system, like on the M2/M3 would be a better option. However as we saw with the M2 … it reduced the number of troops it carried and added to the actual vehicle crew … Of course maybe replacing the 105 with a better system, even if it is a smaller caliber might be an option. So in a perfect world you'd have Strykers with a Bushmaster, increase on number of Strykers to make up for the loss of dismounts because of the Bushmaster. Plus have version with a decent working main gunner, like a 90 instead of the 105. A working 90 is better than a broken 105 …

My wicked idea for a Super Stryker was to raid the naval (remote) mounting for a Bushmaster or Mk44, and "borrow" the Bushmaster III 50mm. Needs a really good HE round to blow up bunkers, which is why the relatively big round.

Still needs a bit of work to reduce top height and weight, but it's vastly better than the Kongsberg medium-caliber Protector RWS (a full turret).

So it may be the Army relies on the Infantry/Tank Tm concept as again they have more tanks/AFVs ?

Yeah, tank/mech works great….if you have the log tail and transport capacity to support it. The Corps rarely does.

I've tried in the past to sketch out my idealized Urban Assault Heavy Mechanized Brigade. Kinda like a whole brigade of WW2 German Assault Pioneers, but with 21st-century tech. I've never gotten far enough to figure out the daily consumption rates on ordnance but I'm sure it'd be obscene.

Re: upgunning a Stryker, agreed that a big-caliber autocannon seems the way to go. At least 40mm like the CV9040's. My previous idea was a BMP-3 style 100mm low-velocity/30mm AC mix, which the Russians were able to fit on BTR hulls. However, now I think a single middle-sized weapon is superior in this application. Simplifies ammo logistics too.

Yeah, tank/mech works great….if you have the log tail and transport capacity to support it.

I agree and understand. In the US Army I was a Mech Bn Logistics Officer, them a Mech Bn and Bde Motor Office, and finally an Asst Mech Bde Log Officer. Plus being an M113 Mech Co. Cdr. So I was completely versed in Catering to the Iron Monsters !

Re: upgunning a Stryker, agreed that a big-caliber autocannon seems the way to go.

Adding the Bushmaster 25mm weapons system to the troop carrier version would work IMO plus as you said, simplified logistics. But yes, a larger caliber cannon mounted on a Stryker hull, [which works !] is a good concept. As the extra firepower is always welcomed. Too bad the current 105 is not mechanically reliable. That should be fixed or replaced … but with what is the rub ?

I've tried in the past to sketch out my idealized Urban Assault Heavy Mechanized Brigade. Kinda like a whole brigade of WW2 German Assault Pioneers, but with 21st-century tech. I've never gotten far enough to figure out the daily consumption rates on ordnance but I'm sure it'd be obscene.

Good concept, but yes in a pitched battle it maybe quite a challenge to keep that or any other unit with 21st Century Tech shooting, moving and communicating …