Ken Estes Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 Missing details of 1st Tk Bn, which has the most contemporary operational commitments. The number of tank companies in the 4th Tk Bn [USMCR] relates to the redesignation severalyears ago of the 8th Tk Bn USMCR as an antiterrorist Bn, back when that was al la mode. I have asked a guy I know at HQ where the tanks are headed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 2 hours ago, Ken Estes said: Missing details of 1st Tk Bn, which has the most contemporary operational commitments. The number of tank companies in the 4th Tk Bn [USMCR] relates to the redesignation severalyears ago of the 8th Tk Bn USMCR as an antiterrorist Bn, back when that was al la mode. I have asked a guy I know at HQ where the tanks are headed. Any chance the U.S.M.C. tankers and tanks going into the U.S.M.C. reserve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Jones Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 None for the tanks, the tankers may but not as tankers. That is if I understand the Marine Commandant's intent correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R011 Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 32 minutes ago, Harold Jones said: None for the tanks, the tankers may but not as tankers. That is if I understand the Marine Commandant's intent correctly. Not as Marine tankers, anyway. As noted above, some of them are transferring to Army National Guard armored units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LouieD Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 I’m gobsmacked ......am I missing something here ? Wouldn’t the Chinese have their own sensors to detect these landings ? While they are waiting for the HIMARS to be air landed wouldn’t the Chinese be throwing the kitchen sink at the reinforced Company ? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8872631/US-Marines-running-island-hopping-exercises-fears-future-war-China.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Estes Posted October 30, 2020 Share Posted October 30, 2020 On 10/22/2020 at 12:48 AM, Ken Estes said: Missing details of 1st Tk Bn, which has the most contemporary operational commitments. The number of tank companies in the 4th Tk Bn [USMCR] relates to the redesignation several years ago of the 8th Tk Bn USMCR as an antiterrorist Bn, back when that was al la mode. I have asked a guy I know at HQ where the tanks are headed. The part answer: Quote From what I have seen (I was at 29 Palms when the last tank departed the base) it appears that all Tanks will end up at Barstow, then shipped to Anniston Depot. Now I'm asking about continued USMC ownership of said tanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Estes Posted November 5, 2020 Share Posted November 5, 2020 YGTBSM! https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2020/11/03/will-the-marine-corps-take-on-submarine-hunting/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EBB 11.04.20&utm_term=Editorial - Military - Early Bird Brief ...and if that was not enough: https://news.usni.org/2020/10/22/marine-corps-navy-ready-to-hone-naval-integration-in-2021-joint-force-exercise "to the rear.....March!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BansheeOne Posted November 5, 2020 Share Posted November 5, 2020 4 hours ago, Ken Estes said: YGTBSM! https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2020/11/03/will-the-marine-corps-take-on-submarine-hunting/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EBB 11.04.20&utm_term=Editorial - Military - Early Bird Brief Shut up, put your K-Bar between your teeth and dive after that Akula, Marine! 😁 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stargrunt6 Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 On 11/5/2020 at 12:42 AM, BansheeOne said: Shut up, put your K-Bar between your teeth and dive after that Akula, Marine! 😁 There was that Marine General who was asked "what is the best anti-tank weapon?" His answer: "a Marine and his rifle." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Tan Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 (edited) In this case it would be a Marine and his EFP limpet mine. Anti-Tank/Anti-Submarine. Edited November 9, 2020 by Simon Tan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stargrunt6 Posted November 9, 2020 Share Posted November 9, 2020 "this is my limpet mine . . . " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Robertson Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 On 9/2/2020 at 11:18 PM, Hellfish6 said: https://twitter.com/CMC_MarineCorps/status/1300513520052776961 CMC talking about the need for a new light amphibious warship. That tank doesn't belong to the Royal Marines though does it. The airforce of your navy's army is larger than our airforce. There is a good argument that the US could do a hell of a lot of inter service consolidation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 Nice to see you back Dan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bojan Posted December 5, 2020 Share Posted December 5, 2020 +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted February 9, 2021 Share Posted February 9, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Estes Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 (edited) Who wants to ride that [four posts above] "affordable risk-worthy platform?" Guess it looks OK from the Pentagon. Below: "Service leadership is ready to take the plunge and go all in on this force transformation effort" "They spent months conducting modeling and simulation, wargames and table-top exercises ahead of releasing the Force Design 2030 in March. Both have acknowledged this will be an iterative process, but they’re ready to dive in and start the work of changing the Pacific-based Marines to be ready for the pacing threat the service sees in China." What if the "Pacing Threat" turns out to have more troops than we have bullets? The stand-up of this first Marine Littoral Regiment is among the first and most visible steps being taken towards implementing the new Force Design 2030. The service will also test a ground-based anti-ship missile system in “weeks,” acquire stern landing vessels and a light amphibious warship to move smaller groups of Marines around the littorals in about three years, and transform the rest of the force by 2030 to reshape the Marine Corps for a fight against a peer adversary, Deputy Commandant for Combat Development and Integration Lt. Gen. Eric Smith told USNI News in a phone interview this week. Service leadership is ready to take the plunge and go all in on this force transformation effort: Smith, formerly the commanding general of Japan-based III Marine Expeditionary Force, and Commandant Gen. David Berger, who previously held Smith’s job and prior to that led all Marines in the Pacific, have seen both the status quo of forces in the Pacific and the intelligence that shows where that force needs to evolve to. They spent months conducting modeling and simulation, wargames and table-top exercises ahead of releasing the Force Design 2030 in March. Both have acknowledged this will be an iterative process, but they’re ready to dive in and start the work of changing the Pacific-based Marines to be ready for the pacing threat the service sees in China. Above - "III Marine Expeditionary Force, and Commandant Gen. David Berger, who previously held Smith’s job" -- Not true. Berger did not command III MEF, Edited February 16, 2021 by Ken Estes Additional material Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 Is it just me, or does having shedloads of antiship missiles look of little potential use when facing an Airborne or Air Assault attack? Why are stupid ideas so contagious? I hope we dont catch this one like we did with Stryker/FRES that held our attention for a decade and a half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BansheeOne Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 13 minutes ago, Ken Estes said: The service will also test a ground-based anti-ship missile system in “weeks,” Within weeks? Must sorta already exist then. I thought "RBS-17" as soon as I heard of the whole "Marines with anti-ship missiles" thing. Embrace the suck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJ Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 USMC requirement in the linked long document of blah blah has the necessity out of anti-ship missile being long range buried in there. HIMARS demonstrated some anti-ship ability at RIMPAC 2018. So its probably referring to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R011 Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 4 hours ago, Ken Estes said: Who wants to ride that [four posts above] "affordable risk-worthy platform?" Guess it looks OK from the Pentagon. Below: "Service leadership is ready to take the plunge and go all in on this force transformation effort" "They spent months conducting modeling and simulation, wargames and table-top exercises ahead of releasing the Force Design 2030 in March. Both have acknowledged this will be an iterative process, but they’re ready to dive in and start the work of changing the Pacific-based Marines to be ready for the pacing threat the service sees in China." What if the "Pacing Threat" turns out to have more troops than we have bullets? The stand-up of this first Marine Littoral Regiment is among the first and most visible steps being taken towards implementing the new Force Design 2030. The service will also test a ground-based anti-ship missile system in “weeks,” acquire stern landing vessels and a light amphibious warship to move smaller groups of Marines around the littorals in about three years, and transform the rest of the force by 2030 to reshape the Marine Corps for a fight against a peer adversary, Deputy Commandant for Combat Development and Integration Lt. Gen. Eric Smith told USNI News in a phone interview this week. Service leadership is ready to take the plunge and go all in on this force transformation effort: Smith, formerly the commanding general of Japan-based III Marine Expeditionary Force, and Commandant Gen. David Berger, who previously held Smith’s job and prior to that led all Marines in the Pacific, have seen both the status quo of forces in the Pacific and the intelligence that shows where that force needs to evolve to. They spent months conducting modeling and simulation, wargames and table-top exercises ahead of releasing the Force Design 2030 in March. Both have acknowledged this will be an iterative process, but they’re ready to dive in and start the work of changing the Pacific-based Marines to be ready for the pacing threat the service sees in China. Above - "III Marine Expeditionary Force, and Commandant Gen. David Berger, who previously held Smith’s job" -- Not true. Berger did not command III MEF, I think they meant to say Berger held Smith's current job, which seems to be the case. It's not well phrased, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Estes Posted March 13, 2021 Share Posted March 13, 2021 I have previously speculated that the CMC was seeking to resurrect the WWII Defense Battalion of 1938 in the guise of the current "Littoral Battalion" to which he wants to convert infantry and artillery battalions. This is summarized from the Marine Corps Times, 23Sept1919: Quote Since WWII the Marine Corps has dropped security on US naval ships and forward bases from its mission statement, retaining only the mission of carrying out amphibious assaults'. General David Berger, current commandant of the Marine Corps, has stated that it is time for the marines to add back to its mission statement the guarding of US Navy overseas bases from direct enemy sea-based attack. At present, neither the navy nor the Marine Corps have quick react, line of sight, land-based weapons systems to guard naval base from direct attack by an enemy ship or boat. General Berger believes that it is just a matter of time before an enemy using a water-borne vessel launches a gun, rocket or suicide ramming attack against a a target-rich undefended port. In 2019, the Marine Corps asked the defense industry for proposals to equip shore-based marines with guns or missiles capable of killing a vessel of up to 1,500 tons at a range of 3 to50 miles. The preferred ship killing weapon would be comparable with the existing HIMARS rocket systems currently being used by marines. The marines would prefer toto mate the US Navy's Naval Strike Missile to an existing vehicle being used by the marines rather than develop a totally new weapon system. The marines plan to produce and fire two prototype land-based antiship missile by the end of 2020. --Charles H Bogart, "USMC Returns to Its Roots" [Sic!!] CDSG Newsletter - Fall 2019, 8. This is the strongest insight I have seen showing what has moved CMC to the present apparently urgent need to reorganize. I can only imagine what his naval flag officer counterparts in Hawaii were telling him about Navy fears of another Pearl Harbor. Alas, Gen. Berger should be thinking about a future Wake Island!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJ Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 A 4 wheeled unmanned vehicle that launches NSM was shown. https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/04/here-is-our-first-look-at-the-usmcs-nmesis-nsm-being-launched-from-an-unmanned-jltv/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burncycle360 Posted April 30, 2021 Share Posted April 30, 2021 Quote At present, neither the navy nor the Marine Corps have quick react, line of sight, land-based weapons systems to guard naval base from direct attack by an enemy ship or boat ... General Berger believes that it is just a matter of time before an enemy using a water-borne vessel launches a gun, rocket or suicide ramming attack against a a target-rich undefended port. I seem to recall an asset that the USMC had that would have made a pretty good quick react, line of sight, land-based weapon system to protect against direct attack of that nature. It weighed about 70 tons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssnake Posted May 1, 2021 Share Posted May 1, 2021 Nah. Your memory is wrong, comrade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted November 3, 2021 Share Posted November 3, 2021 Guess someone might want to rethink the lack of tanks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now