Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed
7 Pages  1 2 3 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

> Military Thread V26

views
     
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 2 2018, 01:16 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
Sorry if repost, but have yall seen this? Any comment?

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-...ommandant-says/

QUOTE
12-man rifle squads, including a squad systems operator, commandant says

Marine Corps Commandant Robert B. Neller announced major changes to ground combat units, including the shift from a 13-man rifle squad to a 12-man squad and the addition of a squad systems operator along with transformations in the gear Marines carry.

ARLINGTON, Va. ― The Marine Corps rifle squad has lost a member but will gain a suite of capabilities in a servicewide initiative to bring powerful tools from information to precision fires to the lowest echelons of combat.

Commandant Robert B. Neller told a crowd of hundreds at the Marine Corps Association and Foundation Annual Ground Awards Dinner on Thursday that the new configuration would consist of three, three-Marine fire teams and a command element of three ― a squad leader, assistant squad leader and squad systems operator.

The systems operator will be the most tech-capable Marine in the formation, Neller said. Rather than create a new Military Occupational Specialty, the systems operator will come from the infantry ranks.

And all squad members will carry the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle.

Each squad will have a squad designated marksman, which is set to be the M38, an accurized version of the M27. The foundational formation of the infantry will also carry a common handheld tablet, multi-channel radio and replace M203 grenade launchers with the M320 grenade launcher.

But for all the accessory weight such as night vision goggles, a sound suppressor and laser sighting tools, other areas will have to be trimmed, he said.

“Everything that Marine wears is going to be changed,” Neller said.

In recent months there had been some debate on the size of the squad and the rifles they would carry.

The sizes being considered were 11-, 12-, or 14-man arrangements, and some considered having the squad systems operator carry the M4 carbine to reduce the load, as it is a smaller, lighter weapon.

But Neller said that he decided against keeping the M4 in the squad because he didn’t want the systems operator to stand out and be easily identifiable on the battlefield.

The M4 will eventually replace the M16A4 carried by most non-infantry Marines, Neller said.

While the squad loses a number in manpower, the 13-man variation will remain on paper because as with all the equipment and formation changes that Neller announced, it must be “reversible.”

Other changes included adding drone capabilities at the rifle company level, adding engineer platoons to infantry companies and shifting the engineer squad from nine Marines to 13, he said.

The company commander will also have an intelligence operations cell and a logistics cell at his or her disposal.

Javelin and 81 mm mortar formations will get their own MRZR, a two-person all-terrain vehicle now used by recon marines.

Neller said some changes would happen as quickly as in the coming months while others would take longer, such as developments to extend precision fire ranges and add Active Protection Systems to tanks and other ground vehicles.

SUSKLboy92
post Jul 2 2018, 01:41 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
QUOTE(Fat & Fluffy @ Jul 2 2018, 01:28 PM)
no mention of m249?
*
All squad members will carry the M27 IAR

Focus on accurate fire for suppression rather than high volume but inaccurate fire
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 3 2018, 11:51 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
now all those Opposition macai have to change their tune, start complaining that Pakatan won't increase defence budget whistling.gif

QUOTE(MichaelJohn @ Jul 2 2018, 02:17 PM)
I'm kinda keen to ask, since Malaysia is covered mostly by water, wouldn't it be better to fund more towards the navy and air force. (not cutting the armys budget or anything)
*
In other words, increase budget and only give to Navy and Air Force?

Firstly, there will be complaints of discrimination from the Army

Secondly, there really is no extra money to be had

Thirdly, patrol aircraft and boats are essential but it is cheaper to fund a company of foot soldiers especially in Msia where cost of living is cheaper and soldiers aren't that individually well-equipped
QUOTE(MilitaryMadness @ Jul 2 2018, 02:22 PM)
I am convinced the IAR is a scam run by HK on the USMC. laugh.gif

It is literally an overpriced HK416.
*
Maybe USMC have different mods? rails etc.

They really should develop high-capacity magazines though

This post has been edited by KLboy92: Jul 3 2018, 11:51 AM
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 3 2018, 11:13 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
Not sure of bunny already posted this

But interesting anyway to see new developments in the region threat picture ahem whistling.gif

user posted image
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 5 2018, 12:07 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
The change is apparently based on the experiences of their own troops, that is, a high rate of fire doesn't produce any effective suppression on experienced troops, it is an accurate fire that produces suppression.

QUOTE(MilitaryMadness @ Jul 4 2018, 08:00 AM)
When physical targets are not available, the fire of all infantry weapons must search the area occupied by enemy. Use marching fire. It reduces the accuracy of his fire and increases our confidence. Shoot short. Ricochets make nastier sounds and wounds.
*
This point is still valid. It is how to achieve suppression however that changed.

The volume of fire also will not change that much as they expect to issue each IAR man 20 x 30 rounds of ammo, and the IAR can sustain rate of fire that M16 can't and maintain accuracy at ranges which the M249 can't.

Also every IAR will include ACOG sights which I think is where a lot of the costs go. Squads will also each carry the M32 grenade launcher.

QUOTE(heavyduty @ Jul 4 2018, 07:41 PM)
M27 is the M16 while the HK416 is the M4, the USMC prefers full size rifles for it's line units. The people testing the M27 during the early 2010s said the same thing, we need volume of fire.the HK representative answer? No you're wrong
*
Army prefer volume
Marine claims accuracy is more important - that is the theory underlying these changes

What do you think?

This post has been edited by KLboy92: Jul 5 2018, 12:07 AM
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 6 2018, 01:23 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
QUOTE(zacky chan @ Jul 5 2018, 02:35 PM)
do they know how much money they need for that??  shakehead.gif
*
can buy 2 of each and call it an improvement rolleyes.gif
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 6 2018, 03:03 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
Layanlah sohai troll tu
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 6 2018, 08:30 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
A picture speaks a thousand words.

user posted image

user posted image

user posted image

user posted image
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 10 2018, 07:33 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
QUOTE(zacky chan @ Jul 9 2018, 08:22 AM)
agree with those words. hope to see an increase in asset and budget.  rclxm9.gif
hope nobody stupid in new govt suggesting we in a peace time and no need of increase budget or add asset.
so RMAF really lobbying for something huh.....good job  icon_rolleyes.gif
*
Why doesn't that commenter also say "look at Switzerland and Sweden public infrastructure, so much better than Msia, hope we get better funding an asset"?

Msia is behind most developed countries in A LOT of things, defence is only one area and sorry to say maybe not the most important

Msians should focus less on the arms race for sexy high tech jets etc and more on putting boots on the ground where they are needed

QUOTE(lucifer_666 @ Jul 10 2018, 12:18 PM)
True. I always wonder though, the effects of network-centric warfare, and to what extent it may or may not lead to micro-management. At one point, iirc, I've read that unit-level decision-making autonomy is one of the factors why the IDF forces prevailed against the neighbouring Arab armies that emphasise too much on hierarchy & chain of command.
*
There are many factors. Generally the quality of Arab soldiers in most areas is far below IDF. Even if they are given decision making autonomy it would be pointless as they wouldn't know what to do.
QUOTE(99FoxDemon @ Jul 10 2018, 07:02 PM)
can give it to us?  laugh.gif  brows.gif
*
Not sure its that worth it

Leo 1 and Leo 2 is like earth and sky

And Leo 2 and Leo 2A6 also like earth and sky
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 12 2018, 07:01 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
QUOTE(lucifer_666 @ Jul 12 2018, 02:25 PM)
Apart from Greece, the Baltic States sure are eager with NATO. Crimea certainly spooked them to the max.
*
Of course

The Baltic looks like easy meat to Putin

Trump isn't wrong actually. A more reasonable target is 2.5% though. But he's not wrong. They've been relying on the US as insurance for defence for too long.
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 13 2018, 10:46 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
QUOTE(MilitaryMadness @ Jul 13 2018, 10:31 AM)
This is so BS la. laugh.gif

If going by GDP percentage, Germany spends more on NATO defence than everybody else except US. Germany's 1.24% contribution is probably higher than UK's 2.10% considering its GDP is nearly 80% higher than UK.

Yet Germany kena marah also. Memang betul la kata NATO's own 1st sec gen: "NATO is created to keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down".
*
There's spending, effective spending and effective usage.

The Cold War German army was indeed the meat of the Fulda Gap forces.

But the modern German army is shockingly poor in readiness. Though it has contributed significantly to the Baltic Air Patrol and Standing NATO Maritime Group, amongst other initiatives, its nothing compared to what they used to do.

Meanwhile the British forces contribute a lot to NATO. Not only to BAP and SNMG, but in other ways - their AEW aircraft and drones, C17 and A400M fleet are in high demand amongst NATO partner nations, and QE2 will be heavily tasked in the next few years between NATO and US commitments. Plus of course the RN provides half of Europe's nuclear retaliation capability.
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 13 2018, 10:58 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
QUOTE(MilitaryMadness @ Jul 13 2018, 10:45 AM)
There is no way,shape or form today's Russia underwhelming armed forces is able to attack, much less invade any part of western Europe. Nowadays NATO has severely overreached its stated aim of protecting 'The North Atlantic region' from Soviet aggression by getting into ridiculous irrelevant conflicts in the Balkans , Libya and Afghanistan. It has since seems that NATO has morphed into the European extension of US foreign policy. If that is the case, isn't it appropriate that the US shoulder most of the costs?
*
EU and US foreign policy is at odds much more than is apparent. NATO is still very relevant to defend European interests.

And nobody should underestimate Russia. Putin is a fuckin dinosaur trying to fight the Cold War all over again and he still has a few capable army (and Navy!) units to do it with. Blink and he'll pull another Crimea on the Baltics. Even if the Russian army has drawn down significantly, so has everyone else - everybody is a shadow of their Cold War selves.
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 14 2018, 06:02 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
QUOTE(sniper on the roof @ Jul 14 2018, 09:42 AM)
But QE2 don't even have full air wing
*
Committed to at least 24 UK F35s fully operational by 2023, plus some USMC F35s, and surge capacity for even more if need be. That's more than zero at least. QE2 will be filling in the EU carrier gap while the US gets the delayed Ford-class fully operational. Thats part of why the US and UK are working so closely together on carrier ops.

This post has been edited by KLboy92: Jul 14 2018, 06:05 PM
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 14 2018, 06:51 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
QUOTE(sniper on the roof @ Jul 14 2018, 06:35 PM)
France got carrier no?
*
One carrier, ONE

Charles de Gaulle is in midlife refit. Should be back in action next year. But you need at least 2 to always have one operational, because it can't be available all the time. Then you end up with embarrassments like CDG going back to port in the middle of Libyan operations.

Pity that the French cancelled carrier 2. The Brits conmitted to QE and POW both, and that's a big part of what makes them still capable of independent action and great contribution to NATO both.

This post has been edited by KLboy92: Jul 14 2018, 06:52 PM
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 14 2018, 11:04 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
QUOTE(lucifer_666 @ Jul 14 2018, 10:30 PM)
How about Pow? What's the complement? And which of these two will be deployed/stationed in the far east btw?
*
Ships spend as much time in port as they do at sea. Having 2 carriers doesn't mean both will be used at the same time, though it can and will be done during wartime. E.g. the US has a requirement for 11 to 12 carriers on the basis that it wants to have 4 active carriers at any time.

So when QE is deployed POW will be doing maintenance, training, refit etc and vice versa.*

Complement is expected to be either 24 F35s, or 12 F35s and 9+ helicopters, but the ships are large enough that complement will be very flexible - the QEs can carry 36 F35s and 4+ helis in full strike mode and even more, up to 60+ aircraft in overload conditions - but having more aircraft can actually reduce combat effectiveness.

The QEs are unlikely to ever come to the Far East except perhaps much later in their lives. We will probably see some visiting Type 26s or more likely Type 31es thoug, travelling through to connect with the Aussies.

*Similarly the UK is expected by 2023 to have 24 operational F35s, 18+ in training or maintenance, and 3 test aircraft for a total of 45+.
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 14 2018, 11:59 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
QUOTE(lucifer_666 @ Jul 14 2018, 11:18 PM)
I guess I was referring to this. not permanently of course..
*
Meh. Unlikely. IINM as I said earlier, QE once operational is expected to take up carrier duties in the EU so the US can task a carrier to the Persian Gulf again.

At the moment the Gulf is "gapped" while two active carriers are in the Pacific and one is in the EU area. Rest are in port.
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 15 2018, 05:38 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
QUOTE(lucifer_666 @ Jul 15 2018, 12:05 AM)
And BoJo is no longer in the game for now
*
BoJo?
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 17 2018, 12:19 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
QUOTE(minizian @ Jul 17 2018, 01:27 AM)
Much Appreciated man. Clausewitz isnt he like bapak on field of defence studies kind of things?
No war tactcs man. Sound like his story book je
*
In like fuckin 1810, sure
But his calculations are no longer applicable unless you are fighting a war with brass cannon and muskets

What's left is his thoughts on strategy which nowadays is so generalised its as relevant as Suntzu's Art of War

Would be better off looking for writeups of Soviet and US Cold War doctrine, even though outdated it would have some relevance still and its a good background to contrast with today's conflicts
SUSKLboy92
post Jul 17 2018, 05:53 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
RIP SU-57

Russian menteri said its because its so fricking awesome, no need to produce rolleyes.gif

Totally not because of budget problem or failure to have enough stealth advantage to defeat the F35 let alone F22 rolleyes.gif

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/russia-a...018-7?r=US&IR=T

QUOTE
Russian Deputy Defence Minister Yuri Borisov ... said, per The Diplomat: “The Su-57 is considered to be one of the best aircrafts produced in the world. Consequently, it does not make sense to speed up work on mass-producing the fifth-generation aircraft.

SUSKLboy92
post Jul 17 2018, 07:54 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
189 posts

Joined: Aug 2015
From: Cherasboy
QUOTE(sniper on the roof @ Jul 17 2018, 06:08 PM)
So now how? continue re-hash the SU-3x over and over again?
*
Glorious Rusiya Velikiy not need weak and dishonourable capitalist stealth technology, will defeat imperialist aggression with power of proven Soviet Engineering, vodka and AK-47s like real Russian man

7 Pages  1 2 3 > » 
Bump Topic Topic ClosedOptions New Topic
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.1175sec    0.47    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 6th December 2025 - 09:31 AM