ComNavOps occasionally has distinguished visitors drop by and today is such a day. We have a guest post provided by WireguidedMarine. Regular readers will recognize the name from his frequent and insightful comments throughout the blog and especially concerning Marine and amphibious matters. Indeed, it is exactly these topics that WireguidedMarine offers his unique perspective on in today’s post. He is a retired Marine SNCO who started off using missiles and eventually moved to Intel. He later went to college on the GI Bill where he majored in history. An authoritative and unique perspective, indeed! Enjoy!
____________________________________________________________
Recently the Navy and Marine Corps have begun to focus on the Pacific and China
One way to bring some capability back to the Fleet is to reinstate the Marine Detachments (MarDets). Until the 1990’s, Marines were regular components of battleship and aircraft carrier crews. During the Cold War, detachments usually consisted of two officers with 35 to 44 Marines on cruisers and two officers with 46 to 64 enlisted on carriers. By the late 1990’s, budget and manpower constraints had reduced these numbers by half on carriers before being eliminated altogether. As the regulations at the time specified, Marines were: “To provide for operations ashore, as a part of the ships landing force; or as a part of the landing force of Marines from ships of the fleet or subdivision thereof; or as an independent force for limited operations.” Does this not sound familiar to us in the present day?
 |
| MarDets - More of Good Thing |
These Marines would have no major impact on carrier operations. Transport would be by MH-60S Knighthawk, a good surrogate for the Marines’ UH-1Y and integrated with the carrier air wing. Current plans are for about half a dozen Knighthawks to be in a Carrier Strike Group, enough to transport most of the Leathernecks in one flight. Another option is that one or two MV-22s can be cross-decked as necessary, or used to help justify the overdue replacement of the old C-2A as both a cargo and tactical transport on the carrier.
Marines I knew who had been part of these MarDets talked of how they worked with the crews of the SH-3s (and later SH-60s) on all types of insertions including on land, on ships, at night, and in bad weather. They were the Captain’s personal assault force when necessary. Not to take away from the SEALs, but these roles of hostile ship-boarding and raiding are tailor-made for Marines. This would ease up demand on the already stretched thin SEALs.
I believe the MarDets need to be placed on cruisers again as well. A smaller contingent of one officer and 25 enlisted Marines would add to the flexibility of any task force.
A CSG under my plan with a carrier and two cruisers would have over 100 Marines fully integrated into the force. MH-60s (and possibly MV-22s) organic to the group would provide airlift. Any tasking more than the CSG’s Marines could handle might be brought in by the ESG with the LHD or LPD to handle the C3 and logistics. The Marines would be a small enough unit to get in and out quickly and would have naval gunfire (5”/54, 5”/62, 155mm AGS), MH-60Rs, and fast movers to provide the support needed during their brief time ashore.
I like the idea of bringing back the MarDets. They are the Marine Corps’ past, and I believe they can be the Marine Corps’ future.
Bibliography
The Naval Institute Guide To The Ships And Aircraft Of The U.S. Fleet Norman Polmar 18th edition 2005
Is there even much utility to a 25 man Marine detachment on a cruiser? It's not even the size of an infantry platoon - which seems almost too small to be of much practical use.
ReplyDeleteAnd although this MarDet could be used for VBSS, we we already train/use sailors from the ship's company for that function.
One related concept that sort of make sense to me is to place a landing company (~200 marines) on an LCS. LCS has lots more storage space for marines and their gear than a cruiser.
MarDets are gone from Capitol Navy ships and that was the smartest move ever made by the Marines.
ReplyDeleteThe Navy doesn't need 100 more toilet cleaners, or deck buffers. Those Marines are more useful in their Gator Navy.
There IS NO JOB the Marines have to do aboard a CV or other large Navy ship that any common sailor cannot do.
Form up the weapons Divisions into 100 man ad hoc Naval landing parties led by SEALS.
Put the SEALS on those ships, they are Navy and the sailors will have Sailor heroes to look up too.
SEALs are great special ops fighters. But having them lead sailors in that large a group would waste their talents and throw those other sailors into a difficult spot: having to keep up with and fight alongside Navy SEALS.
DeleteMarines are perfect for small small unit tactics. And there is nothing that prevents SEALs from still doing the super-specialized missions they do.
Those Marines would be utilized as sea going bellhops for the Officers on the bridge. Their main mission would be cleaning shitters, buffing deck tile and swabbing decks.
Delete"The MarDet will never be used in the role you see as commando's they will be honor guards, aides and brig turnkeys as well as targets for harassment by every other Sailor on that ship."
Marine Detachments aboard US Navy capitol ships is the biggest waste of Marine personnel than any other Marine post.
Take the sailors in the weapons divisions train them and let them do the missions.
HELL, Let the Army put some Rangers aboard and let them do the job if the SEALS cannot.
"There IS NO JOB the Marines have to do aboard a CV or other large Navy ship that any common sailor cannot do."
Being in a MarDet aboard a US Navy capitol ship is the shittest job any Marine can have.
Let the Navy handle it's own little landing party.
Neither SEALs, nor Marines, nor Rangers have any purpose being assigned as ships company. If these units show up on a ship it should be for a specific mission.
DeleteNow the idea of having small task units composed of one-to-many ships with USA/USMC/USCG/SOF *is* appealing and has a long history...
Anon, this particular post was written by a guest author, WireGuidedMarine. I won't presume to speak for him but it is also unlikely he'll see your comment at this point. I'll try to make him aware in case he wants to respond.
DeleteIn the meantime, maybe I can get you to expound a bit. You say that SEALs/Marines/Rangers have no purpose being assigned to a ship. WGM describes a purpose and a reasonable one. Further, having them assigned on an ongoing basis allows a great deal of flexibility and speed of response. With that said, what do you see as the specific drawback(s) to having a non-naval force assigned to Navy ships? You clearly don't think it's a good idea. Now explain why.
Not a bad idea, and in a unconstrained human resource world, even incredibly useful. So, since people aren't free, the USN and USMC are top end limited, and every body is already spoken for, what do you propose to give up to add this capability to the CSG (by my count something like a thousand Marines)?
ReplyDeleteI think most if not all can be found in the headquarters elements. There are some extra bodies "saluting the flagpole" and not much else. If each division, wing, and service group HQ gave up 80 or so Marines, that would make up the shortfall The MarDets would create.
DeleteRight now, there is talk that some combat veterans in the Corps are being denied reenlistment. The MarDets will help keep more combat arms Marines in the service and eliminate the excess.
It will also broaden the experience of sea duty throughout the Corps faster, increase Navy/Marine interaction, and allow for more small unit leadership.
MarDets have ended the careers of more young enlisted Marines than any other duty.
DeleteNo real Marine wishes to serve aboard a Navy ship with 5,000 sailors.
Marines belong on the Gator Navy ships at least there is some common ground between the gator sailors and the Marines, there is NO common ground between Blue water sailors and Marines.
Navy interaction?
ReplyDelete"increase Navy/Marine interaction"
Example: "hey grunt, grunt, grunt come on shoot me with your gun, come on pussy shoot me with your gun (takes gun away from Marine) grunt, grunt fuckin' stupid grunt"
Navy ship, Marine will get no justice.
Career ending path.