ComNavOps has often criticized the Marine Corps for what
it’s become. A once proud and valuable fighting
force has been reduced to silliness and irrelevance. So, what would ComNavOps’ ideal Marine Corps
look like? What would its main mission
be? What forces would it need? I’ve described some of this in passing in
previous posts and comments but here is the collected and condensed summary.
As always, it starts with mission. What is the Marine’s mission – its purpose?
There are two answers to that: legal (Title 10) and practical (what’s
actually needed)
Mission – Legal
Requirements
Title 10 [see Ref 1 for the text of Title 10, Section 8063]
defines the purpose of the Marine Corps which consists of the following stated
purposes:
- seizure or defense of advanced naval bases
- conduct of such land operations as may be essential to the
prosecution of a naval campaign
- provide detachments and organizations for service on armed
vessels of the Navy
- provide security detachments for the protection of naval
property at naval stations and bases
- perform such other duties as the President may direct
- develop, in coordination with the Army and the Air Force,
those phases of amphibious operations that pertain to the tactics, technique,
and equipment used by landing forces
- responsible, in accordance with integrated joint
mobilization plans, for the expansion of peacetime components of the Marine
Corps to meet the needs of war
Notice that it doesn’t actually say that the Marines must be
the ones to conduct amphibious operations, only that they jointly develop the
“tactics, technique, and equipment” for such operations. Note, also, that there is no explicit mention
of amphibious assaults, only “operations”, which can be any action initiated or
enabled from the sea. Again, that means
that amphibious assaults, while certainly one example of an “amphibious
operation”, are not the only possible action.
Thus, the claim that many make that the Marines must be capable of
performing amphibious assaults is not true, strictly speaking.
Mission – Practical
Requirements
Legal requirements aside, what missions are actually
pertinent to US military operations, in general, and suited to the Marines, in
particular?
Main Mission – Port seizure (a form of amphibious assault,
thereby satisfying the legal requirement)
Secondary Missions – naval base defense, embassy
protection, and the like
Regarding the more commonly envisioned amphibious assault, I’ve
said, repeatedly, that I don’t see amphibious assaults as being strategically
necessary in the foreseeable future so what does that leave? As we’ve often noted, any ground action
(adage: the seat of purpose is on the
land) requires a secure port for sustainment.
Over the beach supply cannot support a large ground action. For example, Normandy was all about securing
ports. Thus, the Marine’s main mission
should be port seizure. I’d add airfield
seizure to that except that the Army/Air Force once had that mission and,
presumably, still do. If not, that would
also be part of the Marine’s mission.
Many would suggest that the Marine’s primary – or, at worst,
secondary – mission is to be the nation’s first response force. Once upon a time that was true, though not a
legal requirement, but now the combination of Army/Air Force can respond faster
and with more force than the Marines can.
Thus, first response is not a Marine Corps mission although they might
assist in such a mission if circumstances warranted.
So, having defined the main mission as port seizure, what is
needed to execute that mission?
Size
Two divisions (10,000 men, each) ought to be sufficient to
execute a successful port seizure. If
you need more than that, you’ve probably bitten off too big a bite and should
look elsewhere for a port to seize.
There is also the practical concern that 10,000+ men crammed
into the relatively small area of a port is beginning to get too physically
crowded to be practical and would offer an enemy too concentrated a target.
In addition, one brigade (3000 men) should be dedicated to
specializing in the secondary missions.
Add in a 50% extra troop level for logistic support tasks
and you get a total troop strength of around 34,500.
Division Unit Types
- 3x Assault Brigade
- 1x Construction Battalion (300 troops) specifically
dedicated to port clearing and initial repair
- 1x Construction Battalion (300 troops) dedicated
to road construction and repair to enable landed supplies and forces to quickly
disperse outward
- 1x Harbor clearance and dredging unit
(specialized vessels, 100 troops)
- 1x MCM – land (100 troops)
- 1x MCM – sea (100 troops)
- 1x Recon Drone Company
Equipment
- Self-propelled anti-aircraft guns (think ZSU)
- Self-propelled anti-aircraft missile units
- Mobile C-RAM
- Mobile EW
- High speed landing craft with capacity for two
squads
- Amphibious tank like LVT(A) for anti-personnel
and anti-building and anti-fortification
- Small, very fast, very maneuverable assault
helos carrying one squad each; very fast
insertion/unloading/departure (think Vietnam Huey) unlike current helos and
V-22
- Specially designed, high speed attack transports
- Lots of self-propelled mortars for use in urban
areas requiring indirect fire.due to high rise buildings
- Combat Engineering Vehicles for debris clearance
Note some of the things that are not listed as equipment,
meaning that they are not useful or required under this concept: AAV/ACV, fixed wing aircraft, ‘jeeps’,
anything towed
Aviation
This is the big question.
Does a Marine Corps need its own air force? For the port seizure mission, I see a need
for a heavy helo component providing both attack and troop assault
transport. Helos are used for rapid
insertion of troops at key locations in and around the port. Attack helos provide the suppression and fire
support needed to land the ground force from the air and sea.
I do not see a need for a fixed wing component. Fixed wing aircraft are nearly useless for
ground support in an urban area and are far too vulnerable to ground anti-air
weapons. Aerial supremacy is a fixed
wing function but is a Navy responsibility so no Marine aircraft are needed for
that.
A division should have a helo component of something on the
order of 50 attack helos and 50 transport helos. This would require the use of three big deck
amphibious ships.
I’ve often stated that helos are not survivable over the
battlefield. Well, port seizure is an
exception to that rule though only under this specific scenario. The helos must be supported with ground
forces applying relentless attack against the enemy’s anti-air assets. Further, the helos do not fly overland to any
great extent and thus avoid much of the enemy’s anti-air threat. Finally, as described in the equipment list,
the helos must be designed for very rapid insertion, which is the polar
opposite of the MV-22 or any existing helo.
The idea of helos spending time over a battlefield is,
indeed, a non-survivable scenario as is trying to land in giant, open fields
using snail-slow descents and takeoffs as MV-22s are required to do. The helos in this scenario, as in Vietnam,
would use a gut-wrenching drop, a five second unloading, and bounce back into
the air heading directly away from the battlefield. You might want to look at videos of Vietnam
helo insertions to see just what we were once capable of.
One of the reasons helos had such high attrition rates in
Vietnam was that we attempted to use them to insert troops directly into high
threat areas. In this concept, helos
would be transporting troops around the periphery of the battle more so than
directly into the threat. We also
attempted helo ops without much firepower support, depending on surprise to
achieve survivability. For this
scenario, naval gunfire should be used to suppress enemy anti-air fire as the
helos are inserting. Of course, we have
no naval gun support but that glaring weakness is another topic.
Another aspect of aviation is the role of the fleet
carrier. Many people believe that our
carriers will supply ground support aircraft.
Setting aside the fact that we have no carrier based, ground support
aircraft, that is not the role of the fleet carrier. The carrier group’s job is to provide distant
interdiction of enemy counterattacks.
That means preventing enemy naval response, overland troop
reinforcement, cruise missile attacks, air attacks, etc. Typically, this would be done at significant
distances from the landing site and the carrier would not be in range to
provide effective ground support.
Ships
Amphibious Aviation Ship – Looking at the equipment
list, it is obvious that a new type of amphibious aviation ship, geared toward
port seizure, would be needed. The ship
would carry 30+ helos (attack and transport) but not troops. It would be purely an aviation ship – a
landing support carrier. As such, it
would be, conceptually, half the volume and displacement of today’s big deck
amphibious ships. Troop insertion helos
would be supplied and serviced by this ship but would pick up their loads from
the attack transports, as needed, using the same combat-quick ‘bounce’ loading
as for insertion unloadings.
Attack Transport – As we’ve previously discussed, WWII style
attack transports would transport and land troops. Landing craft would consist of around 30
reusable landing craft (think Higgins boat) as opposed to the sinlge use
AAV/ACV. While a well deck is an option,
I would lean towards a WWII style attack transport.
Basing
My Marine force would not function like today’s
Marines. There would be no deployments,
no extended MEU-like cruises floating around, doing nothing, just waiting for
something to happen. Instead, the forces
would embark from CONUS or, possibly, a central base such as in the Middle East
or Pearl Harbor. A port seizure is never
going to be a spur of the moment operation so there is no need for
deployments. The force would be home
based, training relentlessly – nothing else.
Mission
Methodology
The key to the success of the port seizure mission is
speed. This means a rapid approach to
minimize defensive reaction time. For
example, despite knowing pretty much where and when the Allies would invade
Europe, the Germans were still slow to react and were unable to mount a rapid,
coordinated counter attack. Even if the
enemy knows we’re coming, if we can hit fast enough and hard enough (shock), we
can still be successful.
Command
This force would have little need for a top-heavy command
structure. Here is the envisioned
command:
Commandant = General
Staff = Colonels, as needed
Division = General (1x per division, 2x total)
Brigade = Colonel
Thus, the entire force would have a total of 3 Generals and
a handful of Colonels. Hopefully, this
would create a smaller, more focused force.
Missing
What are we currently missing in order to execute my vision
of the Marine Corps? Well, almost
everything! Setting aside the missing
mission, organization, doctrine, operational planning, command and control
structure, and mindset, we lack the following equipment (partial list):
- Large caliber naval fire support
- Amphibious aviation ship
- Attack transport
- Landing craft
- Anti-aircraft vehicles
- Self-propelled mortars
- EW
- C-RAM
- MCM
- Amphibious tank
- Transport helo
- Combat engineering vehicles
- Harbor construction vessels
In short, we lack everything. Almost nothing we currently have is useful
other than largely untrained bodies.
Conclusion
There you have it.
I’ve laid out a coherent rationale for the existence of the Marine Corps
and a description of their mission and what is needed to execute that
mission. Contrast my vision to today’s
Marine Corps vision – to the extent that they even have one. Which one would you like to devote your taxes
to supporting?
___________________________
[1] Following is the text of Title 10, §8063.
Title 10, §8063 United States Marine Corps: composition;
functions
(a) The Marine Corps, within the Department of the Navy,
shall be so organized as to include not less than three combat divisions and
three air wings, and such other land combat, aviation, and other services as
may be organic therein. The Marine Corps shall be organized, trained, and
equipped to provide fleet marine forces of combined arms, together with
supporting air components, for service with the fleet in the seizure or defense
of advanced naval bases and for the conduct of such land operations as may be
essential to the prosecution of a naval campaign. In addition, the Marine Corps
shall provide detachments and organizations for service on armed vessels of the
Navy, shall provide security detachments for the protection of naval property
at naval stations and bases, and shall perform such other duties as the
President may direct. However, these additional duties may not detract from or
interfere with the operations for which the Marine Corps is primarily
organized.
(b) The Marine Corps shall develop, in coordination with the
Army and the Air Force, those phases of amphibious operations that pertain to
the tactics, technique, and equipment used by landing forces.
(c) The Marine Corps is responsible, in accordance with
integrated joint mobilization plans, for the expansion of peacetime components
of the Marine Corps to meet the needs of war.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments will be moderated for posts older than 7 days in order to reduce spam.