Let’s talk about the restructuring of the marine corps to disrupt Chinese naval projection in the pacific theater.
They are procuring a bunch of land based anti ship missiles, cruise missiles, and surface to air missile systems. The idea is to spread out these units on small islands in the pacific to screen for Chinese vessels.
Do you think it’s a good move?
Those tomahawk missiles are there so the marines can sink oil tankers and grain ships heading to China. Let me remind everyone that China imports 3/4 of their oil and 3/4 of their food.
Those aren't tomahawks, they look like NSM. There are plans for ground-based SM6 and tomahawk for anti-air/anti-ship but it's prototype at this point. Whether NSM has the range we need in Indo-Pacific is unclear. I'm thinking not.
That’s incorrect, the artillery unit receiving tomahawks d already received their first launchers. There was a ceremony
I'm talking about the Typhon anon. These little JLTV with containers are a meme and offer meme capabilities. Better than nothing, but still a meme.
I mean it's just a game of tubes. Typhon is 4 Mk 41 tubes, the funny JLTV is one tube. If you have four JLTV tubes it's equal to one Typhon.
this is what modern naval warfare really looks like and it's fucking disgusting
The typhon is a fucking system my nagger, it's literally a 4 truck system. The jeep with a tube is just a jeep with a tube, you can't reload it, you can't fire it without targetting and radar, in short it's a fucking meme. Oshkosh just trying to milk the platform. Many such cases. Here is the Australian equivalent they are shilling here with the bushmaster albeit with NSM.
Bushmasters are still in production?
Yea the government keeps giving them money to build them in Bendigo with union jobs in a Labour held electorate, they just got a $160 million contract for more this year. Donating them to Ukraine was great PR plus it gave them a reason to recontract for lost inventory. They'll probably do something similar for hawkei soon (Aus JLTV equivalent: pic rel).
It is spelt 'Labor', not LaboUr. We only have three parties so you should be able to spell them correctly.
Hawkei is not a JLTV equivalent. Sadly, it is much more limited in adaptability.
>It is much more capable
Ftfy
>actually shilling for that piece of shit
fucking hell.
Are you retarded? literally nobody believes that.
The marines just bought the gator radar. Plus targeting data can come from sats
This is useful for shooting down UAVs but it has no value as a ground-based deterrent or area denial system. Also you have to think anon, what's the fucking point of putting it on a jeep if it needs a truck anyway and another truck behind it plus a radar system BUT you still have no ability to reload. How about instead just shoot it from a truck in the first place given it gives you more tubes anyway.
I said it once and I'll say it again JLTV/jeep based VLS are a meme and you've gotta be 1.oshkosh or 2.eating fucking rocks to think it makes sense.
Typhon is the superior system and you can't change my mind.
> Typhon is the superior system and you can't change my mind.
Sure but it isn’t very mobile. For example it can’t be embarked on a navy ship and set up on an island. The JLTV system is the superior at that. As far as targeting goes satellites, ships, aircraft that aren’t big enough to carry cruise missiles of their own. There’s tons of ways to use these
>it can’t be embarked on a navy ship and set up on an island
>both systems require heaps of trucks
It's literally a portable battery, it's no different to deploying a couple of himars anon, is it marginally less mobile than a single shoot tube, sure, but so what. One tube isn't a capability and since it requires a fleet of other shit, including trucks to make it work it's hardly mobile either.
i think the point is you can't fit a typhon truck on an lcac
Isn’t it an army system anyway? The army doesn’t have shipborne expeditionary units constantly deployed.
If you can deploy a himars you can deploy a typhon, simple as. Yes it was developed for army by locksneed but since this is really the only option for long-range ground-based strike I can't see the marines not acquiring it. Unless they think they can get more range out of PrSM and they can make it a viable anti-ship missile. If the latter obtains then you'll see more himars with PrSM. But what you absolutely won't see is a single tube JLTV variant for LRS or area denial. I can see use cases for the NSM variant but not the memetube version and that's because it's retarded.
> If you can deploy a himars you can deploy a typhon, simple as
You aren’t qualified to make this statement. You certainly can’t deploy a typhon system on a single LCAC. 2 LCACs can be preloaded on an LPD. An entire missile system loaded across 2 LCACs wouldn’t be preloaded over something like a light armored recon platoon. So you’d have to debark those assets first and then load it all up. You have an army brain do you really don’t understand expeditious measures
>has an army brain
Says the crayon eating cunt that wants to use a single tube launcher that need three trucks to support it. Muhh expeditious measures. Jesus the absolute fucking state of the average marine.
Space is important on a ship
Yes but having a functional capability is more important. Not to invoke Clausewitz but If you want to invade Vienna, invade fucking Vienna. If you want area denial do area denial. If you want to larp at area denial then buy a single memetube with no reload that needs three trucks to support it.
Why is a non-American even talking about this? You've no frame of reference.
I've worked with marines. What further frame of reference do you think is required.
In what capacity? I feel like your getting a lot of use out what you call "working with marines."
>you can't call marines stupid as a non-american
I can and I did. I'm also not doxing myself for your benefit anon. The marines I met were good blokes but the crayon eating glue drinking meme obtained.
I am a marine and I am smarter than u
What's your favourite flavour?
I could never afford Crayola I ate craZart.
i love the new universal anti-everything sm-6
yeah its a big part of the entire belt and road initiative since the infrastructure developed will let them reduce dependency on the straits of malacca, particularly what they're doing in Burma, Pakistan and Russia (which is kind of separate from BRI). But it will never eliminate it because its just inherently cheaper to move shit by water with the exception of pipeline oil/gas. That infrastructure out of Russia will take the longest to build, probably over a decade if ever since no western companies will touch it.
I think when it comes down to it the idea of a Chinese war against the USA is similar to the Confederate hopes for an Anglo-French intervention in the civil war. It has some geostrategic appeal but was headed off at the time by Russia and the Union having a strategic partnership such that if Britain pulled the trigger they would lose ~60% of their grain supply overnight.
this is what the containerized tomahawk looks like. this setup is just a VLS cell on a tilting dingus so it can also do SM6 (IIRC), or presumably anything that fits in a Mk 41 presumably.
OP's pic is the NSM launcher vehicle.
>a jeep on some tiny fucking rock lugging around a single ASROC and a UAV with a dipping sonar
>kills a billion dollar Chinese SSBN
ain't asymmetry a bitch
>2!!! vlp-16s?
> Take missiles off ships that can move.
> Put missiles on island that can't.
The same brilliant strategy that left the Japanese Army starving on islands after the US Navy cut their LOS.
But you can't sink the islands and those missiles can hit far further than any WW2-era artillery ever could.
It's more of a tactic to restrict PLAN movement and funnel them into disadvantageous positions
>you can't sink the islands
You can sure bomb the hell out of the Marines on them. And it's harder to hide on a weensy island.
The marines have bulldozers and earth movers. They could easily spend a day fortifying positions and then send the construction equipment back on ship.
You mean after the Japanese navy lost control of each area in turn, buying them time even in situations where their logistics were disrupted? Contingencies are good things even if you're losing.
buying these for cheaper allows you to free up those ships to do other shit without having to build more ships
Bro we dont need to sink those tankers when we control the ports sending stuff to China
yeah
i agreed it's a good move
don't know how they're gonna handle logistics inside chink air defense and anti ship missile range though
Submersible supply drones? Cow ship brings them in close, drone delivers missiles and crayons. They already have tanker drones for carriers and iirc the navy is developing several sub drones.
It makes a lot of sense. The marines should be made up entirely of MEUs, ARGs, and littoral combat teams. They’re a unique fighting force that no other country has equivalents for. It doesn’t make sense to shoehorn them into being a smaller army
Thos was exactly the internal talk in the Corps when I was in from 08-12. We were deploying like a second Army because of GWOT needs, but the institution was already planning for a return to form that we are now seeing fulfilled in force restructuring and stated mission.
Same. I was in 10-16 in an LAR unit. After my first afghan deployment most of the training was focused on conventional threats
Civvie but watched Marines rehearse landing on an island and then the next part of the exercise was striking (simulated) another island with weapons brought onto the first island. It was pretty interesting. Like taking Oahu and then firing missiles at Maui.
The Marines I know are still seething hard over losing their tanks
Are they really
Yeah, one in particular has gone on several rants about how the Marines will be a specific disadvantage without being able to have IMMEDIATE ARMOR SUPPORT in a landing, and kept citing "when I was in Iraq" nonstop. They're all old gwot vets who were basically playing Army Jr their entire enlistment and are upset that's changing.
This might be a retarded question, but how come the Marines aren't getting Griffins?
I've heard it said before that Abrams are too heavy for island warfare, but are Griffins also too heavy? Or is it just that there isn't really a need for armored vehicles beyond IFVs in modern islsnd warfare?
just different doctrine (which is kind of retarded cause having tanks is better than not having them and IFV guns are not like a 120mm cannon).
the weight limit for LCACs is at about 60 tons, reason why marines kept the older M1A1 in service when the army moved on to the A2.
LCUs have a weight limit of 200 tons but are much slower and may have problems depending on the seabed.
>the weight limit for LCACs is at about 60 tons
Aren't those currently being replaced with the LCAC (SSC)? That one has a 74 ton payload.
i heard they were looking at upgrading or replacing their fleet but i dont know how that went.
either way the weight limit is not a factor anymore since they've already decided to decommission their abrams fleet.
Shermans were used extensively in the island hopping campaigns in WW2. It was basically a Tiger compared to paltry Jap tanks.
M48s and M60s were also heavily used in Vietnamese jungles.
I might be completely retarded about this, but would enemy ships ever get close enough where you could reliably fire on it with something like this? Is a solid tank round going to do anything against the armor?
Anything is possible - the Brits used a Carl Gustaf to bombard a ship in the Falklands once - but practically, no. It's for supporting infantry against other infantry lingering on the island.
>Do you think it’s a good move?
Yes, it just means the army takes on and delivers capabilities the marines had in-house (ala armour). Just means they are more focused on littoral maneuver and hopping on islands to set up long range strike to deny chang. Will it make a difference in a china conflict? Depends on the contingency. Is it a good idea?
Well if the Indo-Pacific is the future theatre then absolutely yes.
Marines will sit on cvck sandbars while aviation Chad's do all the real work
Finally a good thread
Will you stop spamming this thread?
Sorry you don’t like it but no, we will discuss this topic
Fuck you Armatard
He will never stop.
>Not even trying bumps
Organic.
>The idea is to spread out these units on small islands in the pacific to screen for Chinese vessels.
>Do you think it’s a good move?
No, it fucking sucks and I bet this decision was made to bolster the pockets of the usual suspects. Dumping your forces spread out across a bunch of island means supply becomes an issue.
GMLRS launching JLTV when?
Tomahawk version already exist
Can this fire a Trident or SM-3?
If only
It's literally a Mk41 VLS stuck on a light vehicle. It can technically fire anything that fits in one. Tomahawk, SM-2, SM-3, SM-6, ESSM, and VL-LRASM are all technically doable.
This is to say that it is now technically possible to shoot down an ICBM with a jeep.
>This is to say that it is now technically possible to shoot down an ICBM with a jeep.
USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA
You missed some of the more esoteric options. ESSM can quadpack on the single tube JLTV, turning it into half a NASAMs launcher. VL-ASROC can fit. Nulka aerial decoys can quadpack on the ExVLS adaptor. You could have a battery of these little VLS jeeps on an island and have them exhibit the radar signature of a cruiser.
Yes, fire one fucking tomahawk from a jeep, have a fucking 50tn truck behind you to reload then another one behind it to enable targeting. Jeep's with VLS are a meme.
>Trident
is 40ft long anon.
Why exactly do you want to jump through al the hoops (build this thing, put it on a ship, load it into a landing craft, move it onto a beach, drive it ashore, drive it around on land, then launch the missile) instead of launching the missile from teh ship's VLS?
Because then the ship can be somewhere else.
>instead of launching the missile from teh ship's VLS
Because the fleet captures the island, stations missiles on it then moves on.
It's just a way to take and hold territory and deny that patch of ocean to the opposing navy. They're not terribly obvious either and can probably be hidden from satellite so the enemy has to do a low overflight of every island to know what's out there and half those flights are going to through contested airspace and would be shot down if they even did get there.
Because it's hard to sink an island.
are these vehicles drones?
Yep
Should've made a universal mount/erector so it could launch whatever missile you want
The chink fears the mobile Minuteman III
No need. HIMARS is good enough. It’s crazy the marines are going to have
>GMLRS
>PrSM
>NSM
>SM6
>Tomahawk
All other countries marines are just light infantry without any of this strategic gear
armaturdsniffer thread
Dissolve the marine corps and make them reunite with the navy.
Nah
Yes, no reason for them to exist as a seperate branch.
there are many reasons and you are a retard and baiter
Whats one reason that the marines shouldn't be integrated into the navy as a branch?
1) they're already integrated enough
2) diluting the only branch with an obesity rate under 15 percent is retarded
>verification not required
>diluting
Are you stupid?
xddddd
when were they ever part of the navy?
They've always been part of the Navy.
Something tells me that a force that has to 're-invent itself', 'restructure', 're-orient' etc. every five years is just doing it to cover up the fact that they're a redundant boondoggle that exists solely to allow its former generals to remain in their post-retirement consultant positions.
If you think that littoral forces are great after the smashing success story that was the littoral combat ship, go right ahead.
I'm sure dumping all the busted jeeps or whatever they call them wil go great on the surplus market in 2028.
This is their first restructuring in decades. Your reply has been entirely disregarded
So you're saying they were actually obsolete decades ago, check.
t. Armynagger
having a specialized naval combat force for a nation that explicitly relies on its naval power is not retarded. The USMC provides a rapid response force with capabilities unmatched on earth. Humans need the ocean to economically transport big heavy stuff over long distances, airplanes just don't cut it. Armies are big and heavy, so the easiest way to get them to another land in a large enough force to contend with them, is by the ocean. For this you need specialized naval infantry with enough firepower to do something once they get there.
Cry harder Army fag, the doctrine and capabilities required for the naval landings you were forced into during ww2 were developed by the Marine Corps over decades and by Great Britain, a naval empire. Yes D-day was the largest naval invasion in history, and half of it was done by the Canadians and Britons. The Marine Corps conducted several nearly equivalent naval invasions that allowed us to defeat the Japanese empire.
Marines put the stars and stripes on mount Sirabachi, and thus the Corps will live for 1,000 years.
Unironically yes. For as long as I can remember, the marines were just a smaller army. This shift actually gives them a purpose.
The Corps is poor. The army has had a half dozen M16 replacement programs that wasted millions of dollars for no results. The Marines had to lie about getting a new Automatic Rifle to get a new standard rifle, but actually followed through. The bulk of Marine Armor in the Gulf War was M60A3s when the Army had M1s out the ass.
The Marines are using the "Pivot to the Pacific" to justify getting a bunch of shit funded, like:
>AAV-7 Replacement
>LAV Replacement (eventually)
>King Stallions
>JLTV
>ROGUE Fires
Probably a whole bunch of shit I'm forgetting, plus funding for more LHAs, LPDs, LCAC replacement for the Navy that will be utilized by the Marines.
Ah yes. The pure genius of repalcing all belt-fed MGs with AR18s.
Don't get me wrong, teh AR18 is fucking great. But belt-fed MGs are literally the cornerstone of 100+ years of infantry small unit tactics. This implies that not having them might not the ideal way to fight small unit infantry battles.
>AR-18
What?
It was a scam, you dunce. The Marines didn't dispose of the M249s like they did with tanks. They are still in the unit armories, but on paper every automatic rifleman has an M27 and a bunch of mags.
>AR-18
>What?
Sounds a bit like you'Re the dunce here.
The M27 is based on the HK416, which is based on a G36, which is an AR18 in a bodykit.
Not 100%, of course, and the Muhreens will insist on how their IAR is the bestest rifle ever etc.
But the lineage is there. In the end, it's an AR18. Which is a very solid choice, and probably a bit more sturdy than the AR15.
If they secretly kept their MGs, then they're at least not retarded.
>The M27 is based on the HK416, which is based on a G36, which is an AR18 in a bodykit.
It's an AR-15 with a piston, you dumb nagger.
No, you triple nagger, a HK416 is an AR15 with a piston. An AR18 and AR15 do nit interchange parts. Beyond that, your other premises are also fucking stupid. The USMC replaced zero M249s with M27s IRL, but did replace loads of (all of their infantry's) M4s with them. You assertion that belt feds are the basis of infantry tactics and have been since 1923 is also dubious, since no one was firing and moving in 1923 with belt feds (the GPMG wasn't invented yet) and anyone the USSR backed in the Cold War had RPK based infantry that did quite well (for eg: NVA and VC).
tldr you're stupid and categorically wrong, lurk moar
quite literally one of the if not THE most retarded comment threads I've read in a while. Yes the squad belt fed was removed, however company level belt feds like the M240 are being dispersed to the platoon and squad level which is what we were doing anyways. Even so we still have M249s lurking around as the picture shows.
Also, something isn't an AR18 because it has a short stroke gas piston, the M27/ HK416 is an AR15 with a short stroke gas piston. The concept of squad magazine fed support weapons has been utilized by the Russians for decades, and works well. Why waste time with 5.56 belt feds when you have perfectly good M240s and people very well trained in how to use them? Not to mention now the infantry Marine has a suppressed 16 inch rifle, with variable optics as a standard issue rifle. The target identification capability, longer distance performance, and sustained fire capability is now much better than what it was previously and is a net improvement of bullets on foreheads.
>AR15 with a short stroke gas piston.
>Marines as a littoral force
It's Island Hopping 2: Reef-Island Boogaloo
If you want to push the PLAN out of the south china sea, the navy bombards the fuck out of a reef island (there are now seven or more such island bases) while tanking the AShMs from it, the marines move in and clear the PLA/PLAN forces present, then station AShMs and SAMs there to keep the PLAAF and PLAN from taking it back.
It makes perfect sense to have launchers all over the South China Sea on any patch of sand that can support a wheeled vehicle. Put a satlink there and your troops can hide in a bunker and only come out for maintenance and swapping batteries or something while the TEL is operated from home soil or by local marines. Driving and firing a TEL from the safety of a bunker sounds cozy and TELs can be replaced more easily.
>It's Island Hopping 2: Reef-Island Boogaloo
It's literally the exact opposite retard.
>Island Hopping 2: Reef-Island Boogaloo
This Time We Hold Them.
The sequel always has to introduce a twist.
US Marines?
Are those the guys with less training than an Estonian conscript?
I think it’s based. I wish someone would give me anti ship missile trucks and drop me off for a little beach vacation
>anti ship missile trucks and drop me off for a little beach vacation
A classic setting.
They’re intelligent for ditching tanks and leaning into long range fires
It was a good move
I guess you do need someone to defend naval facilities and atoll airstrips as a last ditch effort after all. But it doesn't seem likely we'll ever get to that stage. No harm in doing this at least.
https://desuarchive.org/k/search/image/Fot1ypkXaytNM5-FKACfGQ/
Maybe he just wants to talk about it more
>Marines as a literal force
do they write angry letters?
>do they write angry letters?
That would be a literary force.
Weak
That would be a literary force, retard.
>Marines as a marine force
Whoah
why don't marines own their own landing ships
what do they expect to do other than play pretend as another land army
Theyre a department of the Navy. We're not retarded like the IJA owning its own aircraft carriers.
I agree all signs point toward Taiwan, but, what if China goes for South Korea first? I also agree there are zero signs pointing toward South Korea being in any kind of danger from China.
I think there are far more advantages for China to go with South Korea, especially with the Marines restructuring for Taiwan. China can hold taiwan as a hostage, they can avoid the problem of an amphibious invasion, they can put up a "better" fight in the Yellow Sea than the Taiwan strait, and it potentially takes South Korea out from a Taiwan intervention. China could also stand to capture significant amounts of industrial and technical expertise. Japan and the United States will be the only powers in any position to easily intervene.
In that scenario, does the restructure still work?
you mean the place with a fuck shit ass ton of US military stockpiles, troops, equipment, and military presence thats existence isnt politically contested?
>thats existence isnt politically contested
it's just reunification under the juche system in the spirit of collective self defense against the decadent west :^)
This is also the thing, technically North Korea and South Korea remain at war. And all of China's recent war movies are about the Korean War.
China's recent propaganda is about Korea because if they want to make the US seem like a formidable foe that will take all of China's might, they're going to use that time Ridgway turned the 38th Parallel into a blender.
>all of China's recent war movies are about the Korean War
that's because it's the only war they've ever fought that wasn't suckerpunching the indians or getting their asses kicked by the vietnamese
>I think there are far more advantages for China to go with South Korea
If those advantages include tossing chinese lives away then sure
South Korea the place with mandatory conscription that's constantly packing enough missiles to level Pyongyang at a moments notice? The place that gets way more US support and equipment than Taiwan? The place within spitting distance of Japan, the US's closest ally in the region? That South Korea?
What exactly does a tomahawk jeep do better than sensor-linked aircraft and navy ships with the same weapon?
It can sit on an island forming a screenline. An aircraft can’t do that and a ship can but could be needed elsewhere
bump
Marines mite be a littoral fource but VDV are a vertual fource only these days.
It makes sense
The cool part is that these littoral combat groups are intended to be constantly deployed, much like the venerable MEU. No one else can do that
known spammer _
So are these going to be attatched to MEUs or what?
I worked for the USMC for the last decade and saw most of this start and go till recently. I was told that in the restructuring the decision makers not only wanted to turn the marines back into the original vision but also said decision makers across the board are all plane guys. This means downsizing preposition ships full of hardware, (giant multi billion dollar unarmed fucking targets) to ground based units that can be forward deployed and loaded on those old ships to give them and their gear a ride to where they are needed. The air guys, then took that money for the old preposition ships( its a lot of money) and are buying tank ships to keep their planes supplied with fuel for their new restructured USMC. Just what i heard.
Pretty accurate. I was part of the air traffic control community with the Marines during the whole concept exploration of EABO.
I worked the martime proposition fleet and all those ships with a few exceptions are gone and now tankers are coming along faster than anybody can crew them. Not to mention the labor shortages everyone is seeing.
Good on the marines for thinking outside of the box and using force multipliers like long range missile systems. Just plain based
>Marines as a literal force
They're blue?
Obviously I'm being facetious but I don't understand why the army hasn't been disbanded yet. The marines are the force of the future and should take on the army's responsibilities as well as this new littoral stuff.
The Marines are there to clear the beaches and the Army is sent in next for the major thrust inland.
Oh woah living on a prayer