USMC Order of Battles

[Canadian Army]

I have been working on this for a while, I would like some feed back, that is why I'm posting it.

[dragoon500ly]

Excellent work!

Only issues that I see are with the two Raider organizations. I asked a jarhead in my office what his opinion would be and his viewpoint was that the Marines would not organize a "Raider" unit. More likely would be attachments to the Force Recon Companies themselves.

Hope this helps!

[Mohoender]

Nice work

US Orbats are too often neglected especially when going in details.

[Rainbow Six]

Looks good to me...well done...anything at Camp David and / or the US Naval Academy?

[kota1342000]

Outstanding! Ill be chewing on this for quite some time! Great job!

Heres some feedback you were asking for.
First, I notice youve placed additional battalions in with the MEBs, which is cool, but if theres already a MEF level established above the MEB, then the MEB command staff isnt quite as necessary, unless the MEB is going to work independently and alone. It might be easier for the MEF level to call the MEBs "Task Forces" in that case.

Second, I see youve reactivated a fourth Rifle Company and established a fifth in the Infantry Battalions (in some cases, still reading and digesting both). Marine Regiments letter their Rifle Companies all the way through the battalions;
1st Battalion
Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta Companies
2nd Battalion
Echo, Fox, Golf, Hotel Companies
3rd Battalion
India, Juliett, Kilo, Lima Companies
Adding a fifth Rifle Company would move all the letters down, making 3rd Battalion have a Kilo, Lima, Mike, November, and Oscar Company. No big deal though. this one is kind of a headache and Ive screwed it up too.

Third, the Combined Battalion is an awesome idea, but M113s and M1A2s seems..................................out of place for US Marines. LAV-25s, AAV7s and M1A1s.....or even better M60A3 fit in better with what we usually had to work with. Im thinking mostly parts and logistic support instead of practicality, which is usually the route a lot of our officers went.

And fourth, I have to disagree with my colleague that Dragon works with, forming Special Operations units in the Corps was something I thought needed to happen for quite some time. We did a lot of the MEU/SOC stuff, but when you asked officers farther up the chain on both sides, it sounded like the Corps didnt want to play nice with USSOCOM. Its turned around now, but you turning it earlier makes me smile. And I like the use of Edson's and Carlson's Raiders.

[dragoon500ly]

I asked the jarhead in my office about calling such formations "Raiders", as I understand this the Marines never really wanted to form Raider Battalions in WWII to begin with, it was pressure from FDR (one of his sons was with the 2nd Raider Battalion) that led to the creation. The Marine viewpoint is that every Marine is qualified to perform any combat mission and there was no need to waste resources on Raiders or Paramarines.

As 1944 rolled in, FDRs son was transferred back to the states and within a couple of months, the Raider Battalions were deactivated and the personnel transferred into the 4th Marine Division.

Of intrest is that ever since, the USMC has opposed the formation of Raider Battalions.

So where do the Force Recon Companies come from? As the Navy moved away from the UDT teams in favor of SEALs, the Marines still maintained a need for a dedicated reconnaissance element for amphibious warfare, hence the development of the Force Recon to fulfill the role.