Where are the US airforce and Navy ground Units

[Spec6]

I'm sorry to say it But Can you see an airforce General officer in Europe leting his comand be take over as infantry in the Army .
So were our the Airforce Battions or Sqs listed in the Game .
I can see the Airforce fielding some strange ground units that have aircraft weapons convereted to ground Use .

Same with the Naval Units were are they located or have they been intergraded into the USMC .

Rember towards the End of WWII the German Navy and Airforce had Ground units .So why wouldn't the Airforce and Navy have them in WWIII .

[sic1701]

I can see Air Force and Navy officers at any rank in the command structure transitioning (upon proper orders and verification, that is) their troops from their existing billets and specialties to leg infantry if the need were extreme and they were trying to win a war, or just stay alive.

Without fuel to fly aircraft and replacement parts and weapons to maintain and arm them and no real prospects for that situation to change, many Air Force units would not be good for much else at the moment other than to become infantry units or, better yet, assume support positions in the rear so that Army non-combat units can then become leg infantry.

An Air Force general officer or Navy flag officer might have serious reservations about that, as well as tons of operating questions on how to make it all happen, but if the orders were clear and had the proper authority I would think they'd get on board in short order, especially if there was a way to help shorten a nuclear war in the process or ameliorate its effects on civilians they have sworn to protect and defend.

It also stands to reason that at some point in the command structure, AF and Navy officers are given a "What If?" briefing that gives them, in general terms, what's likely to happen in case of nuclear war devastate their bases or (more likely) actions such as electromagnetic pulse that cripple aircraft and ships or shortages of aviation and diesel fuel to propel them. Certainly they don't expect to just be allowed to sit around and twiddle their thumbs and drink coffee while the Army's infantry and mechanized units get overrun in a central European ground war.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Spec6

Rember towards the End of WWII the German Navy and Airforce had Ground units .So why wouldn't the Airforce and Navy have them in WWIII .

Actually, it was the other way around. Late in the war, German air force and navy personel were funneled into Volksgrenadier divisions (basically another attempt at reorganizing the standard infantry division TOE due to shortages of manpower and equipment).

At the beginning of the war and in it's first few years, the Germans fielded Luftwaffe field divisions, mostly due to the political influence of Goering. They didn't really distinguish themselves in battle, though. Apart from the Herman Goering division, Luftwaffe field divisions were generally more poorly equipped than regular Wermacht units and they suffered greatly as a result. Most of them were decimated on the Eastern Front. By early 44, there were only a few left and they were soon to be destroyed during the Bagration offensive and the Normandy campaign. Survivors or remnants of the Luftwaffe field divisions were absorbed into the army.

Most historians and analysts agree that the manpower should have been used as replacements for regular army units in the first place. Luftwaffe ground combat divisions were a waste.

I can't see NATO commanders making this same mistake twice. Air Force personel would be assigned to existing army units as replacements and Navy personel would go either to army or Marine units.

[waiting4something]

I think the Navy and Air Force units would be kept within there own branches and used as a rear guard. Mixing them in with soldiers and Marines would be a nightmare. This way they could operate and develop at their own pace. Both sides would not like mixing it up, because they are of completely different mind sets. I mean the only way I could see mixing them with the Army or Marines is if units were reduced so badly from what they once had been. Also, if a total break down of command happened and people were deserting I could see that happening. But as long as there is enough personel in the combat units I think they would not add them into them. There are non combat personel the the Army and Marine Corps that will be doing that.

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by Spec6

I'm sorry to say it But Can you see an airforce General officer in Europe leting his comand be take over as infantry in the Army .

I can see an Air Force officer of any rank following orders. The question is what orders SACEUR issues and for what reasons.

There is a logic to using squadrons of Air Force personnel as rear area security. There is an equal logic to using the warm bodies is whatever fashion circumstances dictate. Goering's approach gives us a fine example of how not to use excess airmen. As a practical matter, it's going to be more efficient to turn airmen into infantry (or whatever is required by the Army in 1998 and afterwards) than to turn civilians into infantry. By the same token, how does one answer the question asked by Joe when he perceives that the Air Force is doing rear area missions:

"What the [expletive deleted] are those Air Force [expletive deleted] doing in the [expletive deleted] rear with the [expletive deleted] gear? There aren't even any more [expletive deleted] planes flying! Why the [expletive deleted] do they get the easy jobs while we live in [expletive deleted] holes in the ground? They're in the [expletive deleted] military, aren't they?"

How does one answer that question with anything better than "Shut your cake hole, Smith!" After 1997, this answer will carry less and less authority (there being no cake left, and all).

All of this said, one of the Joint Chiefs is an airman. How he manages the irresistible pressure to yield some of his personnel to meet the needs of the Army with the very understandable desire to maintain an independent USAF would make for a very interesting thread.

Webstral

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by waiting4something

I mean the only way I could see mixing them with the Army or Marines is if units were reduced so badly from what they once had been. Also, if a total break down of command happened and people were deserting I could see that happening.

This is pretty much Twilight: 2000 in a nutshell.

Webstral

[waiting4something]

Originally Posted by Webstral

This is pretty much Twilight: 2000 in a nutshell.

Webstral

Yes, you mean like a bunch of stranglers joining up like how the playing characters are. Yes, that is Twilight 2000. I was thinking of just before you get the "good luck your own your own message".

[Adm.Lee]

IMO, and in any campaign I run, a lot of Air Force and Navy personnel have been funneled (voluntarily, at least at first) into Army replacements. I envision a mass retraining program set up in the winter of 98-99 or 99-00 to retrain them as infantry replacements. Likely each field army and division would have its own training detachment, and then shuffle units out of the line to integrate them over time. To me, the best time to do this would be in the winter, while the formations are in cantonments-- lots of time for small-unit training and patrolling.

Any others, who don't or can't volunteer for combat-arms replacements, would get moved to support & service functions. Possibly the Army could disband its own service functions, and transfer most of the soldiers there to the combat arms, while Air Force & Navy personnel take over the base functions.

OTOH: I remember reading in the '90s that the US Air Force had nearly as many Air police & security squadrons as the Army had infantry battalions. YMMV.

[Kemper Boyd]

Originally Posted by waiting4something

I think the Navy and Air Force units would be kept within there own branches and used as a rear guard. Mixing them in with soldiers and Marines would be a nightmare.

Considering that according to the source material, many combat units even have former enemy nationalities serving with them, some old service rivalries might get old real fast.

[Raellus]

Precedent is there. Why make this more complicated? Germany's experience in the later years of WWII supports using surplus to requirements airforce and naval personel as infantry replacements. German AF and N personel were given an abbreviated basic training and then attached to a parent Volkgrenadier unit where they would participate in field excercises. Some of these men couldn't handle the relative hardships of army life and did in fact desert but the vast majority fought on, even when it was fairly obvious to all but the most fanatical Nazi that the war was lost. During the time when the Volksgrenadier units were being formed (late '44 and early '45), Germany was under constant pressure on all fronts but they were still able to reorganize many shattered infantry divisions and bulk them up with AF and N people. During the cantonment phase of the Twilight War (WWIII), there would have been plenty of "down time" to integrate AF and N people into Army units.

If you formed them into homogenous "rear security units" you would only create resentment among line army units and actually heighten intraservice rivalry.

I also think the idea that a former sailor, pilot, or aircrewman wouldn't accept or couldn't handle a transition to infantry is kind of insulting to those folks. The vast majority of soldiers, sailors, and airmen do what they are told by their superiors. Do you really think the navy and airforce would be lobbying to have their people formed into independent, homogenous rear area security (or like) units? Why? How are they going to supply them? Aside from airfield and port security, AF and N brass have little to no experience running those types of units/ops. Who's going to supply them with supplies that the army traditionally receives? Army generals are going to be bawling for replacements and someone's going to tell them that they can't have the thousands of beached sailors and grounded airmen because those groups are going to start taking traditional army missions but be placed under navy and army command. They'd be making the same deadly mistake the Germans made in WWII.

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Actually, it was the other way around. Late in the war, German air force and navy personel were funneled into Volksgrenadier divisions (basically another attempt at reorganizing the standard infantry division TOE due to shortages of manpower and equipment).

At the beginning of the war and in it's first few years, the Germans fielded Luftwaffe field divisions, mostly due to the political influence of Goering. They didn't really distinguish themselves in battle, though. Apart from the Herman Goering division, Luftwaffe field divisions were generally more poorly equipped than regular Wermacht units and they suffered greatly as a result. Most of them were decimated on the Eastern Front. By early 44, there were only a few left and they were soon to be destroyed during the Bagration offensive and the Normandy campaign. Survivors or remnants of the Luftwaffe field divisions were absorbed into the army.

Most historians and analysts agree that the manpower should have been used as replacements for regular army units in the first place. Luftwaffe ground combat divisions were a waste.

I can't see NATO commanders making this same mistake twice. Air Force personel would be assigned to existing army units as replacements and Navy personel would go either to army or Marine units.

The German Airborne units of WWII were part of the German Air Force too...

[Abbott Shaull]

Once you run out of fuel to fly flight with your fighters and not much need to port facilities. The excess enlisted and officers will be re-trained in Infantry tactics. Air Force and Naval commanders wouldn't like it. They don't have too like it.

Even in WWI the 4th US Infantry Division had a Marine Brigade assigned to it as one of it combat two combat Brigades.

So their is precedents, and these new acquired infantry would be used as replacement for the large part. With that said, the bulk of the Air Force newly trained infantry would go to Army units, with some going back to reinforce the remains of Airbase security details where they still have operational aircraft and can conduct operations.

While the Naval commanders would attempt to funnel their personnel into Marine and Naval Infantry units that were formed with Marne Officers/NCOs in leadership roles and excess naval personnel in all other slots, would be the in their eyes the ideal. The main catch here is having a MEF or MEU around for the Naval commander to justify funneling their personnel into a Marine unit as oppose to sending them to an Army units. Again limited number of these new infantry officers and enlisted personnel would also go back to help base security to bases deemed worthy to defend.

The next thing no matter the Officer rank/Enlisted rank on the food chain back in their native branch, they would be treat as newly minted O-1 for officers and privates for enlisted and would have work their way up the chain by proving themselves so it may be quite a while until O-3, O-4, O-5 would be in a position that would be worthy of their rank. This probably would happen at an very rapid pace than would normally due to them already having rank, but then again they Officers after all. Same with E-5 and higher in the squads, until they show they can lead a fire team, they would be treated as privates and specialist. Once they done that and lead a fire team and they show they are capable of leading a Squad if one is in need of a NCO, then maybe they will be given the spot, and so on back up the chain until they are holding position that in equal to their rank...

[Legbreaker]

Of course it's exceptionally probable that these rear area units would have suffered greatly from nukes.
It's most probable not very many naval or aviation personnel survived.

Those few Air Force personnel remaining, particularly ground crews and pilots, would be far too valuable to reassign to army units. There might not be any fuel to actually fly the handful of planes left more than once every few months, but they'd still require maintaining "just in case".

Naval personnel are in my mind more likely to be reassigned to the army (and a few going to support what's left of the Air Force).

[pmulcahy11b]

Soviet military doctrine also targeted rear area and supply units for special operations raids. Survivors of these raids would be very lucky or skilled.

[Trooper]

Food for thought.

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~dh...t2k/raf2kh.htm

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~dh...t2k/raf2kr.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luftwaffe_Field_Division

http://twilight2000.wikia.com/wiki/RAF_Regiment

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Of course it's exceptionally probable that these rear area units would have suffered greatly from nukes.
It's most probable not very many naval or aviation personnel survived.

Those few Air Force personnel remaining, particularly ground crews and pilots, would be far too valuable to reassign to army units. There might not be any fuel to actually fly the handful of planes left more than once every few months, but they'd still require maintaining "just in case".

Naval personnel are in my mind more likely to be reassigned to the army (and a few going to support what's of the Air Force).

As with the armies, there are grounds for a variety of outcomes for specific formations of the various air forces. In Europe, tactical nuclear weapons undoubtedly have caused major losses among NATO air force personnel. The tally from chemical weapons probably is not inconsiderable. Raids by Pact special forces will have caused some loss of life, too, along with effects of conventional air-delivered weapons of every description. The same probably can be said in the Far East and perhaps the Middle East.

All of this being said, I think we must allow for significant numbers of airmen to have survived into 1998. The operating premise of the game is that the conventional fighting, the nukes, the chemical weapons, starvation, and disease did not destroy the armies of the world completely. The divisions fight on, although at much-reduced strength. Although air force personnel are particularly vulnerable to WMD, given the concentration of air crews at air bases, not every air base will have been nuked. The USAF owns a number of bases in CONUS that were not attacked. Although many of the personnel will have been sent oversease by the beginning of the nuclear exchange, many will remain.

You've got a point about the value of retaining irreplaceable skills, Leg. Surely the USAF Chief of Staff (and his counterparts among the other air forces of the world) will make that case. The question is how many of these people need to be retained? It's one thing for us to believe that once food supplies can be stabilized the armies of the world can receive more recruits and rifles. It's another thing to believe that additional F-16s are going to be made operational anytime soon. The armies of NATO will be screaming for people to do real work needed today and tomorrow, not in three or six or fifteen years. There is a case to be made for keeping the senior NCOs and warrant officers as airmen. The mid-grade and junior enlisted people have a lot less to recommend them.

I bring this back to an earlier discussion about airships in Colorado because airships offer the USAF a better case for retaining its independence and its manpower than "some day" regarding pre-war systems. By the end of 2000, the pressure on the USAF Chief of Staff to surrender most or all of his remaining people would be nearly insuperable. The arrival of a working airship and some expertise would be a godsend to the USAF Chief of Staff. One of the reasons I believe Colorado will get behind the airship program with such enthusiasm is that the Air Force will throw themselves behind the idea with the abandon of an addict set loose in a police evidence room. A significant airship program offer the USAF something important to do besides wait for conditions to improve and otherwise do what the Army does in Air Force uniforms. As an added bonus, a large airship program probably will be very good for the country.

Webstral

Addendum: The USAF could opt to concentrate on maintaining its C-130 fleet. The requirements in spare parts certainly is going to be much less. Yet given the fuel situation, C-130 use will be quite limited.

[Raellus]

Another argument for AF and N people being transfered to the army is that, AFAIK, T2K canon makes no mention of independent AF or N ground units.

And with Army generals seeing their units dropping to 1/3 of their authorized strength (or less) starting in '98- and undoubtedly clamouring for replacements from at least that point forward- I just can't see the top brass trying to form, train, and equip naval infantry or AF field formations. It would be a collosal waste of manpower and equipment.

It does make sense that the Navy send most of its beached sailors to Marine units, assuming such units are relatively close by.

As for retaining AF techicians "just in case", if the gutted Luftwaffe sent thousands of purposeless men to the front as infantry replacements in late '44 and early '45, instead of keeping them to service Hitler's trickle of jet and rocket-powered Wunderwaffen aircraft, it stands to reason that the USAF could/would do likewise. As Web already pointed out, how many ground crew people are going to be needed to keep the handful of surviving jets and turboprops airborne? 100 to 1 (ground crew to aircraft), 20-1, 10-1, 5-1?

[Matt Wiser]

One example to keep in mind, gents, is the Air Corps Regiment on Bataan (Jan-Apr 42). After the Air Corps was virtually destroyed in the first days of the Philippine Campaign, only the best pilots and maintenance folks were kept to keep the few remaining P-40s and other aircraft flying, and the rest were formed by their squadrons into a provisional infantry regiment, with the proviso that if sufficient aircraft arrived, they would be released back to Air Force control. (it never happened) They were used for rear-area security, and did help in eliminating two Japanese amphibious landings in Bataan's rear in Feb 1942-at a cost-some had over 50% casualties. (other than basic, virtually none had any kind of infantry training and learned on the job-under fire) In T2K, trained air and ground crew would now become theater, if not national level, assets and handled accordingly. Mechanics would find work keeping vehicles and other equipment in running order, and aircrew would be assigned jobs that one with their bachelor's degree might find useful. AF Combat Security Police would help MPs with general security tasks, and AF engineer units would supplement Army (or Marine) engineers in their jobs. The same for medical units.

[Legbreaker]

In 1944 and 45 even the most blinkered of Germans had to admit in the privacy of their own minds that winning wasn't really an option. Survival as a nation, or alternatively, complete destruction to prevent said nation falling into the hands of the enemy was the best that could be hoped for.

In T2K there are still a few aircraft around. Certainly not as many, in fact even 5% of pre-war would be a stretch, but enough that if sufficient fuel and munitions were found they could turn the tide of an enemy offensive.

Yes, there are arguments for transfer of the lower ranks of technicians, etc from the Air Forces, however even if fuel, etc is not available for a number of years, the aircraft do still need maintaining. In 2000 there may be sufficient numbers of senior NCOs available, however these people are likely already old and their numbers will decline. Younger men and women NEED to be retained and trained to replace these senior people.

The same goes for the navy, however with most ships on the bottom, and the generally lower technically of ships (they only have to float, not fly), the need for specialist technicians may be less critical. In the US forces, I tend to agree that naval personnel are likely to be shifted into Marine units, but many countries do not have Marines - these are likely to be send into the general army.

Regardless, technical skills and specialities should be considered when transferring. It's extremely wasteful to have a naval communications specialist sent to an infantry company for example. This may result in a higher percentage of these "reinforcements" being sent to rear area and support units, but...

Take a look at the Soviet 10th TD OOB as a good example of what may happen. Although a paper strength of several hundred soldiers, many of them simply wouldn't be risked in battle unless the Divisions continued existence was under immediate threat.

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

In 2000 there may be sufficient numbers of senior NCOs available, however these people are likely already old and their numbers will decline.

I don't know how the Royal Australian Air Force is organized, so I can't comment. In the USAF, senior NCO means E-7 through E-9. These are men (and women) with 15-30 years of experience. The bulk of these people are in their thirties. They're not in immediate need of replacing, if old age be the primary consideration. The E-9s will be older, having 20-30 years of experience. The same goes for the warrants. Even they aren't so old that we should worry that they are about to lose their faculties.

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Regardless, technical skills and specialities should be considered when transferring. It's extremely wasteful to have a naval communications specialist sent to an infantry company for example. This may result in a higher percentage of these "reinforcements" being sent to rear area and support units, but...

I agree that using highly trained technicians as riflemen is wasteful of skills. This is why the junior enlisted people go first. In any event, Twilight: 2000 offers such an extreme circumstance that the usual rules of calculation go out the window. Now if the Navy guy arriving in the rear has a superior ability to run whatever equipment is available than the Army guy who is already there, a case can be made for bumping the Army guy to the rifle unit. Nevertheless, the idea that the infantry will continue to take it on the chin so that excess specialists from the Air Force and Navy can sit in the rear and avoid being wasted is unlikely to carry much water after 1998. The need for riflemen after the nuclear exchange will develop a logic all its own. Some specialists will be left as cadre to operate whatever gear remains and to train the next generation. Everyone else is going to have to remember what they learned in Basic.

Webstral

[jester]

I would also think ALOT of the surplus personel with specialty training could be put to work repairing much of the damaged infrastructure on bases and camps and in the more critical sectors of the community.

I would think power, water and transportation networks would be the key facilities everywhere these specialists could be used to repair and rebuild.

And then we also have the thousands of displaced persons who the surplus military personel could tend and manage as well. Creating lists and rosters of who the refugees are where they are from and what they do. Find the security risks, criminals, civilian specialsts, and people who can be put to work. As well as lists of people who have been seperated from their families for family reunification.

I can see ALOT of work for these surplus personel.

Like the russians did, some could manage unit farms, naval personel could even run small fishing vessels or repair civilian fishing fleets and keep them repaired and running. And still others could manage other activities, like salvaging parts from the damaged items, be it circuits from electronics, or copper from bad wire for use either as parts to repair new equipment, or raw materiel for making something new.

[natehale1971]

Actually... the Air Force General or Navy Admiral wouldn't have to give up operational control over the personnel under them... The US Navy has created Naval Infantry Battalions in the past. And in the T2k universe, I can see this being done on a larger scale for both the USN and USAF.

The USAF could easily put together 'squadrons' of guntrucks based around field expediant guntrucks just like they had been with combat aircraft with their ground crews acting as support roles carrying out area control and security duties.

The USN would assemble their naval infantry battalions for similar roles... or actually assign them to the marine divisions to fill out/round out the marine TOE.

[Doc Firefly]

I'm working on my American TO&E for my Savage Twilight Campaign and I included Air Force "provincial battalions" Mostly these are excess USAF personnel acting as "combat forces" In CONUS. I figure any troops with military training would be used as local security/ "best we can do" fighting troops. I also know that I wouldn't want a large number of troops sitting around doing nothing due to lack of planes to fly. I figure these troops would all have M16 with a few M60 as support. I also gave each battalion 6 fabricated 81mm mortars for "teeth". These battalions would be mounted in 5/4 ton trucks and a few other cargo vehicles, with some lucky enough to have Peecekeepers, M705's and M1077's. They wouldn't stand a chance against a Soviet MR Regiment, but for local patrols, anti-marauder duties and projection of power, they would be the best thing.

I also did the same thing with excess navel personnel, only at the heart of each Battalion was a group of marines to act as sergeants/command staff, and a "flying platoon" of veterans to provided a little "umph." The Marines would have been made up of Marines recently brought back to service from hospitals and those separated from their units. The navel units would have fewer support weapons, no armored vehicles and mostly civilian transport, but like the USAF units they would be "better than nothing."

[Abbott Shaull]

Like I stated in the Air Force and Naval commanders would retain certain amount of their force to help maintain what is left that make usable what facilities they have to maintain what left of their forces. Also with their bases still potential to raid would beef security forces, but there would still be more than enough forces left over that they would have to be turned over to Army or Marine units. In some case they would form their own 'Infantry Battalions', 'Security Battalions', 'Support Battalions' and at time 'Infantry Brigade/Regiments' (much like the school brigade from Fort Bliss of the US Army), while in other cases, especially if they are sent to established Divisions to help make up for the losses, they would be used as individual replacements. It would depend on the 'local' command structure. Sometime the local Air Force or Naval commander would be the ranking member and they would prefer to have their men not assigned as cannon fodder, so it would depend on the location of the base where the excess personnel were coming from. Yeah, lot of them would/could be used as more or less local security force with the goal to preserve force while claiming they were doing the best they could do....

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull

Like I stated in the Air Force and Naval commanders would retain certain amount of their force to help maintain what is left that make usable what facilities they have to maintain what left of their forces. Also with their bases still potential to raid would beef security forces, but there would still be more than enough forces left over that they would have to be turned over to Army or Marine units. In some case they would form their own 'Infantry Battalions', 'Security Battalions', 'Support Battalions' and at time 'Infantry Brigade/Regiments' (much like the school brigade from Fort Bliss of the US Army), while in other cases, especially if they are sent to established Divisions to help make up for the losses, they would be used as individual replacements. It would depend on the 'local' command structure. Sometime the local Air Force or Naval commander would be the ranking member and they would prefer to have their men not assigned as cannon fodder, so it would depend on the location of the base where the excess personnel were coming from. Yeah, lot of them would/could be used as more or less local security force with the goal to preserve force while claiming they were doing the best they could do....

I'm glad you mentioned the variability of possibilities. As we've seen in Twilight: 2000, the situation varies considerably from locale to locale, region to region, and theater to theater. Assuming that the Joint Chiefs issue guidelines for handling "excess" USAF and USN personnel, the execution of those orders will vary considerably from place-to-place. Almost any of the ideas put forth are possible in the wide, wide world of Twilight: 2000.

Webstral

[chico20854]

ISTR King's Ransom has details of a USAF Security Squadron, formed of excess rear-area personnel, as part of the garrison of Lordegan. As you say Web, one option in one command worldwide, and CENTCOM is a different beast than the rest of the US Military in 2000-1.

[Abbott Shaull]

The thing is Central Command has always been horse of different color when compared with the other major combat joint commands. Where South Command, North Command, the joint Command for Europe and Pacific Command have been overlay of existing forces and their chain of command that has been established for several years before anyone thought of it being need for say guys in the Army to communicate with those in the Navy or Marine and for each to understand entirely what the other was talking about. While they were at it they should talk to Air Force dudes too.

Central Command was able to achieve a lot of it inter-operational due to the fact that many of the sub-units only come together to play when the Command is active in it theater of operation and with the lack of bases in said theater everyone was forced to share the few resources from the start. In many cases the creation of the Rapid Deployment Force and the later formed into Central Command directly resulted in the creation of the Special Operation Command once it was realized that Green Beenies, Rangers, Air Force Special Ops and Naval Seals talked to each other in Central Command quite effectively and maybe they should talk to each other on regular basis to help eliminate the inter service rivalary...

Just some thoughts..

[Webstral]

After some thought, I decided to take up the challenge of creating a naval infantry battalion that would be able to maintain its independence from the Army. No TO&E yet.

US Naval Infantry Battalion 2

US Naval Infantry Battalion 2 was brought into being on August 11, 1998 by amalgamating personnel from the US Navy, USMC, and US Coast Guard. In the wake of the evacuation of the military facilities in San Diego at the start of the Second Mexican-American War, literally thousands of seamen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen were brought to the San Francisco Bay Area. The greatly reduced number of operable Navy vessels left the Navy in San Francisco with “excess” personnel. The Army had been demanding the transfer of personnel from the sister services since the nuclear exchanges began the previous July; in mid-1998 those demands assumed an even greater level of urgency.

As a compromise solution, the Navy divided its personnel in the San Francisco Bay Area into three groups: some would remain to support ongoing naval activity and maintain facilities, some would be released directly into the Army, and some would be formed into a Department of the Navy security unit that would release Army units in the Bay for duty elsewhere. The new Naval Infantry Battalion 2, which soon earned the moniker Blue Two, used its unique blend of experience and available equipment to form a waterborne patrol and quick reaction force. As of April 1, 2001 Blue Two operates on the waters and ashore from the Golden Gate to Sacramento and from Petaluma to San Jose.

Location: San Francisco Bay (HQ: Alameda)
Subordination: Sixth US Army
Manpower: 500
AFV: 0 (the battalion does possess a number of armed boats)



Blue Two is a compromise solution that has worked quite well, even though the solution makes few of the higher-ups happy. The consolidation of much of the Navy’s surviving West Coast assets at Alameda in San Francisco left the Navy in the awkward position of having a large number of personnel who were not performing their MOS functions. Under enormous pressure from the Army and the USMC, the Navy had been transferring less-critical personnel to replacement depots for employment in the ground forces. The unique situation and geography of the San Francisco Bay Area offered the Navy the opportunity to create a force of Department of the Navy personnel who could conduct security missions with an efficiency and effectiveness the Army could not match.

In a nutshell, Naval Infantry Battalion 2 is organized as a waterborne infantry formation intended for security and combat operations throughout the San Francisco Bay estuary. Utilizing its unique mix of Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard personnel and equipment, Blue Two patrols the waterways throughout the Bay Area and assists local militia and law enforcement. Although supplied and supported by the Navy, Blue Two is under the operational control of Sixth US Army. Troops of the Blue Two combat the re-emergence of piracy in the Bay and ensure that waterborne commerce can move freely. Though the “squids” of Blue Two are equipped as light infantry, they can count on fire support from their watercraft.

Sixth US Army would like to have full control over the men and resources of Blue Two. However, the command recognizes that supporting Blue Two out of Army resources would be undesirable, if not unworkable. Besides, the squids do the waterborne job quite well. Periodically, the Sixth Army absorbs some trained replacements out of Blue Two, which somewhat satiates the Army’s appetite for manpower.

The Navy at Alameda dislikes providing logistical support and manpower for an organization that is under the control of the Army. However, Blue Two basically does the same job under the Army that the Navy would have them do. The periodic transfer of riflemen from Blue Two to the Army is a genuine irritant; however, Blue Two actively poaches from the militia of the Bay Area. The most promising recruits manage to stay in the Navy.

Tactics and techniques for water operations largely came from Navy and Coast Guard personnel. Expertise in infantry operations and landing operations came from the Marines who were available. Former members of municipal SWAT teams rounded out the capabilities of Blue Two. Blue Two seldom operates very far from water. While riverine patrols reach as far inland as Sacramento, very rarely does a member of Blue Two get to Pleasanton, South San Jose, West Marin, or Napa. Despite its proximity to San Francisco, Pacifica is essentially outside the area of operations of Naval Infantry Battalion 2.


Webstral

[stilleto69]

Web-

I like it. Very well done.

[Legbreaker]

It's good, but I wonder if your numbers are a bit high? My thoughts are than maybe 200-300 would be more accurate with only a handful of marines (recovering from wounds received elsewhere) available. Police, etc have their own organisations on the whole which they're likely to remain with.

It's possible though that civilians may have been recruited, especially those with prior military experience or relevant skill sets. These people might be enough to add say a further 20-40% to the manpower (much more and it becomes a civilian force rather than navy).