US Marauder Companies

[Benjamin]

Historically, the term Scouts or Rangers would make a bit more sense. The US Army had long used scouts (not just Indian but local colonials in the pre-Revolution era and local militia during the War of 1812 and Civil War). Of course the term Rangers was already taken by the 75th Regiment but there were no official "Scout" units (except perhaps the 207th Infantry Group, Alaska Army National Guard, mislabeled and enlarged in the U.S. Army Vehicle Guide as the 1st and 2nd Infantry Brigades (Arctic Recon)).

Either way it's still a very good write up. Thanks.

Benjamin

[Adm.Lee]

Would these be in addition to the LRP (or is is LRSU?) unit in the divisional Military Intelligence battalion? IIRC, those guys had a lot of Ranger-qualified individuals, but I can't remember if it's a platoon or company. They were definitely scouts and not raiders, though.

I remember this, from when the Black Beret was instituted to give morale. I had a pal in the EW side of an MI battalion, who told me the big and burly-looking fellows in his unit were not happy to be giving "their" berets to the geeks and paper-pushers of the rest of the battalion.

To my mind, '97 may be too early, but around '98, when things break down and the front goes static, I could see SACEur (wearing his Seventh Army CG hat) setting this up to give his division commanders more recon assets at their disposal. I'd think these might be the first guys to get access to horses, and/or the last ones to lose access to helos.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Adm.Lee

I remember this, from when the Black Beret was instituted to give morale. I had a pal in the EW side of an MI battalion, who told me the big and burly-looking fellows in his unit were not happy to be giving "their" berets to the geeks and paper-pushers of the rest of the battalion.

Ironically, the Rangers are getting their black berets back, now that the rest of the Army has decided to switch back to patrol caps.

[HorseSoldier]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Ironically, the Rangers are getting their black berets back, now that the rest of the Army has decided to switch back to patrol caps.

Last I heard (since the switch was announced just prior to 06/14) is that the black beret is going to remain the army wide head gear for Class As, just not for use in ACUs unless specially directed by local commanders.

Always was a silly idea, in any case. Hopefully I'll have orders by the end of the month letting my put my red one back on.

[HorseSoldier]

Does the organisation and equipment look about right to everyone? Bear in mind they are designed as a raiding force. I probably need to add an anti-tank capability (maybe TOW on the HMMWV). Of the top of my head assume two vehicles per section, 1 with MG(s) and 1 with TOW (Mk19 could replace either).

If they're motorized, I'd say gun them up.

Maybe sections of three vehicles -- two gun trucks, and one cargo humvee being used as a squad carrier. Three man crews on the two gun trucks (possibly augmented by medics, FOs, TACPs, translators, guides, whatever), plus six men on the squad carrier (driver, gunner, plus four man fire team, with the FT leader as vehicle commander when mounted).

Gun trucks with one 50 cal and one Mk-19, and a mounted and dismounted M240 or M60 for the squad carrier. At least in theory one or two Javelins per section, plus AT4s for the dismounts. Practically, they're probably a fan of RPG-7s later in the war like most everyone else in NATO, and possibly are using captured Pact ATGMs or recoilless rifles, etc.

Three of those sections per platoons, with PL and PSG each leading one of them, plus a truck with a 60mm or maybe 81mm mortar crew on it, for a total strength of 40 pax per platoon. Gives a mix of options somewhat like a light version of the old armored cav platoons where you had tanks, scout tracks, an infantry squad, and a mortar carrier all organic to the platoon.

The one other issue I'd see as presented is that these guys simply aren't survivable on a 1997 central European battlefield. The density of enemy AFVs, artillery, and everything else just makes it a non-starter. The US had been steadily moving further and further away from sending a gun truck out onto the German battlefield for decades. I don't think these guys will be able to effectively accomplish anything pre-nuke that the division cavalry squadron can't do better and more survivably.

Now, post-nuke when things start to fall apart, I think a niche for a light cavalry raiding force (which is what these guys are effectively, if they're motorized) emerges. The troop density on the battlefield thins out, even more so AFVs and red air and everything else that makes them non-survivable in the opening phases of the war. Plus you have additional targets emerging like marauders who a fast, light but well armed flying column can go after seriously.

With things getting more static, and air mobility fading fast, these guys start to have an effective mission harassing the other side and screening friendly positions while the bulk of a unit are getting crops in or out of the ground and that sort of thing. With the war kind of becoming more low intensity,

I'm possibly biased and such, but the more I think about it, the more I'd probably have these guys organized post-nuke and becoming D Troop of their respective divisional cavalry squadrons (assuming any surviving air frames are consolidated into C Troop). They might become a separate unit later in the war if/when their respective division converts their cavalry to horse mobility, or might be retained under squadron administrative control and OPCON'ed to brigade or higher S-2 as needed.

[Tombot]

Theres a french movie about an irregular unit in World War I., called "Capitaine Conan" (there are trailers on youtube available); good movie about something similar to your idea... something for every T2k-Fan to watch (havent seen it for years).

[HorseSoldier]

Revisiting this thread because the idea just occurred to me, in the specific context of 5th ID, that a unit along these lines could be flagged as P Company, which was the 1st Bde/5th ID's Ranger/LRRP unit in Vietnam.

If players were members of this unit, on some special tactical or operational level tasking when things all go pear shaped for 5th ID, it would allow a different sort of spin on Escape from Kalisz. (Maybe the unit even gets an incredibly vague and bare bones mission to link up with B/1/20 SFG as they pull off their Op Reset objective -- but, for OPSEC purposes, without knowing exactly who, what, or why.)

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

Last I heard (since the switch was announced just prior to 06/14) is that the black beret is going to remain the army wide head gear for Class As, just not for use in ACUs unless specially directed by local commanders.

Always was a silly idea, in any case. Hopefully I'll have orders by the end of the month letting my put my red one back on.

Leave it to the Army; they "correct" their initial bad idea by making the reg more convoluted!

[Grendel]

Originally Posted by Adm.Lee

Would these be in addition to the LRP (or is is LRSU?) unit in the divisional Military Intelligence battalion? IIRC, those guys had a lot of Ranger-qualified individuals, but I can't remember if it's a platoon or company. They were definitely scouts and not raiders, though.

The term is LRSU (unit) or LRSD (detachment) or LRSC (company). When the Army organized the LRSC's in the late 80's all officers and NCO had to Airborne, HALO and Ranger Q'd. Enlisted personell had to be Airborne and pre-Ranger Q'd. More often than not all most all the early teams consisted entirely of Ranger Q'd (or tabbed if you prefer) personell.

I like the Idea of fast moving raiding parties to harass the enemy or disrupt thier supply lines. Sir James you are a madman! All of your write ups are excellent.

[Legbreaker]

If they weren't organised until post nuke, then I'd imagine the requirement for airborne/parachute/halo qualification would be dropped.
Emphasis would be placed on physical fitness, long distance marching, horse riding, and vehicle skills, in addition to rifle, machinegun, demolitions, boobytraps and mine warfare.
I see their role being similar to that of the Finnish Sissi units - stay behind the lines acting as guerrillas and saboteurs, living off the land and whatever they capture from the enemy.

[atiff]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Emphasis would be placed on physical fitness, long distance marching, horse riding, and vehicle skills, in addition to rifle, machinegun, demolitions, boobytraps and mine warfare.
I see their role being similar to that of the Finnish Sissi units - stay behind the lines acting as guerrillas and saboteurs, living off the land and whatever they capture from the enemy.

Sounds like a PC party to me...

[Legbreaker]

It does indeed, however I believe the Raiders role would keep them away from using heavy weapons and enemy AFVs as much as possible - get in fast, do bucketloads of damage to the soft underbelly of the rear echelon, and get the hell out again before the tanks and mechanised infantry show up.

[HorseSoldier]

I would just have the situation be that MTOE changes were authorized to bump the divisional LRSD up to company strength and re-orged to make them more like Korean War era divisional Ranger companies.