USMC Order of Battles

[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.

[LAW0306]

there is no "Juliett" in the Marine Corps system its Mike company, I know I was in 3rd Battalion 3rd Marines........

[LAW0306]

Raider Battalions were not need after 1943. you dont need to recon a island with people when you fly over and bomb it every day. raids were now being done by regular rifle companys...war makes you better. also it was not that we did not want to play nice with USJSOC...they did not want to pay for us and the navy said we were a redundant unit with there seals. now the war on terror shows all can play and they needed more units then they had.. the army asked for us by name was there when it was forming...

[kota1342000]

Hay Canadian, is the Navy/Marine Corps amphibious forces list as for 1996 as well?

[kota1342000]

Originally Posted by LAW0306

there is no "Juliett" in the Marine Corps system its Mike company, I know I was in 3rd Battalion 3rd Marines........

Yup. No Delta when I was with 1/5 and no Hotel at 2/9 either. But with the OOB here, Canadian is boosting a Rifle Battalion to five companies. And given the length of the Twilight War, I figure, hell, why not?

[LAW0306]

You had a Delta it was just the combat reserve. Same with 2/9..Juliett was banned in 1928 or so when companys went from numbers to names. no company wanted a woman name. thats what I got from the USMC historical division when stationed in the nations capital. we named a attached company Mike in 2009 when we went to IRAQ. it was a mixed reserve company...asked HQ USMC and they gave us the go ahead. it was a big hit with the vietnam guys..... after Vietnam. they canceled the 4th line company and added a weapons company to each battalion. most of the weapons were in other places...IE regimental TOW's and Mortar platoons and Battalion H&S companys for medium AT weapons.

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by LAW0306

You had a Delta it was just the combat reserve. Same with 2/9..Juliett was banned in 1928 or so when companys went from numbers to names. no company wanted a woman name. thats what I got from the USMC historical division when stationed in the nations capital. we named a attached company Mike in 2009 when we went to IRAQ. it was a mixed reserve company...asked HQ USMC and they gave us the go ahead. it was a big hit with the vietnam guys..... after Vietnam. they canceled the 4th line company and added a weapons company to each battalion. most of the weapons were in other places...IE regimental TOW's and Mortar platoons and Battalion H&S companys for medium AT weapons.

"Juliet" is the alphabet code from after WW2, before that, it would have been "Jig."

As I understand it, the US Army and Marines don't use a J Company (and neither did the British), since it's too easy to mix up I and J when written by hand. And when a battle could turn on an order scribbled in pencil on a sweat-stained message order, it seemed like a good idea.

[Canadian Army]

I have a question that I would like some feed back on. Should the Low Altitude Air Defense Battalions be replaced with the Light Anti-Aircraft Missile Battalions, which were active in 1996. The MIM-23B Hawk; used by the Light Anti-Aircraft Missile Battalions; was phased out of U.S. Marine Corps service in 2002, replacing it with the FIM-92 Stinger; which is used by the Low Altitude Air Defense Battalions.

I think no, because I think that Marine Corps would replaced the HAWK Missile sooner than 2002 if there was a viable threat on the horizon.

Also I'm currently working on the UK/NL Landing Force (Royal Marines and Korps Mariniers unit), I will post for all interested parties.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by kota1342000

...given the length of the Twilight War, I figure, hell, why not?

And given it's just a game, there's no need to give reality anything more than lip service.

[LAW0306]

Leg even if its a game should we not try to be a little bit true to things in the military?

[Canadian Army]

Thank you all for your input, especially all you marines out there. Here is answers to the questions you ask.

1. Yes the Navy/Marine Corps amphibious forces list is for 1996.

2. The Combined Battalion was something I happen as Marine Corps would be more involved mechanized warfare, especially in Europe and the Middle East theaters. The M113s and M1A2 were based on information I had at the time. I have since learned that all of the Marine M1A2s are all US Army Gulf War surplus, which would not be available. The M113s were used because of larger number. I agree AAV7s and M60A3 fit in better and it will be one of the corrections I will be doing.

3. The Maritime Special Purpose Force (The Raiders), the way I envisioned was the Raiders as an ad-hoc unit designed to supplement US Navy SEALs, who would deployed elsewhere.