I'll be the Marine Corps' Guinea Pig

[onodera]

297 people in a company? That's a bloody large company, I must say. Ours are twice as small.

[Ben Kenobi]

Platoon/squad level movement and tactics, some MOUT, some room clearing, react to mine/IED, react to IDF, that sort of **** everyone learns, and it doesn't take incredible physical prowess to do. You don't have to wreck your knees training unless you're light infantry.

I wonder how much of that has to do with people's service backgrounds. Heinlein was a Naval Officer and he shares Tuberski's opinions on this. The idea that everyone can be specialized for certain slots makes sense in theory. In practice, I don't think it does. It makes you much more vulnerable and I think it's important that everyone be able to carry their weight.

Lowering the standards isn't likely to attract more people - what you'll get are folks like me, with a physical disability presently barred from serving since I couldn't hear. If someone is determined to enlist and they are capable of attaining the required fitness levels, keeping the standards what they are will encourage them to get fit and get able to meet these standards.

Plus you have cameraderie - everyone having to swim through the same **** is important.

[regexcellent]

Every Marine is a rifleman...some get to do other things as well.

Yes, that's what the POGs like to tell themselves but...no.

297 people in a company? That's a bloody large company, I must say. Ours are twice as small.

Varies a lot by branch in the Army. I've heard of some companies being like 400 people. A standard infantry company I think is like 130ish, while an armor company is 60 and change.

[Al B. Sure!]

Every Marine is a rifleman...some get to do other things as well.

Yes. During OEF and OIF, artillerymen were formed into provisional rifle companies:

Battery I, 3/12 was attached to Regimental Combat Team 2 and tasked with a provisional infantry mission conducting combat operations in the Kajaki District, Helmand Province, Afghanistan. The battery conducted a relief in place with Delta Company, 40 Commando, British Royal Marines, at Forward Operating Base (FOB) Zeebrugge and became the first American unit to assume operational control of the Kajaki District and the key infrastructure of the Kajaki Dam. To characterize the execution of the transfer of authority as a steep learning curve would be a drastic understatement. During an 8-day period, the battery’s Marines were expected to adapt to the task of conducting daily dismounted combat patrols in routine contact with a well-entrenched insurgent force. Within days, squads of Marines encompassing a wide spectrum of occupational specialties were patrolling independently, leading the battery’s aggressive pursuit of enemy forces throughout the Kajaki District. My squad leaders were an 0811 (howitzer section chief), a 3521 (motor transport mechanic), and an 0621 (radio operator). The Marines charged with the conduct of our mission were anything but infantrymen, yet working together they realized their potential as highly proficient warfighters who proceeded to locate, close with, and destroy the enemy like generations of Marines from the sands of Iwo Jima to the jungles of Vietnam.

The ability of our Marines to quickly adapt and execute was a result of thorough preparation, which should be the focus of any unit preparing for deployment. Under the auspices of predeployment training for an artillery mission, the battalion and battery never took for granted the importance of training Marines for combat across the spectrum of operations. Marines were sent to the 1st MarDiv’s noninfantry machinegunners course and urban assault leaders course. Combat lifesaving was supplemented with live tissue training that proved indispensable and undoubtedly contributed to the life-saving skills of the battery’s Marines treating traumatic combat injuries. Marines also participated in provisional infantry training on a routine basis at the Camp Pendleton infantry immersion trainer, experiencing realistic combat scenarios that conditioned decisiveness in junior leaders. Identifying the unique nature of the threat posed by IEDs, Marines participated in tactical site exploitation courses, classroom instruction, and practical application of counter-IED operations all coordinated through the Joint IED Defeat Organization, which also conducted intelligence briefings with the SNCOs and officers of the battalion regarding up-to-date assessments of enemy tactics, techniques, and procedures specific to the areas of operation where the battalion expected to be located. During the many field operations conducted by the battery and battalion in preparation for deployment, the application of skills gained through the aforementioned training was emphasized, tested, and evaluated. While the battalion’s primary focus centered on providing accurate and timely artillery fire in support of maneuver, the skills required for success in combat, notwithstanding a specific task, were consistently emphasized and promoted. Enhanced MOJAVE VIPER is not the first time a Marine should find himself behind a machinegun since Marine combat training. It is the responsibility of leaders at the company/battery and battalion levels to ensure that the Marines in their charge continue to develop the critical skills required to succeed in combat. Once we prepare them, we must trust and empower them to apply the lessons they’ve learned. The things Marines can accomplish if given the proper training, resources, and opportunity are boundless. - See more at: http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/e....JImNf4Ga.dpuf

In today's COIN environment, there is no 'rear echelon'. The military is slow to change its training and orientation (until the early 2000's, Marine officer training was built around jungle warfare as a response to Vietnam), but already OIF and OEF have resulted in a stress on the ability of formerly rear MOS' to be combat effective.

The infantry can talk smack on pogues (and remember, artillerymen and other non-infantry combat MOS' are still pogues) but every Marine is a rifleman and is expected to be combat effective. Every enlisted Marine goes through School of Infantry; I don't know that the army has a similar requirement of their enlisted.

Physical tests really ought to be MOS-specific.

That's partially the purpose of this test. They're trying to correlate PFT/CFT scores with combat tasks... simulated tank round loading, clean and press, and carrying a 95lb round 50m, among other things in order to have an idea of say, can this Marine with X and Y PFT/CFT be able to handle the tasks of an artilleryman or tanker?


As for company size, training unit sizes do not correlate with the fleet. By doctrine, a company consists of 3 rifle platoons (of 3 squads of 13 Marines = 39 + Plt cmdr + Plt Sgt + Plt guide = 42 Marines/plt) plus a weapons platoon (smaller. Like 20 Marines), plus Co cmdr, Co XO, Co 1st Sgt, Co Gunny, and a few Marines support staff (clerks, police sergeant, etc.) for a total of about 150 Marines/Company as per doctrine.

Real life complicates matters, though, so companies vary from as low as 80 men to as many as 250

[Al B. Sure!]

This is probably related to the push to lower physical fitness standards due to the increasingly obese American public.

Nope. In fact, standards are increasing due to the force reduction. Use common sense. With a shrinking budget and less personnel requirements due to the ending of wars, the military is becoming more selective in recruitment and especially retainment.

If your business plans to hire less people this year than last, would you lower your standards?

[Sava]

Speer. You seemed like you were/are in pretty good shape. Can you give me some basic stats?

h/w
bench/squat
mile time

Thank you. Just curious.

[kentonio]

[regexcellent]

Yes. During OEF and OIF, artillerymen were formed into provisional rifle companies:

In today's COIN environment, there is no 'rear echelon'. The military is slow to change its training and orientation (until the early 2000's, Marine officer training was built around jungle warfare as a response to Vietnam), but already OIF and OEF have resulted in a stress on the ability of formerly rear MOS' to be combat effective.

By rear-area security and convoy security, I meant the kind of infantry engagements that non-infantry units were getting in: convoy mine/ied attacks and ambushes, indirect fire and assaults on outposts, bases, and camps, and that sort of thing. Long-distance foot patrols aren't part of that domain as far as I know. I could be wrong.

The infantry can talk smack on pogues (and remember, artillerymen and other non-infantry combat MOS' are still pogues) but every Marine is a rifleman and is expected to be combat effective. Every enlisted Marine goes through School of Infantry; I don't know that the army has a similar requirement of their enlisted.

The Army doesn't have such a requirement for enlisted men or officers, although all officer accession pipelines require a certain minimum amount of infantry tactics be taught. I assume BCT teaches basics of squad and platoon movement and such and does STX lanes but I don't know. I don't think either would compare to SOI in depth or difficulty.

That's partially the purpose of this test. They're trying to correlate PFT/CFT scores with combat tasks... simulated tank round loading, clean and press, and carrying a 95lb round 50m, among other things in order to have an idea of say, can this Marine with X and Y PFT/CFT be able to handle the tasks of an artilleryman or tanker?

That's encouraging.

As for company size, training unit sizes do not correlate with the fleet. By doctrine, a company consists of 3 rifle platoons (of 3 squads of 13 Marines = 39 + Plt cmdr + Plt Sgt + Plt guide = 42 Marines/plt) plus a weapons platoon (smaller. Like 20 Marines), plus Co cmdr, Co XO, Co 1st Sgt, Co Gunny, and a few Marines support staff (clerks, police sergeant, etc.) for a total of about 150 Marines/Company as per doctrine.

I guess Marine squads have three teams then? Army squads are 2 teams + SL for 9 men.

[Al B. Sure!]

I guess Marine squads have three teams then? Army squads are 2 teams + SL for 9 men.

Yes. The Marine fireteam consists of four members made up of two buddy pairs: a rifleman, a fireteam leader with an M203, an M249 SAW gunner, and an assistant SAW gunner. There are three such fireteams per squad and 3 squads per platoon. Marine Corps doctrine is predicated on maneuver and small unit leadership. Compared to the Army, the additional fireteam per squad provides squad leaders with an additional maneuver element.

I don't know Army tactical doctrine but two FT's per squad significantly reduces maneuver. You're limited to one maneuvering main effort tasked to close with and destroy the enemy and only one supporting element to provide suppression. The Marine squad leader, by comparison, has more tactical choices and discretion.

It is interesting how much more trust and confidence is placed in small unit leaders in the Marine Corps compared to the Army. Army squad leaders are typically Staff Sergeants responsible for only two fireteams. Marine squad leaders are Sergeants or Corporals responsible for three fireteams.

[regexcellent]

Army doctrine (as I was taught anyway, which is a BIG caveat) is to split the squad into two equal sized fire/maneuver groups, with the squad leader moving with the maneuver group. Larger squads wouldn't fit well in the vehicles of Army mechanized units iirc. I'm sure downrange for dismounted patrols a PL could just throw another team at a squad if there's some kind of squad level action going on and the SL needs more firepower.

The increase in firepower in the 13-man squad is mitigated by the generally lower amount of firepower available to the company/battalion for marines. And aren't the marines replacing their SAWs with plain old magazine fed automatic rifles?

Someone like Oerdin probably knows more about this **** than I do.

[PLATO]

Friday has come and gone. Where is our update Al B.??????????

[Al B. Sure!]

What do you want to know? We just did some basic stuff. Deadlifts and clean/press with very low weights (135lbs and 115lbs), picked up and carried a 95lb shell 50m, did a simulated tank round loading (5 rounds in <35 seconds), climbed a wall in battle rattle, and did a max set up pullups.

All the females satisfied all the minimums except for clean and presses and some didn't do too well on pullups (although a few got 12+). For males, all the events were a joke. This is to be expected though since we're all lieutenants with high PFT/CFT scores.

[PLATO]

What do you want to know? We just did some basic stuff. Deadlifts and clean/press with very low weights (135lbs and 115lbs), picked up and carried a 95lb shell 50m, did a simulated tank round loading (5 rounds in <35 seconds), climbed a wall in battle rattle, and did a max set up pullups.

All the females satisfied all the minimums except for clean and presses and some didn't do too well on pullups (although a few got 12+). For males, all the events were a joke. This is to be expected though since we're all lieutenants with high PFT/CFT scores.

That about covered it. Thanks!

[Al B. Sure!]

Speer. You seemed like you were/are in pretty good shape. Can you give me some basic stats?

h/w
bench/squat
mile time

Thank you. Just curious.

6'2" 190lbs

I have no idea what my bench and squat are. I don't know my mile time, either. I had a 20:05 3 mile on my PFT in early May and a 2:43 800m (in boots and utes) on my CFT a couple weeks ago.

My expectation is my run has declined. Our PT here is combat fitness stuff, no distance running.

[Tuberski]

Your mile time would be ~5:30 or so, give or take 10 seconds.

ACK!