I must repeat the Gray maxim stated when he ran the Development Center at Quantico: “you fight a war with what you have at hand, not what’s on the drawing board or somewhere in the acquisition pipeline.” Divesting the Weapons, Formations and Marines in advance was a huge error and no amount of “speed” in the development, testing and acquisition system will correct it. Get the funding and rebuild our war fighting ability NOW.
Happily we MCCP readers and contributors consume the same OSINT and read voluminous amounts of articles on these topics. as well as, retain the decades of learning and experiences from our Active Duty Marine Careers as Senior Officers, taught to us as Juniors by the Giants of the Corps who learned from their experience in Korea and Viet Nam. We also have read 3500 years of the history of war. The reality of Today’s Active Duty Admirals, Generals and those careerist, who seek for their own personal glory to be a GO or Flag Officer is that they will not dare speak or deviate from the “party line”! We are in a multi front war a World War. Currently we are fighting to the last Ukrainian while constraining the only Democracy in the Middle East from ending Hamas, while it stares down Hezbollah, Iran’s Proxy. The US Army cuts force structure while announcing Retiree Recall. The USMC doubles down on stupid w FD thinking drones will replace Artillery and Tanks while we send Artillery and Tanks and millions of rounds for each category to our allies who are actually fighting wars. Simultaneously Our Homeland has been invaded by those who will soon be attacking us in Our Homes. Thousands of Islamist, Chinese, Russian (assets and operatives) others from 172 countries have set up their cells and await their orders. Meanwhile one of the Rocks of Our Freedom, the USMC has been destroyed not by an enemy in battle but, by those entrusted to keep it viable.
During my three tours in Vietnam as a Marine artillery officer,I served as a Forward Observer and Aerial Observer with 3/4 and CAP Alpha in Phu Bai in 1965-66, as the artillery advisors with the Vietnamese Marines 1966-196, and as a battery commander with Kilo 4/11 on Hill 65 from January to August 1968 during the TET offensive where my battery was one of the first Marine batteries to fire the COGRAM (DPICM) rounds.. I also observed the effects of HIMARS in Afghanistan as a DOD contractor during 2009-2010.
I doubt seriously that if only HIMARS was available during the ambush patrols where I had to call in "Danger Close" fire missions against a squad of VC, that they would have shot a HIMARS mission. I served with Tony Zinni, Chuck Krulak, and Joe Hoar, and I am glad they are speaking out against this ridiculous and dangerous move to strip out our guns, tanks, engineering equipment and ECW aircraft.
Artillery, like aviation, must be versatile. Towed Artillery can be helicopter borne artillery. SP artillery and towed artillery have their place. With GPS each tube, towed or SP, can position in ways that best comport with terrain, enemy capability etc. Each can fire and displace individually. Key are the prime movers and the ammunition vehicles. With proper ammunition development tube artillery can be anti aircraft, anti drone and anti tank artillery.
The US marine Corps is divesting to invest in missiles? Tanks, engineer equipment, tube artillery, and aircraft are being traded for missiles…really? Design 2030 is pursuing the old WW2 Marine Defense Battalion idea of defending islands with anti-ship missiles at the expense of MAGTF combat power.
NMESIS (Navy Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System) is a missile that will be launched by a HIMARS on the unmanned remotely operated version of the Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV).
US Marines plans to integrate Naval Strike Missile on unmanned JLTV ROGUE Fires vehicle | May 2020 News Defense Global Security army industry | Defense Security global news industry army 2020 | Archive News year (armyrecognition.com)
“The NSM (Naval Strike Missile) is a multi-mission cruise missile that can ably neutralize highly secure maritime and land targets. It is a versatile missile and lethal weapon, delivering heavy naval power. The missile can destroy enemy ships located more than 100nm away. Equipped with an advanced seeker, it provides high-precision capabilities. The missile can escape enemy radars by performing maneuvers and flying close to sea level. It carries a 226.79kg-class warhead and programmable fuse.”
If the US Marine HIMARS has the opportunity to fire a NIMESIS at an enemy ship within its 100nm range, the first question I have is: Where is the US Navy? Dide the Navy and Marine Corps conceded to the enemy the loss of air superiority and the control of an SLOC? The 2030 Design MLR is the old WW2 Marine Defense Battalion idea that failed at Wake Island. The difference here is we are trading naval guns for missiles. When President Roosevelt got the news that Wake Island was captured, he stated that news was worse than the Pearl Harbor bombing.
The Marine Corps is also working on a ground launched anti-ship Tomahawk Missile.
The Tomahawk has been around for a long time. It was developed in the 70s and there are multiple variants and it is a long range (1000nm+) cruise missile. I would call the Tomahawk more of a strategic asset capable of protecting cities and islands (like Gaum) and helping to control SLOCs. For that reason it will need an integrated air and missile defense creating an additional requirement for the Marine Corps.
The development of this ground launched system is for coastal defense and that is traditionally an US Army mission. Why not give our Tomahawk launcher requirement and anti-missile defense requirements to the US Army instead of listing its development as an unfunded requirement?
Anti-ship and anti-missile defense of SLOCs is the mission for the US Navy. If a Marine MEU is committed to a small island seizure or amphibious raid, I think an Arleigh-Burke Destroyer (or two) would do nicely for anti-missile defense. Besides, if I remember my old amphibious doctrine, each a Color Beach requires a destroyer in direct fire support.
Final note on the Tomahawk. The US did developed a ground base launch unit for the USAF. Curious why that requirement was not handed back to the USAF.
Another interesting point is the ground facilities required to support this Tomahawk system. Here is a picture of the facilities in England. I suspect that a ground launch Tomahawk system is going to eat a lot of amphibious ship square footage.
Is the US Navy planning to pivot from advanced bases or planning to abandon US Marines in the Pacific or any other sea based conflict? I am wondering because I am recalling the Navy’s withdrawal from the Guadalcanal Battle and the failed relief of Wake Island during WW2. We also need to remember that Midway Island was “plaster” despite knowing it was the Japanese objective and reinforced island defenses. The airfield (and planes) were destroyed in the first Japanese aerial attack wave. The B-17s were drawn off from Wake with the Japanese deception attack on the Aleutian Islands. The Japanese were planning on a second air raid to destroy the Midway facilities when they realized that US carriers were in the area. We knew Midway Island was the Japanese objective and we beefed up the islands defenses and in all probability those defenses were going to be over whelmed.
We need to remind the Commandant and the US Navy that the anti-ship (and anti-missile) mission is very different from the mission of the USMC tube artillery.
Now Design 2030 is pursuing the old WW2 Marine Defense Battalion idea of defending islands with anti-ship missiles at the expense of MAGTF combat power.
I came away from the article believing that General Rainey was talking about towed artillery. We've all heard stories of artillery (or anything) being decimated by drones and counter-battery fires. I could not agree more. On today's battlefield, to be idle is to be killed.
There are numerous new mobile/wheeled light artillery systems out there: the Hawkeye/Humvee 105mm, the Brutus 155mm (on an Army 5T chassis). In the March 2024, issue of the Gazette, there is a fine article about the French CAESAR 155mm howitzer. The article: Artillery: Move or DIe. The title speaks for itself. The Marine Corps could adopt a 155mm on the chassis of the 7T MTVR. In addition to artillery, the Marine Corps should bring back the 120mm mortar on a Humvee or MZRZ chassis.
Seven batteries of tube artillery are the equivalent of just two battalions of artillery for a three-division force. Totally unacceptable. Instead of reducing artillery, we need more. Each division should have at least a regiment of three tube battalions and a HIMARS battalion. Artillery is being used in Ukraine at WWII rates of fire. This is just a glimpse of the future. Is anyone at HQMC listening?
Artillery was never to be in reserve was taught to me early on. Yes, we knew we’d be hunted by any enemy, we mastered night and radio silence moves, and always had logistics in the right side of the brain housing group. Many decisions made in this maddening drama were made with no loud dissenting opinions-and there certainly should have been. Might it be these now decision makers always had the fire support they needed with a foe that lacked the ability to have much arty much less the ability to mass fires??? It would seem so
Our strategic stocks need replenishment and then some
Maybe those sleeper cells reside in the farm lands owned by their hostile to us nations? None of us doubt their presence
My MOS was Armored Scout/Observer back in the days of the Cold War, while my heart lies with the infantry - Ernie Pyle’s “mud, wind, rain, and snow boys” but it’s artillery that makes the infantry and armor into an army. No reason not to use up the existing tubes while bringing on the needed mobility for the future and if you’re really in a hurry give Ukraine the tubes now and let them use them ( along with the needed rounds). And “artillery” doesn’t need to be limited to gun tubes but any mobile system that accurately delivers firepower at long range on the target.
When trying to make sense of the motivation of the myopic and as we learn of the slanted thinking toward FD230 and “Divest to invest” through corrupted “war gaming” one is repeatedly trying to figure out where the former CMC, the current CMC and their toadies went off the rails and left the Corps behind. It dawned on me, like any corporate enterprise that is publicly traded when the mangers at the top have a vision, which is likely flawed, they have to sell it to two constituencies, the Big Wall Street investors and then the general public. In order to do this they need to avoid litigation if their lousy ideas go bust. Think “New Coke.” In analyzing the last several years, if one closed their eyes they would hear and sense McKenzie and Co all over FD2030. Minimize your opposition which in this case is easy, “that’s an order Marine!” “We are divesting to invest and you will like it.” Then get the consultants to help sell the idea. That’s what they get paid for, and the good news for McKenzie and Co, is they get paid no matter what the outcome. Where else would a general officer ever get the idea that he needed other officers with security clearances and years of active duty experiences to sign NDA’s like they were rolling out the next Tesla Cyber Truck. Exactly, the consultants. Next use the consultants to find the lobbyists, who bend the congressional ears collectively. “You NEED FD2030 Congressman Blatz, it’s a must; Hell everyone has an FD2030!” The retail investors aka the American taxpayers paid their money and took their chances only they didn’t know someone had their foot on the roulette wheel at Rick’s Cafe’. Surely our generals and admirals know what they are talking about! The consultants keep them coming through the doors of the casino.
Now the bad news and it ALWAYS happens to bad ideas (just ask Jeff Skilling at Enron) when the bad idea is exposed, say in a case of the NEO and the MEU being one key reason that the NEO didn’t turn completely pear shaped at HKIA in August of 2021, or a little “special operation” in the Ukraine in which 10,000 to 20,000 artillery rounds are being fired a day, the consultants bail out. “Sorry General Berger and Smith, we just are awash in new business gigs and can only send a few new associates with their MBA from the Cracker Jacks box to help you. Good luck in the semifinals!” The consultants know you can’t hide the bad idea anymore. Recall the New Coke….
The damage is done. Now it’s up to the hard workers and those that want to turn it all around to fix the mess. Despite the awful feelings of concern about the situation and the future of the Corps, there is an underlying, a physical deliverable here at CP, which is our pathological optimism! We know the problems, there are very great and experienced minds at working on ideas to solve shambles of the last several years. The grift has been exposed. Now the heavy lifting. HMLA 269 is back in business. Surely new artillery tubes and a return of the engineers could be next. Maybe some of the great ideas on ship modification to support the amphibious lift issue get a real hearing. Something really simple sniper school reopens. Go figure over watch with a rifle and scope. The big issue is continued and relentless attack on FD2030 and Divest to Invest. Kill those two foes and better outcomes are likely.
Reply to Richard M. Cavagnol's comment.
Dick, Compass Points has received a reply from General Zinni to your comment.
"Dick was a great artillery officer! He saved my butt with a 714 round TOT to stop an attack on the Vietnamese Marine company I was with." -- ACZ
I must repeat the Gray maxim stated when he ran the Development Center at Quantico: “you fight a war with what you have at hand, not what’s on the drawing board or somewhere in the acquisition pipeline.” Divesting the Weapons, Formations and Marines in advance was a huge error and no amount of “speed” in the development, testing and acquisition system will correct it. Get the funding and rebuild our war fighting ability NOW.
Happily we MCCP readers and contributors consume the same OSINT and read voluminous amounts of articles on these topics. as well as, retain the decades of learning and experiences from our Active Duty Marine Careers as Senior Officers, taught to us as Juniors by the Giants of the Corps who learned from their experience in Korea and Viet Nam. We also have read 3500 years of the history of war. The reality of Today’s Active Duty Admirals, Generals and those careerist, who seek for their own personal glory to be a GO or Flag Officer is that they will not dare speak or deviate from the “party line”! We are in a multi front war a World War. Currently we are fighting to the last Ukrainian while constraining the only Democracy in the Middle East from ending Hamas, while it stares down Hezbollah, Iran’s Proxy. The US Army cuts force structure while announcing Retiree Recall. The USMC doubles down on stupid w FD thinking drones will replace Artillery and Tanks while we send Artillery and Tanks and millions of rounds for each category to our allies who are actually fighting wars. Simultaneously Our Homeland has been invaded by those who will soon be attacking us in Our Homes. Thousands of Islamist, Chinese, Russian (assets and operatives) others from 172 countries have set up their cells and await their orders. Meanwhile one of the Rocks of Our Freedom, the USMC has been destroyed not by an enemy in battle but, by those entrusted to keep it viable.
During my three tours in Vietnam as a Marine artillery officer,I served as a Forward Observer and Aerial Observer with 3/4 and CAP Alpha in Phu Bai in 1965-66, as the artillery advisors with the Vietnamese Marines 1966-196, and as a battery commander with Kilo 4/11 on Hill 65 from January to August 1968 during the TET offensive where my battery was one of the first Marine batteries to fire the COGRAM (DPICM) rounds.. I also observed the effects of HIMARS in Afghanistan as a DOD contractor during 2009-2010.
I doubt seriously that if only HIMARS was available during the ambush patrols where I had to call in "Danger Close" fire missions against a squad of VC, that they would have shot a HIMARS mission. I served with Tony Zinni, Chuck Krulak, and Joe Hoar, and I am glad they are speaking out against this ridiculous and dangerous move to strip out our guns, tanks, engineering equipment and ECW aircraft.
Artillery, like aviation, must be versatile. Towed Artillery can be helicopter borne artillery. SP artillery and towed artillery have their place. With GPS each tube, towed or SP, can position in ways that best comport with terrain, enemy capability etc. Each can fire and displace individually. Key are the prime movers and the ammunition vehicles. With proper ammunition development tube artillery can be anti aircraft, anti drone and anti tank artillery.
Marine Missiles
The US marine Corps is divesting to invest in missiles? Tanks, engineer equipment, tube artillery, and aircraft are being traded for missiles…really? Design 2030 is pursuing the old WW2 Marine Defense Battalion idea of defending islands with anti-ship missiles at the expense of MAGTF combat power.
NMESIS (Navy Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System) is a missile that will be launched by a HIMARS on the unmanned remotely operated version of the Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV).
US Marines plans to integrate Naval Strike Missile on unmanned JLTV ROGUE Fires vehicle | May 2020 News Defense Global Security army industry | Defense Security global news industry army 2020 | Archive News year (armyrecognition.com)
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/07/us-marines-conduct-first-nmesis-launch-in-two-years/
“The NSM (Naval Strike Missile) is a multi-mission cruise missile that can ably neutralize highly secure maritime and land targets. It is a versatile missile and lethal weapon, delivering heavy naval power. The missile can destroy enemy ships located more than 100nm away. Equipped with an advanced seeker, it provides high-precision capabilities. The missile can escape enemy radars by performing maneuvers and flying close to sea level. It carries a 226.79kg-class warhead and programmable fuse.”
https://www.naval-technology.com/projects/navy-marine-expeditionary-ship-interdiction-system-nmesis-us/?cf-view
If the US Marine HIMARS has the opportunity to fire a NIMESIS at an enemy ship within its 100nm range, the first question I have is: Where is the US Navy? Dide the Navy and Marine Corps conceded to the enemy the loss of air superiority and the control of an SLOC? The 2030 Design MLR is the old WW2 Marine Defense Battalion idea that failed at Wake Island. The difference here is we are trading naval guns for missiles. When President Roosevelt got the news that Wake Island was captured, he stated that news was worse than the Pearl Harbor bombing.
The Marine Corps is also working on a ground launched anti-ship Tomahawk Missile.
https://seapowermagazine.org/navy-orders-tomahawk-cruise-missiles-for-marine-corps-army/
The Tomahawk has been around for a long time. It was developed in the 70s and there are multiple variants and it is a long range (1000nm+) cruise missile. I would call the Tomahawk more of a strategic asset capable of protecting cities and islands (like Gaum) and helping to control SLOCs. For that reason it will need an integrated air and missile defense creating an additional requirement for the Marine Corps.
https://www.marines.mil/News/News-Display/Article/3473524/back-to-the-future-mric-and-the-rebirth-of-the-corps-air-defense-capability/
Question: Why is both the US Army and Marine Corps working on this development?
https://www.army.mil/article/269227/army_successfully_fires_tomahawk_missiles_from_mrc_system
The development of this ground launched system is for coastal defense and that is traditionally an US Army mission. Why not give our Tomahawk launcher requirement and anti-missile defense requirements to the US Army instead of listing its development as an unfunded requirement?
https://news.usni.org/2021/06/02/anti-ship-missiles-top-marines-2-95b-fiscal-year-2022-wishlist
https://www.marines.mil/News/News-Display/Article/3473524/back-to-the-future-mric-and-the-rebirth-of-the-corps-air-defense-capability/
Anti-ship and anti-missile defense of SLOCs is the mission for the US Navy. If a Marine MEU is committed to a small island seizure or amphibious raid, I think an Arleigh-Burke Destroyer (or two) would do nicely for anti-missile defense. Besides, if I remember my old amphibious doctrine, each a Color Beach requires a destroyer in direct fire support.
Final note on the Tomahawk. The US did developed a ground base launch unit for the USAF. Curious why that requirement was not handed back to the USAF.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BGM-109G_Ground_Launched_Cruise_Missile#
Another interesting point is the ground facilities required to support this Tomahawk system. Here is a picture of the facilities in England. I suspect that a ground launch Tomahawk system is going to eat a lot of amphibious ship square footage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BGM-109G_Ground_Launched_Cruise_Missile#/media/File:RAF-Molesworth-25Jan1989.jpg
Is the US Navy planning to pivot from advanced bases or planning to abandon US Marines in the Pacific or any other sea based conflict? I am wondering because I am recalling the Navy’s withdrawal from the Guadalcanal Battle and the failed relief of Wake Island during WW2. We also need to remember that Midway Island was “plaster” despite knowing it was the Japanese objective and reinforced island defenses. The airfield (and planes) were destroyed in the first Japanese aerial attack wave. The B-17s were drawn off from Wake with the Japanese deception attack on the Aleutian Islands. The Japanese were planning on a second air raid to destroy the Midway facilities when they realized that US carriers were in the area. We knew Midway Island was the Japanese objective and we beefed up the islands defenses and in all probability those defenses were going to be over whelmed.
We need to remind the Commandant and the US Navy that the anti-ship (and anti-missile) mission is very different from the mission of the USMC tube artillery.
Now Design 2030 is pursuing the old WW2 Marine Defense Battalion idea of defending islands with anti-ship missiles at the expense of MAGTF combat power.
I came away from the article believing that General Rainey was talking about towed artillery. We've all heard stories of artillery (or anything) being decimated by drones and counter-battery fires. I could not agree more. On today's battlefield, to be idle is to be killed.
There are numerous new mobile/wheeled light artillery systems out there: the Hawkeye/Humvee 105mm, the Brutus 155mm (on an Army 5T chassis). In the March 2024, issue of the Gazette, there is a fine article about the French CAESAR 155mm howitzer. The article: Artillery: Move or DIe. The title speaks for itself. The Marine Corps could adopt a 155mm on the chassis of the 7T MTVR. In addition to artillery, the Marine Corps should bring back the 120mm mortar on a Humvee or MZRZ chassis.
Seven batteries of tube artillery are the equivalent of just two battalions of artillery for a three-division force. Totally unacceptable. Instead of reducing artillery, we need more. Each division should have at least a regiment of three tube battalions and a HIMARS battalion. Artillery is being used in Ukraine at WWII rates of fire. This is just a glimpse of the future. Is anyone at HQMC listening?
Artillery was never to be in reserve was taught to me early on. Yes, we knew we’d be hunted by any enemy, we mastered night and radio silence moves, and always had logistics in the right side of the brain housing group. Many decisions made in this maddening drama were made with no loud dissenting opinions-and there certainly should have been. Might it be these now decision makers always had the fire support they needed with a foe that lacked the ability to have much arty much less the ability to mass fires??? It would seem so
Our strategic stocks need replenishment and then some
Maybe those sleeper cells reside in the farm lands owned by their hostile to us nations? None of us doubt their presence
My MOS was Armored Scout/Observer back in the days of the Cold War, while my heart lies with the infantry - Ernie Pyle’s “mud, wind, rain, and snow boys” but it’s artillery that makes the infantry and armor into an army. No reason not to use up the existing tubes while bringing on the needed mobility for the future and if you’re really in a hurry give Ukraine the tubes now and let them use them ( along with the needed rounds). And “artillery” doesn’t need to be limited to gun tubes but any mobile system that accurately delivers firepower at long range on the target.
When trying to make sense of the motivation of the myopic and as we learn of the slanted thinking toward FD230 and “Divest to invest” through corrupted “war gaming” one is repeatedly trying to figure out where the former CMC, the current CMC and their toadies went off the rails and left the Corps behind. It dawned on me, like any corporate enterprise that is publicly traded when the mangers at the top have a vision, which is likely flawed, they have to sell it to two constituencies, the Big Wall Street investors and then the general public. In order to do this they need to avoid litigation if their lousy ideas go bust. Think “New Coke.” In analyzing the last several years, if one closed their eyes they would hear and sense McKenzie and Co all over FD2030. Minimize your opposition which in this case is easy, “that’s an order Marine!” “We are divesting to invest and you will like it.” Then get the consultants to help sell the idea. That’s what they get paid for, and the good news for McKenzie and Co, is they get paid no matter what the outcome. Where else would a general officer ever get the idea that he needed other officers with security clearances and years of active duty experiences to sign NDA’s like they were rolling out the next Tesla Cyber Truck. Exactly, the consultants. Next use the consultants to find the lobbyists, who bend the congressional ears collectively. “You NEED FD2030 Congressman Blatz, it’s a must; Hell everyone has an FD2030!” The retail investors aka the American taxpayers paid their money and took their chances only they didn’t know someone had their foot on the roulette wheel at Rick’s Cafe’. Surely our generals and admirals know what they are talking about! The consultants keep them coming through the doors of the casino.
Now the bad news and it ALWAYS happens to bad ideas (just ask Jeff Skilling at Enron) when the bad idea is exposed, say in a case of the NEO and the MEU being one key reason that the NEO didn’t turn completely pear shaped at HKIA in August of 2021, or a little “special operation” in the Ukraine in which 10,000 to 20,000 artillery rounds are being fired a day, the consultants bail out. “Sorry General Berger and Smith, we just are awash in new business gigs and can only send a few new associates with their MBA from the Cracker Jacks box to help you. Good luck in the semifinals!” The consultants know you can’t hide the bad idea anymore. Recall the New Coke….
The damage is done. Now it’s up to the hard workers and those that want to turn it all around to fix the mess. Despite the awful feelings of concern about the situation and the future of the Corps, there is an underlying, a physical deliverable here at CP, which is our pathological optimism! We know the problems, there are very great and experienced minds at working on ideas to solve shambles of the last several years. The grift has been exposed. Now the heavy lifting. HMLA 269 is back in business. Surely new artillery tubes and a return of the engineers could be next. Maybe some of the great ideas on ship modification to support the amphibious lift issue get a real hearing. Something really simple sniper school reopens. Go figure over watch with a rifle and scope. The big issue is continued and relentless attack on FD2030 and Divest to Invest. Kill those two foes and better outcomes are likely.
Throw another log on the fire…increase the heat to LISTEN.