Even if they come to their senses, it’s not just a matter of equipment purchases. It will take years to replace the experience and training that has been lost. The Corps falls farther and farther behind, every day this ridiculous experiment continues.
Whatever conditions existed that allowed this mentality to attain leadership positions in our Marine Corps, must be identified and excised. Semper Fi
In WWII the fabled German 88mm was an anti aircraft gun, an anti tank weapon and anti personnel weapon
with a wide variety of uses. There is no reason a similar type weapon with flechette type ammunition could not sweep drones from the skies.
Everyone in this thread, for five years, has explained the versatility and utility of tube artillery. Still, the Marine senior leadership continues its march to irrelevance.
With the loss of air superiority the Corps needs SP anti aircraft units traveling with maneuver units and different air defense capabilities with the Wing.
A beehive round for drones. Bring back the Avenger Humvee or the system which was on the LAV. The new Trextron Cottonmouth 6x6 for the Advanced Reconnaissance Vehicle, to replace the LAV, would be a good vehicle for a mobile SAM system. I also think the Division needs its own ADA, and not rely on the Wing.
The prototypes for a high end hypersonic interceptor round have already been trialed in 155mm and even 127mm calibers, a cheaper, slower, and heavier version with ballistically unstable effectors for down range safety and for higher rates of fire could bolster this capacity further when defending against massed artillery fires that peer adversaries will use against Marines as well as weaponized hobby store offerings.
The same rationale should be used in succeeding the big horizontal guns in tanks, but in a smaller caliber to allow for a dramatically lighter armored vehicle and more versatile fires. A 60mmL60 smoothbore revolver or chain gun could employ a very effective AHEAD or related timed release multi penetrator round, protecting itself as well as nearby foot Marines whom do not have to maintain distance from the lethal blast over-pressure of big horizontal tank guns. Horrifically effective against exposed enemy infantry or even chunking out holes in walls.
The armor penetrating qualities with a smaller caliber gun can be maintained with a 1kg APFSDS round that can eviscerate the side armor of tanks with rapid fire bursts, for surprise frontal engagements a limited three round burst with a 2kg-2000m/s electrothermal-chemical boosted round is within known technology. No tank should ever choose to go head on with other tanks and fight at parity or at best small advantage, fire and displace and call arty or other tank killing assets. This medium revolver 60 tank would have substantial armor given its more compact profile, the firepower can be boosted by a rear hull VLS of anti-tank, anti-air, and demolition missiles which could include a kinetic energy missile more potent than anything coming out the muzzle of a 140mm tank gun.
Rounding out the AHEAD and AP rounds could be a variable yield semi-armor piercing explosive effects rounds used to kill or incapacitate the occupants of building rooms, since urban warfare often is a necessity in modern conflicts and collateral casualties are no more acceptable than in the history past.
The airmobile revolver 60 tanks would share ammunition data and possess automated combat engagement programs at platoon and company level to optimize the speed and efficient use of a generous but still finite magazine capacity. These Marine armored combat vehicles would be assigned in strength to armored recce regiments as opposed to tank battalions, with regular assignments of companies and platoons to operate with Marine infantry. Some of the MAC-V units would be trained to MARSOC standards for raids with armored assault grade lethality, rather than just bombing terrorists it would be useful to capture and kill them all that can be located in a specific location.
As a side note to the drone topic here, I have seen statistics a few times that indicate 90% of the drones are ineffective due to jamming, relative ease of being shot down, and general lack of lethality of their terminal effects against armor. The drone element is useful, but overrated by media sources that have separate agendas behind their unobjective reporting.
AHEAD in Military refers to Advanced Hit Efficiency And Destruction, a system aimed at enhancing the effectiveness of munitions through precision targeting and advanced technology. Hmmm....interesting. Maybe AHEAD can be a cheap solution to eliminate the HIMARS antiship role/mission? or enhance?
https://www.army-technology.com/news/skydio-small-drones-us-srr/ So the US Army is moving forward with the Skidio X10D Drone. OK, I want to know more about this drone. The drone’s mission is surveillance and recon and its capabilities are impressive. I also believe that recon should be the primary mission of man-pack drones. Below is a “Youtube” discussion that covers the technical pros and cons of this drone and others. The video is a bit long but worth watching because it talks about the technical capabilities that need to be employed at the tactical level.
My thoughts are that this particular drone is not a toy and will need at least one dedicated operator (probably two or more). I will also take a certain level of support; battery charges, cleaning, transporting, etc. I don’t see it being use by a rifle squad drone operator. Maybe attach it to the rifle company?
The X10D is not a “Kamikaze” drone and I am left wondering how tactical Kamikaze drones are going to replace a “Fire for Effect” of the 155mm artillery strike. S/F
Way back in the 1980's at MCDEC, Quantico I was working on developing Electronic Warfare systems including electronic jammers and ways to deliver them. We had a hand emplaced jammer, EXDRONE, a drone delivery system and EXJAM, an artillery delivered jammer(s). In my view, Drones were very important but conventional means of delivering the jammers were just a important. I was an early proponent for drones, but in my opinion, artillery was perhaps the best way to delivery the jammers.
I note drone jammers are becoming ubiquitous-maybe down to the squad level??? Jamming a 155 dumb round is a feat not yet available!!! Standby…fire…CSMO may be survival to be revived
Even if they come to their senses, it’s not just a matter of equipment purchases. It will take years to replace the experience and training that has been lost. The Corps falls farther and farther behind, every day this ridiculous experiment continues.
Whatever conditions existed that allowed this mentality to attain leadership positions in our Marine Corps, must be identified and excised. Semper Fi
In WWII the fabled German 88mm was an anti aircraft gun, an anti tank weapon and anti personnel weapon
with a wide variety of uses. There is no reason a similar type weapon with flechette type ammunition could not sweep drones from the skies.
Everyone in this thread, for five years, has explained the versatility and utility of tube artillery. Still, the Marine senior leadership continues its march to irrelevance.
With the loss of air superiority the Corps needs SP anti aircraft units traveling with maneuver units and different air defense capabilities with the Wing.
A beehive round for drones. Bring back the Avenger Humvee or the system which was on the LAV. The new Trextron Cottonmouth 6x6 for the Advanced Reconnaissance Vehicle, to replace the LAV, would be a good vehicle for a mobile SAM system. I also think the Division needs its own ADA, and not rely on the Wing.
The prototypes for a high end hypersonic interceptor round have already been trialed in 155mm and even 127mm calibers, a cheaper, slower, and heavier version with ballistically unstable effectors for down range safety and for higher rates of fire could bolster this capacity further when defending against massed artillery fires that peer adversaries will use against Marines as well as weaponized hobby store offerings.
The same rationale should be used in succeeding the big horizontal guns in tanks, but in a smaller caliber to allow for a dramatically lighter armored vehicle and more versatile fires. A 60mmL60 smoothbore revolver or chain gun could employ a very effective AHEAD or related timed release multi penetrator round, protecting itself as well as nearby foot Marines whom do not have to maintain distance from the lethal blast over-pressure of big horizontal tank guns. Horrifically effective against exposed enemy infantry or even chunking out holes in walls.
The armor penetrating qualities with a smaller caliber gun can be maintained with a 1kg APFSDS round that can eviscerate the side armor of tanks with rapid fire bursts, for surprise frontal engagements a limited three round burst with a 2kg-2000m/s electrothermal-chemical boosted round is within known technology. No tank should ever choose to go head on with other tanks and fight at parity or at best small advantage, fire and displace and call arty or other tank killing assets. This medium revolver 60 tank would have substantial armor given its more compact profile, the firepower can be boosted by a rear hull VLS of anti-tank, anti-air, and demolition missiles which could include a kinetic energy missile more potent than anything coming out the muzzle of a 140mm tank gun.
Rounding out the AHEAD and AP rounds could be a variable yield semi-armor piercing explosive effects rounds used to kill or incapacitate the occupants of building rooms, since urban warfare often is a necessity in modern conflicts and collateral casualties are no more acceptable than in the history past.
The airmobile revolver 60 tanks would share ammunition data and possess automated combat engagement programs at platoon and company level to optimize the speed and efficient use of a generous but still finite magazine capacity. These Marine armored combat vehicles would be assigned in strength to armored recce regiments as opposed to tank battalions, with regular assignments of companies and platoons to operate with Marine infantry. Some of the MAC-V units would be trained to MARSOC standards for raids with armored assault grade lethality, rather than just bombing terrorists it would be useful to capture and kill them all that can be located in a specific location.
As a side note to the drone topic here, I have seen statistics a few times that indicate 90% of the drones are ineffective due to jamming, relative ease of being shot down, and general lack of lethality of their terminal effects against armor. The drone element is useful, but overrated by media sources that have separate agendas behind their unobjective reporting.
AHEAD in Military refers to Advanced Hit Efficiency And Destruction, a system aimed at enhancing the effectiveness of munitions through precision targeting and advanced technology. Hmmm....interesting. Maybe AHEAD can be a cheap solution to eliminate the HIMARS antiship role/mission? or enhance?
The old German Gepard is doing well in Ukraine.
Caught this article on RCP Defense a couple days ago. “Skydio delivers first small drones for US Army SRR programme”
https://www.army-technology.com/news/skydio-small-drones-us-srr/
https://www.army-technology.com/news/skydio-small-drones-us-srr/ So the US Army is moving forward with the Skidio X10D Drone. OK, I want to know more about this drone. The drone’s mission is surveillance and recon and its capabilities are impressive. I also believe that recon should be the primary mission of man-pack drones. Below is a “Youtube” discussion that covers the technical pros and cons of this drone and others. The video is a bit long but worth watching because it talks about the technical capabilities that need to be employed at the tactical level.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbpqFDzw678&t=2285s
My thoughts are that this particular drone is not a toy and will need at least one dedicated operator (probably two or more). I will also take a certain level of support; battery charges, cleaning, transporting, etc. I don’t see it being use by a rifle squad drone operator. Maybe attach it to the rifle company?
The X10D is not a “Kamikaze” drone and I am left wondering how tactical Kamikaze drones are going to replace a “Fire for Effect” of the 155mm artillery strike. S/F
Way back in the 1980's at MCDEC, Quantico I was working on developing Electronic Warfare systems including electronic jammers and ways to deliver them. We had a hand emplaced jammer, EXDRONE, a drone delivery system and EXJAM, an artillery delivered jammer(s). In my view, Drones were very important but conventional means of delivering the jammers were just a important. I was an early proponent for drones, but in my opinion, artillery was perhaps the best way to delivery the jammers.
I note drone jammers are becoming ubiquitous-maybe down to the squad level??? Jamming a 155 dumb round is a feat not yet available!!! Standby…fire…CSMO may be survival to be revived