Check My Order! Marine BLT

[Timothy OConnor]

I'm about to (finally!) complete my Marine Battalion Landing Team (this has been a start and stop project so I have some elements for it). If you know Marine organization and doctrine, please review and comment.

Scale is 1 stand = 2-4 squads, 20-40 men, 2-4 heavy weapons/vehicles, etc. For transports lift capacity required to move the assigned infantry stand determines the actual vehicle:stand ratio in some cases. I don't get hung up on strict mathematical ratios and focus on stand/battlefield function. So, some transport stands might represent 2 vehicles while others represent 4 vehicles.

Source material is this forum and Tom Clancy's Marine. Equipment limits, especially lift capacity, are a concern for me. Any advice/help in this area would be very much appreciated! When considering force compostion think "battalion-level intervention in complex third world coastal conflict" instead of land-locked ops like Fallujah or Nasiryah. Marine Corps Gazette has lots of scenarios along these lines. In such a situation is it reasonable to assume that some companies might be flown in via helo while others move in using AAVs? I'm also thinking about some LCACs to move the heavier stuff (tanks and LAVs). Good idea or not?

Battalion HQ with:
1 HQ Staff Stand
1 Humvee Stand

1 Heavy Company with:
2 Crew Stands w/Medium Mortar + 2 Humvee Stands
2 TOW Humvee Stands
2 HMG/AGL Humvee Stands

3 Rifle Companies each with:
2 Rifle/MG Stands w/SMAW
1 Rifle/MG Stand w/JAVELIN
1 Crew Stand w/Light Mortar

Attached Platoons:
1 Recon LAV-25 Stand
1 LAV-AT Stand
1 M1A2 Abrams Tank Stand
4 AAV Stands
4 Sea Knight Stands
4 Super Stallion Stands
2 AH1W Cobra Stands
2 Harrier II Attack Jet Stands

[voltigeur]

Taking a guess here. The 1 to many scale is kinda messing with me. Since there are 3 platoons to a company I would change the Rifle company to 3 stands. The Marines (At least when I was in.) held a triangular formation from top to bottom. # stands per company makes more sense to me.

Anyway just my 2 cents (At least in 1972 pennies) may 1.25 now lol

[Devildog]

Don't forget the attached Recon platoon from the Divisional Recon Battalion, maybe even a Force Recon team and/or Navy SEAL Team as well (depending on how your rules handle recon assets.) The Recon platoon would probably have HMMWVs or the new Wolf IFAV.

Generally 1 company would be trained to assault ashore in the AAV's, one to assault from Helo's and the third in light Rigid Assault boats, or they could follow up in a second wave of helo's or other landing craft. If I remember correctly a MEU has four (?) LCAC's to move heavy vehicles/equipment ashore.

[Rutgervanm]

Yup, a recon platoon would be a good idea. Additional Force Recon teams are sometimes attached to individual companies, so perhaps they wouldn't show on your organisation (unless you add them all up again).

A Marine Rifle Company has four platoons, tree rifle and one weapons, so in that respect the organisational table is correct.

I would guess the companies are all cross trained and it definitely doesn't mean that the 'rigid inflatable company' wouldn't be capable of helo insertions.

There is no fixed number of LCAC's as it is entirely dependant on the individual MEU commanders choice and the combination of ships in the PHIBRON. But as you've read Clancy, you probably allready know that.

One of the strenghts of an MEU is its multiple ways of insertion. Which of the different ways is used is entirely up to the situation I think. If you need speed and large numbers, but not much heavy equipment, you could use the LCAC's to drop off large amounts of infantry. If you need to deploy a small scout unit some distance from the shore, you can swingload a LAV each with your four Superstallions. Any combination is possible.

While I think this is a very cool unit for its completeness, I must say that I think an MEU does not come into it's own if you scale it down. What is the fun of having just one tank or one LAV on the table.

But that is just a personal note. I think this is a great unit to play with in CWC (for which I think it is meant, right?)

[Timothy OConnor]

Thanks guys! I love the FAV idea, more toys for the table top! Thanks too for the LCAC info, will likely add GHQ's models to the order.

re: organization both a circa 1978 Marine FM (FMFM 6-4) and current sources show rifle companies with 4 platoons (Three Rifle, One Weapons). And sources such as Osprey also show an "official" Vietnam-era four-platoon company of three rifle and one weapons platoon. Thus the following:

Three Rifle Platoons: each of 3 squads (each squad has three fire teams)

The fourth Weapons Platoon shows:
- 3x 60mm mortars
- 6-9x GPMGs (the '78 org shows 6x GPMGs while a later org. show x9),
- 3x LAW/Assault squad with 4 AT weapons each

Since stands are awarded capability at multiples of 2-4 weapons each I parceled out the GPMGs to the Rifle Platoons at 2-3 GPMGs per platoon and the LAW/assault squads at the same proportion (1 squad/4 LAWs per Rifle Platoon). Thus each rifle platoon stand represents (at full strength) 9x fire teams (each with 1x SAW) and 2-3 GPMG from the company-level Weapons Platoon for a total of 11-12 SAWs/LMGs (very high firepower in game terms!). Each Rifle Platoon stand is also awarded LAW capability based on the attached Assault Squads from the Weapons Platoon.

That left the 3x 60mm mortars aggregated in a single stand (the fourth one) as a Crew Stand w/Light Mortar. Crew Stands have limited self-defense capabilities in game terms to represent their smaller numbers and focus on crew-served weapons.

This is of course what sources show on paper! Osprey and other sources note that in Vietnam most companies left their 60mm mortars behind and parceled out the Weapons Platoon troops to the typically understrength rifle platoons, thus the familiar three-platoon company that Voltigeur mentions. Just drop the 60mm Crew Stand in game terms.

[Timothy OConnor]

But that is just a personal note. I think this is a great unit to play with in CWC (for which I think it is meant, right?)

Yup, exactly! I already have conventional battalions (eg Stryker) with lots of tanks, APCs, and IFVs. For this sale, err, project, I wanted to do something different. I also prefer a focus on infantry and complex, combined arms ops so this should be perfect!

Sample scenario for this force: coup in coastal third world country threatens US and European nationals, critical oil infrastructure, and escalation due to border conflict with neighboring country ready to exploit the chaos. Only thing available to protect/evacuate the US/European civilians, secure the oil infrastructrure, and block conventional (if very poor quality) neighboring country is this BLT.

So, you have a four-way conflict: Marine BLT, government forces, rebels, and neighboring conventional forces. The marine ground force is certainly light with very limited armor resources but excellent quality and excellent air and off-shore support. Purely from a game perspective it should be quite enjoyable with a mix of terrain and forces: LCACs and AAVs coming in from the sea, a couple of helo insertions further inland, and desparately needed air support (when available!).

Most importantly, there should be opportuntiy for lots of assyemtrical warfare for all sides. Where the marines can draw upon their limited armor and Cobra support they should do quite well against conventional and even unconventional foes. But the ROE will prevent them from exploiting thier firepower advantage in urban terrain and when isolated against the neighboring OPFOR the tables will be turned with marines acting as the light infantry against an armored onslaught (where is the air support when you need it?!)

And the victory conditions could be more interesting than the usual "capture the town/hill/bridge" as the Marines must make repreated sorties to extract the civilians while holding the ongoing chaos at bay. Sites that could be modeled include embassies and maybe a soccer field where Euro and US civilians have taken refuge.

Tim

[jb]

... If I remember correctly a MEU has four (?) LCAC's to move heavy vehicles/equipment ashore.

Just a note; Whidbey Island type amphibious ship to hold 4 LCACs+ LCVPs. Just in case you want add 1/2400 scale ships in

[Devildog]

I would guess the companies are all cross trained and it definitely doesn't mean that the 'rigid inflatable company' wouldn't be able of helo insertions.

Correct, they are cross trained, but usually during the MEU workup/training period each company in the BLT would be designated for a specific role and focus their training on that method of insertion/mobility (refer to One Bullet Away of Marines in the Garden of Eden) ie: the company assigned with the AAV platoon could expect to be deployed and fight as the armored force (usually in cooperation with the tank platoon) - etc.

[Timothy OConnor]

I'm curious as to how marines conduct an opposed landing with respect to armor support. Do they still have LSTs capable of delivering tanks to shore under fire?

I like the LCAC models and have ordered GHQ's boxed set. And they make sense for lower-intensity warfare. But in a major dust-up they would seem to be quite vulnerable in an opposed landing.

[Devildog]

From my understanding of current amphibeous warfare tactics (and eight years in the Marines) the current tactics are to avoid opposed landings at all costs - land where the enemy isn't, or conduct airmobile landings behind enemy lines to envelope them or cut them off, before landing across the beach.
I think the only vessels the navy has that are capable of beaching in amphib ops (correct me if I am wrong) are the LCU, LCM and LCAC - and you definately don't want to put the LCAC ashore under fire.

[ShortRound70]

Tim:

OB looks good from my references. I haven't seen CWC down here, so I'm not familiar with it. I would add a Recon platoon and a SEAL platoon as others have said. Also, don't forget the Engineer platoon. 1 x Dozer, 1 x truck, 1 x Eng. stand should do per your OB. How about the Service & Support Group (MSSG)? Are you going to represent them in the BLT as well? Just a thought. More importantly, lets see some photos!!!!!

[Devildog]

For some really good scenarios related to third world conflicts visit the Tactical Decision Game archive at the online edition of the Marine Corps Gazette.

[Cpl_Blakeman]

I'm curious as to how marines conduct an opposed landing with respect to armor support. Do they still have LSTs capable of delivering tanks to shore under fire?

Marines dont take the heavy armor to shore under fire, it just isnt done. If you cant clear the beach with harriers, AAVs, ship batteries, missles, etc, then it isnt worth trying to land some heavy armor via an LCAC.

Also remember your combat engineers in an infantry platoon.

[jb]

As I mentioned in an earlier thread, we are in the works of using the Solomons islands as a basis for a modern day scenario. So far it goes like this. Terrorist groups (for loss of a more fitting label no name yet) are setting up training camps in the Solomons islands. The US has 2 CBG (Carrier battle groups) on the way. One from Yokosuka, Japan and the other from Pearl harbor. Other forces in the form of SEAL teams need to be inserted to asess where and what these camps are. Once this is done force will sent in the form of either air strikes and/or marine landings.
One thing to note , in this scenario the port city of Honiara has a large airfield which is capable of handling large aircraft. The terrorist have aquired Mig-29s , SU-33 type aircraft, and Ka-27 ASW helos, which means they are supported by the Russians. This is one objective that must be destroyed. After that Honiara must be taken and occupied.Marine armor might be a valuable asset to take this objective.
I beleive that these MBLTs are what is needed for my force. I have a USS Whidbey Island, but that can only handle 500 troops (402/or +100 surge). I'm guestimating the above battalion is 700-800. (Anybody know how many?) If this is true I will need 2 USS Whidbey Islands. BTW USS Whidbey Island can also carry 4 LCACs or 21 LCMs and can handle harriers and helos.

[Cpl_Blakeman]

I know a bunch of our guys went out on the USS Boxer which is a Wasp class amphibious assault ship.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasp_class ... sault_ship

There are also still Tarawa Class amphibious assault ships out there like the Tarawa.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarawa_cla ... sault_ship

With an island campaign it will be more about mobility and less about heavy armor. Remember that heavy armor is not a major component of Marine Corps tactics as it is with the US Army, but that Marines use heavy armor as a one of many tools, not the 'big hammer'.