"Marine Corps" does not exist


There is the United States Marine Corps, which can hardly be called Marine Corps. But first things first…


The creation of a domestic analogue of Marine Corps would require a cycle of important organizational measures, the purpose of which is to unite all units of the marine corps and airborne forces under a single command, giving them Kantemirovskaya tank divisions, missile and artillery brigades, as well as engineering units and Coastal Forces of the Navy. In the process, it will be necessary to withdraw from the VKS and transfer to the new command several aviation divisions.

The command of the military structure should be placed in a separate building in the building of the Ministry of Defense on Frunze Embankment. At the entrance, knock out the inscription: “Armed forces of the Russian Federation. On a smaller scale. ”

Whether such a solution is necessary or unnecessary is another matter.

I suppose a satirical example gives a pretty good idea of ​​what the United States Marine Corps (USMC) is.

The practice of creating smaller “clones” of the armed forces is not uncommon in our time. It is enough to see what are the domestic troops of the National Guard (Rosguard) of 340 thousand people. Which in terms of equipment, in quantitative and qualitative aspects, often surpass the Armed forces of Russia! The latest models of small arms are also presented there. weapons, and armored vehicles, and military transport aviation. There are even combat helicopters!

Of course, the USMC and Rosguard have a different look and purpose. But the very fact of the existence of “yet another armed forces” in parallel with the main Armed Forces is not something exceptional in the modern world.

This is again to the question of how correctly to use the generally accepted term "Marine Corps" in relation to Marine Corps.

The concept of “Marines” originated in the XNUMXth century and referred to the light infantry that fought for the interests of the British Empire.


The meaning of the name was not that the soldiers jumped into the water, and, having barely reached the shore, immediately entered into battle.

Everything was much simpler. In order to get to any war, Marines soldiers first needed to cross the sea.

Fascinating sea cruises and conditions of service on distant shores, of course, left their mark on the appearance and equipment of these parts.

To date, the Royal Marines ("Royal Marines") have become what we used to call the Marine Corps. Elite landing units and special forces of the Navy with a total number of about 7500 people.

The Americans borrowed the word, but their idea of ​​Marines is very different from what we see in other countries of the world. In this sense, the concept, purpose and objectives of the United States Marine Corps is much closer to the concepts of the XVII century.

If you express the true meaning of USMC in Russian, then its most accurate translation would be: "Overseas Corps."


Expeditionary army, combining all kinds of troops and designed to operate exclusively on foreign territories. In the desert, in the jungle, in the mountains, on the coast - these are already particular conditions of that war, which is unleashed in the Pentagon’s offices.


Roller "Lt Baldomero Lopez" delivered to the next batch of amphibians AAV-7 in the Middle East. Pay attention to the typical marine color of armored vehicles. Just a picture of Aivazovsky!

Other tasks of the Corps are the protection of naval bases (here the tasks of the USMC are consonant with the tasks of the Russian Navy Coastal Forces) and the security of American embassies. Honorary ceremonial function.

Why is the marine corps quoted everywhere? The personnel of the US Marine Corps are 10-20 times larger than the Marine units in other countries of the world!

At the sea borders of Russia 12 thousand "black pea jackets" are serving.

China has two naval brigades of approximately 12 thousand troops.

Turkey has only one Amfibi Komando brigade.

The personnel of the United States Marine Corps today totals 180 thousand people, not counting 35 thousand reserves!

The few. The Proud. The marines One of the motto of the Marine Corps Corps sounds exactly like the famous “We Are Few, But We Are in Vests!”

The presence of parts with "Abrams" in the USMC is not much surprise. Participation in modern conflicts is impossible without the support of heavy armored vehicles. The scope of those conflicts is fairly obvious. 180 thousand people are held in combat service not for participation in "targeted" operations.

Tanks are inevitable. But often have you seen "Marines" armed with multipurpose fighters of the 4th and 5th generation?

300 combat aircraft and fifty air tankers. Behind which on the way - an armada of 800 helicopters and convertiplanes. USMC Aviation outnumbers the Air Force in most countries.

Here is such an "infantry".

The main difference between USMC and other types of aircraft is increased mobility.


In its purpose, the Overseas Corps is no different from what is called the US Army. Like the Marines, the Army has absolutely nothing to do on the American continent. The meaning of all Pentagon units is reduced to wars on foreign shores.

Nevertheless, in the interests of the "Overseas Corps" special samples of equipment are ordered that accelerate the deployment of troops upon arrival at theaters of military operations.

On the other hand, all these amphibious cars and aircraft with vertical take-off are just a decorative cover.

Major military operations are impossible without serious and lengthy training, without achieving dominance at sea and in the air. Examples of the XNUMXth century clearly demonstrate the timing. Long months of concentration of forces in selected areas.

First, gaining access to ports and airbases of neighboring states. With the subsequent penetration of enemy territory (North Vietnam, Iraq) by organized convoys across the land border. If the enemy is not able to provide organized resistance, and his state and power structures are decomposed to the state of anarchy and the Middle Ages, then the capital’s international airport (Lebanon, Afghanistan) is used directly as the “portal” for the invasion forces.

Of the major naval operations, only the Incheon landing operation can be called as an exception. Which, firstly, occurred 70 years ago. Secondly, the US Marine Corps was represented in it by a single division. The bulk of the landing were British and South Korean infantry units.

More recent example. During the special operation in Grenada, the number of "marines" also amounted to only 30% of the total landing force.

This is a very important point. Let us turn to statistics: over the years of World War II in the Pacific theater of war, units of the "Marine Corps" took part in 15 large landings of naval landings of strategic importance. Whereas units of the US Army - at 26!

The Marines cannot be blamed for cowardice. The mortality rate among them was higher (3,7%) than in other types of armed forces (2,8% for the army, 1,5% in the ranks of the Navy), while 80% of the irrevocable losses of the USMC were directly attributable to losses in battle. In terms of mortality, the Marines were second only to civilian sailors. fleet (3,9%).

The paradox had a banal explanation: the Corps was many times inferior in size to the Army, and therefore took part in fewer operations.

But the fact remains so. If the tasks of these "rambo" were successfully carried out by ordinary army units, then what is the uniqueness of the Marine Corps in this case?

The “accelerated deployment” of certain USMC units equipped with special equipment is in many respects overestimated and cannot be decisive.


The army and the USMC are fighting under the same conditions in the same directions. The need to ensure the same combat characteristics does not dramatically reduce weight and reduce the size of military equipment. The identified problems are largely offset by the capabilities of the transport command of the US Armed Forces.

Therefore, the "expeditionary forces" do not hesitate to use the Abrams MBT with a mass of 70 tons. And as a heavy truck, engineering machine and tractor, the Corps uses the army five-axle chassis LVSR (10x10).

Nevertheless, an obvious fact: the Marines do not even have 1/10 of the amount of heavy armored vehicles that are present in the arsenal of the US Army. And that puts an end to the “do-it-yourself” actions of the USMC.

No matter how cool the Marines are and no matter how magnificent their Javelins are, with only ATGMs with a limited amount of heavy weapons, they will not withstand the attacks of the armies of those countries against which and for the sake of which the 180th Zamorsk Corps are contained.

No Stryker and Bradley infantry fighting vehicles. The personnel of the Corps moves exclusively on "hammers" (19,5 thousand units), trucks (11 thousand units) and recently gained popularity of wheeled armored vehicles protected by the MRAP standard.


The situation in which such “light forces” will fall when trying to act independently on enemy territory is eloquently illustrated by the example of Somalia (1993). Then the United States Army units, also moving in trucks and light wheeled armored vehicles, got into a difficult situation. As a result, they are blocked and deprived of any chance of an independent exit from the environment.

400 tanks and two battalions of the HIMARS MLRS as part of the USMC are too few on the scale of serious operations.

And while the Marines are busy with their super-lightweight towed M777 howitzers, the army is using the Paladin self-propelled guns. Providing army units with significantly greater room for maneuver in the database zone.

The landing capabilities of the Overseas Corps are justified by the presence of 1100 AAV-7 amphibious landing vehicles.


30-ton amphibious armored personnel carriers drive beautifully along the beach and, in theory, allow landing on an enemy-occupied coast. In practice, AAV-7s are more common in the interior of the continent, performing typical tasks of armored personnel carriers. Associated with the transport of personnel in areas of armed conflict.


AAV-7 floating armored personnel carrier in Fallujah, Iraq. Far removed from the coast.

Promising floating (amphibious) ACV armored vehicles, ordered to replace the AAV7, will even more affect the number of landing groups. It is planned to purchase a total of 573 floating armored personnel carriers, half as much as is currently available.

Also in service with the Zamorsky Corps in small numbers there are wheeled BTR-BMPs under the designation LAV-25 weighing 13 tons. Able to overcome water obstacles swimming and even parachute landing. However, the popularity of the LAV-25 among the "Marines" is small. The number of light armored vehicles is at times inferior to the Abrams MBT!

This is once again about the priorities and real tasks of the Overseas Corps, for which amphibious assault forces remain a beautiful ceremony and a memory of traditions.

Undoubtedly, the Corps has amphibious assault forces similar to our Marine Corps, but the bulk of the USMC's tasks are located at a considerable distance from the coast.

USMC aviation deserves special mention.


The original idea was the possibility of rapid deployment in the war zone. With the deployment of aircraft on board aircraft carriers and at advanced airfields near the line of contact with the enemy.

In practice, all this was meaningless for several reasons.

The conditions and methods of basing USMC aircraft were no different from the basing of tactical aircraft of the Air Force.

It is very naive to believe that 4th-generation fighters (not to mention the F-35) will be able to service and operate from unprepared airfields. Only first-class airbases equipped with the latest technology!


USMC 11th Air Group at Sheikh Isa Air Base (Bahrain)

To date, the concept of "advanced airfields" in order to reduce flight time is completely out of date. During urgent requests, aircraft strike from the “airborne alert” position. After all, the duration of conventional sorties of multi-role fighters of the US Air Force in modern conflicts reaches 9 hours. Fighters with bombs “hang” for hours over or near war zones. Everything is done in the interests of the ground forces. From the moment a request is received, air strikes take a few minutes.

No VTOL aircraft stationed at the nearest aerodrome will provide such a response to the call.

In turn, the navy has its own carrier-based aircraft, superior in all respects to the aircraft of the "Overseas Corps". USMC squadrons are present on board aircraft carriers only as guests of honor.

As a result of all efforts to give a ghostly “mobility”, the bulk of the marine corps aviation currently consists of obsolete aircraft.

The basis of combat aviation is the first generation F / A-18C Hornet fighter-bomber and the Harrier II strike VTOL.

I believe that all connoisseurs of military equipment understand what is at stake, how different the capabilities of these aircraft are from the Strike Eagles and Raptors of the Air Force.

Things are slightly better with the promising F-35B, but there are also questions to the vertical. It is inferior in most TTX to the usual "Lightnings" of modification "A". From a less efficient hose-to-cone refueling system to an overly complex and overweight structure with a limit on permissible overloads and the value of the combat load.

But most importantly, the "Marines" lack their own AWACS aircraft, the basis of the foundations of modern air warfare.

The USMC fleet of rotorcraft makes a double impression. On the one hand, 800 units of helicopters and convertiplanes are power. Power with a capital letter.

On the other hand, there is only a faint resemblance to army aircraft, which are armed with over 2700 helicopters.

What is the USMC in light of the circumstances?


Conceptually - the invading army.

On the technical side - light motorized infantry with small "interspersed" heavy weapons. Which attached aviation units in order to simplify interaction and provide support from the air.

In reality, this structure does not correspond to the imposed image and does not have independence in real conflicts. Despite its large number and its “maritime” name, Marines have neither the ability nor the technical means to carry out amphibious landing on the coast of any prepared enemy.

Just as they would not dare to independently advance deep into enemy territory by land without the support of army units.

What was clearly demonstrated during Operation Desert Storm, the largest military conflict since World War II. The basis of the shock army again became the tank "wedges", which provided comprehensive support to other branches of the army. By the way, the American command took into account the experience of its predecessors in the operation "Citadel" and at that time effectively crushed the Iraqi defense.

Under the indicated conditions, all the tasks of the "light motorized infantry" are reduced to strengthening army units with heavy weapons. Acting in a single bundle, they really represent a formidable force.

Here, the last differences between the motorized infantry units of the Army and the Overseas Corps are blurred. Soldiers differ only in chevrons and payment checks issued from different departments.

USMC’s independent actions are limited to conflicts of the lowest intensity, in which the first "Marines" who arrive first are mostly police officers. Like any modern army, Corps units in such conditions demonstrate confident superiority over a technically weak and disorganized enemy.

The author of the article does not see the point in a detailed description of the particularities of the command of the Overseas Corps, which, as you know, "reports directly to the president." Who is whose deputy and what rank? Those interested in bureaucracy can find this data in any source.

I only note that even the US president will not be able to execute the order to deploy a contingent of such numbers. This is not an instant strike from a drone. Finally, the Marines themselves have no ships under their command; without the support of the fleet and the Maritime Command, they will not be able to get into any war.

The author does not set out to rewrite the established truths, because from this moment he returns to the familiar term "Marine Corps."


The main thing is to understand that under this phrase there is nothing like the Russian marines (Great Britain, China, etc.), which in their concept really are parts of the sea landing.

"Marine Corps" does not exist

The most interesting question: why does the ocean still need to withdraw part of the Army and Air Force units into a separate type of armed forces?

Everything is explained by traditions.

The traditions of military glory. And traditions benefit!

Taking advantage of the presence of “another army”, colossal contracts for the supply of “special equipment” for it can be implemented. Everything - from rations and uniform sets, to those questionable in terms of utility, but due to their small numbers of extremely expensive fifth-generation fighters with vertical take-off.

At the same time, you can build an armada of landing helicopter carriers with a dock camera. By the way, the Navy has tacitly recognized the fallacy of the all-in-one concept, dividing the classes of helicopter carriers and dock ships. In any case, neither one nor the other nor the third are used (and cannot be used) for their intended purpose in modern combat conditions.


The Marines will soon not have enough amphibious vehicles, and all military operations are conducted on land. The US Navy does not need 20-node pre-aircraft carriers; it includes full-fledged nuclear aircraft carriers. But just imagine the appetites of the shipyard in Pascagul! There, several generations of managers live on projects of such grandiose and meaningless constructions.

This is what “a special type of armed forces” means in practice, which needs special attention.

Not to mention the increase in the staff of general posts.
Author:
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

172 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Horst78 21 March 2020 06: 23 New
    • 12
    • 2
    +10
    Cool. In principle, I guessed that the Marines are not really Marines. ps We also have different marines. A former colleague from the Pacific Fleet (the Marine seems to be) called them "suicide bombers", and a classmate from the "Balt" even for a light "humorous" insult to the Marine immediately in the "rack".
    1. Insurgent 21 March 2020 07: 48 New
      • 16
      • 23
      -7
      It seems in the series of programs "Impact force", a phrase was heard separating THEIR AND OUR marines:

      THEY land on the coast, WE capture it.


      Actually, the repeated actions of the United States ILC, both in exercises and in a combat landing, confirm this statement.
      1. Deck 21 March 2020 09: 17 New
        • 34
        • 11
        +23
        THEY land on the coast, WE capture it.


        Sounds nice! How long have our marines captured something from the sea? Do not remind? Well, or in extreme cases, landed?
        1. Insurgent 21 March 2020 09: 22 New
          • 19
          • 28
          -9
          Quote: Deck
          Sounds nice! How long have our marines captured something from the sea? Do not remind? Well, or in extreme cases, landed?


          I will answer with a counter-question: How long has Russia generally had to conduct military landing operations at sea?
          And "part two" - All, practically without exception, the exercises of the MP of the Russian Navy are held under the legend of landing on the coast occupied by a fortified enemy.

          At the ILC of the USA, we do not observe this.

          They are still “Overlord”, the level of losses, still produces a depressing effect.
          1. Deck 21 March 2020 09: 26 New
            • 31
            • 16
            +15
            THEY land on the coast in the war, WE capture him in the exercises.
            The slogan has become even more beautiful! thank you for your opinion laughing
            1. Okolotochny 21 March 2020 10: 12 New
              • 18
              • 10
              +8
              Do you want to fight? So go ahead, get up off the couch and attack.
              1. Deck 21 March 2020 11: 37 New
                • 17
                • 9
                +8
                What the hell? Nobody attacks my house except greedy officials and cops (a collective image!). And they, unfortunately, do not live across the ocean, but near their heaps are darlings. Therefore, without touching the landing craft, we successfully fend off the enemy from the couch, using the laws they invented. wassat
            2. Horst78 21 March 2020 17: 34 New
              • 8
              • 8
              0
              Quote: Deck
              THEY land on the coast in war

              In what war did they land on the coast? Panama, Grenada? Oh yes, absolutely their level.
              1. Deck 21 March 2020 17: 40 New
                • 6
                • 7
                -1
                THEY land on the coast, WE capture it.


                Here is the "it" not the ILC came up with. These are local show-offs! But for example, to show evidence of their immense coolness in capturing the coasts? Actually, I just asked if I hadn’t followed the heroic deeds of the Russian marines. I thought maybe someone here will enlighten.
                1. maidan.izrailovich 22 March 2020 03: 40 New
                  • 8
                  • 4
                  +4
                  But for example, to show evidence of their immense coolness in capturing the coasts?

                  For you, the demagogue personally.

                  My uncle (the elder brother of my mother) in the Marine Corps went from Novorossiysk to Varna.
                  1. Deck 23 March 2020 08: 37 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Your uncle well done
            3. Ka-52 23 March 2020 06: 51 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              Deck (Pertti) March 21, 2020 09:26

              THEY land on the coast in war

              list full-fledged military operations during which your beloved USMC landed / captured the coast. Without blablabla.
              1. Deck 23 March 2020 08: 37 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Why did you decide that I love Marines (Nafig they surrendered to me, rednecks)? Without blablabla. I do not understand the cheers of patriotic frenzy out of the blue. No evidence. No facts. From which should I list something? Look for it yourself. Or ask the Insurgent, who pushed this agitation here. Are you eighteen year old collective farmers gathered here?
        2. gsev 21 March 2020 17: 22 New
          • 0
          • 3
          -3
          Quote: Deck
          How long have our marines captured something from the sea?

          Somalia.
          1. Deck 21 March 2020 17: 30 New
            • 3
            • 3
            0
            In November 1977 after the landing in Mogadishu with one amphibious tank PT-76 and two armored personnel carriers BTR-60? So the USSR was. And what about the current sea-legendary something to wrap up?
            1. gsev 21 March 2020 17: 42 New
              • 6
              • 8
              -2
              Quote: Deck
              And what about the current sea-legendary something to wrap up?

              There was a full-fledged war in Somalia. Yes, in the days of the USSR. There was a naval landing in the South-Autumn War, which ensured the destruction of the Georgian fleet. In addition, the return of the Crimea was unthinkable, including without the presence of landing forces. The latter has become a legend.
              1. Deck 21 March 2020 17: 49 New
                • 8
                • 4
                +4
                In addition, the return of the Crimea was unthinkable, including without the presence of landing forces. The latter has become a legend.


                For more details, please, how parts of the Russian marines captured the Crimean coast. I'd like to hear this beautiful story (legend)
                1. gsev 21 March 2020 17: 55 New
                  • 5
                  • 10
                  -5
                  Quote: Deck
                  how parts of the Russian marines captured the Crimean coast.

                  Where did you see the capture of the coast of Crimea? It was said that Russia had combat-ready armed forces and could neutralize the blockade of Crimea. The valiant service of the warriors turned the Crimean dream of returning to Russia into legendary history.
              2. tatarin1972 21 March 2020 18: 02 New
                • 4
                • 0
                +4
                What kind of landing ?! And what?! The landing ships approached the shore and took people.
        3. Vlad.by 21 March 2020 19: 05 New
          • 3
          • 4
          -1
          Sounds nice! How long have our marines captured something from the sea? Do not remind? Well, or in extreme cases, landed?

          The operation to capture Dalniy, Port Arthur, in 1945. It was the capture, not the landing.
          Try to refute.
          1. Deck 21 March 2020 19: 23 New
            • 6
            • 0
            +6
            Refute? What for? Who is arguing? For example, on March 3, 1799, the Russian marines of the squadron of Fedor Ushakov took the fortress of Corfu. It’s possible to get into Peter's times. What does this have to do with:
            It seems in the series of programs "Impact force", a phrase was heard separating THEIR AND OUR marines:
            THEY land on the coast, WE capture it.
          2. Sasha_rulevoy 22 March 2020 07: 56 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Vlad.by
            It is capture, not landing.


            ?

            The landing party was headed by the deputy commander of the Transbaikal Front, Lieutenant General Vladimir Dmitrievich Ivanov, he was accompanied by 4 officers and 200 soldiers from the 6th Guards Tank Army. At 17, planes landed at the Port Arthur airfield. After some time, Ivanov entered into negotiations with the head of the Japanese garrison, Vice Admiral Kobayashi. He immediately agreed to surrender and gave Ivanov his samurai sword.
          3. The comment was deleted.
        4. Afghan1979 22 March 2020 21: 01 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Yours definitely did not capture. And you don’t need to know about ours.
        5. Xazarin 22 March 2020 23: 15 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          I promised, on this site something to comment on, but there is no urine to hold back. 800 Marines in Poti in 2008. Quite a decent landing operation. We do not take into account the participation of the Marines in the Chechen campaign (since they did not do their job (in terms of specialization) but managed).
          And I don’t know how to insert the link, but hammer in the "Marines, Kofra, Parade" into YouTube and everything will become clear to you.
      2. Po-tzan 22 March 2020 16: 39 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Insurgent
        THEY land on the coast, WE capture it.


        And how many coasts have our marines captured over the past half century?
    2. tatarin1972 21 March 2020 18: 00 New
      • 6
      • 1
      +5
      Are you a specialist in the use of units of the Marine Corps of Russia ?! In the 50s of the last century, after the disassembling of parts of the marine corps of the USSR Armed Forces, at large-scale exercises with the marine company, they decided to transport the infantry regiment on landing ships. Surprises began immediately, two hours after going to sea, 2/3 of the personnel were not combat ready.
      1. Lopatov 21 March 2020 21: 25 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: tatarin1972
        two hours after going to sea, 2/3 of the personnel were not combat ready.

        This is not an argument in favor of the marines.
        This is an argument in favor of the normal training of conventional infantry.
        I don’t think that a couple of hours of riding in the BMP-2 landing party gives less load on the vestibule than two hours at sea.
        1. CTABEP 21 March 2020 23: 28 New
          • 8
          • 0
          +8
          The marines in the Russian Federation are not subordinate to the land command, that’s the whole tsimes, and there these 12 thousand can be justified. We have something else - a sacred cow in the form of airborne forces - the same ILC - its own line of equipment, they didn’t land parachutes in combat conditions (and it’s somehow doubtful in any modern conflict - from a local war to a theoretical big war), but the financing is separate and the preparation is better. As a result, instead of cooking better "fuel oil" (and leaving airborne assault units in it, capable of helicopter landing and having infantry equipment), we put airborne assault into all holes, which, although it has a high level of training, is burning in aluminum BMD. And the submission system itself is strange; it was a big mistake to remove the air assault brigades from under the command of the kmk districts.

          In favor of the American KVM, this is a parallel structure with a different bureaucracy, if budgets allow it - why not. But we pancake always have no money :(
        2. tatarin1972 21 March 2020 23: 34 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Probably those military leaders also thought that all the landing ships were flat-bottomed, so they even chatted with a "fresh wind", the vestibular apparatus could not be trained in two hours.
          1. Lopatov 21 March 2020 23: 48 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: tatarin1972
            The landing ships are flat-bottomed, so they chatted even with a "fresh wind"

            The infantry in the BMP-2 amphibious chatting even harder in motion. Even when driving on asphalt. And if the primer - untrained person in half an hour seasickness is guaranteed

            In general, as far as I remember, the task of "increasing resistance to motion sickness" in the NFP-87 was set only for pilots and paratroopers
            1. tatarin1972 22 March 2020 00: 16 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Did you go to sea ?! Manual on physical training with? You will be training from motion sickness on the Rhine wheel and on the swing of Loping ?!
              1. Lopatov 22 March 2020 16: 16 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: tatarin1972
                Did you go to sea ?!

                Did you ride for hours in the BMP-2 landing?

                Quote: tatarin1972
                Manual on physical training with?

                Hello, we’ve arrived ... Do we have other guidelines for physical training?

                Quote: tatarin1972
                You will be training from motion sickness on the Rhine wheel and on the swing of Loping ?!

                And you will find it in part, if they are not required by the NFP?
                1. tatarin1972 22 March 2020 18: 04 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  I rode for hours in BMD, armored personnel carrier. They recruited draftees with a health category of A1 and a good vistibular apparatus in the Marine Corps units, remember on the draft board, in the office at the ENT, did you turn on the armchair? All of the above simulators are present in the Marine Corps at the airborne forces.
                  1. Lopatov 22 March 2020 18: 18 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: tatarin1972
                    All of the above simulators are present in the Marine Corps at the airborne forces.

                    But motorized riflemen do not have them.
                    Although there is a need, and a big one.
                    1. tatarin1972 22 March 2020 18: 45 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      The whole point may be that we do not have a large number of landing forces and means. Maximum, in each fleet of landing ships per battalion, with reinforcements. And the flight-lifting, if reduced from all fleets, to two battalions.
  2. Vladimir_2U 21 March 2020 06: 24 New
    • 15
    • 2
    +13
    US Navy Does Not Need 20-Knot Pre-Aviation
    So to the uselessness of the BDK, and in principle the DK, you can hang out! A very strange article.
  3. arlekin 21 March 2020 06: 43 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    I watched a good series "Generation of Assassins." There are just Marines on the Hammers in Iraq.
  4. akarfoxhound 21 March 2020 06: 58 New
    • 5
    • 12
    -7
    The author, yours, like airplanes for hours hanging in a position of duty in the air - betrays with your head that you are in the subject of aviation mug. I'm sorry ...
    And so the article for understanding the topic "population" came out good, more than
    1. Santa Fe 21 March 2020 07: 19 New
      • 19
      • 3
      +16
      Author, yours, as planes hang for hours in the air-watch position

      “The record was the combat flight of the four F-15Es from the 391st Air Force squadron, which lasted 15,5 hours in the air!

      It was a routine sortie, during which the aircraft “lingered a bit” over the war zone. A combat patrol with mixed air-to-air and air-to-surface weapons flew from a / b in Kuwait to be over Afghanistan in three hours. There, the fighters spent nine hours, periodically attacking the targets that the "intelligence" had uncovered. And, they returned back to Kuwait. ”

      The usual duration of combat flights F-15E with a / b Al-Dafra (Kuwait) was 9 hours
      1. akarfoxhound 21 March 2020 07: 33 New
        • 13
        • 10
        +3
        Well done! A record experimental experimental share in a particular operation! Cool example! You would, dear opponent, pack in a full set of equipment with diapers, and put them into the cockpit of a fighter even for at least 4 hours for 15 of your ostentatious 15. And then it is not worthwhile to battle! Have you seen ours at such long, even record-breaking stages with refueling in the air in sparks on the Far East ??? The "green men" are just pale boys, so they were just "long flights." So during "normal" F-9 flights at 5 o’clock in 6 it can be taken warm. Or is it just patrolling "in length" without work, much less intense. This is not what you described as “about constant exposure.” Crazy overspending of people and motor resources with b / d even of medium intensity. This is not even the end pulls. In a simplified form, the explanation is more clear?
        1. Santa Fe 21 March 2020 07: 53 New
          • 17
          • 8
          +9
          You would, dear opponent, pack in a full set of equipment with diapers, and put them in the fighter’s cockpit for at least 4 hours on 15 of your ostentatious XNUMX.

          For a salary equivalent to 11 million rubles per year + all medical insurance and social package

          And you, and I, and any person would not ask a single question
          So with "normal" F-15 flights at 9 o’clock in 5-6 it can be taken warm.

          Any trucker will prove that this is not so))))

          They introduced an artificial limitation - no more than 11 hours at the wheel. If not for control - men are ready to drive all day.

          And to drive an 18-wheeled trailer in a dense stream of transport - it doesn’t fall apart in a chair, on autopilot, waiting for a call from the ground
          This won’t even be pulled

          Well, the facts say they pull


          Two super-hornets of the US Navy F / A-18 from the 31st fighter squadron December 15, 2008 carry out a combat patrol over Afghanistan. U.S. Air Force photo

          Wow, sea, with an aircraft carrier in the Arabian Sea. Climbed far away
          1. Insurgent 21 March 2020 08: 16 New
            • 9
            • 13
            -4
            Quote: Santa Fe
            For a salary equivalent to 11 million rubles per year + all medical insurance and social package

            Remember where this phrase came from?
            “Connections are connections, but in the end it is necessary to have a conscience, someday they will ask, but what can you actually show? And no connection will help to make the leg small, the soul big and the heart fair... "


            This is to the fact that no, even the most fabulous monetary allowance, and so on, will not cancel the banal PHYSIOLOGY.
            1. Santa Fe 21 March 2020 08: 21 New
              • 10
              • 8
              +2
              Do not unlock the banal PHYSIOLOGY.

              The physiology of a perfectly healthy person does not interfere with sitting in a chair with all the amenities and vibration massages in front of the screens for 9 hours

              Toilet, hot meals, drinks - everything is there

              It's not standing on one leg))

              The fact that the salary of the American military pilot (11 million rubles a year) will sometimes need to endure certain burdens of service - no one said that you would have to play golf in a five-star hotel

              Especially not daily, but a maximum of a couple of times a week
              1. Insurgent 21 March 2020 08: 26 New
                • 10
                • 18
                -8
                Quote: Santa Fe
                The physiology of a perfectly healthy person does not interfere with sitting in a chair with all the amenities and vibration massages in front of the screens for 9 hours

                It's not standing on one leg))

                Especially not daily, but a maximum of a couple of times a week


                Clear, pure logic sofa chair expert who experienced overload on a computer monitor ...
                1. Liam 21 March 2020 08: 32 New
                  • 14
                  • 6
                  +8
                  Quote: Insurgent
                  overloaded

                  And what kind of overload does the pilot experience while patrolling the Afghan sky?
                  1. Insurgent 21 March 2020 08: 37 New
                    • 4
                    • 24
                    -20
                    Quote: Liam
                    And what kind of overload does the pilot experience while patrolling the Afghan sky?

                    At the very least, psychological (especially since you have given the most comfortable example from the point of view of safety for the US pilot).
                    They may bring down, they may not be lucky and the equipment will let you down, and you will have to "leave the office" over the territory occupied by bearded men.
                    About the "stress tolerance" of the US warrior, the level of their psychological readiness for unusual situations, you will find the information yourself if you want.
                    1. Liam 21 March 2020 09: 12 New
                      • 12
                      • 6
                      +6
                      Quote: Insurgent
                      About the "stress tolerance" of the US warrior, the level of their psychological readiness for unusual situations, you will find the information yourself if you want.

                      Undoubtedly. At the same experts as you. On the site of courage)
                      1. Insurgent 21 March 2020 09: 16 New
                        • 5
                        • 14
                        -9
                        Quote: Liam
                        on the site of courage

                        Why primitize the serious problems of the US Army? Refer to others, including medical resources (open, secret data, no one will show you).

                        Go ahead, our faceless colleague ...
                    2. tatarin1972 21 March 2020 18: 12 New
                      • 1
                      • 10
                      -9
                      Well, I remember that there was something, at first in the Persian Gulf, they cried when they were captured, then the sailors from the destroyer Donald Cook massively terminated the contract when they realized that they had been divorced.
                  2. eaglet 22 March 2020 21: 35 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    For particularly limited experts - the flight itself is an “overload” for the body ... I’ll give an example, in Soviet times, studies were carried out, including simply measuring pressure after a normal “circle flight” - 12 minutes in the air, I have pressure on the medical board before flights 100/60, after a circle 150/90 ... so it’s a “normal circle", and "combat conditions", and overload during evolution ... lying on the couch - everything is so simple and everything is possible ....
              2. akarfoxhound 21 March 2020 11: 48 New
                • 10
                • 4
                +6
                I said that you will not get involved in a topic about which you have no idea. And the funny thing is that couch experts with a plush view of military aviation minus me and Insurgent. Only such instances have a vision of the life of a pilot - "the loot will write everything off."
                P.S. I now, already in "citizen", have the same representative with his vision at the regional airport. Not a day before that, having no contact with aviation, it pokes its nose into what it has no idea. But he has the opinion that after reading something, he understands the essence of organization and flight support. Some "losses" from his daily activities, you are tired of correcting. From such "professionals" with self-conceit crawling into control, aviation most often ends up subsequently with human lives, God forbid, of course. Thank you for your statement in my doubts. I’ll be a miracle to dismiss naxpen.
              3. Alexy 21 March 2020 21: 23 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                You have an interesting idea of ​​fighter pilots.
                This is a little not a business class of a civil liner, if you are not in the know)
              4. VladGTN 21 March 2020 21: 54 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Do you have a weak drive from St. Petersburg to Moscow and back without leaving your car? You can eat and drink as much as you like. You can ride in the diaper
                1. Santa Fe 22 March 2020 06: 46 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Do you have a weak drive from St. Petersburg to Moscow and back without leaving your car?

                  Compare too

                  Control of equipment in a limited space of roads, among a stream of passing and oncoming cars

                  Trucker in constant tension, he can’t take his hands off the wheel for a minute

                  What diapers
                  What a stone age
                  https://thequestion.ru/questions/159050/chto_budet_esli_liotchik_v_istrebitele_v_40da8831
                2. mmaxx 22 March 2020 17: 26 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  The device for urinating the Americans was still on the Thunderbolts in that war. Ours only reached this not so long ago (Su-27, for example). Who knows earlier examples? I am not very competent here.
                  Even in Soviet times, our pilots were outraged that they fly on bombers with parashes. And the Americans at AWACS with stewardesses and coffee.
              5. Ka-52 23 March 2020 07: 01 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                It's not standing on one leg))

                if my memory serves me, then just a long patrol caused the pilots in Afghanistan to fail and have nervous breakdowns. There was noise, proceedings, and lengthy medical research that confirmed fatigue disorders in pilots who had been under stress for a long time. In our country, the same thing happened while working in Afghanistan.
            2. NordUral 21 March 2020 11: 03 New
              • 6
              • 5
              +1
              Do you believe in a week with diapers in flight to the moon? Or has physiology been canceled there?
              1. Liam 21 March 2020 11: 17 New
                • 7
                • 6
                +1
                Right now it’s about Stanley Kubrick
                1. NordUral 21 March 2020 14: 11 New
                  • 1
                  • 4
                  -3
                  What does Kubrick have to do with it? I talked about natural needs, Liam.
                  1. Liam 21 March 2020 14: 38 New
                    • 5
                    • 6
                    -1
                    I know. My remark was that right now they will explain to you that there was no flight and everything was filming a cockpit in Hollywood
      2. Paul Siebert 21 March 2020 10: 12 New
        • 9
        • 8
        +1
        Wonderful article, thanks to the author!
        The comparison of operations "Desert Storm" and "Citadel" of 1943 smiled.
        Indeed - "predecessors" and "descendants".
        Both of them have the same task. Conquering the world.
        But with us such a thing will not work.
        Not then and not now! wink
    2. Santa Fe 21 March 2020 07: 26 New
      • 12
      • 4
      +8
      As for fuel, the US Air Force is trying not to use tanker aircraft with military crews, leasing the Stratotankers to private military companies. That would not pay a salary to their military pilots

      For example- Omega Aerial Refueling Services

      Whose refueling tanks are constantly in the air, in areas where NATO exercises and zones of modern conflict

      Combat patrols have the ability to refuel any number of times and continue to barrage in the b / d zone awaiting a request for use

      Omega refueling bills the Pentagon the same day
      1. akarfoxhound 21 March 2020 07: 39 New
        • 7
        • 1
        +6
        Yes, where do the refuelers come from, and how many times? Well, I say - you will never plunge into this process, a presentation from bravura reports. Air Force life is slightly different
        1. Operator 21 March 2020 16: 19 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Quote: akarfoxhound
          Air Force life is slightly different

          ... Russian, of course.
      2. Liam 21 March 2020 08: 16 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        Quote: Santa Fe
        That would not pay a salary to their military pilots

        How many tankers does Omega Aerial Refueling Services have?
        1. Santa Fe 21 March 2020 08: 34 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/private-aerial-refueller-omega-buys-kdc-10-tankers-with-booms/135542.article

          Here is another similar office
          https://www.linkedin.com/company/military-aerial-refueling-solutions-mars
          1. Liam 21 March 2020 08: 53 New
            • 5
            • 2
            +3
            Quote: Santa Fe
            https://

            I don’t need to throw links. When I asked a question, I already knew the answer.
            This company had 3 old KC-707s (B 707-321B) converted in 1999 from old civilian aircraft purchased from PanAm. One of them crashed in 2011.
            Plus 1 redone DC-10-40 ex Japan Airlines.
            Since the first 2 are already pouring in, they bought 2 KDC-10 .1 delivered from the Dutch Air Force just the day before yesterday (November 2019, the second one will be in a year.
            In your opinion, a company with a staff of 3 aircraft replaces the military in some small minor volumes ?.
            PySy. In addition to the United States, this mega-company manages to replace the tankers of the Australians. And their services are also being requested by the Air Force of the WB and Canada.
            How many tankers do these 4 air forces have in total?)
            Do private tankers refuel in combat?
            1. Santa Fe 21 March 2020 09: 17 New
              • 5
              • 2
              +3
              In your opinion, a company with a staff of 3 aircraft replaces the military in some small minor volumes

              According to company representatives at AirSpaceCyber ​​2017 in National Harbor, Maryland, these 5000 missions included more than 21 fueling plugs, which included more than 000 million gallons of fuel.

              Non-performance for three aircraft
              Apparently they fly like low-cost airlines - non-stop, 16 hours a day. To the envy of any air force

              Now 10 are buying
              old civilian aircraft.

              Sure! This is not a government agency, where they draw money and are willing to buy gold f-35

              Private office seeks to optimize costs
              1. Liam 21 March 2020 09: 33 New
                • 5
                • 3
                +2
                Quote: Santa Fe
                According to company representatives

                Convert gallons to liters, liters to tons, then divide by years, divide by refueling in tons by 1 combat aircraft again and get a minuscule of about 0)
                How many gallons of fuel are consumed by the US Air Force, ILC and US Navy per year?)
                You often find interesting / unfamiliar facts and just as often make them completely fantasy global conclusions a la
                As for fuel, the US Air Force is trying not to use tanker aircraft with military crews, leasing the Stratotankers to private military companies. That would not pay a salary to their military pilots
                Quote: Santa Fe
                Apparently they fly like low-cost airlines - non-stop, 16 hours a day. To the envy of any air force

                Naturally. Without interruptions for repairs, maintenance, crew changes. 3 old aircraft cover the entire globe from Alaska to England and Australia)
                1. Santa Fe 21 March 2020 09: 57 New
                  • 3
                  • 3
                  0
                  Liam, I always try to look at things wider. As wide as life experience allows

                  And if such a solution appeared, it was allowed to be used in military structures - it should develop rapidly; holy place ...
                  it is everywhere just do not notice him

                  https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/13486/retired-raf-tristars-will-get-new-life-as-contracted-aerial-refuelers

                  They climbed out from everywhere

                  I read somewhere about leasing stratotankers
                  1. Liam 21 March 2020 10: 12 New
                    • 7
                    • 1
                    +6
                    Quote: Santa Fe
                    Liam, I always try to look at things wider

                    This is good. The main thing is not to go beyond. According to your link, if you walk, you will find an explanation of this fact using private traders.
                    The United States Transportation Command said in a request for information in June 2018 that it had 20,000-30,000h annually not supported by its fleet of aerial refueling tankers or contracted commercial services. The command floated the idea of ​​contracting additional commercial aerial refuelling services to meet that need
                    Americans simply do not have time to cover the increased volume of flights with their full-time tankers. And they cover this difference with "civilian"
                    From this to the theories about the return of military stratotankers to leasing and the abandonment of military tankers on the ground in favor of civilian ones, a step, agree
              2. Liam 21 March 2020 09: 41 New
                • 8
                • 2
                +6
                Quote: Santa Fe
                Now 10 are buying

                ))))
                buys-kdc-10-tankers-the number 10 is not the number of aircraft. This is the designation of the type of aircraft-kdc-10). Purchased aircraft-2 (two)
                Omega air took delivery of the first of two KDC-10 aircraft
                1. Santa Fe 21 March 2020 09: 55 New
                  • 5
                  • 1
                  +4
                  You are right i was inattentive
          2. Liam 21 March 2020 08: 58 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            Quote: Santa Fe
            Here is another similar office
            https://www.linkedin.com/company/military-aerial-refueling-solutions-mars

            You yourself at least read what kind of office was created in 2018 with a floating staff of 1-10 people?). I’m even embarrassed to ask how many planes this mega-corporation has)
            1. Santa Fe 21 March 2020 09: 18 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              I’m even embarrassed to ask how many planes this mega-corporation has)

              The question is how many will appear in the coming years.
              1. anykin 21 March 2020 22: 58 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                We will not issue a question as an exclamation point.
  5. infantryman2020 21 March 2020 07: 15 New
    • 12
    • 11
    +1
    I did not expect from this author cheap okolosovkova (custom-made, or what?) Propaganda. Puzzled by his incompetence in matters of construction, development and use of the armed forces.
    According to the capabilities of the ILC and the ability to conduct hostilities on remote theater of operations, we as "to China ra ...", in general, crawl backwards for a long time. Just do not say that we do not have such tasks.
    Regarding "another army in miniature, such as irrational, etc." - So, we have our own similar one, no need to go far.
    1. dali 21 March 2020 18: 08 New
      • 3
      • 9
      -6
      Quote: infantryman2020
      Did not expect from this author cheap okolosovkova (customized, or what?) propaganda. Puzzled by his incompetence in matters of construction, development and use of the armed forces.
      According to the capabilities of the ILC and the ability to conduct operations on remote theater us as "to China ra ...", in general, crawl backwards for a long time. Just do not say that we no such tasks.


      Is there anything weak to write about the case ?! belay

      I, too, can: "I did not expect from infantryman2020 cheap mattress (customized, or what?) propaganda. Puzzled by his incompetence in matters of construction, development and use of the armed forces. According to the capabilities of the ILC and the ability to conduct operations on remote theater im up to us as "to China ra ...", in general, crawl backwards for a long time. Just do not say that them no such tasks. "

      Quote: infantryman2020

      Regarding "another army in miniature, such as irrational, etc." - So, we have our own similar one, no need to go far.

      We have, of course, only no one was going to say that the tasks of this structure are the same as those voiced by PR specialists like mattresses like you.
      1. dali 22 March 2020 13: 28 New
        • 0
        • 3
        -3
        And what, gr.minusery, nothing to say ... belay laughing
  6. Fitter65 21 March 2020 07: 29 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    . By the way, the American command took into account the experience of its predecessors in the operation "Citadel"
    To the very point. good good good good
  7. Ovrag 21 March 2020 08: 00 New
    • 7
    • 8
    -1
    Firstly, the author of the graphomaniac. 10 times the same thing.
    Secondly, he seemed to understand the point. But then I didn’t understand.
    The Marine Corps is not an overseas army. This is the spear point. Drums. Assault, call it what you want - parts. Whose task is fighting in the most difficult areas of the front.
    Such a force must be able to transfer to different sectors of the front. Hence the selection in a separate unit.
    In theory, constant interaction with tank and air units within the same type of troops increases their combat effectiveness and effective interaction. That in the modern complex battle is a key parameter.
    At the level of command structure, this eliminates the need to form the headquarters of such shock units each time the front composition changes. A corps is always a separate unit and ready for battle.
    But the bottom line is yes. Separately, no one has ever fought a corps. But its function is completely different. This is just a separate unit of shock / assault units.
    1. Santa Fe 21 March 2020 08: 09 New
      • 11
      • 1
      +10
      This is the spear point

      Why point spearhead light infantry on the Hummers

      When in the same area are full-fledged armored forces of the army

      On Hammers, you can only lose the war

      Think before you write beautiful phrases about the spear and “fighting in the most difficult directions”
      1. Lopatov 21 March 2020 12: 21 New
        • 9
        • 1
        +8
        Quote: Santa Fe
        Why point spearhead light infantry on the Hummers

        Not only Humvee.
        Do not forget about 488 wheeled infantry fighting vehicles LAV-25, 207 armored personnel carriers on the same base, 106 SPTRK LAV-AT and 65 self-propelled mortars LAV-M
        And all this wealth, as I understand it, will be replaced with a new APC / wheeled infantry fighting vehicle. In the amount of 204 cars of the first phase and 660 cars of the second phase
        1. Santa Fe 21 March 2020 12: 30 New
          • 3
          • 3
          0
          Do not forget about the 488 wheeled BMP LAV-25,

          What is the meaning of this old trash

          When the army has 7 striker brigades with 4000 armored personnel carriers Stryker

          And thousands of Bradley tracked infantry fighting vehicles, with a combat weight of 30 tons
          1. Lopatov 21 March 2020 12: 48 New
            • 5
            • 2
            +3
            Quote: Santa Fe
            What is the meaning of this old trash

            ?????
            These are the same age as the BTR-80.

            Quote: Santa Fe
            When the army has 7 striker brigades with 4000 armored personnel carriers Stryker

            Based on the proportion of 4000 x 185/476 = 1554 pieces
            660 + 204 = 864 pieces.
            Not so much the numbers differ.
            1. Santa Fe 22 March 2020 06: 53 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              I still do not understand, dear, that you are trying to prove

              Why so much attention is always paid to the KMP, if the US army is much more dangerous, numerous and much better equipped enemy
              1. bk0010 22 March 2020 12: 54 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                It’s because the army is sitting across the ocean (it’s a bit at the people's bases, it’s mostly junk) and we need six months to transfer it, and these can be taken for a week because one wanted so.
                1. Santa Fe 22 March 2020 21: 15 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  You can come to the ring without preparation

                  With obvious consequences
                  1. bk0010 23 March 2020 20: 53 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    400 tanks is a lot. This is more than most countries in the world. But the main thing is that these 400 tanks will be where they want now, and not at bases in the USA or Europe. Yes, we have a bunch of tanks. But imagine that they went to Japan, and landed in Vladivostok and on the islands. What will we box with? Megatons? You can, but feel sorry for your own. The troops of the European part or from Khabarovsk will be thrown over how much? And they will take our submarines and other tasty things to the hush (they are not far and there are significantly fewer guards than the USMC) and they will dump them. Then we will write notes.
                    1. Santa Fe 24 March 2020 00: 01 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      1. Why did you decide that all 400 are ready for war.

                      2. What prevents the army from arriving first







                      What is the difference between the way Bradley is transported from Avv7.
                      Bradley has great combat value
                      1. bk0010 24 March 2020 20: 36 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Santa Fe
                        What prevents the army from arriving first
                        The army does not have its own landing ships and mobility in general is not their trump card. Remember, before the war in the Gulf, they accumulated for six months, contracted a bunch of ships, civilian passenger and transport aircraft.
                        Quote: Santa Fe
                        What is the difference between the way Bradley is transported from Avv7.
                        The fact that Avv7 can swim by itself, without the ship entering the 20-mile zone.
                      2. Santa Fe 25 March 2020 02: 09 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        In practice, the forces of the Army and the Corps are moved using the same rollers belonging to the Sealift Command (pictured in the previous comment)
                        ---
                        Of course, six months have accumulated - Iraq and the Hammurappi line are not a landing on the Kuril Islands
                        —- / -
                        After all, you specifically chose as an example the landing on the Kuril Islands. A meaningless landing on a virtually unguarded territory. Whose territorial integrity is protected by the status of Russia and the complexity of such a change in borders in the modern world.

                        Therefore, Aav7 swim only in exercises.
                      3. bk0010 25 March 2020 20: 35 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Santa Fe
                        After all, you specifically chose as an example the landing on the Kuril Islands. A meaningless landing on a virtually unguarded territory.
                        Of course, on purpose. And what, someone will land where the PDO events are held? As regards unguardedness and meaninglessness, this is not entirely true, but in the light of the issue under consideration, this is insignificant. USMC is like a dagger for a warrior: not as devastating as a sword or ax, but mobile and deadly, and it can also be put in motion before the sword is pulled out of its sheath.
          2. Lopatov 22 March 2020 16: 11 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Santa Fe
            I still do not understand, dear, that you are trying to prove

            That the ILC does not consist solely of “light forces”.
            1. Santa Fe 22 March 2020 21: 23 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              2400 abrashek vs 400
              3 thousand infantry fighting vehicles against 0
              17 brigades against MLRS 2

              Let’s say logically - if the ILC has enough armored vehicles for independent operations, then why are the armies an order of magnitude larger than heavy weapons

              Or the army is redundant. Or ILC - is able to act only with the support of the army. What does the marines lack from what the army has? Heavy weapons. So it's light motorized infantry
              1. Lopatov 22 March 2020 22: 59 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Santa Fe
                3 thousand infantry fighting vehicles against 0

                Controversial.
                LAV-25 was originally a "wheeled infantry fighting vehicle" Like "SuperAV", which they are replacing

                Quote: Santa Fe
                then why are the army an order of magnitude more heavy weapons

                Also debatable.
                "Heavy", with tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, they have only 11 plus 5 NG, a total of 16
                "Striker" 7 plus 2, total 9
                “Light” 13 plus 20, total 33

                It turns out that 33 out of 58 are the same "light forces" More than half ...
                1. Santa Fe 23 March 2020 05: 43 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  I do not agree with such estimates

                  400 against 7000+ tracked infantry fighting vehicles and Strikers
                  Disparate forces

                  Let the Americans be proud of their marines, but we can be told openly that they are only a small part of the ground forces. Moreover, not the most important.

                  Of course, the army has its own light infantry units
  • Lopatov 21 March 2020 12: 25 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Quote: Ovrag
    This is the spear point.

    What is at least one conflict during which the ILC units were on the theater of operations before the paratroopers. A place for which the US MTR has already been cleared
    1. voyaka uh 21 March 2020 14: 07 New
      • 8
      • 3
      +5
      All amphibious landing in the Pacific.
      1. Lopatov 21 March 2020 14: 31 New
        • 7
        • 2
        +5
        Quote: voyaka uh
        All amphibious landing in the Pacific.

        It does not count.
        By the time the war began on the theater of operations, the US Airborne Forces were in the process of formation. The first paratrooper regiment, and training, appeared only in January 1942
      2. Cowbra 21 March 2020 17: 49 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        A la, only the fleet turned out to be the first) And for example, combat swimmers making passages in corals ...
    2. Ovrag 21 March 2020 21: 49 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Iraq. Afghan. Often ahead of the army were precisely the advanced reconnaissance units of the marines. Let me remind you that the Marines have their own special forces and so on.
      And this is not the main thing. The main thing is not to interfere with the warm with the soft. Paratroopers are unit divisions. In fact, special forces. Their functionality is a little different. The tasks of the paratroopers do not include the full occupation of the territories.
      1. Lopatov 21 March 2020 23: 07 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Ovrag
        The main thing is not to interfere with the warm with the soft. Paratroopers are unit divisions. In fact, special forces. Their functionality is a little different.

        Voooot.
        And this trifle includes such a trifle as ensuring the deployment of a force grouping on a theater of operations.

        That is why one of the 82nd Airborne Forces brigades is in a 16-hour readiness for boarding aircraft
        One of the battalions of this brigade is in six-hour readiness
        And one of the companies of this “on-duty” battalion sits on combat alert at Pope airbase in a 15-minute readiness for loading onto BTA planes.
        So it goes.

        From recent history: "The Associated Press reports citing a spokesman for the 82nd US Airborne Division about the continued deployment of the Rapid Response Force (RRF) from the US Fort Bragg to North Carolina to Kuwait as reinforcements in the Middle East amid rising tensions following the assassination of an influential Iranian general Kassema Suleymani. A contingent of more than 4 thousand troops will be deployed to strengthen the Pentagon’s position in this area. "That was two and a half months ago.


        Quote: Ovrag
        Iraq. Afghan.

        First Iraq, it all started with the 82nd paratroopers. See above. why.
        Afghanistan - 3rd brigade of the 101st Airborne Forces. And the 10th mountain participated in the storming of Mazar-e-Sharif ...
        The second Iraq - in general, for almost half a year, the group organized. Which included two divisions of the 18th Airborne Forces, the 82nd Airborne Forces and the 101st Airborne Forces Plus at a low start, “Italians” from the 173rd Airborne Brigade. Which eventually turned out to be the only representatives of the US Armed Forces in northern Iraq except the Special Operations Forces, which were driven by Kurdish militants.
  • BREAKTHROUGH READY 21 March 2020 09: 06 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    Everything is explained by traditions.
    Everything is explained by interdepartmental competition, from which the American political system of “checks and balances” consists. Do not put all the eggs in one basket. In addition, the armed forces divided into several independent armies will be more combat-ready though by virtue of greater flexibility.
    1. dzvero 21 March 2020 12: 53 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Both tradition and competition are secondary. The ILC (USMC) is spelled out in their constitution and it is impossible to “remove” them from the armed forces, as if they would not want to. From there and independence at the level of a separate kind of aircraft and their development, procurement, etc.
      1. BREAKTHROUGH READY 21 March 2020 13: 08 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        spelled out in their constitution and it’s impossible to “remove” them from the armed forces, as if they wouldn’t want to.
        If desired, any legislative formalities can be turned and pushed, and the ILC lives and lives.
        Moreover, the corps became a full-fledged army only in the second half of the 20th century (relatively recently, relative to the time of the adoption of the American constitution), already according to the results of the Second World War.
    2. dali 21 March 2020 18: 16 New
      • 0
      • 10
      -10
      Quote: BREAKTHROUGH READY
      In addition, the armed forces divided into several independent armies will be more combat-ready though by virtue of greater flexibility.

      Like the mattresses already have a swarm of such armies, one slammed, a hundred others bite ... laughing laughing laughing

      Even if such a swarm suddenly appears in a fairy tale of fairy tales, we will have our own dichlorvos on them ... laughing
    3. dali 21 March 2020 18: 20 New
      • 0
      • 5
      -5
      Quote: BREAKTHROUGH READY
      In addition, the armed forces divided into several independent armies will be more combat-ready though by virtue of greater flexibility.

      Yes, due to what flexibility is it?
      1. BREAKTHROUGH READY 21 March 2020 18: 34 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Due to the fact that they have different submissions, different responsiveness and tactics of warfare, they use different weapons and different training methods. All this diversity allows you to make the right decisions in a timely manner and adapt to current tasks. It’s like in folk wisdom “the road is the spoon for dinner”.
        1. dali 22 March 2020 13: 39 New
          • 0
          • 4
          -4
          Quote: BREAKTHROUGH READY
          Due to the fact that they have different submissions, different responsiveness and tactics of warfare, they use different weapons and different training methods. All this diversity allows you to make the right decisions in a timely manner and adapt to current tasks.

          This is actually not flexibility, but a dispersal of forces ... you know the tale about father and son - how does he easily break a broom? belay

          And in many comments they have already clearly shown that, in practice, the functions of the ILC, when they are not part of the army, always came down to the primary policemen!

          And as you wrote: “The ILC lives and lives.”, Only because the mattress, after the war, had many police tasks to suppress the toothless enemy. And where it was seriously, they were not needed: Vietnam, Iraq ... there was an army there, and then in Vietnam it got so scruffy that another 20 years later hiccuped.
          1. Korax71 22 March 2020 21: 15 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            What are you saying laughing For example, Vo Nguyen Ziap strongly disagrees with you. Especially having grabbed the khesani during the siege.
          2. infantryman2020 23 March 2020 07: 37 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Are you ready to present a similar claim to our airborne forces?
  • voyaka uh 21 March 2020 14: 06 New
    • 8
    • 3
    +5
    The article has been translated into English and submitted to Trump.
    Trump read and took action. am
    The body is disbanded. yes
  • Korax71 21 March 2020 14: 18 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    Oleg, the main task of the MP is to capture the landing zone and then expand it to land the main landing forces. But in the article you try to hypothetically "bend" the probable enemy only with the help of the CMS. This is not serious. Once the CMS will not operate in full isolation from the rest of the forces. units of the first echelon. It is not clear why you are trying to withdraw it as some kind of separate unit, when the ILC is part of the structure of the US Navy? The presence of its own artillery, armored units is due to interaction issues.
    1. Operator 21 March 2020 16: 31 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      They explained to you that in its entire history the United States ILC has not been able to capture at least one naval bridgehead for the subsequent deployment of army units.

      The only function of the United States ILC since its inception was the conduct of colonial wars in Hawaii, the Philippines, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.
      1. dali 21 March 2020 18: 21 New
        • 1
        • 7
        -6
        Quote: Operator
        The only function of the United States ILC since its inception was the conduct of colonial wars in Hawaii, the Philippines, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.

        More correctly - the functions of the police in the occupied territories.
        1. Operator 21 March 2020 18: 28 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Anti-insurgency operations are more correct.
          1. dali 22 March 2020 13: 42 New
            • 0
            • 3
            -3
            Quote: Operator

            Anti-insurgency operations are more correct.

            And this too, but at first. And as the rebels with the Berdanks will be extinguished, so they begin to police.
      2. Alexey RA 23 March 2020 11: 53 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Operator
        They explained to you that in its entire history the United States ILC has not been able to capture at least one naval bridgehead for the subsequent deployment of army units.

        This is how aliens from alternative realities scorch who did not have Guadalcanal, Saipan and other MAOs. smile

        By the way, in one of the episodes of "The Pacific" dedicated to Guadalcanal, the eternal pain of the ILC was poorly shown - the lag in equipment from the regular army: "The army is all the newest, but we are fighting the same as we fought in World War I". Now this situation is largely preserved - just remember the" Cobras "," Huey "and renamed the" assault machine "floating armored personnel carrier of Vietnam.
        1. Operator 23 March 2020 12: 36 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Read carefully: "for the subsequent deployment of army units" - on the same Gudalkanal, the 1st division of the ILC was dropped and subsequently fought.
          1. Alexey RA 23 March 2020 13: 25 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Operator
            Read carefully: "for the subsequent deployment of army units" - on the same Gudalkanal, the 1st division of the ILC was dropped and subsequently fought.

            Read the docks - they rulez! ©
            The task of the Marine Corps on Guadalcanal was to capture the Japanese base with the subsequent transfer of the captured territory to the army. Therefore, first, in August 1942, the 1st DMP and the 2nd regiment of the 2nd DMP were landed on the island. Two more regiments (6th and 8th) of the 2nd DMP arrived in November 1942 and January 1943.
            The marines were followed by an army. In October-November 1942, the 23rd SD was landed. In December 1942 - the 25th front.
            And a week before the landing of the 25th pd, the 1st DMP began to be withdrawn from the island. Until the end of the campaign, only the last 6th and 8th regiments of the 2nd DMF remained on the island (PMSM, this was done to train combat personnel in combat conditions on a weakened enemy).
            1. Operator 23 March 2020 14: 40 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Between August and October, the booooo-sized distance - the 1st DMP not only captured the naval bridgehead, but also fought with the Yapi alone for a long time (due to the lack of free army divisions and the sufficiency of the marine corps for pressing Japanese rogues).

              Participation in the battles for Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad of the internal troops did not make them army men.
              1. Alexey RA 23 March 2020 17: 27 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Operator
                Between August and October, the booo-oversized distance - the 1st DMP not only captured the naval bridgehead, but fought with the Yapes alone for a long time

                This does not negate the fact that the task of the marines on Guadalcanal was precisely the capture and retention of the naval bridgehead for the subsequent deployment of army units.
                And the fact that the army appointed the Americal division to replace the marines, which began only on May 27, 1942, is another story. In the end, the fleet until October 1942 could not ensure the delivery of significant reinforcements to Guadalcanal.
                1. Operator 23 March 2020 17: 38 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  By October 1942, the bridgehead had become a layered division position with front and rear.
    2. tatarin1972 21 March 2020 18: 25 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      The marines are also intended for the defense of naval bases, important sections of the coast and coastal facilities.
      1. dali 22 March 2020 13: 44 New
        • 0
        • 3
        -3
        Quote: tatarin1972

        The marines are also intended for the defense of naval bases, important sections of the coast and coastal facilities.

        Give an example of such tasks.
        1. tatarin1972 22 March 2020 14: 25 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          877 PMTO Angola, 922 PMTO Vietnam. Combat service of the USSR Obligatory Military District, with a six-month rotation.
  • Cowbra 21 March 2020 15: 27 New
    • 8
    • 3
    +5
    Let's start little by little. Firstly, the classic mistake of any author writing about the USMC: where did you see the word "infantry" in the name of these troops, damn it ?! Where, his mother - "infantry" ?!
    Finally, the Marines themselves have no ships under their command; without the support of the fleet and the Maritime Command, they will not be able to get into any war.

    Conceptually - the invading army.

    You don’t even have to comment.
    And now slowly. Have you heard anything about the "system of checks and balances"? So - the KMP - the personal army of the PRESIDENT, the rest of the troops are subordinate to the CONGRESS and on the orders of the president - they put a bolt with a left-hand thread, he is not their boss wink The point is that even if the presidents have a stub like a minister of one defense, who cry “Russians are coming” who has stepped out the window, he can declare war, he will only fight, delivering the ILC with cruise liners and civil aviation flights, while Congress will not give the go-ahead "fleet - work!" On the other hand, the situation with the rebellious Congress, as we have in 1993, is completely ruled out. They will devour Congress just in passing.
    The author just left for such a “nituda" that there is simply nowhere for tongue
    More about the balances - in the USA and the third army there are - Nazigads, these are generally subordinate to the state, and in Texas in 2014 almost reached the National Guard’s war with the US army, yeah, the governor announced mobilization in order to “counter the threat of invasion from the USA” ( c) - and I’m not joking!
    1. Santa Fe 22 March 2020 06: 57 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Firstly, the classic mistake of any author writing about the USMC: where did you see the word "infantry" in the name of these troops ?! From where, his mother - "infantry"?

      You at least read the article first
      1. Cowbra 22 March 2020 07: 28 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        I read it, I read it ...
  • Operator 21 March 2020 16: 11 New
    • 3
    • 8
    -5
    In Russia, there is a complete analogue of the United States Naval Forces - the Airborne Forces of the Russian Federation (in theory it is more advanced, since aviation, and not the fleet, is nominated as an amphibious assault).
  • Operator 21 March 2020 16: 25 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    Quote: Spade
    These are peers BTR-80

    But is this not rubbish 40 years ago? laughing
    1. Cowbra 21 March 2020 17: 52 New
      • 0
      • 3
      -3
      Something and Abrashka you write in the trash ... But what? Also 40 years old, and the Hussites burn this junk with cardboard
      1. Santa Fe 22 March 2020 06: 59 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        40 years old too

        What do the first abrams have in common with the 105th gun with modern
        the Hussites burn this junk with cardboard

        When they tell how easy it is to burn a tank from an RPG, they forget to specify how many grenade launchers before this went to the other world
        1. Cowbra 22 March 2020 07: 27 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Lord, at least the "Negro Joe" and the inability for the European theater of war ... There are no rulers ... Ancient junk)
  • dokusib 21 March 2020 17: 10 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    Oleg found himself a new topic. Why write about Zamvolt if you can blame the whole kind of troops for being unnecessary. Bravo. Just need to study the material more thoroughly. In Somalia, it was not the ILC but the Rangers and the Delta that seemed to be quite different (submission to the command of the MTR). I understand correctly that what is meant is the failure of the operation to capture Mohamed Farah Aydid? Strategic mistakes were made in planning. The operation, planned as a lightning raid, was doomed. Heavy weapons such as armored vehicles and air support using the AS-130 were requested but a refusal was received. Later, Pakistani armored personnel carriers participated in the evacuation of the wounded. In Iraq (Iraqi freedom), the Marines in the Hlamaras were used precisely because of their mobility. A classic blitzkrieg in which highly mobile units advance at the forefront of attacking units. And by the way, I remembered a recent video of the notorious Rudenko, in my opinion it was in questions and answers with Razvedos. So he said there that the morins are sick on the head, the KMP is the most motivated warheads, of course, excepting the MTR. There are no former among them. If you see that a car stopped on the road and a person stepped out of it to salute the American flag hanging somewhere on the street, then you know this Marine. Training at the ILC and the Army is radically different.
    1. Cowbra 21 March 2020 17: 57 New
      • 3
      • 7
      -4
      Quote: dokusib
      There are no former among them. If you see that a car stopped on the road and a person stepped out of it to salute the American flag hanging somewhere on the street, then you know this Marine.


      Glory to Ukraine! Ugh, you ...
      And where the gang of murderers, which boasted boastfully,
      Like the flames of war, spirit of dismay,

      Excerpt from the mattress anthem. Go take a photo of Lee Harvey Oswald's Kiss. Propaganda, propaganda, because propog * ndon By the way, this is not a mat. and the name of the doctor, only his name was Kond.laughing
      1. dokusib 21 March 2020 18: 21 New
        • 7
        • 0
        +7
        Something surprises me with your inadequate reaction. The enemy needs to know in person. The source of information is the source of information provided that it is critically evaluated. The source mentioned above stated that in the army a large number of employees have as their goal to earn, get an education or citizenship and to become a citizen after the expiration of the contract. In the ILC, a significantly larger percentage of over-term workers extending their contacts and those who have completed service have big problems with social adaptation. Do you have anything to say about this? To the point?
        1. Cowbra 21 March 2020 18: 39 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          Quote: dokusib
          Do you have anything to say about this? To the point?

          Yes there is. The fact. that the elitism of the ILC ... Everything is much more complicated there than you described. Here, in general, we must start with the fact that for the centuries in the USA mainly “johnny” - southerners go to serve in the army, but they have more than enough patriotism, while the attitude to them in the USA is a very “not very” derogatory nickname of these same johnny , - redneck, cowhat, a variant of the word "cowboy"))) Selyuk, in short, a fucking village) In general, the fleet has long been considered an elite in the United States - they are still an overseas power. And the service in the Strategic Missile Forces is considered the most crap))) And the songs about the ILC are pure Hollywood ... With the same success, bombers can be described.
          1. AAK
            AAK 21 March 2020 23: 21 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            A colleague, actually the nickname of southerners in the states is “dixy” (unlike the “Yankees” -severyans), and the Rednecks are white farmers and hard workers in the province
            1. Cowbra 21 March 2020 23: 26 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Dixie or Johnny. And the south is all agricultural, so they’re bought and called wink We have won all the Caucasians black, keep a purebred Georgian:
              1. AAK
                AAK 22 March 2020 00: 06 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Kolega, the “purebred” represented by you, is most likely Svan or Tushetian, but not a Kartlian, and certainly not a Kakhetian
                1. Cowbra 22 March 2020 07: 30 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  So after all, one dog is Georgian, and they are all so called.
          2. dokusib 22 March 2020 02: 20 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            The problem with any Army in the world is that voluntarily the population of the country that it defends is not particularly keen to serve. The Americans have the same problem, people who are not able to get a quality education and, as a result, make a good career or hereditary military go to the army. With the second, everything is clear, these almost always become West Point graduates. But in the first category there are roughly both fools and smart. It’s easier for a foolish person to inspire something, to make him loyal to some simple slogans (ILC motto to the article “Always Faithful”) So it turns out that the rednecks mostly fall into marines. But they are not the only ones there, there was an article on the VO that in some parts up to 40% of the personnel are Hispanic immigrants serving for citizenship. I am sure that among this category there is also a dropout and more gifted comrades have a chance to make a more or less good career in the army. And lastly, you need to remember Rudenko, who is independent of you, who, in my unsophisticated view, is a recruiter working in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia.
    2. Lopatov 21 March 2020 21: 13 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: dokusib
      Heavy weapons such as armored vehicles ..... were requested but a refusal was received.

      They could just as well have requested the Death Star.

      You just read it inattentively. The author indicated the low combat efficiency of the "light forces" in independent actions. And he cited Mogadishu as an example.

      Infantry was operating in Somalia. Attributed to or owned by the 10th Mountain Division. Which in turn is an integral part of the 18th airborne corps.
      Therefore, even armored vehicles were nowhere to take. In the presence of one unarmored "Humvee"

      Therefore, in fact, the Pakistanis had to beg tanks and the Malaysians - armored personnel carriers
      1. dokusib 22 March 2020 01: 31 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        So, someone from the local command had the idea to immediately agree with the UN contingents on the provision of heavy equipment. But upstairs, they rejected it; they did not want to share their laurels with the Pakistanis. The idea was, in one action, to end the civil war in Somalia at once. Stupid must say idea
  • seacap 21 March 2020 17: 22 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Yes, what difference does it make to name the expeditionary force, if there is a lot of budget money and there are economic opportunities, then why not spend it? This is not with us, as always, for objective and subjective reasons, but because of the vision of the leader, to sit on a "half-starved diet", dividing the trishkin caftan and hiding behind "smart words" about sufficient necessity. At the same time, the only category of citizens and civil servants who are discriminated against on a professional basis and are humiliated by a decreasing coefficient of pensions, not recalculation of pensions according to new official salaries and the absence of regular promised compensation. People who served faithfully, who defended the interests of these ghouls with blood and sweat, are thrown out onto the street as waste material and garbage, everywhere humiliating and depriving them of their legal privileges for a normal existence at least at the end of their life's journey, and their family a worthy future existence.
  • seacap 21 March 2020 17: 29 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Operator
    since as an amphibious assault

    it’s a vehicle, that is, a delivery method, and they can be completely different, the parachute units are both our marines and foreign, and the Airborne Forces units more than once used the BDK, in the same Abkhazia as the railway, destination and combat the tasks are different, about this the author also interprets what the ILC is in modern realities.
  • dokusib 21 March 2020 17: 54 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Something else about logistical support. Hlamera are removed from the advanced units in the army and in the ILC and are replaced by L-ATV. And Stryker and LAV-25 have one ancestor, this is MOVAG's Piranha. It's just that the ILCs apparently decided that mobility than comfort is more important to them. With the M777, everything is clear, its helicopter can be dragged from the ship to the shore.
  • tatarin1972 21 March 2020 18: 21 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    People, of course, I understand everything, you are all "professionals", where should I go to the "poor peasant". But at least you ask or consult with officers who served in the marine units of the USSR and Russia.
    1. dokusib 22 March 2020 04: 36 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Well, expound, we all honor you with pleasure. Better yet, a series of articles on the comparison of the Russian and US rapid reaction forces.
  • Talgarets 21 March 2020 18: 45 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    By the way, the American command took into account the experience of its predecessors in the operation "Citadel"

    hi Thin
  • raif 21 March 2020 20: 34 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Shaw for the "expert" wrote this opus? in the National Guard of the Russian Federation: equipment that the rest of the security forces do not take - scrap metal on wheels, financing according to the "residual principle", incomprehensible transfers of special police detachments, which still somehow remained subordinate to the Ministry of Internal Affairs ... nicknames from liberals "Putin’s army " etc. cause "guards" only laughter.
    1. Alexey RA 23 March 2020 13: 07 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: raif
      incomprehensible transfers of detachments of special policemen, who still remained somehow subordinate to the Ministry of Internal Affairs

      So who is SOBR and OMON will give to uncle? Well, then what happens - each time you have to coordinate power support not with another branch of your structure at the city level, but with a different department in general? Yes, during this time, the suspects are not just from the city - they will get the country out of the country.
      Otherwise, the Ministry of Internal Affairs will have to organize its own SWAT, that is, a freelance force group of additionally trained operas and patrol officers who are going only on call, and who are engaged in their usual work between calls.
  • Lord of the Sith 21 March 2020 20: 50 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The Yankee Marine Corps is considered to be elite, like the Russian Airborne Forces. Yes, and it looks like something.
  • bk0010 21 March 2020 21: 40 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    A couple of comments:
    1) Not the "overseas corps", but the "expeditionary corps".
    2) You can not call the infantry, where there is a Humvee, armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles, SPTRK, artillery, mortars "light". The presence of such funds vastly expands its capabilities. Compare with what our marines had during WWII: rifle, grenades, PTR. Yes, the presence of such equipment and the possibility of its landing enormously increase the cost of the Marines, but also greatly expand their capabilities.
    Quote: Santa Fe
    What is the meaning of this old trash
    When the army has 7 striker brigades with 4000 armored personnel carriers Stryker
    This trash can appear exactly where it is necessary, and not be "in general", like the Strikers (by the way, IMHO, here they are trash. The only advantage is air transport).
    Quote: Operator
    They explained to you that in its entire history the United States ILC has not been able to capture at least one naval bridgehead for the subsequent deployment of army units.
    This is a plus for the US command, and not a minus for the marines, that it could always provide the solution of tasks in the usual units. But this does not mean that the marines cannot seize the bridgehead if there is no way out.
    1. dokusib 22 March 2020 02: 40 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      The Marine Corps and the Expeditionary Marine Corps are slightly different things.
  • AAK
    AAK 21 March 2020 23: 33 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    This article by Kaptsov’s colleague would look good in some popular publication for civilians, like there are such troops in the USA. Very much so in general ...
    Those who wish can raise the archive of the Foreign Military Review for the 1980s (until 1991), there are a number of very informative publications about UES Marine Corps: organizational and staff structure, organization of the operations of expeditionary formations (Division, brigade, battalion), nomenclature armaments and military equipment in each of them, the composition of the first, second, third echelon of the landing, the main tactical techniques and organization of interaction with the Navy, the command of maritime transport, the Air Force and the combined command of the MTR when conducting air-ground-sea era tio, the organization of the MTO, including the use of squadrons of warehouse vessels and much more ... It is really very interesting, unlike this publication ...
  • Alt-right 22 March 2020 00: 07 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    And I thought, where did such a ridiculous ridiculous hatred come from?) And it turns out that Kaptsov returned to the weapons section! laughing
  • Narak-zempo 22 March 2020 00: 30 New
    • 0
    • 3
    -3
    Of course we need our own Marine Corps. Otherwise, who will support the Emperor in unifying humanity and overcoming the Heresy?
  • Sasha_rulevoy 22 March 2020 07: 31 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Of the major naval operations, only the Incheon landing operation can be called as an exception. Which, firstly, occurred 70 years ago. Secondly, the US Marine Corps was represented in it by a single division. The bulk of the landing were British and South Korean infantry units.


    In fact, 1 dmp and 7 pd NSS. Just at that time, the Americans did not have a second marine division.

    With the deployment of aircraft on board aircraft carriers and at advanced airfields near the line of contact with the enemy.

    In practice, all this was meaningless for several reasons.


    Fair. Indeed, coastal-based KMP aviation is a 2MV rudiment when there was no Air Force, but there were three separate branches of the army: army aviation forces, fleet aviation and MP aviation.

    No "Strikers" ...


    LAV-25 and Stryker are one and the same person.

    Then the United States Army units, also moving in trucks and light wheeled armored vehicles, got into a difficult situation. As a result, they are blocked and deprived of any chance of an independent exit from the environment.


    Only the soldiers from the helicopter landing were blocked. The group on wheeled vehicles eventually took them out, although not on the first try.

    However, the popularity of the LAV-25 among the "Marines" is small. The number of light armored vehicles is at times inferior to the Abrams MBT!


    Tanks - 403. LAV-25 - 401 (counting only armored personnel carriers). Given that the ILC is somewhere around four settlement divisions, one hundred for each division, is it a lot or a little?

    Just as they would not dare to independently advance deep into enemy territory by land without the support of army units.


    In the second war in the Gulf of 2003, the 1st DMP quite independently moved along the left bank of the Euphrates. At the same time as the 3rd Front - the most prepared of the US Army divisions, it advanced along its right bank. Both groups acted in isolation from each other, and the marines were not inferior in mobility, despite the smaller number of armored vehicles at 1 dmp (TB, one battalion LAV-25s and one AAV-7).

    Map for clarity:



    The basis of the shock army again became the tank "wedges", which provided comprehensive support to other branches of the army. By the way, the American command took into account the experience of its predecessors in the operation "Citadel" and at that time effectively crushed the Iraqi defense. By the way, the American command took into account the experience of its predecessors in the operation "Citadel" and at that time effectively crushed the Iraqi defense.


    There was no "Citadel" in the Gulf War. The main blow was delivered by two airborne divisions of 18 AK: the 101st and 82nd with the attached armored cavalry regiment. They acted on the extreme left flank, i.e. where Saddam could no longer stretch his defenses. Quickly moving deep into the Iraqi defense, these two divisions created a threat to the communications of the Iraqi army. Saddam made a fatal mistake, giving the order to withdraw, under the blows of aviation, the retreat turned into flight. The "tank wedges" of the Americans had only to drive past the burnt Iraqi armored vehicles.
    1. Alexey RA 23 March 2020 12: 05 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Sasha_rulevoy
      Indeed, coastal-based KMP aviation is a 2MV rudiment when there was no Air Force, but there were three separate branches of the army: army aviation forces, fleet aviation and MP aviation.

      Not only. This is still the legacy of those difficult times when one morning the marines could wake up and find that the fleet had left. smile
      The air forces of the fleet ensure supremacy at sea, air supremacy in the landing area (at the first stage) and long-range isolation of the landing area. The air forces of the KMP are engaged in direct support and direct cover from the air of the landed forces and DESO. Moreover, in the great war, the AUG has quite a few other tasks besides supporting the marines, and at any moment the fleet may throw the marines be redirected for their implementation, leaving the landed units to themselves. So its own aviation for the ILC is a matter of survival. smile
  • Stas1973 22 March 2020 12: 23 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Article - bullshit. It was necessary to start with the fact that the USMC is a means by which the local condom can operate at its discretion without the consent of the congress. Otherwise, a declaration of war. Therefore, the USMC is a diverse mix of forces designed to forcefully continue the president’s policies. And that is precisely why the USMC protects all AI offices abroad. The article is nonsense.
    1. dokusib 22 March 2020 19: 23 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Any armed forces are a means of continuing the policy by force. The USMC is not special in this regard; it is not directly subordinate to the US President. The chain of command is approximately the following: the ILC is subordinate to the US Department of the Navy, which is headed respectively by the Chief of the Navy, having legal ministerial status but reporting to the US Secretary of Defense. Another thing is that the forces and means of delivery are concentrated in the hands of the Minister of the Navy to start a small war in two to three days, and he can do this by receiving a direct order from the president. But as practice shows, it is just as easy for the president to start throwing “Axes” and he would like to lay down on your congress. And the protection of embassies and diplomatic missions is rather a historically established tradition which is facilitated by the fact that the ILC organizationally includes three Expeditionary Corps permanently housed outside the United States and, accordingly, each with its own area of ​​responsibility covering the entire entire surface of the globe
  • Cer59 22 March 2020 16: 37 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    read, understood one thing, what I did not understand is not what. nonsense raised in the 4th degree. if the author and our marine are left alone, after this raving, he will not write like that. the proposal is clear, another cut. but I’ll answer, all the generals, especially the couch, are preparing for the last war .... and the author is ready to fight as in the past. we have just raised a little army. But how did we serve in union? remember ....
  • Arslan Ali 22 March 2020 17: 05 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The usual duration of combat flights F-15E with a / b Al-Dafra (Kuwait) was 9 hours

    On this subject. In Iraq, a British convoy was attacked by the A10, several approaches, there were losses. The column did everything not to fall under the "friendly fire". Almost every B. M. state. flag, other ident. signs. A 10 attack aircraft with excellent optics, but still attacked several times. They tried to hush up, as it was already more than once. But the BBC connected, they had a serious journal. investigation, and former US pilots began to speak. It turned out that before each departure, specials were necessarily taken. means for
    continuous fulfillment of combat missions. One of the pilots constantly heard his favorite tunes in his head. Fatigue was not felt at all. They were ready to take off, fly all the time. After that, to Tony Blair at Brit. society’s attitude has changed dramatically, for trying to make concessions to the Americans about "friendly fire. Some cartoons are worth it." The hooligans feature film also has a reference to this when an American guy was told that our guys shed blood for you and you are destroying them, so prolonged air duty is possible.
  • Real Vugluskr 23 March 2020 06: 32 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Well, in fact, the MORF marines are armed with MBT, and the capabilities and means of landing are two orders of magnitude smaller than those of the USMC. The moment is important that units of the "overseas infantry" are stationed mainly abroad, or their combat personnel are dispersed throughout the fleets. We remember that the tasks of the Corps, just like in our fleet, include the commandant service on ships. The USMC is also responsible for guarding US embassies. But if you evaluate the goals and objectives of the Corps from the standpoint of Operation Overlord or, as the author mentioned here, the Citadels, comparing the Yankees with the Nazis, then the Corps is really incomprehensible. In general, the topic is not fully and biased.
  • shinobi 23 March 2020 06: 34 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Rozov’s dream is that any American businessman-firm, get an army government order. Consider life a success. 60% of the US military budget goes to the “communal” maintenance of its highly inflated armed forces. Moreover, their army alone doesn’t count , the war did not win.
  • Diverter 23 March 2020 10: 56 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Auto RU.
    All the same, to cross the infantryman with weapons with water and join the battle is not to become a marines automatically. Therefore, it is worth in the article to indicate the creation of this Marine Corps by the Russian Tsar, more than 300 years ago. Stop praying for the Anglo-Saxons in everything.
    According to the article.
    I would propose in the Russian Federation to create a new kind of troops-DShV (landing assault troops). Where would the Airborne Forces and the Marine Corps go. With the presence of them and tanks and their helicopters.
  • Alexey RA 23 March 2020 12: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The practice of creating smaller “clones” of the armed forces is not uncommon in our time. It is enough to see what are the national troops of the National Guard (Rosguard) of 340 thousand people.

    And what does "our time" have to do with it? WGs are just renamed and supplemented explosives that were created more than a hundred years ago. Moreover, the current RG is only a pale shadow of the Soviet explosives with their motorized rifle divisions, armored units and artillery.

    And about 340 thousand ... so do not forget that the WG includes such a structure as the FSUE “Protection” of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia:
    Initial number: 53 065 people (full-time), 39 425 (payroll).
    25.10.2018/15/653, the FSUE Svyaz-Security (XNUMX XNUMX people) was attached to the FSUE Okhrana of the Russian Guard.
    On October 21.10.2019, 18, FSUE Departmental Protection of the Ministry of Energy of Russia (more than 000 people) and FSUE Departmental Protection of the Ministry of Agriculture of Russia (more than 300 people) were added to the FSUE Okhrana of the Russian Guard.
    That is, out of 340 people. WG more than 000 people. (statewide) is security.
  • Akuzenka 23 March 2020 13: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    But just imagine the appetites of the shipyard in Pascagul! There, several generations of managers live on projects of such grandiose and meaningless constructions.

    So it’s wonderful! Let them live and prosper.
  • Proctologist 26 March 2020 19: 28 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Wow, how fast things are changing! Well, the article was just published, and everything has already changed!

    Marines completely get rid of tanks after almost 100 years of their use, abandon artillery in favor of long-range missile systems, etc. It's all about the theater. They are going to fight with China in the Yellow Sea, where there are no distances for howitzers and will not come out to use tanks. The islands are too small ...
    https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a31915295/marine-corps-tanks/