New Royal Marines Commando Uniform
- Thread starter dimsum
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 27,204
- Points
- 1,090
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,896
- Points
- 1,160
Dimsum said:Looks like the RM are using Canadian C8s too.
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/RMUniform
The 'All Arms Commandos', that is, not Royal Marines but those Army (Arty, Engr, Log etc) and aircrew who completed the All Arms Commando Course and were posted to 3 Cdo Bde units, were the only ones allowed to wear the dagger patch.
It always pleased me to note that, while I was serving with 45 Cdo, it was easy to wind them up about that. Not that I did. Much
And nothing says 'special' in the UK forces like the ability to divorce yourself from the beleaguered SA 80, and its variants, for the M4 family.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,896
- Points
- 1,160
Jarnhamar said:Could be. I've heard troops really like chest rigs that can charge their cell phones
I dunno.... having done just a teeny tiny bit of 'running around chasing bad guys in a ship' type scenarios, the fewer things that I have on me that can cause me to be hung up like a Thanksgiving Turkey in a shop window, the better.
There's a reason why tankers and stokers wear boiler suits. Not as glamorous, but more practical
- Reaction score
- 8,211
- Points
- 1,160
Mebbe you can stop ooing and ahhing over LCF buttons and bows long enough to read what the troopies are supposed to be doing in their new gear. ;D ;D ;D
You might be interested in what and where.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/26/uks-future-commando-force-radical-lethal-new-unit-fight-threats/
Apparently the force is to be built around the three Bay Class LSDAs (bet they wish they still had the one they sold to the Aussies). Just a reminder they are 16,000 tonne flat decks with a well deck and no hangar, built to civvy standards, with a civvy crew of 70 (Royal Fleet Auxiliary) and capable of carrying 1,150 linear metres (vehicles), 200 tons or 24 TEU (cargo) and 356 troops (700 at a squeeze)
Here outfitted with a bunch of drones and stuff for mine clearance
UK's Future Commando Force: a radical and 'lethal' new unit to fight threats across the globe
Two new Littoral Response Groups - one east of Suez, one in the High North - will hold hundreds of Commandos at immediate notice to move
By
Dominic Nicholls,
DEFENCE AND SECURITY CORRESPONDENT
26 June 2020 • 11:00pm
Britain’s Commando forces are to undergo a radical transformation to face future threats across the globe, the Royal Navy has announced.
The days of British troops charging across enemy held beaches are, hopefully, over. However, complex and technically advanced threats from adversaries have demanded a new way of projecting force.
As modern weapon systems can hit ships hundreds of miles out from an objective, just getting to the fight is now a problem in itself.
Major General Matthew Holmes, the Commandant General of the Royal Marines (CGRM), says the Future Commando Force will be a more “lethal, survivable and sustained” amphibious capability.
A persistent forward presence based on ships seeks to offer global access and “pose greater dilemmas to our adversaries,” General Holmes says.
Two Littoral Response Groups (LRG), each of a few hundred commandos and supporting elements, will deploy on roughly six-month cycles to respond to crises ranging from humanitarian disaster to conventional warfare.
It is envisaged one LRG will be permanently east of Suez, with the Royal Navy facility in Bahrain acting as a staging post.
The second Group will focus on Nato’s northern flank, working closely with Norwegian amphibious forces, and the Mediterranean.
The three Bay-Class Landing Ship Dock Auxiliary ships, crewed by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary, will be the likely hosts, initially at least, with additional medical and aviation facilities developed in the near future.
General Holmes says there will be “tangible differences” in how Britain’s commando forces operate from next year.
Initial developmental work will take place through 40 Commando, based in Taunton, Somerset.
Royal Marines want to be forward deployed on operations, General Holmes says, “unequivocally”.
The Future Commando Force concept is being developed just as the US Marine Corps wrestles with similar ideas.
In ‘Force Design 2030’, released in March this year, the Commandant of the US Marine Corps is similarly seeking to adapt his force for future threats with an emphasis on the Indo-Pacific region; longhand for China.
Introducing the work, General David Berger said “modest and incremental improvements to our existing force structure and legacy capabilities [will] be insufficient to overcome evolving threat capabilities”.
He has directed that: “The Marine Corps must be able to fight at sea, from the sea, and from the land to the sea; operate and persist within range of adversary long-range fires... Achieving this end state requires a force that can create the virtues of mass without the vulnerabilities of concentration, thanks to mobile and low-signature sensors and weapons.”
Greater use of armed unmanned surveillance systems, long-range precision weapons and ‘bubbles’ of secure communications are expected to be at the core of the force.
One of the first actions was for the USMC to get rid of its seven squadrons of main battle tanks, deemed too cumbersome and logistically demanding for the lighter and more agile force General Berger demands.
The Future Commando Force concept does not seek to copy the USMC model, but respond to the shared vision of the threat through an appropriately British financial and political lens.
Colonel Mark Totten, Programme Director of the Future Commando Force, said the programme had two main drivers.
The first is the increased conventional threat posed by technically sophisticated weapons, particularly when matched with artificial intelligence.
Advances in defensive systems mean it is now easier to find, identify and engage military forces with much greater lethality and at much greater range. These so-called Anti-Access/Area Denial capabilities (known as A2AD in military jargon) will make it much harder to get into an area of operations, let alone operate in comparative safety once there. As theatre-entry troops, Commando forces need to address this threat.
“If we don’t, the conventional aspect of our deterrence model will probably be less effective,” Colonel Totten says.
The threat to maritime forces has increased significantly in recent years.
States such as China have made technological and operational advances in areas such as long range precision missiles that can pose unprecedented threats to ships hundreds of miles away from their objectives.
Even non-state actors with reasonably low grade coastal defence munitions can pose maritime task groups problems.
One such place is the Bab al-Mandab strait between Yemen and the Horn of Africa, a vital choke point through which 4.8 million barrels of oil passed every day in 2016. “It’s a widespread problem,” Colonel Totten says. “If we are to make a contribution to Nato we will have to address it.”
The second driver for the Future Commando Force is the more aggressive use of difficult to identify military forces, combined with economic and diplomatic activity and disinformation: commonly referred to as sub-threshold (of war), hybrid or ‘grey zone’ activities.
This area between declared warfare and state competition is a sophisticated and complex operating environment. It is important for political decision makers to have a broad range of military options to complement actions by the intelligence agencies and special forces. The Future Commando Force is billed as a possible high-end conventional contribution to this demand.
The Royal Marines hope the Future Commando Force will also break the “get ready to be ready” model of force generation.
Colonel Totten says Commando forces cannot just “wait for something to happen” before deploying. The aim is to get troops forward where they’re needed, working alongside partner nations.
“We can provide more problem sets to an adversary as a crisis builds,” he says.
He eschews the suggestion such a posture would, in itself, be a provocative act.
The forward deployed Littoral Response Groups, numbering in the low hundreds of Royal Marines and supporting elements, would fit into an already existing network of forward defence presence, he says.
“It would not be introducing a totally new dynamic, which could be escalatory.
“It means an adversary has to track something more than it does today. It’s very easy to track a Task Group deploying from Devonport.”
A persistent presence forward provides an additional surveillance problem for any would-be enemy, he says. It would also focus attention in a way talk of preparing forces in the UK might not.
Colonel Totten held out the prospect of legacy platforms being retired to enable new capabilities to be brought in. Such wider discussions will be included in the government’s Integrated Review of Foreign, Defence and Security policy, due to start later this year.
Nick Childs of the International Institute for Strategic Studies says developing the Future Commando Force is a recognition that Britain’s amphibious capability needed updating. “The status quo was not going to be the answer to the future,” he says.
Repeated Defence cuts over the last decade have hit maritime forces hard and have left Britain’s amphibious capabilities vulnerable against the opposition they are likely to face in the future, Mr Childs believes.
He says the USMC work is leading the way for Western militaries in general when it comes to “sacrificing sacred cows” (such as their tanks) so as to adapt to modern threats.
“The Commandant of the US Marine Corps has grabbed a lot of attention and won a lot of plaudits for being prepared to be radical,” he says.
The ambition for the Future Commando Force to be more flexible, dispersed and available is probably right, he believes, although some - hinting at China - “will take a less beneficial view of it”.
However, he questions whether the plan will work without more investment in maritime capabilities.
“My concerns are that in order to deliver the kind of effects [CGRM] is talking about, there is going to have to be quite a lot of investment in new capabilities.
“It’s not going to be the classic assault across the beach anymore, it’s going to be from more stand-off ranges around 150 nautical miles, delivered onto land. In order to be able to be really effective [they] will have to invest in more capabilities.”
Mr Childs questions whether the Future Commando Force will have enough resources to be able to operate assault forces at a scale over and above traditional raiding parties without additional investment. Using existing capabilities might take them away from other tasks, adding to the resource burden.
“How do you balance using the aircraft carriers for the Carrier Strike capability but also for operating in an amphibious role?” he wonders.
“There are only three Landing Ship Dock Auxiliary and they are probably the most in-demand platforms in the naval service at the moment. What is going to happen to the Landing Platform Docks (HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark), only one of which is running at any one time? Where are we with the Littoral Strike Ship idea?”
The USMC and US Navy are considering getting rid of some of their classic naval platforms in favour of smaller, faster and more agile vessels for the amphibious role.
General Holmes was unable to discuss future investments ahead of the Integrated Review.
However, he said: “We’ve got what we need at the moment in order to demonstrate the concept.
"I’m confident that by demonstrating what the new concept offers to Defence it will get the requisite support.”
Too bad we couldn't figure out something similar with some light troops, AOPS and maybe an Asterix or two. Beyond Canadians I guess. ;D ;D ;D
You might be interested in what and where.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/26/uks-future-commando-force-radical-lethal-new-unit-fight-threats/
Apparently the force is to be built around the three Bay Class LSDAs (bet they wish they still had the one they sold to the Aussies). Just a reminder they are 16,000 tonne flat decks with a well deck and no hangar, built to civvy standards, with a civvy crew of 70 (Royal Fleet Auxiliary) and capable of carrying 1,150 linear metres (vehicles), 200 tons or 24 TEU (cargo) and 356 troops (700 at a squeeze)
Here outfitted with a bunch of drones and stuff for mine clearance
UK's Future Commando Force: a radical and 'lethal' new unit to fight threats across the globe
Two new Littoral Response Groups - one east of Suez, one in the High North - will hold hundreds of Commandos at immediate notice to move
By
Dominic Nicholls,
DEFENCE AND SECURITY CORRESPONDENT
26 June 2020 • 11:00pm
Britain’s Commando forces are to undergo a radical transformation to face future threats across the globe, the Royal Navy has announced.
The days of British troops charging across enemy held beaches are, hopefully, over. However, complex and technically advanced threats from adversaries have demanded a new way of projecting force.
As modern weapon systems can hit ships hundreds of miles out from an objective, just getting to the fight is now a problem in itself.
Major General Matthew Holmes, the Commandant General of the Royal Marines (CGRM), says the Future Commando Force will be a more “lethal, survivable and sustained” amphibious capability.
A persistent forward presence based on ships seeks to offer global access and “pose greater dilemmas to our adversaries,” General Holmes says.
Two Littoral Response Groups (LRG), each of a few hundred commandos and supporting elements, will deploy on roughly six-month cycles to respond to crises ranging from humanitarian disaster to conventional warfare.
It is envisaged one LRG will be permanently east of Suez, with the Royal Navy facility in Bahrain acting as a staging post.
The second Group will focus on Nato’s northern flank, working closely with Norwegian amphibious forces, and the Mediterranean.
The three Bay-Class Landing Ship Dock Auxiliary ships, crewed by the Royal Fleet Auxiliary, will be the likely hosts, initially at least, with additional medical and aviation facilities developed in the near future.
General Holmes says there will be “tangible differences” in how Britain’s commando forces operate from next year.
Initial developmental work will take place through 40 Commando, based in Taunton, Somerset.
Royal Marines want to be forward deployed on operations, General Holmes says, “unequivocally”.
The Future Commando Force concept is being developed just as the US Marine Corps wrestles with similar ideas.
In ‘Force Design 2030’, released in March this year, the Commandant of the US Marine Corps is similarly seeking to adapt his force for future threats with an emphasis on the Indo-Pacific region; longhand for China.
Introducing the work, General David Berger said “modest and incremental improvements to our existing force structure and legacy capabilities [will] be insufficient to overcome evolving threat capabilities”.
He has directed that: “The Marine Corps must be able to fight at sea, from the sea, and from the land to the sea; operate and persist within range of adversary long-range fires... Achieving this end state requires a force that can create the virtues of mass without the vulnerabilities of concentration, thanks to mobile and low-signature sensors and weapons.”
Greater use of armed unmanned surveillance systems, long-range precision weapons and ‘bubbles’ of secure communications are expected to be at the core of the force.
One of the first actions was for the USMC to get rid of its seven squadrons of main battle tanks, deemed too cumbersome and logistically demanding for the lighter and more agile force General Berger demands.
The Future Commando Force concept does not seek to copy the USMC model, but respond to the shared vision of the threat through an appropriately British financial and political lens.
Colonel Mark Totten, Programme Director of the Future Commando Force, said the programme had two main drivers.
The first is the increased conventional threat posed by technically sophisticated weapons, particularly when matched with artificial intelligence.
Advances in defensive systems mean it is now easier to find, identify and engage military forces with much greater lethality and at much greater range. These so-called Anti-Access/Area Denial capabilities (known as A2AD in military jargon) will make it much harder to get into an area of operations, let alone operate in comparative safety once there. As theatre-entry troops, Commando forces need to address this threat.
“If we don’t, the conventional aspect of our deterrence model will probably be less effective,” Colonel Totten says.
The threat to maritime forces has increased significantly in recent years.
States such as China have made technological and operational advances in areas such as long range precision missiles that can pose unprecedented threats to ships hundreds of miles away from their objectives.
Even non-state actors with reasonably low grade coastal defence munitions can pose maritime task groups problems.
One such place is the Bab al-Mandab strait between Yemen and the Horn of Africa, a vital choke point through which 4.8 million barrels of oil passed every day in 2016. “It’s a widespread problem,” Colonel Totten says. “If we are to make a contribution to Nato we will have to address it.”
The second driver for the Future Commando Force is the more aggressive use of difficult to identify military forces, combined with economic and diplomatic activity and disinformation: commonly referred to as sub-threshold (of war), hybrid or ‘grey zone’ activities.
This area between declared warfare and state competition is a sophisticated and complex operating environment. It is important for political decision makers to have a broad range of military options to complement actions by the intelligence agencies and special forces. The Future Commando Force is billed as a possible high-end conventional contribution to this demand.
The Royal Marines hope the Future Commando Force will also break the “get ready to be ready” model of force generation.
Colonel Totten says Commando forces cannot just “wait for something to happen” before deploying. The aim is to get troops forward where they’re needed, working alongside partner nations.
“We can provide more problem sets to an adversary as a crisis builds,” he says.
He eschews the suggestion such a posture would, in itself, be a provocative act.
The forward deployed Littoral Response Groups, numbering in the low hundreds of Royal Marines and supporting elements, would fit into an already existing network of forward defence presence, he says.
“It would not be introducing a totally new dynamic, which could be escalatory.
“It means an adversary has to track something more than it does today. It’s very easy to track a Task Group deploying from Devonport.”
A persistent presence forward provides an additional surveillance problem for any would-be enemy, he says. It would also focus attention in a way talk of preparing forces in the UK might not.
Colonel Totten held out the prospect of legacy platforms being retired to enable new capabilities to be brought in. Such wider discussions will be included in the government’s Integrated Review of Foreign, Defence and Security policy, due to start later this year.
Nick Childs of the International Institute for Strategic Studies says developing the Future Commando Force is a recognition that Britain’s amphibious capability needed updating. “The status quo was not going to be the answer to the future,” he says.
Repeated Defence cuts over the last decade have hit maritime forces hard and have left Britain’s amphibious capabilities vulnerable against the opposition they are likely to face in the future, Mr Childs believes.
He says the USMC work is leading the way for Western militaries in general when it comes to “sacrificing sacred cows” (such as their tanks) so as to adapt to modern threats.
“The Commandant of the US Marine Corps has grabbed a lot of attention and won a lot of plaudits for being prepared to be radical,” he says.
The ambition for the Future Commando Force to be more flexible, dispersed and available is probably right, he believes, although some - hinting at China - “will take a less beneficial view of it”.
However, he questions whether the plan will work without more investment in maritime capabilities.
“My concerns are that in order to deliver the kind of effects [CGRM] is talking about, there is going to have to be quite a lot of investment in new capabilities.
“It’s not going to be the classic assault across the beach anymore, it’s going to be from more stand-off ranges around 150 nautical miles, delivered onto land. In order to be able to be really effective [they] will have to invest in more capabilities.”
Mr Childs questions whether the Future Commando Force will have enough resources to be able to operate assault forces at a scale over and above traditional raiding parties without additional investment. Using existing capabilities might take them away from other tasks, adding to the resource burden.
“How do you balance using the aircraft carriers for the Carrier Strike capability but also for operating in an amphibious role?” he wonders.
“There are only three Landing Ship Dock Auxiliary and they are probably the most in-demand platforms in the naval service at the moment. What is going to happen to the Landing Platform Docks (HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark), only one of which is running at any one time? Where are we with the Littoral Strike Ship idea?”
The USMC and US Navy are considering getting rid of some of their classic naval platforms in favour of smaller, faster and more agile vessels for the amphibious role.
General Holmes was unable to discuss future investments ahead of the Integrated Review.
However, he said: “We’ve got what we need at the moment in order to demonstrate the concept.
"I’m confident that by demonstrating what the new concept offers to Defence it will get the requisite support.”
Too bad we couldn't figure out something similar with some light troops, AOPS and maybe an Asterix or two. Beyond Canadians I guess. ;D ;D ;D
- Reaction score
- 8,211
- Points
- 1,160
Thoughts. I see that aviation facilities are to be developed in the future. But why?
Aren't helos too useful to have sitting around rusting? Aren't they better off forward based with an ally in theatre?
Don't they (and all the other war kit stowed aboard) just make a bigger investment at risk and a more attractive target?
The lsda's - austere transit points for crossdecking between ship and shore?
Aren't helos too useful to have sitting around rusting? Aren't they better off forward based with an ally in theatre?
Don't they (and all the other war kit stowed aboard) just make a bigger investment at risk and a more attractive target?
The lsda's - austere transit points for crossdecking between ship and shore?
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,229
- Points
- 1,010
Because littoral commando type ops, which likely includes hostage rescue and anti-piracy ops, requires helicopters, and helicopters (or any aircraft) don't take too well at being left out on deck at all time - not to mention (especially East of Suez) aircraft technicians would not appreciate having to do all their work out in the tropical/equatorial sun.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Cell phone case is ‘standard issue’ for PAO’sJarnhamar said:
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Reaction score
- 4,665
- Points
- 1,160
Jarnhamar said:
Likely a digital Blue SA tool. Easier to buy COTS products than the Palm Pilot circa 2004 stuff I've seen for our integrated soldier project. Milspec case and Phone/tablet of that size is about $2K each.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,760
- Points
- 1,160
Chris
What might have and in my opinion should have happened https://news.usni.org/2014/09/19/opinion-mistral-canada
What might have and in my opinion should have happened https://news.usni.org/2014/09/19/opinion-mistral-canada
- Reaction score
- 8,211
- Points
- 1,160
Oldgateboatdriver said:
I'm thinking that littoral means within reach of shore and that the shore is intended to be a friendly one. These types of operations are likely to be in support of friendly/wavering nations under diplomatic pressure from unfriendly ones. That would allow for helos to be forward deployed as in Mali with a light foot print at risk. If troops are required the helos can come out and get them - along with the beans, blankets and bandages.
As for getting to the LSDA - self deploying air assets like the CH-147 - or, transport on blue water assets like CVs, LPDs/LPHs that maintain standoff distance and sea room. Those would also be your maintenance bases for maintaining your gear. And would it be necessary to maintain a complete air wing at sea? Or could you maintain a lower level of embarked assets commensurate with the mission and just surge additional assets by self-deployment as necessary?
- Reaction score
- 213
- Points
- 880
Chris Pook said:
I think the whole point of the changes going on in the USMC and Royal Marines is that they are preparing to operate in denied areas, with a renewed focus on supporting/enabling their respective fleets. Not so much near friendly shores.
- Reaction score
- 8,211
- Points
- 1,160
reverse_engineer said:
And yet
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/02/12/heres-the-us-marine-corps-plan-for-sinking-chinese-ships-with-drone-missile-launchers/
https://news.usni.org/2020/03/11/marines-will-field-portfolio-of-jltv-mounted-anti-ship-weapons-in-the-pacific
Give me the place to stand, and I shall move the earth - Archimedes 2500 years ago still applies.
"As modern weapon systems can hit ships hundreds of miles out from an objective, just getting to the fight is now a problem in itself.
Major General Matthew Holmes, the Commandant General of the Royal Marines (CGRM), says the Future Commando Force will be a more “lethal, survivable and sustained” amphibious capability.
A persistent forward presence based on ships seeks to offer global access and “pose greater dilemmas to our adversaries,” General Holmes says."
“The Marine Corps must be able to fight at sea, from the sea, and from the land to the sea; operate and persist within range of adversary long-range fires... Achieving this end state requires a force that can create the virtues of mass without the vulnerabilities of concentration, thanks to mobile and low-signature sensors and weapons.”
We don't seem to be looking at concentration of forces - defending fortresses - so much as making life as miserable as possible for the other guy by converting every island - natural or man-made, immobile or propelled into a threat and, importantly a low cost, low risk "expendable" threat.
Not even a lily pad strategy - more like duckweed.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,896
- Points
- 1,160
reverse_engineer said:
And more time away from home on ships - the greatest dread of any Royal Marine is endlessly hanging around on a ship, away from home, waiting for something to happen - the bigger the morale issues will be:
Royal Marines Morale Hits Rock Bottom
Posted on May 28, 2018 by Liam, Editor, Warfare.Today
UK Armed Forces Survey Shows Declining Morale Across All Military Services
The MOD has released the findings of its Armed Forces Continuous Attitude Survey (AFCAS) 2018. From September 2017 to February 2018, they handed out 27,333 questionnaires to Regular serving personnel in the Royal Navy, Royal Marines, British Army and RAF, and got 11,069 back (40%). This is what they found out.
Most noticeably, satisfaction with Service life has been on a downward spiral since a high of 61% in 2009 to now stand at a dismal 41%.
Overall, personal morale was generally higher, decreasing for unit and lowest for Service. Across all the Services, 36% described personal morale as high, while only 17% described unit morale as high and only 7% described Service morale as high. Two-thirds (67%) described Service morale as low. The report noted that the main reason for this lay with dramatically falling morale among Royal Marines.
Royal Marines Morale At All-Time Low
In 2015, 64% of Royal Marine officers and 32% of Royal Marine other ranks rated Service morale as high. Now, only 23% of officers and just 9% of other ranks do so.
The Royal Marines have been the subject of a number of rumours and reports that have suggested that the Marines’ 6,600 strong force may be reduced as many as 2,000, with the additional loss of the Royal Navy’s amphibious assault ships, HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark.
Low Military Morale Affects Recruitment
The morale of serving personnel is critical, not only to retention, but also to recruitment. Overall, less than half (41%) of those now serving would recommend joining up to others.
Recommendation was also based on rank. More than half of officers (56%) would recommend joining up to others, but only 38% of other ranks would do so.
It is not only a problem of morale. Across the board, servicemen and women are increasingly dissatisfied with pay, allowances and benefits. They are less satisfied with appraisal and promotion.
… And Retention
Consequently, many of those now in uniform are planning on leaving: 31% of those in the Royal Navy, 26% of those in the Royal Marines, 25% of those in the Army and 27% of those in RAF all plan on leaving the service. Many others are undecided, meaning that 57% overall intend to stay on at least until the end of their current engagement/commission.
Things most likely to influence the decision to leave were the impact of service life on family and personal life, and spouse/partner’s career.
Still Making Their Families Proud
Is there any good news? Most (88%) serving personnel believed that their family was proud of the fact that they were in uniform. Even this was tempered by the fact that only 24% thought that their family benefitted from their service.
While 71% thought that they offered an important service to the country, only 38% thought that society valued them.
Finally, few Service personnel thought that effective action had been taken on previous survey results – only 16% – or would be taken – only 20%. So is it all a waste of time?
An MOD spokesman told Forces Network, “We will now work with the Royal Navy, Army and Royal Air Force to address the findings of this year’s survey.”
http://www.warfare.today/2018/05/28/royal-marines-morale-hits-rock-bottom/
- Reaction score
- 8,211
- Points
- 1,160
reverse_engineer said:
Still thinking about this - your point is well taken. The great threat to Naval operations is area denial.
One supposition is to accept that the area is denied and then figure out how to replicate the island hopping campaigns of 1943-45, or the North Atlantic campaign, in the 21st century.
The alternate supposition, is to deny the enemy the ability to deny the area. In other words get there first with a light footprint.
Fort Henry at Kingston is a great model for me. It was created as an area denial system. With its cannon it could enforce the 3 mile territorial limit that was the international standard of the day. A limit that increased to the modern 12 miles when rifled guns became the standard. Aircraft made all of that obsolete. Aircraft carriers were the counter. Carriers have now been countered by missiles.
In the meantime the world has moved territorial limits out from 12 miles, to 200 mile Economic Exclusion Zones and then further out to Continental shelf limits. Making life harder for short range carrier aircraft like the Hornets but still easy for land based patrol aircraft like Sunderlands, Kondors and Auroras. New missiles like the NSMs are making it cheap and easy to cover those EEZs with fire.
So the next arms race, or in WW1 terms, race for the channel - is establishing fire bases on as much of that coast line as possible.
Maps of EEZs - potential denied areas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_economic_zone
For the record this is the UK's EEZ - excluding friendly Commonwealth countries like Jamaica and Ghana
And why the Europeans are fighting so hard over fisheries and Ireland
Britain has always been the cork in the bottle as far as the Europeans have been concerned.
Similar threads
