SW1 wrote:Berger goes far beyond the other service chiefs in describing how existing doctrine, weapons, and operational concepts are no longer adequate for the wars of the future
shark bait wrote:That is a great article, and even though it's about the USMC as I'm reading it so much is applicable to the Royal Marines too. There are clearly people in the British and American Marines that recognise they must change to stay relevant in the future, and I hope the vision in this article wins!
Question is what do the Brits need to achieve the goals set out by Berger?
Not sure how to "distribute" them.SW1 wrote:A complete change of mindset.
Starting with ensuring this
“must continue to seek the affordable and plentiful at the expense of the exquisite and few.”
Is Tattoo on the wall of ever service commands and ever procurement office of past current and future pet wonder project.
For example, we know SPEAR3 is coming. Distributing assets on plenty of 20-30m long boats will be a good "game" for SPEAR3 (=small smart weapons). Even if there are 30-40s of them, 30-40 SPEAR3 will easily sink all of them in a minute.
Then, how about a 2000t level (like River B2 or Cross-over-like) vessels? Without good SAM and soft-kill tools, it will be a good "game" for "a dozen of" NSM or even SeaVenom (=smaller family of modern ASMs).
Then, how about Bays and Albion = the same size as currently used? Will be hit by a swarm of NSMs or super-sonic ASMs, or even a few anti-ship ballistic missiles?
So, if the enemy countermeasure is a big concern, only way I can see is to carry RM soldiers on escorts. T45, T26 and T31 all can carry ~50 RM soldiers. (River B2 can also carry the same, but she is not an escort). So, this is the way to go? Not sure.