|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
 
Group: Registered User
Last Login: 10/2/2005 10:13 PM
Posts: 5,502,
Visits: 70
|
|
That would be some real cool stuff. The upside I see is also the downside. Lots of potential recruits would say 'screw that, I'm going next door.' Marines would get a BETTER draw of civilians at the expense of the Army. All thoses guys who would join the 82nd would be wearing Blues instead.
It would still be cool though.
I would nearly bet on seeing two Raider Bns. on jump status though. Maybe make first termers spend a year in the fleet before taking an indoc?
Go with God, but make Him walk the point.
If you load a mudfoot down with a lot of gadgets he has to watch somebody a lot more simply equipped - say with a stone axe - will sneak up and bash his head in while he is trying to read a Vernier. - Robert Heinlein
|
|
|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 9/7/2005 7:22 PM
Posts: 6,666,
Visits: 289
|
|
quote:
All thoses guys who would join the 82nd would be wearing Blues instead.
I was in the 82nd and had dress blues. I think the Army Dress blues are very good looking. Hmmmmmm.....maybe the Army should have more commercials showing soldiers in dress blue uniforms.
|
|
|
|
|
Anti-social
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: Yesterday @ 4:57 PM
Posts: 1,890,
Visits: 13,027
|
|
I don't agree with this jump school for everybody stuff. IMO only troopers going to Airborne units should be sent to BAC. This includes officers as well...
1/508th Abn Inf, 82nd Abn Div 81-83 1/4th Inf (Mech), 3rd Inf Div (USAEUR) 83-84 SGT\EIB\Recondo "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx
|
|
|
|
|
President for Life
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 11/19/2008 9:45 PM
Posts: 5,167,
Visits: 5,463
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trooper
Group: Registered User
Last Login: 2/1/2008 9:39 AM
Posts: 956,
Visits: 31
|
|
What would the Marines use for delivery of its airborne troops? Does the Marines have C-130's, c-141's or c-117's?
I guess I really don't see the need for three different branches of the military except to drive up costs. Why not have one military where costs, equipments, assets and delivery equipment would be all under one roof, instead of having to have specialized units within all the branches. I know I am dreaming but man their is a lot of waste in having three branches. Then close air support could be used by the Marines and Army and we wouldn't have to worry about stepping on each service's toes because of stupid rules designed by Generals to protect their turf and money.
Ranger2
|
|
|
|
|
Jarhead
Group: Community Supporter
Last Login: 12/15/2007 1:24 PM
Posts: 294,
Visits: 37
|
|
I agree with no jump school for non-Airborne units. What I am advocating is putting two of the three MARDIVs on airborne status to enhance the flexibility of a MARDIV to conduct operations.
The 3rd MARDIV would not be on status in Okinawa, but the personnel would be jump qualified as part of the initial training process. This would be because they will rotate to either the 1st or 2nd after their overseas assignment. I am not talking about a morale booster for Marines by sending them to jump school. I am talking about a distinct change in the capability of operations to spread across the Corps as a whole. I am pretty sure the Navy at one point had their own jump school. Fire that school back up and it will enhance the ability to turn out parachute qualified Marines and sailors. I also advocate the Army extending the number of divisions on jump status as well.
 "Your Marines having been under my command for nearly six months, I feel that I can give you a discriminating report as to their excellent standing with their brothers of the Army and their general good conduct."-General John J. Pershing, U.S. Army
|
|
|
|
|
Trooper
Group: Registered User
Last Login: 2/1/2008 9:39 AM
Posts: 956,
Visits: 31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sh0t
quote:
Does the Marines have C-130's
Do we ever.
And the Osprey has already been used in recon free fall and static line operation evaluations. So basically when the fleet changes from 46s to v-22s(which they are slated to replace) you have from the sea OTH airborne capability. Say 25 v-22s per floating hotel and that's a decent force air dropped.
I think as a whole we could use another airborne training center, and I think the Naval service should run it on the west coast.
I'm all for at LEAST the BLTs practicing FTS OTH airborne deliveries. And with v-22s replacing our medium lift choppers anyway, it's probably been considered.
But they couldn't operate as part of a seaborne force with 130's correct? So they would have to base from someplace else? So why would they have to be Marines then? I understand the Osprey part, if they ever get them working they will be an great asset. How many could be dropped as part of a airborne drop with 25 Osprey's?
Ranger2
|
|
|
|
|
Jarhead
Group: Community Supporter
Last Login: 12/15/2007 1:24 PM
Posts: 294,
Visits: 37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ranger2
quote:
Originally posted by Sh0t
quote:
Does the Marines have C-130's
Do we ever.
And the Osprey has already been used in recon free fall and static line operation evaluations. So basically when the fleet changes from 46s to v-22s(which they are slated to replace) you have from the sea OTH airborne capability. Say 25 v-22s per floating hotel and that's a decent force air dropped.
I think as a whole we could use another airborne training center, and I think the Naval service should run it on the west coast.
I'm all for at LEAST the BLTs practicing FTS OTH airborne deliveries. And with v-22s replacing our medium lift choppers anyway, it's probably been considered.
| | | |