USMC trains it's final Scout Snipers

[Slater]

Heck, five years ago who knew that the Marines would be operating Tomahawk cruise missile batteries?

https://news.usni.org/2023/07/25/mar...mahawk-battery

[sinister]

Naturally an Army guy would say something like that. I remember when we help develop the Modern Army Sniper school in the 80’s. Yes Marine Snipers did this. I do agree with some of what he says. Our attrition rate was high and I do think some liked that and were proud of it. It got better during the war but went back to the high attrition rate. I am part of the Marine Corps Scout sniper association and alot of us are pist and rightfully so. Sniper employment training has lacked at the company and battalion level. It’s to bad. The Marine Corps Sniper has always been the premier Sniper in the American Military. We have always led the way in development as well.

Marines suffer from the same problem Leg Army has with their snipers -- officers don't know how to use them, and they have no godfather to ensure the capability is taught to lieutenants in the School of Infantry, nor to captains at the Amphibious Warfare School.

High attrition turns the division schools into a self-licking ice cream cone. MOS billets are never filled, and besides platoon leaders, company and battalion commanders don't care because they never get full value from a supporting capability that may not belong to them.

The Army's course is now seven weeks long and cannot fill all the empty billets we have in infantry battalions and cavalry squadrons.

The Special Forces Sniper Course is seven weeks long as well, but goes much further in its POI than the infantry school's course. There are two sniper slots in each 12-man ODA. If there are not enough Bragg-trained snipers a battalion can run its own basic-level course, open to sergeants through major.

SF and the Ranger battalions use their snipers.

This is a Russian support-by-fire position with the leader doctrinally observing and directing an RPG, a sniper, and a machinegunner. How many US Marine and Army line infantry platoons do this correctly and routinely?

[ClearedHot]

Integrating snipers or DM’s with a machine gun squad is something that the Marine Corps should be doing. The two assets combined in a mutually supporting role would be extremely combat effective.

This post from an active duty 0331 goes in depth about the concept:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CqsHDgqu...JkMmIyYzQxYw==

[Hank6046]

The Corps seems to be reorganizing itself as something along the lines of an amphibious 75th Ranger Regiment.

I think that's sorta what they have been wanting for a long time, it's how the British Marine Commandos are organized, the issue is that they want their cake and to eat it too. They want to maintain their Airpower, and even if getting rid of tanks, their ground support units. I'm not saying it cannot be done, it is just very process intensive when you want a fast reaction force, but also the logistics of a larger slower force that can bring more firepower to the table.

[chuckman]

I think that's sorta what they have been wanting for a long time, it's how the British Marine Commandos are organized, the issue is that they want their cake and to eat it too. They want to maintain their Airpower, and even if getting rid of tanks, their ground support units. I'm not saying it cannot be done, it is just very process intensive when you want a fast reaction force, but also the logistics of a larger slower force that can bring more firepower to the table.

The RMCs are also undergoing a reorganization. They are indeed a mash-up between our Marine Corps and our Rangers; but then, they are also more selective, it's a smaller service, and the commando course is a different animal from anything we have. In the mid-90s I (and a few Marines) did an exchange with the "four-two" and completed the commando course.

I do not think, and do not know, if the goal is to turn all USMC units into MLRs, or just the Pacific-based units. It's really a great concept, if it works. Adds speed and agility, plus a bit of a SOF-centric role in stay-behind UW-type stuff. But it does require one thing we do not have: more amphibs.

Regarding the sniper role, Berger's 2030 thing started this ball rolling. Honestly the community shot itself in the foot so many times I am surprised it's lasted this long. Personally I hate the decision and think it'll come back to bite the Corps in the ass. MARSOC won't give up their guys and recon will be overworked. There will be friction. I do not hate having more DM-trained shooters, though.

[Hank6046]

The RMCs are also undergoing a reorganization. They are indeed a mash-up between our Marine Corps and our Rangers; but then, they are also more selective, it's a smaller service, and the commando course is a different animal from anything we have. In the mid-90s I (and a few Marines) did an exchange with the "four-two" and completed the commando course.

I do not think, and do not know, if the goal is to turn all USMC units into MLRs, or just the Pacific-based units. It's really a great concept, if it works. Adds speed and agility, plus a bit of a SOF-centric role in stay-behind UW-type stuff. But it does require one thing we do not have: more amphibs.

Regarding the sniper role, Berger's 2030 thing started this ball rolling. Honestly the community shot itself in the foot so many times I am surprised it's lasted this long. Personally I hate the decision and think it'll come back to bite the Corps in the ass. MARSOC won't give up their guys and recon will be overworked. There will be friction. I do not hate having more DM-trained shooters, though.

Yes the RMC is definitely smaller and more selective, and the Marine Corps while being extremely adaptable is constantly being strained to keep up with changes while most likely being under funded. I know that the Marine Corps leadership has always been great at coming up with fighting concepts and as the step-son of a Staff Officer I do think we need people thinking about future conflicts and utilization, the enemy often has a greater share of the say and that also worries me as this is a lesson we have learned before during Vietnam. I also don't hate more DM-trained shooters, but they'll need greater freedom and more training to get them to help carry the load left over from the sniper platoons

[chuckman]

Yes the RMC is definitely smaller and more selective, and the Marine Corps while being extremely adaptable is constantly being strained to keep up with changes while most likely being under funded. I know that the Marine Corps leadership has always been great at coming up with fighting concepts and as the step-son of a Staff Officer I do think we need people thinking about future conflicts and utilization, the enemy often has a greater share of the say and that also worries me as this is a lesson we have learned before during Vietnam. I also don't hate more DM-trained shooters, but they'll need greater freedom and more training to get them to help carry the load left over from the sniper platoons

I think it's the Corps' adaptability and ability to reinvent itself which has largely allowed it to be relevant, especially in relation to the other services. Unlike what the boogeyman likes to say, 'they' were never going to disband the Corps, but the Corps has been in position to be told what to do, but avoided so by its adaptability. It's one of the best things about the Corps.

That the Corps can do this while being underfunded and with certain MOSs undermanned is nothing short of remarkable. They really do more with less. As my dad would say (USMC 1954-1975), "that's the Marine Corps way."

I am all for more agility and lethality, but I hope the Redesign 2030 is not cutting off the nose to spite the face. I am not optimistic that the changes with the sniper community isn't just that.

[Hank6046]

I am all for more agility and lethality, but I hope the Redesign 2030 is not cutting off the nose to spite the face. I am not optimistic that the changes with the sniper community isn't just that.

As much as I love my Marine Corps, and I do love the Marines, this cutting off the nose to spite the face has been an all too common occurrence. As a force that prides itself on small unit leadership and decision making, there are a lot of top down decisions being made.

[Averageman]

The USMC school was eating its young, patting itself on its back for such a high attrition rate. And a lot of the failures were for arbitrary bullshit. As a community they were very inbred and resistant to outside counsel, including the council of people with stars on their collars which led to some of the.

The Armor branch used to have a very, very demanding school with about an 80% attrition rate.
Took me two tries to make it through, it was seriously no joke.
My understanding is that now 25 years later the school survived, but it's nothing compared to what it was and neither are the graduates.
So you either want the best and demand the best from the Students or you water things down to the point where everyone is a graduate and the school and skill become meaningless.

[chuckman]

The Armor branch used to have a very, very demanding school with about an 80% attrition rate.
Took me two tries to make it through, it was seriously no joke.
My understanding is that now 25 years later the school survived, but it's nothing compared to what it was and neither are the graduates.
So you either want the best and demand the best from the Students or you water things down to the point where everyone is a graduate and the school and skill become meaningless.

It wasn't high attrition due to high and unbending standards, it was Keepers of the MOS deciding who stayed and who went based on subjective criteria. Instead of working with higher to make it better, they decided to link arms and turn their backs. A lot of Very Important People told them that it wasn't going to end well. And here we are.

Recon still has their own school, and MARSOC uses it plus the courses at Bragg.