US Marauder Companies

[Raellus]

Does the organisation and equipment look about right to everyone Bear in mind they are designed as a raiding force. I probably need to add an anti-tank capability (maybe TOW on the HMMWV). Of the top of my head assume two vehicles per section, 1 with MG(s) and 1 with TOW (Mk19 could replace either).

I like the comparison to Sissi although I see the role as returning after each raid.

Once again thanks for all the constructive feedback.

PS Feel free to just change the name to your favourite one in your campaign.

-Emphasis added. This is why I think Raider is the more appropriate nomenclature here.

Re AT capability: SOF Humvees in Afghanistan and Iraq usually have a couple AT-4s and one or two Javelin ATGMs strapped down within easy reach.

There was an episode in N. Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom where some Green Berets mounted in Humvees [dismounted] and destroyed some Iraqi AFVs (IIRC, a couple of T-55s, a BMP or two, and an MTLB) with Javelins. Then they called in airstrikes (IIRC from a navy F-14*), one of which hit a friendly unit causing some blue-on-blue casualties.

I think an M-2HB with some AP and/or a MK-19 with some HEDP would be able to handle most light AFVs while a Tankbreaker or TOW could take care of any MBTs encountered. LAWs and RPGs would likely, be standard issue as well.

*Who would have imagined back in the '80s (think Top Gun) that USN F-14 Tomcats would be attacking ground targets with guided [JDAM] bombs

[HorseSoldier]

Ironically, the Rangers are getting their black berets back, now that the rest of the Army has decided to switch back to patrol caps.

Last I heard (since the switch was announced just prior to 06/14) is that the black beret is going to remain the army wide head gear for Class As, just not for use in ACUs unless specially directed by local commanders.

Always was a silly idea, in any case. Hopefully I'll have orders by the end of the month letting my put my red one back on.

[HorseSoldier]

Does the organisation and equipment look about right to everyone Bear in mind they are designed as a raiding force. I probably need to add an anti-tank capability (maybe TOW on the HMMWV). Of the top of my head assume two vehicles per section, 1 with MG(s) and 1 with TOW (Mk19 could replace either).

If they're motorized, I'd say gun them up.

Maybe sections of three vehicles -- two gun trucks, and one cargo humvee being used as a squad carrier. Three man crews on the two gun trucks (possibly augmented by medics, FOs, TACPs, translators, guides, whatever), plus six men on the squad carrier (driver, gunner, plus four man fire team, with the FT leader as vehicle commander when mounted).

Gun trucks with one 50 cal and one Mk-19, and a mounted and dismounted M240 or M60 for the squad carrier. At least in theory one or two Javelins per section, plus AT4s for the dismounts. Practically, they're probably a fan of RPG-7s later in the war like most everyone else in NATO, and possibly are using captured Pact ATGMs or recoilless rifles, etc.

Three of those sections per platoons, with PL and PSG each leading one of them, plus a truck with a 60mm or maybe 81mm mortar crew on it, for a total strength of 40 pax per platoon. Gives a mix of options somewhat like a light version of the old armored cav platoons where you had tanks, scout tracks, an infantry squad, and a mortar carrier all organic to the platoon.

The one other issue I'd see as presented is that these guys simply aren't survivable on a 1997 central European battlefield. The density of enemy AFVs, artillery, and everything else just makes it a non-starter. The US had been steadily moving further and further away from sending a gun truck out onto the German battlefield for decades. I don't think these guys will be able to effectively accomplish anything pre-nuke that the division cavalry squadron can't do better and more survivably.

Now, post-nuke when things start to fall apart, I think a niche for a light cavalry raiding force (which is what these guys are effectively, if they're motorized) emerges. The troop density on the battlefield thins out, even more so AFVs and red air and everything else that makes them non-survivable in the opening phases of the war. Plus you have additional targets emerging like marauders who a fast, light but well armed flying column can go after seriously.

With things getting more static, and air mobility fading fast, these guys start to have an effective mission harassing the other side and screening friendly positions while the bulk of a unit are getting crops in or out of the ground and that sort of thing. With the war kind of becoming more low intensity,

I'm possibly biased and such, but the more I think about it, the more I'd probably have these guys organized post-nuke and becoming D Troop of their respective divisional cavalry squadrons (assuming any surviving air frames are consolidated into C Troop). They might become a separate unit later in the war if/when their respective division converts their cavalry to horse mobility, or might be retained under squadron administrative control and OPCON'ed to brigade or higher S-2 as needed.

[Tombot]

Capitan Conan

Theres a french movie about an irregular unit in World War I., called "Capitaine Conan" (there are trailers on youtube available); good movie about something similar to your idea... something for every T2k-Fan to watch (havent seen it for years).

[HorseSoldier]

Revisiting this thread because the idea just occurred to me, in the specific context of 5th ID, that a unit along these lines could be flagged as P Company, which was the 1st Bde/5th ID's Ranger/LRRP unit in Vietnam.

If players were members of this unit, on some special tactical or operational level tasking when things all go pear shaped for 5th ID, it would allow a different sort of spin on Escape from Kalisz. (Maybe the unit even gets an incredibly vague and bare bones mission to link up with B/1/20 SFG as they pull off their Op Reset objective -- but, for OPSEC purposes, without knowing exactly who, what, or why.)

[pmulcahy11b]

Last I heard (since the switch was announced just prior to 06/14) is that the black beret is going to remain the army wide head gear for Class As, just not for use in ACUs unless specially directed by local commanders.

Always was a silly idea, in any case. Hopefully I'll have orders by the end of the month letting my put my red one back on.

Leave it to the Army; they "correct" their initial bad idea by making the reg more convoluted!

[James Langham]

The article fully fleshed out.

[Raellus]

Great stuff, James. Your work on organization, equipment, and training is really cool. Being a v1.0 afficionado, I just can't divorce the term "marauder" from the eponymous criminal/military elements of the T2K verse. I'm going to use your unit concept but call it a Raider Company instead.

[Adm.Lee]

I like it.

[James Langham]

Great stuff, James. Your work on organization, equipment, and training is really cool. Being a v1.0 afficionado, I just can't divorce the term "marauder" from the eponymous criminal/military elements of the T2K verse. I'm going to use your unit concept but call it a Raider Company instead.

No problems with that, I am not writing canon and EVERYTHING I write is intended for others to modify to suit their own campaign.

I still plan to use the term marauder as it gives a possible origin for the term later in the war as it feels an odd term to have been used to me. I would have thought bandit was more likely in real life.

[Legbreaker]

Personally I always disliked the term "marauder" as used in T2K. Bandits, thieves, ruffians - they all seemed more fitting, but that's probably just me.

[Raellus]

I still plan to use the term marauder as it gives a possible origin for the term later in the war as it feels an odd term to have been used to me. I would have thought bandit was more likely in real life.

That makes sense. I imagine that "marauder" companies would still be around later in the war and using the term to describe both friendly forces and bandits could cause some potentially disastrous confusion. It could lead either to friendly fire incidents or to hostile forces being given a pass, as it were. That, and the fact that I've associated the term marauder with bandits ever since getting my hands on the v1.0 box at the tender age of 11, is why I'd prefer not to call the type of units you've so brilliantly described marauders.

[Medic]

James, you got to stop giving me ideas! Got three online campaigns running and I play in more than I should. And awesome work, by the way.

[Raellus]

James, you got to stop giving me ideas! Got three online campaigns running and I play in more than I should. And awesome work, by the way.

I concur. I'm jonesing to start a campaign based around part of one of these units. I've even started work on a backstory explaining how the PC's fragment got separated from the rest of the company. I should know better, by now!

[James Langham]

Guys, the work is often as much yours as mine as everyone contributes ideas publicly and privately. I would be fascinated to hear any info you develop from this and could always then look at incorporating it.

A Marauder company (sorry but I like the name) would be a great PC unit at Kalisz then little backstory is needed.