Suhiir's Revised USMC OOB #13

[Mobhack]

2) The US Army (on which all USMC weapons data is based) only requires its people to qualify at a max of 300m (someone can correct me if I'm wrong) with the M16. The USMC requires them to do so at 500m (and if they can't they can actually be discharged for unsuitability). To the best of my knowledge no other military force in the world (other then of course sniper types) requires such standards, and ranges of basic marksmanship.

British army rifle qualification was done out to 500 yards with the 7.62 SLR fitted with iron sights (none of this telescope malarkey) was standard. That was back in the mid 1970's when I did my "steam gunnery", I have no idea what they do with the new 5.56 rifle.

Ah the joys of range duty - including recovering some not too bent rounds, and popping those in the holes in the figure 80 target on a recruit's qualifying shoot. When he came up to inspect it, he was advised to squeeze the trigger harder since the rounds were not making it through the paper !. Usually got at least one who fell for that wind-up hook line and sinker...

Cheers
Andy

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

British army rifle qualification was done out to 500 yards with the 7.62 SLR fitted with iron sights (none of this telescope malarkey) was standard. That was back in the mid 1970's when I did my "steam gunnery", I have no idea what they do with the new 5.56 rifle.

Ah the joys of range duty - including recovering some not too bent rounds, and popping those in the holes in the figure 80 target on a recruit's qualifying shoot. When he came up to inspect it, he was advised to squeeze the trigger harder since the rounds were not making it through the paper !. Usually got at least one who fell for that wind-up hook line and sinker...

Cheers
Andy

I stand corrected!
Seems "modern" armies have decided "volume of fire" via the assault rifles is preferred over "accuracy of fire". I know during WW II most armies expected accurate fire at 5, 6, even 800 yards.

Love the bit with the not to bent rounds in the paper! One I never heard before.

[Suhiir]

Upgrade to v5.0

The attached OOB is the update to my USMC OOB revision to compatibility (as far as is possible) with WinSPMBT v5.0.

[Suhiir]

Scenario (part 1 of 7 from my work-in-progress mini-campaign) posted.

13th MEU Part 1 of 7

[Joe1960]

Many thanks for this.

I was a USMC 0311 for 8 years.

I was always going "Huh?" when picking my USMC units for Long Campaigns because of the stock OOB.

Your earlier post about the structure of a "standard" USMC Infantry Battalion is dead nuts on.

Have 2 USMC Long Campaigns going - versus Iran in 2010 and one vs NK in 1985. I just started the NK one so I will restart and give your OOB a test run.

Thanks again.

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by Joe1960

Many thanks for this.

I was a USMC 0311 for 8 years.

I was always going "Huh?" when picking my USMC units for Long Campaigns because of the stock OOB.

Your earlier post about the structure of a "standard" USMC Infantry Battalion is dead nuts on.

Have 2 USMC Long Campaigns going - versus Iran in 2010 and one vs NK in 1985. I just started the NK one so I will restart and give your OOB a test run.

Thanks again.

Of course the problem with the USMC is NOTHING is "standard"

But yes, the structure in my OOB revision is the typical one used in training and as the "base line" for creating whatever task-organized force is needed for a given mission.

Thanks! Nice to hear another Jarhead plays this game...I was getting worried that the "real meaning" of Marine might be true:

Muscles
Are
Required
Intelligence
Not
Essential

[Joe1960]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Muscles
Are
Required
Intelligence
Not
Essential

Hehe...that's a new one to me!