Was pleasantly surprised to find actionable guidance for Marines and not an advertisement for a defense contractor. While we didn’t have any FPV style drones available to us, we did complementary training where our SUAS operators searched for a dismounted element on patrol. Taught cSUAS and reinforced good patrol/camo TTPs to the crunchies and helped the operators get better using their equipment tactically to contribute to the targeting cycle. Just please remember that your SUAS work in the same air as rotors and can cause blue on blue for aircrew and the passengers they carry. When coordination/deconfliction falls apart in the fog of battle/training quick action by a drone operator can prevent a lot of lost lives and capabilities.
This is an iterative and initiative-based approach to C-sUAS that suits Marines. It's not THE SOLUTION but it is part of a foundational approach that will be worked out from now until the time it truly needs to be done in the field. You'll recall that early in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan we had soft-sided HMMWV's and no one really ever practiced a 5 & 25 check, but time and experience changed that.
Even the old Corps types should be able to relate to the OP/LP mission for the air sentries. It's always been a part of our training, but the threat just hasn't forced us to attend to those basics for a long time.
Relating the platoon approach previously well known and rehearsed concepts and battle drills such as HAW-MAW-LAW, massed squad fires like an FPL, and MODI II operator as a new Platoon RTO is smart and lays a foundation for further refinement. Layering the existing commercial and government systems for C-sUAS is the right approach for now and as equipment gets better then the new equipment still fits into the drill. The argument that shotguns for example don't have the range and killing power would miss the point about incremental improvements in systems and ammunition. Likewise bigger systems are likely to be fielded at the Co and Bn levels and then can be tasked according to the need.
The battle drills are the foundation. They are meant to evolve with reality, and because of reality.
The best thing about the 1st MarDiv approach is that it is happening before we are in desperate need of it.
Was pleasantly surprised to find actionable guidance for Marines and not an advertisement for a defense contractor. While we didn’t have any FPV style drones available to us, we did complementary training where our SUAS operators searched for a dismounted element on patrol. Taught cSUAS and reinforced good patrol/camo TTPs to the crunchies and helped the operators get better using their equipment tactically to contribute to the targeting cycle. Just please remember that your SUAS work in the same air as rotors and can cause blue on blue for aircrew and the passengers they carry. When coordination/deconfliction falls apart in the fog of battle/training quick action by a drone operator can prevent a lot of lost lives and capabilities.
Well done to the authors.
This is an iterative and initiative-based approach to C-sUAS that suits Marines. It's not THE SOLUTION but it is part of a foundational approach that will be worked out from now until the time it truly needs to be done in the field. You'll recall that early in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan we had soft-sided HMMWV's and no one really ever practiced a 5 & 25 check, but time and experience changed that.
Even the old Corps types should be able to relate to the OP/LP mission for the air sentries. It's always been a part of our training, but the threat just hasn't forced us to attend to those basics for a long time.
Relating the platoon approach previously well known and rehearsed concepts and battle drills such as HAW-MAW-LAW, massed squad fires like an FPL, and MODI II operator as a new Platoon RTO is smart and lays a foundation for further refinement. Layering the existing commercial and government systems for C-sUAS is the right approach for now and as equipment gets better then the new equipment still fits into the drill. The argument that shotguns for example don't have the range and killing power would miss the point about incremental improvements in systems and ammunition. Likewise bigger systems are likely to be fielded at the Co and Bn levels and then can be tasked according to the need.
The battle drills are the foundation. They are meant to evolve with reality, and because of reality.
The best thing about the 1st MarDiv approach is that it is happening before we are in desperate need of it.