Marines Cut Tank Units, Infantry Battalions and More
U.S. Marines with Charlie Company, 1st Tank Battalion, 1st Marine Division, participate in live-fire training during exercise Native Fury 20 in the United Arab Emirates, March 19, 2020. (U.S. Marine Corps/Sgt. Alexis Flores)
The Marine Corps is cutting all military occupational specialties associated with tank battalions, law enforcement units and bridging companies. It is also reducing its number of infantry battalions from 24 to 21, and cutting tilt rotor, attack and heavy-lift aviation squadrons.
By 2030, the Marine Corps will drop down to an end strength of 170,000 personnel. That’s about 16,000 fewer leathernecks than it has today.
Cameron sends.
The Last Tank Has Left Marine Corps Base 29 Palms, Soon The Entire Service
BY JOSEPH TREVITHICK
There are no more M1 Abrams tanks at the U.S. Marine Corps’ base at 29 Palms in California, one of the service’s premier training facilities and its largest base anywhere. The Marines have been retiring M1s, as well as M88 armored recovery vehicles and Armored Vehicle Launched Bridges, and shuttering armored units all month as part of a radical new force structure plan that Marine Corps Commandant General David Berger publicly unveiled in March.
The last M1 Abrams left left 29 Palms on July 6, 2020. These tanks had been on the base assigned to the 1st Tank Battalion, 1st Marine Division and to the Exercise Support Division, part of the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center. The Marine Corps has also been in the process of closing out elements of the 4th Battalion, part of the Marine Corps Forces Reserve (MARFORRES), and eliminating the heavy armored vehicles that Marine Corps Logistics Command has in its possession over the course of this month.
The Marines have been consolidating the retired M1s from all of these units, along with their M88s and Armored Vehicle Launched Bridges (AVLB) – some 200 vehicles in total – at Marine Corps Logistics Base Barstow (MCLB Barstow) in California. From there, the service has been sending them by train to the U.S. Army’s Sierra Army Depot in California and Anniston Army Depot in Alabama.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Marine Corps plans to eventually divest the entirety of its M1 fleet, more than 400 vehicles in total, as part of the new Force Design 2030 plans, which you can read about in more detail in this past War Zone piece.
These changes are the result an in-depth review and war-gaming experiments that showcased rocket artillery capabilities, anti-ship missiles, unmanned systems and other high-tech equipment the service will have by 2030. Commandant Gen. David Berger directed the review, which he has called his No. 1 priority as the service’s top general.
“Developing a force that incorporates emerging technologies and a significant change to force structure within our current resource constraints will require the Marine Corps to become smaller and remove legacy capabilities,” a news release announcing the changes states.
I believe my opinions on modeling and simulation (aka “experiments”) are well known enough that I don’t need to repeat them now. The entire article may be viewed here: The Drive
Thanks, Cameron.
Category: "The Floggings Will Continue Until Morale Improves", Guest Link, Marines
Title suggestion:
Good Bye 29 Palms, Hello Barstow/Yermo
(Smile)
Tanks for the memories?
If they’re going to have this fancy new tech by 2030, then why get rid of the working stuff now? Government is always so timely with its new equipment acquisitions. *cough* Osprey *cough* F-35 *cough*
All I know as a former Army Treadhead, Marine Tankers were clanging their balls of steel inside of M60’s getting it done during the first Gulf War when Army Tankers were rumbling along in style in M-1’s
I’ve been in an M60 when it’s over 100 degrees outside, it must have made Hell look like a pool party for them in the sandbox.
This only works if the Army can pick up the mission space and keeps enough heavy units on AD…
We already know that the Army is frantically searching for a way out of the ABCT and HBCT formations now with an emphasis on Stryker and other wheeled vehicles.
Apparently, everyone thinks the next war will be fought exclusively on roads and in cities.
Only a PhD could be so myopic.
I have seen videos (or whatever they were called then) from WWII showing tankers in North Africa frying eggs on their tanks.
God forbid that I would try to second guess a learned Commandant of the Marine Corps, or know what all types of lethality will be available or needed 10 years from now. That being said, I would think that the Corps had developed/kept some of the platforms that they are getting rid of because at some point in time they had a need for them. And, having that need, didn’t want to or couldn’t depend on overcoming “inter service rivalry” to provide the platforms needed to do the mission.
Let’s hope this decision doesn’t come back to bite them on the azz. Better to have and not need, than to need and not have.
As a former grunt I always found it a great comfort to have tanks around (During the day, anyway; night is a different story). Always nice to have a big lump of steel to hide behind, especially one with great optics to see your opponent as far away as possible and lots of firepower to eliminate bunkers, etc. without having to get up close and personal with grenades and such.
The Commandant must see everyone beating their swords into plowshares, because I cannot imagine a conflict where having a few tanks around would not make life a bit more pleasant, not to mention longer, for Marine infantry.
So they are divesting the mobile direct-fire stuff in favor of indirect and unmanned? Sounds like someone bought into the old “air/ship/drone bombardment will totally neutralize any resistance” canard.
Well hell, it worked great on Iwo Jima right?
Good thing the Chicoms, and any other possible enemy, doesn’t have tanks, right?? Wait, they DO have tanks? I wonder who the Commandant thinks the Marines might engage in the future?
Yeah, 3rd MARDIV out there on Okie at the tip of the spear won’t have to worry about facing Chinese armor will they?
Of course not, the Commandant seems to believe that can’t happen.
3rd Marine Division has not had tanks since Desert Shield. The tanks went to the sandbox for the first of a double header, and never returned to 1st Tracked Vehicle Battalion.
In other 1800 news, there was a training accident off the coast of Camp Pendleton with one confirmed death, and they are still looking for survivors.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/training-mishap-off-southern-california-leaves-one-marine-dead-5-service-members-missing/
Not just tanks. Evidently the Commandant doesn’t think our possible enemies will have entrenching tools, either. Obviously FM 5-15 “Field Fortifications” is not on his reading list.
This story is missing a headline.
Which is OK,
except it makes clicking on “Recent Comments” impossible.
Everyone’s a critic.
*grin*
Thanks, MarineDad61, fixed. I suck at multitasking.
AW1Ed,
Good catch on my comment.
You’re welcome.
I saw a Poetrooper listing on “Recent Comments”
with nothing to click on,
and so I scratched myself for a minute,
then tracked it here. 1st time I’ve ever seen this.
🙂
Not to mention (but I will anyway),
these cuts in the story….
… could affect my son (MV-22 Osprey).
“remove legacy capabilities”
Win 3.1 Win 95 Win XP Vista Win 7 Win 8 Win 8.1 Win 10.
The old shit can’t talk to the new shit so shitcan it.
USAF did just recently get away from using floppy disks. Not the 3.5″ or even 5.25″ ones, but the REALLY old 8″ ones.
Heh. Got some. AND the drives to play them. Pretty sure that between my Pentium II and DOS 6.22 I also have the drivers.
Yeah, and to echo former SMMC Michael Barrett, Gen Berger will want Marines to be paid less to free up money for, well you know…new tech stuff.
I remember reading on Wikipedia that the Army once tried to rely on light infantry after their success in Panama only to switch back to regular infantry because light infantry by itself just didn’t have the same amount of hitting power. How much do you wanna bet that either this bites the marines in the ass or they end up reversing it in short order?
So the Marine Corps is eliminating/scaling back its capability to do…what Marines are supposed to do. Okaaaay….
Doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me.
I have just one question: has any Marine in any war zone in living memory ever wished he *didn’t* have tanks backing him up? I’m sure there’s lots of instances where Marines were thinking “Man, I wish the tanks were here!” But has there been a single time when a Marine in combat said “God, this situation would be so much better if our tanks would just go away!”?
I’m gonna go out on a limb here, TOW, and go with no, nope and hell, no.
I seem to remember Marines and/or soldiers having to rely on someone else’s tanks in a place called Mogadishu. I could be wrong, but I seem to remember that.
If you were a communications Marine you would hate tanks. They always mess up our wire after we laid in the internal communications layout. Other than that, no.
Unless you were a Comm Guy riding with the tankers like Hack did. They will never make a movie with Brad Pitt as a Communications Officer. The most intense scene would be where he would decide which direction to point the satellite dish because he did not have a compass. (That was based on a true event, Cobra Gold 1998 or 1999).
But was that “Man, I hate tanks and wish we got rid of the damn things!” or “I just wish these tankers wouldn’t drive over my wires!”?
They would waste your overhead lines too, with their antennas. Ain’t no safe place from those things.
“Man, I hate tanks and wish we got rid of the damn things!”
That was my nighttime opinion. As grunts we usually try to keep a low profile, especially on OP or an ambush. Those damn tanks (and APCs) starting their engines to keep the batteries charged so they can do radio checks at full volume and speakers on are not helpful in that regard. Not only is your hearing wrecked but it is amazing how far you can hear the SQWK! of breaking squelch at night.
I seem to remember hearing at least 50 times during briefings about having “overwhelming and superior firepower” to kick the enemy’s ass into the Stone Age.
Me thinkuth that this is giving that edge to our enemies…
Gotta have flex man, flex.
This dirtbag has a historic opportunity to ENLARGE the Corps, and he is making us both smaller and less combat effective. With Trump in there, the Corps could be at like 250000 men, and heavy in infantry. Oh no. Instead he kills off tanks, a significant portion of our artillery, and nearly a division worth of Marines. So we can be ready to go head to head with the Chinks.
I love that form of logic.
Yeah.
Berger is a dipshit, PC dude. I was not a Marine, but this guy is a ball-working lackey that plays it safe. That, in my opinion, ain’t the USMC.
At least the USMC can still use fixed-wing assets as “indigenous” arty and CAS.
In RVN those of us in the 1811 MOS business used M48 A3 tanks, which were hand-me-downs from previous Army use. T C rotates a small round wheel looking through a split-field image range finder, rotating the wheel until both images overlap each other. That was also the typical split field focus used on 35 M M cameras in those days. Meanwhile a numerical index window changed with every roll of the wheel, correctly giving tank-to-target range when images were aligned. That was fed directly to the old ballistic computer on the right side of the gunner. T C would tell gunner what type of round to index on the computer, and it would add for super elevation (climb rate above tank-to-target direct line of sight), allowing for the speed of the indexed round as well as tank to target distance. Presto, in less than two seconds you were ready to present an accurate delivery. Once, had to shoot directly over the heads of a squad of Marines who had sprung an ambush on the side of a river we were on. Called the grunts to let them know we were sending the first round high just to make sure we were still safe on targets we had nailed earlier in the day, still having their numbers recorded as a record. First round went exactly where I expected it. Only then did I feel safe using the same numbers (azimuth and distance to target). The H E rounds we fired were exactly on target and did their job, even with coming very close over the heads of those in the ambush. Right at either 1,500 yards or maybe 2,500 best I can recall. My point is this, why did they ever mess with perfection to begin with? The next tanks used after I ended my four years were the M 60’s. Yeah progress changes so much for the better, but absolute perfection to something better was hard for me to comprehend. We always had a great camaraderie with the grunts, always carried extra water and C’s to share with them… Read more »
Boom-boom in a tank…..
My sister-in-laws would have a field day with that one! There’s a reason why I got rid of my “Full Metal Jacket” DVD.
Ah, good times. Working with Tanks & ACAVs was a mixed experience. They do make great beasts of burden. Being on ambush or OP at night out in front of all those 50 cal.s, M-60s, and 90MMs always made me extremely nervous, though. Particularly when they registered or called in artillery. They seemed to forget that a nice, tight registration close to their perimeter was right on top of us.
Did you all do the thing with the section of chain link fence in front of your vehicles to counter RPGs?
The Iraqis ‘Best Armor Division was wiped out in 3 days and a Captain that flew for United Airlines , and a Reserve helicopter pilot told me it made his sick looking at all the drone films. The Tankers never seen or head where the rockets were coming from. It was like shooting fish in a barrel! Tomorrows Battlefield Technology would probably shock us all. They can hit a moving target from 3 miles out and only kill the person in the passenger seat!