100 Royal Marines defeat 1500 conventional US troops in exercise

Couldn't see this posted anywhere else as a topic so thought I'd add it.



At an urban warfare exercise last year in California, the British say, nearly 100 marine commandos defeated 1,500 of their US counterparts because of help from the situational awareness technology.


“The normal assault rules are completely inverted,” said Dan Cheesman, the chief technology officer with the Royal Navy. “It’s not three or four to one that’s needed, it’s one to four.

Other military technology he highlighted included a DefendTex “flying grenade”, a drone carrying an explosive he described as having the mobility of a “snitch” from the Harry Potter books, and a larger Malloy drone used to dump supplies and possibly one day ferry wounded soldiers from a battlefield. There are also plans to test jetpacks in Portsmouth harbour later this year. - Guardian


Our Future Commando Force attacked in the urban warfare exercise. Conventional tactics suggest they would need to heavily outnumber the defending Americans.

But working in eight teams of 12, they outmanoeuvred their rivals and used helicopter drones linked to screens on their chests to pinpoint weak spots.

The £400million drill in California had to be cut short because the British victory was so swift and unexpected. - The Sun



Well done to the Royal Marines, perhaps new tech is the way forward?
 
I dare say a troop of AS90 would have had similar effect
1618533761566.png
 
Last edited:
I’d never noticed that. Did the UK procure any RHD M270s? Wouldn’t they have been procured for deployment in Germany and thus all LHD?
No idea, looks left hand due to size of the window covers
 

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
In shock news, positive news story about FCF, and at the expense of the Americans, natch. Well done “our boys”, best of British and all that...
 
In shock news, positive news story about FCF, and at the expense of the Americans, natch. Well done “our boys”, best of British and all that...

Now lets make some manpower cuts as we clearly don't need that many bods...
 
Couldn't see this posted anywhere else as a topic so thought I'd add it.



At an urban warfare exercise last year in California, the British say, nearly 100 marine commandos defeated 1,500 of their US counterparts because of help from the situational awareness technology.


“The normal assault rules are completely inverted,” said Dan Cheesman, the chief technology officer with the Royal Navy. “It’s not three or four to one that’s needed, it’s one to four.

Other military technology he highlighted included a DefendTex “flying grenade”, a drone carrying an explosive he described as having the mobility of a “snitch” from the Harry Potter books, and a larger Malloy drone used to dump supplies and possibly one day ferry wounded soldiers from a battlefield. There are also plans to test jetpacks in Portsmouth harbour later this year. - Guardian


Our Future Commando Force attacked in the urban warfare exercise. Conventional tactics suggest they would need to heavily outnumber the defending Americans.

But working in eight teams of 12, they outmanoeuvred their rivals and used helicopter drones linked to screens on their chests to pinpoint weak spots.

The £400million drill in California had to be cut short because the British victory was so swift and unexpected. - The Sun



Well done to the Royal Marines, perhaps new tech is the way forward?

How timely. It happened last year but the results are published in the wake of the IR.
 

Sarastro

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
In shock news, positive news story about FCF, and at the expense of the Americans, natch. Well done “our boys”, best of British and all that...
Hmm. Reading between the lines, it may be that the Sun, the Guardian and Nick Carter can't be entirely trusted to be accurate or honest. Does a 1 to 15 ratio for offensive urban clearances not sound a little unlikely to anyone here? I don't care how good your tech is, you lose that on mistakes and luck alone.

Royal Marines participating in an exercise in which the UK was partnering with a fictional African nation wore mobile phones clamped open on their chest.

Not 100% clear they are talking about the same exercise, but an informed guess might suggest that the 100 / 1500 has conveniently omitted that this exercise was basically Operation Get Behind The Darkies, and the actual ratio of troops was nowhere near that.

I think @stacker1 and @TamtamPWRR have got the right idea. This sounds like RMA MK3. It's been 20 years since Afghanistan now - time to start jettisoning all those unnecessary lessons we're carrying around!
 
US troops have never been a match for well drilled HM Forces, unless they're in an A10. ;)
However, how often does the UK exercise against a 'thinking enemy' with proper freedom of movement / action / thought - rather than pre-programmed serials?
 

Sarastro

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Well done to the Royal Marines, perhaps new tech is the way forward?
Alternatively to option I suggested above, this post suggests that they were playing the insurgent forces.

"Insurgencies can fix and defeat much larger forces" is not quite the same best-of-British, "overturned the principles of war" story for the Sun, however. It is basically the same principle of war we just spent a decade learning.

Honestly, at what point did we accept having such blatant liars as officers that we let one become Chief of the Defence Staff?
 
I think the exercise was very good in proving what the exercise aims were.

But lets not pretend, if 1500 pers of the US Army were also allowed to free play, the bootnecks would've been flattened. Re-reading the lessons learned of Fallujah and Donetsk airport reinforce that.
 

Sarastro

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
I think the exercise was very good in proving what the exercise aims were.

But lets not pretend, if 1500 pers of the US Army were also allowed to free play, the bootnecks would've been flattened. Re-reading the lessons learned of Fallujah and Donetsk airport reinforce that.
Yes, but still, stuff like this:

“The normal assault rules are completely inverted,” said Dan Cheesman, the chief technology officer with the Royal Navy. “It’s not three or four to one that’s needed, it’s one to four.”

Is dangerous claptrap, because someone might actually listen to him. As, indeed, Donald Rumsfeld did in the late 90s. A bootneck should know better. I presume his stated view is while wearing career contacts.
 
However, how often does the UK exercise against a 'thinking enemy' with proper freedom of movement / action / thought - rather than pre-programmed serials?
Poor form to quote oneself, but I have been wracking my brain to remember if we ever did this in my time [2006-2015].

The only time I remember it was at RMAS itself on the final exercise - one company at a time was given pretty much free reign to act as enemy for one of the others, in the Cypriot hills. We had ID'd their harbour areas and were constantly observing them from about 3 hours in - it helps when instead of moving as a slow platoon, you're in 3-4 man patrols. The rest of the time, even on Herrick MST - nope. Serialised encounters all the way.
 

Latest Threads

Top