Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
Tradition has fighter pilots being commissioned officers.
Helicopters can be captained by warrant officers.
Helicopters can be captained by warrant officers.
Imperial marine fighter / attack craft
- Thread starter Blue Ghost
- Start date
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
That depends on whose traditions you mean and the need for pilots.
During the second world war there were many NCO pilots of combat aircraft in most nations.
During the second world war there were many NCO pilots of combat aircraft in most nations.
According to the UK's ministry of defense, the Royal Marines operate rotary wing craft. I think in ages past they also operated some fixed wing aircraft, but I don't know the details.
MThompson016
SOC-12
Yes, the Royal Marines did provide officers flying in the FAA during World War II. Captain R. T. Partridge, RM lead a squadron of Blackburn Skuas over Norway.
Currently, the Royal Navy's Commando Helicopter Force is commanded by a Royal Marines Colonel.
Currently, the Royal Navy's Commando Helicopter Force is commanded by a Royal Marines Colonel.
Given this response, and all the other responses, my sense is that each sector in each domain probably has it's own order of battle and/or TOE. Meaning that some sectors (or perhaps subsectors) have lots of marine drivers that serve along side naval aviators as per the US Navy and Royal Navy, whereas there are probably areas where either the marines or naval aviators are the only military flyers around. It just seems to me to be a GURPS like structure where any force that's needed is created and maintained.
Deneb, Vland and Antares probably have lots of Vargr incursions, so marine drivers, I'm guessing, are probably more prevalent along their frontiers. Gateway and Sylea are probably more populated with army attack units and naval attack units because they don't see the kind of constant threat from corsairs, and are more organized against more politically cohesive foreces, like the K'Kree and Aslan. There's probably lots of Imperial Marine drivers in Sol.
Just my take.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
I'll speculate that with Aslans, only the more organized and richer clans would have a specific Marine branch.
Sort of hard to imagine the Ponies trying boarding actions against smaller statured races spaceships, more likely they'll send in drones.
Sort of hard to imagine the Ponies trying boarding actions against smaller statured races spaceships, more likely they'll send in drones.
Sorry I didn't make myself clear. I meant the Imperial domains, specifically the Imperial space within domains.
Having said that, I haven't checked the samurai cats char gen in forever. Do they even have marines? I can't remember.
Having said that, I haven't checked the samurai cats char gen in forever. Do they even have marines? I can't remember.
This is absolutely contrary to my vision of the 3I (though it's only this my vision), where the Imperium tries to standardize everything in Imperial services, so that units may be rotated and area attachment avoided.
But that's probably for another thread...
Oh yeah? Well, I guess my view is that everyone uses the same standard design for basic ships, personal armor, weapons, tanks, and even uniforms, but that the insignia and details change from domain to domain. Further, that each domain, and sector military within, comprised of subsector and system or planetary hardware, is tailored for their needs.
It would not make sense for say Sol to have squadrons of anti-piracy class vessels of whatever tonnage because they're mostly facing Solis and their more traditional navy and army, verse the doggies who have not just the corsair, but probably lots of variants o the corsair as well as vessels of larger and smaller tonnage for raiding.
I mean, your mileage may vary, and house rules and all that. But how much need for marine strike craft and fliers is there for facing the cats or solis? I don't know, but it's probably not the same as for the K'Kree or the Zhos.
It would not make sense for say Sol to have squadrons of anti-piracy class vessels of whatever tonnage because they're mostly facing Solis and their more traditional navy and army, verse the doggies who have not just the corsair, but probably lots of variants o the corsair as well as vessels of larger and smaller tonnage for raiding.
I mean, your mileage may vary, and house rules and all that. But how much need for marine strike craft and fliers is there for facing the cats or solis? I don't know, but it's probably not the same as for the K'Kree or the Zhos.
BlackBat242
SOC-14 1K
Yes and no... Marine Corps aviation officially began on 22 May 1912, when First Lieutenant Alfred Austell Cunningham reported to Naval Aviation Camp in Annapolis, Maryland, "for duty in connection with aviation." On 20 August of that year, he became the first Marine aviator, as he took off in a Burgess Model H given to him by the Burgess Company in Marblehead Harbor in Marblehead, Massachusetts.
He received his Naval Aviator wings as Naval Aviator #5 - yes, there were only 4 USN pilots certified before him! First Lieutenant Bernard L. Smith was awarded wings as Naval Aviator #6, and Cunningham received orders on 26 February 1917, to organize the Aviation Company for the Advanced Base Force, at the Philadelphia Navy Yard. Designated as the commander of this unit, Cunningham soon emerged as de facto director of Marine Corps aviation (Smith was the founder and CO of the Marine Section of the Navy Flying School, in 1914).
However, the concept that USMC aviators would focus on directly supporting Marines on the ground was present from almost the beginning.
Last edited:
BlackBat242
SOC-14 1K
F-16 (and F-15) USAF pilots... the F/A-18 is a USN/USMC aircraft.
And the USAF's A-10s are trained exclusively for ground-attack because it is a purpose-built ground-attack aircraft with no capability as a fighter, etc.
I seem to recall the Army had, at one time, a fixed wing support air craft in conjunction with and apart from the USAF's A10. It was in one of my Janes pocket books ... it's locked away in storage ... I'm too lazy (and ticked off at real world stuff) to do a search.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
There is an old saying that I find hard to refute - militaries plan to fight the last war.
Right through the cold war both sides were gearing up to fight a WW2 like land war in Europe. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were likewise combined arms operations based on tactics refined during WW2.
Sadly the asymmetric warfare that then developed (despite the hints from Vietnam and other conflicts of that type) revealed serious flaws in military planning, equipment and tactics.
Note this is quite a simplistic take on this, many, many books have been written on the subject.
AnotherDilbert
SOC-14 1K
Oops, sorry. I can't say I keep track of all US air forces. For the Finnish airforce only the F-18 was/is considered to have acceptable performance, IIRC related to basing requirements. I vaguely thought the F-16 was old and the F-18 modernised and current.
Quite, hence the A-10 pilots are presumably better at ground support, just as Marine pilots are better at ground support than Navy pilots because they have different specialisations in training?
Xerxeskingofking
SOC-13
yes, but, as always, what can you base your plan on, if not the most recent experience you have?
the asymmetric warfare that developed in Veitnam and other places was almost always a result of a lack of conventional warfighting ability. the North Vietnamize fought using guerrilla warfare because they couldn't win a conventional war. they tried it, during the tet offensive, and they got their butts kicked (militarily at least, I leave the political effects for the Pit). it was only after the US pulled out that the north veitnamise won....by using conventional tactics. they rolled into Saigon with tanks.
I'd write more, but I need to go. suffice to say, its not unreasonable to say that "russain trained veitnamise in veitnam would not fight like russains in Europe"
.
edit:
I have a more time now, so I will expand:
preparing to fight ww3 in northern Europe like ww2, version 2 is not exactly wrong. not 100% right, obviously, as the tech differences would changed, but not 100% wrong either. both sides were looking at fighting a major land battle, against a peer strength opponent, and expecting it to go nuclear in short order. Given that expectation, its not unreasonable to say that gurrellia conflicts in Vietnam, or 80's Afghanistan, were of only limited use in drawing conclusions about how a conventional war in central Europe would play out (for example, the AC130 and its predecessors were very effective in Vietnam, but would they have worked as well against russain Motor Rifles troops with large numbers man portable SAM weapons?)
now, should these armies also have been prepared for guerrilla/asymmetric warfare? Yes, they should have been, but its case of only so many dollars/ruples to spend, and the conventional mission taking priority over COIN. after all, both the Soviet and Americans managed to loose their repective counter insurgency wars, but these losses did not lead into a immediate collapse of those nations, but a loss in the north german plain would also certainly cause the fall of some of the respective alliances
Last edited:
The A-10 carries a pair of sidewinders for self defense.
The Army is (or at least was) prohibited from operating fixed-wing ground attack aircraft. The Air Force and Marines had the OV-10 Bronco and the Army the roughly similar OA-1 Mohawk, but they were forced to disarm them in the mid-1960's.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
Centralizing functions was considered more efficient; worked for Britain in nineteen fourteen, less so for the Fleet Air Arm, who were starved for men and aircraft, and Coastal Command.
Sixty years later, lack of combat airframes makes the siren call of multimission and multipurpose aircraft hard to resist, and creates the incentive to eliminate all competition for that limited budgeted procurement and and operating costs funds.
That's why the Viper's ground attack capability gets emphasized; and the Lightninged Too.
Drones are a grey area as to responsibility, since they are employed by the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, intelligence agencies, and presumably, the Space Force.
Sixty years later, lack of combat airframes makes the siren call of multimission and multipurpose aircraft hard to resist, and creates the incentive to eliminate all competition for that limited budgeted procurement and and operating costs funds.
That's why the Viper's ground attack capability gets emphasized; and the Lightninged Too.
Drones are a grey area as to responsibility, since they are employed by the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, intelligence agencies, and presumably, the Space Force.
