BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
There is a difference between sharpshooters and the common definition of sniper and a further difference from the Marine Designation of Sniper. (Which is one of the two Marine Special Forces Designations, the other being Force Recon.) Marine Snipers generally operate well behind enemy lines, move by stealth and attack from extremely well concealed positions. They will spend days getting into the perfect position just to take one shot. Simply sitting them on a roof doesn't feel like the typical Marine Sniper Mission, though it does sound like a good sharpshooter/sniper position.Originally posted by Fritz88:
Dan,
Yup, Air Liaison Officers (ALO) are the doctrinal method for providing Air Force ground attack control to the US Army. The AF won't assign their aircraft TACON or OPCON to the Army, they provide ALOs to provide advice, coordination, and control for the Army. A lot of my fellow pilots didn't agree, but I thought it was a great job (allowing as how I was medically grounded, anyway)!
Bhoins,
As far as snipers, the Marines are using them a little differently in Iraq. They are sending them out in urban situations to control the streets from the rooftops. I think this is one of those places where "sharpshooter" and "sniper" blur together. But, I agree that FOs would probably not be snipers.
With Naval gunnery having a direct line of sight to most targets you might want to hit, would you need to actually designate the target at all? It would seem to me that you could (matter of fact you can do it today) having a GPS, a pair of binos with a built in compass and Laser Rangefinder, you can mark a target just as effectively. With two spotters and no rangefinder, but otherwise similarily equipped you could also get a very accurate read on where the target is.Actually, would you want something so powerful as a laser rifle to do lasing work? You can practically do it now with a laser pointer (a specialized one, though), so I think a laser rifle would be overkill. Also, it would (IMHO) make the possibility of shooting the wrong end of the beam even more likely. (You get a nice "bright" spot at both ends, you know!)
Simple geometry is all you need to hit a target, especially a stationary one.
If you are using Naval Gunnery then all you really need is a target description and a general area. The Ships sensors are more accurate than most ground mounted systems and are easily accurate enough to pick off individual vehicles if not individual people.
If your Airpower also happens to be your Armor then it is likely to be fully integrated. Probably no lower than Company Level, but possibly for some specialized units it would be lower. (Cav/Recon Equivalent units for example, where it can be integrated as low as Platoon Level.)I wouldn't put "air power" below the regiment level. First, it is a HVLD - High Value, Low Density - item due to costs. (Though Piper is right about grav technology blurring more lines.) Second, because of its punch, it needs to be flexible across the battlespace (why the AF doesn't just assign aircraft to Army units) - so it will be assigned to a higher echelon. In the US Marines, helicopters are assigned to the Regiments, but fixed wing assets are kept at the Task Force level (however big that happens to be).
Well if we are dealing with a Batalion level fire support asset, then yes you need the TLC Equivalent to a Mortar at Batalion Level. PGMPs are just too short ranged. (Even the later FGMPs.) While the PGMP and FGMP is the FireTeam heavy weapon of choice, or should be, it certainly isn't a long range artillery type weapon. Now when dealing with small units, individually deployed from a Corvette to DE range craft, then they wouldn't need the equivalent of a Mortar, they have the gun mounts of their ship. Larger formations will want, and need Artillery. (One of the reasons for the MMMFV, which fills the role of CAS, Armor and Artillery, IMTU.)Oh, and Bhoins, (cf your artillery at lower levels) do you really need mortars when you have a PGMP-12?