13-man U.S. Marine squad vs 8-9 man squad used by other forces

[removeduser_4536284751384]

I'm sure you're all aware that most armies use an 8- or 9-man squad, with two elements of 4 men each and an optional squad leader (alternatively one of the team leaders can lead the squad). Each fireteam has a light machine gun, and usually also an underslung grenade launcher.

The U.S. Marine Corps use a 13-man squad made up of three fireteams of 4 men each, plus a squad leader. Ideally each fireteam would have a rifle optimized for automatic fire (thicker barrel, larger mag, bipod) rather than a machine gun as it allows far more flexibility. They have used such a "support" rifle since the current squad was introduced in 1944: the BAR, the M14A1 and designated M16s. Only in the eighties did they adopt the M249 light machine gun, and they are currently seeking an automatic rifle to replace it.

Even the Marine squad is based on the "every marine is a rifleman" principle. Obviously their assault rifles are rifles that can act as sub-machine guns in CQB, but even their SAWs are capable of acting as rifles.

So which organisation do you think is the most effective? Obviously the Marine squad has size on its size, so disregard that.

[Farnan]

The US Army used to be 13-man, but only 9 men can fit in a Huey so we reduced it to a 9-man squad. Now we don't use Hueys, but we still have the 9-man squad, and out vehicles are designed around that.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

The US Army used to be 13-man, but only 9 men can fit in a Huey so we reduced it to a 9-man squad. Now we don't use Hueys, but we still have the 9-man squad, and out vehicles are designed around that.

Strange I thought the Vietnam-era squad was 10 men strong made up of two 5-man fireteams?

Perhaps you mean some specialized cavalry squad? The army uses a lot of different squads lol.

[HansDuet]

Smaller team is easier to control effectively.

But honestly I dont see that much difference.

[motiv-8]

Smaller team is easier to control effectively.

But honestly I dont see that much difference.

For the Marines that's mostly irrelevant, as each 4-man Fireteam is trained to be able to work on its own to complete the mission just as well as the Squad as a whole.

Now the reason the Marines have 13 is probably because they are a light infantry force. In those cases they don't have vehicles such as bradleys supporting the infantry squad directly so they need as much firepower as possible in their squad.

Yes, exactly, the squad is designed to maximize firepower output in order to work self-sufficiently when needed.

[Il-Principe]

The size of a Bundeswehr squad is 12 men plus squad leader, so in total 13 men. At least this was the size. when I was engineer back then. The squad leader (Gruppenführer) is a Unteroffizier, short Uffz = sergeant or Stabsunteroffizier, short Stuffz = also sergeant. Two men are responsible for the MG and two for the panzerfaust, the rest are riflemen.

Of course squad sizes are flexible and can be adopted to combat requirements.

[Poach]

I'm making a vague guess that the Marines developed it based off landing craft, or something in that vein, to prevent splitting squads over multiple craft and opening the possibility of command and control breakdown in assaults.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

I'm making a vague guess that the Marines developed it based off landing craft, or something in that vein, to prevent splitting squads over multiple craft and opening the possibility of command and control breakdown in assaults.

No, they started experimenting with this squad as early as WWI (a land-locked war for the Americans), and they had literally countless trials and mock battles with it (everybody was skeptical of its effectiveness) until they adopted it in 1944. They haven't changed it a bit since. That suggests that it is a great unit

[Farnan]

No, they started experimenting with this squad as early as WWI (a land-locked war for the Americans), and they had literally countless trials and mock battles with it (everybody was skeptical of its effectiveness) until they adopted it in 1944. They haven't changed it a bit since. That suggests that it is a great unit

Not neccessarily. Militaries are conservative, unless there is a major reason for change they will keep the organization. Doubly so for the Marines (no offense to serving Marines).

[removeduser_4536284751384]

Not neccessarily. Militaries are conservative, unless there is a major reason for change they will keep the organization. Doubly so for the Marines (no offense to serving Marines).

I guess the fact that it makes for a neat "3 by 3" organisation all the way through the army may also be a reason, unlike other forces where it's 3 by 3 down to squad level and then it changes.

[Farnan]

No, I mean an Infantry Squad, and it was 9-man by the end of the war.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

No, I mean an Infantry Squad, and it was 9-man by the end of the war.

cool I haven't read much about small-scale infantry tactics in vietnam. Do you have a link to relevant material?

[Farnan]

cool I haven't read much about small-scale infantry tactics in vietnam. Do you have a link to relevant material?

I was taught it in my Army class, and I know the current organization from personal experience.

Now the reason the Marines have 13 is probably because they are a light infantry force. In those cases they don't have vehicles such as bradleys supporting the infantry squad directly so they need as much firepower as possible in their squad.

While the Army has light units, until recently it was mostly heavy meaning the squads had direct support from Bradleys so the squad size could be smaller with more firepower. They want a uniform size throughout the Army for ease of training and doctrine creation which is why even light units have 9-men.

And very few militaries are 3 by 3. In the Army in a division there are 4 brigades. In a non-Stryker Brigade there are 6 battalions and at least 2 independent companies. And battalions have different number of companies depending on their type. In an infantry battalion there are 4 companies. In the companies (non-stryker) there are at least 4 platoons. A rifle platoon has 4 squads.

[G-Megas-Doux]

To my knowledge the four man fire team, 8 man section has become the most preferable internationally. I think that the British Army adopted its current structure between 1905 and 1910, the team and section size not changing. It proved an excellent organisation for all of what we have used it for. I know that the SAS prefer to work in groups no larger then the said numbers unless the mission requires more and even then objectives tend to be handed out in groups of four.

[Farnan]

To my knowledge the four man fire team, 8 man section has become the most preferable internationally. I think that the British Army adopted its current structure between 1905 and 1910, the team and section size not changing. It proved an excellent organisation for all of what we have used it for. I know that the SAS prefer to work in groups no larger then the said numbers unless the mission requires more and even then objectives tend to be handed out in groups of four.

I actually think the 9-man US squad is much better than the 8-man Commonwealth section. In the 9-man squad the squad leader is seperate so he can better control his two teams, while in the 8-man section he is dual hatted as alpha team leader.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

To my knowledge the four man fire team, 8 man section has become the most preferable internationally. I think that the British Army adopted its current structure between 1905 and 1910, the team and section size not changing. It proved an excellent organisation for all of what we have used it for. I know that the SAS prefer to work in groups no larger then the said numbers unless the mission requires more and even then objectives tend to be handed out in groups of four.

British army changed its section organisation dozens of times. At one point it had 12 men, and for a very long time had 10

Also in regards to the SAW, it's not actually a traditional Automatic Rifle, in fact it's a light machine gun which is why they're seeking an alternative. The problem with the SAW is that it's pretty vulnerable in close fighting CQB. For instance you can never have your SAW gunner as your one man when entering rooms/buildings because it's an open bolt weapon and they have a tendency to misfire. It's a great piece of gear and there's a big argument right now over replacing it because it slackens firepower, but there's considerations of maintaining one SAW per squad and then the other two fireteams being equipped with legitimate ARs.

I said the M249 wasn't a proper AR

I thought the replaced M249s were gonna be held at platoon level for any squad to use when it needs to?

The 13-man marine squad can also be reoganised on the spot, unlike other squads were re-organisation is strongly discouraged.

For example the SL might leave all the SAW gunners with a corporal and advance with the rest of the squad as one element.

or something that's proven effective when clearing a certain type of house in Iraq and Afghanistan, leave all the SAW gunners in the central courtyard.

[Azog 150]

Originally Posted by G-Megas-Doux
To my knowledge the four man fire team, 8 man section has become the most preferable internationally. I think that the British Army adopted its current structure between 1905 and 1910, the team and section size not changing. It proved an excellent organisation for all of what we have used it for. I know that the SAS prefer to work in groups no larger then the said numbers unless the mission requires more and even then objectives tend to be handed out in groups of four.

Actually in World War 2, the average Rifleman section was made up of 10 men.

1 Corporal (Leader)
6 Riflemen forming a fire team (Lee Enfields)
Light Machine Gun group comprised of a Lance Corporal, a Bren gunner and a loader (Which carried ammo and a spare barrel).

However, in reality the Section tried to get a hold of two Bren Guns for the Light Machine Gun group with the Riflemen helping carry spare ammo and barrels.


I am not sure about World War 1. However, since World War 2, the British Army for whatever reason has seen fit to use the 8-man section and it serves well. According to wiki the modern British section is made up of:

Charlie Fireteam:

• Corporal, armed with a L85A2 5.56mm rifle.
• Rifleman, armed with a L85A2 5.56mm rifle with 40mm underslung grenade launcher.
• Rifleman, armed with a L110A1 5.56mm light machine gun.
• Rifleman, armed with a L86A2 5.56mm light support weapon.

Delta Fireteam:

• Lance Corporal, armed with a L85A2 5.56mm rifle.
• Rifleman, armed with a L85A2 5.56mm rifle with 40mm underslung grenade launcher.
• Rifleman, armed with a L110A1 5.56mm light machine gun.
• Rifleman, armed with a L86A2 5.56mm light support weapon.

And very few militaries are 3 by 3. In the Army in a division there are 4 brigades. In a non-Stryker Brigade there are 6 battalions and at least 2 independent companies. And battalions have different number of companies depending on their type. In an infantry battalion there are 4 companies. In the companies (non-stryker) there are at least 4 platoons. A rifle platoon has 4 squads.

I believe in the British Army its 3 Sections to a Platoon plus a support section with the commander, radio operator, a platoon Sergent and a mortar-man.

I think its 3 Platoons to a Company plus a support/HQ Platoon


I might be wrong though

[Kagemusha]

Finnish infantry squad is 7 men.squad leader, Light machine gun team, AT team and a rifle team. So i guess our squad organisation is lighter then most. Platoon is made of three squads, Platoon leader, medic,forward observer with his 2 man team and AT team of 3 men.

[G-Megas-Doux]

Actually in World War 2, the average Rifleman section was made up of 10 men.

1 Corporal (Leader)
6 Riflemen forming a fire team (Lee Enfields)
Light Machine Gun group comprised of a Lance Corporal, a Bren gunner and a loader (Which carried ammo and a spare barrel).

However, in reality the Section tried to get a hold of two Bren Guns for the Light Machine Gun group with the Riflemen helping carry spare ammo and barrels.

I am not sure about World War 1. However, since World War 2, the British Army for whatever reason has seen fit to use the 8-man section and it serves well. According to wiki the modern British section is made up of:

I believe in the British Army its 3 Sections to a Platoon plus a support section with the commander, radio operator, a platoon Sergent and a mortar-man.

I think its 3 Platoons to a Company plus a support/HQ Platoon

I might be wrong though

I have the pocket book for the British Army. Yes there are 3 sections. In terms of teams the first team is lead by a Corporal and the Second team by a Lance Corporal. If I remember right the war strength of a Company would be changed by adding a fourth platoon as they have three platoons per company.

The British prefer to add numbers at that level not earlier. Smaller numbers are believed in military theory to be best against insurgency and in urban maneuvers rather than large numbers which is better in field warfare.

[Captain Jin]

The three fireteam principle falls in line with the Marine Corps' rule of three.

Three fireteams per squad, three squads per platoon, three platoons per company (not counting weapons and HQ platoon), three companies per battalion (not counting weapons company and HQ and Service Company), three battalions per regiment (unless you happen to be in a reinforced regiment like 7th Marines).

Personally, there are way more benefits to having 13 men than have 9 or 8. You can't effectively maneuver with just 9 men. People argue that you can and you could to a degree but not nearly as effective. The beauty of our system allows for massive amounts of firepower for an infantry unit and as well as maximum maneuverability, flexibility, and endurance. We can take more casualties before becoming combat ineffective. Imagine a 9 man squad taking three casualties, they are reduced by a third of their fighting strength and more than likely you have to leave personnel with the wounded thus pretty much obliterating that squad's combat capability altogether.

Additionally, the traditional warfighting methodology for a standard rifle squad also calls for weapons platoon attachments which can bring your squad from 13 men two 15 with a 240G team added, then to 17 if you add a SMAW team (although SMAWs and the 51s that operate them are going away) and then a Corpsman, which is always with a squad to 18.

In any case, your average squad without attachments will always been 14, unless you're under T/O, because a squad cannot go out without a Corpsman.

And as a former squad leader I'll say this, controlling three fireteams is not hard at all. It's the best system out there, bar none. I'll destroy any arguments for another size squad with ease, try me Farnan.

Also in regards to the SAW, it's not actually a traditional Automatic Rifle, in fact it's a light machine gun which is why they're seeking an alternative. The problem with the SAW is that it's pretty vulnerable in close fighting CQB. For instance you can never have your SAW gunner as your one man when entering rooms/buildings because it's an open bolt weapon and they have a tendency to misfire. It's a great piece of gear and there's a big argument right now over replacing it because it slackens firepower, but there's considerations of maintaining one SAW per squad and then the other two fireteams being equipped with legitimate ARs. Also consider that a commonality within many rifle squads now is one DM usually equipped with a Mk. 12. It's not uniform across the infantry, but it's fairly common.