to support the Navy in a fight for sea control

Good step. I think that the Army is getting on board as well.  Could probably field NSM in a box in a year or two. Harpoon blk III maybe a bit longer.

I like it when we give Marines bad ass weapons.

Yep, the Army did some tests last year.
Makes sense, but damn, scope is getting broad across all the services...



https://www.army.mil/article/209116/first_land_based_missile_launch_performed_at_rimpac_exercise

I wonder what the reason behind the big rush is

Hint: Peking Duck

The country that has thousands of spies in America may want to take a shot at some point and we need a counter

My first thought was the South China Sea.

Agree

For sure.

Do the Marines expect to be somewhere that the Navy isn't?

Russia.
Everything is Russia.

Putin made a "statement".

So its not Tacos rockefeller ?

A ship is a fool to fight a fort.

Couldn't you just use MLRS with guided missiles?

Even if they don't, they have to convince Congress that they will.

Read up on the battle for Guadalcanal.

Bingo.

Considering how many in Congress are getting payoffs from foreign entities, I think Congress is convinced already, that's why funding will be scarce.

I was wondering the same. If they need an antiship missle, can't they pick up the sat phone and call the Navy?

It's happened before: Guam, Wake Island, Guadalcanal at times.  Couple others I think.

Will it be something faster and better than the old Harpoon, or Harpoon in a mobile launcher?  Was the US army test video above a new type of missile or more of the same?  Don't Russia be China have mobile land-based launchers already?   We should have something equivalent/moar-better.  
We should ALWAYS have better; ALL the things.

I am all for it.

As a layman, it certainly seems we lean on the Marines disproportionately to the size of their branch to accomplish military stuff.

The Chinese. The plan is that with the help of the Japanese we can take some of those disputed Islands and the Marines will dig in and be a major pain for the Chinese in that region.

sounds good.  take it out of f35B funding.

I think they like it.
They are excellent at what they do.

half of helmand agrees.

Not really, when you think about it.  US Army was BIG into Coastal Artillery back in the day...

Guadalcanal would have sucked no matter what, but it would have sucked a whole lot less if the Marines would have had some anti-ship capability once the Navy withdrew ( it was the correct decision) from the area around the island.

Or these Royal Marines on April 3, 1982. I bet they wish they had something more potent than rockets, machine guns, and a sniper rifle. That said they did pretty good with what they had.

"The Argentine Corvette once again headed into the harbour and opened fire at 1155. To her commander’s frustration, the Guerrico;s 20mm guns jammed after the first salvo, as did the 100mm main gun. The 40mm mounting jammed after firing just six rounds. As she swung about to head back out to sea, Mills and the Marines unleashed severe hate on the Argentine ship with sustained automatic fire and rounds of anti-tank missiles from their 84mm Karl-Gustav launcher.

Sergeant Leach was armed that day with a L42A1 rifle. A conversion of the Lee–Enfield No. 4, Mk. 1(T). The L42A1 was chambered for the 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge and mounted the 3.5-power No. 32 scope. Lying on the table on the second floor of Shackleton House, the Sergeant sighted on the approaching ship’s bridge. By then, the Guerrico was once again facing the channel and closing on King Edward Point. A moment later, as the other Royal Marines began hammering away at the ship for a second time, Sergeant Leach began firing carefully aimed shots at the vessel. He directed his opening rounds at the five windows across the front of the bridge. At this point, only Captain Alfonso, the helmsman, and the quartermaster were manning that station as glass began to shatter. The three men were forced to crouch down behind ship’s structures to avoid being struck by the rapid succession of accurate shots coming from Leach’s sniper rifle. In his subsequent post operational report, Mills estimated that they engaged the Corvette at 550 metres and killed one sailor and injured four others. An Exocet launcher was put out of action and electrical cables to the 40mm gun were damaged."

USMC 5" coastal artillery on Wake, sitting almost totally unprotected on the beach, sank the first major Japanese warship of the war, destroyer Hayate on December 11, crippled a cruiser and later caused the IJN to sacrifice two more destroyers beached and burned in their second invasion attempt.  Four surviving Wildcat fighters sunk another destroyer, a submarine, and shot the shit out of several destroyers and troop transports.

Thats pretty funny

 Marines are the bad ass weapons.  I love it when we give Marines bad ass tools.

Now it’s almost as important to them as ADA.

fun fact.

first B17 mission was coastal defense.

another fun fact.

DCA is supposed to be an air force mission.

stop asking for a platform and ask for an effect.

ADA shouldn't be an army mission.  but muy command of the air...

Find an island, peninsula, or piece of coastline close to a strategically important waterway, park a bunch of big projectile weapons there to control access to that waterway.

It was a good idea 3000 years ago, and is still a good idea today.

On an island

It’s funny that your normal position is that missiles are better, right up until you can dig on the Air Force.  

how did any of that counter the fact that missiles are better?

I am sure in your mind it did.

The answer seems so obvious.

It countered as well as my statement that the Army doesn’t care about ADA was countered by your Air Force hate.

In the division of responsibilities the Army owns ADA.  Fact or not?

If the Army did ADA the way the AF did CAS, there would be two battalions of M1s surrounding all the airfields.

Care to explain where Army procurement of systems or quantities failed to meet the mission?

Has a deployed airfield ever been told, "No, you don't get patriot.  There isn't enough.  You aren't high enough priority."

I'll wait.

The GD bus doesn't have that many windows and most of those are covered with layers of saliva

Yup!

Good.

Missile tech is one of the very few areas where the US is lagging behind.

What Army unit runs the CRAMs at the bases?

And with that I’m done with this derail of the Marines investigating good tools for them.

Strong work, cowboy.

Wouldn't magical stealthy F-35Bs negate all of this?  Wasn't that the whole reasoning for needing it?  Marines had air power at all of these places.  And it's not like we wouldn't see anyone coming with all of our satellites watching their every move.

thats my line.

and, as I stated, take the funding out of the F35 program.  Stop asking for a platform.  Ask for an effect.

Why shouldn't the army own ADA?  Doesn't it make sense that air defense of army units be integrated into the army's organizational structure?

Service divisions have been f$%ked since 1947.  There's several common sense things that should have been done that weren't due to:

1. Interservice rivalry
2. refusal to give up missions
3. protection of $

Most of our NATO allies have ground based ADA as part of their Air Forces.  The Luftwaffe had a training school on Bliss for decades for this purpose.  Ground based ADA and IR/LR ground based rockets fall most commonly in the Air Forces realm as well (again the Luftwaffe's use of Pershing 1's).

Integrating LR rocketry ADA and air forces seems common sense, but thanks to the DoD it's not.  When Key West was devised the services all were vying for missions and $.  The USAF didn't see a need for ADA (and a pleathora of senior ADA generals who would out-rank/out seniority the majority of it's officer corps) and rocketry was looked at as a longer term solution to problems that could be solved by aircraft and or LR air breathing missiles (AF was big into this).

The Army used ADA ownership to wedge themselves into rocketry, especially since they set up Von Braun's Krauts at White Sands.  The murky realms of rocket ranges (short, IR, ICBM) became apparent in the late 1950's when every service was developing complimentary and competing missiles of varying quality.  Sputnik made Ike kick the DoD in the ass to get their s$%t together and the roles became more set.

Now, over 72 years later you have the Army still controlling ADA for the ground with the Navy muddling the waters with Aegis Ashore (IMO a superior system).  The Army is on a crash course for an IR missile and they have longer range ATACMs as well.  All the services are foaming at the mouth due to the NeoSov Pravda BS about hypersonic missiles that can penetrate the earths crust and detonate American Volcanoes (slight exaggeration).  Ship-to-ship and shore-to-ship missiles are far behind the development curve due to a lack of priority until recently.  Now the services are scrambling for this capability in expanded form as well.

If anything, this "new" shore-to-ship system is an indictment of the whole littoral combat concept.  LCS and light, little ships that can't effectively protect themselves doesn't work.  As @Screechjet1 stated, a ships a fool to fight a fort.  Its much easier and cheaper to control littoral spaces with LR shore based ADA and anti ground/ship batteries than it is with LCS's.  It won't be done, but if you wanted a quick and easy fill for this need you wouldn't throw $$$ at US DoD contractors to develop something new you would procure something from our allies.  Japan has a prepackaged solution that we could buy COTS (but won't).  The Type 12 Surface to Ship missile system is deployed from a HEMMT style truck and is quite advanced.

(edit to correct spelling)