1 Assault Group Royal Marines – the Royal Marines’ amphibious warfare experts – will now be known as 47 Commando Raiding Group, say the Ministry of Defence.
According to a news release, the renaming was announced following the 75th anniversary commemorations of one of 47 Commando’s greatest battles during World War Two at Walcheren in the Netherlands.
“The battle for the island was vital in freeing the approaches to Antwerp, an important supply port, and 47 Commando played a key role in victory alongside their fellow commandos.
Around 48 hours after landing on Gold Beach on D-Day, 47 Commando were also in action in Port-en-Bessin, carrying out a daring tactical raid, approaching from the rear flank and against extreme odds claiming a vital victory to open up supply lines for the advancing allied forces.”
Commandant General Royal Marines, Major General Matt Holmes said:
“It is with enormous pride that I have been able to announce the renaming of 1 Assault Group Royal Marines to 47 Commando (Raiding Group) Royal Marines. The Commando ethos is incredibly strong and remains the golden thread that runs through the Royal Marines as we accelerate into the future as the Royal Navy’s Commando force.”
539 Assault Squadron will also now be called 539 Raiding Squadron, adding further emphasis on the raiding future of the Royal Marines, say the MoD.
It’s an irrational fantasy of mine to one day have a specialised commando of some description specialised in the kind of mobile desert warfare our special forces are currently involved in be named or renamed Long Range Desert Group, just for old time’s sake.
I guess the first of the changes coming to the Future Commando Force.
But in this case there is not much raiding going on with 1 AGRM’s assets, this is another name change re branding exercise.
10 Training Squadron at Devonport.
11 Trials Squadron at Instow.
4 Assault Squadron with the LPD’s with heavier landing craft, the LCU’s and LCVP’s, not really a raiding unit.
Its other formations, 6 Assault and 9 Assault Squadrons RM, once part of 1 AGRM, were cut with Ocean going and the second LPD being mothballed.
539 Assault is more the raiding unit, but that is with 3 Cdo Bde I think, not 1 AGRM.
There was, or is, another shadowy unit known as the “Surface Manoeuvre Group” part of DSF and associated with the SBS.
With little detail available on the future planned structure of the RM, could this be the end of the conventional landing crafts, and the LPD’s with them?
Talk on Twitter and elsewhere is of the RM reverting to raiding with smaller units, which this report emphasises, from ships such as the proposed Littoral Strike Ships, smaller craft, and helicopters.
My problem with this is that it may simply be yet another capability cut, with 3 Commando Brigade no longer considered as a deployable brigade in its own right, which to be fair has been the case for years, but only through a lack of enablers.
Also, with the renewed emphasis on Norway and Arctic warfare, shouldn’t 3 Commando be retraining for this, with more than just 45 Commando, as is currently the case?
It seems the Brigade is being expected to be both arctic trained and a raiding force.
It’s definitely a worry. Cutting the troop sizes to have “more available” just screams cuts to me.
There is some good news with old unit names and patches being brought back along with adopting the C8 and a change in camo it seems (this one could go either way admittedly). I also like that the focus seems to be shifting to a more technological role utilising more drones etc. I do worry there will be a bit of blurring as to what their actual role is though, making them more vulnerable to cuts.
Definitely something to be concerned about Steve..
I meant to add to my above post, I am sure that when a Brigade deployment capability has been formally removed, the powers that be, will see no point in the Royal Marines being so sized as to be able to create a Brigade formation.
Pressure will then be placed to reduce the Corps to about 4,000 with the RN snapping up the allowed Navy manning balance as Sailors (if they can recruit them) for additional T31’s etc.
Hi Danielle,
As we all know there are a lot of changes going on at the moment in the Marine’s and not just in the UK. I have read on here that even the USMC are getting out of largescale amphibious assults against defended positions. All fine and dandy but I wonder if anyone has asked our possible enemies if they would kindly not defend every beach!
“with the renewed emphasis on Norway and Arctic warfare”
This is the rub. I read recently (on UKDJ I think) that the Norwegians have been encountering Russian troops on the Norwegian side of the boarder recently. They are getting seriously worried about and even their Parliamentary Committee stated that the 25,000 strong Defence Forces (yup Army, Navy and Air Force) were no longer able to defend the boarder. Putin is taking risks and not just in Ukraine. The lack of coverage of these apparently repeated incursions would have had NATO pressing the panic button back in the Cold War – doesn’t even make the 10 o’clock news these days.
Mind you I think the Royal Marines have actually survived recent decades in better shape than the rest of the Armed Forces and the move to bring them back into the Fleet after years of being deployed as a light infantry formation might well have real benefits, as suggested on The Pinstriped Line.
https://thinpinstripedline.blogspot.com/2019/10/a-right-royal-rumble-naval-ranks-for.html
There was a great piece on BBC2 Britain’s Biggest Warship showing the Marines ‘rescuing’ a downed pilot. Sort of Fire and Rescue Brigade stuff with added bullets…
Hi Chariot Rider.
Thanks for the response. Yes I recall the Norway border mention, it was indeed on UKDJ.
Yes, the QEC will always deploy with some of the CHF Merlns of 845 or 846 NAS embarked, with RM of 42 being used in a sort of CSAR role.
Have not read that pinstriped line article, will have a look.
Cheers.
The Commandant of the USMC didn’t quite say they were getting out of the amphibious assault business. He said, he was getting worried about the enhanced capabilities of Nations being able to defend coastlines and attack shipping over the horizon. This would put their large LPHs and LPDs in danger which means that they would need to operate from further away.
They are going to rethink how a beach assault is conducted against a well defended coastline. Perhaps by using lots of smaller ships instead of a couple LPHs and LPDs just behind the horizon. He stated he was worried that the Navy’s 5″ gun couldn’t lay sufficient suppression fire in a short enough space of time. So they have been looking at additional means of lighting up a grid square, by using a MLRS strapped to the deck of one of their mini carriers. Clearly this is only a short term fix, as it would inhibit flight operations when being used. However, the trial was successful, so we could be seeing a new MLRS weapons fit to some of their ships in the future.
The proposed littoral strike ship would benefit with a MLRS fit as it could put down instantaneous fire on request.
Brimstone and spear 3 box launchers on our amphibs could be useful?
DaveB,
Thanks for the clarification much appreciated. I have read articles that have suggested the USMC were backing out of opposed assults, but obviously it pays to find the original statement – not always easy.
Nevertheless, I wonder how feasible it still is to mount an assult against a well prepared enemy. Given the Dieppe raid there is obviously a point where it just isn’t feasible. I guess even the USMC with all of their great kit and experience have judged the potential strength of modern mobile coastal missile systems and SAM’s mean they need to respond. Of course, the ability to generate a clear picture of the battlespace is as important as the weapon systems and the US have a real advantage over most adversaries in that regard.
For a peer enemy the Marines big assets would be seriously tempting targets if they can be accurately identified and tracked. Given the range of modern systems they could engage the LPH / LPD and be no where near the stretch of coast to be defended.
It seems that the challenges facing the Marines are pretty much the same in nature as they have always been but the scale of the battlespace has grown hugely as they may take fire from significant stand off ranges making the challenge they face massive in scale and complexity.
To consider such an undertaking suggests an impressive capability which you have to admire…
There is a lot to consider when conducting a beach assault, this is something they learned after Dieppe (Operation Jubilee). For starters, no proper recce was done on the beach. Lots of phots were taken by flying over the town and its defences, but nobody considered the make up of the beach or conducted trials on a similar UK beach. The small pebbles defeated the Churchill tanks they took to provide fire support. So they couldn’t get off the beach and the Allies had to slog it out infantry style.
One of the reasons for the raid was to try and capture an enigma machine that was being using by the German Navy in the town. Ian Fleming the author behind James Bond was part of the team that planned the raid, so it could be a cover for snatching the enigma machine.
The lessons learned from Dieppe were put in place for the following operations. But what was true then, still remains true today. The key elements being intelligence of the opposition and its disposition and most importantly surprise.
The USMC have stated that to be successful and minimise casualties they require air dominance not just over the beach head but up to 50 miles inland. They would also need to render the oppositions surveillance systems inoperable. Not sure how they’re going to take out the satellites, but I’m pretty sure they’d be on the list.
One of the options that’s been mentioned is a massed air assault. This led to one of the key requirements for the future medium lift helicopter to replace the USMC Hueys and Blackhawks, i.e. to be able to go at least 250 knots, whilst carrying a full squad of 12. The idea being with the increased transit speed, it gives the defenders less time to react. Because the assault would use 100 plus helicopters/Ospreys etc. The hope is, the enemy’s air defences wouldn’t be able to cope with such numbers. These troops would be used to hold the beach-head and neutralize beach defences. Once the initial landing has taken place the amphibious vehicles and LCTs etc would bring in the bulk and heavy assets.
You can see why the USMC believe the Navy’s 5″ gun won’t be able to provide sufficient suppression in the shorter amount of time required to get the assault force on the beach. Especially when you consider their destroyers only have one and the cruisers have two, hence the thinking behind MLRS. Not forgetting the F18s, F35s, tomahawks etc
Hi DaveyB,
You pretty much described the basic D-Day plan – airborne to secure the area and guard the beaches for the heavies to come via the sea. Without the Cruise Missiles, of course.
I’m not sure the total air dominance over 50 miles will be enough against a peer enemy potentially with a stand off capability that extends well beyond 50 miles.
In any event they face huge challenges as much today as in WW2 so I sincerely hope they never have to try.
To be honest delivery of the marines to the assault area is a navy concern. I was surprised of these comments when I read them – as if anti-ship missiles/other defences can take out the LPHs & LPDs surely they can destroy the whole USN? As they must have little confidence in Ticonderoga and Arleigh Burkes that surely would screen these vessels? Considering their capabilities and SAM capability nevermind the massive airforce the USN has, to me he is almost saying that naval warfare is dead!? Surely his argument means that you should scrap the corp and fly in! I would be surprised if the 5inch gun is his main concern considering F35b and Cobras as well as F35c, f18, strategic bombers tactom. I am not sure what his agenda was but it seems incredulous/illogical to me
Unfortunately Daniele, this has been a very long time coming, a slow car crash if you would…
First we had the rebuilding of the Commando brigade in 2000, with Albion, Bulwark and Ocean, then the auxiliaries, giving an impressive amphibious capability, second only to the US.
Then September 11th happened ……
Any thoughts of the RM deploying as an amphibious brigade were quite frankly jettisoned from that point on.
I had ‘hoped’ that with a return to the forces traditional roles, post sand pit wars, we might see a return to a full brigade capability, it’s not to be unfortunately….
Albion and Bulwark will without doubt be on the hit list again, as the RN looks to free up Manning and money to hopefully field more escorts in the shape of a batch 2 build of T31.
It seems we are moving more to a RN operating Carrier Task Groups, with an emphasis on a reconfigured ’embedded’ Royal Marine force, focusing on helicopter born attacks, of no more than Company or two in strength.
The new strike ships and auxiliaries, plus dedicated Marine space on T26 and T31 and the QE’s, will fill this new roll just fine.
The truth is, elements within The Royal Navy would rather have an additional five or six T31’s for individual standing tasks, in the age of the CTG, rather than Albion and Bulwark, plus the associated support required.
Playing devils advocate, with no new serous money to be had, we have to decide on priorities.
The RN is being reformed around the hugely expensive new Carriers and all efforts will be put into generating fully deployable Carrier capability.
I have no doubt, the Royal Marines will be highly effective at this role, but it does mean jettisoning important NATO tasking, like reinforcement of Norway etc.
I’m not saying I’m comfortable about the situation
(far from it), but something has to give and it looks increasingly like it’s the Marines unfortunately.
I think you might be spot on John.
The spanner in the works are the MoD’s own published reports and the DS’s emphasising Norway and the Arctic! Bit of a contradiction of their own actions.
The only announcement I want them to make is 42 brought back up to full strength.
(3 new large fast LPD’s to support QE’s wouldn’t go amiss……….)
What is the true cost of changing the nomenclature of these units, is it pence, or good money best spent on hardware?
Not for free, but you know that. 🙂
I think this is all part of something wider. I think there will be moves soon to disestablish 3 Cdo and to turn the Corps more into ‘amphibious rangers’ (rangers used in US Army sense). So there will be lots of specialist sub units all using the designation commando.
Stupid really. The Australians are doing their best to establish the capability of landing a light battle group across the beach. The NZ Army see their main role as stabilising the island nations of the south seas. Africa is growing in importance strategically; huge coast line with little infrastructure. There were moves a while back to chop 29 Cdo RA by the Army until it was pointed out the regiment is paid for out of the RN vote.
To me using QE as an amphibious asset and building on that capability is probably more valid than all this talk of ‘carrier strike’. There is room for both.
Not really sure exactly what this means – but looking more and more likely that the LPDS are a goner & to be replaced by LSS which will probably be 2 converted point class ?. Unless an army formation is earmarked for amphibious ops this is surely inevitable.
The sad thing is that it actually makes CSGs toothless with the ability to attack from the air but unable to take further action.
I think the LPDs are safe because there is still a real need for the capabilities they specifically offer and the LSS will provide the troop lift that has been lost as the Bays seem to be deployed constantly to do other things such is their versatility. More likely is one of the LSS will be cheap and cheerful replacement of RFA Argus providing some reasonable helicopter lift to an ARG and the other will make up for the lack of sufficient Bay class vessels. Your last point would of course be the reality if the LPDs were sold off but I hope to see a renaissance in the UKs amphibious capability to meet the challenges that are emerging in parts of the globe where we have strong interests.
Excellent, there’s nothing that bolsters our defence more & puts the fear of God in our enemies than a name change!
Its a kind of backwards story – the Raiding Group bit – the USMC copied the Commando idea in 1940, creating the ‘Marine Raiders’ – as they wanted their own name, the 1st Raider battalion being led by a Col Edson, who had trained with the British Commandos. Yet despite fighting bravely in the Pacific the raiders were not popular with US commanders (they had some very idiosyncratic leaders, as the UK SF groups did too, Carlson, I think his name was, who helped start them and led the 2nd Raiders was a Red China expert and used Mao Tse Tung’s methods to train his unit – they adopted the motto ‘gung-ho’ and had ‘ethical indoctrination’ sessions!). As a result they were rolled-up into a regular 4th Marine division in 1944. The Royal Marines went the other way, swallowing the Commando ‘raider’ ethic hook line and sinker, and keeping it on after the war. Yet the Royals have been used more and more as regular infantry, especially in Afghanistan, while the US Marines formed their own raider unit the ‘Force Recon’. Recently the US Marines decided to rename Force Recon as Marine Raiders, in honour of their WW2 commando units, and its interesting that the US ‘Raider’ terminology is returning to define what Commandos were always intended for!