I would reduce the rifle squad to fit inside of a single vehicle and possibly play around with adding a 4th squad to the platoon. So you would have 4 squads of 8 or 9 Marines each per platoon, or possibly a 4th Platoon with 3 squads per platoon. Additionally I would base each squad around a CSW either a M240 for a support squad or a SMAW for an assault squad. This would reverse the idea that the CSWs support the rifleman and have the rifleman support the CSW. The German idea of WWII with a rifle squad built around a Panzershrek or a MG42.My bitch with the statement? Here we go changing our operating concepts (if we run with this idea and make no mistake...if HQMC is serious about the MPC becoming the production ACV then they're already considering this) not because its tactically more efficient but because it "fits" the vehicle that we're buying!
I saw this based on my own experience in Afghanistan and reading where others have essentially recreated this same T/O. Many rifle companies in Afghanistan reduced their squads to 2 fire teams and added a 4th platoon. Additionally with all the weight most grunts carry squad sized firefights are typically conducted by the squad or platoon digging in and unleashing a torrent of well aimed fire back at the enemy. Bing West describes this style of fighting best in "A Million Steps."
If we bought the IFV version of the MPCs with a 25mm or 30mm main gun, it would give the squad leader a rifle fire team, a CSW fire team, and a vehicle mounting both a medium machine gun a high velocity cannon capable of firing PD, Delay, or programmable air burst ammo.
So a generic platoon would be 2 squads with M240, 1 squad with SMAW, all mechanized in 3 wheeled IFVs. You mechanize this force with M1A1 and you have serious ass kicking capability.
As for the idea of each squad leader having 3 rifle fire teams and a CSW team transported by 2 vehicles, I think that is too much for a squad leader to handle and still be in the thick of the fighting. Either the squad leader will have to pull back from the fight, more like a platoon commander, or he could be overwhelmed with 5 different maneuver elements. The platoon commander would still have 3 maneuver elements but that would include 6 vehicles and possible fighting between the squad leaders and platoon commander's over who owns the CSW teams.
Or you keep the MPC as a straight up APC that drops the grunts off 5 km from the objective in which case I think the 17 pax school bus is a better idea but you have to be very cautious too keep it out of harms way.
I think it would be worth taking a look at these ways of doing things and yes these are just ideas. It needs a real honest to God experiment ran on this with dedicated company and field grade officers that believe in their assigned idea. It needs to be judged and supervised by a General that is willing to run it as a true experiment and not have a dog in the fight on which of these succeeds or fails.
As for the dismounted troops that are transported by MV-22B or MTVR I would not touch them and leave the base platoon and company organization the same. Weapons company would probably have to be reworked if they were MV-22B transported.
But enough about my "gripes". What do you think. Should we change the size of the Marine Rifle Squad? Oh and before you say "yes this is the way to go!" understand that we are basically doing the "US Army" thing because we fucked up on the procurement of the AAV replacement...check out the pic below...that's a US Army Styker Brigade's Rifle Platoon.
