History of MAGTF Reconnaissance
The formation of a doctrine
At the turn of the 20th century, amphibious reconnaissance as we know it today in the United States Fleet Marine Force (FMF), was first conceived by a Marine officer, then-Major Dion Williams, [1] who formulated the first official (maritime) naval doctrine concerning intelligence gathering for planning of operations; in theaters of amphibious warfare. [2]
In order to prepare intelligent plans for the attack or defense of a harbor or bay, it is necessary to have at hand a comprehensive description of the hydrographic features and accurate charts showing the depths of water at all points, the reefs, rocks, shoals, and peculiar currents which constitute dangers to navigation, and the tributary streams and channels which may form avenues of attack or furnish anchorages for a portion of the floating defenses or auxiliaries of the defenders. [3]
Brigadier General Dion Williams, USMC; Naval Reconnaissance (1906)
Williams' doctrine outlined a wide spectrum of reconnaissance, [3] [4] which consisted of:
- range determination
- topography (configuration of the ground [cities, towns, roads, trails, railroads])
- hydrographic survey of rivers and canals
- telegraph cables/lines and wireless telegraphy
- resources (coal, repair facilities, land transportation, electric plants, food supplies, water supply, and hospitals)
- conditions of the harbor and harbor steamers, wharves, docks, water service
- the population (secret service, professions and occupations, naval and military forces)
- existing defenses (location, form and description, armament, field-works, mines/mine fields, searchlights, plans and sketches, available garrisons and strength of forces, avenues of attack, adaptability of the defenses)
He specified in his thesis that these Marines particularly needed to be competent in surveying, cartography, and recording observations, as well as reading previous maps and surveys of various types. [3]
…talented and experienced men should be assigned to this work, listing among the requisite qualities a thorough technical knowledge, a quick and energetic nature to ensure the work is accomplished without unnecessary delay, a sufficient resourcefulness to overcome unexpected obstacles, a reticence to ensure results are kept confidential, and above all, exactitude of work.
— Brigadier General Dion Williams, USMC (1906), Naval Reconnaissance
Although there was very little effect in creating a formidable unit because the outset of World War I and the Gallipoli Operations due to the lack of Marine Corp personnel by the Isolationism of 1920-1930s. Also drawbacks concurred while most of the Marine forces were engaged in conflicts of China and Nicaragua.
After World War I, three significant aspects of the second edition of Williams' Naval Reconnaissance [4] [5] included:
- discussion of additional capabilities of observation from airplanes and submarines
- promulgation of the book under authority of the Secretary of the Navy instead of under the auspices of the President of the Naval War College
- emphasis on information acquisition for long-term planning.
It was this latter emphasis on obtaining information long before hostilities that was perhaps of greatest significance. Rather than obtaining information solely for military operations in progress, Williams now enunciated a more comprehensive mission. [4]
The object of the naval reconnaissance of any given locality is to acquire all of the information concerning the sea, land, air and material resources of that locality, with a view to its use by the Navy in peace and war, and to record this information that it may be most readily available for: the preparation of plans for the occupation of the locality as a temporary or permanent naval base; the preparation of plans for the sea and land defense of the locality when used as such a base; or the preparation of plans for the attack of the locality by sea and land should it be in possession of an enemy. [5]
Brigadier General Dion Williams, USMC; Naval Reconnaissance (1906)
The earliest activities in amphibious reconnaissance was largely limited in surveying of ports, uncharted islands and adjacent beaches or coastlines. Most of these duties were billeted by senior Naval Intelligence Officers that were prerequisites in topography, hydrography, impermanent construction of fortification with the means of rapid encampment and mobilization of troops to operate in their area. [6]
However, another Marine intel officer and amphibious reconnaissance war prophet, Earl H. Ellis, put most of William's concept to effect years later. [7] After fighting in the trenches in WWI, in 1921, Ellis submitted a request to Headquarters Marine Corps (HQMC) for special intelligence duty in South America and the Pacific, in which he foresaw the built-up of Japanese naval forces that eventually led to the events of World War II; the Director of Naval Intelligence diligently accepted. It was during his special duty that introduced the most profound accounts of Ellis's intelligence reports. He submitted a 30,000 page Top Secret document [8] concerning his detail discussion of local sea, air and the climate, various land terrain types, the native population and economic conditions. He discussed his reports on strategically seizing key islands as forward-operating bases for project naval forces effectively into the area. His time-tables, mobilization projections, and predictions of manpower necessary to seize certain targets. His maritime intelligence reports became paramount years later for the United States maritime forces, during the Pacific campaigns of World War II.
Testing the doctrine
In the 1920s and 1930s, the Fleet Marine Force (FMF) first tested Williams' conceptual methods of reconnaissance in the fourth series of the Fleet Landing Exercises (FLEX) in the Caribbean; for evaluation in establishing a naval reconnaissance doctrine for the Marine Corps. By 7 December 1933, the Fleet Marine Force was formed at HQMC in Quantico, VA, combining the roles of the Navy and Marine Corps into an integrated maritime (naval) assault force. Shortly after, a new naval doctrine, the Fleet Training Publication 167 [9] was created to ensure long-term purposes.
Although the subsequent tests encompassed more broadly in combined amphibious/ground reconnaissance efforts, its aerial reconnaissance elements cannot be overlooked since aircraft were both tested for direct combat support and reconnaissance. The aviation reconnaissance assets did not see further scrutiny until the outset of the Korean War.
Before World War II, the first radars were developed for anti-aircraft purposes. These were soon followed by fire control radars for ships and coastal artillery batteries. However, it wasn't until decades later that improvements to technology proved that radar systems were capable of locating artillery guns.
Patrons of the doctrine
From 'sea-to-shore'
The Marine Corps established its first specialized ground/amphibious reconnaissance unit, the "Observer Group", in 1941, which was formed for the upcoming secretive mission in North Africa (in preparation for Operation Torch )—under the command of Captain James L. Jones Sr. The unit was composed of skilled and highly proficient swimmers from the Army, Navy, and the Marine Corps. Momentarily, the Observer Group was ordered to be decommissioned, but not completely dissolved; the Marine unit was re-institutionalized as the Amphibious Reconnaissance Company. The remaining Army and Navy counterparts formed the "Scouts and Raiders" [10] and continued its deployment to North Africa as planned. [11] The Scouts and Raiders are the predecessor to the Navy Combat Demolition Units (NCDU), which subsequently became the Underwater Demolition Teams—the patrons of the prestigious Navy SEALs.
Preliminary—Ground operations
The Amphibious Reconnaissance Company (still under command of Capt. James Jones) was directed to report to the joint-Navy and Army's Amphibious Corps, Pacific Fleet (ACPF). The United States Navy controlled many joint units of the Army and the Marine Corps. These units represented the sum total of the amphibious forces of the United States, with the exception of small units of the Fleet Marine Force, which had been trained for amphibious raids. The Amphib Recon Company was tasked to provide preliminary reconnaissance for the force commander of the ACPF.
By 1943, the Army ceded their role of amphibious assaults to the Navy and Marine Corps. Subsequently, the Marine subordinate units of the ACPF were re-designated under the full command of the Marine Corps's V Amphibious Corps (VAC)—and the Amphibious Reconnaissance Company shifted alongside under its new command.
In the next following years, the Company increased in manpower and the brevity of upcoming missions, forcing it to be re-designated to full battalion-strength with two active reconnaissance companies; becoming the "Amphibious Reconnaissance Battalion". To include, VAC shifted its command under the Fleet Marine Force.
Prior to the arrival of Marines in this area of the Pacific War, the Australians had already established a network of deep reconnaissance agents known as the Australian Coastwatchers. They operated not only on coasts, but deep in jungles as well. Initially, some Marines became part of the unit. [12]
Although, the force commanders of the VAC weren't the only ones to see the true value of ground and amphibious reconnaissance. The subordinate units of the Marine division and regiments resorted to their own avenues of reconnaissance methods.
The I Marine Amphibious Corps (I MAC) and III Marine Amphibious Corps (III MAC) approached its reconnaissance assets more differently than the V Amphibious Corps's (VAC) Reconnaissance platoons. The amphibious reconnaissance platoons of VAC were more associated to preliminary and amphibious reconnaissance, whereas the division and regimental commanders equated their decision-making process using terrestrial reconnaissance.
Reconnaissance-in-force operations
In 1941, Lieutenant Colonel William "Wild Bill" Whaling, the executive officer of 5th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, established visualized and perceived the use for specialized missions encompassing reconnaissance at the division-level, which would be conducted above the normal infantry battalion-level in scouting and patrolling. [13] He recommended to General Alexander Vandegrift the need of a special "Scout and Sniper unit" for the 1st Marine Division on Guadalcanal. Soon after, each of the three rifle companies that were used during the Guadalcanal campaign were tasked in sending one their best field craft Marines to devise the scout-sniper unit, with each regiment containing a Scout and Sniper Platoon, within the regimental headquarters and service company.
Momentarily, the regiments requested their scouts to be heavily reinforced with tanks for rapid mobility and increased firepower, to allow their scouting parties to determine a hasty, yet accurate account of their enemies potential and strengths—using a technique known as reconnaissance-in-force (RIF). RIF elicits determination of strength by offensively provoking the enemy for a reaction.
The close of World War II discontinued the use of amphibious reconnaissance, and momentarily the Amphibious Reconnaissance Battalion dismantled; all amphibious reconnaissance subsidiaries were under the direct control of the only-remaining division-level reconnaissance assets—ending force-level reconnaissance.
Close-distant operations
The "Scout (Tank) and Sniper" companies later formed the Division Recon Battalions and Scout Sniper Platoons of today. By early-1980s, the Light Armored Reconnaissance units were formed to provide mechanized reconnaissance-in-force for infantry regiments. The responsibilities of the LAR battalions resemble those of the Scout (Tank) companies of World War II.
It wasn't until the highlight of the Korean War that foresaw the re-establishment of force-level reconnaissance; however, only 2nd Amphibious Reconnaissance Battalion was created (1st Amphib Recon Bn remained inactive-only to be used as for training new amphibious reconnaissance candidates) in support of the Marine task force commanders' effort in pushing the Socialist Chinese forces north, from South Korea.
Deep operations
The Korean War introduced the new concept of using rotary-wing aircraft to the Marine Corps in combat employment for logistics and rapid troop transport. During the mid-1950s, a recon test platoon from the Marine Corps Test Unit#1 experimented in various parachute insertions for deeper reconnaissance and pathfinding. In 1957, the command staff of the Recon Platoon, MCTU#1 relinquished the command of 1st Amphibious Reconnaissance Battalion and formed the 1st Force Reconnaissance Company.
When the Force Recon companies were established, they allowed the Fleet Marine Force commanders to obtain information quicker than the slower, processed intelligence that was provided by the division recon platoons, which went through each of the battalion's, regiment's, and division's intelligence sections before reaching the force level.
However, like the fate of the Marine Raiders and the Paramarines of World War II, 1st and 2nd Force Reconnaissance companies were disbanded, albeit temporarily, to make way for the Fleet Marine Force's 'first' unconventional asset that was created within the new Marine Special Operations Command (MARSOC). The force reconnaissance companies were replaced under the command of the Marine Division's reconnaissance battalions while maintaining deep reconnaissance and force-oriented reconnaissance under the Fleet Marine Force.
MARSOC absorbs much of the unconventional operations for which Force Recon had been responsible, allowing the force recon platoons to fully exercise their initial role of providing deep and preliminary reconnaissance to the Command Element of MAGTF without interference.
Signals intelligence operations
By 1986, new counter-battery radars were introduced. These radars were able to locate many artillery batteries simultaneously. In latter, the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan requested for a small, counter-mortar radar, given 360 degree coverage and requiring a minimal crew, for use in forward operating bases. In another back to the future step it has also proved possible to add counter-battery software to battlefield airspace surveillance radars.
