View Full Version : small unit tactics

11-07-02, 01:18 PM

11-07-02, 01:21 PM

11-07-02, 01:23 PM


scroll down the page on this one.


interseting and informative


11-11-02, 11:13 AM


11-11-02, 11:21 AM
medical, first aid, hygiene, and more. resources


11-11-02, 11:41 AM

11-29-02, 04:09 AM




Are you "whelmed" yet! LOL

11-29-02, 04:32 AM

tey 'USMC military strategy' and 'tactics; on a Google search.

also try 'USMC advanced small unit tactics". 'USMC ground tactics'.
'USMC rear area security'.

11-29-02, 04:38 AM

11-29-02, 05:01 AM

11-29-02, 05:25 AM

I'm not even going to attempt to follow this. In the same vein, I don't follow survivalists who provide detailed instructions on how to build an atomic bomb shelter with lists of recommended food and survival supplies.

Given the choice between the two, the more practical is an A-bomb attack, rather than preparing for an armed invasion for which small unit tactics would be a practical response.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

WTF Over?

11-29-02, 06:31 AM
First Sergeant, I've posted this for the Poolees and wannabes to peruse as well as for some of the active duty types we get around here who are too busy to interact with us. We also have ROTC and Naval Academy as well as VMI kids who drop by.

Hell. If nothin' else it gives the Poolees something to do and maybe there's a resource I've posted that will give the "hobbiest" something to look at.

Gimmee a minute and I'll think of another excuse...I mean reason!

03-09-03, 11:54 PM
USMC Small Unit Leader Non-Lethals Trainer (SULNT)


Denise Varner, Ph.D., Staff Scientist; Mr. Scott D. Royse, Manager;

Mr. John Micheletti, Senior Research Analyst

Southwest Research Institute (SwRI)

6220 Culebra Rd.

San Antonio, Texas 78228-0510, USA

210-522-3820 (voice)

210-522-2572 (fax)


Major Gene Apicella

CMC Warfighting Lab

2042 Broadway St., Ste. 201

Quantico, Virginia 22134-5069, USA


As a highly mobile, expeditionary fighting force, the United States Marine Corps excels in applying a variety of weapons in highly dynamic combined-arms environments involving land-, sea- and air-based assets. In recent years the Corps has also assumed the additional mission of Military Operations Other Than War (MOOTW) and must therefore develop and master new techniques of force projection. To this end, Marine Expeditionary Units (MEUs) are being issued non-lethal munitions for small arms and are receiving training in their use. The Commandant’s Warfighting Laboratory (CWL) has funded research into ways to ensure that Marines are properly instructed and prepared to use these munitions in support of peacekeeping and other MOOTW.

A prototype Small Unit Leader Non-Lethals Trainer (SULNT) has been developed that models a peacekeeping mission in a generic urban environment. The SULNT is a constructive simulation that provides a training environment for the situational assessment and decision making skills that must be used by the squad leader in order to successfully manage a variety of peacekeeping and MOOTW scenarios. The SULNT allows a squad leader to simulate establishing a checkpoint position within the context of a specific situation background and within established rules of engagement. The trainee has a 3D ground level view of the urban environment for reconnoitring and a 2D overhead plan view displaying crowds, marine units, and checkpoint defensive emplacements. Once the trainee’s checkpoint position has been established the simulated exercise begins.

During an exercise, a crowd behaviour model operates in real-time and responds to trainee actions (and inaction) with appropriate behaviours such as loitering, celebrating, demonstrating, rioting and dispersing. Multiple crowds and groups, from 2 to 500 members, can be generated by an instructor prior to an exercise. The trainee is given visual cues through the computer display regarding crowd actions, and verbal reports of their activities generated by a speech synthesis engine. The squad leader must evaluate the developing situation and make decisions involving issuing verbal instructions to the crowd and employing various types of lethal and non-lethal munitions. The exercise continues with the crowd responding to the squad unit leader’s actions until the situation is resolved either successfully or unsuccessfully as defined by the mission and rules of engagement. During an exercise, all of the trainee and simulated crowd actions are logged to support an after-action review (AAR) process.

In this paper we describe the design, development, evaluation, and initial testing of the trainer, as well as discuss preliminary results from a 1997 field experiment in which USMC Subject Matter Experts and Fleet Marines evaluated the trainer.

Main Topic

A team of researchers and engineers in the Training Systems and Simulators Department at Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) are working on the second phase of a project for the United States Marine Corps that trains Marines in decision-making with respect to the use of non-lethal munitions in peacekeeping and crowd control operations. The Marines had several requirements for training their personnel for Military Operations Other Than War (MOOTW). In particular, SwRI was contracted to create a scenario-based, visual training system that gives Marines practice in making decisions under realistic conditions about the deployment and use of non-lethal munitions in a peacekeeping operation. This project, called the Small Unit Leader’s Non-lethal Weapons Trainer (SULNT), concluded with a successful test and demonstration at Camp Pendleton at the Emerald Express conference in April, 1997 and a follow-on project has been awarded to the SwRI.

The SwRI team created a visual, scenario-based computer simulation that was highly interactive. The simulation included models of the effects of specific non-lethal munitions in the Marine Corps arsenal and also of crowd and mob activities. Using the simulation, students were able to demonstrate their knowledge of proper rules of engagement, the procedures for dealing with crowds and mobs, and their ability to make decisions about the appropriate level
of force needed to control, contain, or disperse crowds and mobs. The Marine trainees could be confronted with several scenarios at once and by crowds as large as 500 people. Crowds were depicted as moving within a model town along instructor-defined pathways and responded not only to actions taken by Marines but also responded autonomously to actions by other simulated crowds and to the passage of time. The trainees were able to deploy model barriers and fortifications and were constrained to realistic levels of ammunition and squad strength.


03-09-03, 11:55 PM

The design team used historical and generic ethnic and religious groups to confront the Marine trainees, and the confrontations took place within a cluster of undifferentiated buildings within one of three model towns. The Marines were stationary for the most part and were in a reactive mode. The system was highly visual, containing three realistic 3D models of towns and buildings constructed from three databases. The rest of the display provided the trainee with descriptions of events, his orders and background information, and rules of engagement. Silicon Graphics High Impact Indigo2 hardware was used. The trainee also received verbal feedback from an electronic speech synthesiser. Prior to a training session, an instructor would create a new scenario for training (or edit an old scenario) using an interface and set of screens designed for this purpose. Figure 1 is an example of a create/edit scenario screen.

Figure 1. Create/Edit Scenario Screen

After the instructor had created a scenario, the trainee would then set up his forces a standard Marine rifle squad at a checkpoint location designated by his instructor. The trainee would arm his simulated squad with lethal and non-lethal munitions that are part of the Marine Corps arsenal today. The effects of the munitions were modelled to first-order accuracy based on data provided to SwRI from the Naval Surface Warfare Centre in Dahlgren, Virginia. Figure 2 is a sample set-up screen.

Figure 2. Set-up Screen

Scenarios were run from a separate screen and during a scenario the trainee would deal with actions taken by several simulated crowds. The crowds were modelled from data collected from experts, from scientific and technical literature, and from information gathered from Marine Corps and other government sources. The crowd model was dynamic and based on empirical knowledge gathered by experts. Each crowd faction was characterised by the values of a series of attributes which together comprised a crowd profile. Attributes included fanaticism, arousal state, prior experience with non-lethal munitions, and attitudes toward the Marines (fear, respect, anger, etc.), among others. The attribute profiles were linked to a behavioural model that generated crowd activities such as demonstrations, carrying signs, throwing stones, and so on. The link came through a set of Boolean relations shaped by our understanding of the literature and validated by our experts. Crowd movement was determined along initial paths defined by an instructor. However, actions taken by the trainee and other scenario events could influence crowd movement as well. Figure 3 is a screen from the runtime interface.

Figure 3. Runtime Interface Screen

In a typical scenario, the trainee would deploy his squad in fire teams, reserves, and designated marksmen. He would receive audio information regarding crowd activities and he could look at a 2D plan view of the area with or without map grids. The trainee could issue verbal orders to the crowd or call in lethal or non-lethal fire. As in the real world, the supply of clips and ammunition is limited, range is restricted, and munitions effects are probabilistic rather than absolute. The actions taken by the Marines affected crowd behaviour in several ways. Some crowds could be dispersed by a simple verbal command, whereas other crowds would disperse only with swift and heavy action from the Marines. Each training run was independent of others and the outcome dependent on Marine actions and inaction. A Marine could run the same scenario several times and each run would have a separate outcome. Successful trainees would read their background and orders, study their rules of engagement, and make decisions based on proper procedures. At the conclusion of a successful run, the trainee would receive a good report and other positive feedback. On the other hand, if rules were violated as sometimes happened during free play sessions, the trainee would be presented with verbal reports of bad outcomes such as an unacceptable number of dead civilians, angry superior officers on their way to admonish the trainee, and a television news program reporting his actions in a negative manner.

We also provided an After-Action Review Screen (Figure 4) that allowed a trainee and his instructor to replay a scenario run with all actions preserved. The replay could be paused or fast forwarded to specific elapsed time markers so that an instructor could make a teaching point. Scenarios could also be saved for re-use.

Figure 4. After-Action Review Screen

Trainee options were based on USMC procedures and were validated by the Marine Corps experts including the project officer who leads the USMC non-lethals effort for the Warfighting Lab. This officer had direct personal experience with peacekeeping operations and non-lethal munitions in Somalia. In addition, SwRI gathered data while attending a Limited Objective Experiment (LOE) as an observer at Camp Pendleton in July 1996. The LOE was a three-week long field exercise in which Marines were trained in the use of non-lethals. Exercises with actors simulating crowds and mobs were conducted five to six times per day. In addition, Marine Corps Reservists who were active duty crowd control officers from the Los Angeles Police Department and the Los Angeles Sheriff’s
Department were also in attendance. We believe that we met our objectives for this project because of the detailed up-front analysis, the active participation of our sponsor and his experts, and the iterative testing of our software.

In February, 1997, the system was tested with enlisted personnel from the 15th Marine Expeditionary Force (Special Operations Capable) at Camp Pendleton, California. For one week, the system was put through its paces by the enlisted Marines (corporals and sergeants). The Marines used the system as students in the first part of the week and as instructors during the last part of the week. Their comments and suggestions for improvement were collected by SwRI staff and most of their recommendations were implemented. A second demonstration period took place at Camp Pendleton during April 1997 at the Emerald Express conference. During that conference, more than 30 military and civilians used the system. In October, 1997, the system again demonstrated for the Platoon Leaders school at the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department. Again, comments were collected and analysed for improvements to the system. Work is in progress for creating a law enforcement version of the system for use by civil authorities.


03-09-03, 11:56 PM

In February, 1997, the system was tested with enlisted personnel from the 15th Marine Expeditionary Force (Special Operations Capable) at Camp Pendleton, California. For one week, the system was put through its paces by the enlisted Marines (corporals and sergeants). The Marines used the system as students in the first part of the week and as instructors during the last part of the week. Their comments and suggestions for improvement were collected by SwRI staff and most of their recommendations were implemented. A second demonstration period took place at Camp Pendleton during April 1997 at the Emerald Express conference. During that conference, more than 30 military and civilians used the system. In October, 1997, the system again demonstrated for the Platoon Leaders school at the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department. Again, comments were collected and analysed for improvements to the system. Work is in progress for creating a law enforcement version of the system for use by civil authorities.

In developing this software, SwRI researchers and engineers conducted structured interviews with experts from the uniformed services and from civil authorities in addition to the published literature. It was obvious to these researchers that there are many technical training and simulation issues and concerns which overlap between civil and military groups in confrontation with large groups of people, whether those groups are friendly, neutral or hostile and whether the groups have peaceful or violent intentions. The type of crowd is also important. Crowds can be of several types including casual crowds of people who happen to be gathered in the same place (such as shoppers); expressive crowds who have gathered for specific behaviours such as worship, dancing, or singing; and aggressive crowds which are unorganised, potentially unlawful groups (Momboise, 1969). In addition to crowds, there are also mobs and rioters who are engaged in undesirable activities and may be out of control. In recognition of the different types of crowds and mobs and indeed, differences in the behaviour of individuals within a single crowd, the SwRI model includes several psychological variables including level of aggression, hostility toward the Marines, prior experience with non-lethal munitions, and degree of fanaticism and devotion to their religious or political causes. There are also parameters for the degree to which a crowd may be armed. The variables are set to an initial state by an instructor and will change as the scenario unfolds. Actions taken by the Marines may make a crowd or faction more or less angry, more or less hostile. If left alone and unchallenged by the Marines, the emotional variables may also change, depending on the initial states and the degree to which the factions are hostile to one another.

Riots, mobs, and demonstrations are far more common than is realised by the general public and have been going on in all societies and in all parts of world since civilisation began. As an example, in Constantinople in 532 A.D., a conflict between the “Blues” and the “Greens” erupted with over 30,000 casualties. The underlying cause of the rioting is thought to be political and economic but the catalyst for violence was a chariot race. (Steele, 1993). At present, law enforcement officers in major US cities may be involved in public confrontations on a weekly basis and damages can accumulate into millions of dollars. These confrontations may be as small as a bar fight that spreads onto the street or as large as a celebration riot accompanying a major sports championship (Hillmann, 1991; McGregor and Griffiths, 1995). The National Law Enforcement Policy Centre has called for special training in civil disturbances “for both line and supervisory officers, as well as command personnel.” SwRI has also received informal enquiries from civil authorities and from other commercial companies about the possibility of re-use (or re-tooling) of the USMC-owned software for civilian purposes.

In the near future, the SwRI team will be improving the existing model and its interfaces. We will also be improving the 3D visualisation of the system. We are also under contract to determine if the system can be migrated from SGI hardware to PC hardware without loss of capability. Finally, we are to build and deliver eight systems for use by fleet Marine forces in a one-year experiment to be conducted by the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory.

About the Authors



B.A. in Psychology, Florida State University, 1973; M.A. in Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, 1978; Ph.D. in Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, 1981

Dr. Varner is a research psychologist responsible for identifying and researching new technologies, tools, and processes that will facilitate training. She has directed and participated in projects involving virtual environments, scientific data visualization, digital video, and speech recognition technologies in training. She developed a physics-based model and visual simulation of fire and smoke under the Institute's Internal Research and Development program. At present, she is project manager for the Small Unit Leader’s Non-lethals Training.



B.S. in Electrical Engineering, Texas A&M University, 1981

Mr. Royse is a specialist in electronic systems design, integration, and testing, and has significant design and project management experience in the development of simulation and multimedia-based training systems for the USMC, USAF, and NASA.

As manager of Training Systems Development at Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), Mr. Royse is responsible for the develop*ment of proposals and performance of project activities which involve the engineering analysis, design, and development of training systems and simulation devices. He leads a group of engineers and computer scien*tists developing computer-based solutions to the training and simulation problems of government and industrial clients.



B.A. in Computer Science, University of Texas at Austin, 1984

Mr. Micheletti is experienced in the design, coding, testing and documentation of software for real-time, mission-critical avionics systems, avionics maintenance procedures training systems/simulators, and battlefield operations training systems/simulators.

Mr. Micheletti has been involved in the management, analysis, design, test, and documentation of software for several multi-station, networked training and simulation systems for the US Marine Corps and Air Force. He is currently the lead software developer on the Small Unit Leader Non-lethals Trainer (SULNT) project for the Marine Corps. The SULNT is designed to train decision making skills for squad leaders regarding the use of non-lethal munitions in urban operations other than war.



Major Eugene Apicella was assigned to his current duties as an Action Officer at the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory in September 1995. His duties include Nonlethal Capabilities Action Officer and Action Officer, Fires and Targeting Section, Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory.

Most recently he served as Commanding Officer, Company K, Third Battalion, Seventh Marines, First Marine Division at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twenty-nine Palms, California from September 1992 through July 1995. While assigned to 3/7 he was also the Commanding Officer of Headquarters and Service Company and functioned at the Ground Combat Element Commander, Special MAGTF Belleau Wood during OPERATION UNITED SHIELD, the final U.N. withdrawal from Somalia. A 1992 Honor graduate of the U.S. Army Infantry Officer's Advanced Course, Major Apicella has also graduated from numerous other military specialty schools including the Airborne Course and Pathfinders Course.

Personal decorations include the Navy Commendation Medal, with two Gold Stars and Combat V, the Combat Action Ribbon, the Navy Achievement Medal, and the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal.


Hillmann, Michael R. (1991). Civil disorder and crowd control. The Tactical Edge: Winter, 1991, 25-32.

McGregor, W.I., Q.P.M., and Griffiths, Geoffrey (1995). The British transport police and Euro ’96. Transit Policing, 5, 12,10-12.

Momboise, Raymond M. (1969). Confrontations, riots, urban warfare. Pasadena, California: MSM Enterprises.

Steele, Philip (1993). Riots: past and present. New York: New Discovery Books, 1993.

06-15-03, 09:45 PM