Entire British redcoat army vs 100 modern US Marines

[Uriah02]

Does the British Army come with their Calvary and artillery too? If so I think they could take it. The moral would be low, but with full support it is a heck of a lot easier to get 100 lucky hits with or without musket fires. Take into account the British special units too? Those that had more advanced muskets...

[Uriah02]

Wait a second... did this become the new SHTF hypothetical question thread?

[Mssr. Eleganté]

...but with full support it is a heck of a lot easier to get 100 lucky hits with or without musket fires..

But what if all of your troops are shooting their muskets and cannons at a cloud of smoke from the smoke grenades the Marines set off 30 degrees west of their true position?

[BillCA]

Quick thoughts...
Advantages for the British

1. Redcoats have the advantage of numbers.
2. British initially have the advantage of mounted cavalry
3. British initially have the advantage in artillery
4. Redcoats may have the advantage of hostages, defensive positions, etc.
5. Locals may fear Marines as far too odd/wierd.
6. There would be something of a language barrier - old English vs. Ameri-speak
7. Rest cycles - The British manpower allows rotation of "fresh" troops in.

Advantages of the Marines

1. Hitting targets at five times the range of a Brown Bess Musket. Repeatedly.
2. Able to acquire and shoot artillerymen behind the lines if a clear shot presents.
3. Tactical team coordination. Fire teams, cross-fires.
4. Smokeless Powder - much more difficult for Brits to pinpoint source of fire
5. Full-Auto Fire - The psychological effect of this cannot be understated.
6. Camoflouage uniforms - an uncouth and cowardly way to fight per Cornwallis
7. M203 Grenade launchers
8. M60A1E4 and/or SAW 249 machine guns
9. M32 Multiple grenade launcher
10. Night Vision Equipment
11. AN/PAS-13 Thermal imaging sight
12. M18A1 Claymore mines
13. Squad & personal radio equipment to coordinate attacks
14. Psychological advantage of knowing the mission, superiority of weapons & tactics.
15. Advantage of prior knowledge of Continental army field doctrine
16. Experience in fast-moving, far-ranging ops, vs. Colonial British "local ops".
17. Able to relax much more at night vs. the British since Night Ops were rare at that time.

The Marines would use the psychological advantage of their rapid-fire and long range weapons, combined with stealth, team tactics, crossfires to defeat British troops in their early engagements. Proper mission planning and operational discipline would be covered before the first engagement (i.e. use M60's and M249's to chop up cavalry before it gets close). Designated Marksmen with M14's tasked to take out artillery officers & crew and/or several rear-eschelon commanders at 300-400 yards.

Presuming the USMC doesn't have any aerial drone recon capabilities, it still won't be hard to sweep a large area for British activity. Troops of that era made enough noise marching along to alert people for 1/2 mile easily.

The USMC would tactically avoid "urban" warfare where casualtie might be higher from hand to hand and/or surprise ambush with massed troops. Also would avoid open-field engagements by using tree lines and concealment.

Commanders would create small fire-teams, ideally inserting at least one M203 per team or a M60/SAW/M82. Such a 5-6 man team would likey route a British company (100 men) in any open field area. Tactical doctrine would be to ensure at least a few escape to "tell the tale". In the hours it requires for any British response, the Marines have moved to cover a larger area. As much as possible, the USMC seeks to prevent revealing what they look like and/or their strength used.

Especially "spooky" for British troops would be Night OPS by the marines. This could take on one of several incarnations. One would be to use Night Vision gear and creep into their camps, kill a few officers and men by knife and leave silently like ghosts. Another would be to use designated marksmen to shoot several soldiers from 300-500 yards. A third method would be to use M203's at random hours to "lob one in" to their camps throughout the night to prevent their troops from getting sleep.

Through mountains and woods, the Marines would probably slice, dice and chop the British into mincemeat. The British are going to march in columns along established roads and paths. Plus their Red & White uniforms offer no real advantage when dispersed in the brush. The Marines can employ a new surprise -- the claymore -- with tripwires along the paths just ahead of the British troops. Retreat can be cut off by planting a claymore after the column passes.

The troops of that era are conscripts. Many were criminals pressed into HM service. About 90% are "uneducated" by our standards (some can barely read). The psychological effect of a chattering M60 machine gun plus the "mowing down" of one's mates can quickly turn even a brave man's knees to jelly. Coupled with very accurate "artillery" fire (mines and grenades) I'd expect a lot of brown & yellow stains on those white pants.

Provided the Marines are "tied down" to one location for an ammo dump/resupply, it is quite conceivable they could defeat the British army. They would, however, require assistance from the locals for such things as caring for prisoners and maintaining a presence wherever they've defeated the Redcoats.

The main problem would be distances... and getting from one engagement point to the other safely and bringing one's supplies along. All by foot or horseback.

I don't recall if who the author was years ago (Phillip Farmer? Chris Anvil?) who wrote a story about a company of (Vietnam era) National Guardsmen on maneuvers in Louisiana ending up thrown back into Merry Old England in about 1400. Armed with M16's, M14's, a jeep and two trucks and a halftrack. They stumble across a castle under seige and the real question is which side to take. I won't detail the book, but imagine the terror induced by a M3A1 halftrack growling out of the woods firing a .50 BMG from the ring mount!

[Rob454]

I ran the numbers on being surrounded just to look at what's the maximum number of redcoats you could put up to fight against the 100 marines. That 1200 redcoats can only put out about 6000 rounds a minute. 100 Marines putting out 6000 rounds a minute is 60 rounds a minute per guy, it's not going to necessitate barrel changes and so forth. Putting aside terrain, strategy, whatever else, 6000 rpm of musket is inferior to 6000 (or significantly more) rpm of 5.56.

Yes i understand your reasoning BUT you still have thousands of people charging all at once. And it would be a charge over and over all go no stopping. Eventually they would get within range and start firing. At that point you will take cover or lose some defenders. As you lose defenders your defense perimeter weakens. Also your fields of fire are wideranging with only 100 people. Where are your ammo runners? is that added to the 100 marines or how does the ammo get to the marines? Lots of variables. And you also are depending on one shot one hit and that is not gonna happen. Unless the marines are bullet proof the redcoats will eventually get within range and even with their crude smooth bore muskets they will eventually start to work down the # of marines.
Look I'm on your side that that I wish for the marines to win but 100 against 112 000 is simply not gonna happen. No matter how good the defenders youre talking 1120 to one odds. And the bigger odds can fire back also. As they fire back your 100 people you will start losing them. For the enemy to lose 100 people is not as much of a big deal. You losing 25 people you r fighting force was just reduced by 25%.

[packnrat]

sorry army you would loose this one. the britts would win just by the shear numbers game.

now it it was open flat planes. it would be a much bloodier battle...but the britts would just run over the army guys.

number win.

put two guys at opposite ends of a football field both armed with snubby .38 cal revolvers. one gets to have 8 rounds and the other only 5. who would you place your money on?

[Noobert]

That's a lot of ammo for the Marines to carry for them to kill all 112,000 people. In a direct assault, I'd take the Brits for the massive amount of casualties they can take on before over running the Marines. In a gorilla warfare tactic, it can be a close call but it's hard to maintain physical and mental strength and fight that many people. They'll eventually wear you out. Lack of sleep will get the Marines.

[RandyD]

That's a lot of ammo for the Marines to carry for them to kill all 112,000 people. In a direct assault, I'd take the Brits for the massive amount of casualties they can take on before over running the Marines. In a gorilla warfare tactic, it can be a close call but it's hard to maintain physical and mental strength and fight that many people. They'll eventually wear you out. Lack of sleep will get the Marines.

During the revolutionary war period, the British did not fight at night.

[The Director]

This thread has gone full retard.

[xibunkrlilkidsx]

Marines.
SAW
M240
M203 launchers.
M21EBR
M40

Fin.

[wkd4496]

This thread has gone full retard.

Ah! Everybody knows you never go full retard!!

[acolytes]

How about 100 marines + Chuck Norris?

Game over for for the Red Coats for sure......

[Rogu3]

sorry army you would loose this one. the britts would win just by the shear numbers game.

now it it was open flat planes. it would be a much bloodier battle...but the britts would just run over the army guys.

number win.

put two guys at opposite ends of a football field both armed with snubby .38 cal revolvers. one gets to have 8 rounds and the other only 5. who would you place your money on?

I guess the whole modern firearms thing doesn't matter...you know accurate fire beyond 400 yards, automatic weapons, magazine fed.

Your analogy is ridiculous.

[RandyD]

Would I be incorrect to point out that the battle at Chosin reservoir and the subsequent withdrawl did include unit skirmishes?
Yes the chinese sustained large losses, however they were to prevail in that battle. Human wave attrition fighting can work. Sadly, many Marines were lost.

"Over the next four weeks, the Chinese and Marine forces engaged in some of the fiercest fighting of the Korean War. In an epic movement, the 1st Marine Division completed a successful fighting withdrawal through 78 miles of mountain roads in northeast Korea, that ended in mid-December with the amphibious evacuation of the Marines from the port of Hungnam, Korea. Although suffering over 4,000 battle casualties, and uncounted numbers of frostbite, Marine air and ground units had inflicted nearly 25,000 casualties on Chinese Communist forces."

You need to read up on your history. This battle was not a squad skirmish, and the Marine Corps did not loose the battle. The battle of the Chosin Reservoir involved the entire First Marine Corps Division. It was surrounded by nine Chinese divisions. The press back in the states had written the First Division off as being lost. The First Division, marched and fought its way to the sea which was about 80 miles away. During this battle, the First Marine Corps Division destroyed seven of the nine Chinese divisions.

[RandyD]

Some of you here are really bad students of history. Again I bring up Somalia. Same scenario - a highly trained crack force vs a sea of poorly and primitively armed savages.

We lost.

How do you define that as a loss? Our Rangers were surrounded, they took a lot of casualties, but the entire unit was not overrun nor was it destroyed, and they fought their way back to our lines. I believe the disperity of casualties was entirely on our side. As I recall, we lost 18 men. The warlords lost thousands of men.