Did the Federation have an Army / What did it call ground forces in battle?

ompgaming1

I'm trying to figure out the Star Trek lore (especially around the 2400 time frame) about Starfleet ground forces or marines or anything similar. I keep getting point to a group called Section 31 (I think that's the right number) but they seem a bit too rogue and not really fighters but spies.

Anyone have any idea about Star Trek canon around this topic? Thanks for the help.

sollvax

MACO

Andor also has marines

Starfleet has marines as well

also Chief Obrien

ompgaming1

I understood that the MACOs were only during the Enterprise NX-1 timeframe. Is there any reference to them in STO?

sollvax

Yes

Can't move for Maco round here

psycoticvulcan

Earth had Military Assault Command Operations (MACO) in the 22nd century, but I don't know if that carried over to the Federation.

The troops on AR-558 seemed to be regular Starfleet officers.

cehus

ompgaming1 wrote: »

I understood that the MACOs were only during the Enterprise NX-1 timeframe. Is there any reference to them in STO?

Maco ground equipment and maco space equipment

drogyn1701

The ground troops in "Nor the Battle to the Strong" were seen only briefly but had a different uniform, sort of Starfleet-esque but with different shoulder colors. The fanbase, including myself, always calls them marines but they were never referred to on air as such. Certainly could have been in the script or in the script writer's notes or something, not sure where it came from.

I kinda think that normally Starfleet and the Federation would not have a standing army. It would have planetary security forces (some local, some starfleet) plus the security detachments that float around on the starships. However, during a war on the scale of the Dominion War it would kinda have to establish an army. Starships are great, but they can't take and hold ground and in this case you'd need a force capable of taking and holding whole planets, several at a time even. We just never saw them on screen. Couldn't do The Longest Day on DS9's budget, haha.

sumghai

Whilst I acknowledge the presence of MACOs in ENT, I vehemently dislike the notion of "Starfleet Marines".

My respect to the folks who planted the Stars and Stripes on Iwo Jima, but I feel that any dedicated standing army doesn't sit well with UFP Starfleet's humanitarian/exploratory/peacekeeping force.

Sure, ST Marines are popular in many unlicenced RPGs, but they have never been acknowledged as canon, nor did Roddenberry like the notion of a overtly militaristic Starfleet in the first place (apparently the TOS cast complained that the TWoK "Monster Maroons" were too militaristic).

I'd prefer to think that the Starfleet ground personnel on AR-558 were simply volunteers pulled from regular ship complements.

f9thaceshigh

the MACOs are mentioned in the Needs of the Many book. Some of the other books have suggested that there are Starfleet Ground Forces, as I recall, the people fighting on Ajilon Prime in Nor the Battle to the Strong are referred to as soldiers, suggesting that they are more then just starfleet crewmen, and there is definitely mention of some sort of Special Operations Group. The Uniforms worn by the soldiers on AR-558, and Ajilon prime are referred to as "Surface Operations Blacks" in the books and backstage sources; they fit on over the standard uniform undershirt and the books claim that they provide some additional protection against phaser shots.

voyagerfan9751

sumghai wrote: »

Whilst I acknowledge the presence of MACOs in ENT, I vehemently dislike the notion of "Starfleet Marines".

My respect to the folks who planted the Stars and Stripes on Iwo Jima, but I feel that any dedicated standing army doesn't sit well with UFP Starfleet's humanitarian/exploratory/peacekeeping force.

Sure, ST Marines are popular in many unlicenced RPGs, but they have never been acknowledged as canon, nor did Roddenberry like the notion of a overtly militaristic Starfleet in the first place (apparently the TOS cast complained that the TWoK "Monster Maroons" were too militaristic).

I'd prefer to think that the Starfleet ground personnel on AR-558 were simply volunteers pulled from regular ship complements.

This. Roddenberry was adamant that Starfleet was NOT a military organization. Granted, the Dominion War necessitated a "Ground" fleet, but I like to think that was a necessary thing for that time. They created a ground unit, and dissolved it after the war. But I do not believe the Federation has a standing Army/marine/ground force.

kurtzroy

I understand the original vision of starfleet and I know some hate the idea of starfleet marines or infantry or whatever.

But one thing puzzles me, if I am not mistaken in 2409 starfleet is fighting a war on multiple fronts against a lot of factions that specialize in infantry warfare. Klingons are pretty much fighters from the time they learn to walk. The borg are pretty much perfect infantry units, not to mention trouble makes like Hirogen etc. So without a solidified infantry, shouldn't starfleet be losing, or at least on the ropes getting face smashed? I mean one of those factions would have to wise up and see this gaping hole in starfleet's strategy and battles won't stay in space all the time sooner or later they will make landfall.

I don't know maybe I am over thinking.

markhawkman

Most, if not all, Starfleet personnel are trained in personal combat. So it's not like they'd be defenseless. But at the same time, most are also not very good at it.... most. Then you have guys like O'brien who will kick your butt with things made from scrap metal....

Starfleet does have "security" forces at the very least that are capable of fighting ground warfare. And we know from movies like Insurrection that the Federation is very capable of fielding well equipped infantry.

kurtzroy

I see tale tell signs that cryptic thought about this as well to some extent in-game. Which is why we see phaser mini-guns, phaser shotguns, and rapid deployable turrets. But I still think starfleet shouldn't be coming out of this war as clean as they have. I would have expected to see alot more destroyed colonies, ground warzones, and alot more crippled ships in various drydocks.

ompgaming1

Would the current STO timeline wars with the Klingons, Romulans, Borg and Undine create the necessity for these ground-forces again?

markhawkman

ompgaming1 wrote: »

Would the current STO timeline wars with the Klingons, Romulans, Borg and Undine create the necessity for these ground-forces again?

I'd make that past tense. That's pretty much the reason Omega Force exists.

kurtzroy

Well as markhawkman stated starfleet can field a ground forces capable of infantry warfare. And in STO they kinda already reinstated the MACO (assuming it was decommissioned to begin with). But I think that if starfleet intends on coming out of this war not assimilated, not conquered or destroyed then more infantry trained forces are needed.

My characters back story deals with a similar subject.

ompgaming1

markhawkman wrote: »

I'd make that past tense. That's pretty much the reason Omega Force exists.

I'm kind of new to the game and Star Trek lore. What is Omega Force?

kurtzroy

It's a joint battle group with the KDF and Starfleet (kinda a temporary cease fire thing) that deals with overwhelming mutual threats like the Borg or Iconian's.

carmenara

I would think the Federation does have some sort of ability to conduct Starship Troopers style multi-divisional ops at least in theory. There are some times where you must, repeat must have men and women on the ground to secure territory and/or restore order.

Even science missions in alien territory need attendant security detachments.

The reason why we don't see big land battles or independent land armies is because with the (proposed) space-dominance centric aspect of 23rd century warfare and beyond, and with 'modern' transporter technology it is possible to conduct proper effects-based operations (EBO) using small and highly mobile strike teams to immobilize any ground threat.

Also, photon torpedoes and other spaceborne weapons can and have been used for strikes on planetary surfaces. In a typical ground based dispute of today, no one will mess with you if you have a Galaxy class starship in geostationary position above the hot spot. If you can use starship sensors to precision target transporters to beam people and materiel into confined spaces, you can use the same awesome sensors to attack with phasers, guide photon torpedoes like Gulf War GBUs, or even beam in a photon warhead to demolish bunkers from within.

Conclusion:

As huge as a Federation cruiser is, its security detachment is probably large enough to wage a small war on its lonesome, especially with the mothership in direct support above, hence throughout the Federation's recent history a standing ground army was probably not required.

Even "infantry warfare" units as mentioned in DS9 appear to me like naval personnel detached from their ships, just like crack Japanese Navy landing forces (SNLF - Special Naval Landing Forces) in WW2 which specialized in amphibious assaults and operated under Imperial Navy control.

artan42

-The MACOS form ENT
-The ground forces from ST: TFF
-The Force O'Brien belonged to.
-And the ground forces in DS9

Marines, or volunteers or an army, or related to the Federation or Starfleet is really up to the viewer, no mention is really made in the shows (Except for the ENT MACOS).

kurtzroy

Orbital weapons should only really be used as a final solution for several reasons. Irreversible environmental damage, friendly fire, innocent bystanders vaporized etc. If I where president of the UFP I'd be dusting off old earth/terran empire ground tactics, barbaric but effective.

targpetz101

kurtzroy wrote: »

Orbital weapons should only really be used as a final solution for several reasons. Irreversible environmental damage, friendly fire, innocent bystanders vaporized etc. If I where president of the UFP I'd be dusting off old earth/terran empire ground tactics, barbaric but effective.

That highlighted bit.

"Federation News: Special Report - 212 Dartarian school children and teachers were killed today when the Federation Starship U.S.S. nOObSlayer fired on the building from orbit. Their Intelligence gathering had suggested that enemy forces were occuping the structure to launch attacks on war relief and aid station. Security forces took control of the site after the bombardment. No enemy casualties were found in the rubble."

That bit is why Air Superiority has only worked in warfare do to a dedicated ground element to make it work. Wars/Skirmishes/Peace Keeping that has been conducted extensively by air sureriority, hasn't worked. Strategies were changed to implement dedicated ground force.

Special operations groups augmented with air superiority, haven't worked. They needed more dedicated ground forces.

This is why wartime tactics have been written to revolve around ground forces, more specifically, the Infantry. Everything is there to support them in war.

disposeableh3r0

You know the actual definition of a marine is a member of a body of soldiers who is trained to serve on both land and sea. So technicaly every person in starfleet is a marine.

That said i dont see why theer wouldnt be specialized general infintry traind in advanced ground combat techniques as well as general medical and engineering knowlage. Such troops would be deployable for relief, aid, and support duties as well as combat.

sollvax

Actually starfleet officers are closest to naval officers

carmenara

sollvax wrote: »

Actually starfleet officers are closest to naval officers

It is also fiction so there's really no right and wrong. Write your own Starfleet Corps of Marines

(There are already a specialized Corps of Engineers).

disposeableh3r0

sollvax wrote: »

Actually starfleet officers are closest to naval officers

A marine IS a naval officer. Thats kinda the point.

sollvax

A Marine is NOT A naval officer

Aboard a ship the ranking naval officer is in charge

ASHORE the ranks of marines come into play

Marines are not the navy
they are assigned to ships

but a Marine commander is out ranked on a ship by The ranking naval officer (even if he is an ensign)

disposeableh3r0

sollvax wrote: »

A Marine is NOT A naval officer

Aboard a ship the ranking naval officer is in charge

ASHORE the ranks of marines come into play

Marines are not the navy
they are assigned to ships

but a Marine commander is out ranked on a ship by The ranking naval officer (even if he is an ensign)

You are thinking of the United States Marines. Which differes from classical definitions of marines. Since the USMC is its own organization seperate from the navy it's not the same thing.

I was talking about the definition of what a marine is, disambiguated from any current or past orginizations to bear the title.

carmenara

A marine is a member of an infantry force that specializes in naval operations such as amphibious assault. In some countries, a marine force is often part of a navy, but can also be under army or independent command.

Historically, tasks undertaken by marines have included providing protection from war while at sea, reflecting the pressed nature of the ships' company and the risk of mutiny. Other tasks would include boarding of vessels during combat or capture of prize ships and providing manpower for raiding ashore in support of the naval objectives. Marine elements would also contribute to the campaign ashore, in support of the military objective.

Seriously a marine force could be anything, no point arguing over the specifics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_(military)

disposeableh3r0

carmenara wrote: »

Seriously a marine force could be anything, no point arguing over the specifics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_(military)

That was the point of my statement(s).

i think it would be neat to have a core of marines. Probably call it somthing else since it wouldn't be dedicated to combat only. But a well trained rapid response force able to adapt to any situation planetside seems right.

carmenara

Indeed, I agree with you. I put the link and quote up to prevent people from trolling that marines should be this and that... without considering the historical use of specialized naval infantry and QRFs as you propose.

QRFs are definitely valuable for any sort of conflict and it pays to embark such a unit to enhance a starship's capability to resolve local problems.

But on the other hand as we've seen in canon Trek the "Security" and "Operations" departments aboard ship appear to undertake this task rather competently.

Granted most shows show only small away teams (often deployed frighteningly far away from the mothership via shuttlecraft) due perhaps to budgetary reasons, but there are ground combat detachments prominently featured and narrated about in DS9. They don't appear to be a Starfleet Marine Corps organization on its own but draws personnel from the usual 3 branches of Starfleet personnel, albeit detached from their home ship or base.

MACO, etc appear to be closer to a commando or "Delta Force" type outfit deployed only to certain prominent ships. They don't appear to be a "reaction" type force but an elite striking force (hence the "Assault" name), from my perspective.