# The Evolution of The 75th Ranger Regiment



## JackMurphyRGR (May 17, 2012)

Rangers,

I was recently having a discussion with another forum member who was requesting that I write an article about how the 75th evolved during the War on Terror.  You know, how we went from choking on mosquitoes in patrol bases at Benning to blowing down douchebag's front doors and laying down some shit for a living.  Those of us who experienced it know that a ton changed, in my case just from 2003 to 2006.  It looks like the Regiment has continued to evolve in leaps and bounds since then.  My question to the community is, barring OPSEC issues, what aspects of the Regiment do you think I should focus on for this article?  Obviously we went from high and tights to normal haircuts and even beards in some cases but that's superficial compared to everything else.  What aspects of training and combat do you think I should highlight?  The idea here is to help educate all those dumbasses out there who think the 75th is a second string security element for Delta.

Thanks in advance,
-Jack


----------



## RetPara (May 18, 2012)

Compare and contrast....  How does RASP function now as opposed to when George Conrad started the Regt level RIP/ROP?  Talk about the individual - discipline, uniforms, equipment, vehicles, and such.  There is LOT that you won't be able to cover because of OPSEC. 

Your target audience is on this site or for publication?  Just people that are here are pre-Regt will find those differences interesting.  For the dumbass crowd; a short explanation of where Rangers fit into the escalation of force matrix may be in order.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (May 18, 2012)

I suspect that even former Regiment guys would learn something from an article like this, I bet that researching this will be an eye opener for me as well.  For the most part though, our audience probably will not be former Rangers but rather the public at large who is interested in Special Operations and kids who are thinking of signing on the dotted line.  The tone would be informational/educational but I'm sure it would attract plenty of readers from the SOF community as well.  The evolution from Battalion RIP to Regiment RIP to RASP is definitely an important topic.


----------



## JohnnyBoyUSMC (May 18, 2012)

I'd be interested in reading. Would be a interesting read to go along with the Dick Couch book that's coming out soon.....though July is not soon enough for me, I'm not a patient man


----------



## Boon (May 18, 2012)

Regiment's role in theater has changed drastically from the days of OEF I, something to definitely point out.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (May 18, 2012)

From airfield seizures and patrols to HVT raids?  I was in RIP during OIF I so I just missed out on some stuff...


----------



## Boon (May 18, 2012)

In part, but I mean't by their optempo.


----------



## goon175 (May 21, 2012)

I can only make observations that cover from 2006-2010, but here they are:
- During this period the weapons exponentially improved. Weapons went from standard M4A1 14" assault rifles, to M4's with free floating barrells, 10 and 14" barrels, and many non standard items on the weapon. The SCAR also came into play, along with the MK13 replacement of the M203. We went from the PEQ-2's, M68's, and Surefire's to LA-5's, EOTECH/ELCAN's and smaller lights. I saw an increase of only 30 pistols per company to enough to issue one to every man in the company (including supply guys and training shop). The MK-47 replaced the Mk19, sniper weapons systems improved, and night vision went from PVS-14's to your option of 14's, 15's, AVS-6's or PSQ-18's. We went from H&K mags to the P-mags.
- Communications improved. I won't go into specifics, but everyone has peltors and radios now. The stuff that the FO's and Commo guys used got smaller and more capability.
- Battalion became gradually less obsessed with uniformity, and, within reason, gave guys the lee-way to do what made sense. The crye multicam came into use, modifying helmets how you saw fit, wearing what boots were best for you, painting and setting up weapons and other equipment, and basically modifying anything you wanted as long as it made sense to do it (it has and continues to be unnaceptable to do something just because you think its cool).
- The hazing and general treatment of new guys improved significantly. This isn't meant to be a "back when it was hard" anecdote, but guys are just generally treated much better and part of the team, and it is more conducive to learning. Do guys still get the piss smoked out of them for fucking up? of course. Do you still get fucked with? yes. But not the same way it was. I feel like Batt./Regiment has become much more professional in this way.
- PT has gotten smarter. Instead of running like a mad man all week, guys are much more in tune with functional fitness, running, lifting, swimming, and getting injuries treated when appropriate. They have incorporated an entire staff for improving fitness and health, and I think guys are less likely to let an injury go untreated.
- Training is of course very focused on the current operating environment and top notch. I firmly believe (and this is not a slight to any other sof unit out there) that a Ranger strike force is the most effective/lethal/precise direct action element in the U.S. military today, with the exception of one notable unit up at Bragg (who coincidentally recruit very heavily from the 75th). The focus on DA missions and the training to go with it is exceptional. There has been an increased emphasis on pistol marksmanship, which was at one time seen as unnecessary. The Regiment now utilizes a variety of civilian-run shooting courses for pistol, Close Quarters, and long range shooting. I would also say that there has been an increase on emphasis to learn languages, especially with the implementation of the Ranger Language Program.
- I believe medical training has continued to improve. Obviously the bare minimum for all Rangers is to be RFR certified (which happens in RASP), but many go on to get NREMT-I as well. The medics are all obviously top notch and have an exceptional amount of trauma experience. I found that I and many other guys trusted our medics more than the average doctor at the hospital or E.R.
- Emphasis on non-traditional/ non-standard skill sets has increased. I won't go into details, but they are doing training on things now that was not done when I first got there.
- Regimental and Battalion leadership have been put into positions of increased responsibility overseas, and oversee units that most might find surprising.
- Company Commander slots are for Majors now, and Battalion Commander is usually a full bird or LTC (P) now. I don't believe this was the case when I first got there.
- The average Ranger has become more flexible. Going from the mentality of going explosive on every target, to now fully integrating with HN forces and doing call outs shows the maturity of the force and what it is capable of.
- The variety of missions has increased. While I was there I saw Rangers do personnel/equipment recovery/CSAR, hostage rescue, counter-terrorism, counter-insurgency, cross border stuff, low vis stuff, FID, SR, obviously DA missions, as well as larger scale hits on large concentration of enemy pax.

This is just some stuff off the top of my head, and edited for opsec as well, but overall the Regiment has changed a lot, and I am sure there are many things that I don't know about. I was in the same company the whole time, and don't necessarily know what other things went on for other guys. I will say that the modern breed of Ranger is the most violent of any unit I have been around, and it creates for a very unique type of unit. Everyone wants to kill bad guys and has the means to do so effectively, from the supply guy to the 11B in a line squad.


----------



## JohnnyBoyUSMC (May 21, 2012)

That all is really quite interesting there goon, and I for one appreciate the answers. Out of curiosity, what is the general age of those you saw in the regiment, and what were the widest differences in age from lowest to highest for active members of the regiment that you witnessed?


----------



## goon175 (May 21, 2012)

The average I would say was 20/21 to 30. On the young side you would see 18, on the old side 40's (this was not just senior enlisted either)


----------



## goon175 (May 21, 2012)

I also think it is noteworthy to mention average combat experience. This is strictly only what I observed, and definately was not the rule:
- Team Leaders had an average of 3-6 deployments under their belt
- Squad Leaders 5-9
- PSG's 7-12
- 1sg's 6-9


----------



## JohnnyBoyUSMC (May 21, 2012)

goon175 said:


> The average I would say was 20/21 to 30. On the young side you would see 18, on the old side 40's (this was not just senior enlisted either)


 
Interesting. Appreciate the answer! Keep feeling like at 28 when I decided to go back into the service and if I really pushed for/was considered for opt.40 I would be "old, withered and used up" age wise in their eyes lol! Silly thought I know but still.....


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (May 22, 2012)

Great info Goon! On the deployments, are these short rotations 3-6 mths or long rotations 12-18 mths? It's seemed like most of the Rangers I saw were in and out, except for TF guys, who seemed to have longer deployments.


----------



## DA SWO (May 22, 2012)

JAB said:


> Great info Goon! On the deployments, are these short rotations 3-6 mths or long rotations 12-18 mths? It's seemed like most of the Rangers I saw were in and out, except for TF guys, who seemed to have longer deployments.


They were 6 months.


----------



## goon175 (May 22, 2012)

6 months at the most, typically much shorter


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (May 22, 2012)

I believe 2/75 did a 6 monther at one point but ours were all 3 months, a few were four.


----------



## Ravage (May 22, 2012)

Great post Goon!


----------



## Brill (May 22, 2012)

goon175 said:


> The average I would say was 20/21 to 30. On the young side you would see 18, *on the old side 40's* (this was not just senior enlisted either)


 
WTF?


----------



## goon175 (May 22, 2012)

Yeah man, a guy that I was there with as a new guy served in desert storm, he was 41 when he got his scroll. There was another that was 42 when he showed up as a new guy.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (May 22, 2012)

That's hardcore!  I went through RIP in 2002 with two former Rangers looking to get back in, both of whom had jumped into Panama.  One made it, the other didn't.


----------



## CDG (May 22, 2012)

Really enjoyed reading your take on things, goon175 .  One other thing I was curious about is if the way the 75th interacts with other SOF units has changed at all.  I would imagine that units opinions of each other has the potential to swing significantly in a wartime environment.  So is there a noticeable difference in the dynamic of working with other SOF units?


----------



## JohnnyBoyUSMC (May 22, 2012)

goon175 said:


> Yeah man, a guy that I was there with as a new guy served in desert storm, he was 41 when he got his scroll. There was another that was 42 when he showed up as a new guy.


 
Wow. If anything all that says to me is "you've got no excuses" lol!


----------



## Brill (May 22, 2012)

CDG said:


> Really enjoyed reading your take on things, goon175


 
You do realize he typed that while Ranger panties, his toe shoes, and eating a turkey leg (the big ones like at Six Flags)? Still enjoying it now? 

I'm here all week.


----------



## Ranger Psych (May 22, 2012)

One of my PSG's was a Grenada vet.  2 out of 4 SL's were over 30, one having relinquished his commission as an infantry Captain to go enlisted and more specifically, go to Regiment.  We had one of the guys from Somalia who got out, come back in... he was mid 30's at that point.


----------



## goon175 (May 22, 2012)

> One other thing I was curious about is if the way the 75th interacts with other SOF units has changed at all. I would imagine that units opinions of each other has the potential to swing significantly in a wartime environment. So is there a noticeable difference in the dynamic of working with other SOF units?


 
I didn't really see any dynamic change while I was there. Regardless of what unit you are in (SOF-wise) it is very much a joint environment these days. Of course everyone has their own individual opinions of certain units they have worked with, some good/some bad, mostly just opinions based on personal experiences. I think most everyone understands that we all need each other for the different skill sets we bring to the table, and at the end of the day, all jokes aside, we are there to get a job done.

In 5 years, there is only one SOF element I never had any contact with, and that was MARSOC. I think that is an excellent example of just how "joint" things are these days.

I would also say, and again my own personal opinion, that some of the most impressive units I had the privilege to be around and serve with were the 160th and PJ's. Those two elements I have not a single bad thing to say about, and they are truly masters of their craft, as far as what I could see. PJ's are some of the most technically competent guys I have ever been around, and the things the 160th can do with rotary wing aircraft is nothing short of amazing.


----------



## lancero (May 22, 2012)

It is crazy to read about the evolution of the Regiment. I was in from 1996 - 2002 and spent the majority of that time in a patrol base, ambush, traditional raid, or airfield seizure.

We had high-and-tights and didn't dare stray from the RSOP. We ran like scalded dogs for PT.....everyday.

Those of us in the Sniper platoon thought we had found the best kept secret in the Army because we got away with more than the line-doggies did.


----------



## goon175 (May 22, 2012)

Airfield Seizure is another interesting aspect of how things have changed. From what I understand, the traditional AF seizure has pretty much been taken over by the 82nd/173rd. The Ranger Bn's still train on it every training cycle, but for a much different purpose now than in the past.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (May 23, 2012)

Okay, here is part 1.  Remember, civilians and non-Rangers will also be reading so this type of intro will be necessary for some people.  In part 2 I'll write about how things actually evolved.  Sharpshooters welcome, I look forward to hearing the input of the group.

The Evolution of the 75th Ranger Regiment, Post-9/11 (Part 1)

The Ranger Regiment was initially established during the Post-Vietnam War years when the Army was seriously hurting. Rangers were to serve as role models and set the example as Airborne Infantrymen who religiously attained and surpassed standards. Before the War on Terror began, Rangers focuses on mainly Infantry tasks such as ambushes, raids, patrolling skills, with the additional responsibility of airfield seizures.

There was the Regimental Standard Operating Procedures, a Blue Book that when combined with the Ranger Creed dictated pretty much every action a Ranger was to take or prohibited from taking. Load Carrying Equipment had a tie down SOP, how jungle boots were worn had an SOP, how dog tags were taped together had an SOP. Discipline and adherence to the standards was paramount and most of the year Rangers would be training on post with occasional off-site training at NTC or JRX.

Then 9/11 happened.

I arrived at 3/75 just as the battalion was coming back home after jumping into Iraq during the opening salvo of OIF I. Of course it was disappointing to miss out on the invasion but I had some second thoughts when I saw dudes limping around on crutches with two broken ankles. They told me that they had been so loaded down with equipment during the combat jump that the static line hung at waist height.

This was 2003 and we were still being issued LCE's which had to to have pouches and canteens tied down with 550 chord (according to SOP) with the ends burned and melted to keep knots in place. However, no one used the LCE and it was being phased out. The MOLLE rucksack and riflemen's kit was being issued. The rucksack, I shit you not, came with a VHS instructional video on how to put it all together. It also had a plastic frame which was laughable given how hard Rangers are on their equipment. The ruck sat at the bottom of everyone's locker but the combat vest that it came with was used in substitution of the older LCE.

This was a strange time for Ranger battalion. Things were changing and not everyone was pleased. The standards were still being enforced, but these Rangers had been on real life combat deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq. Judging a man's discipline by inspecting his haircut or how well his dog tags were taped together just didn't seem as relevant anymore. When an NCO yelled that doing this-or-that is against the RSOP and will get you killed in combat, it just didn't ring true to young Rangers who now wore CIB's on their chest.

As a cherry Private, I got the impression that the Regiment was having something of an identity crisis. We were not counter-terrorist commandos but we were also not toy soldiers who spit polish boots for the parade ground. We were training for combat, but the training was not always reflecting what Rangers were being confronted with on the battlefield. Sometimes it seemed like maintaining a high and tight and a spotlessly clean rifle was the main focus of your day in Ranger battalion.

All of this would soon change.


----------



## JohnnyBoyUSMC (May 23, 2012)

Sounds a lot like life in a Marine infantry regiment, "your all hard corps, mean mother-fucking killers! now make sure the barracks are super clean for the BN CO IF he decides to come by, and get your rifles spit shine clean!"


----------



## goon175 (May 23, 2012)

really interesting, I had no idea the rucksack came with a plastic frame at one time, or with a VHS instructional tape!

I can't imagine being the only guy in the company that doesn't have a combat scroll, CIB, or mustard stain on the jump wings.


----------



## JohnnyBoyUSMC (May 23, 2012)

goon175 said:


> really interesting, I had no idea the rucksack came with a plastic frame at one time, or with a VHS instructional tape!
> 
> I can't imagine being the only guy in the company that doesn't have a combat scroll, CIB, or mustard stain on the jump wings.


 
I remember the plastic framed ruck's, never got the VHS but those plastic frame rucks...yea.....my back is still hurting lol


----------



## reed11b (May 23, 2012)

JohnnyBoyUSMC said:


> Sounds a lot like life in a Marine infantry regiment, "your all hard corps, mean mother-fucking killers! now make sure the barracks are super clean for the BN CO IF he decides to come by, and get your rifles spit shine clean!"


 First of all, great beginning to your article Jack, outstanding!

Second, I find the above comment and Jack's article in line with my attitude about 75th in the mid 90's as an outsider looking in. I had zero interest in trying to go to the Ranger Battalion while I was in, even though I was airborne, because of my perception of what life in the 75th was like. I often stated, "If I had wanted to be a Marine, I would have joined the Marine Corp." Not saying this right or a good attitude, but it was my attitude and perception at the time. In 2010, when I met some Rangers at RSLC and they talked about life in the 75th, I became very interested in trying to get into 75th, and was activly seeking to re-enlist with an option for RASP. I wonder if the drawdown and focus on dog and pony in the rest of the Army will change the 75th back to how it was in the 90's?
Reed


----------



## JohnnyBoyUSMC (May 23, 2012)

reed11b said:


> First of all, great beginning to your article Jack, outstanding!
> 
> Second, I find the above comment and Jack's article in line with my attitude about 75th in the mid 90's as an outsider looking in. I had zero interest in trying to go to the Ranger Battalion while I was in, even though I was airborne, because of *my perception of what life in the 75th was like. I often stated, "If I had wanted to be a Marine, I would have joined the Marine Corp."* Not saying this right or a good attitude, but it was my attitude and perception at the time. In 2010, when I met some Rangers at RSLC and they talked about life in the 75th, I became very interested in trying to get into 75th, and was activly seeking to re-enlist with an option for RASP. I wonder if the drawdown and focus on dog and pony in the rest of the Army will change the 75th back to how it was in the 90's?
> Reed


 
Ironic since when I was in JROTC back 2000 we had two Rangers from 2nd BN come by to speak with us, when I told em I was going Marines after high school they made comments like "programmed" and "robots" and such lol! Despite the drawdown I think all SOF units will be in a state of positive flux due to continual global requirements despite the drawdown, and the fact that policy makers have found the light footprint strategy of using SOF to engage hostile terrorist/insurgent forces works better than a big, conventional military build up. Personally I just hope when the crazy rush to draw down the numbers is over with they relax a bit and those of us wanting to return to the military and go SOF have a legitimate shot.


----------



## Ranger Psych (May 23, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> Okay, here is part 1. Remember, civilians and non-Rangers will also be reading so this type of intro will be necessary for some people. In part 2 I'll write about how things actually evolved. Sharpshooters welcome, I look forward to hearing the input of the group.
> 
> The Evolution of the 75th Ranger Regiment, Post-9/11 (Part 1)
> 
> ...


 

You make it sound like the blue book was a bad thing.  Every get beaned by equipment on a jump or have an E-tool do the ninja star into the DZ right next to you?  Tiedowns have a purpose, and with ALICE gear it was necessary to tie everything down because of the ALICE clips propensity for failure. The downfalls of ALICE gear were workarounds for the best thing we had at the time.  The Airborne SOP has a purpose in keeping you safe as well as the guys who were on the passes before your bird.  All those SOP's were lessons learned from the last conflicts we had been in. Large part of them being from SF/MACV/LRRP experience.  Once we started getting MAV's and molle vests and the like,  SOP's got adjusted from where shit went specifically because part of the whole idea in that system is to be able to put things where it's most efficient to use. Some things were still SOP for placement but "higher" started to realize that

The largest problem was equipment overlap more than anything. The "problem" if there was really one, is best described like this. We picked up equipment that was either individual or squad issue from SOCOM sources,  yet still had to deal with CIF for a large portion of our equipment. As such, we were issued all the stuff that a regular Infantryman should be issued as per Big Army, yet we had all our johnny highspeed shit we were issued otherwise. I can remember going down to the Supply hangar at Lawson and getting a metric shitton of stuff that was a one-time "here ya go you'll need this" issue, signing for stuff from company supply, but still having to deal with CIF for uniforms and other portions of our equipment.  Having to deal with CIF meant having to deal with turning stuff in outside of the unit, statements of charges, and general stupidity as per "big army".


It's also key to remember that failure to adhere to SOP's is what has continually gotten Rangers shot the fuck up, more often by our own people than not. It got Rangers lit up in Panama, It got Rangers lit up in Afghanistan.


----------



## goon175 (May 23, 2012)

Ranger Psych makes some great points, and its also not like we don't still have SOP's, I just think they are all so much based on common sense now that guys don't find it an annoyance.

The CIF issue is still an issue. We get an issue from CIF, from the Battalion S-4 warehouse, from the company, from RIF's, as well as stuff that is ordered overseas. It always results in Ranger getting hemmed the fuck up when they go to clear the unit or army at CIF.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (May 23, 2012)

I don't think that the Blue Book or unit SOP's were a bad thing. I chose a few key points to focus on which would highlight how much things changed in the Regiment. When I first got there the specific knot used on each tie down was inspectable. This is the right way to bring up new Rangers of course but the emphasis changed drastically as the years went by. I agree that deviating from hard learned SOP's and getting away from the basics is something that came back to bite us in the ass more than once or twice. Love it or hate it, we went from everyone having LCE's and Rucks that looked exactly the same to chest rigs and plate carriers that were all arranged completely by personal preference (at least under the supervision of a Team Leader) and looked very different from one another.

One addendum: I do think that the Blue Book held us down in some regards. For a long time Rangers couldn't go out and buy appropriate mountain boots for instance because the Blue Book only allowed you to wear your jungles.


----------



## JohnnyBoyUSMC (May 23, 2012)

goon175 said:


> Ranger Psych makes some great points, and its also not like we don't still have SOP's, I just think they are all so much based on common sense now that guys don't find it an annoyance.
> 
> The CIF issue is still an issue. We get an issue from CIF, from the Battalion S-4 warehouse, from the company, from RIF's, as well as stuff that is ordered overseas. It always results in Ranger getting hemmed the fuck up when they go to clear the unit or army at CIF.


 
It's the same way supply wise within every branch I think friends, at least for infantry units. Had the same issues before my last tour in Afghan, was being sent over a combat replacement to another unit. Got a CIF issue, then a CIF re-issue of some things like diff carrier plates, etc. Next got plate carrier, drag bag, frog gear, and some other things from BN supply, THEN had to get some other things on the list made/ordered. Ended up not using about 2/3 of the stuff I took over, and all the BN supply stuff got returned only to be chunked in the trash since it was all used up/messed up over there.


----------



## Ranger Psych (May 23, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> I don't think that the Blue Book or unit SOP's were a bad thing. I chose a few key points to focus on which would highlight how much things changed in the Regiment. When I first got there the specific knot used on each tie down was inspectable. This is the right way to bring up new Rangers of course but the emphasis changed drastically as the years went by. I agree that deviating from hard learned SOP's and getting away from the basics is something that came back to bite us in the ass more than once or twice. Love it or hate it, we went from everyone having LCE's and Rucks that looked exactly the same to chest rigs and plate carriers that were all arranged completely by personal preference (at least under the supervision of a Team Leader) and looked very different from one another.
> 
> One addendum: I do think that the Blue Book held us down in some regards. For a long time Rangers couldn't go out and buy appropriate mountain boots for instance because the Blue Book only allowed you to wear your jungles.


 
The knot was inspectable for a combination of attention to detail considering RIP vs RASP, as well as the fact that a booger knot won't hold as well as a square knot with 2 half hitches properly melted down so they WILL.NOT.COME.LOOSE.

After all, it's a real bitch if you're X position and Y pouch frapped the fuck in/departed your gear in movement. Ranger school is a classic example of showing you how shitty things can get if you have retards being retards... and there's always going to be the dumb private.

Personally purchased equipment is great but it comes down to the fact that if you're in-country, the Army supply chain is what is going to be supporting you right then and there. Blow your boot out? Sarn't Tracy in the company is going to be making a supply request to HQ, and you'll be getting pushed Army boots. Having feet used to army boots, even if they aint broken in, is still better than being used to cush civvie boots and then being fucked because you ain't getting resupplied with them.

That, and you aint out $xxx of your own if they fail/wear out/etc.  I personally tried to prevent personal purchases specifically because I saw how much shit broke/wore out.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (May 23, 2012)

Damn dude, you seem pretty fired up about this.  I wasn't making judgements, just pointing out how things changed.  Whether we like the changes or not, they still happen.  If I was to make a judgement here, some things needed to change.  Ranger battalion went to war and needed to adapt which it did fairly well.  Yeah, I had long hair and wore Merrill Sawtooth boots that I bought on the commercial market.  It wasn't the end of the world or anything.


----------



## Ranger Psych (May 23, 2012)

I'm not fired up, I'm making a point that lots of people fail to understand about working in the military environment. I had long hair, high and tights, facial hair, clean shaved... We had high and tights when I got there, 670-1 haircuts when I left. Overseas we adjusted grooming due to operational and locational requirements or necessity. Haircuts and beards, or lack thereof neither help nor hinder the soldier overseas specifically because it's not like you're going to just magically fit in with durka and his bros... that's like expecting that Joe cracker ass whitey is just going to show up in a Detroit 'hood and be "down" with Jamal and his homies. They know you're different and from elsewhere and it's not going to help significantly with interface... if that local can't get past that you don't have a beard, then it's not like there was going to be a positive interface in the first place.

The Regiment has continually been in a state of transition. The only reason it seems to be some sort of large transformation is because there's this decade-plus long war that is causing transition at a rate 3 times as fast now as compared to during the somewhat stable global environment that we had in the 90's. While there was different things going on, we still didn't have anything "big" going on. This happens in any establishment across the board, civilian or military. If there's not an outside force causing a business or entity to adapt, you're just going to get good at things and not change things that work according to lessons you have learned.

Even pre 9-11, We were still getting new equipment and armor systems, adjusting mission types depending on what intel was showing across the globe. Changing tactics and techniques... The key thing ABOUT Regiment as a whole is that it's a highly motivated, well trained, and highly capable unit that can adapt to new missions. The strongest thing about Regiment is specifically the fact that Rangers can flow from a generally non-aggressive state of paranoia to full blown kill everything within 2km from our grid location at the flip of a selector switch.

Lots of guys didn't understand that 98% of what we did as far as training pre-9/11 actually had factual reference regarding different templates of locations we'd have to do some party crashing at. Even our training deployments OCONUS were for a reason beyond getting to use locations and resources beyond our stateside capabilities. Regiment has and always will be part of the "oh-shit plan" for the nation if something goes down that is beyond what the talking heads at the State Department can handle.

I'm glad to see the new tools that are being used across the board. There's stuff in use now that would have been fantastic to have then, and it's a testament to both the military understanding a need and the civilian community being able to come up with something that will fill that need. One such example being the SEEK II. That thing has to bring a whole "Aha, Bitch!" factor to operations... catch some dude doing somewhat shady shit at one point and you can actually KNOW that it's the same cat you caught before, at the next objective the next province over... since it's not like you can't just hop the next Hadji truck outa town if your cover gets blown. Now you can know for sure that this dude's shady rather than having to go off spidey sense.

The biggest thing across the board is to not abandon the basics but to refine them. Woods patrolling may not be something currently used, or individual camouflage... but ignoring those skills will prove to be a mistake because the entire planet isn't desert, and it seems there's quite a bit of terrorism going on in woods and jungles. Expect to go there eventually if it rises beyond what the locals can handle on their own. Just because we rarely seem to have to do boat infiltrations, doesn't mean one day you're going to have to row up shit river to go wreck shit. Specific environments breed specific techniques and failure to understand that what works well in one part of the globe will get you killed quicker than shit elsewhere is huge.

That's why Regiment did things the way they did. We didn't have one specific place to focus on like we do now, we had an entire planet we had to worry about flying to and past experience with short term operations which fueled the planning and standards of tactics, techniques, and procedures. Abandoning those core essentials is something that will work up to the point that the battlefield shifts elsewhere.


----------



## goon175 (May 23, 2012)

On the boot issue:
Everyone took spare boots with them, usually 2-3 pairs. We didn't have to buy them ourselves, b/c regiment came up with a "boot menu" that we could order from on their dime. It had all the best COTS boots on the market at the time. I personally got a nice pair of Asolo Fugitive GTX's out of the deal, along with some winter Danner's. When it came to socks, the company ordered a bunch of "darn tough" socks (10 per ranger), and those are approximately 4,000 times more durable than typical army issue socks.

Most guys shifted from using 550 chord for tie downs to using the bailing wire, it had less propensity to snag on your kit, was lower profile, more durable, etc.

As far as the supply chain goes overseas, our supply guys ordering stuff off the internet and having it sent to our APO address ALWAYS moved faster than the Army supply chain orders.

Also, even faster, going down to the local conventional aviation unit and trading them (for example) some hogue pistol grips for a bunch of AVS-6 mounts (cuz they always break, being designed for aviators and all). You walk up in civilian clothes with a pistol and all of a sudden the XO at said unit is real willing to help you out.

The best thing Regiment did was shift to "what works best", whether it be 550 chord or bailing wire, helmet covers or spray paint, Peltors or Sordins, etc. I still believe today that the combat effectiveness increased by atleast 10% when we switched from sordins to peltors. I wouldn't wish those headaches on my worst enemy...


----------



## Ranger Psych (May 23, 2012)

Those are all things I'm fuckin glad to hear!  Those "luxuries" are implemented with common sense understanding. 

You gotta remember, Invasion of Iraq, Invasion of Afghanistan... we got mail... twice our first deployment? We got mail once a month or so our second, and we just didn't get mail period when we invaded iraq.  So the only supply was Army supply if any supply at all.  Hell, we were mooching off of AF supply for various shit at one point... Wish I still had that flight suit.... and making sure that Ranger Joe's got enough sets of boots and socks to cover the time lapse between shit getting fucked and when you get your gear replaced, is specifically why we used to get so much shit from CIF.  The command knew then, and still obviously understands, that Regiment will not always have the ability to rely on a logistics train immediately.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (May 23, 2012)

Ranger Psych, your words are well taken.  I just wasn't sure if you were trying to say that I missed a few things that should be included in the article or what.  It sounded like you were trying to justify tie down SOP's to me which isn't necessary.  I was a team leader in 3/75, I get it.


----------



## 0699 (May 23, 2012)

goon175 said:


> The best thing Regiment did was *shift to "what works best", whether it be 550 chord or bailing wire, helmet covers or spray paint, Peltors or Sordins, etc*. I still believe today that the combat effectiveness increased by atleast 10% when we switched from sordins to peltors. I wouldn't wish those headaches on my worst enemy...


 
And IMO this is the stuff that needs to be captured in an SOP.  The biggest problem I have with SOPs (besides units not having them, but that's a whole 'nuther issue ) is when they aren't updated.  Any SOP should be updated as often as possible so future members don't have to re0invent the wheel.


----------



## JohnnyBoyUSMC (May 23, 2012)

Jack, psych, and goon, quite honestly I for one would be interested if you guys collaborated together and did perhaps a joint article/paper/book/whatever as you all seem to have a rather interesting take on how things have gone when you were in the regiment, and being a consummate reader would like to read about it.


----------



## Ranger Psych (May 23, 2012)

My responses weren't intended to be a pissing match, but what I read just felt like you were trying to thrash on Regiment as it existed and operated prior to your arrival. Now I get you're not trying to say that.

There were large transitions in equipment as well as operations between when I first got there to when I left... and Regiment has obviously continued to mutate even further, and for the better. The last thing I would want is for Regiment to get target fixation because that's when you can get flanked...

I got to Aco 3/75 in early '98 and left from HHC in '04 and learned quite a bit about the method to the madness simply because it made it easier for me personally to understand why the fuck we'd be doing shit a specific way, or be doing a specific mission and how it keyed into the larger picture.

Regiment and Higher had specific ideas as to how we'd be utilized... and we were also working under a Clinton military which wasn't exactly the best funded or just supported period, so unfortunately for Rangers in general, we had to look good on two fronts.

We had to conduct our specific tactical taskings in support of strategic objectives like a well oiled machine..... and we had to be the most disciplined unit in the military while looking the part due to our visibility and figurehead status due to being Regiment. That meant spits and starches when "outsiders" could see us, keeping what people could see through/outside the brown fence squared the fuck away, etc. It sucked, but it was necessary then (and still is to some extent now) in order to retain the support from higher and respect from others. With the degraded military support from the civilian leadership, in order to continue to be able to have the resources to maintain our capabilities for war-fighting, we had to play the fuck fuck games on the other side of the coin.

hell, one of our exercises back then was quite literally a pissing match for a templated target between the AF and Army... and we had senators a couple clicks away with a frigging static display of a squad from our company to ask any questions and be able to actually show those politicians specifically what kind of shit we could pull off with little to no notice.

Best part, the air force missed 3 times when they tried doing their thing. 

Anyways, I'd focus more on how the battlefield differed from past experiences and the rapid adaptations required to be able to meet the obstacles. SOP's and differences in equipment is driven by what the battlefield requires from us, as well as basically what the commercial market has to offer and even today Regiment could go right back to ALICE gear or hell shit from Korea and WWII and still be able to kick fucking ass... equipment is handy but it's the human factor that wins or loses. We never did any shit back in 98-2001 regarding interfaces with local nationals... and we still didn't do much interface at least in the intial invasions of either Afghanistan or Iraq... that's the transition from invade to continued occupation with follow on operations that had basically been avoided with previous combat operations Regiment had undertaken.

Examples being Grenada, and Panama. Go in, accomplish mission, GTFO. Hell, even Somalia was intended to do just that. Same with Iran, but that obviously had complications due to not having the capabilities to accomplish something that far reaching. I have no doubt if that shit needed to happen today a JTF would swoop the fuck in and rock it while looking good. Especially with the shit we pulled off in both recent invasions.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (May 23, 2012)

Thanks for providing all of that background.  Ultimately all of that goes to informing how the article will turn out and now it will have a better perspective to it when it is finished.  That's the whole reason why I posted the draft so I appreciate your input.  No, I wasn't trying to thrash the Regiment pre-9/11 but it was a different world back then.  Really what I am trying to express with the article is how things changed.  The Regiment did advance forward, I really believe that but of course this doesn't mean that everything that came before was all fucked up.  They were like that for a reason.  With the 75th there usually is a method to the madness one way or the other.

I agree that how the kit evolved is superficial compared to the tactics and the overall unit culture.  Showing how the culture shifted will be more difficult so maybe the equipment aspect is the 25 meter target and I will move on from there.


----------



## RustyShackleford (May 24, 2012)

I honestly think the first part of 75th's transition was actually pre-9/11.  I PCS'd (yes, I was a tabless import-one of the very few who did not get RFS'd) to 2/75 in the summer of 1999.  When I got there I endured much of what any new private deals with and it didn't let up until most guys realized I was not a fucked up cherry college kid.  Considering I came from a mech unit, I was much more laid back than most guys, especially once I got my shit and shortly thereafter pinned on Corporal (and SGT a few months later).  I am sure Anger 2/75 heard some horror stories about what a dick I was as a TL, but most of that didn't compare to how other, younger TLs and tabbed SP4s treated guys.  Anyway....

Most of the changes that took place after I ETS'd in late 2002, haircuts, boots, gear, etc., were a lot of the things many of us bitched and complained about when we were in.  During our first trip to OEF, most guys issued desert boots were shredded after a 90 day trip.  Hell, by the time we were ready to leave some dudes were wearing their old jungles.  The molle ruck and accompanying components were a mess.  Yes there was a VHS that came with it.  If memory serves, B co. 2/75 initially T&E'd them around 98 or 99 and rejected the design as you could not carry as much shit as you could in a ruck, and most of us had already transitioned to the rack by then.  Very few guys (minus wpns squad dudes) used the LBE.  Since big Army decided everyone was getting the molle ruck (with the attachable pouches so it could hold more crap) and vest in 2001, the CoC made us use it but relented upon our 2002 trip to A'stan.

Guys have always complained about certain aspects of SOPs and other shit, but Pace hit the nail on the head.  A lot of the things such as tie downs and whatnot serve a purpose and while guys can argue the whole spit shine garrison thing, one would be hard pressed to find a Ranger during my time frame that spent more time worrying about his starch and spits than his gear and training for whatever comes up.  I had the "pleasure" of serving under Clinton and then Bush, in a leg unit and in the 75th.  At 2/75 guys wanted to go anywhere they would send us.  Hell, after we got back from the first trip, a lot of us said to hell with it and ETS'd as we figured America would do what it always does and bring everyone home.  Thanks to that mentality I watched the invasion of Iraq from the couch, at which time most of  2/75 was on their second 6+ month deployment to A'stan.


----------



## medicchick (May 24, 2012)

RustyShackleford said:


> A lot of the things such as tie downs and whatnot serve a purpose and while guys can argue the whole spit shine garrison thing, one would be hard pressed to find a Ranger during my time frame that spent more time worrying about his starch and spits than his gear and training for whatever comes up.


 
First duty upon becoming a live-in Ranger girlfriend, learn to do spits and starches (this all went away with ACU's). Second, learn to properly pack a packing list. This allowed RP to focus on what he needed to do at work.  ;)

Even I had to take part in the knot tying classes he's do in Alaska so I could fix any that I saw, or help attach new gear.


----------



## medicchick (May 24, 2012)

Just re-read everything and I would like to add my thoughts from the civilian reading it.  I think part of your difficulty in the way you come across in explaining the differences pre and post 9/11 is you weren't there for them.  You've got at least 2 guys in the thread who were and they have different views on things.  You do come across as a bit condescending when talking about the RSOPs before you arrived, and the reasoning for them.  To you it may have been "old school and obsolete" and it may have changed when you got there, but it changed in part because they were real world combat testing it.  Before, they were using what HAD been combat tested.  It seems like you are just brushing off the lessons learned because you do not have the first hand knowledge.

That being said, your view is not bad, but if your goal is to show the changes made, you may want to get first hand info from those that predate you.  If you stop teaching the "old" way of doing things, what happens when you get the old gear because that is all that can be found?  Like RP said, what happens when you cannot get the boots you like and are forced to use basic issue stuff.  First in units aren't going to have the supply line you did/do.  It's one of the changes that you haven't seen, but others here have and are just trying to point out.

Like I said, this is just my .02 from a civilians take on your article, take it for what it's worth.


----------



## Brill (May 24, 2012)

medicchick said:


> *First duty upon becoming a live-in Ranger girlfriend,* *learn to do spits and starches* (this all went away with ACU's). Second, learn to properly pack a packing list. This allowed RP to focus on what he needed to do at work. ;)


 
Did a double-take on above section.  I must need new glasses.  :nerd:

Getting old sux.


----------



## Ranger Psych (May 24, 2012)

lindy said:


> Did a double-take on above section. I must need new glasses. :nerd:
> 
> Getting old sux.


 
Say what you want but 90% of guys didn't do them themselves anyway, it was off to the cleaners to pay to have them done or roll dice with the post laundry. There are better things to do (like drink, fuck, fight) than run an iron in your barracks room. She's better at it anyway (the starches) so I think it'd be pretty stupid to not take advantage of it when she volunteers to do it after watching me run an iron like a monkey fucking a football. She'd iron up my uniform while I sat with a chew in and polished my boots.

Packing list, I didn't have a barracks room nor a locker to stow my shit at (hence using the office for my 2 uniforms and 2 sets of boots and locking my aidbag/MICH/MAV to the medsov) so everything was at home. If we had to pack stuff, once I got the packing list I'd fax it home then go with the NCO's to make sure our new medics had their gear packed to standard... halfway through that evolution MC would show up with my C/D/Ruck in the pickup truck and a deficiency list that basically consisted of what I kept on-hand with the limited space I could use at the aid station or hangar. I'd take them and put them where we were storing our off-post bags at, then she'd leave, hit up the commisary for BBQ shit and we'd have an aid station cookout with follow-on halo tournament at the house that evening.

Method to the madness and priorities of work ;)


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (May 24, 2012)

Medicchick, I think you are looking a little too deeply.  I appreciate your input but this is the exact reason why I started this thread, to get second opinions from those who were in the 75th before and after me.


----------



## medicchick (May 24, 2012)

Sorry for trying to give my opinions.  I'll butt the fuck out of your thread .


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (May 24, 2012)

Wow.  Okay.


----------



## goon175 (May 25, 2012)

http://www.hark.com/clips/vgwrhvxblv-escalated


----------



## dknob (May 25, 2012)

Regardless of what the unit was considered since inception, or what command it was placed under - the way I see the 75th:

75th from 1974 - 2003 was nothing more than an elite and highly disciplined infantry unit.
75th from late 2003 - present is a special operations force of the U.S. Army.

Period.

The 75th has been cyclical since 9/11.. shit gets immature and SOPs lack common sense.. guys get treated like shit in garrison, and then treated like rock stars on deployment, and then back to being treated like children. Fucking stupid.. no wonder we have the absolute worst attrition of any SOF unit.

Then CSM Birch came on and started running shit, he brought his common sense approach of not doing shit if it doesn't pass the common sense test. Things got amazingly better. Then left and shit went cyclical again and the gayness returned. Its up and down. Until the pre 9/11 dinosaurs, no offense Psych ;), start retiring and the post 9/11 breed of Rangers take up senior leadership positions.. things will be continously gay and the dinosaur Rangers will finally have a chance to revert the 75th back to how they like it once the deployments come to an end (which they will). And all of post 9/11 combat hardened Ranger SLs and PSGs will simply leave. And everything the 75th has done in the past decade will leave with them.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (May 25, 2012)

That's what I was trying to get at.  Ranger Battalion _did _change whether the old guard liked it or not.  I would argue that for the most part it changed for the better.  If you hear about the reindeer games that used to go on pre-9/11, and even in the years immediately after, it is hard to take the 75th as a serious Special Operations unit at that time.  There really were Rangers who thought that Regiment was all about high and tights and saw that as a defining element of the unit's culture.  No one is trying to take anything away from pre-9/11 Rangers but it was a whole different ballgame once we started going on regular rotations overseas.


----------



## Ranger Psych (May 25, 2012)

CSM Birch _who is a pre-9/11 dinosaur who lived at our MSS and patrolled with my squad in Afghanistan post 9/11 since as the 3/75 CSM he wanted to stay out of the mind numbing zone at Bagram..._ was predated by CSM Connell a few years prior with about the same professional pedigree and previous experience.  We had a speed bump in the middle thanks to a slug that snuck in the selection process, but he got the boot... and it was a glorious day with virgins throwing themselves at the gates, steak and lobster served at the chow hall, and a 4 day for everyone in celebration of the ogre having slain itself.

Until every battalion has it's barracks area in the middle of the woods with a single unmarked road leading to it and no visibility from any normally traveled road... you will always have the garrison gremlin that seems to be the biggest bitch amongst every Ranger since Regiment came along.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (May 25, 2012)

The Regimental Sergeant Major that came after Birch was also a joke in my opinion.


----------



## RetPara (May 25, 2012)

Finally took some time to read the whole thread from the start.  Holy Shit.   WAD would either go ballistic or just nod his head.  When we stood Regt HHC in '84 it was the biggest nut roll I have been involved in before or since.  The closest I can come to describing the experience is not unsimilar to a woman giving birth...  it's messy, noisey, uncomfortable, painful, and could end in disaster.

We lost 60% of the officers and senior NCO's in HHC that first year (STILL can't figure out how I survived); most of which came from Batt's.  The junior enlisted were just called Ranger.  Few lasted long enough for us to get to know them very well.  Ranger Dominguez (spelled wrong) came up with his Killer Man poster that lives on...  He also made the "2" shop a porky pig That's All" slide to end briefings with.  The writing of the first edition of the Regt FSOP was not pretty.  I wrote some of the "2" stuff and have NEVER had grammar checked and my shit cross referenced for accuracy as that was.  Pretty much _everything_ that was done at the Batt's were thrown out.  I kid you not sports fans.  It was more conventional in mind set for appearance and such than anywhere else I ever was.  While I was there we had one Batt command group relieved, and another Batt Cdr "request relief".  We had a few of the inevitable the "get ready, get set,............................. turn your shit in and go home exercises.  A couple of which I was thankful for.....   (bear in mind when planning airborne operations in Africa; if your DZ is near a river or large body of water.... ensure that the potential of encountering _VERY_ aggressive, fast, large crocodiles that firmly believe you are _FAR_ below them in the food chain are in the 'hazards on the drop zone' part of the pre-jump brief.)  

While surviving my Regiment assignment did a lot for my career; I will always consider it the most difficult assignment of my career.  It was incredible though to serve with people that have become legendary like SSG Harvey Moore and others. 

It's good to see the baby lived and grew up into an adult to be proud of.


----------



## dknob (May 25, 2012)

Ranger Psych said:


> CSM Birch _who is a pre-9/11 dinosaur who lived at our MSS and patrolled with my squad in Afghanistan post 9/11 since as the 3/75 CSM he wanted to stay out of the mind numbing zone at Bagram..._ was predated by CSM Connell a few years prior with about the same professional pedigree and previous experience. We had a speed bump in the middle thanks to a slug that snuck in the selection process, but he got the boot... and it was a glorious day with virgins throwing themselves at the gates, steak and lobster served at the chow hall, and a 4 day for everyone in celebration of the ogre having slain itself.
> 
> Until every battalion has it's barracks area in the middle of the woods with a single unmarked road leading to it and no visibility from any normally traveled road... you will always have the garrison gremlin that seems to be the biggest bitch amongst every Ranger since Regiment came along.


 CSM Birch was most definitely a pre-9/11 soldier, but he was far from the old guard Ranger. Dinosaur refers to the guys who lived and breathed the Regimental mentality (some type of mix between the French Foreign legion and the USMC). CSM Birch was open minded CAG shooter through and through who loved the 75th so much that he returned once in a while to keep us up with the times.


----------



## goon175 (May 25, 2012)

The "back story" of how everything came to be is just as interesting as where we are now, I knew nothing of some of this stuff, but it all makes so much sense.

RetPara, they don't talk too much about the integration of the battalions into a Regiment, and I can only imagine how crazy that was. Was "conventionalizing" the force the direction that the new Regimental leadership wanted to take? Very interesting stuff.

In reference to the retention rate, I believe it goes up and down with whatever senior leadership is in place at the time. My first 3 year in batt. the retention rate in our company was ridiculously high, very few wanted to leave. Then a new CSM came along and shit took a real quick reversal.

I can't speak for the rest of the Army, but I believe that a good dipstick of how good the leadership is at any given time in Regiment is "what is the retention rate". If it's not good at the time, hard questions need to be asked.


----------



## RetPara (May 25, 2012)

That was  (then)Col Downing's guidance.  He was one of the smartest people I ever met in the Army.  He wrote a good number of articles for Military Review and the like.  For all that he seemed very conventional minded to me.   I believe he was _told_ to bring the Battalions under control.  2nd Batt had started to go a little outside the box in relation to TTP's and such.  When they came down for OUF, they came as SO Bn.  By that I mean they left most of the PFC and below behind.  Also they had shot an aggressor with a live round at JOTC.  Then a Company Commander was killed in a mortar accident.   1st Batt was just as off in some ways, but they were closer to big Army and much more visible.    I used to carry the "Black Book" around to the command group every week...  So I had more one on one time with the command group than any other NCO in HHC....  Then I debriefed to my supervisory chain for an hour every word and nuance the command group said.... 

When we started jumping we had to go with the ARSOC ASOP....  THAT really threw the Batt Boys for a loop.  They had been used to jumping exposed weapons....  You could do that with the ARSOC ASOP too.... BUT you had to rig so damn much padding and shit that it wasn't worth it.  I had been jumping M-1950's for years.  So I had to teach some of the other NCO's about them.  One thing they did like was that you could jump it with a 20 round magazine in place.


----------



## 275ANGER! (May 27, 2012)

RustyShackleford said:


> I am sure Anger 2/75 heard some horror stories about what a dick I was as a TL, but most of that didn't compare to how other, younger TLs and tabbed SP4s treated guys. Anyway....


 
You were a princess


----------



## Brian1/75 (May 27, 2012)

Retpara - Interesting stuff. I've heard so much stuff about the pre-Regimental era transitioning to the Regimental era. Lots of "You're not special anymore," or "we're going to work on just being a really good infantry unit," commands from the top followed by the old guys complaining and a mass exodus from the unit. I hadn't realized the guys, specifically the 2/75 guys were going a bit off the reservoir. I'd honestly like to hear more stories. The 75th still has to this day an identity crisis between being a flexible SOF unit and being an 'Imperial' Ranger Battalion. Goon knows what I'm talking about.


----------



## RustyShackleford (May 27, 2012)

275ANGER! said:


> You were a princess


Lol, that makes me feel better!


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Jun 1, 2012)

With the help of the forum members I've rewritten and touched up the original article.  I realize I can't make everyone happy but please keep in mind that this is just the first part.  As always, I welcome corrections.

The Evolution of the 75th Ranger Regiment, Post-9/11 (Part 1-Take Two)

The 75th Ranger Regiment was initially established during the Post-Vietnam War years, when the Army was seriously hurting. Rangers were to serve as role models, and set the example as Airborne Infantrymen who religiously attained and surpassed established standards. Before the War on Terror began, Rangers primarily focused on basic Infantry tasks such as ambushes, raids, and patrolling skills, with the additional responsibility of conducting airfield seizure missions.

There was the Regimental Standard Operating Procedures, or RSOP, a Blue Book that when combined with the Ranger Creed dictated pretty much every action a Ranger was to take or prohibited from taking. Load Carrying Equipment (LCE) had a tie down SOP, how jungle boots were worn had an SOP, how dog tags were taped together had an SOP. Discipline and adherence to the standards was paramount and most of the year Rangers would be training on post with occasional off-site training at the National Training Center (NTC) or Joint Readiness Exercise (JRX).

At this time the Regiment was a highly disciplined Airborne Light Infantry unit that trained for immediate short-notice world wide deployment. Like in Panama, Grenada, and to a lesser extent, Somalia, there was an expectation that Rangers would jump into future conflicts, conduct their missions, and catch the first flight back to the US. Training and SOP's had grown out of these past conflicts, particularly Vietnam, and reflected the projected nature of future deployments.

Rangers during the Clinton years were not nearly as well funded as they should have been. They also had to fill the dual role of being the Army's premier combat Infantry unit as well as setting a sterling example of discipline and professionalism for the rest of the Army. This meant that shinning boots and pressing uniforms were often as important as training for combat. Attempting to wear these two hats at once is an issue that the Regiment has always had to grapple with.

The 75th always has, and probably always will, be a high visibility unit.

Then 9/11 happened.

I arrived at 3/75 just as the battalion was coming back home, after jumping into Iraq during the opening salvo of OIF I. Of course it was disappointing to miss out on the invasion but I had some second thoughts when I saw dudes limping around on crutches with two broken ankles. They told me that they had been so loaded down with equipment during the combat jump that the static line hung at waist height.

This was 2003 and we were still being issued LCE's which had to have pouches and canteens tied down with 550 chord (according to SOP) with the ends burned and melted to keep knots in place. However, no one used the LCE and it was being phased out. The MOLLE rucksack and riflemen's kit was being issued. The rucksack, I shit you not, came with a VHS instructional video on how to put it all together. It also had a plastic frame which was laughable given how hard Rangers are on their equipment. The ruck sat at the bottom of everyone's locker but the combat vest that it came with was used in substitution of the older LCE.

This was a strange time for Ranger battalion. Things were changing and not everyone was pleased. The standards were still being enforced, but these Rangers had been on real life combat deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq. Judging a man's discipline by inspecting his haircut or how well his dog tags were taped together just didn't seem as relevant anymore. When an NCO yelled that doing this-or-that is against the RSOP and will get you killed in combat, it just didn't ring true to young Rangers who now wore CIB's on their chest. This isn't a positive attitude to have of course, but this clash between old school Rangers and new school Rangers was something that continued for years.

As a cherry Private, I got the impression that the Regiment was having something of an identity crisis. We were not counter-terrorist commandos but we were also not toy soldiers who spit polish boots for the parade ground. We were training for combat, but the training was not always reflecting what Rangers were being confronted with on the battlefield. Sometimes it seemed like maintaining a high and tight and a spotlessly clean rifle was the main focus of your day in Ranger battalion.

All of this would soon change. Future installments in this series will describe how the weapons, equipment, culture, and mission of the 75th Ranger Regiment evolved, particularly in the Post-9/11 years.


----------



## Brian1/75 (Jun 1, 2012)

I'd almost say if you want to do a real evolution of 75th, you need some first-hand experience from guys from the 70s and then guys that were there when 3rd Batt and 75th HQ were stood up.. Everything I've read and seen about the 75th was pretty unorthodox during the early years. Different uniforms, unbutton LCEs, a loose SOP on pouches, patrol caps during live-fires, etc. I even saw a photograph of someone from 2/75 conducting an airfield seizure in spray-painted sneakers, watchcap, PVS-5 and MP-5SD. Guys were commonly getting CDQC, MFF, SFARTEC or whatever it was called back then. A good bit of the original cadre were Vietnam SF guys with Ranger tabs.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Jun 1, 2012)

That would be pretty bad ass, you've definitely got my interest.  For this article, for the sake of brevity if nothing else, I'm going to limit myself to 9/11 and forward.  If I embarked on chronicling the entire history of the modern Ranger Regiment I'd need to write an entire book.  That would be a worthwhile endeavor, but beyond my scope at the moment.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jun 1, 2012)

Prior to Regiment and RRD, recon tasks were battalion internal. Basically 2-3 squad leaders per company were part of the battalion's team, Pathfinder/Recon duties then once the BN was on the ground, their tasking was to link back up and take control of their squads.  I'd have to ask my old PSG who did Grenada with 2/75 about it more.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Jun 1, 2012)

That's hardcore!


----------



## AWP (Jun 1, 2012)

Brian1/75 said:


> I'd almost say if you want to do a real evolution of 75th, you need some first-hand experience from guys from the 70s and then guys that were there when 3rd Batt and 75th HQ were stood up.. Everything I've read and seen about the 75th was pretty unorthodox during the early years. Different uniforms, unbutton LCEs, a loose SOP on pouches, patrol caps during live-fires, etc. I even saw a photograph of someone from 2/75 conducting an airfield seizure in spray-painted sneakers, watchcap, PVS-5 and MP-5SD. Guys were commonly getting CDQC, MFF, SFARTEC or whatever it was called back then. A good bit of the original cadre were Vietnam SF guys with Ranger tabs.


 
As an outsider, this period really interests me. Going from companies to battalions (which were stand-alone entities if I understand correctly) to the Regiment, all in a period of about a decade with Iran and Grenada thrown in....The amateur historan in me hopes that enough time has passed that an oral history could begin before we start losing those men, particularly the squad leaders and above who would then stand up the Regiment and see it through to the GWOT in some cases.

If anything, gents, take down their history even if it is locked up...but get their words before they pass on.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Jun 1, 2012)

Check out Ross Hall's "The Ranger Book".  I've only begun reading through it myself but it's serious stuff, about the size of a brick too.  It's got tons of this stuff in it covering Ranger history from the beginning, pre-Revolutionary War.  Unfortunately, Ross is in the final stages of cancer but we can be very grateful that he put his book together for the Ranger community.


----------



## AWP (Jun 1, 2012)

Thank you, Jack.


----------



## abn_rngr (Jun 4, 2012)

Brian1/75 said:


> \ Different uniforms, unbutton LCEs, a loose SOP on pouches, patrol caps during live-fires, etc.


We wore plain green jungle fatigues and jungle boots.
Yes, LCE was almost always worn unbuckled.  How the f@#k do you IMT with two full ammo pouches and a buckled LCE?
I don't know what a loose SOP on pouches means. What?
Yes, patrol caps during live fire.  On occasion, depending upon what was being done, range control might have been locked out of the range for some period of time. Accidentally.  Of course.




Brian1/75 said:


> \I even saw a photograph of someone from 2/75 conducting an airfield seizure in spray-painted sneakers, watchcap, PVS-5 and MP-5SD.


The airdrop teams, before the air land, dressed as needed. Sneaks were sometimes worn as it makes it a lot easier to run across and airfield quietly. Mixed blessing as not a good choice to jump in.  2/75 learned everything from 1/75.  Really.

To "are Rangers 'special"', all these TTPs were developed at that time.  Trial and error.  Gun jeeps.  Clearing the fields.  Securing the perimeter. Folding in and out.  Learning to start all sorts of vehicles.  It was 'special' but the term is relative. What's 'special' about anything else?



Brian1/75 said:


> \Guys were commonly getting CDQC, MFF, SFARTEC or whatever it was called back then.


Common, no. But those courses were available to guys throughout the Bn (no Regt) as incentives, attaboys, etc.  



Brian1/75 said:


> \A good bit of the original cadre were Vietnam SF guys with Ranger tabs.


Ranger companies, too.  It's accurate that so many SOPs came from those guys, from their experience.  SOPs existed because they had been battle learned and battle proven and were enforced even if we didn't understand it.  It's foolish to let a newbie learn for himself or try to be smarter than experience.  There's a lot to be said for being able to grab any ruck, blind from claymores flashing, at night, in the ORP and be able to find EVERYTHING you needed, without looking, because of those SOPs.  Jungle or other boots were enforced because you knew that's what the supply train could provide.  No internet then-no way to buy other equipment but brick and mortar.

Know that what made the transitions you've seen in the last 10 years was how deeply ingrained the basics were in the Bn culture.  I call BS on the 'we were infantry not SOF.'  Who says they have to be different?  No other infantry in the world could touch us or the missions we could perform.

The problem arose, years later, when those SOPs stopped being about what worked and started being enforced for their own sake.  Like the story of the Christmas ham.

Starch and spits were never liked.  But it was seen as any other mission was seen. We didn't have to like it, we just had to do it.  And do it properly we did.

High and tights were always senseless.


----------



## RackMaster (Jun 4, 2012)

abn_rngr Please follow the site rules and start your own Intro before posting again.  Failure to follow site rules will result in you being banned.  Have a nice day.


----------



## abn_rngr (Jun 4, 2012)

RackMaster said:


> abn_rngr Please follow the site rules and start your own Intro before posting again.  Failure to follow site rules will result in you being banned.  Have a nice day.


I joined this site in 2008. I posted an intro way back then. I have to do it again?


----------



## goon175 (Jun 4, 2012)

abn_rngr I thoroughly enjoyed your post on how it was "back then". I always got the feeling that Rangers were at there most "special" back then, when combat experience was still available.

I don't think anyone has anything against SOP's, its the SOP's that don't make sense, or are enforced for the sake of "it's an SOP". Things like everyone having their med pouch on their left side makes sense and saves lives, as one example.


----------



## AWP (Jun 5, 2012)

abn_rngr said:


> I joined this site in 2008. I posted an intro way back then. I have to do it again?



In that case, don't worry about it.


----------



## RustyShackleford (Jun 5, 2012)

abn_rngr said:


> I joined this site in 2008. I posted an intro way back then. I have to do it again?


 
Your intro post from 2008 has probably been deleted, so as Free said, don't worry about it.  Good post by the way.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Jun 5, 2012)

In my experience I found that some SOP's are critical, as mentioned above.  The location of your med pouch is something that should be standardized.  That said, I always found standardized kit, particularly packing rucksacks exactly the same to be excessive and unnecessary.  Maybe you need to know where your buddy's claymore mine is located.  2x OD socks, rolled and in the bottom left corner of the ruck...not so much.

SOP's (or TTP's as is the current buzzword) are often neutral.  Good NCO's know dozens of techniques and know when to apply which one to any given situation that is encountered.  That's one reason why there is no substitute for real experienced leadership.


----------



## Brill (Jun 5, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> In my experience I found that some SOP's are critical, as mentioned above. The location of your med pouch is something that should be standardized. That said, I always found standardized kit, particularly packing rucksacks exactly the same to be excessive and unnecessary. Maybe you need to know where your buddy's claymore mine is located. 2x OD socks, rolled and in the bottom left corner of the ruck...not so much.


 
Were those socks were properly stenciled with the Rangers name & last four? ;)

Possibly Ranger vs. SF mentality, being that a new Joe could go to the 75th whereas SF was looking for more "seasoned or weathered" soldier?


----------



## abn_rngr (Jun 5, 2012)

goon175 said:


> abn_rngr I thoroughly enjoyed your post on how it was "back then". I always got the feeling that Rangers were at there most "special" back then, when combat experience was still available.
> 
> I don't think anyone has anything against SOP's, its the SOP's that don't make sense, or are enforced for the sake of "it's an SOP". Things like everyone having their med pouch on their left side makes sense and saves lives, as one example.


 
There were distinct advantages to being separate Bns, with no centralized headquarters.  There were distinct advantages to having to work things out once we went 'special operations.'  To more succinctly make my point, we could be special because we had the fundamentals so firmly nailed down.

In my previous post I made mention of the 'story of the Christmas ham.'  Great, great grandma is invited over for Christmas dinner and sits in the kitchen as mom prepares it.  She follows the recipe religiously- a 15lb ham, carefully selected for shape and marbling, spices, the candied glaze, the oven temperature, the type of pan, all of it. Just prior to putting it in to the oven she takes a knife and cuts off 2" from either side of the ham.  Grandma looks at her oddly and asks why she did that.  Mom replies, surprised, "well, that's how we've always done it and, it always turns out great, every year."  Grandma nods and says "sure, but we only used to do that because it wouldn't fit int hat old oven unless we did."  When you don't know the why, you don't know when or how to change for fear of screwing up what you don't really understand.


----------



## goon175 (Jun 5, 2012)

> Great, great grandma is invited over for Christmas dinner and sits in the kitchen as mom prepares it. She follows the recipe religiously- a 15lb ham, carefully selected for shape and marbling, spices, the candied glaze, the oven temperature, the type of pan, all of it. Just prior to putting it in to the oven she takes a knife and cuts off 2" from either side of the ham. Grandma looks at her oddly and asks why she did that. Mom replies, surprised, "well, that's how we've always done it and, it always turns out great, every year." Grandma nods and says "sure, but we only used to do that because it wouldn't fit int hat old oven unless we did." When you don't know the why, you don't know when or how to change for fear of screwing up what you don't really understand.


 
That is the best parable ever! I am going to use that somewhere, just not sure where yet!


----------



## abn_rngr (Jun 5, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> In my experience I found that some SOP's are critical, as mentioned above. The location of your med pouch is something that should be standardized. That said, I always found standardized kit, particularly packing rucksacks exactly the same to be excessive and unnecessary. Maybe you need to know where your buddy's claymore mine is located. 2x OD socks, rolled and in the bottom left corner of the ruck...not so much.
> 
> SOP's (or TTP's as is the current buzzword) are often neutral. Good NCO's know dozens of techniques and know when to apply which one to any given situation that is encountered. That's one reason why there is no substitute for real experienced leadership.


 
None of the 'old school' Rangers I know would disagree with what's going on these days.  There is no doubt in anybody's eyes that Rangers today are everything we hoped we were years ago.  Better killers to be sure. As was stated nobody loved starch and spits, everybody hated high and tights, but we trained hard and that mattered and kept people around.  New things like RASP (and most of my ilk think it needs to be longer still), the marksmanship program, the way PT is conducted, the diminishing of the harassment suffered by the new guys, increased specialty training, broader reaching mission profiles, modified grooming standards when appropriate, language training, more exposure to SMUs, all those things and more are very, very positive.  

I think what I'm reading in the thread is reaction to statements you've made that may be construed as throwing away the baby with the bathwater. As stated in my first post, what makes the Rangers of today capable of adapting so well in this current fight is the solidity of the base developed over the many years before.  Without the selection, training standards, self-disciplined and hard-driving culture of yesteryear, the 75th of then couldn't be transformed into the 75th of today.

As to the old guard, recall the senior NCO leadership in place exhibits a self-selection bias.  Those that enjoyed and believe in the efficacy of the 'high and tight mentality' stayed around when others moved on and are promoted up by those with a similar mindset.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Jun 5, 2012)

I couldn't agree more. We stood on your shoulders. Before anyone gets the wrong idea, the Vietnam-era Rangers are my heroes. I joined the military and got an option 40 contract because I read their books. Today I'm happy to be in contact with many of them (some of them the authors of the books I read in High School) and call them friends. Maybe you are hearing the SF guy in me coming out. I would never argue against the way Rangers bring up and "home grow" Privates. The 75th does it the right way. Later on, as a Sergeant in SF I began to see that the same style of leadership and supervision can actually hinder the mission when applied in different circumstances. But you guys know the deal, Rangers and SF are like night and day.


----------



## goon175 (Jun 5, 2012)

different strokes for different folks!

I think both organizations could learn something from each other as far as the issue of how to best implement leadership/supervision. Both organizations could be better in those areas, from what I have seen. Not that either is LACKING in this area, please don't take it that way!


----------



## Salt USMC (Jun 6, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> I would never argue against the way Rangers bring up and "home grow" Privates. The 75th does it the right way. Later on, as a Sergeant in SF I began to see that the same style of leadership and supervision can actually hinder the mission when applied in different circumstances.


 
This is interesting.  Can you give an example for us outsiders?


----------



## Brian1/75 (Jun 6, 2012)

abn_rngr said:


> We wore plain green jungle fatigues and jungle boots.
> Yes, LCE was almost always worn unbuckled. How the f@#k do you IMT with two full ammo pouches and a buckled LCE?
> I don't know what a loose SOP on pouches means. What?


I meant loose as in customized by the user to a certain extent. Nobody was freaking out if someone wanted to put two mag pouches on the same side.


As for the whole infantry vs special, it's of my opinion that all  direct-action capable SOF are infantry. I always hated the statement, "Oh, Rangers they're just elite infantry." It reeked of ignorance and stupidity.


----------



## surgicalcric (Jun 6, 2012)

Brian1/75 said:


> ...I always hated the statement, "Oh, Rangers they're just elite infantry." It reeked of ignorance and stupidity.


 
Maybe today, however my father and several of his 2nd BN buds referred to the BNs as elite infantry in their everyday conversations.  After 32 years in the Army, many of them in the BNs and Ranger Companies, I would hardly consider him ignorant or stupid.  ;)


----------



## dknob (Jun 6, 2012)

I agree with cric , the 75th was initially meant to be an infantry force that took training, discipline, and fitness on a whole new level. It was not initally meant to be a special operations force. The whole point was to get awesome infantry guys molded from the Rangers and then sent out to the big Army to bring about what they learned. Although much of what we do in todays 75th is very infantry oriented... there are still MUCH what we do that isn't.


----------



## dknob (Jun 6, 2012)

Man abn_rngr's posts are awesome to read.


----------



## lancero (Jun 6, 2012)

dknob said:


> Man abn_rngr's posts are awesome to read.


Agreed!
I got a fever, and the only cure is more abn_rngr posts.


----------



## Brian1/75 (Jun 6, 2012)

dknob said:


> I agree with cric , the 75th was initially meant to be an infantry force that took training, discipline, and fitness on a whole new level. It was not initally meant to be a special operations force. The whole point was to get awesome infantry guys molded from the Rangers and then sent out to the big Army to bring about what they learned. Although much of what we do in todays 75th is very infantry oriented... there are still MUCH what we do that isn't.


I meant to say that all direct-action SOF are elite infantry at their basis with special skill sets above that. The Bns have always had special skill sets. To try to take away from Rangers of today or the past by 'downgrading' them to elite infantry as if SOF and elite infantry can't be synonymous is stupid.


----------



## Poccington (Jun 13, 2012)

dknob said:


> I agree with cric , the 75th was initially meant to be an infantry force that took training, discipline, and fitness on a whole new level. It was not initally meant to be a special operations force. The whole point was to get awesome infantry guys molded from the Rangers and then sent out to the big Army to bring about what they learned. Although much of what we do in todays 75th is very infantry oriented... there are still MUCH what we do that isn't.


 
As a slight divert, that's exactly what happened over here back in the day when we sent a few dudes over to you guys and put them through Ranger School.

They came back and were supposed to run courses aimed at increasing the skill level of troops, who would then go back to their Units and preach the new bible. Instead, we ended up with a new SOF Unit named the Army Ranger Wing, who even adopted the Ranger tab, with an Irish twist. Our only SOF Unit can trace it's beginnings all the way back to you boys.

Cool thread by the way. It's always interesting to see how Units develop and grow over time.


----------



## TCnTally (Jul 22, 2012)

There was the Regimental Standard Operating Procedures, or RSOP, a Blue Book that when combined with the Ranger Creed dictated pretty much every action a Ranger was to take or prohibited from taking.

How or where do you get the blue book? We have not been able to find one.....any help would be greatly appreciated.....


----------



## goon175 (Jul 22, 2012)

The blue book is not publicly released, I believe it is FOUO.


----------



## TCnTally (Jul 22, 2012)

goon175 said:


> The blue book is not publicly released, I believe it is FOUO.


Oookay... Not sure what that means..;). 
Can we get it from regiment or 1st Lt? Buy it from Px,library card (haha). What is FOUO? Sorry to be a pain. Just trying to help out. Been getting shit about not having something that was never issued...


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Jul 22, 2012)

I had no idea that the Blue Book was restricted in anyway but to answer the question, they get issued out to everyone in Battalion.  At least that's how it used to happen maybe they shoot you an e-mail with the PDF in AKO these days!


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 22, 2012)

TCnTally said:


> Oookay... Not sure what that means..;).
> Can we get it from regiment or 1st Lt? Buy it from Px,library card (haha). What is FOUO? Sorry to be a pain. Just trying to help out. Been getting shit about not having something that was never issued...


 
FOUO means "For official use only."  It's pretty much the unclassified version of "need to know."  That means it shouldn't be out there for the public to access.  Anyone with a legit need should have no problem getting it on his or her own.


----------



## TCnTally (Jul 22, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> FOUO means "For official use only."  It's pretty much the unclassified version of "need to know."  That means it shouldn't be out there for the public to access.  Anyone with a legit need should have no problem getting it on his or her own.


Of course. That would explain why they showed to them in RASP and then took them back. I'm guessing that they were either fckn with him or thought he was in 3/75. Thanks!



JackMurphyRGR said:


> I had no idea that the Blue Book was restricted in anyway but to answer the question, they get issued out to everyone in Battalion.  At least that's how it used to happen maybe they shoot you an e-mail with the PDF in AKO these days!


Thank you. He has not gone to Bat yet...makes sense.


----------



## CDG (Jul 22, 2012)

TCnTally said:


> Oookay... Not sure what that means..;).
> Can we get it from regiment or 1st Lt? Buy it from Px,library card (haha). What is FOUO? Sorry to be a pain. Just trying to help out. Been getting shit about not having something that was never issued...


 
ETA: Mara beat me to it.


----------



## lancero (Jul 23, 2012)

TCnTally said:


> Thank you. He has not gone to Bat yet...makes sense.


 
I am sure his first TL will "square-him-away." ;)


----------



## TCnTally (Jul 23, 2012)

lancero said:


> I am sure his first TL will "square-him-away." ;)


Thanks, hoping he gets his schtuff squared away SOON!



CDG said:


> ETA: Mara beat me to it.


You guys are so on top of it. Ty


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 31, 2012)

Part Two is finally published!  This one is the history of RIP and RASP.

http://sofrep.com/10875/the-evoluti...egiment-pt-2-selecting-and-building-a-ranger/


----------



## goon175 (Aug 31, 2012)

Awesome write up jack, really enjoyed the stuff on the origins of RIP.


----------



## RAGE275 (Aug 31, 2012)

STELLAR article Jack. Posting it on 2B if that's okay?


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 1, 2012)

Sure, feel free to spread it around.


----------

