Can anyone clarify what exactly are the mission roles given to the navy
seals?I know they are a maritime commando force but are they as good on land as they are at sea?
Are they as highly trained as Delta Force?
How hard is BUD\s? as hard as UKSF selection?I know it `s tedious trying to compare but I just want an idea.Do SBS /SEALS train together?
Us Navy Seals have a similar role to the SBS. (Or at least they used to before the SBS became another SAS sqn.!!! - dig, dig.) They are probably better trained than Delta Force. Buds/Seal training is every bit as tough as SBS/SAS selection although a bit more moronic.
There isn't too much history of SBS and SEAL team training together apart from the odd exercise but there is an exchange programme that goes back 30 years.
They are pretty good, but like most Americans, they don't like taking advice from us inferior Brits.
Sneaky
Is that common where there`s often antagonism towards Brittish special
forces from the americans?I remember a while ago Jonathan Ross was
reporting about an article I think was in the Mirror about the slagging
that went on in afghanisthan between the royal marines and the USMC?
From what I remember it was`nt to nice from the yanks ,they thought
the RM`s were crappy?
I think we (in the US) pay too much attention to appearances and kit than actual performance.
On the other hand, I don't think anyone who's actually fought alongside British troops, or observed them fighting, has anything bad to say about them. On the contrary...
Frank, that is a very interesting first line in your post.
When our guys trained with the 82nd AB in '86, the general impression was that they did Holywood proud, but just couldn't soldier! Lots of "huah" and not a lot else.
I've found some to be heavily "kit-dependent". One bunch of US infanteers last year looked at me like two heads when I suggested that GPS should only compliment manual nav ("land nav" as they called it), rather than replace it.
We had some US SF (from Bragg, I believe) come up to train in winter warfare with our Airborne Regiment in the early 90's. Talking to the commando sergeant-major after the ex, he said it was a disaster. Sure the cold took it's toll, but the fitness level and lack of mental toughness of the US troops was deemed the prime factors in a general low tempo and their ending the ex three days early and building a bonfire!
A friend of mine did the US SF course when he was in the Pathfinder Pl in the late 80's. He said it was tough but doable. Longer than the Pathfinder course but not as hard overall. Of course, that's just one opinion.
Maybe it's just been bad timing, or that the "sampling" was off, leading to a bad impression. I don't now. I do know that I have met some very bright, switched-on, and innovative U.S. soldiers, but I have found that such people tend to be working somewhat against the grain of a very "stodgy" system. I got the impression from Charlie Beckwith's writings about project Delta that he had banged his head against the wall on more than a couple of occasions, although he appeared to be too much of a gentleman to sling mud.
To say the SEALs are better trained then the Delta Force leads me to think someone may need to do a little homework on the subject. Other then TS units (as in unknown) something like GreyFox etc....Delta is by far the best trained unit in the US unless someone can come up with a finer trained unit...I go with Delta. Remember SF/DELTA went to SAS and SBS to train in the 60's-70's and always hear nothing but the BEST about them..the training...the pubs...the friends.
SEALs are a great outfit on sea..air..land and not to be under rated as well. The last class some time back was 100% Navy guys. UK has some very..very good SO's units. My feeling is UK/US can use more cross training of all special units. IT WORKS...in the past ..it was the BEST and helped keep many alive and well in many places in the world.
Last edited by grayberet on Wed 25 Feb, 2004 6:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The state of project Delta in the late 70's was not what could be described as operationally ready. They were still recruiting and having a hard time doing it due to bureaucracy and "turf" wars. Delta's stand-up on 19 Nov '77 was only as a skeleton crew, still with all the pers selection, training and admin ahead before anything even closely resembling and ops-ready outfit would materialize. During this time, though some members did spend time with 22 SAS to upgrade
sneaky beaky wrote:Buds/Seal training is every bit as tough as SBS/SAS selection although a bit more moronic.
I would hazard a guess that it has to be, as BUD/S can be undertaken by a civvie with no previous military. I guess they have to instill some military discipline
joe wrote:
I would hazard a guess that it has to be, as BUD/S can be undertaken by a civvie with no previous military. I guess they have to instill some military discipline
Not entirely true. They go through Navy "boot camp" and their trade course before attending BUD/S. So they are basically trained sailors when they start the course, albeit not all that experienced.
- Cobalt
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt - then it's hilarious"
joe wrote:
I would hazard a guess that it has to be, as BUD/S can be undertaken by a civvie with no previous military. I guess they have to instill some military discipline
Not entirely true. They go through Navy "boot camp" and their trade course before attending BUD/S. So they are basically trained sailors when they start the course, albeit not all that experienced.
Ah, didn't realise that. I thought people who signed up on the SEAL Challenge went directly to BUD/S - and if they failed, they would then go on to do the boot camp etc. However, it's been a while since I read up on SEAL recruitment
What about selection for Delta ?Isn`t it regarded as the toughest of all
selection courses in US armed services?I know alot of cooperation goes on
between SEAL team 6 and Delta.
