Results 1 to 20 of 180

Thread: Back to Basics…The Lost Art of Basic Combat Fundamentals

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member Tracker275's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    51

    Default Back to Basics…The Lost Art of Basic Combat Fundamentals

    Back to Basics…The Lost Art of Basic Combat Fundamentals

    Four days after I turned 17-years old, I found myself at MEPS enlisting in the Army in January of 1993. A lot has changed since then, and a lot of redirection of focus has taken place over the last two decades of the service I still maintain.

    When I went to 2nd Ranger Battalion in 1994, I was instantly given the realism of what I had entered, as I did not really get a chance to sleep for the first few days of my arrival. I inprocessed through CIF, received the (3) duffel bags of gear, rucksack, etc., only to get to the Ranger Battalion and instantly have an E4/Specialist yelling at me that night to get my gear ready to head to the field. He threw his web gear at me, and said, “Make yours look like mine.” So, without any hesitation, I took the SOP that was given to me, and started to take 550-cord and start to tie down my equipment, cut off excess nylon off of straps, 100mph tape up loose tails, and place items in the little pouches tied down to my gear that I would later use in the field. Just for my canteen cover and canteen, I had to even tie down the little plastic flap for utilizing the tube on a gas mask, then secure it with 100mph tape…Place iodine tablets in the little pouch on the outside of the canteen cover, place engineer tape in the cover, with a canteen cup that had a stove stand that slid over the outside of the cup, and finally tied down my canteen to my gear in case it fell out, I wouldn’t drop it and lose it in the night or on a jump.

    The detail to which I had to just get my canteen and canteen cover ready to the way my rucksack was setup. Even something as simple as taking illumination tape, writing my personal information on it, covering it with acetate, and then securing it with 100mph tape to the frame of my rucksack was an intricate detail. To some, they may wonder why you would do that, but to someone with basic knowledge of field craft, they know that at night, you will be able to see your name in the dark, and know which rucksack is yours in an ORP when you have to grab it and run to move out from a raid or ambush.

    In today’s world, it is all about what “guchi gear” you can get, or what elaborate setup you can have your weapon put into…From Surefire lights, Picatiny Rails, custom buttsocks, etc., it is all about what may work, but looks “cool” at the same time. The pictures of Rangers floating down the river on a Zodiac with painted faces are gone. We have become the age of the “Techy Warrior”, and less on the basics, and field craft. I personally have seen infantry that are barely able to utilize a compass, read a map, perform a true road march, and be able to setup their gear to be able to stay out on a patrol for more than 24hrs. The US soldier of the modern age is completely attached to their vehicles, “guchi gear”, technology, and the roads of the country we are in. The philosophy of decentralized operations is a lost art, and even the ability to perform extended patrols with knowledge of “The Basics” is becoming even more of an issue. No longer do soldiers place camouflage paint to their faces, but rely on digital camouflage that has proven to be ineffective in all environments to aid in their physical feature break up.

    This is something that I have been watching for a long time since we changed to the ACU, Velcro, MOLLE, body armor (IBA, IOTV, etc.) and other equipment.

    Yes, it all works fine in Iraq and Afghanistan, but there is absolutely no way on earth that you can take the soldier equipped for Iraq or Afghanistan and place them in a jungle and expect them to be able to perform the same mission. In the heat and humidity of the jungle and other temperate environments, the foam padded helmet that does not breath creates a heat trap, and absorbs moisture that will not ever dry…the body armor expected to be worn will fry a soldier due to their body core temperature going through the roof…the lack of knowledge of field craft while on a patrol when they expect to be back at the FOB that night…etc…….These are all examples and failures of our military to understand we cannot become “Pigeon-Holed” into one form of combat, but have to realize we must be able to fight in any environment.

    Honestly, based on how we equip our soldiers for Iraq/Afghanistan, if we had to send them to a tropical environment with exactly what they have there….Can anyone honestly say that a Stryker, or that soldier with the IOTV, and tons of gear will be able to survive there?

    ….I say not

  2. #2
    Council Member Tracker275's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    51

    Default

    Take the "Techy Warrior" of today and place him here with everything he his reliant on and see how he does...

    Panama - 1997 (2nd Ranger Battalion)
    Attached Images Attached Images

  3. #3
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Do not confuse one thing, with the other.

    YES - modern infantry are overloaded with much they could do without/discard, and would not work if the need arose to conduct extended dismounted operations.
    YES - core navigation and field craft skills need to be emphasised and retained.

    BUT - a lot of modern equipment is remarkably useful. I was soldiering in the 1980's. I am deeply envious of some of the equipment I see today.
    Also a lot of what infantry does/did is just dumb. Rubber boats? Armies who have actually fought in jungles use wooden or metal boats. They also used outboard motors. You can plug a 7.62mm whole in aluminium boat with a rag, pushed home with a round. Can't do that in rubber death-trap. Rubber boats do have a role, but it is very, very limited.

    A large amount of "Infantry skills" are actually just "Hiawatha BS" not fixed in an operational reality.
    In modern warfare no one can operate without vehicle support or some sort. Even SF are deeply reliant on helicopters.

    All for core skills, but beware the "Hiawathas".
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  4. #4
    Council Member Tracker275's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
    Do not confuse one thing, with the other.

    YES - modern infantry are overloaded with much they could do without/discard, and would not work if the need arose to conduct extended dismounted operations.
    YES - core navigation and field craft skills need to be emphasised and retained.

    BUT - a lot of modern equipment is remarkably useful. I was soldiering in the 1980's. I am deeply envious of some of the equipment I see today.
    Also a lot of what infantry does/did is just dumb. Rubber boats? Armies who have actually fought in jungles use wooden or metal boats. They also used outboard motors. You can plug a 7.62mm whole in aluminium boat with a rag, pushed home with a round. Can't do that in rubber death-trap. Rubber boats do have a role, but it is very, very limited.

    A large amount of "Infantry skills" are actually just "Hiawatha BS" not fixed in an operational reality.
    In modern warfare no one can operate without vehicle support or some sort. Even SF are deeply reliant on helicopters.

    All for core skills, but beware the "Hiawathas".
    You missed the point I was trying to make. It is not about the boats...It is about the reliance on technology. Technology is great, however they can't do anything without it anymore.

    I may need to repost to get the point I'm trying to make so folks don't think it is about boats.

  5. #5
    Council Member Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North Mountain, West Virginia
    Posts
    990

    Default

    When we changed from olive drab fatigues to the Battledress Uniform in 1982 we were told not to starch and press the BDUs because it would ruin some sort of protection in the fabric against detection by infrared night-vision technology. I'm glad nobody could see me while I was standing next to a 105mm howitzer or a 5-ton truck ...

  6. #6
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    When we changed from olive drab fatigues to the Battledress Uniform in 1982 we were told not to starch and press the BDUs because it would ruin some sort of protection in the fabric against detection by infrared night-vision technology. I'm glad nobody could see me while I was standing next to a 105mm howitzer or a 5-ton truck ...
    But don't forget, Pete, that after the BDUs were reissued in a hot-weather version (post-Grenada after the heat injuries), we started starching them....

    I keep watching for the first pair of shined roughside out boots.

    Sooner or later, it will happen

    Tom

  7. #7
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    99

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    When we changed from olive drab fatigues to the Battledress Uniform in 1982 we were told not to starch and press the BDUs because it would ruin some sort of protection in the fabric against detection by infrared night-vision technology. I'm glad nobody could see me while I was standing next to a 105mm howitzer or a 5-ton truck ...
    I was told that same thing when in the Royal Australian Air Farce when we got our AUSCAM uniforms. Army blokes told me to boil and use heavy detergent for three washes before wearing them as they were a heat magnet. 40% nylon in the tropics sucks.

  8. #8
    Council Member Infanteer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tracker275 View Post
    This is something that I have been watching for a long time since we changed to the ACU, Velcro, MOLLE, body armor (IBA, IOTV, etc.) and other equipment.

    Yes, it all works fine in Iraq and Afghanistan, but there is absolutely no way on earth that you can take the soldier equipped for Iraq or Afghanistan and place them in a jungle and expect them to be able to perform the same mission. In the heat and humidity of the jungle and other temperate environments, the foam padded helmet that does not breath creates a heat trap, and absorbs moisture that will not ever dry…the body armor expected to be worn will fry a soldier due to their body core temperature going through the roof…the lack of knowledge of field craft while on a patrol when they expect to be back at the FOB that night…etc…….These are all examples and failures of our military to understand we cannot become “Pigeon-Holed” into one form of combat, but have to realize we must be able to fight in any environment.
    Honestly, based on how we equip our soldiers for Iraq/Afghanistan, if we had to send them to a tropical environment with exactly what they have there….Can anyone honestly say that a Stryker, or that soldier with the IOTV, and tons of gear will be able to survive there?

    ….I say not
    Did you walk 40 miles to school each day with no shoes as well? Thanks for reminding me about how inferior my generation is. As I was humping around in the 40 degree celcius heat in a grapefield I should have said "Well, it could be worse, I could be soldiering in the '80s when men were men!"

    Funny thing is, the generation before yours probably said the same thing about you guys.

    I don't doubt that your relevant points have merit, but they get lost in your polemic about "the good ole days". For some reason, people tend to remember the "good" of the past while only focusing on the "not-so-bad" of the present.

  9. #9
    Council Member Tracker275's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Infanteer View Post
    Did you walk 40 miles to school each day with no shoes as well? Thanks for reminding me about how inferior my generation is. As I was humping around in the 40 degree celcius heat in a grapefield I should have said "Well, it could be worse, I could be soldiering in the '80s when men were men!"

    Funny thing is, the generation before yours probably said the same thing about you guys.

    I don't doubt that your relevant points have merit, but they get lost in your polemic about "the good ole days". For some reason, people tend to remember the "good" of the past while only focusing on the "not-so-bad" of the present.
    I find it funny you say that, because I am still in. Having just returned from a tour only weeks ago, I think my points are valid as they encompass not only several years ago, but today. So, to act as if I am out of the service and dwelling on the "good-ole-days" is definitely a deficiency on your part, as I still live it and do it in combat theaters as you do.

    So, do not belittle me with your dribble about today vs. yesterday, as I am still humping the same ruck as you today in the same places that you end up. See you in theater on my next tour.

  10. #10
    Council Member Infanteer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tracker275 View Post
    I find it funny you say that, because I am still in. Having just returned from a tour only weeks ago, I think my points are valid as they encompass not only several years ago, but today. So, to act as if I am out of the service and dwelling on the "good-ole-days" is definitely a deficiency on your part, as I still live it and do it in combat theaters as you do.

    So, do not belittle me with your dribble about today vs. yesterday, as I am still humping the same ruck as you today in the same places that you end up. See you in theater on my next tour.
    Well then you should know as well as I the capabilities of today's soldier. Mine were fit, enthusastic and pretty savvy young men. Sure, they have had some things imposed on them from above (protective equipment), poor operational concepts (KFC in the FOB) and some training deficiencies (GPS/Compass seems to be a favourite) but the soldiers of today are as adaptable and hungry to shoot their enemy in the face as before. I really don't get where the assertion that we'd fall apart in the jungle is coming from. We'd probably adapt, improvise and overcome in that environment just as we did when we got fired off to the desert or the Hindu-Kush.

    My 2 Cents,

    Infanteer

  11. #11
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default The Kids are okay. In some cases their training is deficient

    Quote Originally Posted by Infanteer View Post
    Well then you should know as well as I the capabilities of today's soldier...
    but that's the fault of the system, not the kids. Aside from a small percentage recruited who should not have been for obvious reasons, most of these kids will do what's needed -- if they don't do it right, it is the fault of the system that failed to decently train and prepare them.

    The same son who came from Afghanistan on the MTT to Edmonton four or five years ago was a few years before that a Ranger Instructor (RI) at Dahlonega. While he was there, they brought in a bunch of old, retired 1960 version RIs for a couple of days to assess and get their thoughts on current training.

    After they'd followed the working RIs around a bit, they assembled them and asked their opinion. The general response was "It's a wonder you get anything done; you have a bunch of wusses..." (I think they used another word). The Bn Cdr replied, "Yes, student preparation and attitudes are a problem." The Old guys response was "Yeah, they're kinda weak, too..."

    The story that the second US Marine recruited in 1775 came aboard the Frigate Alfred, griping and moaning and was met by the first one recruited with "You should've been in the old Corps..." may well be true...

    Some things don't change all that much.

Similar Threads

  1. Appreciating the lost art of Field Manuals
    By Tukhachevskii in forum RFIs & Members' Projects
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 09-04-2011, 04:37 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •