Light infantry foot mobility standards?

[ganulv]

To add to what Ganulv said, this website

http://www.marathontrainingexpert.co...thon-time.html

states that the average time for men to complete a marathon is 4 hours 30 minutes. I doubt B Co. did that.

Running 26.2 miles at any pace is an accomplishment -- I've never run farther than 20 miles at a time myself but it was plenty! for me, the difference between 12 and 15 miles isn't so much, but there is definitely a difference between 15 and 18 -- but 4 hours 30 minutes is as you say average. I think the qualifying time for the Boston Marathon is 3 hours 10 minutes.

Twenty-five miles in four hours in kit wouldn't be a superhuman feat but it would require serious athletes, not just a bunch of guys in good shape. Seems like overkill to me, though. Twelve-and-a-half miles in two hours with that load would tell me enough about general fitness. (Or as my high school cross-country coach once told me, "Most world class distance runners aim to run 100 miles a week because it's a nice round number. 88 seems just as round to me." )

[JMA]

Running 26.2 miles at any pace is an accomplishment -- I've never run farther than 20 miles at a time myself but it was plenty! for me, the difference between 12 and 15 miles isn't so much, but there is definitely a difference between 15 and 18 -- but 4 hours 30 minutes is as you say average. I think the qualifying time for the Boston Marathon is 3 hours 10 minutes.

Twenty-five miles in four hours in kit wouldn't be a superhuman feat but it would require serious athletes, not just a bunch of guys in good shape. Seems like overkill to me, though. Twelve-and-a-half miles in two hours with that load would tell me enough about general fitness. (Or as my high school cross-country coach once told me, "Most world class distance runners aim to run 100 miles a week because it's a nice round number. 88 seems just as round to me." )

Often the original intention behind this training is good... but in peace time the 'means to the end' often becomes the end in itself.

The idea behind these marches is to approach the enemy on foot and surprise them by putting in an attack after the march. For this purpose the Brits use 'march and shoot' exercises where at the end of the (often) ten mile march troops need to shoot for a score.

The idea is for the company/platoon to arrive together in a condition to launch directly into an attack. So the speed is controlled (or should be) and the weight carried should equate to first line ammo plus a reserve (including light mortars) to sustain an attack on arrival with enough spare to fight off any counter attack before reinforcements and/or the land tail arrives.

This is the idea... but you will always find (idiot) officers who turn it into a speed competition leaving the troops in no condition to fight at the end of the march.

As they say... some mothers have them and the army gets them.

Edit: I note I commented much the same earlier in the thread. In fact I would go so far as to recommend that a company commander gets fired/relieved if 6 men (two per platoon) drop out of the march (which must be conducted at a controlled pace). If more than two drop out per platoon you fire the officer and the sergeant.

[carl]

Often the original intention behind this training is good... but in peace time the 'means to the end' often becomes the end in itself.

The idea behind these marches is to approach the enemy on foot and surprise them by putting in an attack after the march. For this purpose the Brits use 'march and shoot' exercises where at the end of the (often) ten mile march troops need to shoot for a score.

The idea is for the company/platoon to arrive together in a condition to launch directly into an attack. So the speed is controlled (or should be) and the weight carried should equate to first line ammo plus a reserve (including light mortars) to sustain an attack on arrival with enough spare to fight off any counter attack before reinforcements and/or the land tail arrives.

This is the idea... but you will always find (idiot) officers who turn it into a speed competition leaving the troops in no condition to fight at the end of the march.

As they say... some mothers have them and the army gets them.

Edit: I note I commented much the same earlier in the thread. In fact I would go so far as to recommend that a company commander gets fired/relieved if 6 men (two per platoon) drop out of the march (which must be conducted at a controlled pace). If more than two drop out per platoon you fire the officer and the sergeant.

Nice comment JMA. It is good to be reminded what the actual purpose of the thing is.

The same thing happens in with American police in shooting. High qualification scores get to be an end in themselves. So many things seem to turn into sporting events, as you note.

[JMA]

Nice comment JMA. It is good to be reminded what the actual purpose of the thing is.

The same thing happens in with American police in shooting. High qualification scores get to be an end in themselves. So many things seem to turn into sporting events, as you note.

Carl its simple and here is what its all about from US experience (repeat):

A good example of a successful march occurred during World War II. It was the grueling foot march during the Sicilian campaign from 20 to 21 July 1943. The 3d Battalion, 30th Infantry Regiment, 3d Infantry Division performed this march. The battalion was directed to move on foot across mountains from Aragona to San Stefano to enter into a coordinated attack on enemy forces in San Stefano. The battalion made this record-breaking, 54-mile, cross-country march in only 33 hours due to continuous marching. Two hours after arrival, the battalion was committed in the attack on San Stefano, which resulted in its capture.

Training should be aimed at being able to replicate that magnificent feat.

[Infanteer]

Good post JMA, and an instructive bit on the utility of the march as a means and not an end. I see the attitude you've mentioned quite frequently in our Battle Fitness Test.

[Ray]

In the Indian Army, foot mobility is the norm since most of the infantry is up in the mountains and the High Altitude.

Eyeball to eyeball contact does not allow air transportation!

And roads are non existent in most places!

[JMA]

In the Indian Army, foot mobility is the norm since most of the infantry is up in the mountains and the High Altitude.

Eyeball to eyeball contact does not allow air transportation!

And roads are non existent in most places!

So what (may I ask) is your fitness standard in this regard? Carrying what weight? What distance within what time, uphill or flat or whatever?