Infantry accompanying load carriers

[Rifleman]

Not just Canadians. At Ft. Richardson we had/have akio sleds as well. We cursed them from the bottoms of our airborne hearts btw.
Reed

I've pulled them at Ft. McCoy, Wisconsin and in the Italian Alps. I didn't like it any more than you.

[Firn]

I've pulled them at Ft. McCoy, Wisconsin and in the Italian Alps. I didn't like it any more than you.

Where in the Italian Alps?

What about a bike cart like that one? Best if detachable for easy handpulling.


Firn

[William F. Owen]

Mules and Llamas, and that's about it. Infantry walk. Men don't have wheels, so I can't see the point of limiting them to things with wheels. If you are on roads with carts, why not use vehicles??

Try walking around the Southern Lebanon with something with wheels. 30-40cm step and trench obstacles, plus 40 degree slopes are routine.

[Fuchs]

The simple reason for wheels is
a)stuff needs to move
PLUS
b) a wheel carries weight. The mechanic system itself supports the weight, you do not need to put any energy into the system to support the weight (as on legs, no matter whether biological or technical).

This greater energy efficiency is a huge advantage over legs, and the reason why we move faster on bikes than on legs, for example: We spend our power on forward movement and almost nothing on supporting our own weight (only on the spine).


That's why I make the compromise at something on wheels that's either meant for roads or meant to be crew-portable over obstacles (even walls).

There's no universal solution anyway. You don't want to use mules in jungles where you need to create a path with a machete, for example.

[William F. Owen]

I know wheels have many mechanical advantages. The problem is that wheels are the thin edge of wedge. They enable stupidity.

Allowing infantry to carry more weight, by allowing wheels, means that they will be get even more overloaded. Man-packing is a simple and coherent method of forcing the argument back to basics, as is Mules or Llamas, or even well trained Hamsters.

We want to try and avoid making doing stupid things possible, because history shows that Infantry Officers always overload their men - almost always because of stupidity, and a failure to ask the right question in the right context.

I also submit that a well trained and well lead army does not have load carrying problem because it has already exercised the judgement necessary to avoid it.

[OfTheTroops]

http://www.militarybikes.com/paratroopervid.html

http://www.bikesatwork.com/

just in case you thought no one made such non-sense.


And no need to worry about overloading or wheels! we shall devise an overly complex machine to assist you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0X1vyWU6bw

[Infanteer]

A better load carrier will simply result in greater loads...that we don't need in the first place.

Now, take my combat load and cut it to half its weight from lighter materials and then we're talking!

The greatest problem with the combat load today is the body armor. When you start with 45 lbs burden it is a quick trip to 30% or 50% of the porter's weight. Soldiers are not meant to be pack animals and when used as such are less effective at soldiering. The best part of training is realizing what looks good on paper doesnt work in reality. Two things are important here, 1)you can not train the average Soldier to be a SuperSoldier no more than you can train an attack dog to be an attack mule and 2) the carts or jeeps or iBattles are not likely to solve this. Likely just adding to the stuff Joe can break or lose. I have often joked with my battle's that "They" weigh you down so "They" know you can't run away. You always need about twice as many troops to do what half could do in better circumstances.

I know wheels have many mechanical advantages. The problem is that wheels are the thin edge of wedge. They enable stupidity.

Allowing infantry to carry more weight, by allowing wheels, means that they will be get even more overloaded. Man-packing is a simple and coherent method of forcing the argument back to basics, as is Mules or Llamas, or even well trained Hamsters.

We want to try and avoid making doing stupid things possible, because history shows that Infantry Officers always overload their men - almost always because of stupidity, and a failure to ask the right question in the right context.

I also submit that a well trained and well lead army does not have load carrying problem because it has already exercised the judgement necessary to avoid it.

These statements really hit the mark. We don't need ways to carry more #### - we have too much #### and it is an essential command responsibility to make sure soldiers aren't carrying too much.

Although S.L.A. Marshall gets rightfully blasted for shoddy research, the ideas in his Soldier's Load and the Mobility of a Nation are, IMO, correct. There's been a few good articles in the Marine Corps Gazette that also concern themselves with the load carried by soldiers in both the approach and the battle. The way I see it, vehicles have a GVWR. Soldiers need a GSWR that commanders need to adhere to as a matter of force sustainment.

Problem is, even when you cut your load down to the bare essentials (required or directed from above) you still end up with burdened soldiers. I cut my load in Afghanistan down to the bare essentials - ammo, water, a bit of food, batteries, comms gear and STANO. I still feel the weight load.

STANO, especially MNVGs, are getting good and light. Comms gear as well, with the MBITR and the PRR being pretty handy, reliable, and lightweight comms systems. The biggest problem is ammo and personal protective equipment (PPE). Just wearing the armour gets uncomfortable after a while. If we approached this from an engineering perspective, getting our ammuntion (ball, link, frags, etc) and body armour reduced in weight by 25-50%, we'd be rolling. From a command perspective, tactical commanders (Coy level and below) need to consider carefully how they structure their TTPs (do you really need 10 mags or will 5 do?).

[Fuchs]

Then again there are very useful things that are not part of a basic scout or infantry squad inventory yet.

Examples:
- mine search needles (just in case you're stuck and can't wait for engineers. Knifes are inferior for the purpose).
- slim periscopes
- LMG tripod with periscope kit
- rifle attachments for easy cracking of windows (a few gram on a modified flash hider do the trick)


There are more things that deserve to be considered, such as
- helmet-mounted foldable cheek armour (not for scouts)
- water purify equipment (advanced filters, not pills)
- Reflex-style suppressors (for maximum flash hiding)
- parascope UCS for carbines
- cheek rest for (>1.5x scope) rifles


By the way; scout squads and infantry platoons have often good use for a military dog. Some dog breeds were even used for towing loads (even in WW1), and they certainly could carry a few kg once they're trained to do it (vests of all kinds irritate dogs until they get used to them).
(Dogs are also good for morale, not just for scouting/guarding, explosives detection and tracking.)

[Rifleman]

Where in the Italian Alps?

I don't remember the name of the nearest village (I'm suffering from a bad case of middle age) but I think it was considered part of the Tyrol. It might have been one of those areas that was sometimes Italy and sometimes Austria pre-WWII. I remember hearing people mention Folgoria. That's not where we were but I think Folgoria must have been in the same area.

Anyway, the Airborne Battalion Combat Team went there from Vicenza to conduct winter training every year.

[Firn]

I don't remember the name of the nearest village (I'm suffering from a bad case of middle age) but I think it was considered part of the Tyrol. It might have been one of those areas that was sometimes Italy and sometimes Austria pre-WWII. I remember hearing people mention Folgoria. That's not where we were but I think Folgoria must have been in the same area.

Anyway, the Airborne Battalion Combat Team went there from Vicenza to conduct winter training every year.

I guess you trained with the Folgore. There are quite some places where you could have been, as IIRC the Folgore trained in quite some areas in Southtyrol. Many of them have been purchased over the years by the province.

This list contains all the village names of the province. If you want you can revive memories. Could be Innichen, Toblach or others.

Anyway you seem truly have enjoyed your stay. Personally I think the Akio is an excellent way to transport stuff in snowy winters even if I sometimes wondered why they could not have made some single parts of the obice smaller. Wikipedia informs us that being a pack howitzer it is designed to be broken down into 12 parts, each of which can be easily transported. Easily transported perhaps by a truck, a MTC or a helicopter, but not by some poor guys with only Akios up the Marmolada.

While the MTC was and is a good idea mules could be faster in quite some areas and go where no wheeled thing could. At least as mountain infantry you need both. It would be of course ideal to pull the vehicles as close up to the units as possible. The MTC(motocarello/motorcart) can extend the reach of the wheeled transport. Especially with an additional cart he can pull quite some weight. Perhaps one could add remote control to something like it.


Firn