Read his book: The Soldier's Load and Mobility of a Nation
This is an important but often overlooked area of research.
S.L.A. Marshall
Read his book: The Soldier's Load and Mobility of a Nation
This is an important but often overlooked area of research.
David S. Maxwell
"Irregular warfare is far more intellectual than a bayonet charge." T.E. Lawrence
We used to have or maybe we still do one of the originators of Gerado.com who did reviews and posted info on this subject. I think the website is defunct..not sure. Somebody check the members list he had that in his bio if I remember.
Actually it's more of a "forgotten, then reinvented" area of research. Since a group of Prussian medical students studied the combat load of infantry in the early 1870s it's come up, been forgotten, come up again, been forgotten again....you get the idea. You see mention of it as far back as the Civil War in American military writing, and the Frontier Army actually spent some time coming up with (and circulating via the few print outlets they had...I think ANJ had a few letters on the subject) a good combat/campaign load. Good to see it's coming up again...maybe this time it won't be forgotten right away.Originally Posted by max161
"On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War
I have never found "A Soldier's Load" useful reading. It's a very variable work.
What was done by the Germans in the 1870's should be the bench mark for all load carrying tests, yet I know of no attempt to repeat it. The closest I have evidence of is a 2002 Australian Army test. All load carrying should be based on testing, but almost none is.
The US Army has only ever conducted two complete audits of loads carried in Combat since 1942, and the UK has never done it, in terms of published results or data that has usefully informed progress in the area.
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
Not quite a timeless issue
It's interesting about the weight issue, especially in our present conflicts. Most of the concern in the past has been about the 'survival' gear - food, clothing, shoes, soap, tents, etc., that the soldier had to haul around on a daily basis to keep himself alive and healthy. When the time for fighting came, most of that load was shed and he carried only ammunition.
Now it seems to be the opposite. We just don't have that many soldiers who move primarily by foot over great distances any longer. Now, 'survival' gear is mostly stowed somewhere, while 'fighting' gear is the burden that saps strength and mobility. Body armor, night vision devices, squad communications gear, batteries, etc., plus ammunition have increased the load for the grunt even when he is 'stripped' for action.
Our relative mobility in Afghanistan- both us vs. the enemy and operational vs. tactical - was one of the reasons why we had so little success in pursuit, tracking, or maintaining contact.
All true and none of this is as a product of absolute conditions or needs. Its how modern armies "choose" to behave. Soldiers are only overloaded when commanders make bad decisions, and use bad judgement.
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
Agreed. I know of units in Afghanistan that
wanted to shed vests and other impedimtia for just the reasons Eden cites. Permission denied.
Whose fault is that...
(My take is it's the units for asking; 'it is better to not ask and receive censure than ask...' But that's the modern yankee Army...)
I know Cavguy talked about the political factor - the investigations into KIAs and the thus the imperative for more and more body armor - and in 28 Articles Kilcullen says we must "ruthlessly" lighten the soldier's load, but realistically what are we talking about here? Cut the armor and ammo to a minimum and you still have helmet, a vest/plates at least, weapon, considerable ammo load, water, radios, batteries, medical-supplies/first aid kits, etc., making soldiers still far more burdened than the opposition. Since there's no way to lighten troops enough to have equal tactical mobility on foot, what's the best that can be achieved?
Regards,
Matt
"Give a good leader very little and he will succeed. Give a mediocrity a great deal and he will fail." - General George C. Marshall
(My take is it's the units for asking; 'it is better to not ask and receive censure than ask...' But that's the modern yankee Army...
Until the first guy gets shot and the whole chain of command loses their career in the ensuing 15-6 and is the subject of a negligent homicide investigation for failing to obey a general order.
Initiative has its place, but not here IMO.
Last edited by Cavguy; 04-28-2008 at 07:19 PM.
My second trip to sunny Afghanistan...
I was made to write and sign a "memo of compliance" stating that my guys would wear full kit (body armor/helmet) whenever we were "outside the wire" or suffer the consequences... which at the time meant the detachments removal from the battlefield at the very least. This came straight from an SF Battalion Commander. I was never able to find out if that dictate came to him from the CJSOTF or higher.
So, I wrote the memo, signed my name and proceeded to perjure myself to varying degrees for the rest of the deployment; depending on the nature of the misison. I imagine I would have wound up in jail or some other form of UCMJ had one of my guys gotten killed without his helmet or body armor on.
Funny, I just saw a report where a 7th Grp team sergeant got the DSC for some absolutley heroic deed in Afghanistan, conducted entirely without body armor. god love him. I don't suppose his team commander had to sign a compliance memo...
Last edited by Vic Bout; 04-28-2008 at 07:22 PM.
"THIS is my boomstick!"
This was required reading at TBS. Then the next time we went to the field we were loaded down with 60lbs of (mostly) useless crap. Oh the irony.
Wilf, you may know where this study is. The original Israeli Web Gear "Efhod" was designed in the US. The US rejected it of course and Israel picked up on it and improved it. The point of the study showed a Soldier can carry more weight from his waist down than from the shoulders up. Know where it is?
Sadly not, but I'll ask my wife. She may know (long story).
"Ephod" -from the Bibical attire of the Tsanhedrin- is actually super chest webbing. Modern US webbing is starting to mimic it - and there is now a Molle "M-10/11" harness out there.
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
Have you seen the book Battle Rattle? It has allot of input from the original Gear Guru, Eric Graves a former SOF logistician and Steve Hilliard a former grunt now at ATS tactical gear. We have discussed this over at Lightfighter.net for YEARS!
Putting Foot to Al Qaeda Ass Since 1993
Not seen, but will now! Cheers.
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
Does anybody know Sam Katz who writes books for the Osprey- Men at War series. There is picture in the back of one his books that looks identical to the original Ephod. The picture is from 1958!!!! the US soldier in the picture is also wearing a new helmet that looks alot like some of the first ballistic material helmets. I used to have the book but somebody borrowed it and I never got it back. I came to know about all this while doing research on General Gavin. Would love to see the picture again because it has a publication reference that may lead to the load carrying study that was done.
There's no real need for a study about it in my opinion.
The reason for the effect is that weight at waist does not put additional demand on torso muscles. This in turn reduces the oxygen consumption of the torso muscles, which frees oxygen for leg muscles, which increases endurance and/or possible average speed.
The effect on mobility depends on several variables and will not be visible in empirical studies. It depends on leg muscle fitness, torso muscle fitness, lung performance, food (is the body burning fat or carbohydrates? = different oxygen consumption/energy) and psychical factors.
A similar concept speaks against heavy boots. The forward-brake-backward-brake-forward movement causes a huge energy consumption. The less weight at the end of the legs the better. That's why Kenyans are great marathon runners - very thin lower legs.
To save one pound in the boots is much more relieving than to save one pound at the waist.
That's all the more reason for a study. The typical effects of weight and marching may not be empirical, but ability to run a simulated battle or obstacle course should be pretty clearly affected if the study breaks down into broad enough weight classes.
You might start with three broad weight classes (light, medium and heavy) and then distribute those between carried on the back vs at the waist. That gives you six groups, plus you can use a group with "standard" equipment for a control. Have each group run your obstacle course or whatever and time them. Then put them through force marches of increasing length and have them run the course at the end. Differences in timing should become obvious if carried weight is an issue (it is). But differences in how the load is carried also come out.
As far as individual fitness, because you have course times before and after the weight gets carried you can compare the reduction in performance as a relative, rather than an absolute.
Are we gonna include
equipment reliability, survivability, longevity and replacement cube and weight factors on monthly logistic throughput in that study?
My best friend in High School was named Billy Fuchs....that ain't you by chance? Disagree about evidence not being visible. Research the long term effects of vertical compression of the spinal column and you will find how critical this is. That is why most large civilian rucksacks have a waist belt, it transfers the load to the lower body and has a less damaging effect on the upper body.
Posting Permissions
"A Sherman can give you a very nice... edge."- Oddball,
Bookmarks