A Soldier's Load, and His Lack of Mobility

Status
Not open for further replies.
NMshooter said:
But with time and a whole lot of money I suppose the Stryker will eventually become a good vehicle for troop transport. We are still stuck with trucks for supplies and troops in non-combat situations.

Only for certain uses, and I believe the LAV and M113 can cover all its missions between them with the same electronics suite.

Why spend several hundred thousand per vehicle where several million will do?

Trucks are used for support transport to reduce the weight in armor and weapons. An extra ton of weapons you MIGHT need for the truck is an extra ton of ordnance you WILL need for the fight.

No, I don't plan on being a transportation officer if I can avoid it. An essential task, but not mine. Thanks.
 
carebear said:
In charge of the motor-t element of the supply company. :evil:

Or maybe personnel.


I'm Guard. I get some choice.

I'm thinking artillery, for no other reason than this:
Comanche_Artillery_Vulgar_Brawl_Cartoon.jpg

:evil:
 
Well, carebear, as an officer he won't have to carry the baseplate...;)

But you still can't escape those darn logistical details, especially when you are feeding the big guns.:D

Not to mention getting them to the battlefield in the first place.

The 101st sure wished they had brought their 105mms for operation Anaconda, though they might have been happy enough with the ability to carry enough 120mm mortar ammo to last through the fight.
 
So what about these gizmos?

I'm immediately skeptical of the fact that they're supposed to be semi-autonomous. That might make some sense if you're using one to clear a minefield, but why have a self-guided robot just to haul stuff when you're dismounted? If they have a built-in set of manual controls, why throw a computer and sensor array into the mix? I suspect they'll go the way of the XM-8 and it'll become a moot point anyway.

I also doubt they could compete with a real pack animal when it comes to terrain negotiation, but I'm not the expert some of you seem to be. :D
 
MN_Strelok said:
So what about these gizmos?

I'm immediately skeptical of the fact that they're supposed to be semi-autonomous.

You should be. Those are concept drawings. There are probably a dozen things on the wish list for it, and they'll be happy to get two.

Keep in mind the autonomous vehicle challenge was just won a few months back, and involved massive support and mapping ahead of time.

The idea here is that you can send it to a known point to deliver or pick up, and have it come back. You will ONLY do that where it can't be hijacked.

The slave setting means, however, you can have one driver clearing an entire area or driving the whole convoy, which means more troops for sky watch and perimeter security. That means more effect for less troops.

Nice idea, though. I can incorporate that into a current story.
 
madmike said:
You should be. Those are concept drawings. There are probably a dozen things on the wish list for it, and they'll be happy to get two.

Keep in mind the autonomous vehicle challenge was just won a few months back, and involved massive support and mapping ahead of time.

The idea here is that you can send it to a known point to deliver or pick up, and have it come back. You will ONLY do that where it can't be hijacked.

The slave setting means, however, you can have one driver clearing an entire area or driving the whole convoy, which means more troops for sky watch and perimeter security. That means more effect for less troops.

Nice idea, though. I can incorporate that into a current story.

Heck, throw in some radio shack sentry guns and you've got a low-rent PFC.

As in "PFC Snuffy, go check out that alley." :evil:
 
Better some robot than me...;)

That does seem to be the direction we are attempting to head in.

I do wonder though, how far will we go, and how far should we go.

There is a difference.

What do you do when you can no longer afford to send 17 year old boys with rifles up the hill? And your enemy can...

Well, I do not have any good answers, but I can always come up with more questions.:)
 
I'm reading a lot of Hansen (Western Way of War, Carnage and Culture) lately. It ties in with what HJ Poole (Last Hundred Yards, Phantom Soldiers) is also putting forth. We are transitioning from a style of warfare that has always emphasized decisive shock action and total war to prizing the life both of our soldiers and of "civilians" almost over any other military factor.

Our technological superiority and the willingness of our troops to go the extra mile and face the risk has made it possible to fight the cleanest (effective) warfare in human history.

The risk is that the folks on our side, who don't understand the theory or detail of what we do, take that hard to achieve and costly new warfighting and expect it all the time. We figure out a way to save a few thousand men and it is no longer "thank you" it's "why couldn't you save a few hundred more?".

I think, facing asymmetrical opponants, we may have hit the technological limit for a while. We have to make sure the public, the politicians AND our own egg heads and visionaries don't forget that we have always needed infantry and we will for the future and always more than we would like to think.
 
mulishness

brand new member, and probably won't be very vocal :p , but just wanted to comment on mules as pack animals and their abilities.

let me start off by saying that most of my experience is with horses, and so almost all of my mule-information is related to horse information. so, to start with, mules are stronger, pound for pound than horses, although just how much weight they can carry varies by cross. Vern's number of 300-400lbs is a perfectly reasonably number for a 15-16hand animal, weighing about 1200-1500lbs. (most quarter horses - cowboy horses - are about that size, if you need a referent.)

mules are also smarter than horses, less prone to spooking, and more trainable than horses. they can go further on less fodder, and what they do eat can be rougher than what you give to horses. endurance riders would be the modern day equivalent to cav horses on a long march; some of them can get 40 to 50 miles a day out of their animals, but they feed them a high ratio of grain, which is expensive. mules will do that with more hay/graze. (i understand that might not be available, but it's still an advantage.) mules will also go into more areas than horses will; they're more sure-footed and agile.

best of all, mules are less prone to colic. this is a really nice feature, because colic can be - often is - fatal.

i agree that you should take the animals you train with with you. this is because you have no idea what the local animals will be trained for, and what they respond to, but you can train mules to handle just about anything. between the two, i'd far rather take a mule than a horse with me to a battlefield, and i'm an devoted horse-fan.

mule gear from the ground up:
hoof-picks; extra horseshoes; hoof-flex/ neat's foot oil; beogle oil/ horse liniment; polo wraps/ support wraps for general support or strained tendons; boots (optional) for protection; pack-saddle, saddle pad, and assorted d-rings, snaffles, and ties and snaps to attach gear; martingale or chest band if necessary; curry comb for caked on mud; soft brush (you should have individual brushes and combs for each animal); mane and tale combs; fly spray or other insect repellent; halter; lead ropes; pickets and picket line string. red ribbon if the mule is a kicker is standard. whips, twitches, and leads with lip chains. water buckets, even in the jungle. blankets for cold nights, sweat sheets for excruciatingly hot days, fly masks would be nice.

shipping wraps will be necessary, but as they're primarily used to, well, *ship*, it's not like you have to take them 'in the field' with you, as long as you have space for them at the depot.

i don't think you need to attach a full vet to a battalion for mule care, although that would be ideal on the home base. you could probably have a couple people cross-trained as vet medics, the way you have folks cross-trained as field medics. most civilian horse owners do a good deal of their own doctoring because large animal vets are few (which means they're always busy) and far between (which means it will take a while to get there) and clinics/ hospitals are even worse. i know of two large animal hospitals in the US, tho i'm sure there are a few more - one at texas a&m, main campus, and another in louisville, KY. most doctoring is done at the barn.

maintainence care for equids includes: shoes are on a 16 week rotation, provided the shoes don't get thrown off. deworming cycles are every 6 weeks, and the usual is to cycle between 3 and four worming medicines so that the parasites don't get resistent to one. teeth floating - basically, taking a file to the teeth to knock off the sharp points. you do this because most domestic equids don't get enough dirt and sand in their diet to do it for you.

if you're actually in-country for more than 4 months at a time, you can rotate groups of mules thru the shoeing, so you're not doing it all at once. and as someone pointed out, most shoes these days start as blanks, and are just altered a bit in a forge. this takes an anvil, and electric forge, a few shaping tools, and something that basically looks like a giant nail clipper to trim the hoof and later help hold the shoe on while you nail it. nails, of course.

deworming is usually, oral, tho there are intra-venous shots; this requires hitting the big neck vein on the side of the neck. again, something most horse owners take care of themselves.

teeth floating... well, the vet usually does this one, but i think, like shoeing, it's an individual skill you could learn without much difficulty.

there's a bunch of common ailments that most horse owners take care of themselves to a point, too - thrush; strained muscles; colic can often be walked out; minor wounds might require corona or other topical anti-biotic, major surface wounds would require stitching, but horses can be taught to withstand the sensation (twitches help, so does local anesthetic); etc ad nauseum. the big key to equine care is to know the foibles of each animal under your care, and learn how they signal something is wrong. most equids don't make noise if they're in pain. they don't whimper like dogs do, for example.

i don't think it would be that hard to add basically a 'vet medic' specialty as a variant, and i think given the loads being mentioned here that a mule train would be a very good idea in some situations.

i should also remind folks that equids pull much more than they carry. single draft horses regularly break, start, and pull 2 ton+ trees in some fringe forest harvesting operations. so if you can fathom a reason to need an equid to *pull* a wagon or sleigh, the right one can pull quite a lot.

my two cents.

-boogieshoes
 
Farriers use an electric forge?

Gas is cleaner, cheaper, heats faster and is easier to carry in the field.

I suppose they use electric inductance to avoid fumes.

Propane or acetylene would be preferred in the field, depending on the type of unit attached to. Since a good many have a welding/machining section with a torch already aboard a truck, a small tunnel forge would be easy to carry. I recommend a 100 lb anvil, though a 25 would work if you had to.

If there is no attached section, propane would be easier to carry. Several 2lb cylinders in a tunnel forge would allow enough heat to weld or forge for several minutes each.
 
madmike said:
Farriers use an electric forge?

actually, as i learned it, farriers float teeth. horse shoers are properly titled blacksmiths.

Gas is cleaner, cheaper, heats faster and is easier to carry in the field.

I suppose they use electric inductance to avoid fumes.

electric forgers are lighter and take up less space. the plug and play option means you don't have to carry your fuel with you to your client (most barns are wired for electricity, but don't have gas).

istr many complaints about the weight of batteries, so i understand that electric forges might not be an option; they're what i'm used to, so into the list they went. i expect some things on my list of essentials would get replaced with other items as either the need arose, or someone jury-rigged a substitution that happens to work better than the original.

-boogieshoes
 
Always liked the idea of prepositioning supplies in orbit. Containers inside heatshields with rudimentary steering. Just deorbit as needed, though control of space is important lest those containers be destroyed, and those supplies would be incredibly expensive.

Failing that, establishing secret supply dumps elsewhere in the system with ships capable of coming in close and dropping supplies would work, even more expensive though.

Prepostioned supplies are the best kind, you do not have to carry them, they do not have to be delivered, you simply dig them up as needed. You have to maintain more caches than you will need, however, because some of them will be found and the contents stolen. Placing them in other folks' countries might be a bit dangerous too...;) One of the benefits of NATO was that the host governments would secure POMCUS sites for us, cutting down on initial supply requirements in theory.

Edit to add: Why are horse and mule shoes still made out of metal?
 
NMshooter said:
Always liked the idea of prepositioning supplies in orbit. Containers inside heatshields with rudimentary steering. Just deorbit as needed, though control of space is important lest those containers be destroyed, and those supplies would be incredibly expensive.

I did that in "Freehold."

"Failing that, establishing secret supply dumps elsewhere in the system with ships capable of coming in close and dropping supplies would work, even more expensive though."

I did that in "The Weapon.":)

Edit to add: Why are horse and mule shoes still made out of metal?

As opposed to? And why change what works?
 
Well, plastic of course.

Ceramics are out, and I think pretty much everything else was tried long ago and found wanting.

As for why, to reduce weight, after all, we are discussing possible air transport of these mules. No need for nails either, just glue them on.
 
NMshooter said:
Well, plastic of course.

Ceramics are out, and I think pretty much everything else was tried long ago and found wanting.

As for why, to reduce weight, after all, we are discussing possible air transport of these mules. No need for nails either, just glue them on.


Far lower abrasion resistance and hard to form to a permanent shape. It will also deform more easily than metal.

The weight difference wouldn't exceed a couple of pounds tops. If that's an issue, go with titanium-aluminum alloy shoes, but you'll need a hotter forge.
 
NMshooter said:
Edit to add: Why are horse and mule shoes still made out of metal?

not all of them are. there are rubber shoes out there, but they get chewed up pretty quickly. i've also seen special shoes where there's a rubber 'sole' inserted between the hoof and the shoe before the shoe is nailed on.

the big evolution in shoeing technology outside of standardized blanks is the metal mix they're made of. used to be, shoes were a cold-forged iron, almost like the stuff in wrought iron gates, now they're usually made of high-quality, lightweight steel or aluminum blends. steel adds durability, and, believe it or not, a certain amount of 'give' - like shock absorbers - and the aluminum blends are used for a) racers, and b) draft horses. and even so, shoes the size of dinner plates (literally!) are bloody heavy! :what:

speaking of shoes... if any of you ever decorate with horseshoes, make sure the shoe is open side up. i saw a person hang some shoes once upside down and it just absolutely killed me - doing it that way means all the luck runs out!

-boogieshoes (superstitious like all good horse folk are)
 
NMshooter said:
No need for nails either, just glue them on.

you don't want to glue 'em on. hooves are nails. big, honking nails. that grow, which will stress the glue bond as the hoof outgrows the shoe. and the hoof would probably end up growing 'over' the shoe'. add in a sand and dirt to abrade the glue, weather changes causing fatigue cycling in the glue bonds, and getting knocked on every concievable rock in the road... all you'd be *doing* is glueing the shoes back on. worse, murphy is fully evident in horse-land too. the glue bond would probably decide to release just at the same time the mule decides to through his once-a-year bucking histrionic fit. then you'd be playing horse-shoes with people's heads...

trust me on this, nails are better. they'll help the shoe stay flush with the hoof wall as it grows, which is much, much better than the horse growing out of it's shoes so soon.

also, you add caulks for traction on slippery surfaces in many cases - they have to be nailed in anyways. better, by far, to secure the plates with nails.

-boogieshoes
 
Well, whatever would work best.

Which is perhaps the point of the thread, what does work best?

Moving stuff from point A to point B is easy, so long as people are not shooting at you.

I assume that log types already know what and how much, but getting it there is the hardest part.

As MANPADS become more commonplace and more countries acquire submarines deployed forces will have to find ways to do without a steady supply chain.

As I read through Rommel's Attacks I am finding that he had the same problems we had in Afghanistan. Sometimes he had mules available, too.

Something like a helicopter, with a supersonic top speed and as much armor as an M1, with tons of cargo space would be nice.

I think John Ringo had something like that in his Posleen wars books, and they had a nasty habit of getting shot down...

I guess you just adapt, improvise, and overcome.
 
madmike said:
Farriers use an electric forge?

Farriers by and large don't use forges at all. At one time, the farrier made the shoes. Nowadays we mostly use "keg" shoes (so called because at one time they were shipped in kegs.) The farrier selects the shoe size and shape that best fits and cold-forms it (usually just a few raps with a hammer).

In some very high-priced stables, and for some special animals, shoes are still special made -- but that's as uncommon as making boots to order for infantrymen.

If you want to pay extra, you can get "hot-shoeing." In this case a made or keg shoe is heated and held against the hoof, buring the high spots off the hoof wall and supposedly ensuring a better fit. But nowadays cold shoeing is the rule. The hoof is trimmed and rasped and the shoe nailed on cold.

Shoeing horses and mules is very simple -- I can put on a shoe faster than I can change a flat, and with a lot less work. In the old days, a cavalry platoon carried extra shoes, nails and basic tools and the trooper himself would nail on a shoe if one was thrown -- and usually get cussed by his sergeant for not tightening it when it first came loose.
 
Vern Humphrey said:
Farriers by and large don't use forges at all. At one time, the farrier made the shoes. Nowadays we mostly use "keg" shoes (so called because at one time they were shipped in kegs.) The farrier selects the shoe size and shape that best fits and cold-forms it (usually just a few raps with a hammer).

That would be the easiest approach with an iron shoe. I recall I've seen them cataloged by size.

OTOH, if you run out of the right size, you'd need the heat to shape a different one.

But since there's no heat treating or other purity issues involved, a clean fire isn't necessary and a campfire would suffice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top