A Soldier's Load, and His Lack of Mobility

[Vern Humphrey]

How much do mules eat and drink?

As a rule of thumb, an equine needs about 2 to 2 1/2% of his body weight in fodder a day. That is primarily because his digestion system is designed for high-volume, low-nutrition foods (grass.) The water needed is based on the amount of work and the temperature and humidity -- but will run several gallons on an average day.

On the other hand, how much gas, oil and spare parts does a motor vehicle need?

 

[Jeff White]

I really don't think there is any doubt that mules would be easier to support then vehicles. What we'd save in HMMWV glow plugs and glow plug controller boxes alone would probably pay for the maintenance of the mules .

Two mules would almost equal the practical load carrying capacity of the old M151 Jeep and trailer. And they would go places you couldn't take the truck. I don't know what the payload of the John Deere Gator is, but I'd guess it's 4-500 pounds.

We're talking light Infantry here. Basically one HMMWV for the commander and an FMTV for the company supply sergeant. Everyone else walks. Pack animals wouldn't be practical for units that are organized to be more organically mobiile.

There will always be a requirement for light Infantry. Mountains and jungles and large forest areas aren't good terrain for units that require a lot of vehicle or air support to sustain themselves.

Jeff

 

[carebear]

If a mule weighs 1500 pounds, that's 30-40 pounds of fodder and say 4 gallons at 8 pounds; so 75 pounds of food and water / day.

Mules can run on local-purchase hay (depending on region I guess) and if we can get water for the men we can get it for the mules. That's not a lot of specialty items to ship or move forward. A little grain and the sutlery stuff to the base camp.

 

[VorpalSpork]

Found this last night while wandering the internet.

The Modern Warrior's Combat Load - Dismounted Operations In Afghanistan, April - May 2003

 

[madmike]

How much do mules eat and drink?

That's covered in the link I posted from Boogie.

Proper selection means an animal that can forage well and minimize resources. There are also references to the load of oats brought along.

 

[Sam]

Not a whole lot of 1500 lb mules around these days. Most are closer to 1000. You might even prefer to go with a lighter mule than that. The smaller stock carry a higher payload in proportion to their weight. They are avaliable in every size from little pony mules for work in mines to sugar mules equal in size and capacity to the large draft breeds of horse

As for feed, mules take about 1/3 less grain than a comparable sized horse when being worked and if not being worked, need no grain if there is decent graze. They also do better on rough forage than horses.
Unless worked exclusively on roads or rock most mules get on well without shoes.

Here is the real reason why we don't use them and are not likely to in the future. Apply it to other thing as you see them fall in place: It requires true skill and a little bit of natural ability. Some people have it some do not, just the way it is. People who do not have it sometimes resent those that do. It's why we are always trying to come up with a machine to replace a dogs nose too.

Sam

 

[madmike]

Here is the real reason why we don't use them and are not likely to in the future. Apply it to other thing as you see them fall in place: It requires true skill and a little bit of natural ability. Some people have it some do not, just the way it is. People who do not have it sometimes resent those that do. It's why we are always trying to come up with a machine to replace a dogs nose too.
Sam

Yeah, but I LIKE the military leopards in my SF

I'll be writing more of them. Including the jump trained ones.

 

[carebear]

Yeah, but I LIKE the military leopards in my SF

I'll be writing more of them. Including the jump trained ones.

I think you should rethink leopards in a recon role.

No matter how sneaky they try to be, in the end they're always spotted.

 

[spartacus2002]

I think you should rethink leopards in a recon role.

No matter how sneaky they try to be, in the end they're always spotted.

Ban carebear -- it's for the children!

 

[madmike]

I think you should rethink leopards in a recon role.

No matter how sneaky they try to be, in the end they're always spotted.

Hanging is too good for a punster.

He should be drawn and quoted.

On a serious note, the reason leopards were thought endangered for so long was because they are THAT good at hiding. There was an article in Smithsonian a couple of years back about leopards being tagged, and researchers getting within 10 yards with GPS and unable to see them.

Capstick and other professionals were saying this for decades.

Of course, a bunny-humper I ran into a couple of years ago told me that he "knew for a fact that the hunters and game guides who said that were wrong." His African experience was zero.
:banghead:

 

[ghost squire]

Allright I'll play the devils advocate here. Other than jungle and roadless mountain warfare, how are mules better then our Mercedes IFAVs? Say we fitted them with a hybrid diesel electric engine for special purposes... You could use the electric engine for about 2 hours and sneak up real close on an enemy. You can mount a GPMG or HMG on an IFAV, and I think it would use less weight, supply wise, to keep it running. It would also have better manueverability on muddy terrain would it not? Due to the difference in surface area and PSI exerted on the mud.

I can see mules being very useful, in fact vital, for specific purposes. Guerilla warfare, operations conducted far away from a home base such as the British marauders in SE Asia during WW2. Although they were supplied by air for the most part. Movements through mountains with no suitable roads...

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Allright I'll play the devils advocate here. Other than jungle and roadless mountain warfare, how are mules better then our Mercedes IFAVs? Say we fitted them with a hybrid diesel electric engine for special purposes... You could use the electric engine for about 2 hours and sneak up real close on an enemy. You can mount a GPMG or HMG on an IFAV, and I think it would use less weight, supply wise, to keep it running. It would also have better manueverability on muddy terrain would it not? Due to the difference in surface area and PSI exerted on the mud.

Jungle and trackless mountains is exactly what we're advocating mules for.

I can see mules being very useful, in fact vital, for specific purposes. Guerilla warfare, operations conducted far away from a home base such as the British marauders in SE Asia during WW2. Although they were supplied by air for the most part. Movements through mountains with no suitable roads...

British Chindits, American Marauders.

 

[madmike]

It would also have better manueverability on muddy terrain would it not? Due to the difference in surface area and PSI exerted on the mud.

No vehicle has a tighter turning radius than a mule.

While the surface pressure of the vehicle could be lower, that would predicate larger tires and greater visibility, as well as larger turning radius. Also, in certain trees or scrub, a wheeled vehicle just will not fit. A donkey or mule is much narrower.

The surface pressure issue isn't that important. A mule can lift a stuck foot straight out. A wheeled vehicle just spins.

 

[NMshooter]

So, in our light infantry company does the commander walk or does he get a horse?



All kidding aside, a lot of militaries up to WW1 had horses for the officers. I suspect the radio makes that an unneeded expense, but either way top is gonna have fun marching with everyone else...

Having a small number of horse mobile infantry available would definitely be useful, as scouts if nothing else. You do still run into the old 1 in 4 as a horse holder problem, but for scouts this would not be as big a deal. Though I guess the UAV makes this whole question moot.

You can carry the UAV on muleback...

 

[ghost squire]

No vehicle has a tighter turning radius than a mule.

Obviously you misunderstood what I was saying, but anyway. So in fact in muddy terrain a mule with 500 pounds on its back would be less likely to get stuck in the mud then a Land Rover?

Jungle and trackless mountains is exactly what we're advocating mules for.

Allright in that case it makes sense. For some reason I got the impression mules were supposed to replace trucks for shipping things...

 

[madmike]

Obviously you misunderstood what I was saying, but anyway. So in fact in muddy terrain a mule with 500 pounds on its back would be less likely to get stuck in the mud then a Land Rover?

I think with 500 lbs the mule would founder. But with a normal load, he can move ONE foot at a time to get unstuck. Once a vehicle is stuck you need a winch.

Mules ARE still used by a great many militaries in odd terrain, including our own. Bicycle and ski mounted troops are still around. I wouldn't rule out any mode for rough terrain...except maybe the pogo stick.

Although...

 

[carebear]

Isn't there a "dumb enough to ride a pogo stick in a minefield" joke already?

If there isn't, there should be.

 

[ghost squire]

I recall that some of our airborne troops use foldable mountain bikes sometimes.

http://www.montagueco.com/productpara.html

http://www.militarybikes.com/pro4.html

 

[Vern Humphrey]

So, in our light infantry company does the commander walk or does he get a horse?



All kidding aside, a lot of militaries up to WW1 had horses for the officers. I suspect the radio makes that an unneeded expense, but either way top is gonna have fun marching with everyone else...

Having a small number of horse mobile infantry available would definitely be useful, as scouts if nothing else. You do still run into the old 1 in 4 as a horse holder problem, but for scouts this would not be as big a deal. Though I guess the UAV makes this whole question moot.

You can carry the UAV on muleback...

Colonel John Osteen, my brigade commander in Viet Nam, was Company Tactics Department chief at Benning later. He wanted to develop a flying machine for the company commander. He showed me some mockups and said, "Think what you could have done with this in Viet Nam, Vern."

I thought about it and said, "I could have strapped Lieutenant Boulware (a real loser) in, set it on full UP, and watched to see where he drew fire from." Then I gently reminded him of the Second Rule of Combat ("Shoot the man in the funny hat.")

Mounted scouts might well be a good idea in some situations -- but if only the Company Commander is mounted, well . . .

 

[NMshooter]

I remember seeing footage of a one man flying platform built in the 60's or 70's.

Suspect it was pretty noisy, in addition to being obvious. Remember some pretty neat looking one man helicopters on the same show, they were not very noisy.

VorpalSpork, thank you very much for posting that link! For anyone who has not downloaded that .pdf yet, I highly recommend it. I knew loads were high, but average fighting loads in excess of 60lbs.? Clearly no less ammunition could be carried, the only places for significant weight reduction were body armor and water.

I have performed physical labor in worse heat than that, and I drank about a gallon an hour, still sweated it all out real fast. Can not reduce water consumption, which means it has to be carried somewhere... As for the armor, for some missions it might be left behind, at least the SAPI plates, having mules to carry it would avoid leaving it.

I did take note of the recommendation for mechanical mule substitutes, even referring to them as mules, but carefully not mentioning any actual four legged beasts of burden...

I must admit, the mule may not be the one size fits all answer, but it sure looks good for some uses.

 

[madmike]

I remember seeing footage of a one man flying platform built in the 60's or 70's.

Used in a Bond movie (THunderball, IIRC), though theirs may have been a mockup on wires.

Noisy, blew lots of dust, and had a flight time in seconds. Up, over, down. That's it.

You could do the same thing with an observation kite (Observer hangs from it) or a balloon. And get shot at.

Or you can use satellite and AWACS intel and an Air Liaison Officer or USAF Combat Controller

But mounted for rough terrain, even if it's a rotating chance or minor casualties, means moving faster than on foot.

 

[zpo]

If your talking about the jet pack, it was the real one in the movie. Flown by the inventor, not the actor.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

If your talking about the jet pack, it was the real one in the movie. Flown by the inventor, not the actor.

I saw the thing demonstrated at Fort Bragg around '66 -- it had to be flown by the inventor. No one else was fool enough.

 

[madmike]

he definition of the word "subtle" might just bring along a hatchet and take a few swings.
-stolen from Cordex

I wouldn't recognize subtlety if it was painted purple, dancing naked on a harpsichord.
-stolen from Blackadder

 

[NMshooter]

I believe I saw that platform on a show about hovercraft, it had a small jet engine, and the operator was shooting an M-1 carbine from it.

And as far as intel goes, all that stuff is great, but we still need folks who speak the local lingo to do things the old fashioned way. As in so much else, "Get both!" would seem to be the rule.

And I want the magic Hollywood software that does quick and easy photo interpretation while you wait.

Still think the UAV will turn out to be a wonderful thing, seems to be doing well so far.