Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Overloaded Soldier: Why U.S. Infantry Now Carry More Weight Than Ever

popularmechanics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 148 posts

Re: The Overloaded Soldier: Why U.S. Infantry Now Carry More Weight Than Ever

#51

Post by mcv »

michaelt wrote: post #43
Kiro wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? The soldiers don't need to carry the "nice to have" items and if it get struck it's not such a big deal.

1. Being OK to lose doesn't fix the problem of it being noisy. 2. There aren't many truly "It's OK to lose it" items, as they'd all have been lost by overburdened soldiers already.

But it does fix the problem of it becoming an attractive target for the enemy. If the mule carries special weaponry, taking it out is attractive to the enemy. If it only carries stuff that the squad isn't going to need in the current engagement, there's no reason for the enemy to focus on it.

Noise is a different issue of course, but the article mentions it only for the walking "big dog" mules, not for wheeled ones. And if the mule only carries stuff that's not immediately essential, it doesn't have to stay close to the squad. If it can follow them autonomously (which is probably a requirement anyway), it could trail them at some distance.

Re: The Overloaded Soldier: Why U.S. Infantry Now Carry More Weight Than Ever

#52

Post by mnw21cam »

szopa wrote: post #14

This sounds insane. My hobby is medium distance hiking in (say, 250 km/155 mi na week) in the Scandinavian Arctic, so I have to carry all my food. I'm a fan of ultralight hiking, so my whole summer baggage weights around 10 kg/20 lbs excluding water. I invested some money in lighter equipment, yes, but most of my weight savings is stuff I simply do not take with me, or things that serve in multiple roles (eg. my hiki…

Agreed. I remember going hiking, and having my rucksack weighed at the airport. It was 11kg, but my friend's was 14kg. That difference meant he got worn out much quicker than me.

Re: The Overloaded Soldier: Why U.S. Infantry Now Carry More Weight Than Ever

#53

Post by tcpekin »

michaelt wrote: post #42
erikpukinskis wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, if electronic mules are so great, I would expect to see some actual mules still in service.

According to "FM 3-05.213 (FM 31-27) Special Forces Use of Pack Animals" from 2004 [1] "Today and throughout the operational continuum, SF may find themselves involved in operations in rural or remote environments, such as Operations UPHOLD DEMOCRACY or ENDURING FREEDOM, using pack animals." [1] https://fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-05-213.pdf

Wow, this document is fascinating.

Re: The Overloaded Soldier: Why U.S. Infantry Now Carry More Weight Than Ever

#54

Post by ForHackernews »

taurath wrote: post #41
sa46 wrote: post #38

Ah, an article I can comment on. I was an Infantry officer for 6 years and did all the normal schooling and a deployment. This is a pretty well done article. Here's some general ideas to keep in mind. - Most dismounted missions are run from trucks or an established forward operating base, so you don't carry a huge rucksack most of the time because you can just go back to your base. - Like the article states, even a d…

> Public perception and the news cycle makes the death of American service member a bigger deal than in past conflicts. How does this compare to say Vietnam? It feels to me like the populace is worse divided, it’s disaffected. It seems like the new normal to have some god forsaken outpost where a few dozen soldiers die a year (not to mention thousands of local population - they’re even less of a consideration).

The populace is not more divided now. They just don't remember how it used to be.

> “People have completely forgotten that in 1972 we had over nineteen hundred domestic bombings in the United States.” — Max Noel, FBI (ret.)

https://status451.com/2017/01/20/days-of-rage/

Re: The Overloaded Soldier: Why U.S. Infantry Now Carry More Weight Than Ever

#55

Post by chrisseaton »

szopa wrote: post #14

This sounds insane. My hobby is medium distance hiking in (say, 250 km/155 mi na week) in the Scandinavian Arctic, so I have to carry all my food. I'm a fan of ultralight hiking, so my whole summer baggage weights around 10 kg/20 lbs excluding water. I invested some money in lighter equipment, yes, but most of my weight savings is stuff I simply do not take with me, or things that serve in multiple roles (eg. my hiki…

It's also clothing. I bet you don't wear a thick long-sleeved shirt, a helmet and a headset digging into your ear while you're hiking.

You do just get used to it quite quickly. 10kg is a light load for going for a run in the military community.

Re: The Overloaded Soldier: Why U.S. Infantry Now Carry More Weight Than Ever

#56

Post by Kiro »

michaelt wrote: post #43
Kiro wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? The soldiers don't need to carry the "nice to have" items and if it get struck it's not such a big deal.

1. Being OK to lose doesn't fix the problem of it being noisy. 2. There aren't many truly "It's OK to lose it" items, as they'd all have been lost by overburdened soldiers already.

The wheeled mules I'm talking about are not noisy though. From the article:

> Although quadruped robots like BigDog from Boston Dynamics is no longer in the running (it turned out to be a bit too noisy), there are numerous wheeled alternatives.

Regarding your second point the article seems to come to a different conclusion:

> A British army study, called Project Payne, found that far too much of what is carried is “just in case” and that the amount of ammunition carried by troops is excessive.

Re: The Overloaded Soldier: Why U.S. Infantry Now Carry More Weight Than Ever

#57

Post by Balero »

taurath wrote: post #41
sa46 wrote: post #38

Ah, an article I can comment on. I was an Infantry officer for 6 years and did all the normal schooling and a deployment. This is a pretty well done article. Here's some general ideas to keep in mind. - Most dismounted missions are run from trucks or an established forward operating base, so you don't carry a huge rucksack most of the time because you can just go back to your base. - Like the article states, even a d…

> Public perception and the news cycle makes the death of American service member a bigger deal than in past conflicts. How does this compare to say Vietnam? It feels to me like the populace is worse divided, it’s disaffected. It seems like the new normal to have some god forsaken outpost where a few dozen soldiers die a year (not to mention thousands of local population - they’re even less of a consideration).

There has been an order of magnitude less casualties in both Iraq(4,424) and Afghanistan(1,856), than in Vietnam (58,220).

Re: The Overloaded Soldier: Why U.S. Infantry Now Carry More Weight Than Ever

#58

Post by Balero »

gadders wrote: post #48
sa46 wrote: post #38

Ah, an article I can comment on. I was an Infantry officer for 6 years and did all the normal schooling and a deployment. This is a pretty well done article. Here's some general ideas to keep in mind. - Most dismounted missions are run from trucks or an established forward operating base, so you don't carry a huge rucksack most of the time because you can just go back to your base. - Like the article states, even a d…

What's your opinion on soldiers addiing more of a fitness emphasis to strength, rather than just cardiovascular fitness? EG: https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/heavier-kit-stronger-soldiers/

There is a tradeoff in fitness (a person can only train so much). If you want a stronger soldier, then they are gonna be worse in a different way, ie, lose some cardio. A person can only do, and maintain, so much.

Re: The Overloaded Soldier: Why U.S. Infantry Now Carry More Weight Than Ever

#59

Post by barry-cotter »

taurath wrote: post #41
sa46 wrote: post #38

Ah, an article I can comment on. I was an Infantry officer for 6 years and did all the normal schooling and a deployment. This is a pretty well done article. Here's some general ideas to keep in mind. - Most dismounted missions are run from trucks or an established forward operating base, so you don't carry a huge rucksack most of the time because you can just go back to your base. - Like the article states, even a d…

> Public perception and the news cycle makes the death of American service member a bigger deal than in past conflicts. How does this compare to say Vietnam? It feels to me like the populace is worse divided, it’s disaffected. It seems like the new normal to have some god forsaken outpost where a few dozen soldiers die a year (not to mention thousands of local population - they’re even less of a consideration).

Yeah but no one in the median journalist’s social circle is dying. The change from a draft to a volunteer army was enormous. No one goes to war against their will anymore. People care much, much less if it’s not their brother, their son, their cousin. And when volunteers come home in a box their family knows they chose to go. Hard to organise a march against war out of people who either have no personal connection to the military or who want to honour the service of the fallen.

Re: The Overloaded Soldier: Why U.S. Infantry Now Carry More Weight Than Ever

#60

Post by Moru »

dingaling wrote: post #44
szopa wrote: post #14

This sounds insane. My hobby is medium distance hiking in (say, 250 km/155 mi na week) in the Scandinavian Arctic, so I have to carry all my food. I'm a fan of ultralight hiking, so my whole summer baggage weights around 10 kg/20 lbs excluding water. I invested some money in lighter equipment, yes, but most of my weight savings is stuff I simply do not take with me, or things that serve in multiple roles (eg. my hiki…

> avoid redundancy That's really dangerous advice for anyone inexperienced in a particular endurance activity away from contact. The military have a phrase: one is none and two are one. For anything that is life-critical, having only one is too risky.

That advice might be why there is so many SOS-calls from the swedish mountains every year, from hikers getting stranded somewhere in the wilderness. The phone coverage isn't great everywhere either...
Post reply on HN