"World War II vs. Today: Comparing the Soldier’s Load" Topic

… in Two Eras

"With the soldier's load growing beyond the bounds of reason, and the Army set to replace the M4 Carbine in some units with the new Interim Combat Service Rifle, questions have arisen about how the soldier's burden has changed over time. In the comments section of several of my articles relating to these subjects, readers asked if I could compare the current soldier's load with the soldier's load from World War II, to see how they compare. As always, I am happy to oblige.

What we'll be doing is comparing the Approach March Load (AML) of the Rifleman from 2017 versus the Rifleman of 1944-45, as well as the AML of the Automatic Rifleman (SAW gunner) of 2017 versus his counterpart of 1944-45…"

Main page

link

Armand

Hmm, I never heard the term, "approach march load" in my infantry days…

However, I did get to weigh my rucksack and LBE prior to a one of my major training missions back in the 90's. I was then an AG on an M60 team:

Rucksack: 110lbs.
LBE: 45 lbs.
This weight included all my equipment and full ammo load.If I remember correctly I was carrying the tripod, T and E equipment, 210 rounds of 5.56 and I think 4-600 rounds of 7.62. Possibly a spare barrel as well.
The gunner usually carried the MG, night sights and more 7.62 than I did. Plus a pistol (no blank ammo for that, though).
Then add helmet, rifle, etc….no body armor though (which would have been the kevlar vest at the time, which we rarely used).

Then add parachute. I could barely walk up the ramp of the C130 when we loaded for our jump into the training area. Putting the ruck on was an exercise in agility and strength as well. Battle buddy was a must….

That was with BLANK ammunition.

Soldier Load Carriage, Injuries, Rehabilitation and Physical Conditioning: An International Approach

link

Soldiers are often required to carry heavy loads that can exceed 45 kg. The physiological costs and biomechanical responses to these loads, whilst varying with the contexts in which they are carried, have led to soldier injuries. These injuries can range from musculoskeletal injuries (e.g., joint/ligamentous injuries and stress fractures) to neurological injuries (e.g., paresthesias), and impact on both the soldier and the army in which they serve.

Following treatment to facilitate initial recovery from injuries, soldiers must be progressively reconditioned for load carriage. Optimal conditioning and reconditioning practices include load carriage sessions with a frequency of one session every 10–14 days in conjunction with a program of both resistance and aerobic training. S

peed of march and grade and type of terrain covered are factors that can be adjusted to manipulate load carriage intensity, limiting the need to adjust load weight alone. Factors external to the load carriage program, such as other military duties, can also impart physical loading and must be considered as part of any load carriage conditioning/reconditioning program.

With the typical web gear and pack used before 1980, it was hard to carry over 70 pounds. Weights are increased now because of the new packs and rigs that can hold more.

Wolfhag

Dismounted from Humvee, my walking around Baghdad load was 95 lbs – just water, armor, ammo, and M-4. A day long patrol was brutal in the summer heat. Our support was turret mounted M2 or M249B so we did not hump their ammo too.

There was some discussion in 1942 on the weights to be carried by Rifle Platoon members in the British Army. Abbreviated information was (rounded to nearest pounds) -

Platoon Sjt – 60
Orderly – 68
Batman – 60
Atk Rifle No.1 – 82
Atk Rifle No.2 – 76
2-in mortar No.1 – 92
2-in mortar No.2 – 83

Sec cmdrs – 54
Bren No.1 – 69
Bren No.2 – 83
Riflemen – 60

That was based on the 1937 pattern equipment I believe.

Gary

Thanks.

Armand

I've heard that the load of a soldier from the days of the Roman Legions up to today has not changed at all: as much as the poor fellow can carry. :)

With body armour and advanced combat informatic systems the load of a combat infantryman is considerable and requires considerable core body strength – as noted, however, combat infantry loads were never light

Thanks also…

Armand

Pity the forward observers, who carry all that AND a radio. When I was a 2LT, the Army had just replaced the old PRC-77 with the PRC-119 SINCGARS, and the base RT-1523 unit weighed 30 pounds by itself.

Fun to carry, even more fun to jump! Everyone was glad when the 1523-D replaced it, a third of the mass and the weight, it was a miraculous improvement.