"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

Wow. Great read. Both my sobs can attest to the load. My oldest weighed 135 lb and was almost carrying his entire weight around. My youngest bulked up to 150 lb.

The rock sacks have improved greatly since WW2. Starting in Vietnam the ruck sack began to focus on weight distribution on a soldiers back. This allowed for greater capacity.

In many ways tech makes the load lighter. But it seems that just means you can carry more stuff ! Didn't have a lot of the tech in WWI, WWII, etc. A lot more devices, to go along with more tech …

Yep one example is the bulky sleeping bag used in Vietnam and before being replaced with the compact foam sleeping mat.

That is sobering.

Glad you like it…

Armand

Not just that but boots are still a problem. Show me anyone's feet after 100 miles and it isn't pretty. Add another 50 miles and under current loads you are looking at additional long-term joint and back issues. Boots still have a long way to go.

I love that logic, but it seems so true.

Technology has made every single item so much lighter, so the poor soldier can carry even more stuff. No, that is brilliant and (now) obvious

Yeah … we used to say … there is no such thing as "Light Infantry" … That is the way it seemed in the 101.

This topic pops up every now and then, and I see the US Army continues to fail this lesson.

In the early 90's (as a young infantryman) I had the opportunity to actually weigh my total gear before embarking on a airborne assault training exercise. At the time I was the AG for the M60 team (only two persons; we did not have enough troops for the full 3 person team-the extras went to the rifle squads). Now keep in mind this is with blank ammunition, which is about 1/2 the weight of live.

-I was carrying 600 rounds of 7.62 (blank).
-210 rounds of 5.56 (blank).
-The T&E mechanism.
The tripod (yes, we used the tripod; my company was obsessed with the tripods for the GPMGs).
-1 round for the 60mm mortar platoon.
-the rest of my personal gear.

My rucksack weighed over 110 pounds.
My LBE weight over 45 pounds.
Then was my rifle, uniform, helmet (no body armor, mind you, that the troops wear today which is over 20lbs with the ceramic plates…)

Then there was the parachute.

I did not jump out of the airplane. I fell out.

I weighed 160lbs at the time….

Watch some film of US troops in Afghanistan. The locals called US infantry "mules."
History does not seem to change in western armies much, does it Marius?

Thanks

Armand

Maggot +1

Despite belonging to the Navy, I served with the Army's Civil Affairs brigade in Baghdad in 2006. My kit was 95 lbs for a midday stroll on a warm summer day. We got used to the weight, but the heat was miserable. The armor kept the heat in and you baked like a Crab in a shell. After a day long patrol opening the armor and dropping it was a huge relief. Sailors are meant for the sea, not the sand.

Thanks also…

Armand

I had ETS'd[RIF'd] in early'90. So, the only sandbox I got to play in 2-3 times was the NTC. Been to Panama 3 times in that jungle. And the 2 winters in the ROK. But I think the Mojave Desert sucked the most …