Infantry Equipment Weight

[Threelions]

I'm trying to write an Anthropology paper but i cant find certain evidence to argue my point. I need a link ( or links) that tell the average weight carried by modern infanteers, and the weight carried by WWI or WWII infanteers. Any help would be appreciated!

Cheers

[scm77]

It's will obviously very on what mission they are doing, but I read somewhere that the average infatryman in afghanistan was carrying 110 lbs. I have no idea how accurate that is though.

[NcDeuce]

Originally Posted by Threelions

Over the next few weeks i think Kerry will try and drift away from War, and move towards domestic issues. why? Because the bBush camp only has one platform for re-election, and that is war. If kerry shows the US public that he is a president for the USA and not for WAR then he will stand a very good chance of winning

Surely with all of your knowledge and insight into Bush's sole reason for running for President of the United States, wouldn't you think that Three Lions would know about how much equipment someone who goes to war carries?

Cheers

[crazyman]

there was an article awhile back in maxim (yea i know, not the greatest source) on the topic...WW1/2 infantrymen were carrying somewhere in the range of 20-40 lbs of equipment. obviously WW2 was more towards the higher end, and WW1 towards the lower.

[scm77]

20-40 pounds. That is extremely light.

[Steve Andrews]

I would expect that the weights carried would be about the same.
Modern equipment is lighter - but, as every infantryman knows, that means you can carry more of it!!!!

[DANJANOU]

I remember reading an article way back ( 10 years ago or so) in the Infantry Journal where the author did list the relative weights of infantry soldiers in WW1, WW2, Korea and (then) modern grunt.

The weight kept going up mainly because of the gear. Cdn troops in WW1 and WW2 didn't have framed rucks with sleeping bags (inner/outer) ranger blanket shelter half, air mattress, spare boots etc. They carried a small pack and their basic webbing.

Also look at the weapons carried, the basic load (number of mags/rds) for the C7 is more than the FNC1 which in turn was more than the old SMLE and 60 rds.

[Threelions]

Originally Posted by NcDeuce

Surely with all of your knowledge and insight into Bush's sole reason for running for President of the United States, wouldn't you think that Three Lions would know about how much equipment someone who goes to war carries?

Cheers

Thanks for your constructive post! My comment that you quoted was a political comment, not a military comment. I served in the infantry for a few years and remember lugging 60lbs, but this is in no way close to what i would expect a person to carry in combat.

Cheers

[martinexsquaddie]

there was a comment on arrse.co.uk awhile back on this comment.
someone said talk to some serious reennactors typical grunts load not changed much since roman times around 60lb plus maxing out around 12Olb. theres a limit to what somebody can carry for an extended period of tme.
so 60lb is probably about standard

[EchoSierra2]

mistake

[EchoSierra2]

Originally Posted by martinexsquaddie

there was a comment on arrse.co.uk awhile back on this comment.
someone said talk to some serious reennactors typical grunts load not changed much since roman times around 60lb plus maxing out around 12Olb. theres a limit to what somebody can carry for an extended period of tme.
so 60lb is probably about standard

Just spoke to a good friend of mine who was USMC EOD and he said that back when he booted it was around 80lbs. They use to hump that !@#$ all day. He said that it was probably only going to get heavier as the years went on. Go figure. With all these alloys, fibers and composites, you would think that it would be lighter. But yeah martin 60 sounds a bit light for '04 but it's close enough.

[EchoSierra2]

Originally Posted by scm77

It's will obviously very on what mission they are doing, but I read somewhere that the average infatryman in afghanistan was carrying 110 lbs. I have no idea how accurate that is though.

Pretty damn Close brother in the late 80's and early 90's I have been told that it was around 80. I was told that it would probably get hevier as the years went on. So 110 sounds about right.

[eggroll]

sheesh

weapon (for the sake of argument) 8 lbs AR15 loaded with small optic (ala AP COMPM)
ammunition 12 mags 13lbs

water 5qts (argument 1Lt roughly equivalent to a 1qt) 10lbs

LBE empty (3 lbs)
FAK = (1lbs)
clothing (on person) 3.5lbs
Boots (1.5lbs)
Foodstuff (2 lbs)
signal equipment (2lbs)
radio (1-2lbs)
knife/bayo (1lbs)
misc equipment (10lbs)
mission specific equipment (10-50lbs)

and all the sudden it hits HOME.... an interesting thing starts to appear over the course of review is that you will find load ranging from 1/4-1/2 the infantryman's bodyweight.


BTW if you still havent figured it out, 50-100lbs of lightweight equipment and mayhem gear is STILL 50-100lbs of equipment


2BTW - My last tactical pistol class, I had on body armor (4lbs) 5L of water, clothing, Glock 19, 6 mags, 200rnds loose, misc belt gear. Just shooting in front of a target I had on close to 25lbs of gear and I felt UNencumbered.

EGG

[bishop1]

Well in WW1/2 they didnt have any kind of body armor or anything i dont think did they? Where as in Korea/Nam they had the flak jackets, and now they have the Inteceptor or F.S.B.E. armor, and that in itself probably weights 20lbs or so

[Germaine]

on average for me i carry 80lbs and plus (with Basic ammo and water) we usually carry more depending on the situation