Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Though you guys might like this photo collection...

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_vault/2014/08/08/history_of_soldiers_battle_gear_thom_atkinson_photo_project_soldiers_inventories.html

I guess they use to call them Marius' Mules for a reason.

 Easy E wrote:
I guess they use to call them Marius' Mules for a reason.

There's no Roman equipment in the photo series though, is there?

No but it is epic cool.

 Hordini wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
I guess they use to call them Marius' Mules for a reason.

There's no Roman equipment in the photo series though, is there?

No, but I doubt the load was any smaller back then.

Also, ont he Pho-Togs site their is a section of Airfix ruins. Fun.

They're missing the tobacco and pics of girls.


Really cool, thanks for the share. I love stuff like this.

Jebus. US carry more crap then the Brit's (modern)

Do all the modern British soldiers carry metal detectors?

edit

Sorry re read it, it specifically said sappers do. But surely they would carry more than just the Metal Detector as extra kit?

 Jihadin wrote:
Jebus. US carry more crap then the Brit's (modern)

No kidding... he's at least 1 or 2 mags short of basic load


and I think they broke his first aid kit apart to provide more "impact" but I know our IFAK would put his gear to shame (as far as sheer number of items)

 Easy E wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
I guess they use to call them Marius' Mules for a reason.

There's no Roman equipment in the photo series though, is there?

No, but I doubt the load was any smaller back then.

Also, ont he Pho-Togs site their is a section of Airfix ruins. Fun.

That's probably true. The funny thing is, in terms of total weight, modern soldiers often carry more than ancient and medieval soldiers.

But didnt soldiers march a hell of a lot more back then? So a lot of their baggage was in carts and so on. I thought that made sense really.

Soldiers (correct me if wrong) dont have to march to the other country for a fight (or sail, then march) so the better mobility became, the more people could carry into combat.

Not sure though, I could be wrong. But I would rather carry more and get transported personally.

 Swastakowey wrote:
But didnt soldiers march a hell of a lot more back then? So a lot of their baggage was in carts and so on. I thought that made sense really.

Soldiers (correct me if wrong) dont have to march to the other country for a fight (or sail, then march) so the better mobility became, the more people could carry into combat.

Not sure though, I could be wrong. But I would rather carry more and get transported personally.

while true, it's also been shown and "proven" that medieval warriors were not some lumbering behemoth attempting to waddle into battle to hack at some other dude who waddled his way in as well... The "average" set of plate mail weighed around 40 lbs. but that 40 lbs was distributed across the entire body. Now, the size Medium SAPI plated vest weighs around 35 lbs by itself, combine that with all the ammunition, etc and you're looking at closer to 50-60 lbs, and all of that is centered on the shoulders and, depending on posture, movement, fatigue, etc. the lower/mid back, with another 5 lbs or so in the helmet with that weight being supported only by the neck (the heaviest/most elaborate plate armor the sallet/helm pieces were attached to the breastplate via bevors and gorgets, so the neck wasn't really supporting any weight except for the fighters own head.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
But didnt soldiers march a hell of a lot more back then? So a lot of their baggage was in carts and so on. I thought that made sense really.

Soldiers (correct me if wrong) dont have to march to the other country for a fight (or sail, then march) so the better mobility became, the more people could carry into combat.

Not sure though, I could be wrong. But I would rather carry more and get transported personally.

while true, it's also been shown and "proven" that medieval warriors were not some lumbering behemoth attempting to waddle into battle to hack at some other dude who waddled his way in as well... The "average" set of plate mail weighed around 40 lbs. but that 40 lbs was distributed across the entire body. Now, the size Medium SAPI plated vest weighs around 35 lbs by itself, combine that with all the ammunition, etc and you're looking at closer to 50-60 lbs, and all of that is centered on the shoulders and, depending on posture, movement, fatigue, etc. the lower/mid back, with another 5 lbs or so in the helmet with that weight being supported only by the neck (the heaviest/most elaborate plate armor the sallet/helm pieces were attached to the breastplate via bevors and gorgets, so the neck wasn't really supporting any weight except for the fighters own head.

The IOTV actually spreads the weight a lot better throughout the whole torso, not just on the shoulders. I can wear the IOTV for hours on end without any discomfort, where the IBA would cause back pain within 2-3 hours. But granted, wearing that, your weapons, ammo, pack, IFAC, etc... yeah I think our typical infantry ends up lugging anywhere from 70-100lbs.

 djones520 wrote:

The IOTV actually spreads the weight a lot better throughout the whole torso, not just on the shoulders. I can wear the IOTV for hours on end without any discomfort, where the IBA would cause back pain within 2-3 hours. But granted, wearing that, your weapons, ammo, pack, IFAC, etc... yeah I think our typical infantry ends up lugging anywhere from 70-100lbs.

yeah, 2nd tour I did with IOTV... I was a right female dog in heat to get on (honestly, I wish I had a squire for that ) but once it was on, there were rarely times where I was uncomfortable wearing it (those times being while sat in a vehicle like a HMMWV, where the shape of the plate, and the shape of the seat and everything else combines to make nothing comfortable, even with no armor)

I always thought of the medieval armour, not being heavy as much as being restrictive and uncomfortable. I have always been taught that its restrictive nature was the armours downfall when in a fight.

Lighter troops without all the plate armour could 'dance around" while the heavy armoured men had limited vision and mobility simply because of how the armour was set up.

Of course it varies etc but comparing the two in terms weight is ok, but I think by design we are now able to carry more.

But I have not seen modern body armour nor worn it, so I am just assuming by what I have seen on the internet etc. (NZ doesnt have a very militaristic society, seeing an army cargo truck is rare)

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

The IOTV actually spreads the weight a lot better throughout the whole torso, not just on the shoulders. I can wear the IOTV for hours on end without any discomfort, where the IBA would cause back pain within 2-3 hours. But granted, wearing that, your weapons, ammo, pack, IFAC, etc... yeah I think our typical infantry ends up lugging anywhere from 70-100lbs.

yeah, 2nd tour I did with IOTV... I was a right female dog in heat to get on (honestly, I wish I had a squire for that ) but once it was on, there were rarely times where I was uncomfortable wearing it (those times being while sat in a vehicle like a HMMWV, where the shape of the plate, and the shape of the seat and everything else combines to make nothing comfortable, even with no armor)

Yeah, it's a bitch to get on. I just spent a month out in the field, and my job requires me to leave my hardened building once an hour. It was such a pain in the ass to put on that I just ended up leaving it on, even when inside.

 Swastakowey wrote:
I always thought of the armour, not being heavy as much as being restrictive and uncomfortable. I have always been taught that its restrictive nature was the armours downfall when in a fight.

Lighter troops without all the plate armour could 'dance around" while the heavy armoured men had limited vision and mobility simply because of how the armour was set up.

Of course it varies etc but comparing the two in terms weight is ok, but I think by design we are now able to carry more.

But I have not seen modern body armour nor worn it, so I am just assuming by what I have seen on the internet etc. (NZ doesnt have a very militaristic society, seeing an army truck is rare)

This all depends really.. I mean, yeah, no one is going to do any Crouching Tiger stuff while wearing a full set of gothic plate, but a knights role in the coming battle plan determined what he wore into that battle... If he was to start mounted, then he'd certainly have more armor pieces on that could/would restrict some movement (particularly in later medieval periods), but if a knight started on foot, he'd wear less of the extra protective plates (think of things like spaulders, and pauldrons, which were often times added on over other pieces of "essential" armor). It also became more typical, particularly in the German/Swiss Mercenary companies to go into battle wearing "3/4 plate" armor, where they'd specifically not wear any plates on their legs, and instead just use, most likely, heavy leather trousers/boots.


Obviously, as powder weapons became more and more the norm, more and more armor was stripped off, until in the Napoleonic era, French cavalry went into battle wearing cloth uniforms, covered by a single breast/back plate, with a shiny metal helmet; and beyond that into WW1, when it was long realized that steel plate dont do gak against a lead projectile flying in at 2000+ ft/s (or however fast bullets travel) and dropped everything but the mass produced cloth uniform. And as you keep moving forward in time, you see materials developed that CAN stop these projectiles, and as they become easier to use/make, and more viable as an option we've added more armor to soldiers again.

 djones520 wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

The IOTV actually spreads the weight a lot better throughout the whole torso, not just on the shoulders. I can wear the IOTV for hours on end without any discomfort, where the IBA would cause back pain within 2-3 hours. But granted, wearing that, your weapons, ammo, pack, IFAC, etc... yeah I think our typical infantry ends up lugging anywhere from 70-100lbs.

yeah, 2nd tour I did with IOTV... I was a right female dog in heat to get on (honestly, I wish I had a squire for that ) but once it was on, there were rarely times where I was uncomfortable wearing it (those times being while sat in a vehicle like a HMMWV, where the shape of the plate, and the shape of the seat and everything else combines to make nothing comfortable, even with no armor)

Yeah, it's a bitch to get on. I just spent a month out in the field, and my job requires me to leave my hardened building once an hour. It was such a pain in the ass to put on that I just ended up leaving it on, even when inside.

Freaking groin protector though makes one crotch a freaking "Dutch Oven" at times. Though I have complete faith in that piece of protection when one of my "Joe's" protector stopped a depleted round Was one fun award to right up for his Purple Heart

 Jihadin wrote:

Freaking groin protector though makes one crotch a freaking "Dutch Oven" at times. Though I have complete faith in that piece of protection when one of my "Joe's" protector stopped a depleted round Was one fun award to right up for his Purple Heart

Lol, I have the complete opposite feeling about the groin protector because of my buddy and his .50 cal incident

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

Freaking groin protector though makes one crotch a freaking "Dutch Oven" at times. Though I have complete faith in that piece of protection when one of my "Joe's" protector stopped a depleted round Was one fun award to right up for his Purple Heart

Lol, I have the complete opposite feeling about the groin protector because of my buddy and his .50 cal incident

Well your frikkin chest plate wouldn't do much about that...

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

Freaking groin protector though makes one crotch a freaking "Dutch Oven" at times. Though I have complete faith in that piece of protection when one of my "Joe's" protector stopped a depleted round Was one fun award to right up for his Purple Heart

Lol, I have the complete opposite feeling about the groin protector because of my buddy and his .50 cal incident

I lost it when I caught one of mine beating the locking pin in on the mount for the .50 cal with a .50 cal round itself.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

Freaking groin protector though makes one crotch a freaking "Dutch Oven" at times. Though I have complete faith in that piece of protection when one of my "Joe's" protector stopped a depleted round Was one fun award to right up for his Purple Heart

Lol, I have the complete opposite feeling about the groin protector because of my buddy and his .50 cal incident

Let me guess, he had the backplate of the .50 off? That must have hurt.


That is, I'm assuming he didn't take a .50 round to the groin protector, since like djones520 said, even a SAPI plate wouldn't stop that.

 Hordini wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

Freaking groin protector though makes one crotch a freaking "Dutch Oven" at times. Though I have complete faith in that piece of protection when one of my "Joe's" protector stopped a depleted round Was one fun award to right up for his Purple Heart

Lol, I have the complete opposite feeling about the groin protector because of my buddy and his .50 cal incident

Let me guess, he had the backplate of the .50 off? That must have hurt.

I've heard stories of that but never actually seen it happen

Edit

I was refering to this incident in mine
http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/2010/06/04/soldier-mutilates-hand-by-hitting-50-caliber-round/

 Jihadin wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

Freaking groin protector though makes one crotch a freaking "Dutch Oven" at times. Though I have complete faith in that piece of protection when one of my "Joe's" protector stopped a depleted round Was one fun award to right up for his Purple Heart

Lol, I have the complete opposite feeling about the groin protector because of my buddy and his .50 cal incident

Let me guess, he had the backplate of the .50 off? That must have hurt.

I've heard stories of that but never actually seen it happen

I've never seen it either, thankfully, but a buddy of mine knows a guy who lost an eye that way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

Freaking groin protector though makes one crotch a freaking "Dutch Oven" at times. Though I have complete faith in that piece of protection when one of my "Joe's" protector stopped a depleted round Was one fun award to right up for his Purple Heart

Lol, I have the complete opposite feeling about the groin protector because of my buddy and his .50 cal incident

Let me guess, he had the backplate of the .50 off? That must have hurt.

I've heard stories of that but never actually seen it happen

Edit

I was refering to this incident in mine
http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/2010/06/04/soldier-mutilates-hand-by-hitting-50-caliber-round/

Are you fraggin' serious? Hammering something with a .50 round? That's ridiculous. At least he didn't use a 40mm round...

Lol, since there's this many comments on the incident here goes: during OIF 3, my buddy was a gunner, and at the time, SOP dictated that we "test fire" all crew served weapons.. Well, this particular time, his squad was in for repairs and refit, one of which was to get their M-2 fixed/serviced.... The unit armorer had deadlined the weapon (and properly tagged it and everything), but squad leader still had them mount the gun on the truck, and then test fire a deadlined weapon.

Basically, some large-ish explosion went off, and all kinds of brass shrapnel hit my buddy's vest, groin protector and everything down to the knees... .the groin protector itself was completely unpenetrated (as in, the front side had the holes,etc from brass going in, but no "exit wound" on the back side) BUT there was still brass scraps all over my buddy's groin area. For the next 2 months, he'd be sitting there on his cot, and find another piece around there, pull it out like a splinter of wood... the docs at the time couldn't x-ray or MRI him and there's still a worry whenever he's gone in to the docs, about possible damage to him, should he need an MRI or whatever

That sounds horrendous. By deadlined, do you mean the headspace and timing needed to be re-calibrated?

 Swastakowey wrote:
I always thought of the medieval armour, not being heavy as much as being restrictive and uncomfortable. I have always been taught that its restrictive nature was the armours downfall when in a fight.

Lighter troops without all the plate armour could 'dance around" while the heavy armoured men had limited vision and mobility simply because of how the armour was set up.

Well, potentially that could happen. The French knights were certainly thumped by the English at Agincourt, although they had to move across muddy ground to get to the English battle-lines whilst under fire from massed expert longbowmen, so fatigue was definately a big factor there.

What a lot of people forget - and what I've had endless arguments with folks about over the old Ninja and Samurai vs Knight arguments - are two quite important points.

Firstly, most knights had been training to fight in full armour from an early age. As such they knew what they could and couldn't do in it and their bodies had grown up used to these demands.

Secondly, the armour itself was usually custom-made for a particular knight. So they fit that knight really well and that makes a massive difference as some guys have already commented here - I luckily don't have to wear a full ballistic vest with plates but our body armour is fitted, and having used a 'spare' set for a few weeks the difference is noticeable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqoh0okQ6Ho is a video featuring a guy called Mike Loades, he does a lot (loads? ) of medieval weapons training for movies/TV etc. He's really impressive - go to 28:40 to watch him deliberately fall off a moving horse in full plate just to show how easy it was for a knight to get back up again. I'm sure in another video he does a somersault in plate as well.....he's definately someone I want to be around in a zombie apocalypse!

 Swastakowey wrote:
But didnt soldiers march a hell of a lot more back then? So a lot of their baggage was in carts and so on. I thought that made sense really.

Soldiers (correct me if wrong) dont have to march to the other country for a fight (or sail, then march) so the better mobility became, the more people could carry into combat.

Not sure though, I could be wrong. But I would rather carry more and get transported personally.

You do a lot of walking as infantry. A 20 to 30 km walk feels pretty rough with 120+ lbs on you.

 Hordini wrote:
That sounds horrendous. By deadlined, do you mean the headspace and timing needed to be re-calibrated?

That sounds about right
One cannot rotate the barrel to the right no more then seven times
Any more then "seven" then you stand a good chance of the round firing in an "open" chamber damn near

Edit

Yes Yes I know We train to rotate no more then 3-4 times (clicks)
You can go up to nine but that's extreme "Broken Arrow" situation

 Hordini wrote:
That sounds horrendous. By deadlined, do you mean the headspace and timing needed to be re-calibrated?

I actually don't know, but I doubt it... I think they went to the main base with intentions of sending her out to 3rd shop, as I think they'd been having issues with it previously (and not issues that were fixed by headspace and timing), but were "forced" back into the fight without being able to get it fixed. About as much as I know personally, is that it made it as far as the unit armorer, where it was deadlined after inspection (I know this much, because I was in the CP when that squad arrived, and helped clean that M2 when they came in)

 Inquisitor Gonzo wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
I always thought of the medieval armour, not being heavy as much as being restrictive and uncomfortable. I have always been taught that its restrictive nature was the armours downfall when in a fight.

Lighter troops without all the plate armour could 'dance around" while the heavy armoured men had limited vision and mobility simply because of how the armour was set up.

Well, potentially that could happen. The French knights were certainly thumped by the English at Agincourt, although they had to move across muddy ground to get to the English battle-lines whilst under fire from massed expert longbowmen, so fatigue was definately a big factor there.

What a lot of people forget - and what I've had endless arguments with folks about over the old Ninja and Samurai vs Knight arguments - are two quite important points.

Firstly, most knights had been training to fight in full armour from an early age. As such they knew what they could and couldn't do in it and their bodies had grown up used to these demands.

Secondly, the armour itself was usually custom-made for a particular knight. So they fit that knight really well and that makes a massive difference as some guys have already commented here - I luckily don't have to wear a full ballistic vest with plates but our body armour is fitted, and having used a 'spare' set for a few weeks the difference is noticeable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqoh0okQ6Ho is a video featuring a guy called Mike Loades, he does a lot (loads? ) of medieval weapons training for movies/TV etc. He's really impressive - go to 28:40 to watch him deliberately fall off a moving horse in full plate just to show how easy it was for a knight to get back up again. I'm sure in another video he does a somersault in plate as well.....he's definately someone I want to be around in a zombie apocalypse!

Medieval plate armor typically only weighed about 45-55 pounds. That's not exactly extremely heavy.

As Nuggz pointed out soldiers today are ruck marching with twice that.

Also, IOTV weighs about 30 pounds fully outfitted and soldiers can maneuver fine with that. Consider the fact medieval warriors weren't much smaller than men today. The armor weight shouldn't have greatly reduced movement, but I can't speak to how restrictive it may or may not have been.