For most of Australia's history, the army has been purely a volunteer force made up primarily of infantry - every single soldier actually WANTED to be there. Some cavalry units existed, and there was authorisation for even greater numbers, however the sticking point was cavalrymen had to provide their own horses....

On a different, but related note...
https://www.awm.gov.au/wartime/44/page54_bou
https://www.historyhit.com/the-role-...world-war-one/
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/wo...ne-horses.html
https://youtu.be/7yuZ4vowQJc

Good point - Travel Move for bicycles is 65/15 vs mounted max 40/40 (horse forced marched) or 30/30 (mule force marched).

So if you have access to roads bicycles have an edge in speed and need less food (rider only) and some upkeep but lose out with load (only what the rider can carry vs what mount can carry) and need (minimal) maintenance - as the Twilight world progresses and roads deteriorate the balance will presumably shift...

I've got some notes for a bicycle article and motorcycles in the Twilight World need their own treatment but still thinking it over [emoji848]






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I did a very short post on World War I motorcycles (stats, no analysis) on my blog in 2017.

Thanks will check it out - there's an article I found somewhere on WW2 Army motorcycles that was decent will try and dig it out and link if I get a chance...

Edit: found it here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've got some notes for a bicycle article and motorcycles in the Twilight World need their own treatment but still thinking it over [emoji848]

Before we make rash decisions let do some reading

http://www.combatreform.org/atb.htm
https://www.landroverweb.com/mountai...ooper-shop.htm
https://www.welovecycling.com/wide/2...on-two-wheels/
https://www.bikeshophub.com/blog/201...-that-and-more

Only 50 lbs /22 kgs for an infantryman? :rolleyes:
In what reality is that? My webbing alone was usually about that heavy!

Its an average, soldiers should carry no more 32% of their total body weight
or they risk becoming combat ineffective do fatigue

my total carry limit is 64 pounds, which includes, ruck, webbing, helmet, weapon and body armor

More info, remember this is not a new concept

http://ridethisbike.com/2007/02/para...-military.html

http://cozybeehive.blogspot.com/2008...s-bicycle.html -Scroll to number 7.

I am not saying that the chart is wrong, just that it does not match up with what I have seen and read other places. Some maybe just because they simplified things down, I have read several places that during the American Civil War/Indian Wars Infantry would move greater distances per day than Cavalry. From what I have been told (by reenactors) is that the time taken to feed and care for the horse is what makes the difference, but this is all second hand at best. When I was deployed to Iraq we did movements lots of time of 400+ miles in a day, day in and day out. It looks like they have their figures for only a eight hour work day, not sure what military works that few hours in a day. As for the AAV the image makes it look like it is wheeled, but the only AAV that I know of is the USMC Assault Amphibious Vehicle and it is tracked but still able to do up to 45mph on road so not sure why they limited it to 66% max (understand not having it go max out) when the 5 ton with a max of about 50-55 depending on truck (from first hand experience) they have doing 40 or about 80% of max. And lastly three gallons of water per troop per day? Is that for field hygiene as well as drinking? If not that sounds like a lot to me to be drinking unless you are walking for eight to ten hours. So I guess I am saying I do not have enough background to say it is wrong, but enough to say it looks weird.

It's not too far off for arid or jungle environments. The Army's Water Planning Guide calls for 1.65 gallons per soldier per day in temperate climes, 2.2 gallons/soldier/day in the cold, and 3.3 gal/sol/day for jungle or arid environments. That doesn't include water for food preparation, hygiene, or medical treatment.

Never going to happen in reality. As mentioned, my webbing alone often weighed about that. Add in pack, etc and I doubt I ever came in at less that 50 kgs, and that at a time when I was only 65kgs myself!

That said, I could carry that load at a fast walk (about 8kph/5mph) pretty much all day long. Make me run more than a few paces though and I was done.

Hmmm wondering whether should split off a collated bicycle thread actually although there's still some overlap [emoji848]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's a good idea. I know we've had horse-cav threads before, but I can't remember if we've ever had a dedicated bicycle thread.

There was one that started in 2013 and got reactivated last June.

This one started out as horse cavalry but quickly moved on to bicycles.

Other Rides
 

I have. Camels, Llamas, and Reindeer (nothern Scandinavia and northern Russia).

i also found an old adventure I had been working on back the in V1 days that took place in Alaska, and had dogsleds. I need to revisit that.

Uncle Ted

Pulled this from some old Cavalry Journal articles...interesting!

Horses require 12 pounds of grain per day (mostly corn).

A wagon, pulled by a 6-mule team can haul roughly 2,000lbs.

Wearing pack saddles, the same 6 mules can carry only 200lbs each, total of 1,200 pounds. Mules require 10lbs of grain per day.

Terry's Column (Little Bighorn Campaign) numbered some 1,131 personnel and 1,694 horses and mules required eight tons of supply per day, carried by 150 wagons...even when rolling four abreast, the wagon column stretched over a half mile.

Has anyone seen Twelve Strong?

Chris Hemsworth movie about the 5th Special Forces group that travelled Afghanistan on horseback just after 9/11.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not a bad movie, but they downplayed the part the Afghani's played a bit I thought.
Certainly more entertainment value than educational even if it is basically a true story (I believe they switched a few events around and changed who got hurt, when and how badly).

Found this, was interesting to compare to the movie.

Is there a point here or is this just you bragging about how much you can carry? what's next? are you going to whip it out too?

lol

Don't make me whip it out. The weather's been cold lately and I won't be looking my best. I'll bet Tassie is colder at the moment, but maybe Leg's got length to spare :D

Of course there is. Real world example of why the figures are rubbish.
I'm sure any other infantryman could say basically the same thing.

LOL

In my basic, We had to carry 80lbs (or 75% of body weight if less than 80lbs) for 20 miles under time (6 hours) to graduate basic. The grunts had to do it in like 4 hours. When I was with the Mountain, we had to do 30 miles in 6 hours with "Full Ruck" every month. My combat load as a 60 gunner was 118lbs. Then you see something like this making the news and you just shake your head...

https://youtu.be/2F_3MKYiF_c

:eek:
Medics. Explains it all really. How often do they have to leave the aid post carrying much more than a first aid kit and water bottle?
Seems pretty obvious to me that "Captain" had a bit of a heart condition. Bet she recovered real quick once she dropped her pack and the cameras stopped rolling.

YEP. Look at the guy at time index 0.31 Seconds. He looks really "beat" by the course. Looks like he's on patrol. :D

While the idea that soldiers should carry no more 32% of their total body weight is a great idea, it's like the saying "No plan survives contact with the enemy." It all works in theory but practical necessity says otherwise.

I think in the 1800s when armies marched for several days to reach a battlefield, it would have been realistically achievable (and completely necessary). They would only have needed to carry fighting order and the baggage trains would carry the rest.
But from the 20th century on, I doubt infantry soldiers in most modern armies would be carrying less than 40% of their body weight. Distances to the battlefield are shorter now because transport drops you as close as possible - there is no baggage train to carry all your extra gear, you carry it all in with you.

Take even a brief look at what the British Paras did in the Falklands and you'll see that infantry units are capable of such feats. Those guys were carrying closer to 80% of their own bodyweight
Even in more modern conflicts like Afghanistan, infantry (of whatever flavour) are carrying bulk ammo and water and plenty more medical supplies than usual, plus all the commo gear and body armour - those troops are not carrying 32% or less of their own bodyweight, it'd be more like 40-50%.

Reminds me of a saying that was common in the Australia Army during the 1970s-90s...
The infantry doesn't want racehorses, it wants packhorses.

I am was infantry and these figures are not. I carried huge loads of distances and guess what I was in no condition to fight when I reached the end of my route.

remember there are three loads that you see dismounted soldiers carry

Battle Load: Ammo (about 5-6 mags total 200 rounds) and food+water (one meal and two canteens) additional items could include belted ammo, grenades and maybe M-72, helmet and body armor are worn

Extended Load: Battle load with a small pack (with additional food, water, and ammo) and e-tool will also be carried I also carried a ranger blanket

Administrative Load: This is the soldier's rucksack and is not carried into battle due to its size and weight, additional food and water are carried along with sleeping gear and a spare uniform and sundries. Rucksacks are left in an assembly area with the units non-combat troops.

In game terms, PC that are dismounted will become fatigued if they carry too much as will pack animals that why we load limits