Post by South Malaysia on Feb 5, 2006 3:30:22 GMT -5
What Logistics is!
QUOTE ("The Evil Overlord @ Tue Jul 15, 2003 4:13 pm")
Since I’m getting tired of posting essentially the same message over and over, I’m going to try posting this as an Aid to Roleplaying thread. Maybe this will help the legions of Napoleon or Genghis Khan wannabes out there to build a realistic military.
Far too many people trying to roleplay military adventures of one sort or another are missing the point. Weapons do NOT win wars. Logistics does. No matter how tough your troops are, if they run out of ammo and food, they’re just cold meat.
Ever hear this one? “For want of a nail, a horseshoe was lost. For want of a horseshoe, a horse was lost. For want of a horse, a rider was lost….” This little thing goes on and on until we discover that a war was lost because one horse didn’t get the proper number of nails in its shoe. That’s logistics.
A modern infantryman carries a load of around 50 kilograms (a little over 100 pounds). This includes a couple of day’s worth of food and water, first aid kit, body armor, ammunition, mess kit, and shelter. Even if the soldier is careful with his ammunition, he will need more ammo by the end of the first or second day of fighting- otherwise his assault rifle becomes a club. By the end of the second or third day, he will need food and water as well.
Let us assume that these consumable items are about 2/3 of the total weight of the soldier’s gear. That’s 66 pounds of ammunition, food, and water per soldier. If you have a unit of 100 soldiers, that’s 6600 pounds of supplies required for that unit.
Every day. These items will have to be delivered to the unit every day. How this is accomplished is through the science of logistics. Food, water, fuel, and ammunition have to be transported from the places where they are assembled or stored to where the soldiers are fighting. Large trucks and trains will get the goods part of the way- most likely to a Supply Depot not too far from the fighting.
Now all of these goods need to be distributed to the combat commands still closer to the fighting. That means the large loads carried by a few trucks and train cars have to be broken down into lots small enough to fit into 5-ton trucks, transport helicopters, and Humvees. Small convoys of trucks move toward the forward supply areas carrying these essential warfighting materials.
Combat commanders have to insure that the supplies that arrive in the rear of the fighting area are protected from enemy attack and also are distributed to the soldiers who are actually doing the fighting. This means either rotating combat units back from the fighting for resupply or sending vehicles with fuel, food, and ammunition up to the fighting. Most military units try to do both.
If the fuel, food, and ammunition do NOT get to the troops where the actual shooting is going on, those troops will be killed, forced to retreat, or captured. Every day. These items will have to be delivered to the soldier every day. Oh, and let us not forget that the people transporting these vital materials will ALSO be using fuel, food, water, and ammunition. Does your head hurt yet? Imagine what kind of headache a Combat Commander gets during a major engagement.
The Combat Commander’s job is far tougher than merely figuring out where to move the troops and what they should do, it is at least as important to get the tools of the trade (fuel, food, ammunition, and REPLACEMENTS) up to where the fighting is. And- just to make the Commander get ulcers and grey hairs before nightfall- the enemy knows all of this and will make energetic efforts to disrupt this entire evolution. Whichever side does the best job of disrupting the enemy’s logistics will have the advantage.
This means that every military force will have a large portion of its resources dedicated solely to supplying the combat trooper with the means of doing his job- Food, fuel, water, ammunition, and spare parts. Along with all of this, there has to be some means of getting the wounded away from the battlefield and back to the medical units behind the lines. For every combat unit involved in the fighting, there will be a long chain of people responsible for getting supplies to that unit. There will be still more people involved in protecting the people getting supplies to that unit, and yet more people getting supplies to the people protecting the suppliers.
Anybody getting the idea about logistics yet?
Having a massive mechanized unit with 300 tanks is LESS THAN USELESS unless the tanks get food, fuel, water, ammunition, spare parts, etc. Each of those tanks will carry a set amount of fuel and ammunition. These will be used up as fighting continues. Pretty soon, each tank is nothing more than an uncomfortable armored box because there’s no fuel for the engine or ammo for the guns. Vehicles will need to carry these items up to where the tanks are fighting, and these vehicles will themselves need fuel and ammunition. The supply depots where the fuel and ammo are stored will need to be protected, and the units protecting the supplies will need fuel and ammo.
Let us issue General Rule #1: We’ll be generous and say that 50% of any Army unit’s resources (manpower and material) will be part of the logistics chain. So, if you have 300 tanks, you’ll need 300 tankers and supply trucks to keep those tanks going.
The same situation is true for Air Forces, perhaps worse. For ever aircraft in use, there will be dozens of people who do nothing except make sure that the plane is in good repair and has all the spare part, fuel, and ammunition to do its job. On top of that, we still need the rest of the logistics chain I described above.
Let us issue General Rule #2: We’ll be generous again and say that 3/4 of any Air Force unit’s assets (manpower and material) will be part of the logistics chain. In other words, you’ll need a minimum of 3 people on the ground supporting every aircraft in the air. You’ll also need support aircraft. In-flight refueling planes, electronic warfare planes, command and control planes. Take a look at how the US Air Force is organized.
Now let’s look at Navies. Back in the 1980’s, the US Navy had 600 ships. 12 of those were aircraft carriers. There were approximately 30 submarines. Toss in two classes of destroyers, three classes of cruisers, three (count ‘em- 3) battleships from World War II, two classes of frigates, for a grand total of around 150 combat ships. Yep, you read that right. At the height of its post-WWII military power, the US Navy was 75% support vessels.
With that in mind, I can’t help but laugh at the nations who boast of the dozens of aircraft carriers and scores of cruisers and destroyers- but lack even a single fleet replenishment ship. The US Navy prides itself on “sustainability”. Ships need fuel, food, and ammunition, too. The US Navy sends out ships loaded with these items to accomplish what’s called “Underway Replenishment” (“UNREP”). Fuel, food, ammunition, and other supplies are transferred between ships out on the ocean, so the fighting ships have the tools to keep sailing “in harm’s way”. Without these vital (but definitely unglamorous and unromantic) ships, the sexy and glamorous aircraft carriers, destroyers, and submarines could not do their jobs without pulling into port every couple of days to refuel and re-arm. One aircraft carrier was continuously at sea for 7 months during the Afghanistan conflict after 9/11/01. They didn’t get to pull into port at all. Yet they continued to launch aircraft and strike targets in Afghanistan the whole time.
Now let us discuss the most glaring omission in most of these world-conqueror wannabes: Transport ships and landing craft. It’s grand to have a big army and lots of sexy weapons, but what if your enemy lies across an ocean? How are your troops and tanks going to get there? Main Battle Tanks are too large and heavy to be carried by plane, with rare exceptions. Even those exceptions require a different aircraft for each MBT. These planes require a working runway (made of concrete) to land on. If you drop an MBT out of an airplane in flight, it’ll be reduced to a large number of metal fragments after the sudden stop at ground level.
“No problem!” I hear you thinking. “I’ll just commandeer a few dozen Roll-On/Roll-Off (RO/RO) commercial ships and fill ‘em with tanks.” That will work….provided that there’s a secure port with modern piers available for your use. In WWII, the Allies landed at Normandy because the Germans weren’t nice enough to allow their enemies to land tanks and troops in any of the French ports. The Allies had to fight hard to CAPTURE Cherbourg, and even then it took months of work to get the port operational after the number the Germans did on it to prevent the Allies from using it.
So, now you’re going to need a bunch of unglamorous and unromantic small ships that will carry a few tanks and a bunch of troops each, The ships have to be small, because otherwise they wouldn’t be able to (essentially) run their bows into the beach and off-load tanks and troops. Even worse, you’re also going to need a bunch of lumbering, unsexy, and unromantic ships that carry LOTS of troops and tanks. These behemoths can’t possibly get close enough to off-load onto a beach, so each one will have to carry a bunch of landing craft- small boats (or hovercraft) that can carry around 50 troops or one tank each. You’re going to need a LOT of these landing craft, and a lot of ships to carry them.
So now we come to General Rule #3: Only ¼ of your Navy ships will be combatants. ½ of the ships will be transports and fleet replenishment ships, and the remaining ¼ will be landing ships and assault ships.
Now let’s take a look at a reasonable breakdown of a military force: Use the very well-designed military calculator to determine how many personnel are in your military and make your distribution accordingly.
RULE 1- 50% of any Army unit (or Marines) will be support/logistics personnel. This will reduce your “effectives” (Combat-Effective personnel) quite a bit, since tanks (for example) require 3 or 4 personnel each. If your Army is 100,000 personnel, then 50,000 of them will be noncombatants- supply clerks, truck drivers, mechanics, etc.
That leaves you with 50,000 personnel who are “effectives”. Let’s say that you want a large mechanized force. Call it 2,000 Main Battle Tanks. That takes 6,000 men, leaving you with 44,000. Organize your Army how you want it, legions, divisions, forces, groups, whatever you want.
RULE #2- 75% of any Air Force unit will be support/logistics personnel. If you have 100,000 men in your Air Force, 75,000 of them are going to be ground crews, supply clerks, truck drivers, etc.
Again, each aircraft has a different manning requirement. You have 25,000 men left. Say you want a large fighter force- 2,000 F-15E’s. Each one requires a crew of 2, meaning 4,000 men. Bomber usually require a crew of at least 3, AWACS 6-12 men, and so on. Make your own decisions on the organization and assign personnel accordingly. DO NOT FORGET to get refueling planes, transport planes, etc.
RULE #3- 75% of your navy ship will be support, transport, or landing/assault ships. Your manpower situation is a bit different for the Navy. Due to the fact that each individual unit (ship) will have a lot of people on board, your actual manpower will be closer to 2/3 shore personnel (supply clerks, drivers, administrators, etc. So- if you have the standard 100,000 men- 66,000 of them will not be on ships. The remaining 34,000 men will need to be assigned to the various ships (called “platforms”) as follows:
NOTE: These numbers are all variables depending on ship design and the individual shipbuilder.
Carriers= 5,000-7,000 each
Cruisers= 300 – 500 each
Destroyers= 250 - 400 each
Frigates= 175 – 300 each
Attack Subs= 90 –125 each
Missile subs= 120 – 180 each
RO/RO ship= 75 - 150 each
Tanker= 50 – 110 each
Troop ship= 120 - 250 each
Landing ship= 150 – 225 each
Assault ship= 230 – 600 each (depending on capacity)
Landing craft= 5 – 12 each
Supply ship= 250 – 400 each
Repair ship= 600 – 1000 each
That’s more than enough to get you all started. As I’ve repeated several times throughout this long message, logistics is not sexy, glamorous, or romantic- but it wins wars.
Start paying attention to it.
Since I’m getting tired of posting essentially the same message over and over, I’m going to try posting this as an Aid to Roleplaying thread. Maybe this will help the legions of Napoleon or Genghis Khan wannabes out there to build a realistic military.
Far too many people trying to roleplay military adventures of one sort or another are missing the point. Weapons do NOT win wars. Logistics does. No matter how tough your troops are, if they run out of ammo and food, they’re just cold meat.
Ever hear this one? “For want of a nail, a horseshoe was lost. For want of a horseshoe, a horse was lost. For want of a horse, a rider was lost….” This little thing goes on and on until we discover that a war was lost because one horse didn’t get the proper number of nails in its shoe. That’s logistics.
A modern infantryman carries a load of around 50 kilograms (a little over 100 pounds). This includes a couple of day’s worth of food and water, first aid kit, body armor, ammunition, mess kit, and shelter. Even if the soldier is careful with his ammunition, he will need more ammo by the end of the first or second day of fighting- otherwise his assault rifle becomes a club. By the end of the second or third day, he will need food and water as well.
Let us assume that these consumable items are about 2/3 of the total weight of the soldier’s gear. That’s 66 pounds of ammunition, food, and water per soldier. If you have a unit of 100 soldiers, that’s 6600 pounds of supplies required for that unit.
Every day. These items will have to be delivered to the unit every day. How this is accomplished is through the science of logistics. Food, water, fuel, and ammunition have to be transported from the places where they are assembled or stored to where the soldiers are fighting. Large trucks and trains will get the goods part of the way- most likely to a Supply Depot not too far from the fighting.
Now all of these goods need to be distributed to the combat commands still closer to the fighting. That means the large loads carried by a few trucks and train cars have to be broken down into lots small enough to fit into 5-ton trucks, transport helicopters, and Humvees. Small convoys of trucks move toward the forward supply areas carrying these essential warfighting materials.
Combat commanders have to insure that the supplies that arrive in the rear of the fighting area are protected from enemy attack and also are distributed to the soldiers who are actually doing the fighting. This means either rotating combat units back from the fighting for resupply or sending vehicles with fuel, food, and ammunition up to the fighting. Most military units try to do both.
If the fuel, food, and ammunition do NOT get to the troops where the actual shooting is going on, those troops will be killed, forced to retreat, or captured. Every day. These items will have to be delivered to the soldier every day. Oh, and let us not forget that the people transporting these vital materials will ALSO be using fuel, food, water, and ammunition. Does your head hurt yet? Imagine what kind of headache a Combat Commander gets during a major engagement.
The Combat Commander’s job is far tougher than merely figuring out where to move the troops and what they should do, it is at least as important to get the tools of the trade (fuel, food, ammunition, and REPLACEMENTS) up to where the fighting is. And- just to make the Commander get ulcers and grey hairs before nightfall- the enemy knows all of this and will make energetic efforts to disrupt this entire evolution. Whichever side does the best job of disrupting the enemy’s logistics will have the advantage.
This means that every military force will have a large portion of its resources dedicated solely to supplying the combat trooper with the means of doing his job- Food, fuel, water, ammunition, and spare parts. Along with all of this, there has to be some means of getting the wounded away from the battlefield and back to the medical units behind the lines. For every combat unit involved in the fighting, there will be a long chain of people responsible for getting supplies to that unit. There will be still more people involved in protecting the people getting supplies to that unit, and yet more people getting supplies to the people protecting the suppliers.
Anybody getting the idea about logistics yet?
Having a massive mechanized unit with 300 tanks is LESS THAN USELESS unless the tanks get food, fuel, water, ammunition, spare parts, etc. Each of those tanks will carry a set amount of fuel and ammunition. These will be used up as fighting continues. Pretty soon, each tank is nothing more than an uncomfortable armored box because there’s no fuel for the engine or ammo for the guns. Vehicles will need to carry these items up to where the tanks are fighting, and these vehicles will themselves need fuel and ammunition. The supply depots where the fuel and ammo are stored will need to be protected, and the units protecting the supplies will need fuel and ammo.
Let us issue General Rule #1: We’ll be generous and say that 50% of any Army unit’s resources (manpower and material) will be part of the logistics chain. So, if you have 300 tanks, you’ll need 300 tankers and supply trucks to keep those tanks going.
The same situation is true for Air Forces, perhaps worse. For ever aircraft in use, there will be dozens of people who do nothing except make sure that the plane is in good repair and has all the spare part, fuel, and ammunition to do its job. On top of that, we still need the rest of the logistics chain I described above.
Let us issue General Rule #2: We’ll be generous again and say that 3/4 of any Air Force unit’s assets (manpower and material) will be part of the logistics chain. In other words, you’ll need a minimum of 3 people on the ground supporting every aircraft in the air. You’ll also need support aircraft. In-flight refueling planes, electronic warfare planes, command and control planes. Take a look at how the US Air Force is organized.
Now let’s look at Navies. Back in the 1980’s, the US Navy had 600 ships. 12 of those were aircraft carriers. There were approximately 30 submarines. Toss in two classes of destroyers, three classes of cruisers, three (count ‘em- 3) battleships from World War II, two classes of frigates, for a grand total of around 150 combat ships. Yep, you read that right. At the height of its post-WWII military power, the US Navy was 75% support vessels.
With that in mind, I can’t help but laugh at the nations who boast of the dozens of aircraft carriers and scores of cruisers and destroyers- but lack even a single fleet replenishment ship. The US Navy prides itself on “sustainability”. Ships need fuel, food, and ammunition, too. The US Navy sends out ships loaded with these items to accomplish what’s called “Underway Replenishment” (“UNREP”). Fuel, food, ammunition, and other supplies are transferred between ships out on the ocean, so the fighting ships have the tools to keep sailing “in harm’s way”. Without these vital (but definitely unglamorous and unromantic) ships, the sexy and glamorous aircraft carriers, destroyers, and submarines could not do their jobs without pulling into port every couple of days to refuel and re-arm. One aircraft carrier was continuously at sea for 7 months during the Afghanistan conflict after 9/11/01. They didn’t get to pull into port at all. Yet they continued to launch aircraft and strike targets in Afghanistan the whole time.
Now let us discuss the most glaring omission in most of these world-conqueror wannabes: Transport ships and landing craft. It’s grand to have a big army and lots of sexy weapons, but what if your enemy lies across an ocean? How are your troops and tanks going to get there? Main Battle Tanks are too large and heavy to be carried by plane, with rare exceptions. Even those exceptions require a different aircraft for each MBT. These planes require a working runway (made of concrete) to land on. If you drop an MBT out of an airplane in flight, it’ll be reduced to a large number of metal fragments after the sudden stop at ground level.
“No problem!” I hear you thinking. “I’ll just commandeer a few dozen Roll-On/Roll-Off (RO/RO) commercial ships and fill ‘em with tanks.” That will work….provided that there’s a secure port with modern piers available for your use. In WWII, the Allies landed at Normandy because the Germans weren’t nice enough to allow their enemies to land tanks and troops in any of the French ports. The Allies had to fight hard to CAPTURE Cherbourg, and even then it took months of work to get the port operational after the number the Germans did on it to prevent the Allies from using it.
So, now you’re going to need a bunch of unglamorous and unromantic small ships that will carry a few tanks and a bunch of troops each, The ships have to be small, because otherwise they wouldn’t be able to (essentially) run their bows into the beach and off-load tanks and troops. Even worse, you’re also going to need a bunch of lumbering, unsexy, and unromantic ships that carry LOTS of troops and tanks. These behemoths can’t possibly get close enough to off-load onto a beach, so each one will have to carry a bunch of landing craft- small boats (or hovercraft) that can carry around 50 troops or one tank each. You’re going to need a LOT of these landing craft, and a lot of ships to carry them.
So now we come to General Rule #3: Only ¼ of your Navy ships will be combatants. ½ of the ships will be transports and fleet replenishment ships, and the remaining ¼ will be landing ships and assault ships.
Now let’s take a look at a reasonable breakdown of a military force: Use the very well-designed military calculator to determine how many personnel are in your military and make your distribution accordingly.
RULE 1- 50% of any Army unit (or Marines) will be support/logistics personnel. This will reduce your “effectives” (Combat-Effective personnel) quite a bit, since tanks (for example) require 3 or 4 personnel each. If your Army is 100,000 personnel, then 50,000 of them will be noncombatants- supply clerks, truck drivers, mechanics, etc.
That leaves you with 50,000 personnel who are “effectives”. Let’s say that you want a large mechanized force. Call it 2,000 Main Battle Tanks. That takes 6,000 men, leaving you with 44,000. Organize your Army how you want it, legions, divisions, forces, groups, whatever you want.
RULE #2- 75% of any Air Force unit will be support/logistics personnel. If you have 100,000 men in your Air Force, 75,000 of them are going to be ground crews, supply clerks, truck drivers, etc.
Again, each aircraft has a different manning requirement. You have 25,000 men left. Say you want a large fighter force- 2,000 F-15E’s. Each one requires a crew of 2, meaning 4,000 men. Bomber usually require a crew of at least 3, AWACS 6-12 men, and so on. Make your own decisions on the organization and assign personnel accordingly. DO NOT FORGET to get refueling planes, transport planes, etc.
RULE #3- 75% of your navy ship will be support, transport, or landing/assault ships. Your manpower situation is a bit different for the Navy. Due to the fact that each individual unit (ship) will have a lot of people on board, your actual manpower will be closer to 2/3 shore personnel (supply clerks, drivers, administrators, etc. So- if you have the standard 100,000 men- 66,000 of them will not be on ships. The remaining 34,000 men will need to be assigned to the various ships (called “platforms”) as follows:
NOTE: These numbers are all variables depending on ship design and the individual shipbuilder.
Carriers= 5,000-7,000 each
Cruisers= 300 – 500 each
Destroyers= 250 - 400 each
Frigates= 175 – 300 each
Attack Subs= 90 –125 each
Missile subs= 120 – 180 each
RO/RO ship= 75 - 150 each
Tanker= 50 – 110 each
Troop ship= 120 - 250 each
Landing ship= 150 – 225 each
Assault ship= 230 – 600 each (depending on capacity)
Landing craft= 5 – 12 each
Supply ship= 250 – 400 each
Repair ship= 600 – 1000 each
That’s more than enough to get you all started. As I’ve repeated several times throughout this long message, logistics is not sexy, glamorous, or romantic- but it wins wars.
Start paying attention to it.
QUOTE ("Freindly Humans @ Tue Jul 15, 2003 4:49 pm")
You do realise most people do this for fun, and not neccessarily for realism or as a giant 'logistical wank-fest'. You also probably realise that most people aren't even close to qualified to deal with logisitics or have the knowledge of military technology neccessary to field 'actual' units.
As such, why not simply assume they have certain items and leave it at that. There's a reason most D&D players don't use the encumberance rules. The post was certainly interesting and informative, but sith dude, why can't we just assume that people are only listing their combat units and they're leaving the non-combat logistic units off the list and under a assumed level.
You do realise most people do this for fun, and not neccessarily for realism or as a giant 'logistical wank-fest'. You also probably realise that most people aren't even close to qualified to deal with logisitics or have the knowledge of military technology neccessary to field 'actual' units.
As such, why not simply assume they have certain items and leave it at that. There's a reason most D&D players don't use the encumberance rules. The post was certainly interesting and informative, but sith dude, why can't we just assume that people are only listing their combat units and they're leaving the non-combat logistic units off the list and under a assumed level.
QUOTE ("Western Asia @ Tue Jul 15, 2003 4:53 pm")
THANK YOU.
That's a great deal of why I scrapped together this effort.
It looks really great. My only note is that armored/mechanized forces require much more support than infantrymen, since the shells are larger and the fuel reqs are simply tremendous. It requires 3-4 times as many tanker and support vehicles as there are tanks. That's part of the reason why I have limited myself to deploying 6,000 combat troops at any one conflict, with a number being involved in vehicles, and with more than twice as many in support.
One thing to note is that a single supply flight of a C17 from the US to Iraq costs in the range of $200,000. Yes, another important factor to all of this is cost. It is extremely expensive to run aircraft (they often require 8-20 times as much time on the "ground" as they have in the air, and that's without any enemy-inflicted damanges). It costs millions of dollars to deploy most ships.
More later on costs, but GREAT job.
THANK YOU.
That's a great deal of why I scrapped together this effort.
It looks really great. My only note is that armored/mechanized forces require much more support than infantrymen, since the shells are larger and the fuel reqs are simply tremendous. It requires 3-4 times as many tanker and support vehicles as there are tanks. That's part of the reason why I have limited myself to deploying 6,000 combat troops at any one conflict, with a number being involved in vehicles, and with more than twice as many in support.
One thing to note is that a single supply flight of a C17 from the US to Iraq costs in the range of $200,000. Yes, another important factor to all of this is cost. It is extremely expensive to run aircraft (they often require 8-20 times as much time on the "ground" as they have in the air, and that's without any enemy-inflicted damanges). It costs millions of dollars to deploy most ships.
More later on costs, but GREAT job.
QUOTE ("Stev-O @ Tue Jul 15, 2003 5:04 pm")
Very nice indeed. People tend to get pissed at me when I ask how they're going to provide 2 liters of water EVERY day to EACH of their 1 million soldiers that they supposedly landed on an enemy beach..oh well.
Very nice indeed. People tend to get pissed at me when I ask how they're going to provide 2 liters of water EVERY day to EACH of their 1 million soldiers that they supposedly landed on an enemy beach..oh well.
QUOTE ("Nianacio @ Tue Jul 15, 2003 5:55 pm")
A note: People can make logistics easier for them but no easier for their enemy if they can use the enemy's ammunition, etc. but the enemy can't use theirs. For example, you could use the same ammunition as a potential enemy with some slight changes in the cartridge. Your guns fire the enemy's and your ammunition, but the enemy's guns only fire his ammunition. There's a RL submachine gun that fires ammunition of different lengths. I don't know if this could be done for rifles, too , but if it could, and the range of usable lengths of cartridge was the same, you could have a gun firing ammunition that has been used by the RL USSR, USA, Czechoslovakia, and Japan.
If each soldier has a hand-pump ROWPU that can purify sea water, it's no problem.
A note: People can make logistics easier for them but no easier for their enemy if they can use the enemy's ammunition, etc. but the enemy can't use theirs. For example, you could use the same ammunition as a potential enemy with some slight changes in the cartridge. Your guns fire the enemy's and your ammunition, but the enemy's guns only fire his ammunition. There's a RL submachine gun that fires ammunition of different lengths. I don't know if this could be done for rifles, too , but if it could, and the range of usable lengths of cartridge was the same, you could have a gun firing ammunition that has been used by the RL USSR, USA, Czechoslovakia, and Japan.
QUOTE
Stev-O wrote:
Very nice indeed. People tend to get pissed at me when I ask how they're going to provide 2 liters of water EVERY day to EACH of their 1 million soldiers that they supposedly landed on an enemy beach..oh well.
Stev-O wrote:
Very nice indeed. People tend to get pissed at me when I ask how they're going to provide 2 liters of water EVERY day to EACH of their 1 million soldiers that they supposedly landed on an enemy beach..oh well.
If each soldier has a hand-pump ROWPU that can purify sea water, it's no problem.
QUOTE ("Western Asia @ Tue Jul 15, 2003 6:30 pm")
Nianacio,
Yes, there is a Stoner rifle (M16/Colt-style weapons for special forces) that has been made specifically to accept both the 5.56 NATO round and the 7.62 AK-type round (and both magazine types).
Many weapons nowadays are designed to hold several types of magazines--the Israeli Tavor is made to both hold the M16 magazine and the 5.56-version Galil magazines (military, civilian arms are specifically made with a limited ability to do so, especially in the USA).
As a general rule, however, soldiers tend to not seek out enemy weapons unless there is a clear use or unless they are not part of an active drive. In Vietnam, the US infantrymen collected and used many of the AKs, RPGs, and other weapons that were available since the original M16 models were known for their unreliability (since tremendously improved)...but during the World Wars, the main items sought in enemy areas were food supplies--always in short supply.
Also, Nianacio, that idea expects that the player's forces will consistantly be driving their enemy back far enough to capture enemy ammunition dumps of sufficient size to supply his needs. In modern warfare, a few ammunition trucks or dumps might be found, but they'd only really be 2 days worth of ammunition for the company or brigade that found it....not enough for the entire force.
Last edited by Western Asia on Tue Jul 15, 2003 7:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
Nianacio,
Yes, there is a Stoner rifle (M16/Colt-style weapons for special forces) that has been made specifically to accept both the 5.56 NATO round and the 7.62 AK-type round (and both magazine types).
Many weapons nowadays are designed to hold several types of magazines--the Israeli Tavor is made to both hold the M16 magazine and the 5.56-version Galil magazines (military, civilian arms are specifically made with a limited ability to do so, especially in the USA).
As a general rule, however, soldiers tend to not seek out enemy weapons unless there is a clear use or unless they are not part of an active drive. In Vietnam, the US infantrymen collected and used many of the AKs, RPGs, and other weapons that were available since the original M16 models were known for their unreliability (since tremendously improved)...but during the World Wars, the main items sought in enemy areas were food supplies--always in short supply.
Also, Nianacio, that idea expects that the player's forces will consistantly be driving their enemy back far enough to capture enemy ammunition dumps of sufficient size to supply his needs. In modern warfare, a few ammunition trucks or dumps might be found, but they'd only really be 2 days worth of ammunition for the company or brigade that found it....not enough for the entire force.
Last edited by Western Asia on Tue Jul 15, 2003 7:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
QUOTE ("The Evil Overlord @ Wed Jul 16, 2003 6:52 am")
The reason I mention this (at great length) is the fact that most real warfare involves tearing up the enemy's supply lines and lines of communications. Witness the strenuous efforts the Germans put into isolating Britain during WW I and II. Read any of the histories about modern warfare and you'll realize that it's a lot easier to destroy the supplies- causing the entire war effort to stall- that it is to kill the men and destroy the tanks. Why do you think the Allies in WW II spent so many lives in bombing raids on Nazi Germany. Why di the US Navy throw squadrons of submarines at the Japanese Sea Lines Of Communication (where they incidentally strangled the Japanese economy by sinking more tonnage than all other weapons systems combined).
If you want to wage war, pay attention to the details. Otherwise, you might as well fall back on the God-Mode roleplaying (I land 200 squintillin troops with blasters on top of your castle...you're dead).
Make the minimal effort required to allow for the logistics. You'll have a lot more realistic war.
Last edited by The Evil Overlord on Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am; edited 1 time in total
QUOTE
Freindly Humans wrote:
The post was certainly interesting and informative, but sith dude, why can't we just assume that people are only listing their combat units and they're leaving the non-combat logistic units off the list and under a assumed level.
Freindly Humans wrote:
The post was certainly interesting and informative, but sith dude, why can't we just assume that people are only listing their combat units and they're leaving the non-combat logistic units off the list and under a assumed level.
The reason I mention this (at great length) is the fact that most real warfare involves tearing up the enemy's supply lines and lines of communications. Witness the strenuous efforts the Germans put into isolating Britain during WW I and II. Read any of the histories about modern warfare and you'll realize that it's a lot easier to destroy the supplies- causing the entire war effort to stall- that it is to kill the men and destroy the tanks. Why do you think the Allies in WW II spent so many lives in bombing raids on Nazi Germany. Why di the US Navy throw squadrons of submarines at the Japanese Sea Lines Of Communication (where they incidentally strangled the Japanese economy by sinking more tonnage than all other weapons systems combined).
If you want to wage war, pay attention to the details. Otherwise, you might as well fall back on the God-Mode roleplaying (I land 200 squintillin troops with blasters on top of your castle...you're dead).
Make the minimal effort required to allow for the logistics. You'll have a lot more realistic war.
Last edited by The Evil Overlord on Wed Jul 16, 2003 11:30 am; edited 1 time in total
QUOTE ("The Evil Overlord @ Wed Jul 16, 2003 6:58 am")
Precisely the reason that EOE military uses the 11.5mm standard ammunition. No one else uses this cartridge.
You can simplify your logistics in this manner only if the enemy doesn't employ "Scorched Earth" tactics (witness the Russians and Germans using this tactic during the Eastern Front campaigns in WW II). You can't count on enemy supplies being available. All it would take is one soldier with a grenade in an ammo dump to ruin your supply situation. You have to have your own supplies coming to your troops on a regular basis, or your troops risk running out of ammo. Soldiers using their assault rifles as clubs are meat on the table for troops with functional weapons.
QUOTE
Nianacio wrote:
A note: People can make logistics easier for them but no easier for their enemy if they can use the enemy's ammunition, etc. but the enemy can't use theirs. For example, you could use the same ammunition as a potential enemy with some slight changes in the cartridge. Your guns fire the enemy's and your ammunition, but the enemy's guns only fire his ammunition. There's a RL submachine gun that fires ammunition of different lengths. I don't know if this could be done for rifles, too , but if it could, and the range of usable lengths of cartridge was the same, you could have a gun firing ammunition that has been used by the RL USSR, USA, Czechoslovakia, and Japan.
If each soldier has a hand-pump ROWPU that can purify sea water, it's no problem.
Nianacio wrote:
A note: People can make logistics easier for them but no easier for their enemy if they can use the enemy's ammunition, etc. but the enemy can't use theirs. For example, you could use the same ammunition as a potential enemy with some slight changes in the cartridge. Your guns fire the enemy's and your ammunition, but the enemy's guns only fire his ammunition. There's a RL submachine gun that fires ammunition of different lengths. I don't know if this could be done for rifles, too , but if it could, and the range of usable lengths of cartridge was the same, you could have a gun firing ammunition that has been used by the RL USSR, USA, Czechoslovakia, and Japan.
QUOTE
Stev-O wrote:
Very nice indeed. People tend to get pissed at me when I ask how they're going to provide 2 liters of water EVERY day to EACH of their 1 million soldiers that they supposedly landed on an enemy beach..oh well.
Stev-O wrote:
Very nice indeed. People tend to get pissed at me when I ask how they're going to provide 2 liters of water EVERY day to EACH of their 1 million soldiers that they supposedly landed on an enemy beach..oh well.
If each soldier has a hand-pump ROWPU that can purify sea water, it's no problem.
Precisely the reason that EOE military uses the 11.5mm standard ammunition. No one else uses this cartridge.
You can simplify your logistics in this manner only if the enemy doesn't employ "Scorched Earth" tactics (witness the Russians and Germans using this tactic during the Eastern Front campaigns in WW II). You can't count on enemy supplies being available. All it would take is one soldier with a grenade in an ammo dump to ruin your supply situation. You have to have your own supplies coming to your troops on a regular basis, or your troops risk running out of ammo. Soldiers using their assault rifles as clubs are meat on the table for troops with functional weapons.
QUOTE ("TJHairball @ Wed Jul 16, 2003 7:03 am")
The handpump is actually a very good idea. Particularly for smaller deployments of troops*, knowing how to scrounge up or purify food and water on site helps a lot. Ammunition, fuel, and replacement treads still need to be crated in though.
I'm adding a link to this thread in the announcement about godmoddery up top; most people could stand to take a look at this. I've seen entirely too many people claim to deploy millions of troops... all at once... without giving the slightest consideration to how they will feed and supply them.
*Being able to scrounge edibles on site isn't that helpful for larger deployments. Really.
The handpump is actually a very good idea. Particularly for smaller deployments of troops*, knowing how to scrounge up or purify food and water on site helps a lot. Ammunition, fuel, and replacement treads still need to be crated in though.
I'm adding a link to this thread in the announcement about godmoddery up top; most people could stand to take a look at this. I've seen entirely too many people claim to deploy millions of troops... all at once... without giving the slightest consideration to how they will feed and supply them.
*Being able to scrounge edibles on site isn't that helpful for larger deployments. Really.
QUOTE ("Tsaraine @ Wed Jul 16, 2003 7:30 am")
TJ: Indeed. Imagine; a scout sees an undefended farm in enemy territory. "A farm! Tell the batallion!" By the time the rest of the guys turn up, there's only a few guys who've made off with all the chickens and bits of cow ... so the foodless guys frag them for the meat. When the commander shows up, they say "Sir! I regret to inform you that the Third Forward Scouting Party was killed by concealed enemy fire!" (wink) "But we managed to liberate these chickens!"
"Very good, Privates." (munch)
Evil Overlord; I've been looking for a good thing on logistics, since I know I'm not so good at it. Thanks.
TJ: Indeed. Imagine; a scout sees an undefended farm in enemy territory. "A farm! Tell the batallion!" By the time the rest of the guys turn up, there's only a few guys who've made off with all the chickens and bits of cow ... so the foodless guys frag them for the meat. When the commander shows up, they say "Sir! I regret to inform you that the Third Forward Scouting Party was killed by concealed enemy fire!" (wink) "But we managed to liberate these chickens!"
"Very good, Privates." (munch)
Evil Overlord; I've been looking for a good thing on logistics, since I know I'm not so good at it. Thanks.