Jump to content

How about some basic advice for those of us new to modern?


Recommended Posts

Reading about this lethality to infantry etc. one could think anyone enlisting in the army must be crazy. 

 

Depends on the army. The chances of getting killed during Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Desert Storm was significantly lower for US soldiers than it was for the iraqis: during Iraqi Freedom, from 20 March 2003 – 1 May 2003, the Coalition suffered approximately 170 fatalities while defending iraqi troops suffered approximately 30.000 combat deaths. That is a kill/death ratio of 176, which is incredibly in favor of the coalition forces.

 

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq

Edited by agusto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that is of course going to be a bloody mess. The motivation for volunteers participating in such a war may vary; they are convinved in the political cause they are fighting for, they didnt expect a war with an equally capable enemy when they signed up, they want to serve their country, they want to protect the local population from the evil enemy, etc. Usually though prolonged large scale wars consume more men than there are volunteers available, hence conscripts will be forced into the fight at some point or another. The huge battles of WW1 and WW2 would certainly not have been possibly without millions and millions of men beeing forced to fight. However If someone tells you that you either fight or face the firing squad, you ll be pretty motivated to fight.

Edited by agusto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'm reffering to a CMBS type of combat where combat motivation and modern weapons make for a big mess on both sides.

 

We spread out. As lethality increases, the density and intensity of action decreases and the ability of any one action to be decisive goes down. Additionally, there is an established trend for the lethality of combat to disproportionately borne by machines, rather than men, as combat power is increasingly reflected in fielded technology rather than bodies. That isn't to say that no one will ever have one seriously bad ****ing day during a peer fight (plenty of people have had seriously bad ****ing days during counter-insurgency, after all) but it probably won't be as bad for your basic trigger-pullers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I remember right, average calculated/estimated life expectancy of Finnish ATGM team in combat (equipped with older wire guided missiles) will be less than one minute.

 

 

I chuckle. One time one of my privates asked me if it was true that a Marine infantryman had a very short life expectancy in combat. I told him "Yes, the life expectancy of a Marine infantryman from the time he hits the beach is about 3 1/2 minutes." He decided to be wise and asked what the life expectancy of a Staff NCO (me) was. I told him "From the time a Marine Staff NCO or Officer leaves the ship until he almost reaches the beach is ......" He got the message that a Marine Staff NCO or Officer leads from the front so we have a higher percent casualty rate. Youth plays a big part in accepting those life expectancies. A young man believes he's invulnerable and the other guy is going to get hit, not him.


 

 

 

Edited by Vet 0369
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apocal, people dieing in combat will never go away. When out machines will be spent we will throw ourselves in the fight before admitting we lost whatever the cause the war was fouoght for. Basic human nature or better said animal nature.

Vet, good story. He he.

Reading aboit all this lethality I might see how armies are afraid to close in and just exchange pot shots from distance. Has something like this happened in Eastern Ukraine?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apocal, people dieing in combat will never go away. When out machines will be spent we will throw ourselves in the fight before admitting we lost whatever the cause the war was fouoght for. Basic human nature or better said animal nature.

Vet, good story. He he.

Reading aboit all this lethality I might see how armies are afraid to close in and just exchange pot shots from distance. Has something like this happened in Eastern Ukraine?

 

No, since the weapons being used in Eastern Ukraine would (85% or more) be right at home during the late Soviet-Afghanistan War period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the weapons being used in Eastern Ukraine would (85% or more) be right at home during the late Soviet-Afghanistan War period.

 

Ahh... To say simply, excellent stuff. Basic, but excellent stuff in squad level.

 

No army can't go wrong with AK74s, PKMs, SVDs, RPG-7s, RPG-22, RPOs, RGD-5s, GP-25/30s... Wouldn't want to be on the "customer side", no way in hell! ;)  

Edited by wee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not just the rifle that makes a weapon deadly, it is the guy who holds it! Give a civillian who has never before held a weapon in his hands an AK-47, set it to full auto and let him pull the trigger. Chances are high that he shoots himself in the foot.

Edited by agusto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not just the rifle that makes a weapon deadly, it is the guy who holds it! Give a civillian who has never before held a weapon in his hands an AK-47, set it to full auto and let him pull the trigger. Chances are high that he shoots himself in the foot.

On that note, I saw a scary pic yesterday of one of the school staff in Peshawar who's been seconded into school security, carrying his AK in one hand with his finger on the trigger. Sure it was pointed at the ground (or his foot, with a bit of wander), but you don't go near the trigger unless you're fixin' to use the thing, even if the safety's on. I know that and I'm a civilian from the UK... These guys might've grown up around guns but I wouldn't want them toting live weapons around my kids; they're more of a risk than the Tali.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me rephrase that. Here's the basics of combat: Whatever you do, make sure there's a safe route for you to retreat, because in combat unexpected things often happen, forcing you to retreat and try again. If there's no safe route for you to retreat, you should reconsider what you are doing.

 

So, in the case of that video, you do not want to run down the hill into the open because if you get caught in the open, you have nowhere to go and you'll die (it looks like at least one of them got hit once or twice, so he'll probably die, the other guy got very lucky). It's better to stay behind the hills. And that's what they did at the end, after getting shot to pieces.

 

But hey, they were probably untrained which is why they just drove down that hill thinking it was perfectly safe.

 

 

Well, they probably weren't well trained, but it's hard to tell anything from a video like that.  We don't exactly have a lot of context, and grainy film can give false impressions.  For all we know, they thought were ambushed in territory they thought safe.  When you are being shot at, it's hard to keep situational awareness, so people make all sorts of mistakes. There is a reason that coolness under fire is so highly valued.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, it is difficult to draw conclusions from a grainy youtube video. What we know for sure though is that, for whatever reason, they were caught out in the open by superior enemy firepower and that this got them killed.

Edited by agusto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...