I noticed that in WW2 and in the decades after it, standard soldiers in most armies didn't really carry much ammunition with them. In WW2 you could argue that first of all the armies were very big and recources were slim, so maybe there just wasn't so much ammo you could give any solder, but that can't be the reason why most armies didn't change that through pretty much the whole cold war. For example the average german Bundeswehr-rifleman carried only 3 magazines with 20 rounds each for his G3 rifle. I imagine being one of them, waiting for the Red Army to roll towards me and only carrying 60 rounds and a knife with me.... seems awfully little to me.
As far as i know even the average US solder, being the first one to carry a smaller 5.56 caliber rifle only was given 4 magazines as a standard ammunition.
If you ever played "Operation Flashpoint", whcih is a very good simulation of how big scale warfare in the 80ies would have looked like, you'll know how fast 120 to 150 rounds can be used up.
When you look at modern soldiers, they carry so much ammo that they often can hardly let their arms hang down or see their feet due to all the stuff hanging around their waist.
Why is that? Especially considering that nowadays it is much less likely for an average soldier to encounter a situation in which he and his fellow troops might be totally cut off supplies for a longer time than it once was.
I once saw a documentation about how military analysts and military shrinks (the most famous was an american scientist i forgot the name of) all over the world started to analyze the combat behaviour of infantry soldiers during the two world wars after WW2 and were astonished to discover that in an average battle only 10 to 20 % of all soldiers really shoot to kill. Most don't shoot at all and most of those who did only did so to appear fighting or to scare the enemy.
They discovered that the "best" ratio of real killers was achieved by the germans in those both wars. Not because the germans were better soldiers or more brutal, but simply because the imperial german army in WW1 and the Wehrmacht in WW2 did, more than other armies at that time, organize their troops in small combat units instead of big battle groups. By giving more freedom and responibility to low level officers instead of giving orders to them about every step they have to take, as it still was usual in most armies during WW1 and WW2, the single units within the german army acted more autonomously.
Later the scientists found out that that was the reason why the german soldiers had a better kill ratio (not only against badly equiped opponents but against equals too), because in such small, largly autonomous units, the soldiers develop strong bonds and a sense of responsibility for each other. Because every soldier feels responsible for the lifes of his comrades, he's more willing to kill to protect them. Every one thinks that every enemy he doesn't kill, can kill not only him but also his close friends.
In big armies where every soldier is just one of hundrets of thousands and he has no overview of what is happening around him, he doesn't develop this sense of responsibility and every soldier thinks it doesn't make a difference whether one soldier is shooting or just hiding in the trench. Because the majority of soldiers in such a anonymous mass-army thinks that way, it diminishes the effectiveness of the whole army drastically.
What the Germans discovered accidently in the two world wars, was deliberately used and endorsed the first time by the US army during the Vietnam war later. By Organising the troops in small, pretty autonomous groups they achieved the "best" kill ratio so far.
Maybe it's that? Because the average soldier nowadays is more willing to shoot and to kill, he needs more ammo.
As far as i know even the average US solder, being the first one to carry a smaller 5.56 caliber rifle only was given 4 magazines as a standard ammunition.
If you ever played "Operation Flashpoint", whcih is a very good simulation of how big scale warfare in the 80ies would have looked like, you'll know how fast 120 to 150 rounds can be used up.
When you look at modern soldiers, they carry so much ammo that they often can hardly let their arms hang down or see their feet due to all the stuff hanging around their waist.
Why is that? Especially considering that nowadays it is much less likely for an average soldier to encounter a situation in which he and his fellow troops might be totally cut off supplies for a longer time than it once was.
I once saw a documentation about how military analysts and military shrinks (the most famous was an american scientist i forgot the name of) all over the world started to analyze the combat behaviour of infantry soldiers during the two world wars after WW2 and were astonished to discover that in an average battle only 10 to 20 % of all soldiers really shoot to kill. Most don't shoot at all and most of those who did only did so to appear fighting or to scare the enemy.
They discovered that the "best" ratio of real killers was achieved by the germans in those both wars. Not because the germans were better soldiers or more brutal, but simply because the imperial german army in WW1 and the Wehrmacht in WW2 did, more than other armies at that time, organize their troops in small combat units instead of big battle groups. By giving more freedom and responibility to low level officers instead of giving orders to them about every step they have to take, as it still was usual in most armies during WW1 and WW2, the single units within the german army acted more autonomously.
Later the scientists found out that that was the reason why the german soldiers had a better kill ratio (not only against badly equiped opponents but against equals too), because in such small, largly autonomous units, the soldiers develop strong bonds and a sense of responsibility for each other. Because every soldier feels responsible for the lifes of his comrades, he's more willing to kill to protect them. Every one thinks that every enemy he doesn't kill, can kill not only him but also his close friends.
In big armies where every soldier is just one of hundrets of thousands and he has no overview of what is happening around him, he doesn't develop this sense of responsibility and every soldier thinks it doesn't make a difference whether one soldier is shooting or just hiding in the trench. Because the majority of soldiers in such a anonymous mass-army thinks that way, it diminishes the effectiveness of the whole army drastically.
What the Germans discovered accidently in the two world wars, was deliberately used and endorsed the first time by the US army during the Vietnam war later. By Organising the troops in small, pretty autonomous groups they achieved the "best" kill ratio so far.
Maybe it's that? Because the average soldier nowadays is more willing to shoot and to kill, he needs more ammo.
