"Experts"

[Scott A. Richardson]

I have long found it an interesting dynamic whereby an alleged expert on any given subject will make a statement that may or may not be entirely accurate, which then gets generally picked up by others and is automatically legitimized based upon the autority of the expert rather than any independent tests. History is replete with so-called experts who made statements of the future which were, clearly, not accurate.

The reason for the lenghthy introduction to this post is we have often talked here about the common misbelief that the fully armored knight was a slow-moving, tortoise-like behemoth that, if knocked flat, was trapped under the weight of his own armor. While Hans Delbruck, well-known German military historian of the early 20th century, is not responsible for that misbelief, he is one of those experts who helped perpetuate an untruth. I found this passge in a modern translation of his History of the Art of War: Medieval Warfare, here refering to the armored knight of the late Middle Ages:

"...the heavy armor rendered him useless for many of the activities necessary in war. On foot, he could fight only with a certain awkwardness, with little movement away from a fixed position; it was difficult for him to mount up, to dismount, and to get up when he was unseated."

While there is little doubt Delbruck was cetainly an "expert" in his field to a certain degree, its also fairly obvious he never actually experimented with what he talked about. This teaches us two important lessons: One, experiment with things for ourselves before we take information as a given; two, question even the so-called experts until we do so, because there is a chance they don't really know about what they are talking.

[Grant Hall]

Hey Scott, when I read this post yesterday I didn't have anything useful to say, then lo and behold last night as I was watching the History Channel an "Expert" graced the screen and informed the world that Egyptian Charioteers were unable to run because they wore heavy armor (a kind of scale armor) weighing 30lbs (I guess this "Expert" has never done any manual work, I mean come on, 30lbs, my daughter weighs 30lbs)!

So here I am, shaking my head, his enitre hypothesis was based on the assumtion than a man wearing a shirt of armor that weighed 30lbs could not run or protect himself in melee against an unarmored foe.

So yeah, that's "Experts" hey.

[RayMcCullough]

That Expert was never in the military I bet. At least not in the infantry.

I caught a show on some bronze age "chariot armour" also. they said it weighed around 50 lbs so it must be "chariot armor". I liked how well that armor stopped an arrow fired from a modern compound bow. Stopped it with no problem. That was cool.

I caught a hearing once on C-span about some new body armor. A very Nice new Flak Jacket. It had all sorts of neck and sleeve attachments. It only weighed about 30 lbs. One of the panelist jaws dropped when he told them how much it weighed. The young NCO that was at the podium at the time had a worried look on hisface and did not know how to respond to appease the panelist. I busted a gut when a general in the background almost ran up to the podium to state that a soldiers regular load was around 80 lbs, and that this Flak jacket was lighter and more protective than the old. LOL He wanted to clear that misconception up very quickly. The panelist still could not completely grasp the fact that they carried and fought with so much.

I fight fires in about 45 lbs of turn-out gear. Depending on the structure and the size of the incident, I may have to crawl or run with hose and other tools, etc... I' m an average sized guy, but I know guys that are smaller and weaker that do just fine with the gear.

[Aaron Pynenberg]

No doubts...as a SWAT Operator, I am the Fisrt through the door, I wear: full body armor, from neck to my ankles,
I carry a load of Ammo in magazines,
usually a flash bang or two,
flashlights of all sorts,
a large knife,
a Glock, with laser and flashlight attached,
some medical gear,
a ballstic helmet and radio gear,
large non-balstic shin, knee and leg guards,

and since I am the first guy in:

I handle a large level IIIA full balstic shield with bullet resistant window port, halogen lights and a battery pack, as well as an extra magazine or two strapped to the back of the shield.

We also have gas-masks and other prting equipment as well.

All this gear in total weighs in the area of about 80-90lbs, and we train in it all the time for 8hrs a day plus heat, humidity and in the winter months add cold-weather gear on top of it-

It all sounds overwhelming, but in a fight, sometimes you don't even realize that the gear is there, you just fight and use the gear, sometime later when the situation is over you may feel some fatigue, but that is due to the decompression of the fight-moment and not the weight of the gear-

In the gear I can shoot-run-jump-fight..etc for hours, it's not a problem.

Those "Experts" are usually idiots, and completely unprepared for any of the statements they espouse to clain mastery in. I love seeing some of these experts torn apart in debates or in Court. It's great fun to watch them squirm when pressed for where thier information comes from.

It's the same in our subject I am afraid and I usually pick up on it right away when they start out their BS backgrounds when they say certain keywords....anyone guess what they are??- AP

[Randall Pleasant]

Aaron

This problem also happens with real experts who have great knowledge in the subject matter. The real expert will make a hypothesis about something. Regardless of the number of false cases found that suggest that the hypothesis not valid is if a few true cases of the hypothesis are found (exceptions) other less knowlable (sometimes less honest) people will start using the hypothesis statement as a statement of fact. Such problems takes on a life of their own when they starts to be referred to as "common knowledge" or "common sense".

As you well know, some lawyers can swing an Exception around in court better than you can swing an longsword. Was it not common sense that if the glove didn't fit that all of the volumes of other evidence against OJ didn't matter?

[Grant Hall]

Perhaps if "Expersts" had to adhere to a three strikes and you're out policy perhaps they'd be more honest or do a little more research. I mean, 40lb swords, and soldiers who can't run because they are wearing 30lb armor.

I look at these people and it makes me sick, they are the last people who would have fought in such encounters and the first to claim they are experts.

The quote in my Signature says it well I think.

[LafayetteCCurtis]

While Hans Delbruck, well-known German military historian of the early 20th century, is not responsible for that misbelief, he is one of those experts who helped perpetuate an untruth.

This is exactly why I continue to recommend Delbruck for beginning students of military history--but always with the qualification that he must be read alongside more modern research that would be able to dispel his worst misconceptions while reinforcing the points that he got right.

[Vance Osterhout]

According to "The Soldier's Load and the Mobility of a Nation" 45 Pounds of total gear, including clothing, is the max recommended weight for combat troops. This book was an analysis of combat gear carried by combat troops and was commissioned after WWII. This weight limit is of course exceeded in almost every contemporary military service that I know of.

30 Pounds of Gear should be no problem

[Toke Krebs Niclasen]

A few years ago danish tv had a clip with a modern soldier and a halbardier in halfplate running.
Both carried app 30kg/60some pounds, the modern soldier were a bit faster over 200m.

They concluded that the old gear wasnt that bad, and got back to daily life in the castle of that time.

[Shane Smith]

A few years ago danish tv had a clip with a modern soldier and a halbardier in halfplate running.
Both carried app 30kg/60some pounds, the modern soldier were a bit faster over 200m.

They concluded that the old gear wasnt that bad, and got back to daily life in the castle of that time.

Please re-register with your real, full name as per the forum rules. Thanks.

[Toke Krebs Niclasen]

Sorry

[Shane Smith]

Sorry

No problem. Welcome to the forum

[s_taillebois]

Perhaps the only manner in which these experts could be correct is by shifting the context but even then it would still be inaccurate.

The Bygots (British and Welsh) en route to Agincourt had been feeding on tainted shellfish found in various polluted medieval waters.
For many of them, even the fairly light gear carried by the archers, any gear would have seemed heavy when they were very sick with dysentery. French accounts record the dead Brits they'd found following Henry's army, and no doubt quite a few sick stragglers were killed as they were found.
But when British/Welsh got to the Agincourt fields, obviously they had retained their gear however much it may have weighed upon them during the march. (Granted there was a train, but that had been substantially reduced by that point, due to sickness and the attacks at the ford) Considering the results of the battle, its obvious the Brits kept their gear, armor and otherwise, despite the ordeals of the route to Agincourt.

And with the (presumably) Lancaster dead recently found at the mass burial at Towton, many of the wounds were on the skulls. Even considering the possibility that some of these men were prisoners who were massacred-the preponderance of head wounds might indicate even fleeing men kept whatever armor they may have possessed up until the very end.

So if this gear was so unbearably heavy how could sick men, or panicked men about to die, still retain it?

[BRIAN.FELL]

In the Marines (two years ago) my load was well over 80 pounds maybe way more....

so lets see.

weapon 5 pounds
ammo 25 or more depending on 5.56 or 7.62 machine gun (you can never have enough ammo!!!!!)
clothes and boots 5 pounds
pack alone 10 pounds (with day pack)
782 gear, and magazines (not including ammo) 10 pounds
food, extra clothes, sleepting tent, water (camel back and canteens), rope ect ect... 25 pounds at most
flack jacket with shoulder extensions... 35 pounds (including helmet)

now that is 115 pounds of just gear alone.... now granted in a fire fight I can drop the pack and lose about half the weight and just carry combat needed equipment (rifle, armour, ammo, and water) and be around 50 pounds...

But with full gear we use to jog 3 miles in around 30 minutes!!! So I am guessing that the warriors of the old could do this with ease!!!!!!

I think that most people misjudge the weight as if they are running with it over theirs heads. If you spread the weight over your body and try to center it on the hips and shoulders it almost becomes just as part of you as much as your arm or anything else.

Now yes i am a very large person 6'1; 260 (even in the Marines)... And I squat over 600 pounds, and bech close to 500; but there were Marines smaller then me that were just as loaded down as I was..........????

[Scott A. Richardson]

I think that most people misjudge the weight as if they are running with it over theirs heads. If you spread the weight over your body and try to center it on the hips and shoulders it almost becomes just as part of you as much as your arm or anything else.

I believe this is the fundamental issue with peoples' confusion about this. 60 pounds worth of gear strapped to our backs and hanging on our shoulders feels uncomfortable, exhausting, and certainly impedes our mobility. Distribute those 60 pounds -- or 70 pounds, or 80 pounds -- over your entire body, especially having had your suit of armor custom made to fit you perfectly, than the weight doesn't seem to so much.[/quote]