Reenactor Field Operations

[davep]

Most of the time the discussion surrounding combat field related topics seem to focus on "find-fix-fire-finish". But most of time reenactments get one thing wrong when it comes to gear. And that is reenactors bring too much of it into combat.

I had an interesting conversation with Victor. And while we tend to focus on the small picture, what is often overlooked is the big picture. In World War II the infantry soldier wasn't running around with a full packs, bags, shovels, etc. While he may have done this earlier in the day or week, as his company was moving from point A to point B in order to establish or move their base encampment, then drop all of this in combat.

The daily battle engagements didn't involved the solider packing a lunch and loading his pack for the day. He didn't bring a shovel, and load up with a lot of extra items. He would have left though back at the base came.

In reenactments it would be more period correct for all the reenactors to drop thier gear at a base camp, HQ, or field hopital, and the various unit rotating in and out for lunch, rather than sitting in the middle of a battle eating sandwhiches.

[barcelonablom]

I had a similar conversation with Burgess. Its quite the reflection of WW1 and WW2 and the very wrong military thinking on the part of logistics and supply. The assumption was that having a highly modern supply network will equal out to giving troops equipment for every case possible.

Think of a D-day paratrooper's loadout (how much they shed when they landed) versus that of his Market-Garden or Varsity counterpart.

I'm sure Victor has read "The Soldier's Load and the Mobility of a Nation" by Col SLA Marshall, a post war book that cover just this thing. Apparently he had anecdotes even to the point where we waste by oversupplying the rear areas, one soldier guarded the same medical supply dump in Normandy from D-day to VE day and didn't see one item get retrieved from it.

As for reenactors, a bit of understanding of how military supply trains comes into play. You are right, though there wouldn't be a base camp in most cases. Pretty much on the administrative march you carry your pack and all the insanity, at your staging area you'd ditch off a lot of your camping gear with the battalion supply train, as you moved across the line of departure you'd ditch pretty much everything non-essential at your rally point. Most photos of men in combat I'm sure you see that they wear little more than a cartridge belt, first aid kit, canteen, maybe a bandoleer of extra ammo, and an assault bag (musette, gas mask bag, etc) with spare ammo and a k-ration and other immediate essentials.

I can see the ability of trying to replicate this. But since our battles get a little confusing you could easily end up far away from the place where you ditch your haversack (I've done it and was without lunch a couple of times). Trying to organize a lunch also makes things a bit more complicated in the planning of a battle but if the host accounts for it, it shouldn't be a problem.

[kanowarrior]

I disagree. Most of the reports I've read on US Army operations in WWII and discussions with others shows the US Army in WWII did not rotate units out the front lines for lunch and return them to HQ. That would be ridiculous. Units sent to the front lines typically stayed there until rotated out for R&R which could be for the duration of whatever mission they were given or for a length of time, typically (or rather supposed to be) every couple weeks. Although sometimes it was as long as a couple months if replacements couldn't be found.

Every unit had support that was responsible for feeding the front line troops. It was their duty to cook and haul HOT cooked meals up to the troops EVERY DAY and most, especially in the 442nd prided themselves on doing so. Even during the rescue of the Lost Battalion these guys were hauling hot meals in mermite cans right up to the advancing troops every day and never missed a day.
This is why one of the items a soldier considered important to carry even after discarding his pack was his mess kit.

K-rations were issued but were not intended to be used unless necessary. Likewise canned rations as well. D-rations were commonly issued as emergency meals when food could not be provided. You can read about the various types of rations and their use in WWII here:

www.qmfound.com/army_rations_historical_background.htm#Operational Rations in World War II Read the article, Operational Rations in World War II

in another article on this website:

After World War II, no visible post-war efforts were made to improve the Army's inventory of equipment or subsistence systems. The Korean War found the Army using the same existing rations, equipment and systems. Additionally, the method of warfare had not changed from fighting on a clearly defined front. Everything in front of the forward edge of the battle area (FEBA) was enemy territory and everything behind the FEBA was secure. Cooks could prepare hot A-Rations (fresh) or B-Rations (dehydrated or semiperishable) directly behind the FEBA. This allowed serving hot meals to almost all soldiers three times a day unless they were out on patrol. When hot rations were not available, soldiers ate the Combat, Meal Individual (CMI). Because the logistical and tactical situation allowed serving hot meals, the theater commander ensured that facilities were in place and that fresh rations were available whenever possible.

Now naturally, currently it is not feasible to provide hot meals to us during reenactments but pulling back to HQ every battle to eat lunch is not practical nor is it historicaly accurate. Eating in the field is. K-rations and D-rations would have normally been carried by a soldier in combat when he couldn't get his B-ration (hot food) supplied from the rear lines. This is why M43 combat jackets were designed and well liked for their big patch pockets (and HBT shirts) because a K-ration would fit in the pocket so nicely.

Paratroopers were a different case. Of course hot meals could not be supplied when dropped behind enemy lines. Normandy is a case in point for that. Market Garden was different as those troopers air dropped by parachute and glider were much better supplied and coordinated then at Normandy. Likewise those dropped at Market Garden were fully expected to be quickly relieved and resupplied.

Immediately following WWII huge changes were done to the supply system although as you can see from the quote above not much had been implemented by the time Korea broke out but one thing that was, was the D-ration became obsolete and dropped from the system. C-rations were beginning to replace 5-in-1 and 10-in-1 rations. By the time of Vietnam the field rations had pretty much been narrowed down to C-rations and front line operations were not the extensive operations done during WWII.

[davep]

Sept 14, 2010 11:55:56 GMT -5 kanowarrior said:

I disagree. Most of the reports I've read on US Army operations in WWII and discussions with others shows the US Army in WWII did not rotate units out the front lines for lunch and return them to HQ. That would be ridiculous.

The point being made is, the normal combat squad would have left his camp after eating, and would eat once again after returning. Most squad operations are for the day, to move out and secure a position, either for information or to wait for more reinenforcements to move up. They also would have dropped much of the gear we carry out into the field, back at their base camp.

The point is they would eat before and after. Now that being said they may have some rations(snack) on them. But during their operations they are on the job, and the unit wouldn't break for lunch.

The idea with reenactors going back to camp to eat, was to eliminate the lunchtime out in the battlefield with people setting up for their picnics. If you had various units/squads/people going back to the HQ area, you could eliminate a formal lunchtime, as well as people taking field breaks. By going back to the HQ, people could eat without rushing and enjoy the time. It also where you can set up a little field stove etc.

[victorc]

This topic was started in a conversation where the question came up....Wether the basic infantry unit carried there gear packs which are non-essential combat gears (including rations) with them while engaging the enemy?

The answer would be Yes and No. It depends. On an invasion fleet landing in Normandy, to Airborne Drop or while in transit to the destination from point A to point B, the answer is yes as simply you do not have a choice. You have to fight the enemy with your gear on. But once you have reached your designated mission assignment (like holding a bridge) then you would drop all non-combat related gear in a secure location from the rear of the front line from that Forward Area and set up a defensive perimeter position.

It also depends on the duration of the mission ( 1 day, 3 days or 2 weeks, etc.) and depending on the size of the unit to accomplish different missions (reconnaissance, Intel, prisoner extraction, or search and destroy mission. On a small scale platoon/squad level, they only take what is needed for that particular day with just enough rations for the estimated duration of the mission at hand.

Bottom line is.. rule of engagement ** hydrate and drop non-essential gear** before an attack if possible. You want your team to be most effective with speed and accuracy. Your team is only as fast as your slowest member.

As reenactors the age and physical fitness will have a big factor in carrying these extra load. As a possible way for the unit to be more effective and safety concern, all non-combat gear can be drop in the rear of the front line like ( field hospital, forward area Firebase Camp or simply on the Jeep) . But that is the discretion of all Unit leaders and coordinators involved as well as their responsibility of the welfare of everyone.

[davep]

Here is a nice graphic image to remained people of the basics.

[victorc]

Nice photo of the basics Dave. Simple rule but not easy to carry out.

[m14msgt]

Sept 13, 2010 15:12:14 GMT -5 davep said:

Most of the time the discussion surrounding combat field related topics seem to focus on "find-fix-fire-finish". But most of time reenactments get one thing wrong when it comes to gear. And that is reenactors bring too much of it into combat.

I had an interesting conversation with Victor. And while we tend to focus on the small picture, what is often overlooked is the big picture. In World War II the infantry soldier wasn't running around with a full packs, bags, shovels, etc. While he may have done this earlier in the day or week, as his company was moving from point A to point B in order to establish or move their base encampment, then drop all of this in combat.

The daily battle engagements didn't involved the solider packing a lunch and loading his pack for the day. He didn't bring a shovel, and load up with a lot of extra items. He would have left though back at the base came.

In reenactments it would be more period correct for all the reenactors to drop thier gear at a base camp, HQ, or field hopital, and the various unit rotating in and out for lunch, rather than sitting in the middle of a battle eating sandwhiches.

I agree that they couldn't wait to shed the superfluous gear...but, on the other hand...when you shell out hundreds of $$ for equipment for your impression, it almost seems wasteful to not take it out and wear it all day. At least, that's how I feel about it. I recenty spent $100 on an Airborne demo bag for September's RPS event, and I didn't even take it out to the battle. I ended up with my GP bag to hold my demo kit.