Did military manufacturers all collectively forget what the term ‘miniaturization’ meant? Why tf is every infantryman of today looking like a fucking blob? What’s the need to make uniforms so fucking thick of they won’t protect the user from anything? Why do they carry so much shit if most of the electronic devices and equipment can be miniaturized to reduce weight and improve mobility? Similarly, why tf are so many other modern weapons and gadgets used in war getting so fucking unconventionally chunky? Some of these soldiers can’t even keep their slings wrapped around their bodies…
way more motorized transport to carry this shit around, body armor, more individualized kits.
>>5293Idk, it seems pretty reasonable to me? They want to have armour or padding for the most lethal areas
>>5293>Why tf is every infantryman of today looking like a fucking blob? Well these uniforms aren't exactly tailor made to individuals, they're mass produced so probably ends up a bit on the baggier side.
>Similarly, why tf are so many other modern weapons and gadgets used in war getting so fucking unconventionally chunky?Just the additional ammo alone seems to add a lot of bulk, and there's never enough ammo. Then there are first-aid kits, and also water, like a big CamelBak-style water pouch on your back. Some of those Israeli soldiers look like they're lugging bulky radios.
The soldiers in the middle (Russian?) look like they're wearing flak vests. It's crazy how much flying metal there is on the battlefield. Not just bullets. All of those explosions are spraying metal in every direction. Ernst Junger wrote a novel called "Storm of Steel."
>>5293>wear skin tight latex suit and tacticool gear on it>get blown into a unrecognizable blob of meat and blood by a droneMakes little difference. Might just as well carry all the shit you need in the trench.
>>5299Did not exist until recently.
>>5295The problem isn’t the amount of shit they’re carrying, but how bulky it is getting. Most of the hard gets used by soldiers today are unnecessarily bulky.
>>5303
Aside for the bulky and goofy looking night vision gadget, this is one of the only images where a us soldier looks reasonably equipped.
>>5303
That image was made by a retard. They don't point out that the Chinese guy is also wearing a plate carrier.
>>5306or gloves, or I'm sure so much else.
>>5293Let deflagration technology finally catch up to destroy any attempts at body armor. There should be some crazy scientist working on ultrafast hypersonic projectiles somewhere. Then but only then will the MIC drop plate carriers and other moneysink soldier enhancement systems.
Or maybe getting forced into an attritional war will wake them up.
>>5308Anon the issue isn’t the amount of shit modern soldiers are carrying but the size of the shit they’re carrying. We can make phones and radios smaller than the human ear. There is no justifiable reason to keep giving soldiers massive fucking gadgets, bags, and accessories with the manufacturing capabilities of today. That shit only makes soldiers unnecessarily slow.
>>5309Bulky size = alot of weight.
We are talking about the same problem.
All those fancy electronics will be dropped when the casualties are back to six digit counts per battle, as in an actual war against a peer adversary, not the colonial policing the Empire was involved in, also called US interventions in the periphery.
>>5309>We can make phones and radios smaller than the human ear.But can this be done cheaply and reliably enough at scale? Do these work over significant distances and across forests, mountains, and urban environments? Can they do their job without any external assistance (like a cell tower or other amplifier)?
>>5312It’s literally cheaper to make smaller shit, because it requires less material.
>>5303
burger soldier: pp exposed
Chynese soldaten: pp protect
>>5312Even a baofeng is more compact than those radios, and you can get them with encryption now. Also check out ultralight backpacking gear, it is certainly feasible. The guerilla does not need fancy gadgets or bulky armor. Still though, better safe than sorry.
>>5293If you train enough with the gear, managing and using it becomes second nature, and you get used to the bulk.
>>5314US troops wear groin protectors too *sometimes. That's why this discussion is so dumb. A bunch of people who've never been in the military, never studied the military, apparently figured out to do it better based off some memes they glanced at.
>DoD spent a ton of money to see what was one of the most common injuries and they found out that the groin wasn't protected well enough. So they added a kevlar triangle to cover that part and to top it off a plate that can be placed in it. After one FTX and getting slapped in the balls, we stopped wearing it.
>We called it the "nutflap" and it was a hard requirement by MND-B when I was in Baghdad. FWIW we also sometimes just folded it up under our plate and whipped it out when somebody important was around.
>I know a guy who has an outline of his groin protector in scars on his lap. Rocket came in through the front of his RG 31 and he lost his right arm where the DAPS ended. Throat protector and collar saved his neck. He had raccoon eyes from his eye pro. His IBA and attachments saved his life.Several other guys where saved by their collars throughout that tour. But that was route clearance in Mosul right before the surge. Personal mobility wasn't as high a priority for us in a route clearance package. We were basically bait, and after an IED blew up we rarely saw anyone.
>>5316>I know a guy who has an outline of his groin protector in scars on his lap. Rocket came in through the front of his RG 31 and he lost his right arm where the DAPS ended. Throat protector and collar saved his neck. He had raccoon eyes from his eye proKek i'd pay to see this specimen.
In the USA you have no welfare or healthcare no? Why not re-start freak shows? Take it global and i'd go if there was discount tickets.
>>5315>The guerilla does not need fancy gadgets or bulky armor. I guarantee you that the NLF or Taliban would love to get their hands on NVGs, helmets, kevlar, etc. That shit gives you distinct advantages and can save your life, which is why modern armies use them.
>>5318I guess one should always take one of those little magnifying lenses for the top of the gun when travelling then.
>>5319I can tell you from personal experience that having a magnified optic on your rifle makes a massive difference in actually being able to hit a target.
>>5320easy money then..
are they legal? i mean, it's not a weapon, it's technically just binos -s, one could just say it's for bird watching, no?
>>5316Known about the groin protection thing flak armours have had for decades at this point. That still doesn’t excuse the unnecessary bulkiness present in infantry divisions these days. At least
>>5310 genuinely provides evidence of reasonably sized equipment.
just like american citizens, the military are used to a life of lazy luxury where they can consume whatever they want since daddy america can just print money to give them their fancy toys. 90% of modern soldiers cant hit a stationary wall in front of them without getting ptsd and shitting their pants
>>5303
I want to shoot a type 95 when I'm in China bros. They have them at some of the shooting ranges, but you need to be a member or guest of a member for the PLA milsurp newer than a rusty sks.
>>5324Honestly man idk what you're even referring to. The guys in the OP don't seem particularly overloaded, they aren't even carrying rucksacks. They've got their rifles, web-gear, armour, small backpacks and some extra pouches. If you think that's a lot then frankly you don't know what you're talking about. How weighed down a soldier is will depend on a lot of things. What's their mission? How long will they be in the field and/or outside the wire? Can they expect resupply? Are they mechanized? Are they establishing a patrol base? If soldiers look like they're carrying a lot of crap its because they are, but you shouldn't assume that this stuff is unnecessary. Once you add up ammunition, food, water, sleeping gear, medical equipment, comms, extra clothing (very important if you don't want your feet to rot away in your boots), entrenching tools, specialized equipment (e.g. explosives, NVGs, spare barrels, etc), platoon/company weapons and associated paraphernalia (e.g. mortars, MG tripods, AT weapons, etc.) of course they're going to be pretty bulky and weighed down. That doesn't mean that this shit isn't necessary to have. In my own experience in the military missing some of these things when you needed them at best made for a miserable experience and at worst made you unable to accomplish your objective.
>>5325I wonder what possesses people to write shit like this.
>>5327What the other guy said isn’t wrong. A lot of American-made equipment is bulky and big as fuck compared to shit produced around the planet. As for your comment, people have been carrying god knows how much equipment in wars for thousands of years at this point and have managed their weight much better than what current US soldiers are doing. The need to carry a lot of equipment is understandable, but that equipment shouldn’t be so stereotypically American in its size.
>>5294How would that work when you are talking stuff like Stalingrad of Berlin '45? When transport can't be on the front as your tanks and self propelled artillery are hogging the tight urban roads. Soviet infantry in Berlin did not got a ride even on the backs of tanks from the suburbs of Berlin to the Reichstag, they had to advance by foot.
>>5330Body armour for infantry didn't exist at the time, which tbh is most of what's adding apparent bulkiness to individual soldiers.
>>5331My point is that transports stayed out of the fight to not get in the way of tanks and artillery. Shoving 6 thousand tanks (not including the enemy's) into one city guarantees a traffic jam on it own.
>>5331Body armour? The bulk is being caused by the thickness of the bags, uniforms and gadgets. The body armour itself barely contributes to the bulkiness of modern infantryman. Just look at the size of Ukrainian riflemen these days. The fucking guys can’t even manage to get their slings to wrap around their backpacks.
>>5334Bad and lazy excuses. Most of that shit is meant to be contained and hauled around in vehicles anyways, and long-term trips often take use of camps, bases, and forts anyways. Even without that information, better manufacturing processes and designs can fix these issues with space anyways without turning soldiers into fucking blobs. What the other guys said was right, the bulkiness is a stereotypically American problem.
Military contractors make more money the more shit they sell. It's a very simple calculus.
>>5335I'm starting to suspect that you've never been an infantryman and are just talking out your ass.
>>5338Thank Christ I’m not. Even with endurance training I’d likely get hurt first from a back or ankle injury from carrying around so much garbage for days to weeks on end than I would be from a bomb made by some half-illiterate jackass whose lucky enough to never have seen a tank in his life. Manual labour is awful.
Does this post glow like me?
>>5337They’d probably make more money by selling ammo if the flashlights, binoculars, radios, microphones, and other electronic and mechanical junk was made smaller. The reason why ammunition sales should increase is because the decreased sized would accommodate more space for more rounds. This change might also prevent the weight of the average rifleman today to actually change.
>>5309The reason the electronics are so big is because they need to operate at higher power for a longer duration, while also being more rugged than standard consumer devices.
Unique IPs: 29