NationStates

Fordorsia wrote:

Laritaia wrote:
Tradition

the Gurkhas have their khukuris and the Commandos have their fighting knives

"tradition" probably meaning they genuinely think they could get in a knife fight with someone.

Kukris are practical knives. FS knives are needless, limited in their utility and not even real fighting knives. A fighting knife should be able to cut and thrust equally well, be able to be held in a sabre grip well (aka not a thin round handle), and have a fairly substantial guard. The FS has none of these.

ripo commando


If you want to try make your SF sneaky tacticool Hollywood ninjas with knives, give them knives with long-ish spike blades. Not short daggers or actual fighting knives. Get good UK

And how many years of practical knife fighting experience do you have Ford? What formal, or informal training?

I would be quite surprised if this thread had close to 60 combined fights between the few members here who have actually used a knife in "combat", and the bulk of those would probably be Puzzles. Whereas Fairbairn himself had over 600 altercations to draw from.

You can base your opinion on something because of its form over function, there is nothing specifically wrong about that Ford. But it is terribly ignorant of you to begin claiming the function is your issue with it when you have no experience with which to draw that functional assessment and outright flaunt disdain for the opinions of those who do have that experience.

Fordorsia wrote:At this point I can't tell if the people who complain about few and far between blade discussions are serious or not. Go back to repeating the same things about ballistics, organization and loadouts week in week out.

Welcome to the circle.


Oh Ford, if you had to choose. Bowie or Machete?

Crookfur wrote:Because we've had it before and Frod has a silly hatred of stabby blades. The FS knife was for discretely stabbing people in street brawls, which made it pretty damned good for discretely stabbing German sentries and gaurds.

The royal marines still have it because it was the commando knife and the RM are still commandos and expected to do the odd bit of sneaky stuff (although the recent adds just show the cartel soldier being dragged into a bush rather than being brutally stabbed).

Heck Fairbairn made it very clear what his fighting knife was for which is why he came up with the smatchet for actually fighting with.

Oh my god.

I'd not seen the smachet before, but Kours need to have it.

Dostanuot Loj wrote:You can base your opinion on something because of its form over function, there is nothing specifically wrong about that Ford. But it is terribly ignorant of you to begin claiming the function is your issue with it when you have no experience with which to draw that functional assessment and outright flaunt disdain for the opinions of those who do have that experience.

tbf, the only reason it's such glaring behaviour is because he's putting his disdain eloquently. If he'd removed all punctuation and capitals, added some emoticons, and said 'reee,' 'sperg' or 'tard' then it'd have been par for the course for the armchair generals and technicians in this thread describing whichever school of thought is out of fashion that month.

Fordorsia wrote:At this point I can't tell if the people who complain about few and far between blade discussions are serious or not. Go back to repeating the same things about ballistics, organization and loadouts week in week out.

Crookfur wrote:Because we've had it before and Frod has a silly hatred of standby blades.

I've just never accepted any good reasons for why it was designed, made and adopted.

It's probably the only knife/sword that I truly disdain. But that's only because of how generic and non-special it is coupled with how it's been put on a pedestal for being "super amazing ultimate stealthy killing knife". Kind of like how I despise Boudica, but mostly because of the absurd legacy she's had for the past 150 years.

There is no mystery or lack of good reason as to why it was adopted which basically boiled down to "hey the guy training us and writing the manuals on how to fight and murder people extremely up close and personally happens to have a knife he has found to be very good for the techniques he uses so let's use that but make it a bit longer because greatcoats."

You will need to read Scientific self defence if you want more on Fairbairn's thoughts on the design.

Any legend about the FS is more about the units that used it and its emblematic relation to such units than the knife itself.

Dostanuot Loj wrote:

Fordorsia wrote:
"tradition" probably meaning they genuinely think they could get in a knife fight with someone.

Kukris are practical knives. FS knives are needless, limited in their utility and not even real fighting knives. A fighting knife should be able to cut and thrust equally well, be able to be held in a sabre grip well (aka not a thin round handle), and have a fairly substantial guard. The FS has none of these.

ripo commando
(Image)

If you want to try make your SF sneaky tacticool Hollywood ninjas with knives, give them knives with long-ish spike blades. Not short daggers or actual fighting knives. Get good UK

And how many years of practical knife fighting experience do you have Ford? What formal, or informal training?

I would be quite surprised if this thread had close to 60 combined fights between the few members here who have actually used a knife in "combat", and the bulk of those would probably be Puzzles. Whereas Fairbairn himself had over 600 altercations to draw from.

You can base your opinion on something because of its form over function, there is nothing specifically wrong about that Ford. But it is terribly ignorant of you to begin claiming the function is your issue with it when you have no experience with which to draw that functional assessment and outright flaunt disdain for the opinions of those who do have that experience.

I don't need years of practical experience to know what features a fighting knife should have. Same as how I don't need to be a doctor to tell if someone's sick or I don't need to be a chef to know a meal tastes like shit. The best features for a fighting knife are the ones I mentioned, among others depending on personal preference. The FS simply doesn't have any of them. It was just another generic dagger, nothing special even for the time.

Whereas Fairbairn himself had over 600 altercations to draw from

I'd like a source for this number. He was policeman in Shanghai, often having to deal with knife wielding criminals. He wasn't duelling people.

Rhodesialund wrote:Bowie or Machete?

For what purpose?

Kouralia wrote:tbf, the only reason it's such glaring behaviour is because he's putting his disdain eloquently. If he'd removed all punctuation and capitals, added some emoticons, and said 'reee,' 'sperg' or 'tard' then it'd have been par for the course for the armchair generals and technicians in this thread describing whichever school of thought is out of fashion that month.

I am an eloquent human bean

Fordorsia wrote:

Rhodesialund wrote:Bowie or Machete?

For what purpose?

Anything.

Rhodesialund wrote:

Fordorsia wrote:
For what purpose?

Anything.

Bowie. Far more versatile.

Fordorsia wrote:

Whereas Fairbairn himself had over 600 altercations to draw from

I'd like a source for this number. He was policeman in Shanghai, often having to deal with knife wielding criminals. He wasn't duelling people.

tbf, no military weapon in the modern era is meant to duel people. There's a difference between a duel and 'just straight up trying to murder someone, no holds barred.'

Fordorsia wrote:

Rhodesialund wrote:
Anything.

Bowie. Far more versatile.

For straight-up murdering people...

Bowie, Machete, Kukhri?

Fordorsia wrote:

Dostanuot Loj wrote:
And how many years of practical knife fighting experience do you have Ford? What formal, or informal training?

I would be quite surprised if this thread had close to 60 combined fights between the few members here who have actually used a knife in "combat", and the bulk of those would probably be Puzzles. Whereas Fairbairn himself had over 600 altercations to draw from.

You can base your opinion on something because of its form over function, there is nothing specifically wrong about that Ford. But it is terribly ignorant of you to begin claiming the function is your issue with it when you have no experience with which to draw that functional assessment and outright flaunt disdain for the opinions of those who do have that experience.

I don't need years of practical experience to know what features a fighting knife should have. Same as how I don't need to be a doctor to tell if someone's sick or I don't need to be a chef to know a meal tastes like shit. The best features for a fighting knife are the ones I mentioned, among others depending on personal preference. The FS simply doesn't have any of them. It was just another generic dagger, nothing special even for the time.

You make this judgement based on what criteria?
Taste is, quite literally, a personal opinion that has no basis in any other external detail, and is thus a complete strawman.
You don't need a doctor to tell if someone is sick usually, but you do need all that experience being sick and dealing with sick people you get from generally living. Again, strawman.

You do however need experience, training, or some actual involvement to know what is good for something actually involving external applications that are not inherent to living. You can't give recommendations on a good MIG welding machine if you have no idea how to weld, you can't criticize someone's handwriting if you don't know how to write.

If you don't like the FS knife, that's perfectly fine. In fact I don't like it either. But you are in no position to base that dislike on its utility. It is perfectly suited to perform the function it was designed for, and it has a solid reputation for that. This is why I asked not only if you had any practical experience, but any formal or informal training. If you occasionally partake in amateur fencing down at the YMCA or $H Club or whatever, then you at least have some informal training and a basis from where you can draw that conclusion.

Whereas Fairbairn himself had over 600 altercations to draw from

I'd like a source for this number. He was policeman in Shanghai, often having to deal with knife wielding criminals. He wasn't duelling people.
Sure, here you go.. I believe he also mentions it in Scientific Defense.

Also, real knife fights are not duels. Romantic literature is not a reflection of reality.

I am an eloquent human bean

What kind of explosion/ How big it is, that could sever or simply disintegrate human body?

Asking this coz, apparently a suicide bomber blow himself up in a place (Kampung Melayu)in Jakarta. 2 dead, one police and the bomber itself. Heard they found body parts.

Dostanuot Loj wrote:You make this judgement based on what criteria?

Based on how the most popular kind of utility-fighting knife came about. The bowie knife started out as a single knife which was basically a long straight blade with a drop point. For over 60 years it evolved into what it is today, a long-ish blade with a pronounced clip point and often an acceptable guard. These are the best features of a knife meant for fighting with. For you average Englishman and American from the 1830s to late 1800s, the bowie knife was the sidearm of your average dood. This is including the US Civil War, which is when you got what are essentially super-bowies, the very large d-guard examples. The vast majority of infantrymen couldn't afford pistols, so they carried large actual fighting knives instead. Helped that they were fantastic utility knives also.

Much of that is probably irrelevant, I dunno. But the point is that the bowie knife evolved very quickly into what is essentially the best fighting knife in history (not counting very particular one off examples and stuff). It's often fairly large, it's has good cutting ability depending on how deep and curved the belly is, and with a large enough clip point, it has fantastic thrusting ability. Just a guy having experience in judo and serving in a police force for long enough to supposedly have 600 "deadly encounters" whatever that actually means, doesn't overrule how the most popular knives for in the world for fighting evolved.

Sure, here you go.

As I said, this is pretty vague. What's a deadly encounter? What weapons were involved? What was the context? Being a police officer at the time he could have been using anything from a stick to a sabre to a pistol in any one of these situations. He was there for 20 years. I'd like to see how many violent incidents a modern police officer in a rough city would rack up in that time.

The success, or "success" of the FS knife is more about what he did and taught with it rather than what others did with it. He made the techniques for his own knife after all.

In close-quarters fighting there is no more deadly weapon than the knife

-the man himself

I guess he never heard of swords, bats, spears or guns.

Kouralia wrote:

Fordorsia wrote:
Bowie. Far more versatile.

For straight-up murdering people...

Bowie, Machete, Kukhri?

Whichever example of the three is the sharpest. Any will chop into someone's head just fine.

So, thought I'd do some stuff for load-outs for my average infanteers, because we reached the allocated maximum length of time for breaking from gunsperg to stabsperg.

Worn Kit:


Belt Kit:


Assault Pack:


Marching Pack:


Not included - whatever random shite they pick up and put in their pockets, from sweets to an extra ten magazines, or personal kit like string.

Anything glaringly missing?

How long a blade would one need to have to kill someone in this manner? And how thick could it get before the blade becomes too un-stabby? From say 4:45 on.

I'm wondering if a Fairbairn-Sykes would be too short, and a Smatchet too wide.

Kouralia wrote:How long a blade would one need to have to kill someone in this manner? And how thick could it get before the blade becomes too un-stabby? From say 4:45 on.

I'm wondering if a Fairbairn-Sykes would be too short, and a Smatchet too wide.

Haphazardly measuring from my collar to my heart, it' like 10 inches give or take, which may very well be completely off. Either way, as far as I know there isn't all that much stuff in the way of the blade, but again I may be wrong about that too. Quick answer is I guess the blade would need to be as long as the distance to the heart if you want a fast as possible kill.

A FS would probably be too short depending on just how far it is. A smatchet would be far too wide.

As for the method, I'm not actually sure it's authentic. Rome is a generally accurate show, but it does fall short of quite a few things. That method of execution is probably one of them.

Kouralia wrote:How long a blade would one need to have to kill someone in this manner? And how thick could it get before the blade becomes too un-stabby? From say 4:45 on.

I'm wondering if a Fairbairn-Sykes would be too short, and a Smatchet too wide.

A bit of guess based on rondel daggers and early stilettos that were used for that kind of think you are probably talking a 12" blade and the sword shown in the video is at the extreme end of the sort of width you would be looking for. Ideally I don't think you would want to go much wider than a dirk

Crookfur wrote:

Kouralia wrote:How long a blade would one need to have to kill someone in this manner? And how thick could it get before the blade becomes too un-stabby? From say 4:45 on.

I'm wondering if a Fairbairn-Sykes would be too short, and a Smatchet too wide.

A bit of guess based on rondel daggers and early stilettos that were used for that kind of think you are probably talking a 12" blade and the sword shown in the video is at the extreme end of the sort of width you would be looking for. Ideally I don't think you would want to go much wider than a dirk

Fordorsia wrote:Haphazardly measuring from my collar to my heart, it' like 10 inches give or take, which may very well be completely off. Either way, as far as I know there isn't all that much stuff in the way of the blade, but again I may be wrong about that too. Quick answer is I guess the blade would need to be as long as the distance to the heart if you want a fast as possible kill.

A FS would probably be too short depending on just how far it is. A smatchet would be far too wide.

As for the method, I'm not actually sure it's authentic. Rome is a generally accurate show, but it does fall short of quite a few things. That method of execution is probably one of them.

Not too fussed with actual authenticity, more interested in the cool factor, and it does have a kinda classical feel to it as a method.

Damnit anyway. I'll have to restrict 'doing that to slavers, goa'uld and pirates' to full battlemages who carry swords into battle rather than their axe-wielding apprentices.

Crookfur wrote:

Kouralia wrote:How long a blade would one need to have to kill someone in this manner? And how thick could it get before the blade becomes too un-stabby? From say 4:45 on.

I'm wondering if a Fairbairn-Sykes would be too short, and a Smatchet too wide.

A bit of guess based on rondel daggers and early stilettos that were used for that kind of think you are probably talking a 12" blade and the sword shown in the video is at the extreme end of the sort of width you would be looking for. Ideally I don't think you would want to go much wider than a dirk

If a blade is well tapered, and again depending on just how much is actually in the way of the blade, I don't think it's limited in width to anywhere near a dirk. You could probably do it with a Pompeii or Fulham gladius with plenty of umph quite easily. But yeah after that just cut their head off instead.

Kouralia wrote:So, thought I'd do some stuff for load-outs for my average infanteers, because we reached the allocated maximum length of time for breaking from gunsperg to stabsperg.

Worn Kit:

Clothing:

• Underwear
• Socks
• Camouflage trousers
• Top:
  • Undershirt
  • Smock (Optional, for Cold Weather)
• Boots
• Gloves (worn when appropriate)

PPE:

• Helmet
• Body Armour with dynamic weight distribution system and integrated central power supply and data system
  • Shoulder Plates (Optional)
  • Forearm Plates (Optional)
  • Thigh Plates (Optional)
  • Shin Plates (Optional)
• Elbow Pads
• Knee Pads
• Holster for Side-Arm (Role Appropriate)
  • Side-arm
  • 1x spare magazine/cylinder

Belt Kit:

• Pouches attached to Body Armour
• Individual Weapon
  • Rifle
  • Automatic Support Weapon
  • Carbine
  • Other
• Ammunition (Rifle/Carbine Example)
  • 1x 30rnd in Weapon
  • 3x 30rnd to front
  • 6x 30rnd to Left Side
• Grenades
  • 2x Fragmentation Grenades to Right
  • 1x Smoke Grenade to Right
• Dual Role Radio
• IC2-P Radio set (NCO only)
• Smart Device (NCO Only)
• Personal Trauma Kit
• Respirator
• Melee Weapons:
  • Bayonet
  • Fighting Dagger (Commando-Trained Only)
  • Smatchet (At OC's Discretion, where IET not required)
• Water Bottle and Mug
• Torch
• Disposable ATGM (where appropriate)
• 10x 40mm UBMD Ammunition (where appropriate)

Assault Pack:

• Shelter Sheet
• CBRN Gear
• 3x 100 Rnd Belt
• 5x 40mm UBMD Ammunition
• Individual's Entrenchment Tool (Unless not required)
• 300 Rounds ammunition, boxed
• 24hrs Rations
• Bungie Cord
• Tent Pegs
• Basha Pole

Marching Pack:

• Any of the 'Assault Pack' kit should the MP be worn rather than the AP, and the following:
• Sleeping Bag
• Roll Mat
• Waterproofs
• Further 150 Rounds, boxed
• Further 24hrs Rations

Not included - whatever random shite they pick up and put in their pockets, from sweets to an extra ten magazines, or personal kit like string.

Anything glaringly missing?

Nothing missing, but you could definitely settle for some more modularization and less standardization. Scratch Belt Kit verbiage unless it's nation-specific terminology for that particular gear and switch it to 'Rigging' or 'Harness' Kit.

Second, your Belt Kit includes Individual Weapon, but that's rarely something to include as part of the gear. You get issued that separately, swap that terminology towards Individual Weapon Slings (specifying sling-types perhaps), then go from there.

Third, determining where your infantry men will wear their kit is good and all for uniformity, but in all reality they wear it how they want. If they find it easier to have their smoke grenade by their chest, flanked by the radio to the inside of the chest and the ammunition magazine digging into their shoulder for some reason, then they'll do it. Defining how and where htings will go may only get in the way of different soldiers in the fighting force. That's just my thoughts on the matter, taken from SIHMDSS.

I'm guessing that Personal Trauma Kit is a Kouralian IFAK then? If so, good, but you might want to specify other aspects of the IFAK, such as what it holds. The Respirator is standard? Or is it mission specific? You might want to denote which items in the list are Mission-Specific and aren't exactly carried all the time.

Scratch the water bottle and cup. If you really need some sort of vessel for holding water, make one of the magazine holders a dual-purpose for that sake. In the end, what they'll actually want is a Camelbak or some other sort of Water Vessel worn on the back or over the shoulder.

Always have your E-Tool. That's not even an option for us here on the Red White and Blue side of the puddle.

CBRN Gear in it's entirety is a lot more than what could conceivably fit in my assault pack here. Unless you have some sort of super-pack, I'd recommend making that your 'Mission specific' gear, because I'd definitely not want to haul around all of my CBRN kit all the time on patrols or whatnot.

24 Hrs of rations is actually, maybe two MRE's? Comfortably? One MRE is really all you need per day to sustain a soldier. They've got a ton of calories and your infantry will be conditioned and trained on how to properly ration out their own MRE's.

Tent supplies, while nice and all, might not be needed and you might want to specify that your 40mm munitions are also... well, mission specific. Just go through and look at mission specific gear, or moreover find your mission-specific gear. That might help with narrowing things down.

Just my thoughts on it all.

Standardization is what separates man from ape.

Kassaran wrote:

Kouralia wrote:So, thought I'd do some stuff for load-outs for my average infanteers, because we reached the allocated maximum length of time for breaking from gunsperg to stabsperg.

Worn Kit:

Clothing:

• Underwear
• Socks
• Camouflage trousers
• Top:
  • Undershirt
  • Smock (Optional, for Cold Weather)
• Boots
• Gloves (worn when appropriate)

PPE:

• Helmet
• Body Armour with dynamic weight distribution system and integrated central power supply and data system
  • Shoulder Plates (Optional)
  • Forearm Plates (Optional)
  • Thigh Plates (Optional)
  • Shin Plates (Optional)
• Elbow Pads
• Knee Pads
• Holster for Side-Arm (Role Appropriate)
  • Side-arm
  • 1x spare magazine/cylinder

Belt Kit:

• Pouches attached to Body Armour
• Individual Weapon
  • Rifle
  • Automatic Support Weapon
  • Carbine
  • Other
• Ammunition (Rifle/Carbine Example)
  • 1x 30rnd in Weapon
  • 3x 30rnd to front
  • 6x 30rnd to Left Side
• Grenades
  • 2x Fragmentation Grenades to Right
  • 1x Smoke Grenade to Right
• Dual Role Radio
• IC2-P Radio set (NCO only)
• Smart Device (NCO Only)
• Personal Trauma Kit
• Respirator
• Melee Weapons:
  • Bayonet
  • Fighting Dagger (Commando-Trained Only)
  • Smatchet (At OC's Discretion, where IET not required)
• Water Bottle and Mug
• Torch
• Disposable ATGM (where appropriate)
• 10x 40mm UBMD Ammunition (where appropriate)

Assault Pack:

• Shelter Sheet
• CBRN Gear
• 3x 100 Rnd Belt
• 5x 40mm UBMD Ammunition
• Individual's Entrenchment Tool (Unless not required)
• 300 Rounds ammunition, boxed
• 24hrs Rations
• Bungie Cord
• Tent Pegs
• Basha Pole

Marching Pack:

• Any of the 'Assault Pack' kit should the MP be worn rather than the AP, and the following:
• Sleeping Bag
• Roll Mat
• Waterproofs
• Further 150 Rounds, boxed
• Further 24hrs Rations

Not included - whatever random shite they pick up and put in their pockets, from sweets to an extra ten magazines, or personal kit like string.

Anything glaringly missing?

Nothing missing, but you could definitely settle for some more modularization and less standardization. Scratch Belt Kit verbiage unless it's nation-specific terminology for that particular gear and switch it to 'Rigging' or 'Harness' Kit.

My nation's got a bit of a Roman Legion-esque thing for its infantry in some ways, so this 'lol standard' stuff is quite in character. However, they're flexible in the field. So while every soldier will have all of this stuff, not every man needs to carry every thing. It's like, the section will be issued with 2,400 rounds of linked ammo, and while distribution is up to the IC/2IC, they'll probably give each man 3 belts. Or the Corporal in training will teach the guys to stick their ammo pouches etc. in the correct places, and will issue them with X number of pouches to hold Y amount of munititons and supplies, but if they buy or scrounge extra then they can do what they like with it. Also, 'belt kit' is the national terminology, though the actual pouches etc. are directly attached to the body armour by a MOLLE system.

Second, your Belt Kit includes Individual Weapon, but that's rarely something to include as part of the gear. You get issued that separately, swap that terminology towards Individual Weapon Slings (specifying sling-types perhaps), then go from there.

Yeah, it's attached to the body by a 3pt sling. That's included in with belt kit, as I'm considering the different levels of 'being armed' for an RP I've got going. The absolute minimum would just be the top bit, and is probably worn by anyone on administrative duty etc. or combat service support in the relevant facility. Belt kit (with IW etc.) is worn by everyone on guard duty. Assault or Marching Packs worn by those going out on patrol.

Third, determining where your infantry men will wear their kit is good and all for uniformity, but in all reality they wear it how they want. If they find it easier to have their smoke grenade by their chest, flanked by the radio to the inside of the chest and the ammunition magazine digging into their shoulder for some reason, then they'll do it. Defining how and where htings will go may only get in the way of different soldiers in the fighting force. That's just my thoughts on the matter, taken from SIHMDSS.

Yeah, they'll do that but the infantry training school will teach them a prescribed 'ideal' or 'optimal' way of doing it.

I'm guessing that Personal Trauma Kit is a Kouralian IFAK then? If so, good, but you might want to specify other aspects of the IFAK, such as what it holds. The Respirator is standard? Or is it mission specific? You might want to denote which items in the list are Mission-Specific and aren't exactly carried all the time.

Yeah, it is. I'll look at what goes into it tomorrow.

wrt respirator... I guess it's standard? It depends on whether the CO thinks it's necessary or not. They'd at least deploy with it, but if they can get away with stuffing it in the marching pack (and putting the CBRN overalls in there too) they'd probably do so in a heartbeat. And, tbf, most of this is pretty 'carried all the time.'

Scratch the water bottle and cup. If you really need some sort of vessel for holding water, make one of the magazine holders a dual-purpose for that sake. In the end, what they'll actually want is a Camelbak or some other sort of Water Vessel worn on the back or over the shoulder.

Damn, forgot about camelnaks. I'll include that, and they'll probably get issued water bottles too because Kouralia is a hot country and understands the need to never run out of hydration. If they decide to take the bottle pouch off that's their choice. Also, the cup is 100% the most important part of this kit, 'cause how else will you make shitty MRE tea?

Always have your E-Tool. That's not even an option for us here on the Red White and Blue side of the puddle.

WOuld it be possible to carry a Smatchet and an E-Tool alongside the rest of the belt kit?

CBRN Gear in it's entirety is a lot more than what could conceivably fit in my assault pack here. Unless you have some sort of super-pack, I'd recommend making that your 'Mission specific' gear, because I'd definitely not want to haul around all of my CBRN kit all the time on patrols or whatnot.

Okay. It is pretty mission-specific (more so than just the respirator), but considering some of the nations Kouralia might fight, the chances of encountering chemical weapons are probably quite high compared to RL soldiers.

24 Hrs of rations is actually, maybe two MRE's? Comfortably? One MRE is really all you need per day to sustain a soldier. They've got a ton of calories and your infantry will be conditioned and trained on how to properly ration out their own MRE's.

Yeah, I mean like one of these and its contents (and a second one for the second day).

Tent supplies, while nice and all, might not be needed and you might want to specify that your 40mm munitions are also... well, mission specific. Just go through and look at mission specific gear, or moreover find your mission-specific gear. That might help with narrowing things down.

I stuck those in because the belt kit should arguably be enough to last on for a day, even with no shelter (might get a bit peckish by the end though if you didn't stuff your pockets with bits of ration). Then the Assault Kit should contain enough stuff to continue the patrol overnight and to the next day. The Marching kit is more for 'we are carrying everything on our backs as we walk across the Falklands to stab hispanic blokes.'

Kouralia wrote:Fighting Dagger

dolfin knef

Smatchet stays on your person, ETOOL goes with any packs you have. Usually you strap it to the pack as is, because how do you expect to dig your hasty fighting position, your entrenched fighting position, or in that case, anything else important?

just add bayonet attachments to a Smatchet

Kouralia wrote:Damn, forgot about camelnaks. I'll include that, and they'll probably get issued water bottles too because Kouralia is a hot country and understands the need to never run out of hydration. If they decide to take the bottle pouch off that's their choice. Also, the cup is 100% the most important part of this kit, 'cause how else will you make shitty MRE tea?

Believe it or not, MRE tea can be good. To further uplift your enlistee's spirits, add a small tube of condensed milk. They'll add that to their MRE coffee and tea.

Also, in the case of MREs, I would suggest watching Steve1989 on youtube. He taste tests every MRE he gets that is in eatable condition.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2I6Et1JkidnnbWgJFiMeHA