Infantry Discussion Thread part 11: Gallas Razor edition.

[Austrasien]

Bicycles are great they just won't be used routinely when any kind of motor transportation is available.


Bicycle force after passing through one (1) settlement.

[Gallia-]

Parking lots are lava.

You're not wrong but they're still useful since they give you an alternative that is actually viable. Foot bound infantry will also be stealing cars too, after all, but there might not be enough cars for them to use and then they might have to shuttle around like the Rag-Tag Circus. At least bicycles can follow cars that driving a bit slower than normal.

[Questarian New Yorkshire]

I think Anglos are just biased against anything that looks "low-tech"/isn't a civilian fad, and everyone else who used them either got stomped in the end (Japan, Germany) or fell under thrall of the Anglo-American dominated Atlantic Alliance (Nederlands, etc.). Neutral states that didn't become the thralls of either of the Cold War blocs that had bike troops had them for a long time. Sweden and Suisse kept them until the Berlin Wall fell, which I suspect they were more a victim of budget cuts than anything. Once automobiles go out of fashion/production I'm sure Anglos will be the first to jump on the bandwagon of this new "marching" thing.

good pfp

[Manokan Republic]

The problem with bicycle infantry is the difficulty of moving over rough terrain. Other than the hit or miss nature of the environment and the skill needed to do so which is rather specific, and that mountain biking is pretty dangerous, you run in to the more fundamental problems of wheeled vehicles needing largely flat terrain to work well. The key issue is that biking is nothing like walking. You can’t step over light obstacles, climb things, or even sit still, and have to always be moving, which makes avoiding getting shot and ducking in cover, even simply going sideways very difficult. Good luck doing anything with your hands like shooting, and even with one hand off the bicycle you are liable to end in a quick crash. Meanwhile focusing on the environment around you is rather tough, and thus maintaining a sense of awareness. Stopping and starting a lot is tough, as is going up hills, and a simple change in elevation of terrain can make the whole advantage of a higher speed with less energy moot. The key problem is that any environment or surface which is good for wheels is also good for other vehicles, and thus those will be superior in those circumstances usually. Even a small electric scooter will do far better than a bike for tons of reasons.

A tricycle solves some of these issues by being more stable, but runs in to the road issues, and lacks the maneuverability of a bike, which lacks stability. Also having biked four times a week for a year, other than it being uncomfortable, you also are prone to getting constant flats. Honeycomb airless tires can prevent this issue and a more comfortable chair will go a long way, but this doesn’t resolve the more fundamental issue of a wheeled vehicle which needs a relatively flat surface to move on. Biking in the snow, sand, mud, on wet surfaces or anything with a lot of bumps is hard, and stopping and starting at convenient times, going sideways and so on are not in a bikes nature, meaning you lack maneuverability and will have difficult responding to getting shot at. The moment you need to duck in cover you are screwed on a bike, and having intentionally crashed myself a few times to avoid getting hit by a car, it’s never easy to respond to any threat. Horses or camels are frankly the better option, or a pack mule to carry the equipment on its back, as you can do cover the same terrain as a human with them but carry more weight.

[Immoren]

Why are you trying to dodge and weave with bike under fire, instead of leaving it behind goodwhile before you even start firing?

[The Manticoran Empire]

The problem with bicycle infantry is the difficulty of moving over rough terrain. Other than the hit or miss nature of the environment and the skill needed to do so which is rather specific, and that mountain biking is pretty dangerous, you run in to the more fundamental problems of wheeled vehicles needing largely flat terrain to work well. The key issue is that biking is nothing like walking. You can’t step over light obstacles, climb things, or even sit still, and have to always be moving, which makes avoiding getting shot and ducking in cover, even simply going sideways very difficult. Good luck doing anything with your hands like shooting, and even with one hand off the bicycle you are liable to end in a quick crash. Meanwhile focusing on the environment around you is rather tough, and thus maintaining a sense of awareness. Stopping and starting a lot is tough, as is going up hills, and a simple change in elevation of terrain can make the whole advantage of a higher speed with less energy moot. The key problem is that any environment or surface which is good for wheels is also good for other vehicles, and thus those will be superior in those circumstances usually. Even a small electric scooter will do far better than a bike for tons of reasons.

A tricycle solves some of these issues by being more stable, but runs in to the road issues, and lacks the maneuverability of a bike, which lacks stability. Also having biked four times a week for a year, other than it being uncomfortable, you also are prone to getting constant flats. Honeycomb airless tires can prevent this issue and a more comfortable chair will go a long way, but this doesn’t resolve the more fundamental issue of a wheeled vehicle which needs a relatively flat surface to move on. Biking in the snow, sand, mud, on wet surfaces or anything with a lot of bumps is hard, and stopping and starting at convenient times, going sideways and so on are not in a bikes nature, meaning you lack maneuverability and will have difficult responding to getting shot at. The moment you need to duck in cover you are screwed on a bike, and having intentionally crashed myself a few times to avoid getting hit by a car, it’s never easy to respond to any threat. Horses or camels are frankly the better option, or a pack mule to carry the equipment on its back, as you can do cover the same terrain as a human with them but carry more weight.

Have you ever been mountain biking? It's not especially dangerous nor does it require any special skills. They manufacture bicycles specifically for mountain biking, so rough terrain isn't really an issue. The primary concern is that your bicycle troops be in good physical condition.

[Purpelia]

Have you ever been mountain biking? It's not especially dangerous nor does it require any special skills. They manufacture bicycles specifically for mountain biking, so rough terrain isn't really an issue. The primary concern is that your bicycle troops be in good physical condition.

It's not exactly your average grocery run though. And I would imagine that it would become significantly harder if the biker had to carry full military kit including weapons, provisions, munitions, radios etc. and do so whilst people are shooting at him or at least trying real hard to find him in order to do so. And whilst you certainly can expect a certain level of physical fitness from your troops that will accommodate this it's still going to leave them drained and exhausted compared to virtually any other form of transportation.

I'd imagine that if two armies were to meet on the field of battle, one having peddled there on their own for hours and the other been driven to the fight in an air conditioned motorcar the later would have a significant advantage if for no other reason than because they are fresh and rested.

[Taihei Tengoku]

The biggest problem is that military bicycles are fifty fucking pounds

[Gallia-]

You ride it tho so it's fine.

The only time you're carrying it is when you're fording a river or sth.

60+ lbs 1940s bicycles didn't stop the IJA why would it stop a modern army unless they're less physically fit I guess? This is not a rhetorical question.

I'm not actually sure what a modern bike could get down to before it starts crumbling under the literal weight of military use/abuse though. Maybe somewhere between 30-40 lbs is the minimum for a really tough aluminum or something that can still carry 450-500 lbs without bending the frame diamond.

[Spirit of Hope]

The bike should very much be thought of as replacing the road march, you aren't using it once you have engaged the enemy. In fact you should be out of your road march formation, or off your bicycles, if there is a reasonable chance that you will be engaging the enemy and instead in a skirmish formation or conducting a movement to contact.

Have you ever been mountain biking? It's not especially dangerous nor does it require any special skills. They manufacture bicycles specifically for mountain biking, so rough terrain isn't really an issue. The primary concern is that your bicycle troops be in good physical condition.

It's not exactly your average grocery run though. And I would imagine that it would become significantly harder if the biker had to carry full military kit including weapons, provisions, munitions, radios etc. and do so whilst people are shooting at him or at least trying real hard to find him in order to do so. And whilst you certainly can expect a certain level of physical fitness from your troops that will accommodate this it's still going to leave them drained and exhausted compared to virtually any other form of transportation.

As I note above the comparison should be the road march to the bike march. Any complaint about biking is also a complaint against a road march, marching with military kit is harder than simply walking, it is hard to do while being engaged by the enemy, and leaves your troops tired after doing it. However bikes are faster and more efficient to travel with than marching, so a similarly armed force, one using bikes the other marching, the bikes will arrive faster and fresher than the marchers.

I'd imagine that if two armies were to meet on the field of battle, one having peddled there on their own for hours and the other been driven to the fight in an air conditioned motorcar the later would have a significant advantage if for no other reason than because they are fresh and rested.

This is a rather false comparison, you aren't going to be replacing your motorized and mechanized forces with bike forces. You will be supplementing your light forces by equipping them with bikes.

The problem with bicycle infantry is the difficulty of moving over rough terrain. Other than the hit or miss nature of the environment and the skill needed to do so which is rather specific, and that mountain biking is pretty dangerous, you run in to the more fundamental problems of wheeled vehicles needing largely flat terrain to work well.

The skill of biking isn't to complicated, and in most developed nations can almost be assumed to exist for recruits, and it can rather easily be translated to semi broken terrain. But as I have been saying previously the bike march replaces the road march, you don't do these things in bad terrain. You find a path and then road march/bike march along it. If the terrain has no paths or roads that you can march on (and basically any path you can march you can bike) I would question why you are fighting over that terrain.

The key issue is that biking is nothing like walking. You can’t step over light obstacles, climb things, or even sit still, and have to always be moving, which makes avoiding getting shot and ducking in cover, even simply going sideways very difficult.

If an obstacle is to large to be biked over you can dismount from your bike and carry your bike over the obstacle (see example about bike troops fording rivers). If the obstacle prevents you from carrying your bike over it then it would impede a road march to almost the same extent. You can't really duck into cover or move sideways in a road march, and you certainly can stop a bike to take a rest.

Good luck doing anything with your hands like shooting, and even with one hand off the bicycle you are liable to end in a quick crash.

For a road march you shouldn't be shooting, and with a little training you can easily talk on a radio, eat or drink on a bike like you could on a road march. You aren't going to be biking when under fire (except maybe couriers) but instead to maneuver to the battlefield.

Meanwhile focusing on the environment around you is rather tough, and thus maintaining a sense of awareness.

It is just as easy to maintain situational awareness while biking as it is while marching in formation.

Stopping and starting a lot is tough, as is going up hills, and a simple change in elevation of terrain can make the whole advantage of a higher speed with less energy moot.

It takes trivially less energy to go uphill with a bike than to march up a hill, while providing much better efficiency while going over flat terrain or downhill. You shouldn't be stopping and starting except for breaks every hour or so as with a regular road march.

The key problem is that any environment or surface which is good for wheels is also good for other vehicles, and thus those will be superior in those circumstances usually. Even a small electric scooter will do far better than a bike for tons of reasons.

Except for maintenance and supply. The electrical scooter will need more spares, a power supply, repair technicians, and have a limited range. While a vehicle is superior if you have those supplies, if you don't then a bike is better than nothing. Again, the bike is being suggested here for light infantry units that don't normally operate with vehicles.

Horses or camels are frankly the better option, or a pack mule to carry the equipment on its back, as you can do cover the same terrain as a human with them but carry more weight.

Any animal is inferior to the bike because now the animal needs care and supplies. For a bike you already have to care and supply the soldier, but now he is much more mobile.

[Purpelia]

As I note above the comparison should be the road march to the bike march. Any complaint about biking is also a complaint against a road march, marching with military kit is harder than simply walking, it is hard to do while being engaged by the enemy, and leaves your troops tired after doing it. However bikes are faster and more efficient to travel with than marching, so a similarly armed force, one using bikes the other marching, the bikes will arrive faster and fresher than the marchers.

But is that really what we should be comparing it to? The way I see it there are two context here to consider. Olden days and modern days.

In ye old times modern mountain bikes and the like as The Manticoran Empire mentioned simply didn't exist. So offroading would have been extremely difficult and tiring and I just don't see it as being easier than just marching there.
In modern times it definitively is better than marching. But it's modern times. Nobody marches any more unless they have a point to make about social justice. So any modern comparison has to be made against trucks.

[Spirit of Hope]

As I note above the comparison should be the road march to the bike march. Any complaint about biking is also a complaint against a road march, marching with military kit is harder than simply walking, it is hard to do while being engaged by the enemy, and leaves your troops tired after doing it. However bikes are faster and more efficient to travel with than marching, so a similarly armed force, one using bikes the other marching, the bikes will arrive faster and fresher than the marchers.

But is that really what we should be comparing it to? The way I see it there are two context here to consider. Olden days and modern days.

In ye old times modern mountain bikes and the like as The Manticoran Empire mentioned simply didn't exist. So offroading would have been extremely difficult and tiring and I just don't see it as being easier than just marching there.
In modern times it definitively is better than marching. But it's modern times. Nobody marches any more unless they have a point to make about social justice. So any modern comparison has to be made against trucks.

Olden times they certainly did use bikes off roads. While a modern mountain bike will make going off road easier and more comfortable even a relatively spartan bicycle set up off road is more efficient than marching there.

Modern times military forces certainly do still think about marching, and supplementing that with biking isn't a bad idea. Saying the comparison must be made against trucks assumes you will always have trucks, which is a bad assumption, because you won't always have them. When you don't have trucks commandeering local motor vehicles is the idea solution, and has been done, but you can not guarantee that the local area will have a sufficient stock of motor vehicles to support your operations, so you are going to have to march.

[Taihei Tengoku]

The USA is the one place this probably won't work because you can guarantee that every other detached ranch house has a GMC but cannot say the same for bicycles

[Purpelia]

But is that really what we should be comparing it to? The way I see it there are two context here to consider. Olden days and modern days.

In ye old times modern mountain bikes and the like as The Manticoran Empire mentioned simply didn't exist. So offroading would have been extremely difficult and tiring and I just don't see it as being easier than just marching there.
In modern times it definitively is better than marching. But it's modern times. Nobody marches any more unless they have a point to make about social justice. So any modern comparison has to be made against trucks.

Olden times they certainly did use bikes off roads. While a modern mountain bike will make going off road easier and more comfortable even a relatively spartan bicycle set up off road is more efficient than marching there.

Modern times military forces certainly do still think about marching, and supplementing that with biking isn't a bad idea. Saying the comparison must be made against trucks assumes you will always have trucks, which is a bad assumption, because you won't always have them. When you don't have trucks commandeering local motor vehicles is the idea solution, and has been done, but you can not guarantee that the local area will have a sufficient stock of motor vehicles to support your operations, so you are going to have to march.

If it's today and you are reduced to marching to the extent that you contemplate fielding, training and organizing bicycle troops on a grand scale things are bad. Real bad. Like, not might as well surrender bad but not far off.

[Spirit of Hope]

Olden times they certainly did use bikes off roads. While a modern mountain bike will make going off road easier and more comfortable even a relatively spartan bicycle set up off road is more efficient than marching there.

Modern times military forces certainly do still think about marching, and supplementing that with biking isn't a bad idea. Saying the comparison must be made against trucks assumes you will always have trucks, which is a bad assumption, because you won't always have them. When you don't have trucks commandeering local motor vehicles is the idea solution, and has been done, but you can not guarantee that the local area will have a sufficient stock of motor vehicles to support your operations, so you are going to have to march.

If it's today and you are reduced to marching to the extent that you contemplate fielding, training and organizing bicycle troops on a grand scale things are bad. Real bad. Like, not might as well surrender bad but not far off.

Why? We aren't saying make dedicated bicycle infantry we are saying give your light infantry who already may have to operate without trucks bicycles. One example that was discussed was paratroopers, who you aren't going to be able to supply enough trucks and supplies to operate fully mechanized but you could supply bicycles to. Other examples would be special operations forces, amphibious infantry, or general light infantry.

[Purpelia]

Are light infantry even viable in this day and age?

[Spirit of Hope]

Are light infantry even viable in this day and age?

Yes. ATGM's give them the ability to semi reliably attack armored vehicles, while their ability to rapidly dig in and their hard ability to detect makes them difficult to attack.

[Radictistan]

Are light infantry even viable in this day and age?

Yes. ATGM's give them the ability to semi reliably attack armored vehicles, while their ability to rapidly dig in and their hard ability to detect makes them difficult to attack.

Can they break contact fast enough to survive the modern targeting loop?

[Spirit of Hope]

Yes. ATGM's give them the ability to semi reliably attack armored vehicles, while their ability to rapidly dig in and their hard ability to detect makes them difficult to attack.

Can they break contact fast enough to survive the modern targeting loop?

Dismounted infantry can certainly break contact, there hard to see and engage. While speed is nice it isn't essential to the infantries ability to disengage.

[Austrasien]

Can they break contact fast enough to survive the modern targeting loop?

They often escape notice of the loop in the first place.

[Manokan Republic]

Why are you trying to dodge and weave with bike under fire, instead of leaving it behind goodwhile before you even start firing?

You don't control exactly when you come in contact with the enemy, such as if you are ambushed and so on, and if you travel along predictable paths, such as paths ideal for biking, you are even more likely to get ambushed. There is a saying that tends to be especially true, "The easy way is mined". Or perhaps, the predictable path is mined. Given the lack of armor of a bike but also lacking the maneuverability of a soldier, and difficulty getting on and off, it's going to be difficult to get in to combat with a bike. Over very specific terrain it can be useful, especially if getting around on like an air tarmac or something, or if on a foot patrol on a road area, in a small village or town etc., but not really if intended for combat.

The obvious thing to do is get a push cart, as it can carry a large amount of weight but you don't have to ride on it, so you can just jump to the ground any time you need or evne use it as cover. If it gets stuck somewhere you just abandon it. A few hundred pounds is not that difficult to push around in a push cart and many are towable behind vehicles, so it serves a dual purpose. You can tow it to location, then get out and walk the distance you need to. Maybe hook it up to a tricycle for short distances.

[Gallia-]

lööp bröther

[Manokan Republic]

The problem with bicycle infantry is the difficulty of moving over rough terrain. Other than the hit or miss nature of the environment and the skill needed to do so which is rather specific, and that mountain biking is pretty dangerous, you run in to the more fundamental problems of wheeled vehicles needing largely flat terrain to work well. The key issue is that biking is nothing like walking. You can’t step over light obstacles, climb things, or even sit still, and have to always be moving, which makes avoiding getting shot and ducking in cover, even simply going sideways very difficult. Good luck doing anything with your hands like shooting, and even with one hand off the bicycle you are liable to end in a quick crash. Meanwhile focusing on the environment around you is rather tough, and thus maintaining a sense of awareness. Stopping and starting a lot is tough, as is going up hills, and a simple change in elevation of terrain can make the whole advantage of a higher speed with less energy moot. The key problem is that any environment or surface which is good for wheels is also good for other vehicles, and thus those will be superior in those circumstances usually. Even a small electric scooter will do far better than a bike for tons of reasons.

A tricycle solves some of these issues by being more stable, but runs in to the road issues, and lacks the maneuverability of a bike, which lacks stability. Also having biked four times a week for a year, other than it being uncomfortable, you also are prone to getting constant flats. Honeycomb airless tires can prevent this issue and a more comfortable chair will go a long way, but this doesn’t resolve the more fundamental issue of a wheeled vehicle which needs a relatively flat surface to move on. Biking in the snow, sand, mud, on wet surfaces or anything with a lot of bumps is hard, and stopping and starting at convenient times, going sideways and so on are not in a bikes nature, meaning you lack maneuverability and will have difficult responding to getting shot at. The moment you need to duck in cover you are screwed on a bike, and having intentionally crashed myself a few times to avoid getting hit by a car, it’s never easy to respond to any threat. Horses or camels are frankly the better option, or a pack mule to carry the equipment on its back, as you can do cover the same terrain as a human with them but carry more weight.

Have you ever been mountain biking? It's not especially dangerous nor does it require any special skills. They manufacture bicycles specifically for mountain biking, so rough terrain isn't really an issue. The primary concern is that your bicycle troops be in good physical condition.

The injury rate for mountain biking, even among professionals, is exceedingly high. Most of these occur in specific areas designed for mountain biking, with flat surfaces that are ideal for biking and not, rough terrain. If even one soldier gets injured, it will stop the entire team, who will have to wait for the other person to catch up or have to leave behind troops to help them out and so on. If accessible by some other means or, if a helicopter can medevac the guy out for example, why not just use a helicopter in the first place to get the troops in close? Bikes are terrible over uneven surfaces, and the difficulty of maneuvering over them is not easy to deal with, especially since, if you've ever biked for more than a week in a row, you know you will pretty much being getting a flat. I got flats all the time and it became a regular thing to have to fix it, as do most people I talk to about it. This also slows you down, and bare in mind every single person needs it. For an initial part of an assault in specific areas it can be useful, but not all the time all over the place.

Having also biked with a backpack and lots of weigh before, I also know how difficult this can be. I suppose if you've never done it before it can be hard to explain but, most people are not expert bikers, and most people don't bike over rough terrain. The best way to explain it is, look at any mountain biking trail, and then look at the terrain next to it. If you can't go over the terrain next to it, you can't realistically move through a forest or other area in a location people don't frequent.


Just take a look at this picture for example. If one wanted to go over those rocks, they'd have quite a bit of trouble, so unless you have a perfectly made trail for you already, it's going to be rough moving through anywhere not particularly well suited for bikes. Sand, snow, mud and other common things like are also bad for bikes, so if you find a flat area, it's often times, not that great for biking. Let alone for hours and hours, days and days and days worth of it. You are better with a push cart to carry all your heavy stuff since if it gets stuck or falls over or something, of which it has a low center of gravity and doesn't need to be constantly moving to stay upright, you can just abandon it as you are not riding on it yourself.

[Spirit of Hope]

Have you ever been mountain biking? It's not especially dangerous nor does it require any special skills. They manufacture bicycles specifically for mountain biking, so rough terrain isn't really an issue. The primary concern is that your bicycle troops be in good physical condition.

The injury rate for mountain biking, even among professionals, is exceedingly high. Most of these occur in specific areas designed for mountain biking, with flat surfaces that are ideal for biking and not, rough terrain. If even one soldier gets injured, it will stop the entire team, who will have to wait for the other person to catch up or have to leave behind troops to help them out and so on. If accessible by some other means or, if a helicopter can medevac the guy out for example, why not just use a helicopter in the first place to get the troops in close?

First I will note that mountain biking sin't a huge injury risk, you get 1 injury per 1,000 hours of biking, while road marching apparently gets the army 10.5 injuries per 1,000 hours of road marching in initial training and up to 90 injuries per 1,000 hours in marching infantry. In all cases must injuries were relatively minor and would not require hospitalization.

As to the question of if another vehicle can get you there, you might not have access to that other vehicle or that other capability might be denied to you. Using the example of a helicopter, you may be operating in an area where the enemy has strong air defense, making helicopters to dangerous to use. Or the helicopters you were planning to used were damaged, destroyed or lost when the ship they were on was sunk.

Bikes are terrible over uneven surfaces, and the difficulty of maneuvering over them is not easy to deal with, especially since, if you've ever biked for more than a week in a row, you know you will pretty much being getting a flat. I got flats all the time and it became a regular thing to have to fix it, as do most people I talk to about it. This also slows you down, and bare in mind every single person needs it. For an initial part of an assault in specific areas it can be useful, but not all the time all over the place.

If you drive a large number of vehicles around for any amount of time they are going to require maintenance, this is not a surprising thing. Luckily the repair tools and skills for most bike maintenance can be easily carried and learned. Fixing or changing a flat on a bike requires far less effort than changing the fire on a humvee, or a stryker.

Having also biked with a backpack and lots of weigh before, I also know how difficult this can be. I suppose if you've never done it before it can be hard to explain but, most people are not expert bikers, and most people don't bike over rough terrain. The best way to explain it is, look at any mountain biking trail, and then look at the terrain next to it. If you can't go over the terrain next to it, you can't realistically move through a forest or other area in a location people don't frequent.

Hiking with weight isn't fun either, especially over rough terrain. Again you shouldn't be biking over very difficult terrain as I have mentioned previously, you are going to be using this akin to a road march, on a path or a road. If you come to an area that you can't bike through you can dismount the bike and carry the bike over that specific piece of terrain. While this would be slightly slower than marching through that same terrain you can make up for it when you are biking over less rough terrain.

Just take a look at this picture for example. If one wanted to go over those rocks, they'd have quite a bit of trouble, so unless you have a perfectly made trail for you already, it's going to be rough moving through anywhere not particularly well suited for bikes. Sand, snow, mud and other common things like are also bad for bikes, so if you find a flat area, it's often times, not that great for biking. Let alone for hours and hours, days and days and days worth of it. You are better with a push cart to carry all your heavy stuff since if it gets stuck or falls over or something, of which it has a low center of gravity and doesn't need to be constantly moving to stay upright, you can just abandon it as you are not riding on it yourself.

Speaking from experience sand, snow and mud suck to march through when carrying a heavy load, again you try and plan your road march/bike march to use pre existing paths and roads and when terrain gets to difficult you can dismount and walk the bike. When you have any type of reasonably level terrain the bike will allow you to move faster.

You don't control exactly when you come in contact with the enemy, such as if you are ambushed and so on, and if you travel along predictable paths, such as paths ideal for biking, you are even more likely to get ambushed. There is a saying that tends to be especially true, "The easy way is mined". Or perhaps, the predictable path is mined. Given the lack of armor of a bike but also lacking the maneuverability of a soldier, and difficulty getting on and off, it's going to be difficult to get in to combat with a bike. Over very specific terrain it can be useful, especially if getting around on like an air tarmac or something, or if on a foot patrol on a road area, in a small village or town etc., but not really if intended for combat.

It is going to be just about as difficult to react to an ambush from a bike march as it is going to be to react to an ambush from a road march. In either case you are in a terrible position to react to the enemy fire as you will be carrying a heavy load with your weapons badly positioned and personnel bunched up. On foot you might be slightly faster to react to the ambush, but not by a huge amount. No one is saying you use the bike in combat, they are saying you use it for when you would otherwise be conducting a road march.

The obvious thing to do is get a push cart, as it can carry a large amount of weight but you don't have to ride on it, so you can just jump to the ground any time you need or evne use it as cover. If it gets stuck somewhere you just abandon it. A few hundred pounds is not that difficult to push around in a push cart and many are towable behind vehicles, so it serves a dual purpose. You can tow it to location, then get out and walk the distance you need to. Maybe hook it up to a tricycle for short distances.

A push cart doesn't increase the mobility of your soldiers.

[The Manticoran Empire]

Have you ever been mountain biking? It's not especially dangerous nor does it require any special skills. They manufacture bicycles specifically for mountain biking, so rough terrain isn't really an issue. The primary concern is that your bicycle troops be in good physical condition.

The injury rate for mountain biking, even among professionals, is exceedingly high. Most of these occur in specific areas designed for mountain biking, with flat surfaces that are ideal for biking and not, rough terrain. If even one soldier gets injured, it will stop the entire team, who will have to wait for the other person to catch up or have to leave behind troops to help them out and so on. If accessible by some other means or, if a helicopter can medevac the guy out for example, why not just use a helicopter in the first place to get the troops in close? Bikes are terrible over uneven surfaces, and the difficulty of maneuvering over them is not easy to deal with, especially since, if you've ever biked for more than a week in a row, you know you will pretty much being getting a flat. I got flats all the time and it became a regular thing to have to fix it, as do most people I talk to about it. This also slows you down, and bare in mind every single person needs it. For an initial part of an assault in specific areas it can be useful, but not all the time all over the place.

No. You are quite wrong in that statement. Mountain biking is not exceedingly dangerous and flats are easy to fix. In any event, injuries to ANY formation will halt that formation as they ensure the casualty is treated and evacuated. No one here is suggesting that bikes should replace other forms of transport. They are, however, quite right in stating that bikes do have a potential place in modern warfare, particularly among airborne and light infantry units. Many environments are not conducive to the use of trucks or helicopters.

Put in language you can understand, bikes don't need fuel, don't take up much space, and are quiet. Light infantry and airborne units are already vulnerable to hostile forces and allowing them to move rapidly without much noise is, in my opinion, a plus.

Having also biked with a backpack and lots of weigh before, I also know how difficult this can be. I suppose if you've never done it before it can be hard to explain but, most people are not expert bikers, and most people don't bike over rough terrain. The best way to explain it is, look at any mountain biking trail, and then look at the terrain next to it. If you can't go over the terrain next to it, you can't realistically move through a forest or other area in a location people don't frequent.

A benefit of a bike is that, in most cases, it is light enough that you can carry it over terrain that is too rough to ride. You apparently think that, by equipping a unit with bikes, they are ONLY allowed to move by bicycle, which is rather nonsensical. Furthermore, this really doesn't make it any less viable to equip light infantry forces with bicycles.

Just take a look at this picture for example. If one wanted to go over those rocks, they'd have quite a bit of trouble, so unless you have a perfectly made trail for you already, it's going to be rough moving through anywhere not particularly well suited for bikes. Sand, snow, mud and other common things like are also bad for bikes, so if you find a flat area, it's often times, not that great for biking. Let alone for hours and hours, days and days and days worth of it. You are better with a push cart to carry all your heavy stuff since if it gets stuck or falls over or something, of which it has a low center of gravity and doesn't need to be constantly moving to stay upright, you can just abandon it as you are not riding on it yourself.

You are, once again, missing the point. Bicycles aren't being suggested as a complete replacement for motor vehicles nor as something to be supplied to everyone. Rather, it is being suggested to equip troops who ALREADY ARE NOT ISSUED MOTOR VEHICLES with bicycles to provide them an increase in speed over simply walking. Terrain that is basically impassable to bikes is often impassable to encumbered infantrymen, as well. With that understood, there isn't really any terrain that light infantry in full kit can walk over that can't be biked over and if there is, they can carry their bikes over that terrain.