Infantry Discussion Thread part 11: Gallas Razor edition.

[Kazarogkai]

British museums are full of late 19th century mail for some strange reason.

Probably from the Sudanese or the Ethiopians. British fought both and they would have both been equiped with with them at the time.

[The Manticoran Empire]

So assuming One had a gun powder Roman esque professional army of sorts in which soldier equipment is directly provided by the state would it be reasonable for them to be rocking chainmail up until say the 19th century? Just have this mental image of Zulus draped in mail hauberks charging down on some European fools with spear&shield and taking potshots with matchlocks.

British museums are full of late 19th century mail for some strange reason.

That's what happens when you own a quarter of the world's land. You collect lots of strange things from lots of strange places.

[Austrasien]

In your armies, when a newly-minted officer graduates from your military academy, do they immediately get a command? In Barfleur, such an officer is usually assigned for the first few months as a "leading soldier," essentially an ordinary soldier, but with an officer's commission. The idea is to give them experience serving and training alongside the men and women they will lead, after which they are usually appointed a platoon leader. Of course, during war, when it is necessary to fill leadership billets as fast as possible, it is often the case that a newly-minted officer will assume command a week after graduating.

Austrasia traditionally trains prospective officers as apprentices, academy training is reserved for staff officers and warrant officers, so by the time they assume their first command they have already clocked 2 years as an officer-apprentice and completed a practical examination.

[Triplebaconation]

British museums are full of late 19th century mail for some strange reason.

That's what happens when you own a quarter of the world's land. You collect lots of strange things from lots of strange places.

I think you're both missing the point. Mail was fairly common in various backwaters throughout the 19th century. In fact Wilkinson Sword produced mail suits for export (and vests for British officers) until World War One, when it switched to lamellar.

These suits ended up in museums because the people wearing them were either easily subjugated or curiosities not worth the bother.

Not that the armor made a difference one way or another.

[Purpelia]

I am not sure it's really a matter of being backwater. I mean, think about it. Up to right the tail end of the 19th century all firearms would have been large bore smokeless weapons. And many places would have still been stuck with stuff like paper cartridges. And even the first rate powers will be using single shot breech loaders that aren't super fast. So between the smoke clouds, heavy ammo you can't carry lots of and relatively slow rates of fire melee combat as well as being engaged by cavalry and the like would still have been a significant possibility. Especially if you go back to say the middle or early century as opposed to the tail end. So whilst giant european armies abandoned armor out of necessity as it just cost too much and wasn't too practical I can honestly see an argument for it.

[Gallia-]

today in idt: 1mm steel chain > 10mm mauser

purpelia is now manokan 2

[Barfleur]

today in idt: 1mm steel chain > 10mm mauser

purpelia is now manokan 2

That's quite the insult. Still, you do make a good point. One question though: what do they make modern body armor out of? It's not metal, so what material do they use that's light enough to allow the soldier some semblance of mobility while tough enough to actually do what it's supposed to do and stop a bullet?

[Immoren]

In your armies, when a newly-minted officer graduates from your military academy, do they immediately get a command? In Barfleur, such an officer is usually assigned for the first few months as a "leading soldier," essentially an ordinary soldier, but with an officer's commission. The idea is to give them experience serving and training alongside the men and women they will lead, after which they are usually appointed a platoon leader. Of course, during war, when it is necessary to fill leadership billets as fast as possible, it is often the case that a newly-minted officer will assume command a week after graduating.

Officers from "academy" don't need probationary period, because they already did their national service during/after which they got commissioned into reserve officer with required training to command small subunit of platoon or similar. After which they rolled into academy to get bachelor of military science, during which they learn lots of things and are "ready" immediately.

[Korva]

Speaking of which, we are at page 450.

This is my Nomination. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Nominee: Manokan Republic

[Crookfur]

today in idt: 1mm steel chain > 10mm mauser

purpelia is now manokan 2

That's quite the insult. Still, you do make a good point. One question though: what do they make modern body armor out of? It's not metal, so what material do they use that's light enough to allow the soldier some semblance of mobility while tough enough to actually do what it's supposed to do and stop a bullet?

Not meaning to be insulting but do you really not know the basics of modern boby armour?

In short its a mix of specialist man made fibres, often grouped together as "kevlar" although this covers a range of different materials and construction techniques. Commonly known as "soft" body armour. On the other hand you have "hard" body armour that typically takes the form of ceramic or metal plates. The wiki article should lay a decent starting point.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

This is my Nomination. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Nominee: Gallan Systems

This is my Nomination. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Nominee: Giant Meteor 2020

This is my Nomination. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Nominee: Messr. End it All, Just

[Kassaran]

Just finished reading a report on the M-16 and the bureaucratic issues behind it which made it fail so spectacularly in Vietnam. Torn between seething rage for idiot Ordnance Corps commanders and pity for their legacy after having served their countries for so long. Oh well, that's what happens though. What did the British and Germans do to enable development of modern firearms and quick implementation into their militaries? I notice that the L85 is a sort of modern M-16 in reputation, but does that come from a similar 'militarization' process, or because of it's configuration and inherently flawed design principles that were overlooked upon adoption?

This is my Nomination. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Nominee: Gallan Systems

[Triplebaconation]

I am not sure it's really a matter of being backwater.

I think we can safely describe Palawan as a "backwater" in the 19th century.

The obsolescence of chain mail in Europe predates industrial armies and the widespread adoption of firearms.

Few of the mail suits still worn in the 19th century were produced locally. They were imported from more technologically advanced areas, either as trade goods or surplus from places where the gradual diffusion of firearms made them useless.

There were still a great many places in the world where firearms weren't militarily important until the second half of the 19th century.

[Crookfur]

Just finished reading a report on the M-16 and the bureaucratic issues behind it which made it fail so spectacularly in Vietnam. Torn between seething rage for idiot Ordnance Corps commanders and pity for their legacy after having served their countries for so long. Oh well, that's what happens though. What did the British and Germans do to enable development of modern firearms and quick implementation into their militaries? I notice that the L85 is a sort of modern M-16 in reputation, but does that come from a similar 'militarization' process, or because of it's configuration and inherently flawed design principles that were overlooked upon adoption?

This is my Nomination. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Nominee: Gallan Systems

The L85 is basically all about the state of British engineering in the late 70s/early 80s and HM gov's complete inability to manage it.
There is very little British stuff from that era that anyone remembers fondly.

[Barfleur]

That's quite the insult. Still, you do make a good point. One question though: what do they make modern body armor out of? It's not metal, so what material do they use that's light enough to allow the soldier some semblance of mobility while tough enough to actually do what it's supposed to do and stop a bullet?

Not meaning to be insulting but do you really not know the basics of modern boby armour?

In short its a mix of specialist man made fibres, often grouped together as "kevlar" although this covers a range of different materials and construction techniques. Commonly known as "soft" body armour. On the other hand you have "hard" body armour that typically takes the form of ceramic or metal plates. The wiki article should lay a decent starting point.

There's no shame in me admitting I know negative facts about modern body armor. Just that chain mail is gone for a reason.

[Purpelia]

today in idt: 1mm steel chain > 10mm mauser

purpelia is now manokan 2

More like if you charge the other guy and things get into melee range, which they often did in the early to mid 19th century the guy with some armor is at an advantage against the guy without any armor. It slowly goes away as the century progresses but frankly bayonet charges were still a thing up until the very end.

[Crookfur]

Not meaning to be insulting but do you really not know the basics of modern boby armour?

In short its a mix of specialist man made fibres, often grouped together as "kevlar" although this covers a range of different materials and construction techniques. Commonly known as "soft" body armour. On the other hand you have "hard" body armour that typically takes the form of ceramic or metal plates. The wiki article should lay a decent starting point.

There's no shame in me admitting I know negative facts about modern body armor. Just that chain mail is gone for a reason.

Not implying any shame, it was just surprising given the prelidictions of those who frequent these threads and the cultural prevalence of terms like flak jackets and kevlar vests in modern media.

[Barfleur]

There's no shame in me admitting I know negative facts about modern body armor. Just that chain mail is gone for a reason.

Not implying any shame, it was just surprising given the prelidictions of those who frequent these threads and the cultural prevalence of terms like flak jackets and kevlar vests in modern media.

Well, my only knowledge of armor comes from 7-year-old me dragging my parents to the arms and armor exhibits at every museum we ever went to. Fun times those were. As a result, I know a fair deal about Medieval and Renaissance armor, but very little about anything post-1700.

[Manokan Republic]

Speaking of which, we are at page 450.

This is my Nomination. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Nominee: Manokan Republic

I second this nomination.

[Manokan Republic]

Not implying any shame, it was just surprising given the prelidictions of those who frequent these threads and the cultural prevalence of terms like flak jackets and kevlar vests in modern media.

Well, my only knowledge of armor comes from 7-year-old me dragging my parents to the arms and armor exhibits at every museum we ever went to. Fun times those were. As a result, I know a fair deal about Medieval and Renaissance armor, but very little about anything post-1700.

Basically, modern soft body armor such as kevlar does not actually stop rifle rounds. It is only designed to stop shrapnel and handgun rounds. Ceramic armor is typically used to stop high end rifle rounds, but this is typically worn over less than 1 square foot of the body, generally over the heart and torso, and weighs about 5-8 pounds per plate, with 2 plates usually being used on the front and back. The interceptor body armor for example with everything is about 30 pounds, and only a small portion stops rifle rounds. This obviously doesn't cover the arms, hands, head and so on, so you can easily die from modern rifle rounds. Modern combat is more about surprise and speed, getting the first shot on the enemy before he kills you and taking defensive positions, often randomly found in the terrain (I.E. behind a big boulder or car engine) as opposed to rushing the enemy directly. This is changing with dyneema, which tends to be much stronger, and several rifle resistant helmets such as the AS-600 or ECH already exist, at least for use against some rifle rounds. "Though the helmet withstood the impact of a machine gun round at a distance of about 20 feet, the newest helmets the Army is now fielding are even stronger and lighter, Whitehead said."

Ceramic armor may sound strange as we presume ceramic is brittle (although it's usually a much stronger form of ceramic), but it works in a number of ways, one is it's so hard it disintegrates the oncoming round, another is it turns to powder and this helps to break up the round. But, basically it redirects the energy and sends it back towards the target projectile. When you shoot concrete or other ceramic like materials, you'll tend to notice that chunks of the material fly back at you. In fact, steel armor does this, and it's known as spalling, and actually anti-spalling coatings are needed to make it safe. However ceramic does this in a much more pronounced way, so although the more brittle ceramic cracks or has chunks fly out of it, this actually aids it in stopping the round. The main idea is that the round is deflected away since it's so hard, and even if it penetrates somewhat, still slows down the bullet enough to stop it. Chobham armor with metal behind it, or SAPI plates with things like dyneema behind it, enhance this effect by being able to absorb energy really well, thus allowing it to reflect it against the target better. In a way ceramic armor acts a lot like reactive armor, without actually being reactive. All objects do this, given that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, but ceramic composites are particularly good at it. Granted, Chobham armor is not really exactly like ceramic plate armor used by infantry, but the same basic principle applies. A fairly good comparison is when you punch a pillow vs. a concrete wall; a pillow will absorb this energy, but a concrete wall redirects that energy in to your hand, which is why it would hurt and even potentially break your hand. The harder an object is, the more energy it can reflect back towards the target, especially quickly, and this tends to break up incoming projectiles. Kevlar is also a lot like glass if you look at it under a microscopic, and is very brittle, shattering and sheering against high velocity rounds, but being very energy absorbent, and thus good at catching bullets that aren't hard or above a certain velocity.

"This mechanism—using the jet's own energy against it—has caused the effects of Chobham to be compared to those of reactive armour. This should not be confused with the effect used in Non-Explosive Reactive Armour: that of sandwiching an inert but soft elastic material such as rubber, between two armour plates. "

[Gallia-]

This is my Nomination. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Nominee: Gallan Systems

This is my Nomination. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Nominee: Giant Meteor 2020

This is my Nomination. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Nominee: Messr. End it All, Just

umu

~*~*~*~*~

[Gallia-]

[Kazarogkai]

No. Chainmail weighs 20 or 30 pounds and will do fuck all to a musket ball, let alone the later 19th century rifle bullets. Army started to fall out of favor in the 17th century and was basically only worn by heavy cavalry after the early 18th century. Infantry had effectively abandoned armor since it didn't do a damned thing to protect them and weighed a lot, as well as requiring maintenance.

There is technically nothing stopping you from ISSUING mail to your troops all the way into the 19th century but I guarantee you that the troops are just going to leave it behind when they start marching. A cotton or wool jacket and trousers with a cotton or wool cap or a helmet made of pith or steel and leather boots would be far more practical. It's more comfortable to wear (compared to mail or plate armor) and offers exactly the same level of protection as mail or plate armor.

Ehh 30 is a little high though it might depend on the suit. For the most part a chain mail hauberk, which covered one from the neck down to the thighs, averaged around 22lbs give or take. If one were to trim it down a bit having it only cover one from the waist up and reduce the sleeves to just the elbows one should be able to get it down to just around 15-20 lbs depending again on construction compared to say 40-60 lbs for full or reinforced demi plate.

Also the keyword you should have been looking at is gunpowder empire which typically by most peoples definitions doesn't refer to Europe and East Asian civilizations which relieved gunpowder at a rather early date. Instead referring to the Empires of the Mughals and Safavids and to a degree various early modern empires established in Sub-Saharan Africa(Ashanti Empire, etc) and South-East Asia(Burmese Empire, etc) who lied at the peripheries of Europe and acquired and developed gunpowder at a later date. Unlike in Europe said technology the traditional balance of power with said Empires centralizing the use and manufacture of said technology which granted them the ability to dominate the surrounding regions and create rather large polities for the time and area for a good century or two before subsequently stagnating at a later date typically. Hence were assuming what you would regard as a "backwater" entity not one on the cutting edge of tech like those in Europe. One which probably acquired guns sometime in the 16th century, rose and peaked in the 17th century, began to plateau and later stagnated in the 18th, and is in clear decline in the 19th century.

I am not sure it's really a matter of being backwater. I mean, think about it. Up to right the tail end of the 19th century all firearms would have been large bore smokeless weapons. And many places would have still been stuck with stuff like paper cartridges. And even the first rate powers will be using single shot breech loaders that aren't super fast. So between the smoke clouds, heavy ammo you can't carry lots of and relatively slow rates of fire melee combat as well as being engaged by cavalry and the like would still have been a significant possibility. Especially if you go back to say the middle or early century as opposed to the tail end. So whilst giant european armies abandoned armor out of necessity as it just cost too much and wasn't too practical I can honestly see an argument for it.

Jumping from my previous conversation with Manokan Due to various reasons and the rather unequal way gunpowder technology was distributed this meant many of the aforementioned nation's militaries tended to have a large mix mash of troops that were in various tech stages so to speak. For every guy who got a nice musket there would be 2 or 3 or even more with spears, bows, and other traditional weapons. Part of this related to cost. They simply couldn't equip every guy with a gun nor would they want to due to a lack of bayonet usage among many of these nations hence the resulting threat cavalry posed even to gunmen. Even a more advanced nation like the Qing up into the 19th was only equipping about 60% of it's men with muskets last I read about. Part of this was desire. Said nation's fortunes rested on keeping the supply and distribution of guns centralized and importantly in the hands of loyal subjects. Hence many would much rather favor equipping their best(aka primary ethnic groups) units over all others resulting in uneven distribution at certain points. Add this in with things like terrain, tactics, and size of engagements meant that on the battlefields that said nations troops fought on hand to hand combat would still not only be the norm but in many cases a decisive point in a battle. The question wasn't arguably for the gun armed troops in a given army; it was for the poor mooks who were when the battle reached it's height were expected to charge ahead of the line of gun men with spear and shield with the hope being to overrun the enemy in close combat hopefully before they could reload or if they did before they could pick off more than the first line. Assuming one missed I imagine a pissed off Zulu wearing a mail shirt and armed with a 7 foot spear and a big ole hoplite shield would have made for an interesting match up against some Colonial Regular armed with a Martini-Henry topped with a bayonet and with an empty barrel.

[Triplebaconation]

It wouldn't make any difference.

[Immoren]