Re: Militias and Rifles

Ryan M Gill wrote:

> On Thu, 27 Jan 2000, Imre A. Szabo wrote:
>
> > I'm assuming militia is last minute conscripts and/or volunteers
and/or police,
> > not reserves.  There training will be a shadow of reservesists.  How
many SWAT
> > teams train on close assaulting tanks or what to do if you come
under artillary
> > fire...
>
> Thats a question of tactics and equipment both, but the chechens seem
to
> be doing pretty damn well at it...

Chechen society has very little in comon with Russian Society and much
less with
Western European or American Society.  In Chechneya, brigandage is still
considered
by that society as an acceptable means for making a living.  The
population also has
a very firm tie to the land.  What this means that even though some them
do live in
cities, they hunt, fish, and farm on the weekends.  This tends to make a
much more
resilient and determined population.  It doesn't mean they will when. 
What it means
is that the average chechen soldier has a higher combat value then the
average
Russian soldier.

>
>
> > I disagree.  Your'e talking a 50% increase in mass.  Even with
better balance,
> > it is not going to be easy.  In the bush without tansport, humping
it will be a
> > %^#$^$%^&^.  The good news is that combat tends to get the
adrenaline going...
>
> Thing is, it removes the needed requirement for a few other bits of
kit.
> Mainly frag grenades, LAW 66's and the Nightvision gear. Not all
troops
> will have them, just the Grenadier Designate. And if the mission calls
> for not having the 20mm part, you can attach the stock to the 5.56mm
part
> and use just that...

That 20mm grenade isn't going to penetrate nearly the ammount of armor
as a LAW 66.
Also, the burst radius of the 20mm grenades is going to be much less
then traditional
handgrenades.  You aren't losing anything from the kit, only reducing
some types of
ordance in favor of another.  The U.S. Army might be stupid enough to
eliminate
handgrenades, etc., but if they do, they'll wish they hadn't.

IAS