Logistically Viable Weapons AtE

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

World War I trench raiders were fond of pistols, submachine guns, grenades, and even melee weapons. All of those were vastly inferior in effective range to the ubiquitous bolt-action rifles...

Uh-huh. Places where there were likely to be angular turns, miniature mudslides, and the like often could catch someone at point blank with an enemy. In some ways it was almost like urban warfare.

Speaking of which, a fight between two bands of scavengers in a city is a possible scenario for an AtE.

[Þorkell]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

OK the BEF were good but they weren't that good. Also the comparison was to 3 volleys a minute which itself was also better then average for the period in time, the same organisational context being vaguely in effect. The point being we're talking a huge increase in firepower and effective range of fire for infantry with no similar increase for cavalry charges.

Furthermore, FWIW, "Mad Minute" was an expectation in training not in the field.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by ericthered

The trick is that isolated non-fortified riffle units ARE fringe.

They're also highly vulnerable to a lot of weapons that are more generally useful than cavalry charges. For example, machine guns.

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Anthony

They're also highly vulnerable to a lot of weapons that are more generally useful than cavalry charges. For example, machine guns.

The machine gun is not a typical example. If there were no automatic weapons, cavalry would be much more effective.

[Bengt]

How long does ammo actually survive in an abandoned facility, where no one is around to keep the moisture out and the temperature even?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

The machine gun is not a typical example. If there were no automatic weapons, cavalry would be much more effective.

Yes, if the enemy is limited to nothing better than early 19th century weaponry, cavalry is quite effective. There's certainly a realistic chance of opposition at that level in AtE, but they aren't a serious threat to any group organized enough to build a professional military of any type.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by mr beer

If you can cream off the top 1% of willing candidates from a well-fed and well-educated population and then train them for a couple of years using a wide variety of experts and equipment, yeah maybe the post-apocalypse SAS/Renaissance Man teams would make the best possible option.

We already do this - it gets us the modern US or UK military, roughly speaking. Note how tiny the serious spec ops numbers are compared to the population they're recruited from.

Now, in a AtE situation they'd probably be at the top end of the income range, rather than mid-low, so you'd get proportionally more recruits. However, your pool is of overall lower quality, so you're probably worse off.

But a cheap mass-producible firearm and as many warm bodies as you can train to shoot straight and not run away at the sight of the enemy, is a much more practical and achievable goal.

That's what you want for your part-time militia, for sure. That's about 10% of your population, maybe more if you turn every adult out and allow your entire community to grind to a halt. The 1% or so that you can afford to have as a full-time force you'll want to train batter than that, and ideally equip better as well. The few percent of that which is suitable for spec ops, well they should get the best relic gear for their job.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Phoenix_Dragon

Y
Special ops are a powerful tool, but only in narrow (And often very specialized) conditions. There's a reason most of the money and effort is put into the more general military.

The big thing is that spec ops operators aren't numerous enough to function as infantry except on a very small scale and for a very short time. As infantry's job is to take and hold ground, if you have all spec ops and no line infantry you'll not be owning much for very long. Many arms can raid, quite a few can take ground, some can deny the enemy ground, but only infantry is really good for holding ground and making it yours.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Bengt

How long does ammo actually survive in an abandoned facility, where no one is around to keep the moisture out and the temperature even?

AS long as it's not sitting in a puddle, or being rained on, or being seriously baked in direct sunlight, it'll keep for decades. Modern ammunition is water and moisture-proof, so until the case or primer corrodes to the point where it becomes unsafe, or the propellant gets hot enough to denature, the stuff will work fine.

If you found a cache of ammo that's been a bit exposed to nature, you'd want to check each cartridge for signs of corrosion or other damage, and only use the stuff that was intact. If it was stored in sealed tins or ammo boxes, and the seal wasn't broken, odds are that the stuff is perfectly fine.

[Bengt]

Originally Posted by Rupert

AS long as it's not sitting in a puddle, or being rained on, or being seriously baked in direct sunlight, it'll keep for decades. Modern ammunition is water and moisture-proof, so until the case or primer corrodes to the point where it becomes unsafe, or the propellant gets hot enough to denature, the stuff will work fine.

If you found a cache of ammo that's been a bit exposed to nature, you'd want to check each cartridge for signs of corrosion or other damage, and only use the stuff that was intact. If it was stored in sealed tins or ammo boxes, and the seal wasn't broken, odds are that the stuff is perfectly fine.

So it should cut into the available pre war ammo in a Fallout like setting then? The first game takes place 84 years after the war, the second 164.