Military equipment wears out

A place to talk about all things military, paramilitary, tactical, strategic, and logistical.
Post Reply
toad
Posts: 2529
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:00 pm

Military equipment wears out

Post by toad » Sat Aug 25, 2018 7:53 am

I remember back in about 1965 I was talking with a guy who was a reserve tanker about the M3a1 "grease gun" he said the problem with them was that they were worn out . Barrels were worn , magazines were weak, and etc. , and you couldn't get new parts. I've heard many a story about equipment that was worn out and people were scavenging or bribing a machine shop to make replacement parts. Or just praying they'd luck out until replacement stuff would arrive. Also , " we don't want to take it to the range because we don't want to wear it out and we don't have the budget for the ammo (however the golf course was necessary for morale). I was thinking about technical tricks to get guns and stuff to last longer but that isn't the basic problem . I was wondering if it should be a requirement that every rank above major should be required to serve as a grunt in some third world shit hole with 2nd hand equipment ?

Langenator
Posts: 919
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 2:10 pm

Re: Military equipment wears out

Post by Langenator » Sat Aug 25, 2018 10:51 am

FWIW, at least for the US military, MWR (Morale, Welfare, and Recreation) activities/facilities are paid for out of what's called Non-Appropriated Funds - IOTW, they don't come from budget money appropriated by Congress. It comes from a 'sales tax' (they call it a surcharge) at the post exchange and from user fees.

As far as getting new equipment, that's on Congress. The generals and admirals can put all the new stuff on their Christmas lists they want (and they do), but the money comes from Congress.
Fortuna Fortis Paratus

toad
Posts: 2529
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 5:00 pm

Re: Military equipment wears out

Post by toad » Mon Aug 27, 2018 5:02 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ivr4QdhVtU

The M3 and M3A1 grease gun. :twisted:

Imagine an updated version with a red dot sight , salt nitride heat treat , and an improved dual feed magazine with modern springs. . Specify three barrels made for every gun. and a sleazy blonde to train you on it. :twisted:

User avatar
Vonz90
Posts: 3266
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Military equipment wears out

Post by Vonz90 » Tue Sep 04, 2018 3:47 pm

toad wrote:
Sat Aug 25, 2018 7:53 am
...... I was wondering if it should be a requirement that every rank above major should be required to serve as a grunt in some third world shit hole with 2nd hand equipment ?
Many of the absolute worst O's (when it concerns taking care of their troops, and other things) are former E's. I've seen the, "suck it up, I had to deal with it" as much or more than empathy and wanting to make sure issues are dealt with.

Working in the system to get what you need (replacement parts, equipment, supplies, etc.) are very much part of the job. However, as it was said above by someone, Congress ultimately appropriates the stuff, and if it is not there to be gotten, then it is not there.

I will not speak for the Army, but for the Nav at least, a lot of the times the reserves are getting the worst left over stuff anyway as it is assumed to be for training only and they would be issued new stuff when sent forward.

User avatar
D5CAV
Posts: 1998
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:48 am

Re: Military equipment wears out

Post by D5CAV » Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:06 pm

Vonz90 wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 3:47 pm
Many of the absolute worst O's (when it concerns taking care of their troops, and other things) are former E's. .....
I will not speak for the Army, but for the Nav at least, a lot of the times the reserves are getting the worst left over stuff anyway as it is assumed to be for training only and they would be issued new stuff when sent forward.
Disagree on the first comment: I was one of those. IIRC, there were fewer of us than West Point grads, so the majority of bad O's came from ROTC, just from the law of larger numbers. I ran into very few fellow "mustangs". Most of the West Point grads I interacted with were pretty reasonable. VMI and The Citadel, on the other hand ... let's just say they were part of the ROTC contingent.

Somewhat agree on the second comment: However, even on active duty, training equipment was older and more beat up. When we drew equipment at Graf or NTC, it was all "ridden hard and put away wet".
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

User avatar
HTRN
Posts: 11054
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Military equipment wears out

Post by HTRN » Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:03 pm

D5CAV wrote:
Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:06 pm
VMI and The Citadel, on the other hand ... let's just say they were part of the ROTC contingent.
They were turning out Neidermeyers?
HTRN, I would tell you that you are an evil fucker, but you probably get that a lot ~ Netpackrat

Describing what HTRN does as "antics" is like describing the wreck of the Titanic as "a minor boating incident" ~ First Shirt

Langenator
Posts: 919
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 2:10 pm

Re: Military equipment wears out

Post by Langenator » Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:14 am

Vonz90 wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 3:47 pm
I will not speak for the Army, but for the Nav at least, a lot of the times the reserves are getting the worst left over stuff anyway as it is assumed to be for training only and they would be issued new stuff when sent forward.
That used to be the model, at least for the regular Army and the Guard. During the Cold War, it was assumed that the active duty units (especially the heavy armored and mech divisions) would leave their vehicles stateside and fall in on the POMCUS gear sets in Europe. The NG would then fall in on the unit sets left behind, get some train up, load on ships, and deploy as follow on. (The Army Reserve is a very different beast from the Navy Reserve. Army Reserve, since the post-Vietnam restructuring, has consisted almost entirely on combat support and combat service support units, many of which don't actually exist in the active Army. Railroad units, anyone? So they generally had similar equipment priority to the active component.)

That model changed when the NG started getting heavily deployed for the GWOT. Now they generally have similar equipment to the active units.

NTC had the training (visiting unit) equipment set to simulate falling in on those POMCUS sets I mentioned above. I don't remember Hohenfels or Graf having that - because Hohenfels was for units already in Germany. Our training was rail loading to Graf, doing gunnery, then road marching to Hohenfels for unit tactical training.
Fortuna Fortis Paratus

User avatar
Vonz90
Posts: 3266
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:05 pm

Re: Military equipment wears out

Post by Vonz90 » Fri Sep 21, 2018 12:55 pm

D5CAV wrote:
Wed Sep 19, 2018 8:06 pm
Vonz90 wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 3:47 pm
Many of the absolute worst O's (when it concerns taking care of their troops, and other things) are former E's. .....
I will not speak for the Army, but for the Nav at least, a lot of the times the reserves are getting the worst left over stuff anyway as it is assumed to be for training only and they would be issued new stuff when sent forward.
Disagree on the first comment: I was one of those. IIRC, there were fewer of us than West Point grads, so the majority of bad O's came from ROTC, just from the law of larger numbers. I ran into very few fellow "mustangs". Most of the West Point grads I interacted with were pretty reasonable. VMI and The Citadel, on the other hand ... let's just say they were part of the ROTC contingent.

Somewhat agree on the second comment: However, even on active duty, training equipment was older and more beat up. When we drew equipment at Graf or NTC, it was all "ridden hard and put away wet".
My experience with mustangs is that they are either excellent officers or crap with little in between.

Post Reply