USMC and women in infantry

There is equiment that will be necessary but often there are things that might be really useful. Or what happens if one or more of the people on a patrol are injured? Do you take all, some, or none of their equipment? Knowing that you can carry an extra 10 lbs for the rest of the mission but going much over that would help in deciding what to take. In essence one really doesn't know what is necessary for a given mission. There will be things that are almost certain to be needed and things that are almost certainly going to be useless and a lot of things in between. For instance how much water do you take? Will some be available along the way?

In WW2 for instance it wasn't unusual for US soldiers in particular to carry a more ammo than was the standard. In the ACW many soldiers started out with body armor that was for the most part discarded in short order.

 

After a little time in an infantry unit you'll find that anything not entirely necessary, even if it only weighs ounces will be eliminated from the gear they pack. But you have batteries for your weapon optics, night vision devices, communications equipment, food, water, ammunition both for personal weapons and the units crew served, maps, compasses, extra socks, first aid kits, and on and on. It depends upon the mission what can be left behind and if the mission is real world or training, when you start to lose personnel. I have an old SF SOP packing list around here somewhere that I can scan for you if interested, it lists Items to be carried in/on your LBE, that to be carried in a light assault pack and those items to be carried in your big ruck to your base camp, IIRC. Well disciplined troops have a tendency to carry more because they are usually in better shape and are more concerned with mission accomplishment than their own personal comfort. Poorly trained, ill disciplined troops have a tendency to discard that which they don't immediately need when the pain starts, leaving their path littered with discarded gear and supplies. More often than not they'll soon regret their weakness.

 

But what is "entirely necessary"? For instance if you are on a recon patrol ideally you don't have to fire your weapons at all. So if things go ideally you don't need ammo at all. If you encounter light resistance along the way a magazine may be enough. Heavier resistance and you might even find yourself running low. So how much is necessary? It's a judgement call.

Similarly if you have somone injured can you get them and all their equipment home? If not how do you determine what to keep? Certainly easier if you have people who have enough "extra" capacity that you don't have to choose.

 

Well that's a call the individual, usually the sergeant decides every time they go out...part of the sargeant's or squad commanders job is to decide what they will take with them...USMCPrice could list the factors that go through their minds, but it's not a rough guess...you want to travel as light as possible always, (and you would like to have every bit of kit you have if you make contact with the enemy) but the mission, terrain and enemy decide what's necessary and what should be dropped...and I'm sure a few other factors...only half my brain is working at the moment (be gentle)

 

if the shit hits the fan, recon op or whatever, you will die a lot faster without ammo than without water...so ammo is a primary concern for any operation

 

I agree with the last two posts but the point I was making is that you don't really know what will be necessary for the mission at hand. The more experianced the people involved the better their estimate will be but it still will be an estimate. It's not just what to take before you leave either, things that happen durilng the patrol can have some considerable impact on what you want/need to carry and what you can carry. In both cases the individual and the team are in a better position if additional carry capacity is available. A patrol composed of all individuals that just made it over the threshold(s) would be in a much more difficult situation than one that was composed of individuals in the middle of the pack or the high end of those who made it.

 

Here's an article on a Marine experiment with an all woman team:
www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/2015/05/12/gceitf-inside-the-assessment/26590797/

Formatting seams a bit messed up though.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/05/12/navy-doubling-maternity-leave/27203509/

the navy wants to double maternity leave to twelve weeks! females getting extra time off......and a lot of them do not even do anything physical for their MOS....total inequality
so they will pay them more, and they will also get a tax deduction...if no father, more government $...so mucho more government money to someone having a baby, that will make the parent spend less time working, because they will have to take care of their kid when it is sick, or for child care, etc...

 

I agree. One of the points with the women in these MOS' you just made again, (bolded portion), with males the weakest are generally weeded out.

 

I read that article yesterday or the day before. Looking forward to part two. You must admit, the Marine Corps is approaching the issue in an unbiased, science driven, data heavy manner. If they decide to exclude females, it will be with good cause, but the media and zealots will accuse them of being closed minded.

 

There seems to be a strong push for this right now with some pushing rather extreme positions and politicians giving them the nod. Typically this doesn't last all that long. Taking the time to do a thorough job may also mean that by the time it comes to make a decision emotions won't be as likely to trump rationality. At least one can hope that's the case.

 

Only twelve weeks? Colour me unimpressed.

Parental leave in Sweden is twelve months, six months per parent.

 

is that military??

 

Everyone. Civilian & military. Its the law.

Dads have to take at least 60 days leave, or the amount of money paid out by the state is reduced.

Those first twelve months parental leave can be taken at less than full time, as well, if your family's economy can bear it, extending the duration of your leave.

Beyond the first twelve months there is a further 180 days of pay at a minimal wage level (20-25 USD / day, IIRC), these days can be taken out any time until the child turns 7.

 

With pay?

 

With pay, but its from the state, not the employer. So its tax funded, and something Sweden is very proud of.

 

What happens if a baker has only two employees and they both go on maternity leave at the same time?

 

good call dave ....Poppy, that's insane.....that's sounds like a mucho waste of money....but I do admire the Scandinavians a lot...I don't read much about them in the news.....but, 12 weeks is overboard......my sister said she got 6 weeks when she had her baby.....why 12?? so they want to give the females mucho time off for being female

 

Births are generally not quite like tornados or lightning strikes from a blue sky...

I don't know what the local job market is like in the US, but in Scandinavia, it is relatively easy to find two temps for up to twelve months given 6 months notice. At least in the major towns.

 

We have to hire temps quite often to fill gaps in our labor needs. As my boss says, "They're called Temp's for a reason", and in about 90% of cases are rather substandard employees, not nearly as productive as our regular employees.