March 12, 2009
Associated Press

WASHINGTON - An increasing number of Soldiers are being sidelined with muscle and bone injuries caused by carrying combat loads weighing as much as 130 pounds, a senior Army official said Wednesday.

Research is being done to determine how many troops are affected by weight-related stress fractures, sprains and other orthopedic problems that prevent them from shipping out with their units, said Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the Army's vice chief of staff.

The numbers are likely to keep going up as more Soldiers are sent to Afghanistan, where the terrain, elevation and road conditions are much more challenging than in Iraq, Chiarelli said during a hearing by the House appropriations defense subcommittee.

The wear-and-tear injuries have not affected the Army's ability to field effective combat units, he said. But Chiarelli and other service officials want to reverse the trend by lightening the load troops carry.

That means buying less heavy and more comfortable body armor, lighter weapons and ammunition, and unmanned vehicles that can carry supplies into combat zones.

While Soldiers and Marines lug about the same amount of gear, Army troops appear to be suffering more musculoskeletal injuries than Marines. Chiarelli said the difference is likely due to the Army's longer deployment times. Tours of duty for Soldiers are typically 12 to 15 months; Marines usually deploy for about seven.

Another factor is poor aerobic fitness. Army recruits, even those who appear to be in peak physical condition, get stress fractures and other injuries during basic combat training because their bones are not ready for the demands of running and jumping, Chiarelli said.

Since 2006, the number of Soldiers unable to deploy has increased between 2,000 and 3,000, he said. Overall, the Army has 20,000 so-called "non-deployables."

Roughly half were wounded in combat or have serious medical conditions. The other half have less serious injuries and includes those with physical problems caused by hauling heavy loads.

"When you start to see more of these injuries, you want to attack what you need to (and) get rid of them," Chiarelli said. "Every non-deployable Soldier we have is an issue for us."

While the Marine Corps isn't seeing as many injuries caused by heavy loads, service officials are still concerned over the amount of weight troops carry. The more weight they carry, the less able they are to chase down a fast-moving enemy.

Gen. James Amos, assistant commandant of the Marine Corps, who also testified before the subcommittee, said a standard Marine infantryman has about 90 pounds of gear on him.

Amos cited an extreme case where a mortarman lugged 142 pounds of equipment.

The rule of thumb is ground troops should never carry more than 50 percent of their body weight, he said.

"This has been a problem for infantrymen that goes all the way back to the days of Alexander the Great," Amos said. "It's something we're struggling with."

Quoted:
my BASIC combat load was as follows

2 eSapis,
2 Side sapis
flak jacket
Kevlar helmet
M16A4 w) ACOG, PEQ2, ANPVS 14, weapons light
14 mags full
2 frags,
2 smoke
IFAK and other first aid
flashlight
Camel back full fo water....
PRR radio
Daypack with 6 more mags,
1 chow

And I was rolling light die to my billet.

Quoted:
It's been studied for decades. The problem is that there is always more gear out there that makes us more effective but adds to the load.

Quoted:


Then you add the complaining Mom that says "my baby needs armor".  Add new side plates, DAPS, etc, etc.

Quoted:
I would not call BS. SLA Marshall was studying soldier's loads back as far as WWII, and he certainly wasn't the first. Alxander's guys were foot-marching long distances, carrying heavy spears and wearing plate armor....the problem does go back that far.

Quoted:

 I blame both ORM and the Oprahisation of the US for this, for some reason no one remembers war involves risk.

Quoted:
Try jumping from a plane with all that shit. And I wonder why I ache everywhere nowadays. I remember we were rigged for a jump and were sitting around in the pack shed when these Army civilian types came through and were pulling guys out and weighing them fully rigged up as part of some test. You would have a big guy with a machine gun and after they weighed him they were making us switch weapons to lighten their load. It was part of some study. This was around 2002. But it seems the loads just keep getting heavier and heavier.

Quoted:
not to mention you can barely move with all that shit.

I wonder if all the extra body armor is used to compensate for thin skinned vehicles.

Quoted:
not to mention you can barely move with all that shit.

I wonder if all the extra body armor is used to compensate for thin skinned vehicles.

Quoted:
No guys, we need to weld plate steel to each solider to make sure that no soldier ever dies.  If that means he can only sprint for 10 yards before he is wanting to die that's a small price to give him the best protection possible.  At some point the maddness has to stop unless you are going to give them a robotic exoskeleton to carry all this shit.

Quoted:
The best feeling ever is taking off your armor and sitting down.

Quoted:
ONR is working on a very good design for a pack that rides a rail system allowing for pack movement.  The effects are incredible. Modeling shows a %42 reduction in physical stress to the user.

So a 150lb combat load would feel like 87lbs.  Also, a second version will contain a small 25mw generator (less than 3 lbs) that could charge gear.  This is about 5-8 years from hitting the fleet.

Quoted:


No offense, but FUCK THAT!!!  your back may think its 87, but your feet and knees KNOW its 150, but the guys with the shiny stuff will load a grunt down even worse now!!!

Quoted:



Believe me, I agree with you.  But the pack itself will not be any bigger than the current system (LB whatever) so there is a limit to what you can carry.

All of our testers (Marine 03s) have said that they all want one NOW and fuck going back to the old shit.  We'll see.  It could be good trash, but then again, we have to wait and see how the technology develops over the next two years...

Quoted:


QUOTE FOR TRUTH!!!!

Quoted:
The problem is known, my back is trashed after 3 deployments, but still the VA denies me for my back.  I have wasted countless hours upon hours filing paperwork and appeals.  I'm glad I can work and pay for the welfare bums and bailouts though.

Quoted:


No, it does not. The standard combat load of a soldier, from the days of the Legionary to Vietnam, was almost identical. 35lbs combat weight, 60lbs marching weight, on average.

Once the Army came out with the ALICE though, the load fucking skyrocketed.

A soldier humping shit all over the place is old. A soldier humping shit all over the place that weighs as much as he does is a new problem.


ETA: Furthermore, the major Euro Armies all did studies on soldier-weight before WWI, and all came to the same conclusion: that constantly loading a soldier down with over 50lbs of shit, or temporarily 70lbs of shit, would rapidly break down a soldier physically and mentally, no matter how pre-conditioned or physically fit he was.

Quoted:


ORM is a tool to manage risk.  Maybe some misuse the tool (actually just about every SWO I have ever met misuses ORM), but it is a good tool.

Quoted:


Man, that ain't no shit!  I got out in 99.  I know the load has become heavier since then.

Quoted:
It's been studied for decades. The problem is that there is always more gear out there that makes us more effective but adds to the load.

Quoted:
In before the misleading photo of the 173rd guy on the DZ in North Iraq.

Quoted:



What's misleading about it? Did I miss something? That was taken the morning after the drop so I am sure everything he is carrying he dropped in with. Had a jump out at NTC once in 01 and I jumped a 90 lb ruck but this was a combat jump so i'm sure his was heavier.

Quoted:


Actually about ever study has shown the combat load of troops started going up at the beginning of the industrial age and the growth of the nation state based army.   You can go as far back as Hart and Fuller in the desire for troops to be issued packs with frames to deal with the ever increasing weight.

Quoted:


Carry-weight fluctuated over time, but NEVER in military history did the load a sodlier had to carry go above 70lbs, total, until the ALICE.

Quoted:
i guess you guys havent heard of DARPA's "Big Dog" project

Quoted:


The troops who went into Normandy would disagree and that was well before ALICE gear was introduced.

Quoted:



What's misleading about it? Did I miss something? That was taken the morning after the drop so I am sure everything he is carrying he dropped in with. Had a jump out at NTC once in 01 and I jumped a 90 lb ruck but this was a combat jump so i'm sure his was heavier.