Big hypothetical here...imagine a squad of WWII era soldiers goes up against a modern day squad. That means Garands v. M4s, 1911s v. M9s, grease guns/tommy guns v. mp5s, etc. Both squads are American and have equal training. Would the WWII guys get wiped out? What do you guys think?

That's an interesting question. I have never served in the military, but in my opinion, the
advantage and victory would go to the current military. That being said. I think the WWII boys would give them a hell of a fight they would not soon forget.

Side note: Good question, but may get more response in the Lounge.

You left out some stuff.

I'm not sure of the current TO&E, but I believe a squad is currently 12 and is divided into 3 fireteams of 4 each, with two M16s (or M4), one with a 203, and an M249. Currenty military guys and girls, feel free to correct, but I believe that is roughly accurate.

In WW2, I've read various accounts, but basically it was around 10 guys total with a bunch of M1 Garands and 1 BAR, later in the war sometimes 2 BAR. SOMETIMES the squad leader might have a carbine or thompson, but usually just an M1. MGs were kept in the weapons platoon, with only 2 per COMPANY in a US Infantry division (M1919A4). Only the paratroops had MGs issued to individual squads.

Firepower advantage would be hugely in favor of the current squads. Also, the modern squad would have body armor, carry more ammo, have enhanced optics and night vision, IR laser aiming devices, etc.

Having said that, whatever side used the better tactics would win!

Interesting question, but in the wrong forum.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
Interesting question, but in the wrong forum.

You're right. I was waaay too tired to post. My bad!

A modern squad is going to have a huge advantage with it's technology, enhanced firepower with the 249 and 203. Particularly at night where IR lasers and NVGs will allow the modern squad to own the night.

The WWII squad is going to have an advantage of greater effective range for their rifles, but the modern squad with ACOGs, SDMR, and body armor might be able to neutralize that.

Tactics will ultimately decide the winner, but the modern squad has almost all the advantages. With GPS receivers, and radios will allow the modern squad to have better knowledge of the terrain, and be able to work together over much longer distances.

Not to mention things like close air support and the like. WWII boys wouldn't make it out of the gate.

quote:

WWII boys wouldn't make it out of the gate.

+1. Agreed.

Night Vision alone would spell absolute one sided victory for the current squad. Better technology, better training, better equipment, more firepower, and the list could keep on going. Our WWII soldiers were bad MFs because of what they did with what they had, but they wouldn't be able to beat the US Army of today.

Today's soldiers and yesterday's soldiers - Heroes just the same.

WWII Squad is 11 guys with M1 Garands, M1911's and a couple (or three) BAR's...

Current Light Infantry Squad is 9 men, with two M249 SAW's, 7 M4/M16's, 2 M203 Grenade launchers, M9 pistols, and assorted anti-tank weapons (Javelins, etc).

This is a hell of a lot of firepower before you factor in the night vision capability of the modern infantry squad.

Although weapons and technology would play a part, as well as current tactics, even on an even playing field using only old technology current troops would win. Fact is, for better or worse todays military is much more aggressive then soldiers from WWII ever were. I can't remember what the actual estimated numbers were but a surprising number of soldiers on D-Day never fired their weapons, even under direct threat. My guess is that that is no longer a significant problem.

WW II boys wouldn't even know where the modern boys were at until it was too late.

It would be a massacre.

quote:

Originally posted by Pale Horse:
I can't remember what the actual estimated numbers were but a surprising number of soldiers on D-Day never fired their weapons, even under direct threat. My guess is that that is no longer a significant problem.

That's been debunked.

Never the less, modern guys win.

quote:

Originally posted by Pale Horse:
but a surprising number of soldiers on D-Day never fired their weapons, even under direct threat.

Not to hijack the thread, but don't you think this is largely dependent on the definition of direct threat? I imagine that included "someone shooting at you currently with lethal intent" which virtually every one of our guys encountered. The unfortunate fact is likely that many, many of them were shot very early in the engagement before they were able to return fire with any reasonable hope of success.

Amazing it turned out as well as it did, and in spite of the frequently more aggressive stance of our military or personnel today, I wonder if we'd have the balls to pull off something like that again. It would certainly have to be in the face of an extraordinary threat, which hopefully wasn't overanalyzed to death!

I think even with the equipment normalized, modern guys win, but it would be a really ugly fight!

quote:

Originally posted by hogarth:
I'm not sure of the current TO&E, but I believe a squad is currently 12 and is divided into 3 fireteams of 4 each, with two M16s (or M4), one with a 203, and an M249. Currenty military guys and girls, feel free to correct, but I believe that is roughly accurate.

Unless it's changed since I was in, there are two teams per squad. I was in two different units. In Germany, we had an M-203, an M-249, and an M-60 per team with the balance riflemen. We were more heavily armed than a regular Infantry squad.

In Colorado, we still had a 203 and a 249 per team, but we only had one M-60 per squad if I remember right.

I was a SAW gunner my whole time.

As far as who'd win, the modern guys win. Not only do they have superior equipment, but the training has the benefit of sixty years of experience.

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair:

quote:

Originally posted by Pale Horse:
but a surprising number of soldiers on D-Day never fired their weapons, even under direct threat.

Not to hijack the thread, but don't you think this is largely dependent on the definition of direct threat? I imagine that included "someone shooting at you currently with lethal intent" which virtually every one of our guys encountered. The unfortunate fact is likely that many, many of them were shot very early in the engagement before they were able to return fire with any reasonable hope of success.

Amazing it turned out as well as it did, and in spite of the frequently more aggressive stance of our military or personnel today, I wonder if we'd have the balls to pull off something like that again. It would certainly have to be in the face of an extraordinary threat, which hopefully wasn't overanalyzed to death!

I think even with the equipment normalized, modern guys win, but it would be a really ugly fight!

In that circimstance direct threat would be any enemy in range. That is at least how I meant it when I wrote it.

As for this being debunked, I am not sure how or who debunked it, but I heard it from my Grandpa and Great Uncle. Both of whom were there. But D-day was only one example. I have heard several stories of times throughout the entire war of this being a real problem. Soldiers unwilling to fight when the fight was on. I have heard the same was true in Korea as well.

I of course was not there, and like every other story I have heard this has a great chance of being exagerated beyond the reality.

My two cents:

There are pros and cons to be weighed.
WWII Squad, TOE would include:
14 Troops: 1 SNCO, 3 NCOs, one medic and 9 Riflemen
Squad leader would be armed with a M1 Carbine or M1 Thompson
There would be 1 to 3 BAR's depending on the designations of the team, and depending on whether the Squad was working with the rest of the Platoon as a larger force.
Each of the fire teams would have 3 M1 Garand's with 1 per team equipped with a rifle grenade launcher.

As most Army-USMC WWII units were equipped "AD HOC", the weapons mixture could vary greatly, Team leaders may carry M1 SMG's or M2 Grease Guns and even some Resing guns or Sten Guns [Battlefield pickups] as well as a Colt 1911, P-38's and or P07 Lugers.

Riflemen could also be equipped with M1903 Springfields, or other bizzare weapons that were aquired on the battlefield from the G43-44, StG44 or even the FG-42 [sometimes even an SVT]. Some Marine Units in the Pacific were armed with the Johnson Rifle.

If they were lucky a WWII plt would have an M1919 30-06 [.30 cal] Belt-fed, Air-cooled LMG, capable of a high volume of heavy firepower, great for suppression and base-of-fire.


APERS:
The WWII Soldier carried the "Pineapple" grenade. Pot steel with a 3-5 second fuse, pretty scary and unreliable.
Missing from the rest of the thread: WWII Assault units had Flame Units attached for bunker busting and "suppression"- Flame weapons were outlawed by the GC post Viet Nam.

Range is the key here. The long rifles mentioned above were big-bore guns chambered in 30-06, 7.92mm and 7.65mmX54. These bullets all have longer reach and more punch than 5.56mmX45 and 7.62X51.

Protection. Bodyarmor was non-existant on the WWII Trooper. The steel pot protected you from fragmentation, in most cases, but a bullet, even a .32 cal would penetrate it easily. Torso body armor would be 25 years away, and nearly 35 before bullet-defeating IBA was standard issue.


Communication: Field phones, walkie-talkies and UHF-VHF, non-encrypted radios provided the rudiemtary comms for WWII units, substandard by today's standards.

Chow: Pretty inedible from what I have hear-read, poorly stored and prepared rations, did not meet the standards of todays rations

Training. Pretty short, rushed and violent.

[In this next part, I am speaking in genalized terms, it is not true in all cases,but is the rule not the exception.]
The man. A different caliber of man. Tough,grew up in the depression. Physically tough, mentally tough, made due with less, more resourceful, could marh forever and lift heavy objects at will. Air Conditioning is something they had never felt or seen. Bonds of friendship formed that rivaled that of brotherhood. Loyal and trustworthy.


A modern Army-Marine Corps Squad:
14 Troops-Marines, 1 SNCO or Senior NCO, 1 Medic, 12 Riflemen.
3 Fireteams equipped with the following:
3 M16A3-4, or M4 Rifles, 1 M249+M9 and 1 M203 Low-velocity GL

Each Soldier has either a weapon mounted night optic or helmet mounted NOD. This is obviously a big advantage over WWII units who where essentially blind at night

Body Armor: PASGT Helmets, and Wraparound IBA with SAPI inserts provide protection from framentation, knife and projectiles up to 7.62X54

Comms: VHF-UHF-SATCOM-GPS and FBCB2 [As well as other ABCS Systems, I support these in Iraq] add to the leathality of the squad day or night over all terrains.

Chow: 2000-3000 calories, 3x a day, and is pretty edible [MRE]

Training: It varies. That is all I can say.

[In this next part, I am speaking in genalized terms, it is not true in all cases,but is the rule not the exception.]
The man: Grew up playing XBOX, surfing the web and not playing out of doors. Intelligent, but lazy and shiftless. Never been in a fist fight [except in the virtual world]. Grew up in air conditioned home. Can be traned to be somewhat loyal. Not very resourceful


If it was a straight up, non-on man fight, unarmed combat, the WWII vet would wipe the floor with the modern vet

If it was a battle at a range beyond 300m without close air support or artillery, the WWII crew wins again.

If it was a fight in an urban environment at night, the modern troop wins

If it was a combined arms fight, the modern troop wins.

One major issue left out in this discussion is real-time intelligence.

Small birds like the Predator paired up with satellites and active Comm, are much deadlier than comparing rifle calibers.

The edge we have over the enemy with real-time intelligence is astounding.

Then, think about artillery and air support.

With the advances in intelligence, artillery and air, the modern squad is no longer limited to going up against a dozen men; they can level buildings, city blocks, etc, without even firing a weapon.

With all the statistics and descriptions of a modern Army squad organization and TOE, I can't imagine how some smelly, bearded Afgans just about over ran a outpost on Paki border where they had to of been on 50% alert all the time.???????? WTF???????

You just have to look at it like this. If the old army could take out the new army, we would be doing everything the old fashioned way.