3 ms·
I think that's routine, to the extend that it's possible. But one also wants to avoid having too much stored within shooting range. BTW. One of my history book
by Arnt 3y ago
I think that's routine, to the extend that it's possible. But one also wants to avoid having too much stored within shooting range.
BTW. One of my history books stated that in WW2(?) the necessary supplies were more than a ton per day and front-line soldier. 16kg of food and drinks, and a little of this and a little of that.
- 082349872349872 3y agoI remember reading that during the Russian Civil War, although they still used horses (their equivalent of todays "technical" being a machine gun in a horsedrawn carriage), the cavalry pretty much had to operate within a day's distance of rail lines, because they relied on rail transport for grain and hay, only being able to source water locally. (cursory Wiki'ing says standard independent operation for sub-army units is somewhere between days and 1-2 weeks of resupply, so it sounds like being able to destroy rail faster than construction battalions can rebuild it ought to be a thing)
- Arnt 3y agoIt is a thing. Particularly for crucial points like bridges and hubs.
- 082349872349872 3y agoWith questionable assumptions, I'm getting: (10% of 500'000 men) tonnes/day * 1 wagon/60 tonnes = 800+ wagons/day which sounds like a lot of (theoretically interruptible) traffic. Using the model of the US Civil War, which also had an environment where defence easily beat offence, the side that mustered the most industrial output won. That suggests the centre of mass of UA's fight to be less logistical and more political.