Re: john saporito is alive and well!! -- 1st U.S. Infantry (Recreated)

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 13:04:41 03/03/05 Thu
Author: A Prendergast
Subject: Re: john saporito is alive and well!!
In reply to: Hargis, G. 5 A-1 's message, "Re: john saporito is alive and well!!" on 11:50:27 02/03/05 Thu

>Greetings Cove,
>I was thinking about your letter of the 1st inst.
>(thank you for your kind words) specifically those 67
>fellows soldiering away their time at Fort Crawford. A
>successful deterrent is one that is never used.
>Reminds me of the Texas Insurance Commissioner, Jose
>O. Montemayor. Spent a lot of his Air Force time in a
>hole as nurse-maid to ICBMs that never flew. After
>that, said he, the state Mold Crisis never seemed like
>such a big deal. That was clearly a successful
>deterrent.
>As for "not seeing action" consider Co. K, 2nd Texas
>Vol. Inf. That left Dallas in 1898 to fight the
>Spanish, but only got as far as the swamps of Florida.
>They saw action in roadhouses and bars as well as in
>malaria and yellowjack wards.
>In peace or war, soldierin� has always been a risky
>business. Not that that is a revelation to you,
>war-time service an� all. Thank you very much.
>Speaking of real-life service, Let me bounce a 19th
>century logistical question offen you:
>A thousand rounds, elongated ball .58 cal. cartridges
>w/ caps in box weighs 95 lbs. With .69 round ball it�s
>105 lbs. Let�s average that out to a hundredweight.
>Every 1,000 men (and/or women) blasting away as fast
>as they can, would use up 300 lbs. every 60 seconds.
>With "40 round in the box and 20 in the pantaloons"
>they could shoot for 20 minutes before they ran dry.
>How did they replace that three tons of ammo? Wagons
>to the Seat of Mars? Behind the line dumps? Hand
>carried to the firing line? This could work for static
>lines and maybe for a fighting withdrawal, but what
>about on the advance?
>Getting beans and bullets where and when they need to
>be is a tricky art. I s�pect it always was.
>Thanks for yer consideration o� this matter.
>Keep in touch an� we�ll all do th�same
>
>Hargis, G. 5 A-1, a.k.a Deacon, a.k.a. Amodeus Thurn,
>a.k.a. Ives Aargul�ch, a.k.a. Capt. Savage, a.k.a. �
>well all of us.

According to Billings of Hard Tack and Coffee fame.... they'd strap ammo boxes, one to a side for balance (he says) and run mules from further back in the rear to the forward fighting areas. This during his discourse on Mules and how they wuz usually too smart to be found close to where the bullets and shells wuz flying without aid of a box on muleback.
I suspect the beans made a similar journey.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]