Knowledge vs Equipment

[antonkr]

Lets take two people.

One is experienced and worked with Marine Corp and Army and was in a lot of conflicts. He was known as the best. He truly knows how to fight.

Second is a person off the street. He was trained for 3 month. He knows how to shoot a gun and basic survival knowledge. He never have been in a gun fight.

We give the first an M14A1. And civilian type clothing. No bulletproof vest no nothing.

We give the second a LandWarrior system. (Its like combining a person and a machine. Look it up on google if you want to) We also give him an M4 rifle with Thermal Image scope. He is also supplied with a night vision goggles. He has a bulletproof vest capable of making a death bullet and injury bullet.

And we place then in a 10x10 km area with mixed terrain. It includes forest a lake and an abandoned town.

Who would win. Soldier supplied the best with what is available or the soldier with the best equipment or the soldier with a lot of experience but limited equipment.

[grannywils]

This is the last place I would ordinarily expect to find myself, as I am basically opposed to this sort of thing and don't have a lot of knowledge about weaponry. However, I will stick my neck out and say that I would put my money on experience over gagetry. I don't mean to imply that the weapons and armor you describe are not serious; but I just believe that the person with experience will more than likely utilize it more effecively than the neophyte with all the new "stuff". I'm probably wrong, but you asked, and that's what I think.

 

 

[Vindekarr]

You're exactly right on that.

 

If I remember correctly the M14 is an american bolt-action rifle. basicaly, the experience soldier, with such a weapon, really could be quite effective, it just depends on if he is allowed to use the fullness of his experience.

[bben46]

Actually, the M14 (The rifle I carried in the US Marine Corps) is a semi automatic rifle with a 20 round detachable magazine, it fires the NATO standard 7.62mm round (.308 caliber) and can be converted to full auto. - not bolt action. It is much heavier (10.5 pounds - or 4.76 kg) than the current crop of combat rifles, such as the M4 carbine weighs a little more than half that - 2.5 kg) but the M14 is much more accurate at longer ranges - I fired a 10 inch (25 cm) group at 500 meters using an off the shelf unmodified rifle and that was considered 'acceptable'. A good well trained rifleman can score hits at out to 800 meters with the M14 while the other guy with a M4 carbine will be lucky to get hits at 400 meters as the maximum effective range is listed as 360 meters. - The standard unmodified M14 is still in regular use by US Marine scout/snipers and US Army designated marksmen because of it's accuracy, reliability and knock down power. The USMC competition rifle team uses a modified M14 rifle in international competition.

 

There will be advantages and disadvantages on each side of your theoretical contest, although if I had to bet, I would bet on experience. Many times advanced equipment will give a false sense of superiority, while lack of that equipment will lead to being overly cautious. And in all combat, luck still plays a big part in who will survive. Which ever sees the other first will have a big advantage wiich should bias it in favor of technology. But knowing one guy has that technology will make the other one work to use the environment, his own experience and the other guy's inexperience to his advantage.

 

I would work to get a series of well aimed shots from about 300 meters, while I would expect the barely trained guy to use the spray and pray technique so popular in movies.

[DeathWarrior]

I'd say experience would win, and I think that very situation happened during the Vietnam war. The US forces were equipped with the latest technology the US military had, equipment from the late '50s and the '60s, but there are reports soldiers being poorly trained. For example: reports of poorly trained soldiers emptying an entire M16A1 magazine on nothing or walking into punji sticks. The Vietcong and NVA were using mainly Russian, Chinese, and French equipment from the '40s and '50s but had experience fighting the French during the First Indochina War and fighting the Japanese during World War 2.

[Vagrant0]

Warfare is not merely in just what equipment you have, but also the ability to fully utilize that equipment. In the right hands a plastic spork can be a deadly weapon and kill faster and easier than a knife in the wrong hand.

[Aurielius]

Experience teaches what do do with limited equipment and how to utilize it's full potential. There is of course a limit to how far experience will make up for the disparity of relative equipment but real warfare experience beats the hell out any Sunday warrior's excursions, so I'll place my money on the veteran any day.

[SilverDNA]

True, but there is still a "chance", somewhere about one time in ten, that the person from the street will win out of sheer luck. No one knows when that one time has come. If betting wasn't illegal in my country, I wouldn't wage a bet on the "street fighter".

[Trandoshan]

Does the street kid even know how to operate a land-warrior system? Is he given any training in the use of it? Infrared is very useful if you have the slightest clue on how to use it.

 

Doesn't advance equipment require some sort of experience in order to even use it?

[VileTouch]

Well i think everyone has already told you who would win. so i'm just going to quote Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2

 

Sure it matters who's got the biggest stick. But it matters a hell of a lot more who's swinging it

 

 

oh and btw, project Land Warrior was cancelled 3 years ago... it's spiritual sucessor is called Future Force Warrior... what's next? Project Crysis? and Project Master Chief?