Armored Knight vs Soldier in Interceptor

[Nelly]

I've got a question.
The question is because of a Fantasy Desert Setting. Somebody plays a Knight who travels through the Desert.

Some people in a german gaming forum think they could compare an armored Knight with a todays Soldier.

In my opinion a todays soldier has a lot more chances to survive in the desert, not only because the gear is completely different.

What do you think. What are differences between a Knight and a todays Soldier and who has a better chance to survive in the desert.

I'd say the Soldier.

[lather]

Surviving or fighting?

I probably will the modern soldier either way anyway.

[Nelly]

Surviving or fighting?

I probably will the modern soldier either way anyway.

It mainly is about surviving, of how long a Knight can survive in the desert, and of how long a Soldier can survive.

What kind of gear a Knight has, the weight of the gear and of how much water he would need for himself and the horse.

Someone compared a knight to a todays Soldier (a Ranger) and said that a Ranger would have the same amount of weight and the same chances as a knight.

BUT I'd say that they can not compare a Knight to a Soldier, and that a Knight has a lot more to carry as a Soldier. Especially because of the Horse etc.pp

[Nelly]

I would say the knight, since the desert and the knight are both fictional they have a much better chance using his fictional magic sword and skills to overcome the challenges in the fictional setting.

The Modern soldier is SOL unless he puts the smack down on the gm. If your talking a fictional soldier from a modern campaign setting he is still hooped the second he run into anything with the ability to use magic.

Lets keep out the magic and be completely realistic.

[lather]

The horse was a big consideration for me. But the knight can survive without a horse.

Gear is another consideration, sure, and obviously all depends up on what the knight and the soldier are carrying. 300 rounds of ammo is heavy, but so is a two-handed sword.

Modern technology means gear is generally smaller, ligther, and better. Which is a huge advantage for the soldier in my mind.

If he has a radio, he can probably call someone for help.

Desert training and knowledge are more advanced as well - I would think so anyway.

[MASTERMIND]

Lucky beat me to it. Soldiers and knights both have logistics support to one degree or another and without that support they will have serious long term issues that they more than likely will not be able to overcome.

[lather]

Logistics and combat support for the modern soldier is far superior to the knight's. If you include logistics in the context of the question, the logistics gives the modern soldier the absolute win.

Superior training and knowledge of the desert environment is available to the modern soldier.

Water, weight, sun exposure and to a certain extent, food are the biggest things to look at here.

Water - modern soldier can probably carry more water, and more nutritious water than the knight.

Weight - modern soldier can carry more and better stuff, gear, food, armour, probably weapons, etc.

Exposure - modern soldier has sunscreen, sunglasses, or goggles, and can still wear body armour that is not as encumbersome as a knight in plate.

[lather]

Very good, CaptRory.

Indeed, survival is very much a skill as much as anything else.

Proper training goes a very long way.

[Nelly]

Don't forget that the knight needed more food and water, because of his horse. The Soldier has better food and food he can stretch. The Knight didn't have MRE's and as much as a Soldier complains about MRE's it tastes damned good if you are hungry.

Also, if you think about it, the knight already travelled for months or even years and they've lost lots and lots of Soldiers TILL they arrived in the desert.

The Soldier get flewn in, they don't have to travel for a year and lose half of the Army before they get to Theater.

Todays Logistics are a lot better than they were in past.

[lather]

Most of my position is based on availability, not necessarily standard issue gear - there was no standard issue gear for knights, so no reason to hold the modern soldier to that.

Logistics and combat support for the modern soldier is far superior to the knight's. If you include logistics in the context of the question, the logistics gives the modern soldier the absolute win.

This is only true is you are referring to the type of transport available. In this scenario we are assuming there is no support available, so both parties would be screwed. But the majority of resupply today is done by convoy, which would have been available to the knight as well as the soldier. the only difference is that the soldier would have used HMMWVs while the knight would have a convoy of horses.

Or aircraft. Then there is a speed and payload capacity factors giving the modern soldier the significant advantage.

Superior training and knowledge of the desert environment is available to the modern soldier.

Completely untrue. Only a select few get training like that, not everybody. It's not "available" in that any soldier can just go to the training store and pick up some desert training. It's not something they teach you in boot camp, either.

And most of us aren't taught how to make/use a solar still, either (directed towards CaptRory).

Yes, actually, any soldier can pick up desert training, through the easy to acquire Field Manual covering Desert Operations (FM 90-3). That information alone is an advantage, however slight, it could make enough of a difference. In either case, the soldier has access to information based on lessons learned analysis - or even the FM 21-76, Survival. Even if the soldier cannot get these military publications, there are plenty of books on the subject at the library, bookstore, and online. The knight may or may not have access to anything like this.

Although nothing replaces hands on training.

And some deserts are just so brutal that survival requires a miracle if you cannot sustain hydration.

Water, weight, sun exposure and to a certain extent, food are the biggest things to look at here.

Water - modern soldier can probably carry more water, and more nutritious water than the knight.

Water is water. medieval fighters carried water skins, modern soldiers carry canteens and camelbaks. It's exactly the same, I wouldn't give the advantage to either one.

This is not too significant for me, but the slight advantage goes to the modern soldier. Because in the modern world, water is not always water. You can add nutrients through mixtures and powders. Advantage is too minor to really care about, but it is an advantage nonetheless. In a survival situation, where psychology is very important, the significance of having something tastey to drink should not be underestimated.

1) How can a modern soldier carry more than a medieval soldier? I'm pretty sure they had muscles back then, too. In fact, the knight most likely will be carrying more weight with regards to all the heavy metal and such.

When you can pack bare essentials for survival into something the size of a buttpack with weight measured in a few pounds, you have a lot left for armour and weapons and ammo. The modern soldier may not be issued a sleeping bag that can be compressed to the size of a fist, but at least they are available to the modern soldier, which is far more than the knight could ever hope for.

2) Today's soldiers do carry more gear on average, but then again your average knight had a horse which would allow him to carry considerably more.

Then you have to take care of the horse, which requires a lot of food and water.

3) The interceptor vest (with SAPI plates inserted) is surely lighter than plate armor, but it is by no means lightweight. Especially when you hook everything to it; your IFAK, grenade pouches, ammunition, etc. That thing gets heavy real quick. Dehydration is a constant threat.

I guarantee the modern soldier's IFAK is far better than any first aid knights carried. And if it is not, again, one is available. I said that loading up on ammo added weight fast already, but pound for pound the modern soldier is going to be more equipped for survival - he can carry much of what he needs on his person without relying on a horse.

Hydration is key and once the survival situation extends beyond several days (no one - soldier or knight - can carry that much water) then all bets are off. Almost, the modern soldier still has a pretty good chance. If the radio fails, the specially trained search and rescue personnel flying in aircraft probably will get the job done.

One last thing I'd like to add to all this: The average knight trains for years and years and years before being considered competent in his profession. The average modern soldier trains for a few months at most before being considered combat-eligible.

I asked about this, and the focus on mostly on survival.

[lather]

Don't forget that the knight needed more food and water, because of his horse. The Soldier has better food and food he can stretch. The Knight didn't have MRE's and as much as a Soldier complains about MRE's it tastes damned good if you are hungry.

Also, if you think about it, the knight already travelled for months or even years and they've lost lots and lots of Soldiers TILL they arrived in the desert.

The Soldier get flewn in, they don't have to travel for a year and lose half of the Army before they get to Theater.

Todays Logistics are a lot better than they were in past.

All good points, I would say. In fact, just said..

[Nelly]

I think its safe to say that after wandering around in the desert you'd be dropping your weapons and armor. The enemy MAY find and kill you later. The desert WILL kill you.

There was a case a few years ago in a training area in 29 Palms CA where a young junior Marine was accidentally left behind after an exercise and ended up lost in the desert. No happy ending here, the Marine died. But remarkably enough, when they found him the only piece of gear he had not dropped was his rifle. They found his empty canteens and the rest of his kit scattered about his path, but he never dropped his weapon, even after he died.

The moral of the story is that modern troops are trained in such a way that their weapon is their lifeline, and they will not be quick to abandon it.

This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine. My rifle is my best friend. It is my life...."

Ya know.. some Germans forget their Rifles because they are not trained the way you are. It's far better to see it as your best friend instead of forgetting it on a Bazar in Afghanistan

[lather]

Or what you are ditching.

[lather]

The crusaders probably never survived in or even been in a desert before the crusades took them to one. Their survival skills would have to be learned, just like a modern soldier would have to learn. And the modern soldier has access to more than the knight ever would.

All the pictures of crusaders show them in at least chain mail. They were there to fight, after all, so they needed protection. So, yes, they wore metallic armour in the desert.

I am not talking about dripping iodine into water. I am talking about something that tastes good. I think I stated that rather clearly.

Once again, if you bothered to read anything I said, I was speaking about access, not actual training. Anyway, there is absolutely no reason to believe the average knight in Paris knew any more about desert survival than anyone else - unless he had been there. Another thing I stated rather clearly.

Why would a hard life teach the knight anything about desert survival?

Why would a life of fighting teach the knight anything about desert survival?

Why would living in Paris teach the knight anything about desert survival?

Being a fighter or a knight and being a survivor have little to do with each other.

[Nelly]

If a knight is in a desert, then guess what...he knew about that desert.

90% didn't know anything of the desert. Today you get plenty of sources to teach yourself about the desert, of what you should do or shouldn't do. What you need to survive or what you don't need to survive.

That is stuff the knight never had access to. The knight might have a horse, but a horse can't do it for long without the water and the knight can not wear ALL of his gear PLUS the Armor, and I am telling you a Knight wouldn't have left his Armor behind, just as the Marine doesn't leave his weapon.

Both will die from hydration BUT I believe that a Soldier, with the ergonomic and better gear makes it a little longer.

If the knights were so good, why didn't they win?

[lather]

Please enlighten me in how the average soldier living in North Carolina knows more about desert survival than a knight.

Go on, I'm waiting.

Keep waiting, then - because I never made that claim.

What I did claim, is that the modern soldier has access to more knowledge and information about desert survival than a knight could ever hope for.

Do you mind answering my questions now?

And reading what I said? ...

I also pointed out that the "magic tasty water packed with nutrients" is BS.

Where are you getting this? Where did I say "magic tasty water packed with nutrients"?

It does not have to come from an MRE. It can be Crystal Light or anything else that the modern soldier has access to that the knight did not.

And I furthermore clarified that having something tastey to drink is a huge psychological advantage for the modern soldier. Anyone who has been in a survival situation understands that a lot of survival is mind over matter, and having something tastey to drink helps with that. Or having a bar of chocolate or a harmonica or a notebook or ......

Please read what I say. It is rather bothersome to respond to things I never said.

[lather]

Knowledge is easy to come by today. And that is at the core of this debate.

Almost disgustingly easy

[lather]

The word "average" was not in the original question. We are talking about medieval and modern warriors.

If you want to take the access to information, training, and equipment out, then I really do not see the knight or the soldier having any particular advantage over hands-on experience with desert survival. Although certainly the gear the modern soldier wears is far better, even if it is a bottle of sunscreen and goggles.

[Nelly]

Knowledge is easy to come by today. And that is at the core of this debate. "Would your average Knight know more or less about Desert survival than your average Soldier today?" I say the soldier would know more. I can tell you this: That if I was serving in the armed forces today, I would make Damn Sure I knew everything I could about Desert survival and I would pack accordingly. We're not fighting in WW2 where you could be sent anywhere on Earth, we're fighting in and around deserts.

Maybe YOU would. But the average soldier would NOT.

There are a thousand books on warfighting, small unit tactics, and general, desert AND jungle survival within a stones throw of where I'm sitting right this minute. It's available, but am I going to read them? Hell no, I'm going to go to work, then come home and drink beer.

That's what the average soldier does, possibly substituting the beer for working on his car (or girlfriend), or any combination of the three. The average soldier does NOT spend his time reading field manuals.

Perhaps your average soldier.. but definitely not mine.

They do party, and they do spend time with their girls but when they knew they were going on deployment they DID educate themselves and even while they are on deployment they swamp me with emails asking for books and books and books and books.

I'd call my boyfriend an average soldier, but he has tons of books about the American Armed Forces. About their tactics and of how they work. The same about the Insurgents, how they live, where they live, about the desert and of how to survive. He holds classes about those themes and must be informed about the stuff he is teaching others.

Perhaps the average privat doesn't do anything to educate himself...and gets drunk, has fights with others and only thinks about his girlfriend, but when you climb up the ranks you must be informed about the stuff you do, especially when you lead soldiers into warzones. And I am damned sure that an NCO has at least one or two books about the desert in his shelves...and I'd call an NCO average Soldier too.

[lather]

Defining 'average' is important.

Most soldiers are below average.

[The Beast]

<--- US Marine.

IMO, they are about the same.

Knights rarely travelled alone, they travelled with armies. Unless you are thinking of the Arthurian-type knight, which I assume you are but that is not very realistic.

The point here is, knight basically IS a soldier but with shinier clothes. Neither will be able to survive on his own for more than a few days at a time. training or no training, both classes of professional soldier require logistical support to operate. US troops (by and large) don't have much more training in the way of wilderness survival than the average joe and even less in desert survival. There are exceptions to this, but majority of our survival training is just common sense.

Water, weight, sun exposure and to a certain extent, food are the biggest things to look at here.

I would agree with this. Unless both the knight & soldier are lost or on some sort of mission that forces them to be in a desert without any sort of support, they'll both be fine, generally speaking.

Now if they're out there in a small group, by themselves, or something similar, I'd give it to the soldier, though we could break it down a little. Everyone feel free to point out any mistakes here:

Knights = Have a heavy sword and armor tends to be heavy (don't know what averge weight for either would be). Knights are typically considered to be from Europe. How many deserts are there in Europe? Relied on either a carrier pigeon or messanger person to relay info vast distances. Not sure how well their wilderness survival training was, but then again, they didn't have modern comforts. Would hire locals to who could scout the land for them to keep from getting lost, and know what resources are around.

Soldier (going off of US Army here Nelly)= Body armor weighs in around 45 lbs. Weapon is around 8 lbs. My unit didn't issue what I would call a large amount of ammo, but we're a support unit, frontline units probably issue more to their soldiers. I don't think the weight of it is that bothersome. Might have access to a radio and/or a GPS unit. Has access to vast amounts of knowledge via training, internet, school, History & Discovery channels, but doesn't mean he used/paid attention to it. Has these Camal-Pak things which hold roughly 8 canteens of water. Usually has a vehicle which can travel greater distances than a person on foot or horseback. Might be overconfident in his equipment, abilities, and/or knowledge (real or imagined) and take a greater risk than the knight would.

[The Beast]

I also see the title says "...Soldier In Interceptor." The only "Interceptor" I can think of right now is a jet fighter. (In the USA) Soldiers don't fly those, pilots do.

[Nelly]

I also see the title says "...Soldier In Interceptor." The only "Interceptor" I can think of right now is a jet fighter. (In the USA) Soldiers don't fly those, pilots do.

hey, I am German I've got a permission to use wrong grammer and spelling

My main problem is that the knight will have been training for most of his life, and once you have that kind of practical experience under your belt, it's easy to adapt jungle survival to arctic survival to desert survival ad infinitum. The common sense and resourcefulness is what keeps you alive in the wild, not book-knowledge.

he was trained in Fighting, but they didn't have to "survive" in Europe.
Well trained Horses were so expensive that only rich and high nobles could afford them. You do know that Nobles in no way had to work their butt off, that most didn't even know the word "work"

Yes, they've trained their fighting skills, but other than that they got literally their butt wiped.

They had a completely different society, believed in different things, had a different live... their common sense was completely different from ours.

Heck they've burned women because they thought they are evil and use magic. You do know of what they did to proof that they are right?
They put rocks on their feets and put her into water. If she drowned she was a witch and deserved death. If she made it out of water she used magic and was a witch too...and that is just one example. You can't compare their sense to ours...

[lather]

My main problem is that the knight will have been training for most of his life, and once you have that kind of practical experience under your belt, it's easy to adapt jungle survival to arctic survival to desert survival ad infinitum. The common sense and resourcefulness is what keeps you alive in the wild, not book-knowledge.

So training for warfare inherently includes survival training? I would say 'no'.

Book knowledge dramatically increases your chances of survival, especially if you already have the common sense and resourcefulness.

I am not sure jungle survival adapts easily to desert survival. One big aspect of survival that comes to mind is land navigation.

[Nelly]

See, I'd be perhaps able to make a fire in the woods because I've learned in past. I also know of how to make traps and of how to hunt. Yet this doesn't make me find water in a desert. Only because of some shows and books I know that there can be found water in some plants, or that there are places where you can dig for it.

Than there is a completely different animal world. They didn't know about snakes or scorpions and spiders. Things we know because of the books. We know that we better don't get close to a snake or scorpion. We have better medics and don't die from a little scratch.... these are all things that have to be considered I'd say...

[lather]

Certainly the animal kingdom is another important aspect.

[CyCo]

I think part of the problem here is defining what is the 'average' soldier, and the 'average' knight?

Is the German soldier the 'average' soldier, or the American? Australian? English??

Same goes with the knight.

Lets look at the soldier. Are the training of soldiers the same in every country around the world? No, they do share alot of the same basic stuff, but they also tend to spec in training in their part of the world. I'm not talking spec forces, just the grunts.

Here in Oz, they are trained to a certain degree in desert survival. This is a big brown land, and we're in th grip of a long drought. With the worlds largest muslim nation above us, one of the basic tennents of an invasion was going to be let them take the top end, and we'll fight them in Kakadu and the deserts. They may do ok in Kakadu (if they can deal with the salt water crocs), but when they hit desert, they're going to be stuffed.

I won't even go into the SAS, as we're not talking about spec forces, and a fair portion of their selection process is survival in the desert, often for weeks alone at a time, with only a tin cup, a small pocket knife, and a couple of other items. When/if they make it back/or when they're found, they've often lost some muscle mass....

So, looking at the knights, most of them are not going to be able to cope with a desert, when they first arrive. But do you think the knights on the Crusades didn't learn anything about survival when they hit the deserts in the Holy Lands? After watching your mates die around you due to dehydration, I think they'd turn to the locals for some help. They'd learn about the country they're now in, and how to survive.

So then, are we talking about a knight who knows how to survive in a desert, and a modern day soldier who also knows how to survive in a desert? How kitted up are these people wandering alone in this desert? Do they have just basic supplies, or gear pertaining to survival in the desert? Or do they just have the clothes on their backs?

This is the sort of info we need to know before we can even answer your question Nelly.

8]

[lather]

I think part of the problem here is defining what is the 'average' soldier, and the 'average' knight?

Once again, 'average' was never a part of the original question.

[lather]

And most of that is useless in a desert survival scenario, or is at least balanced between knight and soldier.

The only advantage I see is purifying water (something I never learned about in the Marine Corps).

Because one type of survival training does not adapt to another, necessarily.

I have always said that the modern soldier's access to information and technology is the reason I give the modern soldier over the knight. Take that away and neither has any particular advantage.

[SirTenzan]

Hello!

Seeing as how there are far too many variables in this equasion to even come close to an intelligent answer, let's look at the gaming books for an answer;

According to PFRPG 2nd Ed., using the Knight O.C.C. as our average knight;

He has the option of selecting Wilderness Survival as a skill, but without any O.C.C. Related Skill bonus I should add. Considering the skills they automatically possess in terms of weapon skills, hand to hand abilities, and so on - they don't really have a whole lot left to choose, which explains why they only get a couple of related skills anyway, and a handful of secondaries. The real question is, would the knight rather know how to pace himself well in formation marching or would he rather know how to survive if he got separated by his entorage of servants? If he's pretty snobby he probably opted for the whole forced march bit. If he's cunning and plans for the unexpected - he probably took Wilderness Survival. If I had to use characters as a basis, I'd say more the latter than the former. If I had to use NPCs as a basis, definitely the former rather than the latter. You decide which is more likely!

Simply put, if he didn't take it, he's gonna cook - and die of dehydration in no time flat. Leave him roast in the armor for a few days, visit him to add salt now and again and to chase off the scavengers, and you can come back to him in 2-3 weeks and get yourself some good high-quality longpork jerky!

On the other hand those with a background as a minor landowner, farmer, laborer, or peasant are more likely to have this skill as their family skill options include wilderness skills as an option. That said, this family background piece is 1 in 10 - making it only a 10% minority.

According to Ninjas & Superspies, using the Veteran Grunt O.C.C. as our modern soldier;

A veteran grunt has the Basic Military Skill Program to start, but no Wilderness Survival skills are included in there! (Darn!) However, we get the option of selecting any three of the remaining seven military skill programs. Whee! Billions of skills. Prepare to write until your' hand cramps into a painful claw like position and forces you to switch to your' left (or right?) for the next few nights ... ahem! Moving on. Unfortunately ONLY one of those, the Guerilla Warfare Skill Program includes Wilderness Survival. Chances are, you'll wind up taking it anyway, since it's a sweet little program, and gives you four more of those oh-so-valuable W.P.s.

(Everybody knows that guerilla warfare specialists know how to use every modern military weapon known to man ... right?)

However, we're not done yet! Prepare to copy more skills! (Yes, Eric Wujcik is a sadist - I have proof. It's this book! ) You get to select one Basic or Espionage skill program!

Out of the 18 skill program possibilities, including the oh-so-manly Bodyguard/Assassin Skill Program, not a single one of them gives you the option of Wilderness Survival. BUT wait! There's still one better! The Basic Cultural Skill program gives you the option to select FIVE Cultural skills. Among those fifteen dandy little skills is a nuance that kinda-sorta applies to this conversation, called Desert Survival! Yeah, not much chance our beefed out Veteran Grunt is going to waste his final skill program on that ... ... ... but we're still not done.

Secondaries!!! Weep, yes all of you should weep, for the amount of writing you have been forced to do to write up one of these characters! I feel your' pain, but suck it up, and move on man, sheesh!

Yes, our Veteran Grunt gets to select a whopping ten secondary skills, out of the 56 options available. You may select either the delightful skill of Wilderness Survival OR Desert Survival, or you could go for broke and select both, however unlike Desert Survival, Wilderness Survival suffers a -10% penalty when selected as a secondary in this game system! (A little odd, but okay, if you say so Eric! )

Basically speaking, if you didn't take either skill as a secondary, and you for some reason didn't take the Guerilla Warfare skill program, you're vulture food just looking for a sandy patch of earth to feed them in!

So, in summary, let's look at what we've got;

A Knight, assuming he took Wilderness Survival as one of his Related or Secondary Skills has a 30% chance of surviving a few days in the desert if he were level 1, since he can now find water and shelter ... 30% of the time. He does not, however, probably know when is best to travel, how to stay warm at night, and cool in the day. Thus my vote is that unless he was holed up for a few days waiting for someone to find his noble butt he'd probably die of exposure.

If on the 1/10 shot he was originally from a minor landowner, farmer, laborer, or peasant background and he took Wilderness Survival he'd have a 40% chance of making it for a few days. Once again though, it's only a stop gap, he's gonna die anyway of exposure.

A Modern Soldier, on the other hand, if he took the Military Guerilla Warfare Skill Program, he'd start off with a 40% chance of surviving a few days in the desert if he were level 1. Same is true as I described above though, if he starts wandering around out there, he's probably going to die in a few days from exposure. IF he were the super-cranium and took the Basic Cultural Skill Program and Desert Survival he'd have a whopping 55% chance of surviving, not only a few days, but a prolonged experience in the desert, since you now have the know-how of surviving exposure in the desert. If he took Wilderness Survival as a secondary, well, guess what bub - you're on the same level with the Knight from the middle ages ... 30%. If he took Desert Survival as a secondary, he's got exactly a 50/50 chance of making it.

In short, don't take your' Knight to the Desert. Arabian Nights was spelled N-I-G-H-T-S not K-N-I-G-H-T-S. If you come to sand on the back of your' noble steed - do yourself and your' horse a favour and turn around the other way.

Besides, you're out to slaughter orcs, goblins, trolls, and ogres and everybody knows they don't live in the desert! (Okay, maybe there are a FEW trolls in the desert, but that's in Earth's Middle East, and you aren't adventuring there anyway!)

If you're going to take your' Veteran Grunt into the desert make sure you trained him up pretty well to survive. If not, kill him off early so you can make up a new one and get in on the mission before it's too late to get paid!

Thus in closing, if we play a smart 'average soldier', yes he can make it better in the desert than a knight could.

Hope this helps to end the debate! Yes, it was all said as tongue in cheek.

Regards,

Edward A. May

[MASTERMIND]

Ok lets look at this this way
during the crusades the christian roman empire sent thousands of soldiers and dozens of knights (some of which would later become the Knights Templar) to the deserts of the middle east. now they had to supply these knights and soldiers with water and tents. Becouse the knight was thought loyalty and to kill, not desert survival. his armor and the amount of equipment he carried also slowed him down. thousands of soldiers and knights died in the crusades, why not because of the muslims. but, because of the whether. water was more important than the sword. in fact one of the biggest battles took place over water, both sides wanted it. a knight would have a worse time surviving why. his clothing it does not breath. it countians all the heat in, making him hotter. and the armor he wears would get hot. now there is padding under the armor, but has metal heats it gets heavier.
the soldiers of today weather part of the KSK or the Marines have a similar problem. logistics getting water to your men. but we have some advantages over our forebears that give us a bit of an edge in a survival situation. 1) smaller unit size. Water can be dealt out in smaller amounts saving more of it for later. 2) less heavy clothing, lighter armor. This keeps the heat out better and doesn't drag you as much, meaning you'll need less water. and 3) canteen. knights did not have canteens. or any other way getting water except by supplies. and when they did get it, they had to drink it there, or wait till later.

I agreed with you on everything but the canteen part. The canteen is just the modern version of the waterskin used for thousands of years now.

[lather]

Superior training and knowledge of the desert environment is available to the modern soldier..

In the crusades many knights arrived at Jerusalem, even with very shabby logistics.
The knights of outremer lived, fought and holt palestine for generations, they were trained to fight in her own land, and in campaigns in the desert at least razzias in the desert.

I was not talking about fighting, but surviving.

Water - modern soldier can probably carry more water, and more nutritious water than the knight.

only as long as they deliver to him filteredand mineralised water or his pack don`t run out of the gear for them.

True, but I accepted that from the start.

Exposure - modern soldier has sunscreen, sunglasses, or goggles, and can still wear body armour that is not as encumbersome as a knight in plate

also as the knights chain?

Chain? Fine. No sunscreen, glsses, or goggles. Certainly people have lived in the desert without these things for thousands of years.

I am not married to my position, but I think the access to better information and equipment of the modern soldier is far better than that of the knight, and that is a big advantage.

Todays Logistics are a lot better than they were in past

and if you got out of them you re in a damned worse position than an medival army

Probably, not necessarily.

Yes, actually, any soldier can pick up desert training, through the easy to acquire Field Manual covering Desert Operations (FM 90-3). That information alone is an advantage, however slight, it could make enough of a difference. In either case, the soldier has access to information based on lessons learned analysis - or even the FM 21-76, Survival. Even if the soldier cannot get these military publications, there are plenty of books on the subject at the library, bookstore, and online. The knight may or may not have access to anything like this.

Although nothing replaces hands on training..

Yes, I remember well some techniques to make fire or a spear, in my own Books, , nothing i would like to bet my life on, to be sure and nothing i´d seen in the library of my division

Like I said, nothing replaces hands on training.

And I furthermore clarified that having something tastey to drink is a huge psychological advantage for the modern soldier.

******** if you are thirsty it makes no difference, i abhorr coffee but when it was - something C in biwak assure i didn`t cared,only that it was hot.

Ok, something hot. The psychological principles are the same. Psychology is a huge component of survival. Something tastey, something hot... can give a psychological boost for the survivor.

Or having a bar of chocolate or a harmonica or a notebook or ......

or a harp, lute or lyra not unusual for a knight to`ve or singing songs also not unusual or prying and deep believe was normal...

Agree. Although I would drop the harp, personally.

[Beatmeclever]

I know this was a long time ago, but I had to say something. I like to look at the old stuff.

The knight of old cannot be compared to the modern soldier. The knight was a mounted combatant and troop commander. Knights were mated to their horse -- it was their means of getting to battle, maneuver during, and home afterwards. For the most part, the modern soldier has no equivalent. Tankers have their tank, pilots have their aircraft, but the foot soldier has no such restriction. The armies of the crusades were armored, but most of them were not knights they were foot soldiers. The modern soldier is a foot soldier. It would, perhaps, make more sense to compare the modern soldier with the medieval foot soldier. The knight should be compared to the modern Ranger or the like since he was more highly-trained. Or to the modern tanker, if you like (but I don't think tankers get the same availablity of survival training as do Special Operations Forces). (Then again, I might be inclined to agree.)

As for arctic, desert, jungle, or any other survival training all being interchangable, NO! Absolutely not! There are certain similarities -- the need for food, shelter, and water -- but the details are so distantly removed that a person trained in only one wouldn't stand a chance in any of the others.

I was taught that as soon as your situation had switched from a combat mission to a survival situ, armor would no longer be needed in the role of armor -- remove it -- hold on to it, but you won't need to wear it anymore. A knight would have removed his plate or chain once he was lost in the desert too -- hopefully he would have learned from the locals to cover up from the sun. (The reason so many crusaders died during the Battle of the Horn of Hattin was that they had moved too far from water and they were in armor (ready for battle). Had they been thinking, they would have stayed near water and waited in a fortress where they could hold off putting armor on until it was needed.

As well, anything and everything you are carrying serves a purpose for survival. DO NOT drop anything! "Your enemy can track you by your "waste" and you will almost certainly need the thing you dropped within the day after you drop it." -- Sgt A. White, SERE School

Water is equally available to either soldier in either era. They are in the middle of the desert (little to no available water) so all they have is what they are carrying or is being carried by their unit. The modern foot soldier has a camelbak hydration system so he can carry more water than those of yore. But the knight could carry a lot of water with him if he needed to too. We use horses in the Hindu Kush and they are very useful for carrying extra kit and survival gear (including water jugs - 5 gallon). Most of what is needed to care for a horse in the field can be carried on the horse. The knight tended to have a pack horse. If he lost his horse(s), he no longer had that problem or advantage.

The modern soldier gets the benefit of modern, lightweight, microfiber, insulated , etc. equipment of which his medieval counterpart had to carry the full-weight version (if it existed at all). One thing the medieval guys never had was a rescue beacon and CSAR teams.

As we have seen over the course of the discussion, the survival training given to foot soldiers today varies from service to service and, in some cases, is not much different from the training given to the foot soldier of yore. I was given a great deal of survival training while others on these boards seem to have been given very little or none. I also sought out advanced training (books, videos, classes) while I was stateside and I observed or made friends with the locals when I could while I was on station. So, if the foot soldier/knight/modern soldier/tanker/Ranger/Whatever would survive or not would depend on his attitude and ingenuity.

[Natasha]

Over a year old necropost. Aim for the head.
Well there's mechanised infantry units and stryker units that can execute objectives without leaving their vehicles. They often do dismount but isn't that merely a reflection of necessary tactics; a knight that can't get off his horse and kick in a door isn't very valuable in the modern urban battlefield. Rangers, sua sponte, don't ride horses or vehicles in general, except to arrive at the objective; they are light infantry units, too, at the end of the day.

[LostOne]

I'm assuming the knight is in typical armor: full plate with padding underneath, maybe a chainmail hauberk.

He's gonna bake in the desert heat, literally. He'll have to strip off his armor within a couple hours or die of heat stroke. Full plate + desert sun = mobile broiler

The modern soldier has a far better chance. He's had basic survival training or better, his gear is lighter, his tools are better, and chances are he has a radio, he just has to get within radio range, whereas the knight would have to get close enough to a village that they decide he isn't a heat shimmer or a trick of the eyes.

[drewkitty ~..~]

It all comes down to training and preparation.

[csbioborg]

Please enlighten me in how the average soldier living in North Carolina knows more about desert survival than a knight.

Go on, I'm waiting.

I also pointed out that the "magic tasty water packed with nutrients" is BS.

they don't they are east coast maines with neither the temperment nor the training to surive in a desert west coast marines have been hones in cax after cax in the proving gronds of 29 palms.


Seriously though modern solider has modern prinicples going for him. Understands conceptslike bacteria and potable water.

Also this is way to broad of a question. If you are talking about Sonma or Mojave I could prbaly spend as much time as I had to out there becaue I grew up in the reigion and know what I can eat and the plants I can use for water. I've been to other desets and I would have had no idea could eat if I needed to survive