Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

military logistics

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Herodotus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 14-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 130
  Quote Herodotus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: military logistics
    Posted: 26-Dec-2004 at 09:30

I truly dislike the China vs. Rome debate, however, i was reading through parts of it and thought something needed to be said about logistics. The thread is closed, for good reason, so i'll post it here.

PLEASE do not rekindle the whole argument here, i just want to hear debate about the logistical issues.

-on page 2 in the old thread WarHead posted 

"No, because cavalry is clearly depicted in all campaigns before of after Wudi. Xiang Yu's army at Ju Lu is said to have 30,000 made of pure cavalry, Liu Bang's xiongnu campaign is said to have 200,000 cavalry. I don't even know where you emulate your nonsense from, to the extent you've shown no source whatsoever."

1 horse/day comsumes on average 20lbs. of fodder

1 person/day consumes on average 3lbs. of millet (major grain of China)

For a cavalry force of 200,000 there would be both 200k horses, assuming no extra replacement horses, and 200k riders.

Lets assume the campaign Warhead mentioned was only a week long, though it was almost certainly longer.

Lets also assume that your average Han wooden supply wagon can carry 5 tons, about half the average capacity of todays mechanized steel farm wagons.

Using Math:

20x200,000x7=28million lbs. Fodder or 14,000 tons required

3x200,000x7=4.2million lbs. millet or 2,100 tons required

14,000+2,100=16,100 tons supply total

16,100/5=3,220 wagonfulls

 

Of course, Hans' wagaons were not mechanized, so horses/oxen/donkeys, etc were required for traction, in addition to a driver/attendants/guards, etc.

Lets assume every wagon had two horses, one driver, and one attendant to help load and unload.

Using More Math:

3,220x2=6,440 horses

3,220x2=6,440 men

6,440x3x7=135,240 lbs. millet or 68 tons

6,440x20x7=901,600 lbs. fodder 4,508 tons

For a total additonal tonnage of 68+4,508=4,576 tons

4,576/5=916 additonal wagonfuls, which in turn require a certain number of driver, attendants, and pack animals-though i will disregard this fact for ease of understanding.

 

So for a force of 200,000 cavalry involved in just a weeklong campaign, there would at the very minumum, and by using the minium calculations neccessarily be, 3,220+916=4,136 pack wagons.

Lets assume each wagon is as efficient as a modern wagon and thus is only 7 feet long. The supply train still comes out to a a whopping 7x4,136=28,952 ft. or about 5.5 miles long!

 

So what have we proved?

A cavalry force of 200,000  travelling through the best conditions, with no loss or attack on baggage, no need to haul any water, or any supplies other than food, for only a weeks' campaign, would at the very least have a supply train over 5.5 miles long.

However, this is not the situation describes by warhead, I beleive-and correct me if i'm wrong-that this particular army was marching west into the central asian steppe, which has been described as mostly desert, swamp, or empty plain. None of which are likely to provide sufficient water for such a host. Water weighs quite a but more than grain, and men and horses consume more water than food in any given day, so with this additional burden, i dont think it an exxageration to double the number of wagons and thus also the supply train length, which is about 10 miles long now.

Also, i think it is highly unlikely that this campign was only a week long, historically i dont really know, but lets assume it is a month, two weeks marching forward and two weeks to return. This quadruples the amount of supplies i've calculated to be neccessary, and thus the # of wagons, and thus the legnth of the supply train, which is now in excess of 40 miles long!

So, once we've considered the actual circumstances of this supposed campaign of 200k cavalry, not even including any supplies other than food and water, such as arrows for the famed han archers, horse shoes, or seige engines we must, mathmatically and unbiasedly come to the conclusion that any army with a supply train in excess of 40 miles is completly useless, and thus, would not have been used, and thus is fictional.

Sidenote: I have no doubt that there was an expedition, and am not questionaing the historial record, i just beleive that the historians, like so many others (herodotus for instance) exxagerated greatly the size of the host.

 

 

 

"Dieu est un comdien jouant une assistance trop effraye de rire."
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh."
-Francois Marie Arouet, Voltaire

Back to Top
Herodotus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 14-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 130
  Quote Herodotus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2004 at 09:32

Sorry to double post...but i forgot to ask Warhead to please explain how this 200k strong cavalry force IS indeed possible, given these calculations?

"Dieu est un comdien jouant une assistance trop effraye de rire."
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh."
-Francois Marie Arouet, Voltaire

Back to Top
Herodotus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 14-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 130
  Quote Herodotus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2004 at 21:55

Well, seeing as the only person to post here has been myself, despite 17 views, i suppose i'll spice things up a bit.

Let's broaden the scope of this thread. Since I have proved that a host of 200,000 chinese cavalry could never have existed, what does that say for tales of other, numerically similiar, chinese armies?

I would say that it proves that most of those accounts are fiction and exageration, just like herodotus' concerning Xerxes million man army.

How would this effect the whole Han vs. China debate? --it might prove that Han wasnt actually capable of feiling these enormous armies, a fact which so far has been used to argue the superiority of the Han.

Just something to ponder...

Again, I generally dislike this topic, so at least be civil.

"Dieu est un comdien jouant une assistance trop effraye de rire."
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh."
-Francois Marie Arouet, Voltaire

Back to Top
Genghis Khan View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 03-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote Genghis Khan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Dec-2004 at 00:23

i think you mean Han vs Rome. but anyways almost all the numbers of a force are exagerated. we'er talking over 2,000 years ago, a force of 80,000 is considered large. Liu Bang having 200,000 cavalry is pure exageration. if china really did have a cavlry force that large, most of their force would be made up of peasants or poorly thrained soldiers(i think i said this in the Han vs Rome thread too). as Herodotus said you still wouldnt be able to feed all of them.

It is not sufficient that I succeed--all others must fail.

-- Genghis Khan
Back to Top
Imperator Invictus View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
Retired AE Administrator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3151
  Quote Imperator Invictus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Dec-2004 at 01:10
Note that the all cavalry Xiongnu army that Liu Bang faced was supposivly even larger.

The Mongol army that conquered Kwarezm was said to be something like 800,000 men strong. With extra mounds for each soldier, that would equate to a few million horsies. 

200,000 cavalry would be unusually large for any army, but I think that many areas in the world could easily support that number of horses for a campaign. The area that the campaign took place, which is around Shanxi, looks to me like it has enough water with many rivers running aross it.
Back to Top
Genghis Khan View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 03-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote Genghis Khan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Dec-2004 at 02:46
china today has a population of about 1.2 billion. thats about 1/5th of the worlds population, but they only have a 2.8 million man force. the mongols conquering with an army of 800,000 thousand would be imposible. when a country sends a force into battle, they only send a portion of their entire military force. if the mongols really sent 800,000 men into battle that would mean they would have a million or millions back home. remember the population is much smaller during this time. also controling a force of that size would be very difficult and probably impossible especially during that time.
It is not sufficient that I succeed--all others must fail.

-- Genghis Khan
Back to Top
Genghis Khan View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 03-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote Genghis Khan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Dec-2004 at 03:15

"200,000 cavalry would be unusually large for any army, but I think that many areas in the world could easily support that number of horses for a campaign. The area that the campaign took place, which is around Shanxi, looks to me like it has enough water with many rivers running aross it."

you need more then water to supply an army. you will need food, clothing, weapons upkeep etc. the cost would be great and they will only be hurting themselves.

It is not sufficient that I succeed--all others must fail.

-- Genghis Khan
Back to Top
Herodotus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 14-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 130
  Quote Herodotus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Dec-2004 at 19:00

WarHead, care to defend ur statement--I'm assuming you dont agree with the conclusion that this thread has reached?

I'm interested in what you have to say...so please

"Dieu est un comdien jouant une assistance trop effraye de rire."
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh."
-Francois Marie Arouet, Voltaire

Back to Top
Yiannis View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2329
  Quote Yiannis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Dec-2004 at 08:16
Read Hengel's "The Logistics of the Macedonian army", an excelent book that clarifies many misconceptions (keep a calculator by your side as you read it - you'll need it )
The basis of a democratic state is liberty. Aristotle, Politics

Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin
Back to Top
conon394 View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Dec-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 165
  Quote conon394 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Dec-2004 at 12:26

Insightful post Herodotus

>>In passing, Xerxes army is a good comparison point
(since you mention it's likely inflated size). It is interesting to note that whatever its real size it was too large to supply either with local supply or wagons, it depended on the only truly efficient method of bulk transport in the pre-industrial era: ships.  Once Xerxes lost his naval superiority, and ability to protect his naval supply chain, he was forced to reduce his army to the much more manageable level of around  35 - 40,000?

>

Back to Top
Yiannis View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2329
  Quote Yiannis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Dec-2004 at 06:19

True Conon, a large army was only able to support itself by ships back in that era. But Mardonius' army occupied rich farmlands like Macedonia and Thessaly. These regions were able to support a much larger troop base than only 35-40K. Plus you have to add to the Persian army, the Greek contigents from the areas already conquered by the Persians (they were obliged to provide troops).

 

The basis of a democratic state is liberty. Aristotle, Politics

Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.