17-9-26 Garand Pictue of the Day

[Mark in Rochester]

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[ed skeels]

Italy? Looks like pack mules in the rear.

[Mark in Rochester]

Italy? Looks like pack mules in the rear.

For the U.S. Army in WW II, transportation of supplies, equipment and personnel was almost entirely based on motor vehicles. However mules continued to be used in certain circumstances for their ability to negotiate rugged terrain inaccessible by vehicles. Mules could negotiate jungle or mountainous terrain that no horse or vehicle could traverse. In North Africa, the mountains of Italy and jungles of Burma, mules made a significant contribution. Locally obtained donkeys and burros added capacity to Army mules shipped from the U.S.

Ed no note on this one but I am sure you are correct - Italy

[us019255]

Mules could negotiate jungle or mountainous terrain that no horse or vehicle could traverse

A common misconception, it persists to this day in the western USA. Yes, four footed beasts are a great way to move stuff and people in mountains but mules aren't better than horses. They were initially used by the US Army because they were cheaper than horses, and being hybrids were not susceptible to certain genetic diseases found in poorly bred horses. I am a horse owner and have ridden and packed horses in MT in the high mountains. They are every bit as sure footed as mules, and actually easier to handle.

[browningautorifle]

They are every bit as sure footed as mules, and actually easier to handle.

Yes, though there was something about mules the military liked, strength or stamina or something... I agree horses can be just easier to deal with.

[Mark in Rochester]

This came from a hunting web site - I think the point about beer tips things in favor of the mules




I have used both for many years nothing can even come close to a mule's capabilities in the back country. The mules have numerous advantages over horses. Number one is they are a lot smarter than a horse. This trait is often mistaken as being stubborn by people that are not as smart as a mule. It also makes most mules harder to break to be a saddle mule, or a riding mule so to speak. I mean what animal in his right mind is going to let you cram a chunk of steel into their mouth and then let you get up on his back and kick him and jerk the reins ? This makes breaking and training of mules more difficult and accordingly more expensive. Another huge advantage is all four of their legs are the same length unlike a horse which has those weird looking short front legs. This makes for a smoother ride with a mule. None of that pounding you get from a horse especially on a down hill trail where the lack of length in horses front legs is intensified and really beats you to death. One example of this is when you are packing beer, If I am using a horse to carry my beer via saddle bags or wrapped in bundles or boxes and hitched to a saddle. The beer taken off the back of a mule can be opened immediately for drinking where the beer taken from the back of a horse after a days ride has to settle or it's going to spray when you pop the top. The mules also have a much smaller, narrower hoof as well as it is harder. This combined with the balanced legs allows the mule better footing in tuff rocky terrain. Also it makes for healthier hooves, less splitting and other related troubles one has with a wider hoof such as a horse has. I am assuming you may also not only want to ride this animal but possibly pack him as well. When it comes to packing the mules stand alone. When a pack animal has loads tied to it's back the animal becomes wider and at times taller. A person might not give this much thought but adding 3 to 4 feet of width effects clearances along the trails you choose to ride. Mules don't bump loads on trees like horse do. This saves the gear you may have in those loads from the abuse of being beaten into every other tree along the way as well as saving damage to your packing gear.

[CINDERS]

Wonder if they gave the mule ear plugs for the back blast... (I know it would have been dismounted.)

[25-5]

Here is another named Francis.

Attachment 87443

[Bob Seijas]

No chance at all that you could fire it like that, the back-blast would cook the mule's head. I was OIC of a 106mm RR range, when we had visitors we used to stack a pile of empty ammo crates 30 yards behind a gun and fire it... splinters!

[browningautorifle]

a 106mm RR

Those were no joke, you had to sweep up the excess powder after and burn it too. We fired from concrete pads usually and would have residual chunks of propellant around...