Conventional infantry tactics don’t really work against zombies. For instance, suppressing fire; you can’t suppress zombies, because they don’t care if they get shot, and it only matters if they get shot in the head. You can’t inflict any amount of damage that’s going to force a retreat. Artillery and bombs are only going to effect them if they’re in the direct blast zone; shrapnel still has to penetrate the brain.
Your best bets are likely going to be napalm and flame throwers. I’m not sure how many napalm bombs the US military has, but I’m pretty sure that they don’t have tons of flamethrowers.
Conventional infantry tactics from 1945 certainly don’t work. We haven’t fought like that in forever.
Modern infantry tactics would be “Sit inside my nice warm armoured vehicle while the gunner shreds everything with a 25mm autocannon.” And I think that would work just fine against zombies.
Also any competent military shouldn’t have the slightest difficulty getting headshots on a slow moving target that isn’t trying to evade or use cover.
Out of curiosity, how do they shoot in your experience? I’ve never shot but have friends and family in the armed forces who’ve I’ve spoken about this to and I don’t doubt the military could win against a horde assuming they’re regular walking dead zombies and not left 4 dead ones. You don’t have to have perfect aim when you can unload at height level into a crowd.
I’m in the US military. The fact that qualifying on an M4 is 23 out of 40 tells you a lot. (Although my unit’s average is closer to 30ish)
Additionally, a very little amount of the military is combat arms roughly 15%. The other 85% supports the warfighter. I’m part of the 85%
This is why the US military is so logistically and maintenance heavy because we all support the 15%.
However shrapnel will cause a lot of damage and hopefully take out the brain with enough luck. The brain could still be alive without a body to support it.
Also depends on what kind of zombies we’re talking about. If it’s a zombie that still relies on oxygenated blood, then conventional tactics will still apply. However if the zombie only needs non-degraded muscles to keep moving, then it’ll take a while for tactics to change.
Most people in the military do a basic qualification that is pretty easy to pass (23/49 targets, at ranges from 25 to 300m); these aren’t head shots, these are just on the target. Once you’ve done that, and graduated from basic, depending on your specialty, you may rarely touch a rifle. Lots of former military people think that they’re good, just because they managed a single qualification, and that they know a lot about guns, but it’s often just fudd-lore. Spec ops guys and Marines tend to be more proficient overall, because they spend more time practicing. (TBH, a lot of the spec ops are very mediocre as far as competitive shooting goes, but they have a lot of other skills that are relevant to the military, and tend to refuse to give up.) Cops are often even worse; their qualifications are at short distances, with very lenient time standards.
Bear in mind that the kill-to-bullet ratio in Afghanistan was about 1:300,000; most shooting in the modern military is suppressive, rather than directed at a specific target.
Compare that to someone that’s a USPSA B class shooter, or someone that regularly shoots PCSL 2 gun matches; they will tend to outshoot a lot of retired military, because they tend to practice, and practice on a shot timer, a lot.
I have a very direct knowledge of military marksmanship - much moreso than probably 90% of the people in this thread - but in all fairness my hands on knowledge is with the Canadian military, and I’d forgotten that since we’re talking about zombie movies, we are of course talking about US soldiers. So not really the same thing.
For instance, suppressing fire; you can’t suppress zombies, because they don’t care if they get shot, and it only matters if they get shot in the head.
This makes my teeth itch. I realize that this is NCD but…
Without claiming outright magic damage to muscle and bone still matters. A bipedal creature absolutely requires certain muscles and bones to remain upright. If a zombie gets hit with a rifle round that blows out a 3" chunk of its spine then it can’t stand up. That kind of damage is easily done with a 30 caliber rifle round (7.76) let alone the venerable .50 caliber. Even the relatively small .223 / 5.56 that’s carried by standard infantry will remove muscle and break bones.
Your average grunt is going to figure out real quick where and how they need to shoot in order to slow or stop these things. If head shots aren’t possible and it takes too much ammo for body shots they’ll start aiming for the knees and ankles, because again that zombie can’t run / shamble at you if it has no feet or it’s ankle or knee has been blown into a hundred pieces.
So when Tommy Tactical or Isaac Infantry mag dumps 20 rounds of 5.56 into a zombie it may not be “dead” but it sure as shit has taken critical damage to its musculoskeletal system and will almost certainly not able to stand upright. Ol’ Mike the Mighty on the Ma Deuce will reduce a hundred zombies into a quivering pile in 60 seconds or less all by himself.
That zombie horde will be a lot less dangerous and easy to clean up once it’s crawling on the ground with all the speed of a toddler.
…We’re still talking about zombies, right? Animated corpses that have an overwhelming need to consume human flesh, and can only be killed with overwhelming brain damage? I’m pretty sure that’s the definition of magic right there. If you’re talking about something like the cordyceps fungi–which, to infect humans, would still need some kind of magical power–you still have a very, very finite limit on how long a ‘human’ will survive (about four weeks without food, give or take), so you should be able to just wait them out, rather than needing to proactively kill them.
That zombie horde will be a lot less dangerous and easy to clean up once it’s crawling on the ground with all the speed of a toddler.
Less dangerous, yes. Not not dangerous, depending on which version of zombies you’re talking about specifically.
Artillery and bombs can shred/destroy the body, making it hard to move, if there is enough body left to move.
A .50 to the arm isn’t going to slow a zombie down, but the knee? Kinda hard to walk with one leg. 25mm chain gun is probably going to mist a few bodies.
Artillery is an area denial weapon. If you have a hoard a couple 105 shells are going to take apart rotten flesh with ease. Mortars are similar and more mobile.
Mine fields are effective as a way to immobilise and thin the herd.
Choke points work exceptionally well, and claymores can be rigged at head height.
Zombies can and do drag themselves, or even worm their way across fields. Until the brain is destroyed, they’re a threat.
25mm chain gun is probably going to mist a few bodies.
Sure, but, again, unless you hit the head, they’re still a threat. And meanwhile, you’ve blown through a thousand rounds of ammo.
Artillery is an area denial weapon.
You can only deny area when people aren’t willing to charge into it. Zombies aren’t doing massed charges though; each and every zombie is Leroy Jenkins, acting entirely independently, and with zero foresight.
IMO, the most effective method weapon would be a steam roller, as long as all the mechanical parts and the operator cockpit were completely covered so that a zombie couldn’t damage anything. Like, say, some of the mine removal vehicles. Moving around is going to attract the zombies, and then running them over would eliminate them.
Conventional weapons can reduce hoards to manageable amount. And a zombie dragging itself across the ground is much easier to deal with.
If I saw thousands of zombies, a machine gun is what I want. Aim head at the average head height, and make the barrels smoke. It’s not suppressing fire, it’s crowd management.
Remember you can spike a zombie on the ground easier than when they are standing. Immobilise, THEN neutralise.
Zombies can and do drag themselves, or even worm their way across fields. Until the brain is destroyed, they’re a threat.
Head shots are much easier when zombies are moving slower. I suspect a platoon with 8 guys shooting an M2 and the rest with scoped rifles could easily protect an encampment from thousands of zombies.
Not with thermite, it spreads flammable liquid everywhere. Look for “dragon” drone videos if you want. Zombies are unlikely to try to to jump over the burning fluid and if anything probably will spread it further and on themselves so eventually will burn. It’s probably one of thepre effective remote ways to deal with them in modern warfare. Especially since drones are bloody loud so zombies are more likely to chase the drones instead of operators who can be entirely hidden.
Imma get real pedantic here - “thermite” is just a composition, like C4, TNT, or PETN. Those drones show just one of many specific delivery methods, spraying or dropping pre-ignited thermite as they moves To say that “[thermite] sprays flammable liquid everywhere” isn’t correct, but burning thermite can be spread like those drones do.
I think tanks would be their best bet - mounted machine guns and can carry lots of ammo, and if they’re surrounded and about to be overrrun then they can just drive away - through the zombies. It’s a tank, it has torque up the wazoo.
Actually, no, barbed wire would be their best bet - the blade doesn’t have to move if the zombies slice themselves apart on it.
Conventional infantry tactics don’t really work against zombies. For instance, suppressing fire; you can’t suppress zombies, because they don’t care if they get shot, and it only matters if they get shot in the head. You can’t inflict any amount of damage that’s going to force a retreat. Artillery and bombs are only going to effect them if they’re in the direct blast zone; shrapnel still has to penetrate the brain.
Your best bets are likely going to be napalm and flame throwers. I’m not sure how many napalm bombs the US military has, but I’m pretty sure that they don’t have tons of flamethrowers.
Conventional infantry tactics from 1945 certainly don’t work. We haven’t fought like that in forever.
Modern infantry tactics would be “Sit inside my nice warm armoured vehicle while the gunner shreds everything with a 25mm autocannon.” And I think that would work just fine against zombies.
Also any competent military shouldn’t have the slightest difficulty getting headshots on a slow moving target that isn’t trying to evade or use cover.
You haven’t shot with people that were in the military, have you? :P
Out of curiosity, how do they shoot in your experience? I’ve never shot but have friends and family in the armed forces who’ve I’ve spoken about this to and I don’t doubt the military could win against a horde assuming they’re regular walking dead zombies and not left 4 dead ones. You don’t have to have perfect aim when you can unload at height level into a crowd.
Also, tanks.
I’m in the US military. The fact that qualifying on an M4 is 23 out of 40 tells you a lot. (Although my unit’s average is closer to 30ish)
Additionally, a very little amount of the military is combat arms roughly 15%. The other 85% supports the warfighter. I’m part of the 85%
This is why the US military is so logistically and maintenance heavy because we all support the 15%.
However shrapnel will cause a lot of damage and hopefully take out the brain with enough luck. The brain could still be alive without a body to support it.
Also depends on what kind of zombies we’re talking about. If it’s a zombie that still relies on oxygenated blood, then conventional tactics will still apply. However if the zombie only needs non-degraded muscles to keep moving, then it’ll take a while for tactics to change.
Most people in the military do a basic qualification that is pretty easy to pass (23/49 targets, at ranges from 25 to 300m); these aren’t head shots, these are just on the target. Once you’ve done that, and graduated from basic, depending on your specialty, you may rarely touch a rifle. Lots of former military people think that they’re good, just because they managed a single qualification, and that they know a lot about guns, but it’s often just fudd-lore. Spec ops guys and Marines tend to be more proficient overall, because they spend more time practicing. (TBH, a lot of the spec ops are very mediocre as far as competitive shooting goes, but they have a lot of other skills that are relevant to the military, and tend to refuse to give up.) Cops are often even worse; their qualifications are at short distances, with very lenient time standards.
Bear in mind that the kill-to-bullet ratio in Afghanistan was about 1:300,000; most shooting in the modern military is suppressive, rather than directed at a specific target.
Compare that to someone that’s a USPSA B class shooter, or someone that regularly shoots PCSL 2 gun matches; they will tend to outshoot a lot of retired military, because they tend to practice, and practice on a shot timer, a lot.
America: Overrun by zombies
Jerry Miculek’s house: Absolutely clear, they’ve learned to avoid his property line.
You’re wrong and you’re right.
I have a very direct knowledge of military marksmanship - much moreso than probably 90% of the people in this thread - but in all fairness my hands on knowledge is with the Canadian military, and I’d forgotten that since we’re talking about zombie movies, we are of course talking about US soldiers. So not really the same thing.
This makes my teeth itch. I realize that this is NCD but…
Without claiming outright magic damage to muscle and bone still matters. A bipedal creature absolutely requires certain muscles and bones to remain upright. If a zombie gets hit with a rifle round that blows out a 3" chunk of its spine then it can’t stand up. That kind of damage is easily done with a 30 caliber rifle round (7.76) let alone the venerable .50 caliber. Even the relatively small .223 / 5.56 that’s carried by standard infantry will remove muscle and break bones.
Your average grunt is going to figure out real quick where and how they need to shoot in order to slow or stop these things. If head shots aren’t possible and it takes too much ammo for body shots they’ll start aiming for the knees and ankles, because again that zombie can’t run / shamble at you if it has no feet or it’s ankle or knee has been blown into a hundred pieces.
So when Tommy Tactical or Isaac Infantry mag dumps 20 rounds of 5.56 into a zombie it may not be “dead” but it sure as shit has taken critical damage to its musculoskeletal system and will almost certainly not able to stand upright. Ol’ Mike the Mighty on the Ma Deuce will reduce a hundred zombies into a quivering pile in 60 seconds or less all by himself.
That zombie horde will be a lot less dangerous and easy to clean up once it’s crawling on the ground with all the speed of a toddler.
…We’re still talking about zombies, right? Animated corpses that have an overwhelming need to consume human flesh, and can only be killed with overwhelming brain damage? I’m pretty sure that’s the definition of magic right there. If you’re talking about something like the cordyceps fungi–which, to infect humans, would still need some kind of magical power–you still have a very, very finite limit on how long a ‘human’ will survive (about four weeks without food, give or take), so you should be able to just wait them out, rather than needing to proactively kill them.
Less dangerous, yes. Not not dangerous, depending on which version of zombies you’re talking about specifically.
Be non-credible, not wrong. Good post!
Artillery and bombs can shred/destroy the body, making it hard to move, if there is enough body left to move.
A .50 to the arm isn’t going to slow a zombie down, but the knee? Kinda hard to walk with one leg. 25mm chain gun is probably going to mist a few bodies.
Artillery is an area denial weapon. If you have a hoard a couple 105 shells are going to take apart rotten flesh with ease. Mortars are similar and more mobile.
Mine fields are effective as a way to immobilise and thin the herd.
Choke points work exceptionally well, and claymores can be rigged at head height.
Zombies can and do drag themselves, or even worm their way across fields. Until the brain is destroyed, they’re a threat.
Sure, but, again, unless you hit the head, they’re still a threat. And meanwhile, you’ve blown through a thousand rounds of ammo.
You can only deny area when people aren’t willing to charge into it. Zombies aren’t doing massed charges though; each and every zombie is Leroy Jenkins, acting entirely independently, and with zero foresight.
IMO, the most effective method weapon would be a steam roller, as long as all the mechanical parts and the operator cockpit were completely covered so that a zombie couldn’t damage anything. Like, say, some of the mine removal vehicles. Moving around is going to attract the zombies, and then running them over would eliminate them.
Conventional weapons can reduce hoards to manageable amount. And a zombie dragging itself across the ground is much easier to deal with.
If I saw thousands of zombies, a machine gun is what I want. Aim head at the average head height, and make the barrels smoke. It’s not suppressing fire, it’s crowd management.
Remember you can spike a zombie on the ground easier than when they are standing. Immobilise, THEN neutralise.
The most effective weapon would be a steam roller equipped with a machine gun that fires lightsabers.
Head shots are much easier when zombies are moving slower. I suspect a platoon with 8 guys shooting an M2 and the rest with scoped rifles could easily protect an encampment from thousands of zombies.
Give Marvin Heeymeyer a Case asphalt compactor, a welder, and some steel. We’ll have this problem licked before dinner.
/unjerk so googling around slows that the US military stopped using them in the 1970s. TIL.
/rejerk
Say that three times fast and a SIG sales rep appears behind you.
I thought that they still used them for destroying some munitions? Like, those burn pits in Iraq that caused so many cases of cancer? IDK.
You can quite legally buy them in the US though. They’re pricey, but, hey, you never know, right?
And you’re certainly free to fabricate one!*
* Except in California, because California.
I’m pretty sure they count as destructive devices, but I’d be lying if I said child me didn’t have a lot of fun with redneck napalm.
Ukrainian thermite drones would like to have a word
You’d still need to hit each zombie individually though.
Not with thermite, it spreads flammable liquid everywhere. Look for “dragon” drone videos if you want. Zombies are unlikely to try to to jump over the burning fluid and if anything probably will spread it further and on themselves so eventually will burn. It’s probably one of thepre effective remote ways to deal with them in modern warfare. Especially since drones are bloody loud so zombies are more likely to chase the drones instead of operators who can be entirely hidden.
Imma get real pedantic here - “thermite” is just a composition, like C4, TNT, or PETN. Those drones show just one of many specific delivery methods, spraying or dropping pre-ignited thermite as they moves To say that “[thermite] sprays flammable liquid everywhere” isn’t correct, but burning thermite can be spread like those drones do.
Ah thank you for the clarification, I assumed it would be more flamethrower based based on the videos I seen, but never looked at it.
I think tanks would be their best bet - mounted machine guns and can carry lots of ammo, and if they’re surrounded and about to be overrrun then they can just drive away - through the zombies. It’s a tank, it has torque up the wazoo.
Actually, no, barbed wire would be their best bet - the blade doesn’t have to move if the zombies slice themselves apart on it.
In practice, just use both!
A tank that chews through 5 gallons per mile? Who’s going to be sitting in the tanker truck to do refils?