Other Means Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 And please edit it with some respect for us tittians. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 It may well have been a VERY funny line from Team America (a hysterically funny movie BTW) but the reference should be considered inappropriate on this forum. sorry 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted December 22, 2007 Share Posted December 22, 2007 I just read 5 separate accounts on the air guard. Stryker hit by IED, explosions wounds and air guard drops wounded into vehicle. His immediate concern? Get back into the hatch to see if another threat is coming. 2nd example, multi-hour battle in mosul, heavy fighting, the stryker's 50 cal firing OVER the open air guard hatch with crew still fighting from that position. Sgt calls gunner a few choice names... 3rd example, convoy duty, sniper hits air guard, replaced immedaitely by another soldier to do spotting. 4th example a lessons learned type article, stressing the NEED to keep air guard out to keep from being fired upon by over-passes. 5th example, talking about ap round and slat cages, and the wounds to commander and air guard positions, and the need to place sandbags near the hatches and the request to put a flat bracket there. What does this all mean? Hard to say, Iraq is NOT conventional fighting. I don't know the answer, but it seems they do try to keep the position filled, Bradley or not. Will see if I can find anything more detailed... Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
76mm Posted December 23, 2007 Share Posted December 23, 2007 rune, Interesting examples, but I wonder if the emphasis on keeping airguards up would extend to movements into urban areas with intensive and sustained small arms fire rather than IEDs, ambushes, snipers, etc. I see the logic for doing so, but it seems like suicide... I think I read somewhere that in at least one of the Arab-Israeli wars, Israeli doctrine was that tank commanders would stay unbuttoned, period. The result was an astonishingly successful Israeli armored force...and 50% TC casaulties. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl Steiner Posted December 23, 2007 Share Posted December 23, 2007 My personal take on this. It seems pretty certain that US doctrine is for the air guard to be up at all times. However, isn't this the same for Humvee .50 cal gunners? With Humvees we have the option to man the .50 cal or to have the gunner close the hatch. If we have the option to flout doctrine with a Humvee, why not also a Stryker? If the air guard goes below maybe that will mean a slight increase in the chance that an RPG gunner may get off a shot at the Stryker whereas before he would've been suppressed by the air guard, but so what? Isn't playing around with doctrine part of the fun of a wargame? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Card Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 But to get back to the original question of the thread... Will somebody finally clarify air guard? The original post was made 9 days ago, and there's been no official response, so at this point I think it's safe to assume that... No. No one is going to clarify air guard. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hev Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 Look this is idiotic......i dont care what the docktrine says, if your taking even sparodic fire you ARE going to put your head inside the vehicle. Please, does any one realy think that if lead was pinging off the hull that occupants would expose thier heads through the hatch? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 So a sniper hits a crew member and another immediately go to the hatch means what? An IED goes off wounding the soldier, and he immediately goes back to the hatch. I think they are worried about being blind-sided more then anything. However, this is in insurgent warfare. Will try to find out more after the holidays, what the procedure is. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 Originally posted by Hev: Look this is idiotic......i dont care what the docktrine says, if your taking even sparodic fire you ARE going to put your head inside the vehicle. Please, does any one realy think that if lead was pinging off the hull that occupants would expose thier heads through the hatch? They're called soldiers. These aren't guys just going out for a Sunday drive. Guys know that they can be killed, they also know that if they don't do their job that EVERYONE can be killed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hev Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 LOL, so that means because they are soldiers they WANT to die? And once again, if the airgaurd is that vital why hasnt the bradly got an active gaurd. The Airgaurd is a tactical option, and like all options sometimes it will be usefull and sometimes less than so! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 I would assume the air guard is fairly happy to poke their heads out of a hatch. The alternative being that they get out to protect the vehicle. Though I admit that having the ability to button the little blighters up wouldn't be a bad thing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molotov_billy Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 Originally posted by Hev: LOL, so that means because they are soldiers they WANT to die? A large component of typical infantry training is to develop the habit of following orders without question or hesitation, even orders that aren't immediately understandable to the person executing them. The end effect is that when in wartime, soldiers will carry out their orders even when potentially life threatening, because it was instilled in them over and over and over that they do so as an automatic reaction. It's the cornerstone of all modern armies, absolutely vital in keeping a group of men from becoming a disorganized mob of individual wants, needs, and fears. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelmia Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 Heh. Tanks can see better with the commander opened up. He can still close the hatch. So why not have the option to button up the air guard? It's obviously just a bug that you can't. I imagine they'll get around to fixing it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Card Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 All this rousing talk about soldiers willingly placing themselves in harm's way, better to protect their comrades-in-arms, reminds me of a line from a movie. Drill Sergeant: "What's your military mission, Gump?!" Gump: "To do whatever you tell me to do, Drill Sergeant!" Drill Sergeant: "You're a goddamned genius, Gump!" The point being that when I tell a Stryker to button up, I'm not interested in anyone's noble willingness to sacrifice themselves - I'm interested in seeing those idiots close the hatches and keep their heads in the damned vehicle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl Steiner Posted December 24, 2007 Share Posted December 24, 2007 Even if they never close the hatch, surely they should duck below hatch level for a time when under heavy fire to simulate suppression? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.