Disabled tank crew extraction on the battlefield

[JustSomeGuy]

On other forum, one of the soviet-design school proponents suggested that it is pointless to focus everything on crew survivability as on Abrams, for "in the cold war battles, crew would stand no chance outside of their tank anyway."

 

Other people have replied with anecdotal experience from ODS and OIF, noting how disabled tank or other vehicle crews were extracted either by other tanks, or by helicopters using the self-extraction nylon straps and so forth.

 

My question is: was there any SOP concerning the rescue of a disabled Abrams crew in the cold-war era?

And do/did Abrams crews possess nylon straps with which they could attach themselves on another tank or helicopter, or would they rid "just holding on"?

[Ssnake]

"Nylon straps"?

[Mirzayev]

9 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

"Nylon straps"?

 

http://www.army.mil/article/103703/Whatever_it_takes__1st_CAB_aviators_conduct_self_extraction_training/

 

http://www.army.mil/article/93679/

 

Pilots have used them in the past to conduct rescues of other downed pilots. Obviously, this is not the primary method of rescue.

 

Also, I know the tanker NOMEX uniforms do have nylon straps built into them, although they are mainly meant to assist in pulling a disabled crewman out of the tank. 

 

Edited April 30, 2016 by Mirzayev

[Ssnake]

Well, that's an (attack/scout) helicopter-specific method when seats are in short supply. I'm not sure how you think that would apply to land vehicles?

 

There certainly are no textile loops on the turret or hull exteriors by which to transport casualties.

But you have the vehicle interior, or stowage baskets.

[JustSomeGuy]

Well, reading about the 1991 Abrams and Bradley loses, often reoccuring theme is that the crews of the disabled AFVs were picked up by another Abrams which stopped nearby. I have slightly hard time imagining three more people fitting inside Abrams'es turret, so I suppose they attached themselves to the turret basket or such.

 

Plus, I believe I've read somewhere that in the late 80s/early 90s, had an Abrams got shot-up in the enemy territory and the crew got out, they would be rescued by Kiowa/Cobra/Apache using the same self-extraction as the aircrews?

[Ssnake]

46 minutes ago, JustSomeGuy said:

Well, reading about the 1991 Abrams and Bradley loses, often reoccuring theme is that the crews of the disabled AFVs were picked up by another Abrams which stopped nearby. I have slightly hard time imagining three more people fitting inside Abrams'es turret, so I suppose they attached themselves to the turret basket or such.

 

Plus, I believe I've read somewhere that in the late 80s/early 90s, had an Abrams got shot-up in the enemy territory and the crew got out, they would be rescued by Kiowa/Cobra/Apache using the same self-extraction as the aircrews?

 

a) Well, yeah - you "attach" yourself by climbing into the turret basket, and holding on 'till the next stop.

b) May well be, but again, this would be a helicopter-specific method. HOW you transport others depends on the transport vehicle, not on the people who get transported.

[Lumituisku]

Is it physically possible to fit more than just the crew inside tanks, and to maintain it operational. Even 1 additional person?  lets say that person is extremely thin / small.  Im pretty sure that on eastern tanks.. especially old ones. Interiors are really cramped, and after crew and additional adult man just could not be fitted in. A very small child.. perhaps. But I see it very unlikely. What is the truth? Have you ever heard of such happening, even during peace time? 

[Major duck]

When i was in the the artillery back in the late 80ises and early 90ies it was standard practice to have the FO from both the Heavy mortars and the arty to sit in the turret basket at the same time so the Squadron CO just had to stick his head out and tell us where he wanted us to call arty and mortars.

 

and in an emergency there could have been a whole crew up there unprotected off course but that is the nature of the game.

 

So i fail to see why we are still talking about this when evacuating people you are not fully operational you detach another unit so they can fight again.

 

Think about how you yourself would feel to be left on the battlefield.

 

Also think about how much the US do to save pilots that have been shot down that's exactly the same and the echelon is usually right behind the front troops so the evacuation wouldn't be for miles/km and miles/km.

 

The handle on the back of the "tank" suit is for getting people out of the vehicle not for strapping them on to the vehicle.

 

Best regards

MD

 

 

 

 

 

[Ssnake]

1 hour ago, Lumituisku said:

Is it physically possible to fit more than just the crew inside tanks, and to maintain it operational.

"Possible" in some tanks, but certainly neither in a safe way nor at the same effectiveness.

 

In the Leopards, one additional person might fit in the loader's place while you could theoretically still fire and load the gun (three, if you lock the gun and turret)

The M1 turret has a bit more internal space, and then there are of course "clown car experiments" where you might try fitting as many as possible without them suffocating but that's more of a circus stunt as the name implies.

In most other AFVs there just isn't the room, particularly in IFV turrets. But then again IFVs have a troop compartment where you can at least put one guy on the floor, or across the laps of three guys sitting there.

 

But the question is somewhat detached from reality. EITHER you fight, or you evacuate. It might be possible to strap someone on the wing of an Apache and fire the missile from the other wing, but would you actually do it? Most certainly not.

[MAJ_Fubar]

On 4/30/2016 at 9:34 AM, JustSomeGuy said:

My question is: was there any SOP concerning the rescue of a disabled Abrams crew in the cold-war era?
 

The maxim from "The Beast" holds sway here: "Out of commission, become a pillbox; out of ammo, become a bunker; out of time, become a hero."  As one of those cold-war era US tankers, it was assumed that if we were knocked out, we would quickly find ourselves behind enemy lines and would be expected to "E & E" west on our own.  With little chance of rescue versus the red horde (in our minds at least, history would prove otherwise), it all seemed kinda bleak at times...but it was nice to pretend we stood a chance in those situations, and the training was fun.  

[Mirzayev]

9 hours ago, Lumituisku said:

Is it physically possible to fit more than just the crew inside tanks, and to maintain it operational. Even 1 additional person?  lets say that person is extremely thin / small. 

 

Honestly, in regard to the M1A2, I don't see that as possible. You *might* be able to fit one additional person in the turret, but they would have to sit on the TC's lap. Even then, you are degrading the effectiveness of the tank crew, as the TC could not effectively maintain situational awareness and scan with the CITV. This is of course assuming that the command in question is fairly lenient on the uniform standard and does not require tankers to wear their IOTVs in tanks. 

[Marko]

12 hours ago, MAJ_Fubar said:

7 hours ago, Mirzayev said:

 

Honestly, in regard to the M1A2, I don't see that as possible. You *might* be able to fit one additional person in the turret, but they would have to sit on the TC's lap. Even then, you are degrading the effectiveness of the tank crew, as the TC could not effectively maintain situational awareness and scan with the CITV. This is of course assuming that the command in question is fairly lenient on the uniform standard and does not require tankers to wear their IOTVs in tanks. 

That's what I like about the merkava design, the rear escape door and ability in a emergency to evacuate wounded or stranded soldiers

12 hours ago, MAJ_Fubar said:

The maxim from "The Beast" holds sway here: "Out of commission, become a pillbox; out of ammo, become a bunker; out of time, become a hero."  As one of those cold-war era US tankers, it was assumed that if we were knocked out, we would quickly find ourselves behind enemy lines and would be expected to "E & E" west on our own.  With little chance of rescue versus the red horde (in our minds at least, history would prove otherwise), it all seemed kinda bleak at times...but it was nice to pretend we stood a chance in those situations, and the training was fun.  

I have yet to correspond/talk to a cold war warrior  who believes one, he would have survived initial enemy contact. and two A soviet full scale attack could have been held for longer Then a few days.

[Grenny]

How did Shakespeare let Henry the V speak out: "The fewer men, the greater the share of honor..." ;-)

[Marko]

36 minutes ago, Grenny said:

How did Shakespeare let Henry the V speak out: "The fewer men, the greater the share of honor..." ;-)

 

watched an interview once with a retired very senior soviet general.

He stated the red army had a plans made for an attack on the west. though they never intended to strike first,( Yer right)

There plan was to advance 100km a day.

Edited May 3, 2016 by Marko

[Froggy]

During the Thunder Run in Bagdad, 2003, 2 members of the disabled M1 "Cojone, Eh?" jumped in an other M1 taking the place of the loader, relocated in a PC.

While they were 5 in the tank, the gun tube hit a bridge and the tank lose turret drive hydrolic fluid. Thus it only fought a few minutes with 4 members in turret, using only coax to engage iraqis.