Military use of Gators outside fortified bases

[seamus]

Colin, armies have to adapt to the threat at hand. When I was in, the threat was a massive Soviet invasion of Europe. That's what we trained to deal with. Our training had no focus whatsoever on counter insurgency operations, EIDs or anything like that. I don't expect troops today train to deal with 3rd Shock Army rolling through the Fulda gap. If the largest single threat to soldiers deployed today comes from roadside EIDS, then why the %&#*%& are they driving around in unarmoured, open topped lawn tractors that do not even have a bloody roll cage????

To tell the truth, it could carry more water than a quad. Quads are used by many forces outside the wire, but don't have the same capacity to carry suplies. Unless you hall a trailer but then your limiting the mobility which brings us back to why the gator's are being used in the first place.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Funny how the comments telling those who don't have any background to STFU are coming from guys with time in theatre, while comments questioning tactics come from those with little or no experience... Just sayin'...  :

Again, as a couple of posters have stated - no one writing here knows anything about this particular incident, let alone details of the force protection measures involved, the nature of the specific terrain, the perceived threat, the type of IED (if it was indeed an IED), the precise nature of the task the vehicle was performing, the weather... nothing.  The guys that have BTDT know the drill - it's too bad the lesson hasn't been absorbed by the media and by some posting here.

 

[Bob Terwilliger]

Well, Teddy, it seems the Gator has been withdrawn to secure areas, so I guess I was right. You can spin it any way you want, but it does not take a tour there to understand that lawn tractors have no place in harms way. The real decision makers made that call.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Sure Bob, you were right...

or

As MJP pointed out, it is a politically-motivated decision based on press-inspired hyperventilating...

or

It's a decision taken by the chain of command to mitigate risk until the true facts of the attack are known...

Take your pick.  I don't know and neither do you.

 

[muskrat89]

OK, this is silly.

Speculating and back-seat driving ends in this thread now. If people want to do that, they can go to www.Imanarmchairexpert.com or www.letsguesswhathappened.com

Any more tit-for-tat and the thread gets locked down.

It's friggin presumptious beyond all comprehension to second guess what people who are there are saying.

Army.ca Staff

 

[GAP]

Basically, I find this thread exactly as TR described it, and I personally think it has come to its' righteous expiration date....there really is not anything more to add, just more idle speculation, which is doing nobody any favors.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Just noticed this was already fully discussed at this topic, but I'll leave it up:
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/63484/post-581545.html#msg581545

A post by Bruce Rolston at Flit:

About the M-Gator tragedy
http://www.snappingturtle.net/flit/archives/2007_06_22.html#006209

One point worth making about the tragic loss of 3 CF personnel in Afghanistan this week, not yet made by those opposed to the media coverage of it:

The M-Gator, used by the Canadian, U.S. and other militaries, has a ground pressure when fully loaded of 8 psi. Human-foot ground pressure is 9-12 psi. So assuming the IED that destroyed the Gator was detonated by a pressure plate or other independent trigger, it likely would have been tripped by personnel walking from point A to B as well. And if it was command-detonated (ie, someone pressed a button to blow it up) it would also have been equally effective against three dismounted troops.

The general in charge has said the vehicle in question was used in part because of the narrowness of the local laneways, which would seem to rule out the use of any larger, better protected vehicle, regardless of their availability. So there may not have been a lot of good choices here, and given those ground pressure figures it at least seems unlikely the personnel would have been any safer walking that day.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Greymatters]

Mark, +1, totally invalidates the removal of Gators from patrols.

 

[kenneyb210]

O/T  sorry .. I am in Edmonton and would like to pay respect to fallen CF. Is there information as to which airport and flight time. I read about folks lining the overpasses between Trenton and Toronto and would like to do something  here. There is the city center Municipal aiport or the International outside of the city.  

John W

 

[regulator12]

so why then the last tour A coy 2vp none of the guys used gators outside the wire...and because i say i would protest does not mean i am in the wrong job. protesting to ride in that vehicle does not make me a pussy or a wimp. If you  where to never question what is asked of you and take a step back and say hey does this make sense do i have better assets on hand can this be done another way then that makes you a robot and not a thinking soldier. Not everything that higher up tells us to do is correct. Everyone on here always has to defend the decisions made by higher, you know sometimes mistakes are made....I am not a robot and can think for myself thank god i work in an organization that thinks the same way.

 

[daftandbarmy]

The man has a point! Atta boy Reg 12.

 

[cplcaldwell]

The 'Official' place to look is on dnd.ca kenneyb, look at the Media Advisories page.

There is nothing there yet.

Perhaps PPCLI has something coming, 1st Bn PPCLI.

 

[George Wallace]

Colin, armies have to adapt to the threat at hand. When I was in, the threat was a massive Soviet invasion of Europe. Thats what we trained to deal with. Our training had no focus whatsoever on counter insurgency operations, EIDs or anything like that. I don't expect troops today train to deal with 3rd Shock Army rolling through the Fulda gap. If the largest single threat to soldiers deployed today comes from roadside EIDS, then why the %&#*%& are they driving around in unarmoured, open topped lawn tractors that do not even have a bloody roll cage????

I'll have to call you on that.

We used a large number of unarmoured vehicles both in the Fighting and B Echelons.  We had 106 Recoiless Rifles and later TOW mounted on jeeps.  No Armour there.  We had absolutely no armour on any of the B Vehicles we used.  Recce was conducted in both Lynx and jeeps.  Airborne troops of various nations used many types of unarmoured 'mules' to transport their equipment on the battlefield.  None of those vehicles, jeeps through M113 Family would fare well in Afghanistan. 

IEDs are new.  Mines are not.  No one knew in the Cold War when they would run into a minefield or ambush with mines, booby traps and Claymore style mines.  Times have changed and many things are different, but not all that different.

 

[CrazyCanuck]

If it was detonated by a cellphone or other handheld device, I wouldn't think that either walking or Gator's would make much of a difference.

This is an assumption please correct me if I'm wrong, the Gator having no armour would have a lower psi then other vehicles, more armour = more psi, so it's a trade off.

 

[kenneyb210]

Thank you cplcaldwell.

John W. 

 

[George Wallace]

Boater

Please refer back to Reply #5

 

[KevinB]

MarkOttawa -- a very logical and key point - lost in a sea of kneejerking media hype.

 

[cplcaldwell]

Not everything that higher up tells us to do is correct.

Ummm, Actually it is. It's called a Lawful Command.

But I do have to agree with you, you are not a wimp if you say "I think that is too dangerous ..." when it does not interfere with the objective. You are allowed to say that, and the next guy up the food chain is allowed to

a) Say 'Tough snot, get on with it'. (Your decision at that point would be to do it or start practising the hatless dance.)
b) Say ' You know, Bloggins, good point, go get the old man's LAV... he won't mind.' (At which point you thank providence for a chance to do some baja-ing in kit you never signed for.)



Mr Wallace's point is correct, recce was done in Iltis, tarps off, windshields down, door chains stowed and a lot of the time with the crew commander sitting on top of the radio trays for a better vantage. Couldn't get closer to the 'bad guys' than Bde Recce. Why? those safety 'faux pas' were required in order to achieve the mission.

The question of armour and it's protection has to be balanced against speed and stealth, both equally as good methods of protection as armour. I think that's as applicable whether in the Fulda Gap or ferrying jerries between the FOB and the OP.

Heck, the Infantry doesn't call tanks (and other heavy track) 'bullet magnets' for nothing.

Once again, I think if we look at the task that was needed to be done, the intrep, the considerations of armour vs. speed vs. stealth the man on the ground was the man to make the decision.

Given this incident they'll revisit it, I'm pretty sure that does not represent back peddling or incompetence in the first instance (although the press will try to spin it that way) but rather an adaptation of an initially sound plan to changing circumstances.

I'm pretty sure the grown ups will make the right call, they usually do.

 

[1feral1]

so why then the last tour A coy 2vp none of the guys used gators outside the wire...and because i say i would protest does not mean i am in the wrong job. protesting to ride in that vehicle does not make me a pussy or a wimp. If you  where to never question what is asked of you and take a step back and say hey does this make sense do i have better assets on hand can this be done another way then that makes you a robot and not a thinking soldier. Not everything that higher up tells us to do is correct. Everyone on here always has to defend the decisions made by higher, you know sometimes mistakes are made....I am not a robot and can think for myself thank god i work in an organization that thinks the same way.

I would have got inot that gator without question. Read my post, I've used them many times in theatre with SAF, and IDF ( do you know what these terms even are?) going off in the distance, and no it was not a range. I am far from a robot, and as a TP SGT (PL WO), I look after 31 men daily and make many decisions at time well beyond my rank. As for you, you make your comments based on what? As i thought, your profile is EMPTY. So before you go questioning me, why not tell us who you are and what your experience is.

I don't question direct commands and orders. I act on them or delegate. As much as safety and force protection is paramount, necessary risks to perform your job have been assessed by others before hand. Would you protest when you came under fire, refusing to listen to your SECT COMD because you felt unsafe? Or would the EN shooting at you make you want to rethink your situation. When you are told to move you do, others lives depend on your QUICK actions, and if you continue to 'question' things you will fail as a team player. No individuals in the army. Individuals get people killed including themselves, so don't 'come the raw prawn' with me mate! Been there, done it, and have many faded t-shirts.


Wes

 

[devil39]

How about we leave the platforms and tactics to the tactical commanders.  None of us can ever second guess the decisions of a tactical commander. 

Only those who are present at the decision, or have previously articulated their concerns, and make their concerns apparent have the right to second guess.

Full stop.