Michael's Dispatches

Sad, i also had read that wounded soldiers are "stripped" of all weapons and ammo, knives ect prior to being loaded (I understand removing big bulky items that will hinder exam and treatment) but searching pockets for spare ammo and threats from lawyers about violating the convention if you have a bayonette or spare mag in a cargo pocket.

any truth to that?

Just a point of recognition, the Army is the only service that performs MEDEVAC. The other services perform CASEVEC, which means there is possibly no actual medic on board the aircraft. The Air Force performs Combat Search and Rescue which by doctrine can necessitate a 90 minute window prior to launch. Adding weapons to a MEDEVAC aircraft does add weight and another crewmember which means one less patient that could be carried on that aircraft. As a MEDEVAC pilot I do feel something needs to be done but I can't sit here and say that putting a gun on the side of the aircraft will solve the issue. Those door guns will become useless once the bird is on the ground and the medic is out of the aircraft. Also the newest versions of medical evacuation aircraft do not even have the hard points to mount the guns. Believe me I feel for every man, women and yes even child that I have carried in the back of my aircraft and I wish I had the answer. Hopefully the attention that Mr. Yon has brought to the situation will bring a positive change.

You mean Baghdad Bob or Tariq Aziz?

[quote name="gerald farrell"]Ther was no mention of the fact Air Force & Marines go armed without Red Cross markings. Was this an oversight or on purpose.[/quote]

Amen to that.

The problem with the news media, especially TV is that they're composed of really stupid people and they go out of their way to miss the point. The lead with the "Golden Hour" comment is a near-miss too. That is a statistical term much-hated by emergency trauma personnel because it implies that, as long as you get touchdown within in hour, then you're good. Arterial bleeding won't last for a "golden hour." The main emphasis needed to have been on time wasted - any amount of time wasted - waiting for an unnecessary "escort." The non-mention Pedro, sitting on the same tarmac, was a major miss.

On the bright side, they are helping to get the ball rolling, however inefficiently.

Why is the Army so often so institutionally stupid when there are so many outstanding soldiers? I don't get it.

Something that network will never do. They'll keep quoting some Geneva Convention BS, then if they arm the birds, their left wing base will protest about how inhumane we are and then castigate our military like they have since Vietnam. Same old same old. Thanks again Michael for keeping this going!

[quote name="George N"]Whenever we have an ambulance response we send an engine or two to guard the approaches to our scene and furnish more assistance.[/quote]
How do you do that with a forest fire raging at the other end of town? Gotta love civilians sitting in armchairs!

[quote name="Captain once/EMT"]They don't call it the "golden hour" for nothing.

In fact, they do call it the golden hour for nothing. "Golden Hour" is a statistical term created initially by insurance companies and jumped upon by emergency service equipment vendors. The Army has unfortunately adopted it as a meaningless performance standard which, as proven by this particular case, costs lives. Each trauma is unique. An adequate response to mild cerebral edema is completely different from an adequate response time to multiple amputation. As Rapidly As Possible needs to be the standard. "Golden Hour" needs to be banned as a term of obfuscation.

Obviously meant to say M240, just too stupid to breath, as were all the Generals who reviewed it! I'm a retired Air Force guy and I know more about the Army's weapons than the Army's REMFs in the Pentagon--now THAT is sad!

[quote name="c. banks"]Let's see--if the added weight of the additional crew is a problem, reducing the lifting capacity of the aircraft, and there are as many as four wounded waiting, why can't the extra crewmen jump out after landing and let the wounded replace them? They can be picked up at leisure by another helicopter.

Problem is, the Army doesn't want to admit it's made a bad choice, so it's sticking with a failed policy.[/quote]

C. banks,
The Brass cant think that far out of the box...

You really don't understand the role of the President/C-in-C. Dou reaslly thibk he is aware of all decision making in government? Just like the war itself, he listens to his military's advice.

If the President were aware of this important detail - he would change things. As an attorney, he will want to review the law on this subject. The President cannot be aware of everything going on in his administration - the span of control is too great.

But, his generals should know that the only satisfactory percent of success is 100%. To me, it is ridiculous that there is no uniformity amongst the Services. That is why the JCS letter is so disappointing; there is zero concern that there is a difference amongst the Services, much less fellow NATO allies. The Army is saying, we are in--charge here and this is our mission. We will call upon other Service or country assets when we think we need them!

The fact is that the Chairman, JCS and the Commander,ISAF should be concerned that there is no uniformity among the Services. The Air Force SOP is what we should be following. Because their underlying mission is pilot SAR, they are prepared to fight their way in and fight their way out to retrieve a downed air crew. This philosophy reduces the number of aircraft going on a mission. I assume that the Air Force flies in pairs; but there are no other rotary wing aircraft required.That saves money! Doesn't any of this appeal to the brass?

The other aspect is what does it mean to be on strip alert. Obvious runs to their aircraft the moment they get fragged. With todays electronics, they can punch in the coordinates as they take off. They appear to figure-out their flight path on the run. Well, after a short time, they know their AO

Could it be that the Army's problem be that it is doctors and JAG officers who have made this inappropriate decision? Certainly, this protocol isn't satisfactory to Army pilots.

[quote name="Ric Walters"]Maybe they should put the Red Crescent on our medevac birds???
Someone throw the BS flag on the General. If the AF Pedros and Marine medevacs can come in armed, so can the Army. Having spent time in an Army medevac unit in the 70's, with pilots who wouldn't fly into a hot LZ w/o an armed escort because they'd had their butts shot off in 'Nam, I think it's nothing short of dereliction of duty to leave things like they've been for decades. Arm 'em up, and let the medics kick some ass while saving lives.[/quote]

Ric,
That would make too much common sense.