Preventing Combat Vehicle Injuries

An observer in the crew hatch of this M 1 13 w a skilled when the vehicle overturned on a washed-out tank trail. The cargo in the carrier shifted as the vehicle overturned, pinning the soldier and ultimately suffocating him. An Accident Report: Cargo Crushes Soldier as M I 13 Flips The crew of an M113 was sent on a night scout mission to locate “enemy” positions. The crew consisted of the platoon sergeant, tank commander, driver and observer. The driver and the TC were in their positions; the platoon sergeant and observer were both in the crew hatch. There was minimal natural illumination and the dtivtr was operating with no lights. The vehicle was being operated on an improved tank trail. As the driver approached a dry wash or creek bed, he ran off a 5- to 6-foot vertical drop where the trail had been washed away by rains. The APC rolled to an inverted position. The APC as kept from lying flat on the ground by the MILES transponder support pole which dug into the sand of the dry washout. The driver was temporarily trapped at his position by his Mission Oriented Protective Posture (MOPP) boots. He freed himself but could not exit through the driver’s hatch, so he walked through the vehicle and left through the rear door. The TC was held by an M60 machinegun which hit the ground first and which - along with loose objects from inside the APC - blocked his way out of the track. The platoon sergeant, who was thrown from the crew hatch, moved the M60 gun so the TC could exit. The observer was lying with his head and shoulders outside the cargo hatch and the rest of his body inside the APC. Unsecured cargo in the body of the carrier fell on top of the observer and became lodged against his chest. This cargo pinned the observer to the roof of the compartment and caused him to suffocate. Today’s armored vehicles provide ingenious solutions to the changing needs of the battlefield. From tracked running gear designed for quiet, highspeed travel, to air filtration systems, modern armor has been devised to achieve the highest possible degree of protection against an enemy in battle. Soldiers fight more effectively and are better protected. Technology, however, does not protect soldiers against their own mistakes, and these can result in serious or fatal non-combat injuries. In fiscal year 1984, 17 soldiers died in tracked vehicle accidents. In addition, there were 381 non-fatal injuries. The cost of combat vehicle or tracked vehicle injuries was $2,222,090: nonfatal injuries accounted for $1.4 million of this and fatal injuries cost the Army $799,000. However, these are only the direct costs of the injuries. Fatal accidents are investigated and ftom these investigations come preventive measures to ensure that the same injuries don’t happen again. But non-fatal injuries are too often considered “the cost of getting the job done.” This cost can be quite a drain on supervisors, commanders, and the Army, and far exceeds the computed lost time of the injured or deceased soldier. Someone has to fill. the soldier’s position, often leaving another position unfilled. Add to this the cost of men and equipment to evacuate the injured soldier, hospital personnel and equipment to treat the injury, and personnel to attend to the administrative details. Every injury saps a commander’s ability to do his job. Injuries are both time consuming and expensive. Monotonous Repetition Examining a group of accident reports, there is a monotonous repetition: 0 A soldier reaches for a fallen crowbar and catches his finger between the moving turret and the hull wall. 0 A hatch cover vibrates loose, striking a soldier on the hand (or head, etc.) 0 An ammo round slips from the rack, injuring a soldier’s hand. 0 A gun is elevated, crushing the gunner’s hand. 0 A tank hits a ditch and the TC’s head strikes the turret, causing a concussion.

march-aprill985

A tank hits bump, knocking the soldier in the gunner’s station unconscious. 0 A hatch is not secured, and hits a soldier’s head (or hand, or finger, etc.) 0 A tank hits a depression, throwing a soldier against an inside wall and frac-turing his pelvis. Head and neck injuries are the most prevalent in tracked vehicles, according to accident reports. About 36 per cent of all injuries reported in M 84 were head and neck injuries, a majority of these suffered by drivers or passengers in M113sor other carriers. Wearing the CVC helmet or a steel pot would greatly reduce head and neck injuries. Injuries to other parts of the body - the trunk, arms, and legs - were distributed about equally among the rest of the accidents reported. Most trunk injuries occurred in the carriers while leg injuries were about equally prevalent in the M60 tank and the carriers. The victims of most trunk, arm, and leg injuries were passengers. The statistics show a soldier’s chance of being injured depended upon his job or what he was doing at the time. Being a passenger seems to be more risky: the passengers in tracked vehicles received the majority of the injuries. Second in frequency of injury were drivers, then supervisors. More injuries occurred in the 113s and other carriers than in other tracked vehicles, about 53 per cent. But carriers, of course, have a great deal of exposure and carry passengers. Injuries in the M60 were the second most frequent, accounting for 18 percent of the total. Emphasizing Safety Soldiers can do a lot to protect themselves and reduce the number of vehicle injuries. 0 Communicate. Every crew member should know what is being done and when. He should be in his proper location inside the vehicle before it moves. Passengers should be well briefed and vehicle commanders need to ensure that passengers know and observe all safety precautions. 0 Use restraint systems. When restraint systems are installed, they should be used. These systems will keep crew and passengers from being thrown around inside the vehicle when traversing rough terrain. Being secure-Scratched lenses on this night-vision device, incorrect operating procedures, improper focusing, and inadequate natural illumination led to the death of an Ml73 driver in a collision with M60 tank. An Accident Reoort: MI 13 Colhdes With M60, Kills Driver The, convoy commander was in the lead M113A2 as the unit moved in a night tactical road march to occupy an assembly area. Vehicles were using blackout drive, and at the time of the road march, there was no natural illumination. The convoy commander had halted the convoy when his driver ran off the tank trail because the driver couldn’t see. The driver of the lead MI13 was wearing his night vision goggles (NVG) attached to his combat vehicle crewman (CVC) helmet. The observer was wearing a steel helmet and no NVG; the TC was wearing a CVC without NVG; and the convoy commander was wearing a CVC with NVG not attached - he was using the NVG intermittently. At about 8:15 p.m., the convoy commander halted the column to check a landmark and confirm his location. He thought he had passed the crossing trail so he directed his MI13 driver to turn around and go back down the column. The column was directed to hold in place. The accident vehicle was traveling in the opposite direction of the column. The third vehicle in the column, an M60, was stopped and had the main gun tube forward and to the left of the tank’s front fender with the muzzle end of the gun elevated about 6-lh feet above the ground. The M60 tank driver told his TC that the MI13 was on a collision course with them and was going to run into the tank’s main gun tube. The M60 TC tried to move the turret with the TC’s override; however, because of a maintenance deficiency, the M60’s turret power was off. The TC tried to turn the turret power on, but the MI13 had collided with the main gun tube. As the MI13 attempted to pass the M60, the observer in the MI13 cargo hatch and the TC both yelled, “Watch out for the gun tube!” The muzzle end of the main gun tube hit the MI13 driver’s center vision block, then struck the driver in the jaw and along the left side of his face and neck. The tank’s gun tube passed across the top of the MI13 and struck the TC in his abdominal area, pinning him in the TC hatch. The driver of the APC sustained fatal injuries. The TC sustained major injuries to his abdominal area. ly belted in is a routine precaution that many soldiers seem to ignore. 0 Secure hatches. Make sure all hatches are securely in place. Hatches that close unexpectedly continue to cause injuries. Although a technical bulletin (TB 43-0001-39) was issued in April, 1979, requiring installation of a positive safety latch on all MI13-series vehicles, these latches have not been march-aprill985 21 installed on all vehicles, they are nor always being used on vehicles that have them,and in some cases, the latches are broken and have not been repaired. Secure hatches would prevent many injuries. 0 Reduce speed. Drivers could save a lot of teeth and broken noses by reducing their speed. Speed can make hitting bumps and depressions dangerous. Use the TC as another set of eyes to help spot hazards. 0 Think safety. Unguarded areas such as the turret and breech block snatch the unwary. A little thought can keep hands and feet out of these areas and free from injury during sudden movement. 0 Follow a load plan. Securing objects inside the vehicle can keep a soldier from being hit by a flying object. Chart illustrates the distribution of bat vehicle accidents in FY 84. Head.-- 36% injuries suffered by soldiers invoked in comAn Accident Report: Mechanic Pinned When M88 Transmission Malfunctions The salvage 5-ton dump truck had six wheels to be removed and was parked at the installation’s cannibalization point. The driver and mechanic assigned to remove the wheels obtained a dispatch for the unit’s M88A1 medium recovery vehicle to do the job. When the soldiers arrived at the cannibalization point with the M88A1, the mechanic dismounted and ground-guided the M88AI to the 5-ton truck. After stopping the M88A1, the soldiers prepared it for lifting. When the driver raised the boom, the mechanic climbed onto the bumper of the 5-ton dump truck to grab hold of the snatch block to keep it from swinging and to apply pressure on it to ensure the cables did not tangle while the block was being lowered. The driver saw the M88AI was parked too close to the truck to make a proper lift. He told the mechanic, who was standing on the bumper of the truck, that he was going to move the M88AI back a few feet. The driver looked down at the shifting lever, placed the lever in reverse, and the vehicle pitched forward. He looked up and saw the mechanic pinned between the front blade of the M88AI and the front A ground guide attempting to position this M88 recovery vehicle in a salvage oepration was crushed between the M88 blade and the truck at left when the M88 shift lever malfunctioned and the vehicle moved in the wrong direction. bumper of the truck. The vehicles were joined and the M88 was still moving forward. The driver stopped the vehicle’s forward movement by jerking the shift lever back to first gear, then slamming the shift lever into reverse. The mechanic was crushed during the accident sequence. His body was attached by his belt to the right front tow pintle of the 5-ton dump truck. After the vehicle started moving backwards, the driver had to stop it by shutting off the engine using the emergency shutoff switch. The M88AI was still in reverse gear. It had traveled 98 feet before halting atop two scrap W o n vehicle bodies. 22 march-aprill985

A soldier sleeping at night in the deep shadow of a tree was crushed by an M60 tank and another was seriobsly injured. They had not expected tracked vehicles in the area. An Accident Report: Moving at Night, M60 Crushes Two The Chupurrulguided missile carrier was in position and the squad was placed on battle station alert. They were maintaining both a command post and an observation post (OP) which was approximately 150 meters from the carrier. Two soldiers were assigned to man the OP. One soldier at the OP was required to remain awake at all times in accordance with the platoon leader’s orders and standing operating procedures. The soldiers decided to rotate the duty hourly. Four times the squad leader physically checked the OP, and during a check at 2400 he issued the new challenge and password. At 0100, the two soldiers were under a tree, one lying down asleep in his sleeping bag and the other on duty, sitting against a tree with his legs in his sleeping bag. Neither soldier expected track movement through their area. At about 0115, nine M60Al tanks began to move in column formation up the tank trail. Part way up the trail, one tank had a partial loss of steering and abnormal instrument gauge readings and pulled off to the right. The company commander, who was in the disabled tank, directed one of the M60s off the road and into the trees for concealment. The M60 tank proceeded to find suitable cover under a tree whose shadow would assist in breaking up the pattern of the tank. The tank was moving at about 3 miles per hour toward the tree. The soldier in the OP who was on duty was dozing and did not see nor hear the tank coming toward the tree until it was 5 feet from him. The soldier started to scream and tried to move out of the tank’s path, but was unsuccessful. The left track of the M60A1 ran over his lower legs. The tank continued forward and crushed the sleeping soldier. JUNE GREER is a writer for COUNTERMEASURE. a publication on ground safety produced at the U. S. Army Safety Center, Fort Rucker. AL. With a bachelor’s degree in English and journalism from Troy State University, Troy AL., she has previously written for local.area newspapers and was a writer-editor at the Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory for 5 years.

march-aprill985 23