Fireman Carry replaced by Casualty Drag

[meni0n]

As per CANLANGEN that came out this week, as of April 2010 the fireman carry is to be replaced by a 25m drag of a person weighting no less than 70kg by the tacvest. To be done on a grass surface.

 

[dangerboy]

Lets see how many of the "drag straps" on the back of the Tac Vest get ripped off.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Can someone provide Ref ?

 

[daftandbarmy]

75 kgs... so that equates to one soaking wet 16 year old in a tracksuit vs. an average wounded rifleman in full battle order (over 100kgs) right?

 

[Dean22]

As per CANLANGEN that came out this week, as of April 2010 the fireman carry is to be replaced by a 25m drag of a person weighting no less than 70kg by the tacvest. To be done on a grass surface.

I was actually looking forward to casualty carry as part of BFT.

This dragging a person has got to be one of the more stupid things I have heard especially since those straps on the back of the tac vest will not hold a person's weight.

 

[Bzzliteyr]

However, the chance of someone needing to drag someone in a firefight vs fireman carrying them is probably higher.

I did see a photo just the other day of Marine carrying another one on the latest OP in Afghanistan, so I guess it still happens!

 

[Fusaki]

I actually weighed myself once in full combat load: C9, 600rds 5.56 link, plates, water, helmet, ect.  At the time I weighed 150lbs bare-ass. Kitted up I rang in at 230.

However, the chance of someone needing to drag someone in a firefight vs fireman carrying them is probably higher.

I like the idea in principle.  I'm just not sure the weight is very realistic.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I was actually looking forward to casualty carry as part of BFT.

This dragging a person has got to be one of the more stupid things I have heard especially since those straps on the back of the tac vest will not hold a person's weight.

So you were looking forward to the possibility of a blow knee, or back strains, or having your buddy drop you on your head?

If you were in a combat situation and buddy had an abdominal wound and was 220 pounds loaded would you prefer dragging him comfortably to cover or would you sling his injured abdomen over your shoulder like Rambo and make yourself a larger more immobile target?

Have you tried dragging a person by a TACVEST to attest to the durability of it's back strap?

 

[Dean22]

So you were looking forward to the possibility of a blow knee, or back strains, or having your buddy drop you on your head?

If you were in a combat situation and buddy had an abdominal wound and was 220 pounds loaded would you prefer dragging him comfortably to cover or would you sling his injured abdomen over your shoulder like Rambo and make yourself a larger more immobile target?

Have you tried dragging a person by a TACVEST to attest to the durability of it's back strap?

Just pulled on my "TACVEST" a tiny bit now and some of the seams came undone and it's practically brand new (minus one owner) so I doubt it's "defunct".



As for actually carrying a person, now I can understand someone being screwed to have to carry me but for carrying someone else 220? No problem.


Now, look at it this way:



Your in some hot Middle Eastern country and you just dragged your injured buddy with a wound to cover. You pat yourself on the back for your accomplishment and for following your training of "dragging someone" and radio in for a 9-Liner.

"2C this is 2A sorry but we aren't really fighting insurgents anymore this is an actual war. You'll have to casualty carry to safe zone at GR842972 for medical pick up over"

"2A this is 2C(you) what is a casualty carry? over"


The practicality of being able to transport/carry your dying friend to safety is far greater then the need for the ability to pull him 5 meters into some cover which, any stinking monkey can do 70kg.


Let's hope no one has to rely on people to carry them when they are dying and the soldiers are too unfit to carry a person.

 

[Loachman]

You are doing exactly what you apologised for just a few days ago.

 

[captloadie]

In all honesty, I think we have to admit that the fireman's carry (which by the way, I don't think firemen do anymore) has caused more injuries than lives it has saved. Maybe doing like they do in a fireman's competition and dragging a dummy (or a partner) under the arms for a prescribed distance would be better. Because honestly, unless you are one of the bigger/fitter guys, you likely cant hoist a fully kitted out comrade onto your shoulder. If you are going to evacuate someone, you are going to drag them to cover. If you have to go a distance for casevac, you are going to create some kind of stretcher.
We used stretchers at the JSG as a trial, two man with 200lbs on it, over the length of a soccer field. The only down side was it was a killer on the wrists if the front guy dropped the stretcher before stopping.

 

[PMedMoe]

What's a "realistic" weight anyway?  With the fireman's carry, I only had to carry someone "close" to my own weight and believe me, I had a awful lot of bigger people carrying me.  :  Now I have to drag someone who weighs more than I do.  Neither scenario is realistic.  Figure the odds of me coming across a wounded person who only weighs so much and having to move them only a certain distance.  I realize they have to have a limit for testing purposes, but it still doesn't really mean anything.

For my last BFT, my unit also did the two-person stretcher carry.

 

[MikeL]

This dragging a person has got to be one of the more stupid things

Your basing this on your vast amount of Military experiance I assume....

I have heard especially since those straps on the back of the tac vest will not hold a person's weight.

So you've heard things, wonderful.  I've pulled other guys by the strap on the tac vest and it held up. As for how long it can do that over time, I don't know.

Just pulled on my "TACVEST" a tiny bit now and some of the seams came undone and it's practically brand new (minus one owner) so I doubt it's "defunct".

If seams are pulling apart take the vest to stores and I would assume a mat tech could fix it, or you shoudl be able to get a new vest

As for actually carrying a person, now I can understand someone being screwed to have to carry me but for carrying someone else 220? No problem.

You've done how many BFT fireman carrys?

Now, look at it this way:

Your in some hot Middle Eastern country and you just dragged your injured buddy with a wound to cover. You pat yourself on the back for your accomplishment and for following your training of "dragging someone" and radio in for a 9-Liner.

"2C this is 2A sorry but we aren't really fighting insurgents anymore this is an actual war. You'll have to casualty carry to safe zone at GR842972 for medical pick up over"

"2A this is 2C(you) what is a casualty carry? over"

No, you look at it this way. You have zero experiance in the CF, keep quiet and read and learn. You have no experiance to base anything on. You've never been on a tour, let alone day 1 of BMQ.

The practicality of being able to transport/carry your dying friend to safety is far greater then the need for the ability to pull him 5 meters into some cover which, any stinking monkey can do 70kg.

You've been in TICs and moved wounded pers have you?

Let's hope no one has to rely on people to carry them when they are dying and the soldiers are too unfit to carry a person.

A BFT is just a PT test its not the end all be all of PT.

Theres a reason why units do daily PT and a lot of troops also do PT on their own time.  Also, during unit training and TMST you will practice taking care of wounded, carrything them to CCPs, onto helos/ambs, etc.

 

[ModlrMike]

The practicality of being able to transport/carry your dying friend to safety is far greater then the need for the ability to pull him 5 meters into some cover which, any stinking monkey can do 70kg.


Let's hope no one has to rely on people to carry them when they are dying and the soldiers are too unfit to carry a person.

Perhaps, just maybe, 75kg was decided on because it demonstrates the ability in training to perform the task while reducing the injury potential.
[/quote]




Edit: *stupid work computer

 

[vonGarvin]

In order to dispel rumours:
"The casualty evacuation component of the LFCPFS is changing from the fireman's carry to the casualty drag effective 01 April 2010.
After performing the weight load march portion of the evaluation, soldiers will partner with a fellow soldier of similar weight (no less than 70 kg).
Each soldier will wear a helmet and webbing or tac vest.
The soldier performing the drag will carry both his/her weapon and that of their partner.  Gloves are permitted during the evaluation.
The casualty will begin by lying down on tehir back with their shoulders even with the start line.  The casualty will cross their arms and grasp the collar of their tac vest firmly (this will ensure the tac vest does not ride up and case the casualty discomfort).
The soldier performing the drag will squat and grasp the casualty by the tac vest with both hands (ensuring their knees are not locked out)
The soldier will perform a single lift of the casualty to assume the position of the drag.  The soldier will perform the drag by walking backwards in a continuous manner for a distance of 25m.
The casualty must be completely across the finish line before the drag is complete
- No Time Limit
- No pausing during drag
If the soldier is unsuccessful with a casualty exceding 70kg, that soldier will wait 10 minutes and be given a second attempt with a casualty who does not exceed the minimum standard of 70 kg
The soldier cannot be failed for an unsuccessful drag of a casualty who exceeds the minimum standard of 70kg


So, one continuous drag, no pauses.  Can't do it?  Try again after ten minutes.  You try with someone who is say 68 kg and can't do it?  Fail.

Anyway, there it is.

 

[Journeyman]

For the sake of the bleeding hearts and artists* who will endlessly bemoan this, rather than just getting on with it.....

"The casualty must be completely across the finish line before the drag is complete

I don't think it's fair having to drag a tall person, because of the extra travel distance required to get those legs across 




* That was a Pink Floyd reference kids; a band even older than Nickelback!  :nod:

 

[PMedMoe]

So typical of military "intelligence": "Soldiers will partner with a fellow soldier of similar weight (no less than 70 kg)."  :  Why not just say "Soldiers will partner with a fellow soldier weighing no less than 70 kg"?  ???  Or at the very least, change the word weight for build. 

JM, I'm with you, I'm gonna pick the short people.  Dammit, that means I'll get dragged as much as I was carried!   

 

[dangerboy]

As per CANLANGEN that came out this week, as of April 2010 the fireman carry is to be replaced by a 25m drag of a person weighting no less than 70kg by the tacvest. To be done on a grass surface.

Are you sure it was in a CANLANGEN?  I am looking at them right now (http://lfcms.kingston.mil.ca/default.aspx?sectionid=143000440048395&type=D) and I don't see it.

 

[vonGarvin]

That which I posted is from something that was passed about here at the School of Cool.  I'm not sure of the reference, etc. 

 

[dangerboy]

We were told the same thing here at LFWA TC and were not given a reference.  The OP said that it was in a CANLANGEN I could not see it and I checked CANFORGENS also with no luck.  Any other locations it could be?