Intentional or an Oversight?

[Moon]

So, I've been observing the way soldier (not just Pakistani) are seated in pickup-trucks and other unarmored troop transport vehicles. And a question that pops into my mind is, if they want to avoid being caught in an ambush then why are they seated facing one another?

And troops mounted in this configuration are a common sight in Urban areas as well, including Rangers and Police.

So, is this done intentionally? Doesn't this configuration seriously hamper a soldiers ability to see the surrounding area in an ambush situation? Furthermore, wouldn't this make it difficult for a soldier to retaliate? I've seen videos of troops having to dismount during a firefight, just to point their gun at the enemy. Plus, a pressure-plate IED is most likely to blow up under the tires, so wouldn't it be safer to move the troops to the midline of the vehicle, to avoid the direct blast, shrapnel and gases?
See, nobody in their right minds would ambush a vehicle with a front-facing gunner from the front, or the rear, because the barrels are pointed straight at them. But they would definitely hit them from the left and right side, just because troops are facing their backs in that direction (and their eyes the opposite) .
I think having troops face outwards rather than inward would greatly boost their awareness and fighting capability.

@PanzerKiel @Sifar zero @Huffal @Pappa Alpha @Windjammer

I'd like to hear your opinions about this, sorry in advance to mods who think it shouldn't be posted in this section. I want this post to gain traction so we can have a discussion and I can learn a few things.

 

[JonAsad]

foot soldiers are dispensable, that why no protection or armor at all.
you can shoot at them even with paint balls.

 

[Moon]

foot soldiers are dispensable, that why no armor at all.

Wouldn't anyone want their soldier to at least have a fighting chance? ideally we should have MRAPs, but I'dont know when that will happen. Till then, won't this help?

 

[Tornado23]

So they can have a friendly chat with each other easier

 

[JonAsad]

Wouldn't anyone want their soldier to at least have a fighting chance? ideally we should have MRAPs, but I'dont know when that will happen. Till then, won't this help?

As far as i am aware, the MRAP are shinned everyday to be used in a full blown war.

 

[Moon]

As far as i am aware, the MRAP are shinned everyday to be used in a full blown war.

Tbh, I think, we are in a state of war. MRAPs don't have to be the giant American ones, but the smaller and efficient Rhodesian and South African ones.

 

[Darth Vader]

So, I've been observing the way soldier (not just Pakistani) are seated in pickup-trucks and other unarmored troop transport vehicles. And a question that pops into my mind is, if they want to avoid being caught in an ambush then why are they seated facing one another?

And troops mounted in this configuration are a common sight in Urban areas as well, including Rangers and Police.

So, is this done intentionally? Doesn't this configuration seriously hamper a soldiers ability to see the surrounding area in an ambush situation? Furthermore, wouldn't this make it difficult for a soldier to retaliate? I've seen videos of troops having to dismount during a firefight, just to point their gun at the enemy. Plus, a pressure-plate IED is most likely to blow up under the tires, so wouldn't it be safer to move the troops to the midline of the vehicle, to avoid the direct blast, shrapnel and gases?
See, nobody in their right minds would ambush a vehicle with a front-facing gunner from the front, or the rear, because the barrels are pointed straight at them. But they would definitely hit them from the left and right side, just because troops are facing their backs in that direction (and their eyes the opposite) .
I think having troops face outwards rather than inward would greatly boost their awareness and fighting capability.

@PanzerKiel @Sifar zero @Huffal @Pappa Alpha @Windjammer

I'd like to hear your opinions about this, sorry in advance to mods who think it shouldn't be posted in this section. I want this post to gain traction so we can have a discussion and I can learn a few things.

Few problems
1
Majority of weapons systems are geared for big war with India so you can transport as many soldiers as you can in really quick time frame
So problem is with top brass approach to this.
Yes they have deployed some new tactics in engagement but overall supply chain and brain behind all this is still same hence you dont see any major improvements in whole infrastructure

2nd
Foot soldiers are expandable how these jawans were and still are being treated.
3rd
Pakistan hosts a really large military compared to its economy and its resources.
While developed countries use automation and better systems to cover limited man power, Developing countries like Pak and India deploy more man power as a cheaper alternative.
So change is neither quick or cheap.
Hence you see countries go to private sector to provide cheaper locally produced replacement which can fill the gap but Pakistani elite, being Pakistani elite ( politicans & military )dont have the time or care for these bois who are dying daily.

 

[Tornado23]

Doesnt it have something to do with space?

 

[Moon]

1
Majority of weapons systems are geared for big war with India so you can transport as many soldiers as you can in really quick time frame
So problem is with top brass approach to this.
Yes they have deployed some new tactics in engagement but overall supply chain and brain behind all this is still same hence you dont see any major improvements in whole infrastructure

I understand, but making the soldiers sit with their backs together, won't reduce much of their space as you'd think. Pluss, we've been fighting this IED and Landmine warfare for 20 years, I think changes should've been made by now.

Doesnt it have something to do with space?

We're not adding anything new, benches are just being shifted from walls of the truck to the midline.

This one's better for situations requiring a quick dismount, but I think it'd be dangerous on patrols.

Not sure, about this one. I'm no expert. But looks better than having backs towards the side.

 

[Darth Vader]

Tbh, I think, we are in a state of war. MRAPs don't have to be the giant American ones, but the smaller and efficient Rhodesian and South African ones.

PAKISTAN has been facing this for almost over a decade have you seen actually worth JV between military and private sector heck even HIT to offer some thing better bit more protected.
Compare that to what other countries did when they were in similar situation.
If you have not done a single thing after 1 decade nothing will be happen after 2 decades

 

[Pappa Alpha]

And a question that pops into my mind is, if they want to avoid being caught in an ambush then why are they seated facing one another?

Obsolete method of troop transportation. Basically, WWII era mindset.

 

[Moon]

PAKISTAN has been facing this for almost over a decade have you seen actually worth JV between military and private sector heck even HIT to offer some thing better bit more protected.
Compare that to what other countries did when they were in similar situation.
If you have not done a single thing after 1 decade nothing will be happen after 2 decades

But surely we can change the direction in which troops are seated?

Pakistan doesn't have money for expensive vehicles even hiluxes are quite expensive by Pakistani standards

TBH, the amount of new model Hiluxes we've bought and those that have a;ready been destroyed/damaged, you could get 5-7 MRAPs out of them.

Obsolete method of troop transportation. Basically, WWII era mindset.

Well, what's stopping them from changing the direction? It can't be that costly.

 

[Pappa Alpha]

Well, what's stopping them from changing the direction? It can't be that costly.

The problem is of mindset not cost.

 

[Moon]

The problem is of mindset not cost.

Well, why isn't it changing? Such a simple task isn't really difficult.

 

[Moon]

Some more images of troops in this configuration, these guys are specialized in dealing with ambush warfare. And even they use this configuration.
Hence I was asking @PanzerKiel that why don't we use this configuration as a standard? I don't see any downside to it.
Also if there are members who are well experienced in this regard, I'd like to ask them this as well... Really wanna know.