Library

What Procedures Govern Danger Close Artillery Strikes?

2025-08-27 08:11:56 236

5 Answers

Ulysses

2025-08-30 12:14:44

I get drawn into this topic every time I read a military memoir or watch a documentary — there’s something tense and oddly careful about the whole process. At a high level, 'danger close' is less a wild risk and more a formal acknowledgment: you've got friendly forces close enough to a target that the supporting fires could endanger them, so extra layers of communication, confirmation, and command approval get triggered.

Practically that means the person requesting fire has to clearly state that friendly troops are within the danger-close distance, and the supporting element (or higher command) runs a strict risk assessment. They’ll look at everything from munitions type to weather, the precision available, and the presence of civilians, then decide whether to proceed, delay, or use alternate methods like precision-guided rounds or air support. In my head I picture a hectic radio net where someone calmly repeats 'danger close' so everyone knows the stakes — that verbal flagging and higher-authority sign-off are key.

There are also formal fire-support coordination measures and legal rules that differ by country and service. So while the basic idea is the same everywhere — warn, assess, mitigate, authorize — the exact distances, what counts as acceptable risk, and who grants permission vary. If you’re curious about doctrine specifics, look to official service manuals or open-source doctrine summaries, but remember that the real-life emphasis is always on caution and clear chain-of-command decisions rather than improvisation.

Flynn

2025-08-30 20:57:05

I’m the sort of person who gets into debates on forums late at night about how militaries minimize friendly risk, so here’s how I’d explain the procedures in plain terms: when a fire mission might endanger friendly troops, it’s formally marked as 'danger close' and that label changes the whole workflow. The observer or forward element must explicitly declare it; that triggers additional scrutiny from the fire-support element and usually requires an authority higher than the shooter to accept the risk. That’s not just bureaucratic — it’s a legal and safety hedge that forces a real conversation about alternatives.

From there, teams look for ways to reduce the danger: better aim (precision munitions), different fusing, alternate trajectories, tighter spotting, or shifting the type of supporting weapon used. Fire-support coordination measures — things like no-fire or restricted-fire areas and clear delineation of friendly positions — get rechecked. Commanders weigh mission urgency against casualty risk and either sign off, demand changes, or deny fires. I always think that the human call at the top, the one that says 'we accept this risk,' is the crucial moral and operational hinge in the whole thing.

Wyatt

2025-09-01 13:34:44

I like to break this down into layers, partly because layers are how I organize my thoughts while reading tactical manuals and partly because that’s how the process feels in practice. The first layer is identification and declaration — the forward element flags the mission as 'danger close' when friendly troops are within the predefined safety radius. The second layer is coordination: fire direction, supporting commanders, and any adjacent units get notified to prevent fratricide. The third layer is mitigation — here teams consider precision rounds, alternate weapons, or adjusted trajectories to reduce risk. The fourth layer is authorization: someone with the legal and operational authority must accept the increased risk before fires proceed.

What’s important to me is that this isn’t rote; commanders must weigh mission necessity, potential casualty estimates, and collateral risk. Different services and nations publish slightly different thresholds and procedures, and modern tech — GPS, guided munitions, real-time video feeds — keeps changing how these layers look. It’s a tense balance between urgency and protection, and that judgement call is what makes the whole thing so consequential.

Otto

2025-09-02 01:20:00

I often imagine this like an intense scene from a novel: radios buzzing, maps littered with markers, someone announcing 'danger close' to make sure everyone stops and thinks. The procedure itself is a formal safety override — when you declare danger close, you’re saying 'friends are near enough to the target that we must pause and accept extra checks.' Those checks usually include confirming friendly locations, re-evaluating weapon selection, and getting higher-level permission to accept the danger.

Because the consequences are severe, doctrine demands clear communication and risk mitigation: alternative methods, precision munitions where available, or even delaying fires if feasible. Different countries set different distances and rules, so it’s not a one-size-fits-all recipe, but the moral and procedural backbone is the same — protect friendly forces through transparent, deliberate decision-making. I find it oddly reassuring that such high-stakes calls are deliberately structured to force caution rather than impulse.

David

2025-09-02 18:08:43

Short version for someone skimming: procedures for danger close start with an explicit declaration that friendly forces are close enough to be endangered. That declaration elevates the mission: added coordination, higher-level approval, and careful risk mitigation are required. The team will check whether more precise weapons, different firing methods, or alternate assets can accomplish the objective with less risk. The process is governed by national doctrine and rules of engagement, so exact distances and authorities vary, but the core idea is universal — communicate clearly, assess risk formally, and only proceed if authorized after mitigation steps.

View All Answers

Related Books

Warning: Danger

What happens when four very different males are brought together at an academy for supernatural creatures? Chaos, testosterone and of course … danger run amok. Each of the males has a secret, some more obvious than others. Are there even females capable of taming them, or will their secrets be too much? What if the ladies have secrets of their own? Werewolves, shapeshifters of different sorts, vampire and more! With each story that gets told, the danger increases. Will it finally catch up with them? “If you like her, then you’ll want to keep her alive.” Can the guys successfully date while being a total danger not only to themselves but to any females they encounter? Follow Troy, Jesse, Ryan and Dustin as they try to navigate school, love and being teenagers with supernatural powers unlike any other. For both the males and females alike, change is hard but denying true love is even more dangerous. How can they balance it all, and how will their families handle the new additions to their lives? Find out in this four part book, Warning: Danger.

106 Chapters

Danger zone

80 million worth is the book. Danger zone is the past edit. Updates will be in 80 million worth and not Danger zone.

Not enough ratings

9 Chapters

Kissing Danger

"Is this what you want?" he murmurs, gaze gliding down to where his fingers linger dangerously on my upper thigh. Resting his hand on the surface beside me, he leans down above me. "You just have to say it, and it's yours." *** On her eighteenth birthday, Aven starts to notice strange things. She feels watched, and one day, when facing death, she is saved by a stranger. For years she wonders who he is or who he was. When facing death again, he comes back. Aven doesn't realise how special she is, or how many people will go at great lengths to protect her, and to use her hidden gifts for their own gain. Although no one wants her more than a powerful Immortal. However, his desire for her may prove to be deadly, and as her mate, his vow to protect her will prove to put their entire world at risk.

8.5

38 Chapters

Got Too Close

"You're a dangerous woman, Elena," He reached, turning on the shower beside her head. "I think your demons are making you see things wrong, Mr. Rossi," she murmured through the water spilling down her head. He laughed, "They are right; you're my trigger," his nose buried into the crook of her neck, he muttered, sending shivers down her spine. "And too bad a lot of people cross you..." ***** Her life came crashing down when she signed a contract marriage with the calm President Nikolai Rossi, who only had eyes on one woman who wasn't her. To make matters worse, she couldn't help but fall in love with him and his son, knowing he'd never reciprocate. After a terrible divorce, three years later, Elena Vero is a mother of one. She now has to return to Italy for business, unfortunately falling into the waiting palms of her ex-husband, who surprisingly wants her back. But being his wife has never been a bed of roses and never will it be, especially when she finds out he isn't all that he seems.

9.9

132 Chapters

BEHIND CLOSE DOORS

"You slept here?" George asked. "Yes, I…um,” Irene gulped, licking her lips and making a quick calculation in her mind on what to say, “I um…I was feeling hot when reading, so I decided to take a shower and might have fallen asleep after it. You just woke me up, have-have you been standing here? Um what's up, are you ready for work?” She asked while getting up to put on her nightwear. George watched her then sighed, “Irene, can I ask you something?” His eyes was burning red, and he was bitterly angry which was showing on his face “Why did you do this to me, what have I done to deserve the betrayal from you, What haven’t I done for you, what else do you need from a man i’ve not given to, why didn’t you tell me you want to be a model, why do you chose to let me know this way, do you want a divorce?” Irene and George had met in school and fallen in love, then their relationship had led into a beautiful marriage where she had been most happy until she had miscarried two pregnancies. Down and broken, George had decided to make her better by hiring a cook who would bring all her online delicacies to their dining table for her. But who would have expected that her one night of mistake would not only change her but would fill her beautiful marriage with lies? How is she to avoid her sins despite knowing it was wrong and still craving for it? How would she face her darling husband and tell him her darkest secret? But even though the sin was addictive, she had no idea what other secrets lies between, waiting to shatter her heart.

27 Chapters

Scent of Danger

Scent of Danger: Dark Lands book 3 Ever fall in love with the wrong man? With a body to make a young girl sigh and a voice like black velvet, Mathin is definitely the wrong man. He's not safe, he's not stable…he's not even human. Andrea doesn't know what she's getting into when she agrees to visit her granny. Swept away to another world by a man almost too hot to handle, she can't decide if it's a dream come true or someone's idea of a sick joke. Romanced by the light of the triple moons, entranced by Mathin's fiery kisses, will Andrea give up her home on Earth in exchange for something wild?

81 Chapters

Related Questions

How Do Soldiers Define Danger Close In Combat?

5 Answers2025-08-27 18:38:02

The phrase 'danger close' has always felt like a small radio line that carries a huge weight. For me, it means that someone is about to drop firepower within striking distance of my position — close enough that the margin for error has shrunk dramatically. Practically speaking, soldiers use it when indirect fires (artillery, mortars, naval gunfire) or close air support will impact near friendly troops; it’s a formal warning so everybody from the observer to the fire direction center knows to be extra careful. In practice there’s a ritual to it: the observer lays the target, gives coordinates, and explicitly announces 'danger close' when the nearest friendly element is within the prescribed threshold for that munition. That threshold changes by service and weapon, but the intent is constant — acknowledge higher risk, tighten checks, and often request precision or different effects. I’ve been on missions where danger close meant swapping to a different fuse, re-aiming by mere meters, or calling for a last-second confirmation from command. It’s scary, but when you trust your radios and your fire support team, it can also be the difference between holding ground and getting overrun. There’s always that hush before the impact; you hold your breath and hope training and comms do their job.

When Did The Term Danger Close Originate In Military Use?

5 Answers2025-08-27 16:22:24

Funny thing — the phrase 'danger close' always felt dramatic to me, like a warning shouted across a battlefield in a movie. In reality it's more procedural and less cinematic: it developed as a concise way for forward observers and pilots to tell the folks calling in fires that ordnance would fall uncomfortably near friendly troops. The concept of warning that you're firing near your own guys goes back to artillery practice in the early 20th century, but the compact phrase 'danger close' became standard as militaries formalized fire-support procedures. I dug through some old manuals and secondary sources years ago while doing a hobby research project, and what I found was that the term was formalized in mid‑20th century doctrine. During and after World War II and then through Korea and Vietnam, armies and air arms needed a short, unmistakable phrase for high-risk close-support missions. By the Vietnam era the wording appears regularly in U.S. and Commonwealth field manuals, and modern NATO procedures continue that tradition, even if exact distance thresholds differ by weapon and service. It’s one of those tidy bits of military language that grew out of necessity and stuck around because it’s unambiguous under pressure.

How Does The US Military Measure Danger Close Distances?

5 Answers2025-08-27 13:22:01

There's a neat mix of math, manuals, and sweat behind how 'danger close' gets measured. At its heart it's just geometry: we measure the horizontal distance between where friendly forces are and the intended impact point (or aim point) of the fire. That starts with precise coordinates — usually grid or lat/long — for both the friendly location and the target. Then you apply standard map/range calculations (or let fire-control systems do it) to get a range in meters. Doctrine supplies the key thresholds for various weapon systems and munitions, so once the computed distance is under a given threshold, the call becomes 'danger close.' But the process isn't purely numerical. Procedures force extra safeguards: the shooter must be told, higher headquarters or a designated clearance authority often has to acknowledge, and additional risk-reduction measures are required (switching to precision munitions, adjusting fuzes, changing fire patterns, or adding more observers). Digital tools like AFATDS or handheld GPS units speed the math, but the human moment — the verbal declaration and the acknowledgement — is what seals the risk control. I once watched this play out in a training lane where we were on the edge of a danger-close bracket; the radios had that clipped, clinical tone and everyone tightened up, double-checking grids and elevations. That blend of routine calculation and high-stakes judgment is what keeps it from being just another number on a map.

What Movies Portray Danger Close Moments Realistically?

5 Answers2025-08-27 17:45:11

Watching the opening of 'Saving Private Ryan' in a crowded theater felt like a bootcamp of cinema’s most honest moments — the chaos, the smell of cordite (at least in my imagination), and the tiny human reactions caught in the crossfire. That sequence nails danger-close in a way few films dare: it doesn’t glamorize heroics, it lingers on confusion and the way bodies and minds react when violence is literally a few meters away. Beyond that, I’d put 'Black Hawk Down' and 'Lone Survivor' in the same realistic bucket. Both focus on the claustrophobia of urban fighting and small-unit survival, where supporting fires, mortars, or aircraft are called in with the terrifying possibility of landing near your own people. The filmmakers used real military advisers, tight choreography, and sound design so bone-rattling you feel the concussive shockwaves. 'The Hurt Locker' deserves a shout too — it flips the concept: danger close isn’t only rounds; it’s a bomb's unpredictable proximity and the slow, nerve-ripped waits before something goes off. If you want the theater experience to match the content, watch these on a good sound system, and pay attention to camera distance, silence, and the way characters make split decisions. Those little details are what turn dramatized combat into something that actually feels real to me.

How Do NATO Forces Standardize Danger Close Protocols?

5 Answers2025-08-27 19:01:12

I’ve spent too many late nights reading through military manuals for fun, so I've picked up how NATO keeps everyone singing from the same hymn sheet when it comes to danger close situations. In plain terms, the alliance harmonizes terminology and procedures through common doctrine and standardization agreements so that a French forward observer, a Polish JTAC, and a U.S. fire direction center all know what a given phrase or safety threshold means. Practically that looks like a few layered controls: agreed definitions for what counts as 'danger close' for different munitions, pre-established risk or safety distances tied to weapons types, standardized call-for-fire/engagement formats, and clear authority chains for clearance to fire. Units use checks like positive identification of friendly locations, digital location sharing, and verification calls. Training and certification—especially for terminal controllers—are done to common NATO standards, and multinational exercises practice these flows until they’re second nature. When it gets real, there are extra mitigations: use of suppression, shifting fire to safeboxes, coordinated timing, and post-strike assessments. Those common procedures plus exercise-driven familiarity are what make multinational fires work without excessive risk to friendly forces—it's boring in the best way, because boring means safe and predictable, which everyone wants when shells are in the air.

How Do Medics Respond To Danger Close Casualty Scenarios?

5 Answers2025-08-27 16:33:47

When I'm thrown into a danger-close casualty situation, the first thing that kicks in is an almost reflexive checklist in my head: secure, stabilize, and move if needed. Practically that means I look for immediate threats — incoming fire, unstable structures, secondary devices — and try to get the wounded into whatever hard cover or concealment is available. If cover is impossible, I use smoke or suppression from teammates and keep people low while we do the basics for life threats: arrest massive bleeding, maintain an airway, and keep the casualty warm and conscious if possible. I've had to strip a lot of theory down to urgent, improvised action. I prioritize the person who can be saved quickest with the least resource drain so the whole group survives. Communication becomes everything: clear, short calls to teammates to request suppression, evacuation, or extra hands; and to the casualty to keep them oriented. After extraction to a slightly safer spot, I start a more thorough assessment, label priorities for evacuation, and hand them over with concise information to whoever's taking charge. It's messy, noisy, and terrifying, but training plus a calm voice makes a huge difference. I always carry a few spare dressings and a plan for who covers movement — that little predictability helps everyone act faster and with less panic.

How Do Civilian Contractors Mitigate Danger Close Risks?

5 Answers2025-08-27 02:27:19

I’ve been on enough dusty ranges and convoy overwatch jobs to know that mitigating 'danger close' risks isn’t just a checklist — it’s a habit you build before you even step outside. Before a mission I’ll do a layered risk assessment: map out firing fans, blast vectors, and worst-case casualty zones, then pick positions that maximize standoff without sacrificing mission effectiveness. I always insist on hardened shelter positions, marking evacuation routes, and rehearsing casualty evacuation until the team does it without thinking. Communication is everything. We run redundant radios with pre-defined brevity codes and verify GPS coordinates multiple times. If indirect fires or explosives are involved, we coordinate with the firing unit’s safety officer and get written confirmation of the planned munition effects and the exact 'danger close' waiver. When there’s any doubt, I push for a delay, an adjusted firing azimuth, or a different ordnance type. Finally, personal mitigation matters: blast-rated vehicles, ballistic helmets, fragmentation blankets, and minimizing time spent exposed. I’ll also log near-misses and debrief immediately so small lessons get locked into our SOPs — the little fixes keep me and the crew alive, and oddly, they make the day feel more under control than any checklist ever could.

Why Do Video Games Warn About Danger Close During Missions?

5 Answers2025-08-27 07:29:21

There's this tiny adrenaline spike I get whenever a 'danger close' ping flashes up on-screen — it feels like the game is leaning over my shoulder and whispering, "maybe back up." Designers use that warning for a bunch of practical reasons. First, it's about telegraphing: explosions, airstrikes, artillery, or even special enemy abilities can have big radii, and the warning gives you a chance to reposition so the game feels fair rather than arbitrary. Second, it's about pacing and tension. When a mission suddenly calls out a hazardous zone, it forces a quick decision — push through and risk it for an objective, or fall back and play safer. That decision-making is a huge part of what makes shooters and tactical games feel satisfying. On top of all that, the phrase comes straight from real-world military lingo, so it adds a dash of authenticity; I always smile when a mission narrator says it and my squadmates groan because we know chaos is coming. If you want a habit to pick up: listen for the audio cue and glance at your minimap. In co-op runs I learned to shout when I hear it — saves lives and makes for great comms chaos.

What Procedures Govern Danger Close Artillery Strikes?

5 Answers

Related Books

Related Questions

How Do Soldiers Define Danger Close In Combat?

When Did The Term Danger Close Originate In Military Use?

How Does The US Military Measure Danger Close Distances?

What Movies Portray Danger Close Moments Realistically?

How Do NATO Forces Standardize Danger Close Protocols?

How Do Medics Respond To Danger Close Casualty Scenarios?

How Do Civilian Contractors Mitigate Danger Close Risks?

Why Do Video Games Warn About Danger Close During Missions?

Popular Question

Are There Limits To How Many Times You Can Loan Book On Kindle?

What Role Does Wendy Play In Jack'S Transformation In 'The Shining'?

Are There Any Upcoming Romance Books For Teens Adaptations?

How Does Earthsea Novel Differ From Its Anime Adaptation?

Does Bookish Nook Offer Popular Anime-Based Novels?

How Do I Force Save And Quit In Vim?

What Are The Key Character Developments Seen In 'The Vampire Lestat'?

What Makes Young Adult Crime Novels Unique?

Where Can I Find 50 Shades Of Grey Best Passages Online?

Which Fairy Tail Fanfiction Portrays Laxus And Mirajane’S Hidden Chemistry And Emotional Tension?

Popular Searches More