Battle Wounds and the Like

Through the sternum? No. That'll catch the heart, either directly or by crushing the ribcage. Through the abdomen will work.

Don't get the aorta either, that's where all the blood to the heart goes through. And I think it would be kinda hard to breathe if stuff in the chest area is broken. Plus bone-shrapnel might hit important stuff.

edited 13th Sep '11 8:16:11 PM by Merlo

So avoid the general chest area, the shoulders, neck and head.

There is actually an area, about two inches below middle of the shoulder, where there is genuinely nothing you need. It's not very tall though.

I have a question, myself.

If a soldier was caught in an explosion that ripped his arm off (thus leaving a ragged wound) would it be reasonable for a medic to try and stabilise him? Furthermore, how long would it take for the shock and bloodloss to prove fatal?

Edited for lack of proper knowledge.

edited 13th Sep '11 9:58:17 PM by KSPAM

Depends on the medic and the time period.

As of today, in most Western country's militaries, yes, you could do that, but you would have at best a minute and a half to stop the bleeding. Once that is done he'll probably need an IV and blood plasma, but you can wait a bit more on that.

Really all the medic has to do is stop the bleeding or slow it enough to keep them alive for an hour. If you make it as far as the battalion aid station you'll almost certainly survive.

edited 13th Sep '11 9:43:27 PM by Night