Why don't SEALs, Special Forces etc. always wear helmets?

Seems like I often (not always) see them in action without helmets:

http://s.hswstatic.com/gif/navy-seal-4.jpg
http://cdn.cnwimg.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/navy-seal-1024x509.jpg
http://www.cqbchallenge.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Navy-Seals-in-raft.jpg



It can’t just be some kind of macho thing. But I’d think, with the places they go and the things they do, they’d need helmets as much as, if not more than, your basic garden-variety infantryman.

It’s a trade-off between protection and weight/heat management. Helmets can be a bit of a bitch. Also, keep in mind that many such pictures are staged and they may go with hats simply because that looks better in the picture.

Such forces tend to use helmets which don’t look very good: http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/5251c0f26bb3f7b0479d228c/18-things-navy-seals-wont-leave-home-without.jpg

SEALS wear whatever gear is mission appropriate. Making an underwater approach in a helmet would be bad because the helmet could trap air. It’s also more of a regular outline and so is less effective in a camouflage situation.

You’ll see them in helmets for some missions, they’re just not the big infantry style helmets.

nija’d

It depends on the mission. FTR, the steel pot helmets were also useful for digging, washing, and boiling water. You can’t do that with the new kevlar ones. You did have to remove the liner and cover from the steelies though. And they were heavy.

What if they get shot through the vent holes?

They could also get shot through that big face sized hole just below the vent holes.

Those look like bicycle helmets, meant to protect from blunt force. Military helmets won’t stop a rifle bullet- they are only good against shrapnel and maybe pistol bullets.

Beat me to it. If it’s unlikely that there will be shrapnel, wearing a hot, heavy helmet could be counterproductive.

I think I read in Black Hawk Down that the special operations groups generally wear things like hockey and skateboard helmets. They plan for speed, not for protracted shooting, so the weight and visibility issues with the standard issue military helmets mean they go with something that is light and will protect them from concussing themselves on a window frame or pipe.

Crews of armored vehicles, tanks and APCs, often wear “bump helmets”. They’re not for protection from bullets and shrapnel, but from hitting their head against something in the vehicle when it hits a bump or rocks from side to side.

Years and years ago, my USAF unit trained with a reserve unit of Army SF. The reason that we shed web gear, helmets, etc was a matter of speed and sound. Helmets are noisy, restrict your hearing and get in the way.

A SF unit in a protracted fight is a soon to be gone unit.

When you say “Army SF”, do you mean the green berets? If so, it’s true that they don’t tend to engage in protracted fighting on their own. That’s not their job. Other special forces like Delta Force, the SEALs, JTF2 or the SAS may very well engage in protracted fighting, however.

Was it really common to shed web gear as a matter of course? For a short period of time, to something out, I can believe that because that’s also what I was taught by the Vandoo who was my instructor and the Vandoos are just ordinary infantry. I rather doubt that most SF units shed web gear for a long time, though, since that would be foregoing the standard load of water and ammo.

Well, they do call them “special” forces. :smiley:

Units like that, when they fight, like to do it quickly and violently, using surprise and superior infantry craft to quickly overwhelm an enemy, or to quickly break contact. If they get in a protracted fight, they’re usually in deep shit. They just aren’t employed in large enough units, nor do they inherently have the support arms, to duke it out with, say, a motor-rifle platoon or two. And if they get ambushed…see Lone Survivor, Gothic Serpent, the raid on Punta Paitilla Airport…they often get rocked.

Just a minor nitpick.