# Leadership and Non-Issue Gear



## mover1 (4 Apr 2005)

I think you guys are too reliant on toys. Whenever I see a cad pat bag walking around an airport or the base ( in civvies mind you) I think this guy is too wrapped up in his job, or hey look at the militia guy. In my day we would go into the field with as little as possible. no need for FMP's with nice covers. No need for GPS. Hell as long as the troop Comdr and troop Wo knew our posn, that was all that was needed. Although at the time we did buy the necessities of life. American Rain Gear and a cave blanket (poncho liner) everything else was considered useless weight.


----------



## Blackhorse7 (4 Apr 2005)

Mover 1, ever hear the old saying "only an idiot is uncomfortable in the field..."?

I'm sure going hardcore is a thing to pride one's self on, but if I could get kit that makes life in the field easier or happier, so much the better.


----------



## mover1 (4 Apr 2005)

Blackhorse7 said:
			
		

> Mover 1, ever hear the old saying "only an idiot is uncomfortable in the field..."?
> 
> I'm sure going hardcore is a thing to pride one's self on, but if I could get kit that makes life in the field easier or happier, so much the better.



I did hear of that saying and yes you are right. But all I am saying when does comfort and looking gucci  become detrimental to each other. As for going hardcore. We never went hard core. We were just brought up in a different time and didn't know any better.


----------



## KevinB (4 Apr 2005)

Mover - I just dont know if I catch you at bad times but WTF dude.



> I think you guys are too reliant on toys.


 If its stupid and it works - it aint stupid.



> Whenever I see a cad pat bag walking around an airport or the base ( in civvies mind you) I think this guy is too wrapped up in his job, or hey look at the militia guy.


Maybe - but maybe he spent what money he had in a good bag, and as such uses it for civy side stuff too



> In my day we would go into the field with as little as possible. no need for FMP's with nice covers. No need for GPS. Hell as long as the troop Comdr and troop Wo knew our posn, that was all that was needed.


----------



## mover1 (6 Apr 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Mover - I just don't know if I catch you at bad times but WTF dude.


Actually I just say the stuff to stir the Shiite. I still have my flight bag I bought in 1990. And my plate bag I got off of the Regimental MAT TECH. 
I went out and bought a watch cover. Used it for about two weeks and threw it out because all it did was cause a lot of sweat and started to stink. 
But its true about the cad pat bag though. I tend to travel a lot and you can always pick out the army guys by their carry on luggage.  
I used to be a big "kit whore" when I was first in. I had an account at the REGT KIT Shop and we were always over there checking out the new gear. I bought tonnes of it. Now it sits in a box in the garage. My wife wants me to throw it away but I wont let her. Even though most of the issued stuff today is far superior to what we had 10-15 years ago.  

Ask your selves these questions before you buy anything.
Will you need it past this next training period?
Does it have any practical purpose beyond my time in service?
Am I buying it on impulse?
Do I need or am I trying to show off.
In the end buy what you want, buy what you like. Its your money. You earned it.


----------



## PhilB (6 Apr 2005)

I agree and disagree with that statment. Why rely on substandard, uncomfortable kit if you have the money to get what works. I agree spending thousands of dolloars on kit, to use soley in a reserve weekend exercise is a bit crazy, however why be uncomfortable? If you have the money, and the need then why not


----------



## Grunt (7 Apr 2005)

PhilB said:
			
		

> I agree spending thousands of dolloars on kit, to use soley in a reserve weekend exercise is a bit crazy



AWWWWWWWWWW ;D

Some nonstandard kit is pretty usefull, like Camelbacks, assault packs, stiffer belts, suspenders, an AR15 rifle/Browning Hipower to practice with on my own time (or several lol, okay i just had to put that in), ;D non standard vest , nomex flight gloves, US Poncho to go with ranger blanket, surefire lights, slings and better boots is money well spent, but I could never understand why someone would want to buy loads of gucci stuff from cpgear, who needs a CADPAT FMP when a 2 dollar notepad in a ziplock works better, watch band with velcro??? RIIIPP whenever you want to check your watch :, a washbasin, just use the canteen cup!, a pillow??, just use your assault pack, ruck, buttpack etc.


----------



## NATO Boy (7 Apr 2005)

The are two sayings that pop up every time I think of getting aftermarket kit...

"If it isn't broken...don't fix it." - (ie, if you're gonna be issued it, or something close to it that works, don't bother buying it.)

"If the shoe fits, wear it." - (ie, if a patrol bag helps you carry your mission essentials, or if buying a Blackhawk GPMG sling makes hauling the C6 more friendly, have at 'er.)

But just to reinforce this...



			
				KevinB said:
			
		

> If its stupid and it works - it aint stupid.





			
				PhilB said:
			
		

> Why rely on substandard, uncomfortable kit if you have the money to get what works.


----------



## mover1 (8 Apr 2005)

Grunt said:
			
		

> AWWWWWWWWWW ;D
> 
> Some nonstandard kit is pretty usefull, like Camelbacks, assault packs, stiffer belts, suspenders, an AR15 rifle/Browning Hipower to practice with on my own time (or several lol, okay i just had to put that in), ;D non standard vest , nomex flight gloves, US Poncho to go with ranger blanket, surefire lights, slings and better boots is money well spent, but I could never understand why someone would want to buy loads of gucci stuff from cpgear, who needs a CADPAT FMP when a 2 dollar notepad in a ziplock works better, watch band with velcro??? RIIIPP whenever you want to check your watch :, a washbasin, just use the canteen cup!, a pillow??, just use your assault pack, ruck, buttpack etc.



I agree whole heartedly.Some of the stuff is good while others is useless weight.
 The camelback is issued in some areas. 
Better boots. Especially safety boots. I have a pair on right now. 
 Nomex flying gloves issued, you just have to be on the right scale of issue to get them.  
If you need a pillow in the fieldall you need to do is look closely at your gortex jacket. at the bottom by your bum there is a zipper. fold the jacket into it and voila an instant pillow. Wind going up your parka? Take the elastic band from the back (by your bum again) and pull it through your legs and snap it onto the bottom button on the front. somebody thought hard designing this new stuff.
I must say that my favorite after market kit. If it isn't the watch band its the wallet thing that hangs around your neck. Tied with 550 cord its screams in violation of every safety practice ever taught. That and it looks so macho when in line at the mall when you go to pay for something.


----------



## Mortar guy (8 Apr 2005)

I have to wonder - any/all of you who are in leadership positions, do you buy gucci kit for your troops whenever you buy some for yourself? I ask this because its all well and good if you can afford shiny new kit like patrol packs, go-faster boots, gortex towels etc while your troops are making do with what they were issued. But, this may cause some problems. If your troops are suffering in the Mk III combat boots or humping C6 ammo in their POS nuke bags while you strut around in the latest in boot/patrol pack technology, it might cause a little resentment. Also, you could be driving your troops hard without any idea that they are about to go down with bad feet, bad backs, hypothermia, dehydration, whatever.

I am not saying that this will always happen or that buying any type of gucci kit is bad. I'm just saying that leaders who kit themselves out with all the latest while their Ptes make due with what they got from Base Supply could be asking for trouble.


And............. ATTACK!  :warstory:

mg


----------



## NATO Boy (8 Apr 2005)

Mortar guy said:
			
		

> I have to wonder - any/all of you who are in leadership positions, do you buy gucci kit for your troops whenever you buy some for yourself? I ask this because its all well and good if you can afford shiny new kit like patrol packs, go-faster boots, gortex towels etc while your troops are making do with what they were issued. But, this may cause some problems. If your troops are suffering in the Mk III combat boots or humping C6 ammo in their POS nuke bags while you strut around in the latest in boot/patrol pack technology, it might cause a little resentment. Also, you could be driving your troops hard without any idea that they are about to go down with bad feet, bad backs, hypothermia, dehydration, whatever.
> 
> I am not saying that this will always happen or that buying any type of gucci kit is bad. I'm just saying that leaders who kit themselves out with all the latest while their Ptes make due with what they got from Base Supply could be asking for trouble.
> 
> ...


When I was on course, the only thing I was allowed to use for after-market kit was a nuke bag. The course staff, however, had restrictions too (ie, they mostly had to use issued kit, with only a few exceptions like patrol bags) and there was even forbidden kit they couldn't use while teaching a course (ie camelbaks.) At unit level, however, it's fair game (hell, the Ptes and Fus's have more after-market kit than anyone else in our regt.)


----------



## foerestedwarrior (8 Apr 2005)

Mortar guy said:
			
		

> I have to wonder - any/all of you who are in leadership positions, do you buy gucci kit for your troops whenever you buy some for yourself? I ask this because its all well and good if you can afford shiny new kit like patrol packs, go-faster boots, gortex towels etc while your troops are making do with what they were issued. But, this may cause some problems. If your troops are suffering in the Mk III combat boots or humping C6 ammo in their POS nuke bags while you strut around in the latest in boot/patrol pack technology, it might cause a little resentment. Also, you could be driving your troops hard without any idea that they are about to go down with bad feet, bad backs, hypothermia, dehydration, whatever.
> 
> I am not saying that this will always happen or that buying any type of gucci kit is bad. I'm just saying that leaders who kit themselves out with all the latest while their Ptes make due with what they got from Base Supply could be asking for trouble.
> 
> ...



How is it bad? If a leader is under less pain and crap, they can make better decisions. If a leader cant reconize problems with their troops, they are either new to the game, or innefective. 
On the resentment issue, that is just too much PC crap. If someone is so stupid to get pissed at how an instructor is using a patrol pack with a semi rigged back, and they only have a POS nuke bage with no support. Then they can deal with it. 

Leaders lead, they need to be in a good mind set to make sound and timley decisions, forcing them to use bad boots, or bat kit, just forces bad decisions.


----------



## mover1 (8 Apr 2005)

foerestedwarrior said:
			
		

> How is it bad? If a leader is under less pain and crap, they can make better decisions. If a leader cant recognize problems with their troops, they are either new to the game, or ineffective.
> On the resentment issue, that is just too much PC crap. If someone is so stupid to get pissed at how an instructor is using a patrol pack with a semi rigged back, and they only have a POS nuke bage with no support. Then they can deal with it.
> 
> Leaders lead, they need to be in a good mind set to make sound and timley decisions, forcing them to use bad boots, or bat kit, just forces bad decisions.



Lead by example, care for your troops. If you have the gizmo's with all the bells and whistle, you may become out of touch with reality. Saying a job should only take 15 minutes while actually it will take an hour  depending on the equip available and the mindset of your troops.

If you start crapping on people because they take too long because they never took any initiative and bought X piece of kit.  Or are complaining about being sore or tired and you crap on them again for not having the foresight to replace Y with Z piece of gear, you will find yourself alienated and hated. 

But hey if you want the after market gear and like to wear it go ahead. I would be honoured to stand beside you.

You just may be wearing that one piece of gear to may a sniper look twice. Or better yet, the RSM to take notice and have you volunteer fore some special job


----------



## KevinB (8 Apr 2005)

I concure with Mover (  ??? bettcha didn't expect that one...)

 foerestedwarrior - really poorly thoughtout post.


----------



## mover1 (8 Apr 2005)

Never expected it....gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling. Some one agees with me.


----------



## Infanteer (8 Apr 2005)

Forested Warrior, that sucked.

Actually, Mortar Guy and Mover raise a very good point to a certain extent - one must lead by example.  If your a leader and you're strutting the latest line of Lightfighter Gear while everybody else is puttering around in the issue stuff, your tact may lead to earning a degree of resentment from your subordinates, regardless of whether the gear actually means anything in Army terms.  A leader should probably hold it as a rule to be more conservative then his troops to avoid unnecessary attention from both above and below the C-of-C.

I will submit a few points though - most of the issued stuff doesn't suck horribly.  If a guy is going to shell out 500 bucks for a Gucci CADPAT smock from Dropzone, his fellow soldiers won't suffer as the issued jacket does its job (although I hate it myself and never wear it).  If the C-of-C says something is good to go, I can guarantee you that more then just one guy will jump on the chance to play around with other gear.

As well, the "Lead by Example" can work the other way - if the C-of-C has given permission to use certain non-issue items (ie: The famous 3VP on Apollo scenario) and you as a leader find something that helps to do your job better, then doing it and sharing it with your fellow soldiers could be a good thing.

I'm willing to wager that this scenario of a leader "going Gucci" while his subordinates have to "put up with the issue stuff" won't happen because it usually is the troopies leading the way in new gear - they deal with it day in and day out everyday, and if given a bit of leeway, they'll usually take what they can.  

Besides, Officers usually spend their money on CADPAT Junior General kits....


----------



## Michael Dorosh (8 Apr 2005)

forestedwarrior's comments apply, though perhaps not with respect to kit. 

For all those who complain because the CO gets a cot to sleep on, I think it needs to be remembered that the CO is responsible for 500 to 1000 troops and probably _should_ be well rested and capable of making sound decisions.

With regards to personal kit, though, I'm not so sure the comments are as apt.


----------



## Infanteer (8 Apr 2005)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> For all those who complain because the CO gets a cot to sleep on, I think it needs to be remembered that the CO is responsible for 500 to 1000 troops and probably _should_ be well rested and capable of making sound decisions.



I'm not sure I buy that.   You could say that the poor guy manning the C-6 at 3 in the morning is responsible for ensuring that the company position doesn't get overun in a night attack by infiltrating enemy soldiers.  Everybody has to be on their game but expending the extra resources and energy to lug snivel kit in the field on account of rank doesn't pass in my books - I don't think a beauty sleep is a prerequisite for the CO to do his job.

Once you've sat in a watery hole and manned a defensive position while "command" sits in a mod tent a few hundred meters away with the generator chugging away, you begin to appreciate it when leaders take the same hardships as their soldiers.   Some may disagree with me, but it is something I feel strongly about and will carry with me throughout my career.


----------



## Mortar guy (8 Apr 2005)

I agree very strongly with Infanteer. I am not opposed to Gucci kit but I am pretty set in my ways when it comes to leading by example. By wearing all the latest kit you're telling your soldiers two messages: that our kit is junk (which may be the case but not as much today) and that there are two standards within the organization (i.e. those with a little disposable income get to be comfortable and those without have to suffer). The first message is not a huge deal but the second one is the one that bothers me the most. If act like command (and therefore higher rank) gives you the priviledge to be more comfortable or get more sleep, that might breed resentment. 

I accept the argument that commanders need to be alert etc., but from what I have seen/read, commanders who share the hardships of their soldiers are often the most respected and admired while those who put their comforts above that of their soldiers are universally reviled. 

MG


----------



## Canadian Sig (8 Apr 2005)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> For all those who complain because the CO gets a cot to sleep on, I think it needs to be remembered that the CO is responsible for 500 to 1000 troops and probably _should_ be well rested and capable of making sound decisions.



 Entire Brigades can rely on my ability to transfer and send vital info at an extremly fast pace, at 0 notice, at 3 in the morning under fire. Do I get a cot? I mean really; If I get 1 number wrong on a grid reference during an arty call who pays? I agree with Mortar Boy: I respect officers who dig in and live the way the troops do. Just my 2 centavos.


----------



## Infanteer (8 Apr 2005)

Mortar guy said:
			
		

> (i.e. those with a little disposable income get to be comfortable and those without have to suffer).



Hey, I was a Private and I was able to spend money on kit to play with (being a self-professed kit-slut).   Considering how well ALL Canadian soldiers are renumerated and the average cost of a little piece of snivel kit, I'm not sure this would ever be a real concern.   Most kit out there isn't a "break the bank" affair.



> I accept the argument that commanders need to be alert etc., but from what I have seen/read, commanders who share the hardships of their soldiers are often the most respected and admired while those who put their comforts above that of their soldiers are universally reviled.



I just finished reading Rick Atkinson's In the Company of Soldiers; he was embedded with the General Commanding of 101st Airborne (Air Assault).   Interesting book as it was a "fly-on-the-wall" look at a modern division HQ operating in a war.   Sure, in a large formation, the division headquarters is going to be fairly static and established, so I could see the living arrangements slightly above Spartan, but my ire was directed more towards those who insist on a "tactical" setup and then breakout the tents and the gen-sets.... :threat:

Tactical should mean tactical.   No point going light and stealthy if you are going to make a large noisy footprint with a company or battalion command element....

Cheers,
Infanteer


----------



## Mortar guy (8 Apr 2005)

Mortar Boy? MORTAR BOY? Who you callin' boy!?


Actually, I kinda like the name. Has a superhero sidekick ring to it. Who's sidekick would I be? Artillery Man? 

 ;D

MG


----------



## KevinB (8 Apr 2005)

Long gone are the days of ol BGen Cox showing up (in his gortex) and ordering troops out of non issue kit.

  Most (Patrica) officers and NCO's are in working as hard or harder as the troops -- for examply at the BC Fires - Col Vida woudl be out with the troops of the different companies doing the job on his hands and knees beside everyone - I dont think anyone could keep his pace.  

Class differential between officers and men are long gone - and the arguments for the "white glove" treatment have faded (in most cases).


 I don't agree with the kit assesment - but I am a kit slut and I will spend huge $ on kit trying to find a better mousetrap - why - cause I am lazy and would rather the kit work with me than against me.
   That said we are far away from the time in 1997 when we humped up the hills in Ca. at the USMC Mountain Warfare Training Center - in the old parka and crap.


----------



## Pte. Bloggins (8 Apr 2005)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> my ire was directed more towards those who insist on a "tactical" setup and then breakout the tents and the gen-sets.... :threat:



Whenever we're out supporting a tactical setup, we always bring along a generator (actually called "tactical quiet": read the label.) It's main purpose is powering our (and the entire CP's) radios, it also happens to be frequently used to power such creature comforts as coffee makers and heaters.

In a real-life situation, the generator's supposed to be dug-in, I've never seen it done though.


----------



## Infanteer (8 Apr 2005)

Hey, you Jimmy's need the gen-set to do your job; the tankers got it the same with the vehicles - I'm directing my rant against those who feel that rank (as opposed to requirements, as is your case) is some sort of entitlement to an easy go in the field.  As Kevin said, that mentality is almost non-existent today (thank goodness).


----------



## RCA (8 Apr 2005)

My experiance is that the snr leadership is less interested in the gucchi kit and make do with whats issuesd (more or less). 

As to them having more comfortable digs. The more senoir you get the less sleep you tend to get because of the planning process. Yes the grunts stand gurad etc. But when there down, unless something unusal going on, they are down. More on this later.


----------



## KevinB (8 Apr 2005)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> As Kevin said, that mentality is almost non-existent today (thank goodness).



In fact the one thing I have seen is an eager OC or SgtMaj set up mod tent and cots for the CO's arrival and have the CO go WTF? I dont need this...


----------



## Infanteer (8 Apr 2005)

RCA said:
			
		

> As to them having more comfortable digs. The more senoir you get the less sleep you tend to get because of the planning process. Yes the grunts stand gurad etc. But when there down, unless something unusal going on, they are down. More on this later.



Oh, I don't doubt that at all RCA.   I fully remember the Warrant and the Platoon Commander making rounds throughout the night in between O groups and planning - and this was only at the platoon level.   I imagine more gets piled on the higher you go.   However (and I'm sure you will agree with me) everybody performs a vital role and no one should have privledges based soley upon rank (drag the heater up for the Colonel!) - the best anecdote of this I ever read was a CO in Vietnam who made a soldier carry around a clunky and dangerous flamethrower so he could clear away the ants for the officers CP....

If some people disagree with this, fine by me - as I said earlier it is just something I feel strongly about.


----------



## Canadian Sig (8 Apr 2005)

Mortar guy said:
			
		

> Mortar Boy? MORTAR BOY? Who you callin' boy!?
> 
> 
> Actually, I kinda like the name. Has a superhero sidekick ring to it. Who's sidekick would I be? Artillery Man?
> ...


Aww man and I just put in for a posting to RCR..lol. Seriously' sorry Mortar Guy.


----------



## Britney Spears (8 Apr 2005)

The obvious solution, gathered from all the comments here, seems quite clear.

1) Buy a nice patrol pack
2) Load it up to the tits with 7.62mm 
3) Find a troop to carry your pack. Have the troops take turns carry it.

That way, the pte's get to carry gucci kit, the ammo gets carried, and since you selflessly gave up your own aftermarket kit to make it a little easier for your soldiers, your penchant for leadership will be readily apparent. Promotion will be inevitable.

You guys will love it when I become CDS.


----------



## 1feral1 (8 Apr 2005)

mover1 said:
			
		

> I think you guys are too reliant on toys. Whenever I see a cad pat bag walking around an airport or the base ( in civvies mind you) I think this guy is too wrapped up in his job, or hey look at the militia guy. In my day we would go into the field with as little as possible. no need for FMP's with nice covers. No need for GPS. Hell as long as the troop Comdr and troop Wo knew our posn, that was all that was needed. Although at the time we did buy the necessities of life. American Rain Gear and a cave blanket (poncho liner) everything else was considered useless weight.



 :

I don't know who you are, or how much TI you have, but sometimes more often than not, the issue stuff is inadequate, and falls short of the soldier's real needs. I have 'many toys' as you seem to think they are, and I don't have 'em for the LCF either.


----------



## NATO Boy (9 Apr 2005)

Perhaps I'm not the only one thinking this, but what the heck...

What was one of the first things we as soldiers we told (in general) after becoming qualified soldiers?

One example, we are "Trained" Soldiers now. We have to "know" ourselves and be self-reliant. This includes the suitable use of kit (be it issued or not.)

Mind you, this isn't geared at leadership but rather "everyone." If Pte Newbie realizes he can haul ammo for his C6 a lot better with an after-market patrol bag, he has the right to use it (since his job requires it.) If the same Pte. Newbie finds himself in a CAS EVAC team and wants to use a 3 POINT sling so he can keep a better grip on his C7 and a stretcher, he has the right to that too. If a Sect COMD finds it more efficient to use GPS on a patrol, he has the right to use it (given he does so with discipline.) If the same Sect COMD wants to carry extra kit in a patrol bag (rather than empty out his ruck just for use on one patrol,) he has that right.

With that said, there's a flipside. If there's no real need for you to use alternative kit, chances are you'll be informed by C of C (a la CSM or RSM.) For example, if Pte Newbie wants a better LBV so he can carry 16 mags (but won't need to since he's not going on tour anytime soon) he doesn't have that luxury. If Course Staff are in the field with their candidates and want to use kit that the candidates don't have access to (ie Camelbaks,) the Course Staff can't use it to their advantage (common motto, do only unto them what you do unto yourself; this also plays into the "lead by example" argument that has come up.)

If your unit enforces the use of after-market kit by "all" ranks, there's no reason to be "nay-sayin" against the leadership. As 2IC of my section, I use a patrol bag, a camelbak, and a 3 point sling regularly; the rest of my section takes advantage of this and does the same (some have better kit than I do) so they can operate at the same level.

My 2/200 of a Twoonie...


----------



## SHELLDRAKE!! (9 Apr 2005)

My opinion:
                 1)Should be only issued kit worn/used until end of trades training and into first unit

                 2)If gucci kit is auth by RSM then it should apply to all ranks

                 3)Only issued gear should be used when training with foreign forces or when under media
                    coverage so we dont look like a junior high paintball team.

                 4)I believe in the concept of wear what you want but cover it with issued kit.

 I dont believe the issued equipment in this day and age is so bad that we need to buy our own kit to replace it (except maybee the rain gear) and the few items that do need replacing are usually so small that their use would not affect the overall uniformity of our equipment.

my buck n a half


----------



## Infanteer (9 Apr 2005)

I think the 3PPCLI BG policy on OP Apollo (if it looks Canadian, wear it) has proven to be successful and fair to the troops.


----------



## Britney Spears (9 Apr 2005)

But we didn't have the cool Tactical Vests and stuff back then. Now that the army has bestowed TVs upon you, why do you still need after market webbing? With all of our new and (in theory)improved kit do we still need that kind of policy?

As an aside, good thing they rushed the TV issue to the whole army in such record time, while the really useful stuff, like AUSCAM 100rd C9 bags, sit in some forgotten corner.


----------



## KevinB (9 Apr 2005)

SHELLDRAKE!! said:
			
		

> 3)Only issued gear should be used when training with foreign forces or when under media
> coverage so we dont look like a junior high paintball team.
> 
> 4)I believe in the concept of wear what you want but cover it with issued kit.



 :  - So basically you are an issue only guy.

 Maybe that works on the gun line...


----------



## TCBF (9 Apr 2005)

"I think the 3PPCLI BG policy on OP Apollo (if it looks Canadian, wear it) has proven to be successful and fair to the troops."

It was the right policy at the time.

Good thing no body whined about the Coyote OPs and Fire Positions with all of the camnets, sandbags, plywood, posts, and misc stuff we liberated from the US Army/USMC to make our positions less vis and better protected. Anyone complaining about all of the MREs we ate?  That wasn't Canadian either, nor was the fully Halal/Kosher "Mom's Own Meals" .  I suppose I should be charged for taking USAF/Malasia Airlines aircraft on the "Around the world in six months OP APOLLO tour".

My first cup of real coffee in Kandahar was US Army issue.  Good on them.

We asked if the USMC LAV 25s had left any main gun ammo behind, as ours was a bit "slow" in arriving.  They didn't, and my Ptl was on the line for a few days without main gun ammo.  No big deal.

Tom


----------



## NATO Boy (9 Apr 2005)

no  :bullet: :bullet: :bullet: :bullet: :bullet: :bullet: = ouch


----------



## Britney Spears (9 Apr 2005)

Bloody hell, those things -> :bullet: are supposed to be BULLETS?


I just realized that now, I always thought they were something else......


----------



## Spartan (9 Apr 2005)

I'm just curious as to why it is a _ per unit _ ideology/policy versus an _army_ ideology/policy wrt issue/nonissue kit. Doesn't that make us look _more_ of a ragtag group when one unit has bells and whistles, the next has only issue? If it works well, and has a Canadian motif, and fits all milspec requirements, then why not.


----------



## COBRA-6 (9 Apr 2005)

SHELLDRAKE!! said:
			
		

> 1)Should be only issued kit worn/used until end of trades training and into first unit



Why's that? 

Inspections are one thing, the field another. At the infantry school they let us use wheelers nuke bags, camelbaks, danner boots, or most anything else within reason. Of course this has a lot to do with your course staff. Now that I run courses, I have no problem with my instructors or candidates using what works for them in the field... when I took my BIQ to Pet from Sudbury for a week, one of my RCR Sgt's arranged a tour of Y101, a LAV 3, and of course the Kit shop... between the 48 candidates and 12 instructors they made a lot of money on us... my RegF WO even joined the camelbak club that day... I finally picked up a stealth suit... did we "need" everything we bought? Probably not, did it help us do our jobs more effectively? I would say yes... Camelbaks especially!

And as for the Officers with more Gucci kit than the troops, I don't see this as a problem... I'm a kit monkey, but some of the troops blow me out of the water... I've seen Cpls with their own surefire vertical foregrip weaponlights! We're all paid very well IMHO, a bit of after market kit shouldn't break the bank...


----------



## bossi (9 Apr 2005)

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> Bloody heck, those things -> :bullet: are supposed to be BULLETS?
> 
> I just realized that now, I always thought they were something else......



You mean like these ... ?
http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/other/preph.htm


----------



## Ironside (9 Apr 2005)

Wow bossi, very few things I read/look at on my monitor make me laugh out loud...


----------



## NATO Boy (9 Apr 2005)

That was awesome!  ;D


----------



## aesop081 (9 Apr 2005)

bossi said:
			
		

> You mean like these ... ?
> http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/other/preph.htm



How in the world do you find all these things...that was so funny !


----------



## TCBF (9 Apr 2005)

Britney Spears wrote:  "You guys will love it when I become CDS"

You're gonna need a new photo.

Tom


----------



## ZipperHead (9 Apr 2005)

As far as being a kit-slut, I must be in the upper 1% of all crewmen for trying out anything that makes my life more comfortable or easier. You name it, I've probably tried it. I have tried a lot of different gloves out, because I hate having cold, wet hands. The issue gloves (IMO) all suck-ass big time. The new temperate glove (the leather CADPAT) looks pretty decent, for what it's designed for (only seen it for a brief spell). Our unit is getting it issued next week, but we're going to the field, so I'm sure every pot-washer on base will get them before we do, so we'll miss out, no doubt.

I think that if the kit follows a few basic principles, it should be whatever works, works: should look at least somewhat similar to issue kit (to avoid the high-school paintball team effect), it shouldn't just be for show or total idleness (the Hi-Tech "slippers" that were issued like candy to all the people with bad backs and knees (could be the rucksack that some of the fella's were carrying around in front of them that caused the back/knee injuries) that lasted about 3.2 seconds in the field), and for operations especially, effectiveness has to be more important than Gucci-ness (ie. non-IR defeating/resistant kit).

I personally hate the types of people who think that certain traditions have to be upheld at all costs, over the safety and long-term health concerns of their soldiers. The example I am thinking of is the (former) wearing of the black-beret for crewmen at all times. I was on a winter ex when I was a young Tpr, and our Tp WO insisted we wear our beret at all times, no matter how cold it was. Or how guys had to wear the beret when they were in Somalia vs the Tilley hat. When we did Op Grizzly, our RSM grudgingly (probably because he was ordered otherwise) "let" us wear the new CAPAT wide brim hat. I used to find it odd that we had to let everybody know that we were tankers by wearing the black beret. I suppose the 40odd ton tank didn't give it away...... Thankfully, common sense has given way, and we wear the appropriate headwear at the appropriate time.

I think that if somebody wants to squander their money on expensive kit, that's their business. I think maintaining 100% conformity for the sake of everybody looking identical is a complete garrison mentality. I think boots have to be the most important thing that a soldier wears, and we are stuck with the piece of crap that is the MkIII. We are in the 21st century, and there have been many advances in regard to footwear design, so my take on the footwear issue is this: if somebody wants to spend $300 on a pair of boots, let them. As long as it follows the basic guidelines, who cares?!?!? The same people who wear 8 year old velcro closed running shoes to PT will refuse to buy the better boots available, use the MkIII's for their whole career, and then wonder why they have screwed backs and knees. Let the people who want to look after their health and bodies do so (at their own expense, or have a boot allowance). If I knew I didn't have to jump through hoops or have to justify to a MO or a SSM why I want the best Corcoran, Matterhorn, Danner, etc boots, I would go out tomorrow and buy them. But I know that somebody will be jealous that I have enough money free to do this, and whinge, and it would be back to the MkIII (just to clarify, I have worn MkIII's my whole career, with the exception of having orthotics in them, and resoled with Vibrams (one pair) and just recently, after trying to get issued a new pair to get resoled, and being told that they don't have my size, and if they did, I wouldn't get them because they are restricted for Ops only. I was then given a "chit", if you will, to go to a local outfitter, and given a choice of a few boots, and got Goretex Matterhorns. Personally, I would have gone for the Corcoran's (not authorized, however), but you can't look a gift horse in the mouth).

As for the leading by example issue, maybe I'm a piss-poor leader, and disloyal, but I think that if I have to wait for some of my soldiers to get good gear, who would rather squander their money on VLT's, cigarettes, and/or pissing it up against a wall before I can go out to get Gucci kit that makes my life easier and/or more comfortable, I guess I'm a shite example for my soldiers. But I'll have dry, blister free feet, someone useful knees, comfy hands, a dry FMP (the CADPAT CP FMP cover looks pretty lame, but it's waterproof, and if you like writing on a wet FMP, fill your boots), and be somewhat organized. I've given up on waiting for the army to provide what I consider the basics (I woulda/coulda/shoulda bought Matterhorns and a Stealth Suit when I was a young soldier, but was worried about the whims of my various SSM's who would alternately OK or veto non-issue gear depending on their moods. Though to be fair, the CTS program, for the most part, has been very good to excellent (I really like the small pack, and I'm glad I didn't buy the CP version, which pales in comparison). My only complaint is the length of time, and seemingly erratic method of issue. I realize it takes time to produce 60,000 to 100,000 (or whatever the number is) of anything, but somebody has to come up with a sensible priority of issue. 2RCR hasn't been issued the CADPAT goretex jacket, but I've seen DP1's wearing it. And when my wife went to Afghanistan (Op Apollo), they wouldn't issue her a Gerber, because it was only issue for people getting in. When she got in, it was the C5, but the brainiacs behind the counter couldn't figure out that she hadn't ever been issued one (Gerber). So she had to buy one on her own dime.

Anyway, there it is.....

Al


----------



## bossi (10 Apr 2005)

I had to give this one some thought ...
In Afghanistan, the problem I faced was this:
On two occasions, my pistol holster fell off ... one time, whilst shaking hands with a Wakil
(I felt like I was in a Peter Sellers movie, scooping up my pistol and blushing ...)
So, what to do ... ?
Some folks just jammed their nug (slang for pistol) into a magazine pouch on their tac vests.
However, in my job I sometimes had to remove my vest during meetings/negotiations for reasons of diplomacy (and, no matter how diplomatic I wanted to be ... I didn't want to be unarmed ...).
So, what to do ... ?
The issue holster simply didn't cut the mustard.
However, there were other folks from the CF who had a good piece of kit - a thigh rig.
What clinched it for me was ... leadership.
Somebody more senior than me had obtained a thigh rig.
So, I followed suit, and got one that was perfect for what I needed it to do.
I never got Gapped or Mugged, but equally ... I never got plugged ...

Now, as far as the ethics of leadership having Gucci kit ... it was a tool I needed to get my job done, and the Army-issued one was inadequate - so, I chose to get the job done.
We can argue about whether it might have made me a more attractive target for a sniper ... but then we can also argue about whether it confused "the bad people" by making them wonder why I had one of those high-speed, low-drag thigh rigs (i.e. and maybe making them think twice ...)

Do I feel bad because more junior troops could not afford a thigh rig, or because they would have been jacked up for wearing one ... well ... maybe it could also be argued that they became less of a target, if one piece of kit was such a distraction ...

I don't know.   All I know is that I never suffered an "equipment malfunction" with my thigh rig ...

P.S. (by popular demand, the specs on my thigh rig)

The Need:
Why go with a low ride? In a panic situation, a human naturally drops his hands to his thighs to draw. So, even though a belt draw is faster in a premeditated draw, your hands will naturally go to your thighs first in most gun fight situations. This leaves us needing a fast and smooth holster that will anchor itself to the thigh.

The Answer:
The Pistol Thigh Rig (PTR) is a triple retention holster secured to the stable Claw Rigc to provide a smooth, secure, versatile and comfortable holster. The stitching of the holster to the contoured Claw Rig holds the weapon securely to the thigh. This prevents the butt of the pistol from bouncing. 

Universal size with adjustable thumb break for most large frame automatics (Berretta, Glock, Sig, Ruger, Smith and Wesson, etc.) on standard models. Call for availability of other models (compact, Colt .45 / Browning, H&K, revolver, etc.). 

Triple retention straps include snap and Velcror straps over the hammer, and a side-lock buckle-secured strap over the back strap which can be used for extra protection or secured out of the way. 

Felt lined for a smooth draw and to minimize marring of the weapon's finish. 
Plastic lined shell keeps holster open for easy reholsterring and protects the weapon. 

Removable pistol flap (optional with PTR) is secured by Velcro behind the grip for protection and retention while breaking brush. The retention strap routes through the front of the flap and it can be held up and out of the way by Velcro during tactical situations. 

Pouch for a spare magazine, knife, or small collapsible baton. 
Optional speed adapter for attachment to a belt (see Belt Hanger Adapter).

Features:
1000 Denier DuPont Cordura Plus fabric, double layered. 
138 weight bonded nylon parachute harness thread. 
Strength rated nylon webbing and tapes 
American name brand plastic and metal fasteners (Duraflex, ITW Nexus, ACW, etc.). 
VelcroTM and Rip and GripTM mil spec hook and loop fastener. 
Closed cell foam. 
HDPE plastic liners. 
Heavy weight woven elastic. 
Edges bound by double stitched nylon Type 3 seam tape 
Stress points anchored by double stitching, bar tacks, and box x's.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (10 Apr 2005)

It always pissed me off seeing officers wearing kit on simply exercises that we were told we weren't allowed to wear, ie JB's or desert boots etc.   We wouldn't bring them because we were told we weren't allowed to wear them and then you see an officer wearing the precise piece of kit that was forbidden.   Now I don't hang out them balloonists so I'm not sure if they get squared away later but it is a real piss off.   On a funnier note there was this officer that felt all gung ho and wore his personal flak vests to all the CO's O groups (the only pers to do so).   So the CO told him that if he wanted to wear it so bad he would wear it every were.   Meals, shitter etc.   The next O group he didn't have it with him.


----------



## Blackhorse7 (10 Apr 2005)

Bossi....

Got a pic of that holster?  Sounds like top notch gear...


----------



## wack-in-iraq (10 Apr 2005)

i cant believe how much emphasis is put on kit, and not the individual soldier. when i was in the RCR there was one guy in particular who was always buying anything he could get his hands on out of all the US kit mags, but he just happened to be one of the worst 'soldiers' in the coy. focus more on your personal skills, that will get you a million times farther then some new gloves or vibrum desert boots.
  of course it would be nice if our government bought us all sorts of new stuff, but to be honest i was more than happy with the gear i had when i was in. if you really think you are that hard done by, come to Baghdad and see what the iraq NG have to work with, and they are in a combat zone !


----------



## Canadian Sig (10 Apr 2005)

I don't really have a problem with the kit I am issued ( besides maybe boots ). I have a problem with the fact that some of it is next to impossible to get issued. When I was issued my 9mm in Afghanistan I was told that there were no holsters available!. So if I go to the Brit or Italian camp and buy my own I risk getting Gapped or Mugged but the option is to stuff it into a mag puch on my already "mag-challenged" tac vest. In the end I bought my own ( better to ask forgivness ect...) but it left a bad taste.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (10 Apr 2005)

People buy kit for a number of reasons.
1.  LCF
2.  Make their job easier
3.  Be as comfortable as possible
4.  Potentially life saving

I'm sure there are more and we all know people that get kit for all the above but besides the first reason all the others make sense.  If you need to reload your mags because you can only carry five this may prove quite dangerous especially if your in a fire fight or taking a house.  People buy all kinds of new clothing that is far better in terms of quality and the job its designed to too (ie keep warm, keep cool).  Also improvements in hydration are having a slow time making there way into the CF.  Many people buy GPS' because there aren't enough in the system and they want to know where they are.  I could go on but I think you get my point.  People buy kit to improve their abilities as well as look good.


----------



## Infanteer (10 Apr 2005)

You could also say "Makes them more effective".

If someone buys a rig that gives them the ability to carry 12 mags at the ready instead of 4 (along with the other important stuff), wouldn't they be doing the right thing?

We (rightfully) complain that the proposed POS MGS has an extremely limited carrying capacity for rounds - we should be equally critical of limitations that kit may have on the Infantry soldier to do his job.


----------



## bossi (10 Apr 2005)

CFL said:
			
		

> ... People buy kit to improve their abilities ...



Amen, brother.


----------



## SHELLDRAKE!! (10 Apr 2005)

1)Should be only issued kit worn/used until end of trades training and into first unit


  The reason I believe in this is, where else will a soldier learn the value of uniformity.One could ask why were there morning inspections on QL6A course.The candidates are wearing the rank of seargent and yet they all were subject to morning inspection.

  I don't think its too much to ask that up to being trades qualified, everyone follows the same gameplan.Otherwise I believe there will be discipline problems and possibly questioning of most orders throughout ones career.


----------



## KevinB (10 Apr 2005)

SHELLDRAKE!! said:
			
		

> 1)Should be only issued kit worn/used until end of trades training and into first unit



I agree fully there - troops learning the basics have no real clue about kit - uniformity and attention to detail from that uniformity goes alogn way to makign them into soliders (as well as having to solider with shitty kit  ;D )


----------



## Infanteer (10 Apr 2005)

Oh, I don't think anyone will disagree with you, Shelldrake - most "kit-sluts" argue that soldiers should figure out how well the issue stuff works for them before forking out cash for aftermarket gear.

As well, uniformity has its place in recruit and leadership training - I see no arguement against enforcing it in the schools.


----------



## Blackhorse7 (11 Apr 2005)

I agree, while on course.  But deployed or on ex, as long at it looks Canadian, and isn't a VAST departure from the norm, then who cares.  I don't think guys in the field or on ex are going to be looked upon too far past the color of ones uniform (ie don't have a woodland pattern or MARPAT bag or boonie with a CADPAT uniform).


----------



## KevinB (11 Apr 2005)

Who cares if it is MARPAT, Coyote Brown, or Woodland as long as it works...


----------



## Infanteer (11 Apr 2005)

I'm not going to go that far in my own views.  If we got guys tromping around in Woodland Camo Jackets or MARPAT vests, we may be wondering who the hell they are.

As I said before, I say if it looks Canadian (CADPAT or OD/Tan), wear it - that's all your getting outta me, Kevin....


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (11 Apr 2005)

Are you thinking aloud or allowed Infanteer?  ;D


----------



## KevinB (11 Apr 2005)

I was refering to rucks and LBE/armour systems.

   Even I can conform to uniforms - mind you I liked it when the DPM Gortex was issued


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (11 Apr 2005)

Say it ain't so KB.


----------



## Infanteer (11 Apr 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> I was refering to rucks



Ok, as long as you put a cover over it. ;D



> and LBE/armour systems.



Well, if you're not using a PALS rig, you're crazy - so I still say no to German Flectarn Chest Rigs!!!


----------



## IPC10 (11 Apr 2005)

It's funny,

I just scanned through the four pages here and discovered that no one has seriously addressed one of the dominant thoughts behind issue kit is _it's replacement_.

I am sure you can argue that companies will send their go faster kit everywhere you want to, but if for some reason your boots blow out chances are RQ doesn't carry that brand unless it's issue.   (Of course then you would have to wear issue stuff that you thoughfully packed in your follow-on kit until the CF mail arrives three months later).

I not preaching the above point - it's just one to consider.   

I remember being considered a 'rebel' for having a bren gun pouch on my webbing.   Then again the driving reason behind me buying and wearing an Arktis Jungle vest on tour was that my issue web gear just plumb fell apart due to wear and tear (having deployed with all the new pieces I could get).   Thankfully someone at brigade was selling Arktis.   

I wonder if I could 'get away' with wearing that vest now???

It's funny how as much as we preach train as you fight (or work-up as you peace keep) that people view enforcing all issue kit on leadership courses as acceptable.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (11 Apr 2005)

The thing with replacement kit is that at least you can start with your good stuff and if it blows out go to the issued stuff.  I would hazard a guess that no one here would go abroad without the bare minimum in issued get (ie 1 pair of MK 3's) just in case.


----------



## Infanteer (11 Apr 2005)

IPC10 said:
			
		

> I just scanned through the four pages here and discovered that no one has seriously addressed one of the dominant thoughts behind issue kit is _it's replacement_.
> 
> I am sure you can argue that companies will send their go faster kit everywhere you want to, but if for some reason your boots blow out chances are RQ doesn't carry that brand unless it's issue.   (Of course then you would have to wear issue stuff that you thoughfully packed in your follow-on kit until the CF mail arrives three months later).



Ok, I guess the distinction has to be made between non-issue kit that is "extra" and non-issue kit that is "replacement".

"Extra kit" isn't really a factor, since usually it is brought along because Bloggins happens to like it.   Bringing along your nice Hatch gloves or your own GPS shouldn't be an issue - just tell the soldiers to put their issued gloves at the bottom of their ruck.

As for "replacement gear", I guess there is just a level of acceptable risk to take.   If your Chest Rig blowout is so catastropic that it can't be fixed or mended (something I find unlikely) AND your duffelbag with your issue TACVEST (which you thoughtfully packed - something I've always done) hasn't been shipped, are we to assume that the RQ in theater has received a big box of TACVESTs and has them handy to get right to you?

Although you never stated it, I always found it silly to argue "what happens if it goes in the middle of battle?"   First off, if something I use goes in battle, I'm probably not going to wrap it up in gun tape, put my last 3 on it, and send it to the CQ.   In a real situation, when gear goes tits up soldiers will do what they always do, either improvise and fix it or (crass as it sounds) borrow something from another guy who doesn't need it anymore.

Matt Fisher has stated that the US military (the Marines at least) have approved lists of aftermarket gear.   Perhaps this would be a suitable middle ground for us as well - I don't see the USMC breaking down because aftermarket gear kicks the bucket in Fallujah.



> It's funny how as much as we preach train as you fight (or work-up as you peace keep) that people view enforcing all issue kit on leadership courses as acceptable.



Isn't the uniformity used as a stress-factor.   Kinda hard to nail someone on inspection when he's got his Arktis rig layed out how he would take in into battle.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (11 Apr 2005)

Don't the Marines have to buy replacement kit.  Ie their intial issued shitty boots crap out we take them to clothing stores for exchange, I was under the impression that the Marines had to buy their next set whether it was issued intitially or not.


----------



## IPC10 (11 Apr 2005)

CFL said:
			
		

> The thing with replacement kit is that at least you can start with your good stuff and if it blows out go to the issued stuff.   I would hazard a guess that no one here would go abroad without the bare minimum in issued get (ie 1 pair of MK 3's) just in case.



Not to be rude but isn't that what I said with my sentence:



			
				IPC10 said:
			
		

> (Of course then you would have to wear issue stuff that you thoughfully packed in your follow-on kit until the CF mail arrives three months later).



as for the other post



			
				Infanteer said:
			
		

> As for "replacement gear", I guess there is just a level of acceptable risk to take.    If your Chest Rig blowout is so catastropic that it can't be fixed or mended (something I find unlikely) AND your duffelbag with your issue TACVEST (which you thoughtfully packed - something I've always done) hasn't been shipped, are we to assume that the RQ in theater has received a big box of TACVESTs and has them handy to get right to you?



Not too sure where you are going with this.  In my little story I needed repairs done to my webbing (belt was only thing not needing repairs) and the mat techs fixed but after a certain time frame.  I original reason I bought something was that I couldn't get a replacement - not that I tried that hard as I knew that purchase was an option.

My statement on courses was aimed at the field exercises.  Same reason why I don't wear my stealth suit in garrison, during garrison the issue kit works fine.  No need to wear you Oakley assaulter boots unless you're trying to do the old LCF thing.  You have bad knees/back?  Get a chit and get the Mark IIIs re-soled or get a chit for some danners.  Never meant to suggest that it is acceptable to use non-issue kit in garrison.  In my experience even the guys from ottawa played the game and bring regular issue kit for leadership courses at CTC.

Maybe we should look at the US model and have a list of acceptable equipment you could buy and use.  Problem might be to get a companies to produce their kit in CADPAT given the Canadian governments rules on that.


----------



## Infanteer (11 Apr 2005)

IPC10 said:
			
		

> Not too sure where you are going with this.   In my little story I needed repairs done to my webbing (belt was only thing not needing repairs) and the mat techs fixed but after a certain time frame.   I original reason I bought something was that I couldn't get a replacement - not that I tried that hard as I knew that purchase was an option.
> 
> My statement on courses was aimed at the field exercises.   Same reason why I don't wear my stealth suit in garrison, during garrison the issue kit works fine.   No need to wear you Oakley assaulter boots unless you're trying to do the old LCF thing.   You have bad knees/back?   Get a chit and get the Mark IIIs re-soled or get a chit for some danners.   Never meant to suggest that it is acceptable to use non-issue kit in garrison.   In my experience even the guys from ottawa played the game and bring regular issue kit for leadership courses at CTC.



I never got a chit, but I bought (and consistenly wore) Danner's after developing a nasty case of tendonitis due to marching in the lovable MkIII's - no one raised an issue over it (I got them from the Regimental Kitshop   ), so everything was fine and dandy.   It probably wasn't "chitable" (ie: not chronic), but the comfort level went up exponentially.



> Maybe we should look at the US model and have a list of acceptable equipment you could buy and use.   Problem might be to get a companies to produce their kit in CADPAT given the Canadian governments rules on that.



I think this is the right way to go that will offer a workable compromise to those who want to experiment and those who insist on uniformity - it would be way better then the ad hoc and obscure way we go about dealing with the issue now.

The only items that really need to be covered under this is boots, jackets, LBE/vests, and backpacks/rucksacks.   I think that as long as each "vetted" kit manufacturer achieves a certain standard of worksmanship (sorry Blackhawk, no deal for you), then there shouldn't be an issue with replacement.   As I said, the US military seems to allow this and I don't see any real big problems coming out of its recent combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

CADPAT is getting out there - I know Tactical Tailor does stuff in CADPAT (that they get through the back door) and Dropzone makes good stuff with their license.   All we require is the CF to give the license out to a few more companies (Kifaru, PLEASE!) and there could be a fairly decent aftermarket supply.

Cheers,
Infanteer


----------



## KevinB (11 Apr 2005)

The logic is it fails you, never really held water with me.  Specifically the gear I have is "bullet proof" since I have done ex's with half assed CF kit failing - and you know there just is never an RQ around when you need one.
  We where down in the States and we had over 5 broken ruck frames - issue kit - but guess if anyone had spares?  Of course not.

I am pretty sure my Paraclete and Kifaru kit will be going a lot longer than me...

One of the Hills Sgt Maj's made a comment about my kit (noting the ACOG etc.) heck, if he dies I bet there will be a bigger fight over his kit...

And,

 Even I dont wear Oakley boots   ;D


----------



## Infanteer (11 Apr 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> The logic is it fails you, never really held water with me.   Specifically the gear I have is "bullet proof" since I have done ex's with half assed CF kit failing - and you know there just is never an RQ around when you need one.
> We where down in the States and we had over 5 broken ruck frames - issue kit - but guess if anyone had spares?   Of course not.



That is what I was getting at.  We are assuming that the CF supply system is going to be better at replacing stuff.

As I said before, if it is issued or aftermarket and it goes tits up, a soldier is most likely going to have to adapt and improvise to get it in working order - if you buy from the right companies and maintain your gear, this should never be an issue....


----------



## enfield (11 Apr 2005)

British troops in Malaysia in the 50's and American troops in Vietnam often replaced most if not all of their kit after long operations in the jungle - boots and uniforms directly into the garbage on the way to the shower, and I would suspect our ancestors in WWI and II went through more than a few sets of gear. Uniforms, boots, and webbing just don't last that long. Maybe todays material are substantially better - I hope so. Some sources I've read mentioned British troops replacing their boots (destroyed by the march, the weather, and the terrain) with boots from dead Argentinians. Kit does and will fail. No doubt the issue stuff will fail first and most often.  

But, its unlikely RQ will be waiting in the rear with crates of new everything - heck, my unit has enough trouble getting the new stuff in Canada! But if your Danners give out, fine, get out the issue boots and keep going.  

Look Canadian from the outside, especially on the peace support operations where legitimacy and recognition are important. 
Use issue kit on courses and when your new.
Do what you need to do to be comfortable and effective. 

I'm sure everyone has seen the quote about the pretty parade-square army and the mean, dirty, combat field army...


----------



## aesop081 (11 Apr 2005)

" an inspection-ready army never passes combat, a combat-ready army never passes inspection" or something like that ....... ;D


----------



## Infanteer (11 Apr 2005)

Enfield said:
			
		

> British troops in Malaysia in the 50's and American troops in Vietnam often replaced most if not all of their kit after long operations in the jungle - boots and uniforms directly into the garbage on the way to the shower, and I would suspect our ancestors in WWI and II went through more than a few sets of gear. Uniforms, boots, and webbing just don't last that long. Maybe todays material are substantially better - I hope so. Some sources I've read mentioned British troops replacing their boots (destroyed by the march, the weather, and the terrain) with boots from dead Argentinians. Kit does and will fail. No doubt the issue stuff will fail first and most often.



This came to my mind in this discussion - however, I have to wonder if this will be the case now.   I am interested to see AAR's from the US that indicate the failure rate of kit (issued or otherwise) for guys going into Fallujah or the Afghan Mountains.   I doubt they are dumping off their entire kit loadout into the bin when they return.

It seems the stuff we pack around today is quite resiliant if you got the right gear.


----------



## Matt_Fisher (12 Apr 2005)

CFL:
In regard to the post about Marines being required to buy our own gear...that's half-true.   Each active duty Marine is given an annual clothing allowance that is for replacement of uniform items, such as boots, combat uniforms etc.   Each Marine will receive an initial issue while at boot camp, however after that, you're required to maintain the prescribed number and types of uniform items.   Now, depending on your billet and posting, you'll get issued organizational equipment from your unit, such as ruck, sleeping bag, load-bearing vest, body armor, etc.   That stuff you can exchange as it becomes unserviceable, same as in Canada.  The quality of kit we get from supply ranges from good to horrible.   On the good end is our sleeping bags, bivi sack, Interceptor Body Armor with SAPI plates, Marine Corps Individual First Aid Kit and Gore-Tex jacket and pants.   On the horrible side is the medium ALICE pack without frame (logic is that our packs just get strapped to the vehicle anyways...which is half true, but if you ever try fitting 7 months of kit into a Med. ALICE plus your sleeping bag, you're hating life). We also get issued the old ALICE LBV which is crap.   We're probably the last unit in the Marine Corps not to have switched over to the MOLLE system.

Since our LBVs and rucks are crap, the policy on non-issue kit is pretty liberal in the unit.   In recruit training and during your School of Infantry, etc. you're required to wear the issued gear (crawl, walk, run), however after that, most units allow alot of individual discretion.   Have a look at pictures of Marines in Iraq and I challenge you to find a single Marine whose gear layout is the same as the Marine next to him.   In our unit the SOP is that each Marine carries the minimum required amount of ammo, water and have their first aid kit in an identifiable location with the prescribed contents.   As long as your gear is OD, Coyote Brown, Woodland, or Desert Camo it's good to go.   

As hypocritical as it sounds (with my non-issued Kifaru EMR and TT MAV with assorted pouches), I'd personally like to see a bit more standardization within the unit in regard to LBVs, but since the issued stuff is the garbage ALICE LBV that's incompatible with the interceptor body armor (shoulder straps are too wide) it's hard to force everybody to go out and buy decent stuff that's all the same.   We're almost on the other end of the spectrum, where the troops are encouraged to the point of feeling forced to go out and buy gear, as was done when we got deployed to Iraq and possession of Camelbaks was made mandatory, even though they weren't issued and troops had to go out and purchase them with their own funds.

As far as leadership in relation to using issued or non-issued gear...I've never found it to be an issue.   The saltier Marines will often point the new guys in the right direction in terms of kit that works and doesn't work.   It's never been an us vs. them scenario where certain ranks can get away with wearing stuff that the Jr. ranks are forbade from wearing.   I'm in the position of platoon gear queer and show the newbies how much money they can spend in a single online transaction at Lightfighter, Optactical or Tactical Tailor in order to get decent kit that works for them and will meet mission requirements.     ;D

In regard to the professional appearance issue of wearing non-issued gear, I think that the only people who really notice whether somebody is wearing an issued CTS cadpat lbv is the project manager of the CTS LBV program who might be reading the issue of the Maple Leaf that you were pictured in, or a glimpsing shot on The National.   Professionalism lies more with conduct than with whether you're wearing a drop-leg holster that you bought on your own dime.

IPC10:
As far as the field replacement argument goes, how is showing your supply guy a blown out non-issue LBV and temp-loaning an issued one that's in stock different from trading in one that's been destroyed, or what about a soldier who loses his LBV?   Do you only exchange or reissue kit to someone who's got something to trade in?   When I was in Norway a few weeks ago, our LAV got rear ended by another LAV.   One of the Marines in our LAV had his ruck (non-issue Lowe Vector pack) strapped to the exterior of the vehicle as per SOP.   During the collision his ruck was literally torn in half, completely destroyed beyond repair even with a Red Green Handyman's corner amount of duct tape.   He simply temp-loaned one an issued from the MAGTF supply when he got the chance and submitte a loss report along with the vehicle accident report for reimbursement of the value of his ruck.   He was lucky that they even had spares, as when we were in Iraq, if your gear went for a crap, you had to make due for quite awhile as we didn't have any spare stuff for quite some time.   It was actually faster to have commercially available replacement gear sent to you through the military mail system than it was to wait on supply to get it through the channels.   During our 7 month deployment we only got 1 pair of desert boots issued to us in theatre to replace the one pair we were sent over with.

I can't imagine the drain on logistics if every piece of personal kit that was damaged had to be transported out of theatre back to Canada or the US for disposal once it was exchanged for serviceable gear.   Simply, as gear becomes unserviceable, a report should be included with that gear as to what the specific failure is that makes the gear unserviceable and it is put on file (just have it entered into a simple database) and if a repitition of specific problems occur, those reports would be gathered and put into an UCR.   The unserviceable gear should be repaired by a mat tech./rigger or cannibalized for materials (buckles, webbing, patches of cordura, etc.) and destroyed/disposed of in theatre.

About the only downside to using non-issued gear is the event that it is destroyed and you cannot get the government to reimburse you for it.   I've often though about how much its going to suck when my $500US Kifaru EMR & accessories gets a lethal dose of shrapnel from an IED and I'm stuck using the crap medium ALICE bag sans/frame (we don't get issued frames in our unit...go figure) that I have to temp loan from supply.     :'(   However that's my decision to make.   Hopefully Kifaru will honor its lifetime warranty and if nothing else humor my war story with a replacement ruck.     ;D

Where does the answer lie?   I think that the Brits have got a pretty good handle on the use of non-issued kit and still maintaining uniformity and professionalism.   They've been conducting ops around the world in both combat and peacekeeping situations using a variety of issued and non-issued kit.   Their performance has been often admired and emulated in the CFs and yet the subject of them having such a liberal policy on non-issued gear and how it affects their professionalism (if at all) is rarely discussed.   

I think that the first step would be to expand the availability of Cadpat licenses to some reputable gear manufacturers such as Kifaru, SO Tech and Tactical Tailor, etc. and then develop a list of approved aftermarket manufacturers.   The real emphasis should be put on the sub-unit (company/squadron, etc.) setting the standard for what the soldiers load-out will be and going from there and using some common sense.   As long as the gear is OD/Cadpat/Coyote (whatever matches the environment within reason) and it is from a list of approved vendors, and the soldiers load-out meets established requirements it should be authorized for use in the field.   

I hate to say it, but alot of these issues of using or not using non-issued kit boils down to the fact that the CFs have not had to engage in a major shooting conflict since Korea to highlight the deficiencies in issued equipment, and I am well aware of 3VP in Afghanistan and ops in Bosnia/Medak pocket, etc. but these just further point out how the mindset has moved away from combat to...well whatever (?) in regard to providing equipment and support to the pointy end.


----------



## Britney Spears (12 Apr 2005)

> Since our LBVs and rucks are crap, the policy on non-issue kit is pretty liberal in the unit.




Whoa, now that's just crazy talk.


----------



## MPSHIELD (12 Apr 2005)

Hmm, just to add to this post regarding CF members and non issued kit. On and Ex Cougar Salvo held in Kamloops   BC last month, I remember seeing a WO dressed in a variety of Kit. At first I thought he was OPFOR (Opposing force) however I learned that he was the CSM of one of the TF Coy's. He had a MARPAT HAT, an unknown OD LBV, German Flectarn Gators, and what looked like civi pattern hiking boots. The only issued clothing i could see was his CADPAT shirt and pants. The troops within the company were not as "radically dressed". They did have a mixed bag of issued and non issued kit. Despite the varying boots styles, shemagh scarves, non issued pistol holsters, non- issued knee pads, non issued stealth suits (under combat shirt) and non issued Camelbaks and back packs, they all to me look unmistakably Canadian. Now I was not in the TF Coy therefore if there was someone who was there that wants correct me or add anything please feel free.

The point is, aside form the CSM, all the troops were able to "add" kit and still look Canadian.

(edit-Spelling)


----------



## IPC10 (12 Apr 2005)

In a vain attempt to establish more succinctly where I stand on the non-issue kit let me relate the following:

In the fall of 1998 the Comd of 1 CMBG (Col Leslie at the time) stated to the assembled Bn that he didn't care what we wore in the field as long as it worked and we looked Canadian.  The first ex was a bit of a gong show but by Light Heavy things had reached a good equilibrium.  This was also illustrated beautifully to me when during the field portion of a basic recce course in Fort Lewis the 16 odd candidates on the course crowded into the chow hall and we realized that no two people were wearing the same type of boots.

As long as the chain establishes a left and right of arc, like the old hair regulations â Å“may not present a bizarre or exaggerated appearance.â ?  Once those arcs are established then all all follow, or lead by example.  If the RSM says no blue gloves, then no blue gloves.


----------



## Matt_Fisher (12 Apr 2005)

MPSHIELD said:
			
		

> Hmm, just to add to this post regarding CF members and non issued kit. On and Ex Cougar Salvo held in Kamloops   BC last month, I remember seeing a WO dressed in a variety of Kit. At first I thought he was OPFOR (Opposing force) however I learned that he was the CSM of one of the TF Coy's. He had a MARPAT HAT, an unknown OD LBV, German Flectarn Gators, and what looked like civi pattern hiking boots. The only issued clothing i could see was his CADPAT shirt and pants. The troops within the company were not as "radically dressed". They did have a mixed bag of issued and non issued kit. Despite the varying boots styles, shemagh scarves, non issued pistol holsters, non- issued knee pads, non issued stealth suits (under combat shirt) and non issued Camelbaks and back packs, they all to me look unmistakably Canadian. Now I was not in the TF Coy therefore if there was someone who was there that wants correct me or add anything please feel free.
> 
> The point is, aside form the CSM, all the troops were able to "add" kit and still look Canadian.
> 
> (edit-Spelling)



Wow,  that WO must have steered clear from the TF HQ.  I have it from good sources that an OC of one of the sub-units was relieved and sent home for not wearing the issue Tac-Vest and Helmet and there was a brigade wide witch hunt for anyone wearing desert boots.   :


----------



## Infanteer (12 Apr 2005)

Anyone who has heard the story on that specific CSM will understand his whole eccentric kit outlook.  Various SOC units and multiple Armies (and LEOs) tend to do that to a guy.  I've heard that WRT to leadership he is a superb WO.


----------



## 2 Cdo (12 Apr 2005)

The only major problem I see with personal kit is, when things fall apart(and they will eventually) what are you going to replace that Gucci kit with? I don't know too many CQ's/RQ's who carry an extensive line of your favourite hiking boots or chest rigs!


----------



## Matt_Fisher (12 Apr 2005)

2 Cdo said:
			
		

> The only major problem I see with personal kit is, when things fall apart(and they will eventually) what are you going to replace that Gucci kit with? I don't know too many CQ's/RQ's who carry an extensive line of your favourite hiking boots or chest rigs!



Did you read the discussion thread?   :


----------



## Britney Spears (12 Apr 2005)

Your question has already been answered earlier in the threat at some length. The answer is "same thing you do when the ISSUED kit falls apart. replace it with more issued kit."


----------



## Infanteer (12 Apr 2005)

See kids, this is why it pays to go back at least 1 page so that you know what the discussion is about.

You don't want to look silly talking about Leopard Tanks when everybody else is talking about toilet paper....


----------



## TangoTwoBravo (12 Apr 2005)

To amplify Bossi's post a few pages back, I also used a non-issue thigh rig for my pistol overseas.  I got a few raised eyebrows but I pretty much only wore it off camp.  I bought it because the issue one was not working for me. 

In a unit, I feel that we shouldn't get too pedantic about kit.  This runs somewhat counter to our way of doing things.  As long as the rules have some common sense and are applied evenly there shouldn't be any big leadership issues.  Courses are, perhaps, a different matter.  That being said, should we not train as we fight?  Its been said elsewhere but mosts post-battle photos of victorious troops show an incredible diversity of kit. 

Cheers,

2B


----------



## mover1 (12 Apr 2005)

Wesley H. Allen said:
			
		

> :
> 
> I don't know who you are, or how much TI you have, but sometimes more often than not, the issue stuff is inadequate, and falls short of the soldier's real needs. I have 'many toys' as you seem to think they are, and I don't have 'em for the LCF either.



15 years TI. 
Yes some of the stuff is inadequate. But there is something out there called a UCR form CF-777(Unacceptable condition report) that can be filed through either your unit or supply. As well if you have an idea for a new policy or way of doing things submit it through CFAO 99-2 -- INCENTIVE AWARD PLAN  if you have something right off your noggin that has never been thought of before and will revolutionise the way you work though some new fangled device, try  CFAO 99-4 -- INVENTIONS. 
That way the powers that be can know and identify the shortcomings of the kit or policy and can correct it and better tailor it to you needs. Plus it can be finacially rewarding to the submitter if there are any savings incurred to DND.


----------



## KevinB (12 Apr 2005)

Mover1,

 Mnay UCR's have been submitted on gear from operational units.  Problems come down to $ or it was some sacred cow.


----------



## Matt_Fisher (12 Apr 2005)

mover1 said:
			
		

> 15 years TI.
> Yes some of the stuff is inadequate. But there is something out there called a UCR form CF-777(Unacceptable condition report) that can be filed through either your unit or supply. As well if you have an idea for a new policy or way of doing things submit it through CFAO 99-2 -- INCENTIVE AWARD PLAN   if you have something right off your noggin that has never been thought of before and will revolutionise the way you work though some new fangled device, try   CFAO 99-4 -- INVENTIONS.
> That way the powers that be can know and identify the shortcomings of the kit or policy and can correct it and better tailor it to you needs. Plus it can be finacially rewarding to the submitter if there are any savings incurred to DND.



I think you've been drinking the NDHQ Kool-Aid too long... :

Ask KevinB about how many UCRs were submitted regarding the issued Tac-Vest or the Bianchi holster to no avail.   I remember a 45 minute conversation I had with a program officer from CTS about the Tac-Vest, ruck and other assorted kit back in 1999.   He seemed little interested in what other militaries, particularly the US were doing in regard to modular gear, and dismissed the MOLLE/PALS system as "something that wasn't working anyways" and how Canada had developed its own unique "daisy chain" method of attaching kit, and that there was no need for a modular vest or to carry more than the infantry school prescribed load-out of 5 magazines.

I'm all for going through the channels to identify and report non-effective equipment, but when those channels fail you consistently what are you supposed to do?


----------



## Infanteer (12 Apr 2005)

Matt_Fisher said:
			
		

> I remember a 45 minute conversation I had with a program officer from CTS about the Tac-Vest, ruck and other assorted kit back in 1999.   He seemed little interested in what other militaries, particularly the US were doing in regard to modular gear, and dismissed the MOLLE/PALS system as "something that wasn't working anyways" and how Canada had developed its own unique "daisy chain" method of attaching kit, and that there was no need for a modular vest or to carry more than the infantry school prescribed load-out of 5 magazines.



Wow, now there is a nomination for "Tool of the Year" award....


----------



## MPSHIELD (12 Apr 2005)

"Anyone who has heard the story on that specific CSM will understand his whole eccentric kit outlook.   Various SOC units and multiple Armies (and LEOs) tend to do that to a guy.   I've heard that WRT to leadership he is a superb WO."

Infanteer- Yes in my post i had failed to mention that. In my opinion, all that kit did not effect him in doing his job (which is important) and did not have an negative effect on his leadership. In my dealings with him, he was very supportive of his troops and a good leader.


----------



## KevinB (12 Apr 2005)

Matt_Fisher said:
			
		

> Ask KevinB about how many UCRs were submitted regarding the issued Tac-Vest or the Bianchi holster to no avail.



Actually our local chain listened and we got to use personal kit...

 Unfortunately DLR woudl not field a Paraclete mass buy nor for Safariland..


----------



## 2 Cdo (12 Apr 2005)

Sorry about that one troops, got a little lazy and didn't do any back checking. But I digress, that's got to be the first time ever that I've made a mistake! ;D


----------



## PhilB (13 Apr 2005)

Matt,

Your definitly right about the desert boot witch hunt. The det of Calg highrs I was running came off patrol and 6 days in the field to have a shower at the fsg. Not more than 2 minutes on the ground and the brigade RSM was up one side of me and down the other. Fun stuff


----------



## The_Falcon (13 Apr 2005)

The dislike of desert boots is also alive and well for LFCA's Ex Stalwart Guardian.  In some locales the animosity to non-issue kit is extreme.  During pre-training for Athena Roto 3 in Meaford, we were told we could not wear camelbacks at all because the candidates training at the base were not allowed to wear them.  Not a kit thing, but to illustrate the anal retentiveness of the SNCO's in Meaford, we were also directed for the sake of "uniformity" that the scrim on our helmets MUST be the burlap kind given out by the RQ, because thats what the recruits had.  The final kicker was, for a period of almost a month, we were not permitted to wear our regimental headdress up top.  Apparently the sight of all the different Highland/Scottish balmorals (with odd maroon beret) really annoyed somebody.  So to be "uniform" we had to wear the bush hat everywhere.  

I know I kinda hijacked this, but I just wanted to illustrate just how anal some people/bases are when it comes to uniformity.


----------



## Pikache (13 Apr 2005)

^Yet another reason why anyone would want to work in Meaford, unless you're crazy. (or desperate for money)


----------



## Uberman (13 Apr 2005)

In the late 80's I recall our entire battallion being jacked up by our new CO for wearing US rain gear and the the ranger liner. We were told, in no uncertain terms that we were not to wear any non Canadian issue equipment. This included the very long, and comfortable British body scarf, US gloves, or any other piece of kit that was not issued. Of course if you wore the Canadian rain gear, you were most assuredly guaranteed to be wet in minutes. He also had us do PT with metal plate inserts in our mag pouches to simulate full webbing, but thats beside the point. Shortly thereafter our Battalion was inspected by a General - I think it might have been MacKenzie, but not entirely certain, It was a rather wet and chilly day. The General was wearing the British scarf, British gloves and of course the beloved US rain poncho. Didn't hear much about kit after that.


----------



## NATO Boy (13 Apr 2005)

Nothin'  like seein' the Top of the food chain smite your own kit regs...what irony  ;D

Just like my CSM on SQ and DP1 INF. The only non-issue kit we could use was a nuke bag and maybe Nalgene water bottles (don't ask.) Yet when the CSM (who enforced the issue-only standard) came on our patrol as an observer, he had the following:

1. Corcoran boots (or at least some wicked boots with a buckled cuff, kinda like WW2 CDN DR or D-Day boots.)
2. Some OD clone of the British Battle Vest.
3. Sunglasses (these aren't an issued item, thus the troops could get 'em anywhere; but we couldn't wear 'em without a chit for "light sensitivity.)

At least when a GEN does it, it's mostly because he's going with what works for himself (what we all try to do but sometimes get raped for it) and what could work for others.


----------



## Kat Stevens (13 Apr 2005)

Anyone remember the "1 CMBG wants you" poster from the General Jimmy regime (I'm on the AEV  ;D)?  We sat out in the Sarcee Trg Area all day, in completely QM fashion for hours. The Bde Comd shows up in head to toe non-issued kit.  And he was a hawk for uniformity, among other things, like boxer inspections.... ;D

CHIMO,  Kat


----------



## Britney Spears (13 Apr 2005)

> I'm on the AEV  Grin


----------



## sigpig (13 Apr 2005)

I remember that poster, I used to have it up in my civvie office at one time. Will have to see if I can dig it out now.

Once when we were shooting the _*old*_ Strathcona calendar the model needed a cf tunic to wear for a picture so she wore mine! Unfortunately that pic didn't make the calendar, some old blue tunic did  

By the way Britney, congrats on the baby...


----------



## Matt_Fisher (13 Apr 2005)

hahahahah, the good old Strathcona nudie calendars.  Talk about the old days...how much trouble would a unit get in now for doing one of those?   ;D


----------



## Michael Dorosh (13 Apr 2005)

sigpig said:
			
		

> some old blue tunic



"Patrol Dress"

...ah, our fading corporate memory....


----------



## Jarnhamar (13 Apr 2005)

> Apparently the sight of all the different Highland/Scottish balmorals (with odd maroon beret) really annoyed somebody.



I'm sure they had some fancy excuse for it. 
More bullshit.

I've always said one of the worst morale killers is when troops get told something ie 'don't wear this' only to see their superiors wearing it.

It's still obviously alive and well in the CF.  I think I would rather chew my own arm off than be in meaford.


----------



## Kat Stevens (13 Apr 2005)

Was anyone else on pre-deployment trg with 2VP in '96?  We in the Engineer Sqn had to walk around Wainwrong with 5 (yes, I said 5!) different hats in our pocket.  Which beanie you wore depended on which part of the camp you were in.  It also didn't do much for Sapper morale that every binrat in the NSE and Bn Gp had all their gortex sniv kit, and we were left out of the loop. I got my Gucci jacket in June, came in REAL handy...Nothing to do with the topic, I know... I now return you to your regular programming....

CHIMO,  Kat


----------



## COBRA-6 (13 Apr 2005)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> During pre-training for Athena Roto 3 in Meaford, we were told we could not wear camelbacks at all because the candidates training at the base were not allowed to wear them.   Not a kit thing, but to illustrate the anal retentiveness of the SNCO's in Meaford, we were also directed for the sake of "uniformity" that the scrim on our helmets MUST be the burlap kind given out by the RQ, because thats what the recruits had.   The final kicker was, for a period of almost a month, we were not permitted to wear our regimental headdress up top.   Apparently the sight of all the different Highland/Scottish balmorals (with odd maroon beret) really annoyed somebody.   So to be "uniform" we had to wear the bush hat everywhere.



I have buddies who were there, they said it was like doing QL3 again! There were a lot of after-action points that came out of that experiment... thank God they moved the roto 4 trg to Pet!


----------



## ZipperHead (15 Apr 2005)

> Was anyone else on pre-deployment trg with 2VP in '96?  We in the Engineer Sqn had to walk around Wainwrong with 5 (yes, I said 5!) different hats in our pocket.  Which beanie you wore depended on which part of the camp you were in.



Ahhhhh, good times with 2 Pick!!!! Even better was Roto 7, with the jihad against fleece jackets as outerwear, v-neck t-shirts, and long sideburns. And, although I agreed with it in principle, the banning of desert boots in the winter months went over well (or not.....). When you're that worried about the minor things (and not the welfare of the troops) it's time to pack up and come home.... I'm surprised we didn't have to paint rocks.....

Al


----------



## Gunner (15 Apr 2005)

> Ahhhhh, good times with 2 Pick!!!! Even better was Roto 7, with the jihad against fleece jackets as outerwear, v-neck t-shirts, and long sideburns. And, although I agreed with it in principle, the banning of desert boots in the winter months went over well (or not.....). When you're that worried about the minor things (and not the welfare of the troops) it's time to pack up and come home.... I'm surprised we didn't have to paint rocks.....Al



That post made me feel nostalgic for Roto 7...not.


----------



## BITTER PPLCI CPL (7 Aug 2005)

While we are issued good kit, I can't help but see gear out there thats cadpat or even OD (rucksacks, lbv's, chest rigs etc...) that I would rather use, makes sense, yay or nay?


----------



## RangerRay (7 Aug 2005)

Absolutely concur.

As long as we can be identified as Canadian Army soldiers, with CADPAT or OD, I don't think it should matter.

I believe the Brits are allowed to purchase their own kit...

Same goes with something like wearing Danner combat boots.  Far better than issued ones (at least when I was in) and pretty much have the same design...


----------



## geo (7 Aug 2005)

Buy or issue.... aye, that's the question
If there is a need identified then the system should do what it has to - to provide & meet that need. If individuals must buy/ fill a definite need (hole) in essential kit then there is something wrong... and the CF should compensate members for their purchase. 

There was a time when the CF was working on the design of a combat bra..... (which an american journalist refered to as "the cones of death").. in the end; the CF gave up on the project and now refunds female personnel for the purchase of the sports bras of their choice.

On a practical level, if the kit is similar in appearance to what is available in the system and you chose to buy your own because you feel it fits better or the section is only entitled to 4 and you want one too.... then all fair and good, buy it & wear it.

If the kit is a radical switch from what is available from the system, but there is kit available in the system then I would say that every effort should be made to use the kit that is provided for the task.... If you buy it by personal choice and you bust it in the exercising of your duties.... you'd like the system to replace it or reimburse you for your loss......

IMHO


----------

