# Designing your own equipment do people actually do it?



## IRepoCans (21 Apr 2012)

So I've heard some stuff from reservists from my area that a few people run homegrown chest rigs, packs the whole nine yards. I think its a pretty cool idea to design a piece of kit that could allow you to do a job more effectively as long as no regs are breached of course. So my question is do people actually do it or do I just know some wacky reservists?


----------



## my72jeep (21 Apr 2012)

Where do you think CP Gear,Warrior Gear, Drop Zone all came from?


----------



## IRepoCans (21 Apr 2012)

I figured those were more of  a mainstream tactical choice, but I see your point.


----------



## MikeL (21 Apr 2012)

What he means is that a lot of the guys who started up gear companies were Military before and made their own gear for themselves and other troops. Check out Tactical Tailor, theres a quick write up on the guy who created it and how he got into modifying and making gear for himself and others in his unit while he  was serving in the US Army prior to creating the company Tactical Tailor.


----------



## IRepoCans (21 Apr 2012)

Thanks, I'm sort of a person that likes designing stuff that I'd use so I was just curious if it was a small thing or a lot of folk did it.


----------



## GAP (21 Apr 2012)

IRepoCans said:
			
		

> Thanks, I'm sort of a person that likes designing stuff that I'd use so I was just curious if it was a small thing or a lot of folk did it.



So....call the companies and ask them how they went about it...can't hurt...


----------



## IRepoCans (21 Apr 2012)

I guess it wouldn't hurt to shoot a email over.


----------



## Lerch (22 Apr 2012)

When I lived in Gagetown I had CPGear make a couple things for me, nothing as far as a rig, but some pouches, and minor tweaks to one of my jackets.


----------



## GnyHwy (22 Apr 2012)

IRepoCans said:
			
		

> I think its a pretty cool idea to design a piece of kit that could allow you to do a job more effectively as long as no regs are breached of course.



Unless your a soldier from DLR or DGLEPM which works with industry and attempts to design for the masses, "designing" (modifying) your own riggs is a breach of regs.  If a piece of kit is not authorized for use by our CoC, it is technically illegal.  Yes, I know a lot of people do it, and the CoC sometimes looks the other way, but is that the right thing to do?  If you are injured because of an illegal piece of kit, who is to blame?  You or the CoC that turned a blind eye?

I suspect the reason that it is taking forever to get a good modular rig, and the fact that we have went through several differnet variations in the last bunch of years, is that we will never get the 100% solution.  Letting the troops do whatever they want is not a solution either.

Once we get a good modular rig, I believe the troops should get use to it, and use it to the best of their advantage, without modifying or "designing".


----------



## IRepoCans (22 Apr 2012)

Just a question on that modular rig, is it going over the Plate/Armour carrier in use now? Or is it going to be a Plate Carrier with PALs?


----------



## Snaketnk (22 Apr 2012)

All the ones in trial right now go over our issued FPV; as it should be.


----------



## IRepoCans (22 Apr 2012)

Is there a link for this trial?


----------



## Loachman (22 Apr 2012)

There's a "Roll Your Own" forum at www.lightfighter.net. When you register, follow the instructions exactly, especially the one about posting an introduction in the designated forum before posting anywhere else.


----------



## LineJumper (22 Apr 2012)

Yes


----------



## X Royal (26 Apr 2012)

When the C7 first came out and before the scopes I knew someone who designed and manufactured a sight adjustment tool. It was quite small and worked excellent. He was a machinist by trade. I still have one around here some place.


----------



## Miller97 (26 Apr 2012)

GnyHwy said:
			
		

> If you are injured because of an illegal piece of kit, who is to blame?  You or the CoC that turned a blind eye?




Both..


----------



## MikeL (26 Apr 2012)

GnyHwy said:
			
		

> If you are injured because of an illegal piece of kit, who is to blame?  You or the CoC that turned a blind eye?



Injured because of a illegal piece of kit?  Like wearing non issue Ballastic eye wear or chest rig overseas and getting injured/killed by Taliban/AQ actions or referring to something else?

Second hand info, from a few sources is no matter what you are wearing, you are covered by VAC.  As well I know some guys who have been injured overseas and none of them lost any benefits or money due to them wearing non issue gear.


----------



## Towards_the_gap (26 Apr 2012)

GnyHwy said:
			
		

> If a piece of kit is not authorized for use by our CoC, it is technically illegal.  Yes, I know a lot of people do it, and the CoC sometimes looks the other way, but is that the right thing to do?  If you are injured because of an illegal piece of kit, who is to blame?  You or the CoC that turned a blind eye?



Note: Skeletor beat me to it, but we are singing from the same song sheet....


This is something that has irked me for years. Not taking a particular potshot at yourself, but aren't you just parroting the party line because you heard somewhere that, for example, if you receive an eye injury because of an IED strike and you weren't wearing the issue BEW's but rather ESS ballistic goggles, that VAC/DND would not compensate you for any disability you suffer as a result? Army urban myth I say.

I have a lot of friends who are missing eyes, legs, teeth and arms, and not once during their whole ordeal, from Role 3 ==> Landstuhl ===> Sunnybrook and so on, did some bean counter come in and request a swore statement that every single piece of kit on their body had an NSN, nor had any of them been told 'too bad you were wearing non-issue kit, it's your fault you can't see now'. What causes the injury is the friggin IED/Gunshot/Mortar etc, not the brand name of the gear.

As for illegal, please show me the criminal code/NDA act that applies and that I am in breach of everyday.


----------



## PuckChaser (27 Apr 2012)

IRepoCans said:
			
		

> Is there a link for this trial?



I'm currently deployed with that last of the trial rigs, and posted pictures and details of my rig here: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/99830/post-1097312.html#msg1097312

I have issues with imageshack from Kabul, so if the pictures are gone I can take a few more and repost here. The rest of the thread has details on the other 2 rigs trialed.


----------



## GnyHwy (27 Apr 2012)

I'm with you guys more than you may think.  I am just trying to state the other side of the argument.  I agree, the type of kit doesn't really matter against most kinetic attacks; you could be wearing a full up bomb suit with all PPE underneath and still be gravely injured.

I think we can all agree that the troops shouldn't have to buy their own, and we should be able to agree that their should be some sort of standard.  I believe the new FFO if it ever gets here will please at least 90% of the masses; there will always be some who will complain no matter what you give them.


----------



## Redeye (27 Apr 2012)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> I'm currently deployed with that last of the trial rigs, and posted pictures and details of my rig here: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/99830/post-1097312.html#msg1097312
> 
> I have issues with imageshack from Kabul, so if the pictures are gone I can take a few more and repost here. The rest of the thread has details on the other 2 rigs trialed.



The SORD rig's not bad - but I'm really, really wishing we had something integrated like... well... every other army here. It's just easier to have MOLLE on the armour and whatever you need attached - one item to deal with.


----------



## IRepoCans (28 Apr 2012)

Redeye said:
			
		

> The SORD rig's not bad - but I'm really, really wishing we had something integrated like... well... every other army here. It's just easier to have MOLLE on the armour and whatever you need attached - one item to deal with.



Would you be suggesting something like our friends to the South use?


----------



## MikeL (28 Apr 2012)

Just to add on what the Americans use,  they have the PALs webbing on their plate carriers,IOTV, etc so pouches can be mounted directly on,  as well the Army and Marines have chest rigs that you can add pouches onto and mount the chest rig right onto their plater carrier.   IMO that is a good system,  gives the individual the choice if they wish to directly mount pouches to their body armour,  or the option of mounting a chest rig so you can go slick, or with FFO as needed,

Tactical Assault Panel
http://soldiersystems.net/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/IOTV-in-OCP-with-TAP-mounted.jpg
http://loadbearingequipment.ciehub.info/FILBE/ChestRig.png


Canadians do have plate carriers, etc that pouches can be directly placed onto via PALs/MOLLE but it is only for CPP and CANSOF at this time.


----------



## Redeye (28 Apr 2012)

IRepoCans said:
			
		

> Would you be suggesting something like our friends to the South use?



Yes. And everywhere else. I work with Australians, Italians, Brits, Germans, and Americans. They all integrate their armour and load carriage. It's much simpler.


----------



## IRepoCans (28 Apr 2012)

Makes sense, so it would be more cost effective if the armour carrier had rows of PALs webbing instead of using a armour carrier with a chest rig. Example the CIRAS armour carrier:


----------



## MikeL (28 Apr 2012)

IRepoCans said:
			
		

> Makes sense, so it would be more cost effective if the armour carrier had rows of PALs webbing instead of using a armour carrier with a chest rig. Example the CIRAS armour carrier:



Cost effective shouldn't really play a part when it comes to PPE and FFO.  IMO you should be able to have the choice to mount pouches directly onto the vest, or wear a chest rig that can be worn stand alone or mounted  on the plate carrier.


----------



## medicineman (28 Apr 2012)

Helmet on for a moment...when we were in Croatia in the mid 90's, they were trialling the Gen 2 armour (the stiff Israeli thing) with built on load carriage - purpose designed mag carriers, plate pouches and they'd actually sewn part of an '82 pattern web belt onto the bottom rear/sides so you could secure your water bottle and C9 pouches if you wanted.  It actually made sense at the time as well - we were guntaping and bungeeing stuff onto the vests in a manner that just caused issues...not to mention the mags not always fitting well into the breast pockets if the vest was new - we had to bungee the pockets shut.  Helmet off.

MM


----------



## IRepoCans (28 Apr 2012)

So assuming that the superninjasnipers do have easier standards on equipment they just go with a plate carrier with PALs and crack it out with all the Gucci they can grab. Why then don't the rest of the forces have a selected PALs armour carrier with an assortment of pouches and packs?


----------



## PuckChaser (28 Apr 2012)

Lets not go crazy, we won a major battle getting rid of that POS "tactical (fishing) vest".

In 20 years we'll get whatever the CANSOF guys are using that has MOLLE/PALS and doubles as a plate carrier/kevlar. Who knows, maybe the winning bid for ISSP will be a combination rig.


----------



## medicineman (28 Apr 2012)

IRepoCans said:
			
		

> So assuming that the superninjasnipers do have easier standards on equipment they just go with a plate carrier with PALs and crack it out with all the Gucci they can grab. Why then don't the rest of the forces have a selected PALs armour carrier with an assortment of pouches and packs?



Likely something to do with the money:soldier ratio being alot higher in SF than in the green army.

MM


----------



## paffomaybe (28 Apr 2012)

http://www.army.mil/article/67318/_Ironman__a_game_changer_on_battlefield/

*'Ironman' a game-changer on battlefield*

FORWARD OPERATING BASE MEHTAR Lam, Afghanistan, Oct. 14, 2011 -- It all began during an intense 2 1/2-hour firefight with the enemy earlier this year in Afghanistan.

As members of the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 34th Infantry Division, Iowa National Guard, sat around later at Forward Operating Base Mehtar Lam and discussed the engagement, they talked about how three-man teams manning crew-served weapons struggled to stay together over difficult terrain in fluid battles.

Someone mentioned actor Jesse Ventura in the movie "Predator." His character brandished an M-134 Mini-gun fed by an ammo box on his back. After the Soldiers had a good laugh over that thought, Staff Sgt. Vincent Winkowski asked why a gunner couldn't carry a combat load of ammo. He decided to pursue the idea.

"When we first arrived in theater in late October (2010), we were issued the Mk 48 7.62 mm machine guns," Winkowski said. "This was a new piece of equipment for us, and we struggled to come up with a solution for carrying and employing ammunition for it due to our small size and the inability to have a designated ammo bearer, as is common doctrine with the M240B.

"The ammunition sacks that came with it made it too cumbersome and heavy to carry over long, dismounted patrols and especially when climbing mountains. Initially, we came up with using 50-round belts and just reloading constantly, which led to lulls of fire and inefficiency."

So Winkowski grabbed an old ALICE (all-purpose lightweight individual carrying equipment) frame, welded two ammunition cans together -- one atop the other after cutting the bottom out of the top can -- and strapped the fused cans to the frame. To that he added a MOLLE (modular, lightweight load-carrying equipment) pouch to carry other equipment.

"We wondered why there wasn't some type of dismounted (Common Remote Operating Weapons Station) that fed our machine guns instead of a mini-gun as portrayed in the movie," Winkowski said. "So, I decided to try it using the feed chute assembly off of the vehicle CROWS. We glued a piece of wood from an ammo crate inside the ammo cans to create the decreased space necessary so the rounds would not fall in on each other.

"My Mark 48 gunners, Spc. Derick Morgan and Spc. Aaron McNew, who also had input to the design and evaluation, took it to the range and tested it, and even with its initial shortcomings, it was much better than the current TTP (tactics, techniques and procedures) we employed. On Feb. 26, 2011, our prototype 'Ironman' pack even saw its first combat use by Spc. McNew when our squad was ambushed by up to 50 fighters in a river valley, and it worked great!"


----------



## Matt_Fisher (28 Apr 2012)

As was mentioned earlier the 'Roll Your Own' thread on www.lightfighter.net is a good resource for the home sewer.  

Another one is www.diytactical.com/forums which is one of the best resources on the web for people designing and building their own tactical gear, both for personal use, or for commercial sale.

Cheers,

Matt


----------



## IRepoCans (28 Apr 2012)

Matt_Fisher said:
			
		

> As was mentioned earlier the 'Roll Your Own' thread on www.lightfighter.net is a good resource for the home sewer.
> 
> Another one is www.diytactical.com/forums which is one of the best resources on the web for people designing and building their own tactical gear, both for personal use, or for commercial sale.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the link, I'll post around some of my questions on there not 18 yet so I can't go on lightfighter.


----------



## IRepoCans (17 May 2012)

Hey guys I have a question: so if you could have a plate carrier with molle what features would you want in the design? You can use existing plate carriers and equipment to show what you would want in this 'carrier'.

I was thinking a quick release system of some sort so the Medical Tech doesn't have to shear through your armour, leaving you without a armour when being carried to the medvac.


----------



## MikeL (17 May 2012)

I wouldn't bother making plate carriers to market to the CF as the majority of the CF would not be able to use it.  Issue FPV only.



What kind of niche are you looking for,  how are you going to stand out and make people want to buy your stuff, when theres companies that are very well known,  good products, and have government contracts,  etc like LBT and so on.


----------



## IRepoCans (17 May 2012)

Not saying I'm marketing I'm just flexing my designing muscles that haven't been used as of late, figured I'd put them for something practical other then medieval fantasy sketches or the latter. I see your point of view on the subject, don't assume all sixteen year olds are 'Airsofting/Gear whoring wannabes' I'm just asking a no bullshit question what people would like, do some sketches and hell if I can afford it make some prototypes, but like I mentioned its just a hobby to draw out things.


----------



## MikeL (17 May 2012)

Not to be mean,  but you are 16,  from what I can tell no experience with making gear, etc  and you are wanting to get into a very populated market,  it's not going to be easy, if you can even get started.  Do you have machine(s),  any material?  If you have material what kind? 


So,  if you get a list of stuff that people would use if they could,  what would you do with that info?  Please don't call our SOF guys super-ninjasnipers.  Also is your personal preference Eagle or are you saying it's personal choice for SOF?  If it's your personal choice,  what are you basing it off?


----------



## IRepoCans (17 May 2012)

-Skeletor- said:
			
		

> So,  if you get a list of stuff that people would use if they could,  what would you do with that info?  Please don't call our SOF guys super-ninjasnipers.  Also is your personal preference Eagle or are you saying it's personal choice for SOF?  If it's your personal choice,  what are you basing it off?



Not for SOF, heh I said it was something I enjoyed using for training for the CF it had a large hydration bladder and lots of room to carry weights for rucking. Plus could be useful when in the CF (If I'm accepted when done schooling) just said it was a good piece of gear in my opinion. Plus Eagle Ind. from the info I've gotten on DIY-Tact is the benchmark of everything and anything armour carriage related.


----------



## Shrek1985 (5 Aug 2012)

I had John the Rigger up in pet put a zipper in the side of my bivy bag...Lord Gods, did that make it better! I can actually get in and out of it now! And it's still plenty water resistant too!


----------

