# Rucking with body armor?



## Matt_Fisher (18 Nov 2004)

Just wanted to know if the CFs are doing much rucking with body armor on?

In the Marines it's pretty much SOP to ruck with your Interceptor vest and your Kevlar helmet on.


----------



## HollywoodHitman (18 Nov 2004)

Matt, 

I can't speak for the boys in Bttns right now, but I know that in my experience the vests and plates are only issued prior to deployment, or at least workup. I kept my stuff because I might be off somewhere else sooner than later, but once the missions are over, most everyone turns their armour in for another mission or roto to use. 

I could be mistaken, but I don't think there's that much in the system. Surprised?

TM


----------



## nastysasky (18 Nov 2004)

I know at my unit it is the same as HollywoodHitman said, the body armour is turned in for the next group of guys being deployed.


----------



## Matt_Fisher (18 Nov 2004)

Hollywood and Nastysasky,

I understand that on the reserve side of the house ballistic vests are pretty much non-existent.  Therefore the question of whether or not you ruck with body armor is already answered.

I guess I should have asked as to whether ballistic vests are worn in the regular regiments when rucking?


----------



## HollywoodHitman (18 Nov 2004)

Matt, 

I am speaking from a rental point of view. When doing live fire, we use flak vests, but not the body armour with ballistic plates. Those are generally used only on missions, which is my experience anyway.

I can't speak for the reg's at the moment, but like I said, I am sure that there isn't enough in the system to issue every troop armour unless they are on their way to an op, or on workup for one.

TM


----------



## Matt_Fisher (18 Nov 2004)

HollywoodHitman said:
			
		

> Matt,
> 
> I am speaking from a rental point of view. When doing live fire, we use flak vests, but not the body armour with ballistic plates. Those are generally used only on missions, which is my experience anyway.
> 
> ...



Which flak jackets are you referring to?  The US PASGTwoodland camo style or the Canadian OD '82 patternesque ones?  Am I understanding right that your unit has the old (whatever style) flak vests, but they're only worn during the conduct of a live-fire exercise?


----------



## GerryCan (18 Nov 2004)

We have the Woodland and the old 82's right now. Usually we never use them unless during a live fire ex, but recently we've been using them for ruck marches very frequently and i'm sure we'll keep on doing this for work up training.
In my opinion we should always use them to stand by the train as we fight idea. Then again, I don't know why we don't, whether it be a lacking of them or some other reason.


----------



## Yeoman (18 Nov 2004)

GerryCan said:
			
		

> We have the Woodland and the old 82's right now. Usually we never use them unless during a live fire ex, but recently we've been using them for ruck marches very frequently and i'm sure we'll keep on doing this for work up training.
> In my opinion we should always use them to stand by the train as we fight idea. Then again, I don't know why we don't, whether it be a lacking of them or some other reason.



same company as this guy (which platoon again?), but when were doing build up training for a while there, we had the flak vest on even when we were using blanks for the longest time. then we had to turn them in (acutally ticked alot of us off because we thought it was good training that way)
never did a ruck wearing it yet though, but we always had it stuffed onto or into our rucksack somewhere.
Greg


----------



## Matt_Fisher (18 Nov 2004)

I'm kind of mixed opinions personally about wearing the flak when doing a ruck march.

On the one hand, it really makes using the waistbelt difficult and having padded shoulder straps is useless.

On the other hand, you think about if you're doing a cross country movement in a combat area and wearing body armor is a necessity.

I'd be interested to hear what some of the 3 VP Afghanistan vets have to say about their ops where they had to do some significant amounts of movement/patrolling with the body armor and ruck on.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (18 Nov 2004)

Reg Force
2VP
Ruck sack only (supposed to be a set weight)
tac vest not worn


----------



## veiled scout (18 Nov 2004)

Hello
I can't speak from the "ruck" side of things but being with 3 VP in Afghanistan as armoured recce wasn't exactly comfortable. The only saving grace is that you are in a Coyote that has air conditioning, more so we only wore our plates when we left the main camp. That all being said it did not impede the operation of the crew, if we had to fight the veh then it wouldn't be an issue, I'm sure most guys will tell you that they would be ready to dump the webbing and wear the flak only in the turret. After all we all know the value of the helmet and flack, especially if you were going to take a hit from an RPG or other crude AT wpn. Well on the topic of "self protection" glasses and gloves were a must. I don't think I ever took off my nomex gloves, unless to eat, as for the glasses, Oakley are the way to go. And because our Govt has dropped the ball on the "Clothe the Soldier" issue of good qual kit at our time of deployment was individual based. 
Most of the "Rakkasans" I met and spoke with swore by their flak and glasses, plates are definitely cool and a must, I remember talking to one guy from the 101st that was doing one of the assaults in "the north mountain area". He stated that his fire team partner was nailed by an AK74 at close range, yup he flew backwards, but within seconds he said he was up beside him putting rounds down range. The thing that shocked him the most was that his fire team partner was up and at 'em like nothing happened. After the consolidation it turns out that he did indeed get whacked and right in the plate (the plate was shattered as fire as integrity to the ceramic but held to form of the round into the actual plate. Aside from a bruise he was good to go. I found this interesting as to the short range of the round and the fact that buddy had the adrenalin to keep going as nothing happened. I suppose the lesson here is always wear your plates, no matter what and if hit carry on with a quick thumbs up. 
I think part of the mobility issue is that we don't train enough with them, it's always issues like : "well I won't fit in here" or "it's too hot". No one would really care if they understood that someday it would save their life, but it is systemic in how we train, people only get serious about training when they know it will impact their safety. So the lesson here is use the kit in all phases of training, especially at the recruit level and continue the trend for all exercises and future courses. But with that being said we wouldn't have enough kit to go around, I know as sad as this seems it is the truth. More like a disappointment for the soldiers, this is where I get envious about our brothers to the south," lots of money=operational and effective kit to close with and destroy the enemy in all phases of war, by day or night". Anyway that is my view, I hope this adds some insight or a spin on issues from an armoured guy!

TANKS


----------



## HollywoodHitman (18 Nov 2004)

Matt,

Like the guys have said, we're using the US woodland ones, but the units here don't have any in stock as far as I am aware. They're ordered from the ASU for specific ex's and they are usually in such limited quantities that the troops switch off with one another between jungle lanes etc.


----------



## Bartok5 (19 Nov 2004)

The Infantry School conducts all of its officer training courses (starting with CAP) in Gen 3 body armour, but no plates.  The latter simply because there aren't yet enough plates in the system to go around.  I routinely see the Infantry officer trainees marching to and from lectures and meals, performing their weapon-handling drills, and conducting their load-bearing marches in body armour.  I would have assumed that the regular battalions are doing the same, but there may still be a shortage of Gen 3 vests available in the supply system.

As another Op APOLLO type who served on my "pins" like Morpheus32, Devil 39 and hundreds of others, I cannot stress enough the importance of conducting all of your tactical training in the same gear that you will carry on operations.  The same applies to physical fitness training which involves (and it should) regular load-bearing marches.  Essentially, any time you don your fighting or marching order, you should be donning the whole deal, to include the frag vest and an appropriately loaded/weighted Tac Vest/web gear and rucksack.  The 24 Kg all-up weight for the 13 km LFCPFS is a joke.  Recent operational experience has clearly demonstrated that combat-loaded fighting order weighs an average of 90 to 100 lbs (including ballistic plates).  Rucksacks weigh an average of a further 80 to 100 lbs, depending on the individual's assigned role and ancilliary equipment/ammo.  

I am not suggesting for a moment that we should be conducting all of our training with full combat weights, as that would be a sure recipe for uneccesary injury.  Training with 75% of the anticipated combat weight has always struck me as a reasonable compromise between appropriate conditioning and avoidance of unnecessary stress/strain injuries (not to mention long-term physical wear and tear).  If you routinely train at 75%, the "leap" to full combat weight is reasonable and achievable when the bugle suddenly sounds.  Training to the "lowest common denominator" based on the unrealistically light weight mandated by the LFCPFS will not allow soldiers to make that seamless transition to full combat weights.  I am convinced that routine weight-load training with full fighting order and 70 lbs rucks is what adequately prepared 3 PPCLI soldiers to readily adapt to full combat loads at 10,000' elevation in the Afghan mountains.  

We must also realize that much of the the benefit derived from training in full gear is simply becoming accustomed to the sheer bulk on fthe kit.  Everything from how you wear the kit, to weapons manipulation, to learning how to instinctively access kit by touch, etc.  I distinctly recall the first time I tried to fire my pistol during pre-deployment training while wearing the ballistic plates.  Suddenly it wasn't so easy to adopt a 2-handed isoceles (or weaver) stance with that plate and vest in between the biceps!   If one accepts the logical premise that "train as you will fight" necessitates wearing all of the kit during tactical and weight-load training, then anyone who takes the "easy" route by strapping their helmets, frag vests, and/or web-gear to their rucksack and/or slings their weapon during a march, is fundamentally  cheatiing themselves.  Wearing the helmet on your head where it belongs strengthens the neck muscles.  Wearing your fighting order under your rucksack forces you to sort out and adjust your kit correctly.  Carrying the weapon in your hands strengthens the arms.  Etc, etc.  I was aghast the other day when I was conducting a march with Tactics School and saw CTC HQ conducting the LFCPFS.  Soldiers (I use the term loosely) had their RIFLES strapped across the backs of their rucksacks!   Not to mention their web-gear/tac-vests, helmets, etc.  Utterly counterproductive from a training benefits perspective.....

I will leave it at that for now.  The Infantry School has taken a definite step in the right direction by incorporating frag vests and full-fighting order in to all of their appropriate training, including weapons handling classes.  I know that units which have encountered the challenges of combat load carriage on operations (eg. 3 PPCLI, and presumably 3 RCR & 3 R22eR) do their best to train in most realistic possible manner  back in Canada.  Speaking from personal experience, they also demand a much higher standard of "robust" physical fitness and associated training than the average line unit pursues.  By robust, I don't mean running 5 x per week in $150 Nikes and silk shorts.  I mean log PT, jerry can PT, weight-load marching, combatitive games, etc.  It is all a function of lessons learned, and the evidence suggests to me that as an institution, we are indeed learning.  Then again, some organizations still have people weight-load marching in soft-caps with rifles strapped to the backs of their rucksacks.  Ah well - Rome wasn't built in a day.....

For what it's worth.


----------



## Matt_Fisher (19 Nov 2004)

Mark and Veiled Scout,

I appreciate the responses.

It's good to see that the Infantry School is 'planting the seed' into the mindset of future leaders of the realities of combat operations by incorporating the body armour and helmet into their training programs.

I did not realize the Coyote has AC.  Makes me very jealous, as our Marine LAV-25s have none and the poor scouts that are stuck in the back of the vehicle are left to roast.


----------



## GerryCan (19 Nov 2004)

Yeoman:
HQ as of today ;D


----------



## ProPatria05 (23 Nov 2004)

Mark C -- I am really not familiar with the various generations of flak vests, so I'm not sure what "Gen 3" is. This past summer, though, on CAP, we wore the old style (assuming '82 pattern) flak vest. Maybe this IS Gen 3, I really don't know. We wore it pretty much everywhere, as you say.

I can tell those who haven't worn them that they are freakin HOT. This past summer was not that hot, and the only real marching we did with them on was about an 8k web march back from the ranges. But even in 20-25 degree weather, I was dying. Don't get me wrong -- I am in good shape, so my legs were good and my cardio was fine, but it felt like my whole body was on fire. Mind you, for some reason I am one of those people who sweats a lot, and I get hot really easily.

I can't even imagine wearing one for a ruck march in summer weather. I think I would be well-done at the end, if in fact I was able to finish. Any other season would be fine, as they really don't add that much extra weight, and are actually fairly comfortable (other than the aforementioned baking effect, at least for me).

Is the new body armour any cooler?

Murph


----------



## devil39 (23 Nov 2004)

Certainly good to practice regularly with all of the kit on.   As Mark C stated, it forces you to adjust all of your kit and learn how to wear it properly.   Invaluable experience as well.   

Wearing a vest and body armour while rucking was not the preferred solution at 42 deg and 8000 feet.   You create more of a Force Protection threat by creating heat casualties.   A common sense threat assessment is required.   

Half of the solution is fitness, and half of the solution is mental toughness.   Mental toughness is gained by experience, and pushing personal and team boundaries in my opinion.

In my opinion, the best test of dismounted/light infantry physical fitness, and the one which most closely approximated the exertion of 8000 feet plus, was the old 1 CMBG 32 km ruck march.   This was the same weight as the 13 km march, but conducted over 32 km, with a time limit of 6.5 hours.   

The 13 km ruck march (BFT) is completely unsuitable as a real test of dismounted or light infantry physical fitness.   It is at best a decent standard for those who wear green uniforms, and perhaps for the rest of the combat arms.   Thankfully, most infantry units and subunits consistently train to a standard well above that expected of the 13 km BFT.


----------



## pbi (24 Nov 2004)

Hey  > 39.  How's pogue-atory? I remember the 32 km march: I did one in the winter in Calgary (1PP) a part of a fitness test trial. Seemed like quite a demanding thing at the time. When did we stop doing it? Cheers.


----------



## Matt_Fisher (24 Nov 2004)

Murph said:
			
		

> Mark C -- I am really not familiar with the various generations of flak vests, so I'm not sure what "Gen 3" is. This past summer, though, on CAP, we wore the old style (assuming '82 pattern) flak vest. Maybe this IS Gen 3, I really don't know. We wore it pretty much everywhere, as you say.
> 
> I can tell those who haven't worn them that they are freakin HOT. This past summer was not that hot, and the only real marching we did with them on was about an 8k web march back from the ranges. But even in 20-25 degree weather, I was dying. Don't get me wrong -- I am in good shape, so my legs were good and my cardio was fine, but it felt like my whole body was on fire. Mind you, for some reason I am one of those people who sweats a lot, and I get hot really easily.
> 
> ...



Murph,

I'd say it's more a state of mind than anything.  When I did my School of Infantry at Camp Pendleton, California in the summer of 2001, we did a 20km ruck march with personal weapons, body armor, kevlar helmet, tac-vest and ALICE pack loaded with about 40lbs.  Granted, this march was done at the 7 week mark after we'd been living in our body armor and helmets full-time until then, so our bodies had acclimatized to the effects of the armor in terms of increased heat retention.  

The human body is an amazing thing in its ability to adapt to different temperature ranges, given a proper amount of time to acclimatize.


----------



## Bartok5 (24 Nov 2004)

Murph,

The current-issue "Gen III" vest is produced by Pacific Safety Products, and is visually identifiable by the "grid-like" black rubber shoulder patches, the siide closure system, and the removable shoulder armour.  As you noted, it is quite lightweight (without the ballistic plates) and sufficiently flexible to be comfortable.  

The earlier 82 pattern vest was/is the exact opposite - akin to wearing a rigid torso cast.  The 82 Pattern Vest (also referred to as the Gen II vest) is front-closing, has external chest pockets secured by the small slotted combat uniform button, and a snap-close chest-tab for the rank slip-on.  

Preceeding the 82 Pattern/Gen II vest was the old U.S. Vietnam-era fragmentation vest.  To the best of my knowledge, those have all been removed from service and relegated to military surplus shops.   

The CF also purchased a fairly large number of the U.S. PASSGT fragmentation vest as a stop-gap measure during the early 1990s when we were heavily involved in the Balkans and there were insufficient stocks of the 82 Pattern/Gen II to equip our deployed battlegroups.  You will still encounter the PASSGT vests in CF service when there are insufficient Gen III to go around.  The U.S. vest is easily identified because the external carrier is printed in the M-82 "Woodland" pattern camouflage.  

Hope this clears things up for you.


----------



## devil39 (27 Nov 2004)

pbi said:
			
		

> Hey   > 39.   How's pogue-atory? I remember the 32 km march: I did one in the winter in Calgary (1PP) a part of a fitness test trial. Seemed like quite a demanding thing at the time. When did we stop doing it? Cheers.



Pogue-atory is exactly that.   Could be worse, I could be riding the OC Transpo in my monkey suit every day.   

32 km was a real test in my opinion.   I don't know when they stopped them, but it was not a very popular activity for most.   But that doesn't mean it wasn't worthwhile.   

I did a winter 32 km march that started at midnight in Ghost River at the end of a 7 day winter ex.   A couple of troops didn't pack combat boots as per Ops 150 and completed the march in mukluks.   Ouch.


----------



## pbi (27 Nov 2004)

The 32km was hard, but I completed it so it must be possible. I think we should bring it back in Reg Field Force units as a more challenging and "task oriented" test than the current 13km which any average person can do with a little bit of backbone. Doing that once a year is really a test of much. Cheers.


----------



## Stomper (28 Nov 2004)

Do they still do 32km ruck marches for reserve units?

I would like to try one (although I'm sure it's a lot easier said than done).


----------



## devil39 (28 Nov 2004)

pbi said:
			
		

> The 32km was hard, but I completed it so it must be possible. I think we should bring it back in Reg Field Force units as a more challenging and "task oriented" test than the current 13km which any average person can do with a little bit of backbone. Doing that once a year is really a test of much. Cheers.



I think they should bring it back for Reg Force Infantry units, and those attached who are expected to march with the "F" ech.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Nov 2004)

I don't think they do the 13 km in the reserves let alone the 32.


----------



## 043 (1 Dec 2004)

Why wouldn't we ruck with that stuff? We have to train as we fight do we not? If it is issued it should be worn.


----------



## tim (8 Dec 2004)

I found your forum by searching on the web.  I am one of those civilians your moderator discusses when you register.  I'm writing as I have a good friend whose son (a U.S. Marine) is about to start his first duty in Irag.  No jarhead comments please.  Since I'm pretty good at getting around on the web, his mother asked if I'd look into what they could do to help protect him as much as they can.  It has made the news from time to time here that the protective body armour availability is a little sporatic.  I've read in your messages that Oakley glasses are a must as well as Nomex gloves. Additional body armour for the legs has also been mentioned as being essential in some other articles I've read.  Also it would appear as though the heat is a major factor.  I've found information about body cooling systems, interceptor body armour with ceramic plates, etc.  This marine isn't stupid.  He'll be researching this as well, but if any of you have any suggestions about what we might do to help him out and get back home standing up, we'd appreciate it.


----------

