# Issued Tac Vest



## McGowan (27 Feb 2005)

Just wondering, when do you get ISSUED your tac vest.thanks,
Liam


----------



## xenomfba (27 Feb 2005)

Depends if you're reg force or reserve, I'd imagine. I'm in 3 PPCLI and we got ours over a year ago. As far as I know, all regular force infantry battalions have theirs.


----------



## Love793 (27 Feb 2005)

31 CBG complete received ours in Sept.


----------



## stukirkpatrick (27 Feb 2005)

Is it an exchange when you receive one for the 82 pattern webbing?   or are you able to keep that as well?   thanks,  (rumours say we in North ON are getting them soon)


----------



## Korus (27 Feb 2005)

Hopefully soon for you guys in 8 FER.

Most of the guys I see in Jefferson Armouries now have theirs.


----------



## MikeM (28 Feb 2005)

Got mine in Sept.

I haven't handed back my webbing yet, we've been told to wait out on that.


----------



## mudgunner49 (28 Feb 2005)

Kirkpatrick said:
			
		

> Is it an exchange when you receive one for the 82 pattern webbing?   or are you able to keep that as well?   thanks,   (rumours say we in North ON are getting them soon)



Kirkpatrick,

Where in NorOnt are you?  We got ours in Sept (33 Bde complete)...


Blake


----------



## stukirkpatrick (28 Feb 2005)

We're in North-Western ON, in 38 Brigade (part of LFWA, that probably explains the difference)


----------



## Love793 (28 Feb 2005)

Kirkpatrick said:
			
		

> Is it an exchange when you receive one for the 82 pattern webbing?   or are you able to keep that as well?   thanks,   (rumours say we in North ON are getting them soon)



We did a one for one in 31 CBG.  I have heard of others whom didn't have to return their 82 pat, but it sounds like it's supposed to be a 1 for 1.  We did get to keep our butt packs (why, I don't know.)


----------



## chrisf (28 Feb 2005)

You know that strap on the butt pack that's been wrapped up in electrical tape for as long as you can remember? The theory is that when you're wearing the ruck, the butt pack is either supposed to be inside the ruck, or slung over your shoulder with the strap, as such, the tac vest replaced the webbing with the except of the butt pack. The new small pack system is supposed to be the replacement for the butt pack.


----------



## Love793 (28 Feb 2005)

lol, NBC bags do the same thing.


----------



## chrisf (28 Feb 2005)

No argument there, simply offering an explanation as to why you had to turn in the webbing sans butt pack.


----------



## Love793 (28 Feb 2005)

I know, I turned mine in regardless.  One more piece of kit, that I have absolutley no use for to lose.


----------



## chrisf (28 Feb 2005)

For reference purposes, I once read the pam on the rucksack. I tried taking a shower after, but I just couldn't make the dirt come off


----------



## chrisf (28 Feb 2005)

Oh, and as a complete hijacking of the thread, out of curiosity, is there any "good" way to attach a nuke bag to the ruck? Despite the fact that I'm generally mounted, I'm always looking for better ways to fit out my ruck.


----------



## Love793 (28 Feb 2005)

Just a Sig Op said:
			
		

> Oh, and as a complete hijacking of the thread, out of curiosity, is there any "good" way to attach a nuke bag to the ruck? Despite the fact that I'm generally mounted, I'm always looking for better ways to fit out my ruck.



Attaching it to the snow shoe straps on the current one works.  I carry a jump ruck though, and find it can be strapped around the valise.


----------



## McGowan (28 Feb 2005)

hijacked....that is okay, I found the info I needed....do engineers get them?!


----------



## Love793 (1 Mar 2005)

McGowan said:
			
		

> hijacked....that is okay, I found the info I needed....do engineers get them?!



Yep


----------



## stukirkpatrick (1 Mar 2005)

well, we got outfitted tonight with tac-vests finally - only had to turn in our magazine pouches and bayonet frog to CQ, and are already figuring up new and inventive ways to make up for the lack of a butt pack.


----------



## JimmyPeeOn (2 Mar 2005)

Strap it to the right side of your vest. Ya know where ya strap on your gas mask?  Thoose little tab things are on the other side too


----------



## foerestedwarrior (3 Mar 2005)

I cant beleive it how people are doing that. Like doesnt it hurt to start running and have it flapping around, or has anyone that still has that thought it through. Most people I have seen use the extra utility/C9 pouch to do this with.


----------



## JimmyPeeOn (3 Mar 2005)

It's only rain gear budz, if anything ints nice and cofmy, a lot easier to get your gear back in and besides when you carry the C9, you kinda need that pouch.


----------



## Canadian Sig (3 Mar 2005)

Carried one through roto 0 in Kabul and we never bothered with butt packs. Just use both C-9 pouches.


----------



## clinton_84 (4 Mar 2005)

the tac vest is good for somethings but overall if i had the choice id use my webbing agaiin, alot simpler, could hold more, the jump coy here in 3VP still uses webbing along with recce, they cant jump wearing the tacvest, at least thats the reason they give, i always figured you could simply rig it to your ruck


----------



## McGowan (4 Mar 2005)

doesn't tac vest work a little better for you when you are carrying ruck? or hyrdation pack?


----------



## NATO Boy (5 Mar 2005)

Depends on your preference...

I find that the 64 ruck (with skeleton 82 frame) doesn't ride as well on the vest because the buttpack isn't there to support the bottom (thus letting the weight ride on your hips on the 82 pattern web belt instead of on your shoulders.) This is because the new ruck comes with a waist belt system to distribute the weight to your hips. As for hydration packs, the vest is great for these (you can use a Camelback underneath it, attach one to the back panel or even just use the canteen straw with the 2 QT in a C9 pouch.

But what it comes down to is preference...try some ideas out to see what works for you


----------



## JimmyPeeOn (5 Mar 2005)

I just threw my old webbing belt in the ruck as a waist belt and found that worked well.


----------



## CF_MacAulay (5 Mar 2005)

JimmyPeOn said:
			
		

> I just threw my old webbing belt in the ruck as a waist belt and found that worked well.



good idea, i might give that a try...


----------



## ramrod (6 Mar 2005)

if you still want webbing but had to turn it in go to a good surplus shop (eg.abc in kitchener).it's $90 for a youk,butt pack,canteen/canteen pouch,belt,and 2 c7 pouches that conect to your youk and about $6-20 bucks for pouches.
personaly i like webbing better so you can costomise for op's.the only disadvantages of webbing are the plastic loop/cloth pin system and the pain in the ars it takes to take off and put on the pouches espesialy when the brass rings fall off


----------



## Pte. Bloggins (6 Mar 2005)

ramrod said:
			
		

> personaly i like webbing better so you can costomise for op's.the only disadvantages of webbing are the plastic loop/cloth pin system and the pain in the ars it takes to take off and put on the pouches espesialy when the brass rings fall off



And you'd know this from what, playing airsoft?  :


----------



## ramrod (6 Mar 2005)

ya'll don't have to get snarky about any thing!i'm just saying webbing is better!


----------



## CF_MacAulay (6 Mar 2005)

the tactical vest will really be a great piece of kit once the rest of the Load carrying Equipment comes out, the small pack system and the new ruck, but IMHO i think the tact vest is already a great piece of kit, i always hear ppl crying about rain gear, oh my...god forbid you get a lil wet... buy a nuke bag....


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Mar 2005)

> but IMHO i think the tact vest is already a great piece of kit, i always hear ppl crying about rain gear, oh my...god forbid you get a lil wet... buy a nuke bag....



On this forum there have been some great debates on the tacvest especially relating to how the lack of space available hinders combat soldiers in the ammount of mission essential equipment they can carry.

Depending on a nukebag is great, unless your carrying around a rucksack for a week +. (and the CQ isn't kind enough to take them during the day heh)
Guys who pack their nuke bags full of shit spend a lot of time pissing around with it trying to hook it up to their rucksack and trying to go on a march with a rucksack on their back and a nukeback hanging off their chest. They look like mules.


----------



## Pte. Bloggins (6 Mar 2005)

ramrod said:
			
		

> ya'll don't have to get snarky about any thing!i'm just saying webbing is better!



I wasn't getting snarky, just don't post on something you know nothing about. Have you used both webbing and a tacvest on operation, or at least a field ex? If not, then your jugement that "webbing is better" doesn't hold much water. 

I've been reading this thread with interest, as I've yet to be issued a tac vest and am hoping to learn its pros and cons while I wait for my turn. I suggest you do the same.


----------



## NATO Boy (6 Mar 2005)

CF_MacAulay said:
			
		

> i always hear ppl crying about rain gear, oh my...god forbid you get a lil wet... buy a nuke bag....



Yes...people are whining about the Raingear; and spare socks, food, water, ammo, and pretty much anything else that's mission essential. LMG and GPMG gunners especially get screwed over by having to compromise how kit is carried. But this has been stated hundreds of times; since the Small Pack (for Reservists, anyway) won't be available for a while to replace the butt pack we miss so much, we have to address the issue ourselves. A nuke bag may be the only some people have; not all of us have a couple hundred bucks to shell out for a better bag and if you have to look like an idiot to get the job done, so be it. The bottom line is we still have to be able to live out of our tac vest for 24 hours; the Vest was only designed for immediate combat and water supply (and even then it somewhat fails at that purpose.) As for no Rain Gear being a petty complaint, consider this: How will your Platoon Commander be able to read a map with red light in Enemy Territory if he has no Rain Coat to keep proper light discipline? Rain gear isn't always about keeping dry, at least that's why I was taught to always have mine on me...


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Mar 2005)

And thats the difference between a corporal and a recruit, i guess.


----------



## NATO Boy (6 Mar 2005)

I apologize if I seemed to rant a little ; the tac vest has been a very controversial piece of kit since my unit was issued the thing.

I agree that the vest is a good piece of kit (in terms of issued kit for support arms) that improves load carriage for urban or mechanised operations but for combat arms it just doesn't completely fit the bill IMO. It all depends on your trade and/or usually type of work in said trade; for my trade there are a lot of issues that make the vest a downgrade compared to the webbing. But that's for reading in another post suh as http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/23363.0.html.

Like Sig Bloggins was saying, he wants to learn the pros and cons of the vest for himself; I guess it's best to let others do so.


----------



## ramrod (6 Mar 2005)

i apologize if i was sounding like i was a know it all.i was just speaking my opinion.


----------



## Gayson (6 Mar 2005)

My comfort level in the field has gone down with the Tac vest.  However unilike the webbing, it does not seem to fall apart whenever I do any rigurous activity.

I like my TV more than my webbing.


----------



## KevinB (7 Mar 2005)

CF_MacAulay said:
			
		

> the tactical vest will really be a great piece of kit once the rest of the Load carrying Equipment comes out, the small pack system and the new ruck, but IMHO i think the tact vest is already a great piece of kit, i always hear ppl crying about rain gear, oh my...god forbid you get a lil wet... buy a nuke bag....



Based on your incredible experience in the CF  :


----------



## Infanteer (7 Mar 2005)

Kevin's right.  Didn't we just finish 20 pages of yakking about this stupid thing.  If I recall correctly, most people on Ops didn't like it one bit.


----------



## CF_MacAulay (7 Mar 2005)

NATO Boy said:
			
		

> Yes...people are whining about the Raingear; and spare socks, food, water, ammo, and pretty much anything else that's mission essential. LMG and GPMG gunners especially get screwed over by having to compromise how kit is carried. But this has been stated hundreds of times; since the Small Pack (for Reservists, anyway) won't be available for a while to replace the butt pack we miss so much, we have to address the issue ourselves. A nuke bag may be the only some people have; not all of us have a couple hundred bucks to shell out for a better bag and if you have to look like an idiot to get the job done, so be it. The bottom line is we still have to be able to live out of our tac vest for 24 hours; the Vest was only designed for immediate combat and water supply (and even then it somewhat fails at that purpose.) As for no Rain Gear being a petty complaint, consider this: How will your Platoon Commander be able to read a map with red light in Enemy Territory if he has no Rain Coat to keep proper light discipline? Rain gear isn't always about keeping dry, at least that's why I was taught to always have mine on me...




i completely understand, your argument, but what im saying is that when the small pack comes out, ppl will be raving about the tact vest and all the LBE...the small pack system has spots for your raingear, also, if u read on the CTS web site, it says that you cna live out of the tactvest for 24hrs, but then yoiu read the same for the smalllpack system, and it says 24hrs...now obviously they wouldnt make both livable for 24hrs, because that would be stupid and a complete waste of money...(well it IS the CDN gov...)but i think that both were PLANNED to be issued together...but obviously contracting and other things hindered that....but all of this is My personal opinion....and for everyones info, im not exactlly a RECRUIT, i have been in 1yr...i jsut didnt take my SQ and BIQ this summer, all i have is BMQ....so plz respect what little training i have...


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Mar 2005)

> RECRUIT, i have been in 1yr...i jsut didnt take my SQ and BIQ this summer, all i have is BMQ....so plz respect what little training i have...


So your not "soldier" qualified, nor are you "basic infantry" qualified.  That sounds like a recruit. Unless the PC term is untrained private because recruit sounds bad?

Don't take it to heart MacAulay.  Were just pointing out that perhaps your opinion ont he matter is lacking a judgement based on hands on experience.
I've never really put much thought into all that "you can live out of it for 24 hours" crap.  What exactly do you need to live for 24 hours?  I know babies and children were living for a week on their own after the tsunami..  
Anyhow, you should take a look at the tacvest threads.  I used to think the tacvest was gods gift to the infantry. I'm willing to bet the points brought up in the thread will change your views.


----------



## NATO Boy (7 Mar 2005)

CF_MacAulay said:
			
		

> both were PLANNED to be issued together...but obviously contracting and other things hindered that...



If CTS had released the entire load-carriage system in the first place, there wouldn't be anybody bitching about it this bad...that's my main argument. Even then the vest still has problems that won't go away by just issuing the Small Pack. But I think Ghost778 really hit the mark with this:



			
				Ghost778 said:
			
		

> you should take a look at the tacvest threads...I'm willing to bet the points brought up in the thread will change your views.


----------



## KevinB (7 Mar 2005)

We got the CTS pack 6 months ago - did not do anything for the fact the TV still sucks


----------



## JimmyPeeOn (7 Mar 2005)

The patrol pack looks really big. Could almost strap a valise on it.


----------



## McGowan (9 Mar 2005)

Sig Bloggins said:
			
		

> And you'd know this from what, playing airsoft?   :



oh snap!


----------



## NATO Boy (9 Mar 2005)

McGowan said:
			
		

> oh snap!



"You boys shouldn't play so rough; somebody's gonna start crying..." - Reservoir Dogs  ;D


----------



## ramrod (9 Mar 2005)

McGowan said:
			
		

> oh snap!


leave the wigger snap for school fou!


----------



## chrisf (9 Mar 2005)

CF_MacAulay said:
			
		

> ppl crying about rain gear, oh my...god forbid you get a lil wet... buy a nuke bag....



Obviously you've never had hypothermia in the rain.

Nature is a great teacher, but a harsh discplinarian.


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Mar 2005)

When your looking for information about a new car, do you go off of what the car salesmen is telling you? 
Or, would you listen to the mechanics who work on the car or drivers who have actually tested the car out.

Same thing with kit, ie the tacvest. 

Are you going to believe everything that the guys designing this thing (or promoting it) say?  "It can do this this and that, it's the greatest piece of kit ever"  
Or are you going to listen to the "mechanics" who actually use it and have nothing to gain or loose by pointing out both the pros AND cons.


----------



## NATO Boy (9 Mar 2005)

Ghost778 said:
			
		

> Are you going to believe everything that the guys designing this thing (or promoting it) say?  "It can do this this and that, it's the greatest piece of kit ever"
> Or are you going to listen to the [soldiers] who actually use it and have nothing to gain or loose by pointing out both the pros AND cons.



Well said, Ghost, well said..and believe me, there are a shit load of threads on this vest since the day it came out.


----------



## gun plumber (9 Mar 2005)

Even with all the stated drawbacks,I am looking forward to getting the vest.The one thing I never complained about,in reference to kit,was the webbing.I always found a way to carry everything I ever needed and more in it,and still carried a nuke bag for the easy to reach items.If the tacvest is as limited in capacity as what is stated here,then I'm sure that I will find a way to carry what I need to be mission ready,wether it be in a nuke bag or some other aftermarket pouch.If you need it,you'll find a way.
All in all,the CTS stuff is a step in the right direction.Compared to what we were issued 10 years ago,I will not complain one bit.The main items are great,and all the "snivel"kit they issue now is the icing on the cake.
my 2 cents


----------



## NATO Boy (10 Mar 2005)

gun plumber said:
			
		

> If the tacvest is as limited in capacity as what is stated here,then I'm sure that I will find a way to carry what I need to be mission ready,wether it be in a nuke bag or some other aftermarket pouch.If you need it,you'll find a way.



As a fan of after-market kit, I totally agree you can find a way to carry mission essentials. But as an infanteer, some combat loads just don't fit on the vest. The best example is a Grenadier Loadout:

C7 Mags x 5
C7 spare ammo x 100rds (3 boxes and a stripper clip)
M 203 Grenades x 36

..plus his EIS, water, and buttpack essentials...

Even with both the new M203 pouches attached, you can only carry 12 M203 rounds...and if you use the dressing pockets, now you have to move all your water and shit to a nuke bag (bunk for ammo and heavy shit, good for snivel kit like fleece.) But then again, the 82 pattern webbing was bad for grenadiers too (you needed to use the bandoliers to carry rounds, also bunk.)

My point is that fighting order should be able to hold your combat, water, and buttpack loadout just on the vest/webbing/whatever for "quick" access; a nuke bag or small pack just don't give you that...


----------



## KevinB (10 Mar 2005)

NATOboy - 10mags


----------



## NATO Boy (11 Mar 2005)

...ouch...that's even worse. Argh!


----------



## Canadian Sig (14 Mar 2005)

Well just to add my two cents worth: I carried the TV for 6 months (7 days a week) in Afghanistan and I love it. I did however have a patrol pack with me at almost all times. We also didnt have alot of call for rain gear there..lol


----------



## KevinB (14 Mar 2005)

Well I just did survey of the 8 of us in the office (all were in Afghan) and none of us ever saw a Sig guy with a TV on...

 and the brief TV survey I just did scored 0/8 in our poll as well...


But hey if I want some comms related advice I'll email you.


----------



## Britney Spears (14 Mar 2005)

> Well I just did survey of the 8 of us in the office (all were in Afghan) and none of us ever saw a Sig guy with a TV on...



You need to pay more attention to details:



> I *carried* the TV for 6 months (7 days a week) in Afghanistan and I love it.



<insert your own snide CSS heckling one-liner here>

 ;D


----------



## KevinB (14 Mar 2005)

Ouch!


----------



## JimmyPeeOn (15 Mar 2005)

You've probably never heard of SDS either then!  :-*


----------



## Canadian Sig (15 Mar 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Well I just did survey of the 8 of us in the office (all were in Afghan) and none of us ever saw a Sig guy with a TV on...
> 
> and the brief TV survey I just did scored 0/8 in our poll as well...
> 
> ...



 Hey I know some of those guys from 1 Sigs and I'm not suprized they dont wear tv's...lol... I however was out on the road 7days a week as a dispatch rider...

 But hey if I want a trench dug I'll email you...jk


----------



## KevinB (15 Mar 2005)

;D

Good DIG - pardon the pun.

 True but if you are shooting and moving in a CQB environment the TV does not fit the bill.


----------



## JimmyPeeOn (18 Mar 2005)

Something that gives the troops leeway to place what they want, where they want it would be excellent.  Like a MOLLE system.  I'm a radio monkey, and if i had to carry ammo/water/frag/smoke/ and my specialist kit like extra antennas and batteries i would be screwed.  So I feel sorry for the infantry that cant get something else.


----------



## McGowan (18 Mar 2005)

Just started poll maybe we could get what the General veiw is!


----------



## Infanteer (18 Mar 2005)

There are many suitable replacements on the open market today.  The CF really has to do nothing but contract the appropriate companies to do the magic work - everything a guy could need is out there right now.  These companies work face-to-face with soldiers and are highly responsive to actual needs.

I don't get large design times - the work has already been done by aftermarket companies and soldiers who are willing to spend their own hard-earned bucks on kit.

As usual, the free market proves to be superior to a centrally driven, command controled system of procurement....


----------



## silentbutdeadly (18 Mar 2005)

the only issue i have with the tac vest is the fact you only have a mag pouch that holds one mag not two and the fact you can't change them , but that the army for you , all about looking the same and not looking for something practical. Oh who put down webbing in the poll ! like come on now ! frick


----------



## KevinB (18 Mar 2005)

McGowan said:
			
		

> Just started poll maybe we could get what the General veiw is!



Problem is on an open site you have people who have no right to give an opinion offer one.


----------



## Infanteer (18 Mar 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Problem is on an open site you have people who have no right to give an opinion offer one.



I think Canadian Army Snipers should use the Dragunov....


----------



## Korus (18 Mar 2005)

> the only issue i have with the tac vest is the fact you only have a mag pouch that holds one mag not two and the fact you can't change them



You'd think they could have made the mag pouches modular/exchangable like they did with the canteen/C9 pouches...


----------



## Canadian Sig (18 Mar 2005)

The whole thing  should be interchangable or modular.


----------



## McGowan (19 Mar 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Problem is on an open site you have people who have no right to give an opinion offer one.


then they don't vote :


----------



## Kal (19 Mar 2005)

For those of us that remember the stats and pics of the 'JTF patrol vest' pappy posted awhile back, do you think that it would fit the bill?  Granted maybe a couple extra frag and DD pockets and some inserts for 40mm rounds.  It's already been designed and developed and probably has seen some operational use.


----------



## McGowan (22 Mar 2005)

you should post pics, Admins should add a part to Equipment were we can post pictures of gear, and bitch about it


----------



## Burrows (22 Mar 2005)

McGowan ... you can always use the


----------



## Kal (22 Mar 2005)

Anything and everything has negatives and downfalls to it, some just more than others.  Big pros for it; has been developed, compatible with other issue gear, good amount of load capacity and with a bit of tweaking could be configured for rifleman, grenadier, gunner, etc.


----------



## KevinB (22 Mar 2005)

Kyle Burrows said:
			
		

> One of my officers accuired it through a government auction



 :


----------



## McGowan (22 Mar 2005)

Kyle Burrows said:
			
		

> McGowan ... you can always use the  tags :P   and even the JTF-2 vest has its downfalls like loud clips and velcro.   combined with the lower canteen packs being somewhat hard to get on the go.   One of my officers accuired it through a government auction and I had the pleasure of trying it out on a weekend.
> [/quote]
> aye. I didn't have the picture. But I'm happy with the old 82' webbing.. Hardly wear my webbing anymore, now that the tac vest is here, but I perfer webbing (82')


----------



## Infanteer (22 Mar 2005)

Kyle Burrows said:
			
		

> McGowan ... you can always use the  tags :P   and even the JTF-2 vest has its downfalls like loud clips and velcro.   combined with the lower canteen packs being somewhat hard to get on the go.   One of my officers accuired it through a government auction and I had the pleasure of trying it out on a weekend.[/quote]
> 
> So, did he try it out in Iraq or Afghanistan?  Was it with plates and full battle load?
> 
> I'm agreeing with Kevin that the peanut-gallery is getting real loud on this thread....


----------



## JimmyPeeOn (22 Mar 2005)

Look on the bright side, it's not like we carry our gear in a bucket.  But I totallly agree we need something that is interchangable.  At very least for the Cbt arms.  The only real gripes I have about the vest is the lack of room for ammo, and my unit has us putting the rain gear in the C9 pouch.  What I fear is gonna happen there is that its going to rain in the field and the Pte's are going to get wet (and get hypothermia) rather than have to stuff that gear back in there.


----------



## Kal (22 Mar 2005)

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/20031.0.html

link for the pics of the vest.


----------



## Andyboy (28 Mar 2005)

A few points on the Patrol Vest if I may.

>I would be interested to know where exactly your officer got his patrol vest, if he in fact has one.

>All the exterior pouches have built in silencers for the hook and loop (velcro) closures.

>With time and use the Side Release buckles make less and less noise. Most users find a way to use them without making much noise, it is a concern though and other than investing in a new buckle design they are an appropriate design decision.

>I concur on the access issues for the utility pouches.  They can tend to gravitate towards the rear, espescially for the more slender users. For the majority of users however the vest can be adjusted to allow them to be in a position for easy access. Failing that undoing the front of the vest and manually moving the sdies around to the front to access them seems to work ok. This is gnerally how I access items at the side or back of my webbing as well.

>The vest requires no tweaking for use by grenadiers, riflemen or LMG gunners. They are all accomodated in the production item. This particular vest however was not designed for regular infantry operations and is but one tool in the tool box. 

Cheers.


----------



## Kal (28 Mar 2005)

Andyboy said:
			
		

> >The vest requires no tweaking for use by grenadiers, riflemen or LMG gunners. They are all accomodated in the production item. This particular vest however was not designed for regular infantry operations and is but one tool in the tool box.
> Cheers.



  No tweaking for grenadiers?  Does the vest come with some inserts for 40mm rounds or would they just carry them loose in a utility pouch?  I didn't see many pouches for dd's or frags either.  Sure they could be thrown loose in the pouches, but, I've never been a fan of carry all my kit together like that, especially ordnance.  Maybe that's what you meant by regular infantry operations?  Care to clarify?


----------



## Bomber (28 Mar 2005)

I have attached my two canteen pouches on the sides of the vest, where your kidneys are, the two other pouches fit on the Velcro patch.  I just did this, and everything seems secure and tight.  Maybe someone else that is looking for a little extra room might want to do this.  If you put these on, you now have "two extra places to put your rain gear" or whatever it is everyone carries with them.  I have yet to fill it and put on a rucksack or anything, but I will do it tomorrow at work and update y'all.  If you try this, remember to face the little pouches on the canteen carrier to the rear or else they will be to in accessible to use jammed against the utility pouches.  Only thing left for this to work well, is a stop at fabric land to grab a 6 inch by 6 inch square of Velcro to eliminate rubbing/sound.


----------



## Andyboy (28 Mar 2005)

By regular infantry I meant it isn't meant for a lot of prone work i.e. sect/pl atks. This is meant more for patrolling, hence the name.

The vest as issued was designed to carry every item you mentioned, some more specifically than others. It is a tough design decision. Pouches that are too specific end up empty for most of their life cycle while pouches that are not specific enough get cluttered. Think single c-7 pouch on the TV versus the buttpack. Using a few different techniques the designer managed to strike a decent compromise between the two. (IMHO   ;D) Keep in mind that some of the equipment it was intended to carry may not be the same as what you carry. DDs for example.

Have you handled the vest? Most of the design is in the details and details can be hard to discern from photos.


----------



## Kal (28 Mar 2005)

Andyboy said:
			
		

> Have you handled the vest? Most of the design is in the details and details can be hard to discern from photos.



  Andyboy, you're way too funny, seeing as maybe one of those vests are civvy side and a couple managed to get off the hill.  I should join cadets, I would have a better chance of seeing it there, than in the rest of the CF by the sounds of it.  

  Good points though, it is a patrol vest, but with the current trend of more CQB/urban training, it may not be too bad of an option.  As for prone work, look at the webbing, not matter how much gun tape was on it, it still fell to pieces once a few section attacks were carried out.  Also magazine placement is basically the same compared between the vest and webbing, so the pouches will still be in the dirt while prone.  

It's still funny to hear the difference in opinion for ammo/ordnance allotment for troops.  While, in the regiment I had a sgt. say you wont need to carry more than 5 mags, while another Mcpl say, you need at least twice that many for urban ops, then to go on course and my section get issued 11 mags apiece.


----------



## NATO Boy (28 Mar 2005)

Kal said:
			
		

> While, in the regiment I had a sgt. say you wont need to carry more than 5 mags, while another Mcpl say, you need at least twice that many for urban ops, then to go on course and my section get issued 11 mags apiece.



 ;D LMAO   On my SQ 2 some odd years ago, we only got issued "4" mags per rifleman!  Plenty of room for "chocy bars" and "platoon pyro..."


----------



## Canadian Sig (28 Mar 2005)

you think thats funny. when we arrived in Kabul for roto 0 we were only issued 5 mags each. (we did b*tch and got topped-up to 250 rounds but still 5 mags)


----------



## Kal (28 Mar 2005)

NATO Boy said:
			
		

> ;D LMAO  On my SQ 2 some odd years ago, we only got issued "4" mags per rifleman! Plenty of room for "chocy bars" and "platoon pyro..."



Nato Boy - Did you do all your training with your regiment, or did they ship you off somewhere?  My BMQ and SQ were held at my unit and for our BMQ FTX we got issued a whole 60 rounds of blanks a piece.. :-\  SQ was a little different, but because of most of the training being done in town, not a lot of rounds were expended.  We did a BMQ at the regiment, QL3 in shilo and an SQ in town the following spring.  shilo was by far the best training though, and why so many mags were issused was probably because of the Cowboy PPCLI instructors....


----------



## NATO Boy (28 Mar 2005)

Kal said:
			
		

> Did you do all your training with your regiment, or did they ship you off somewhere?



BMQ - Regiment - 5 mags and EIS (no blanks or pyro at all)

SQ and DP1 INF(a.k.a BIQ)  - LFCA TC Meaford - 4 mags + EIS with Combat Load (plus PL pyro, comms, or other essentials as required)

The sad part was, even though Riflemen only carried 4 mags, we were constantly getting in firefights on the FTXes (thus necessitating the need of more mags)   and found ourselves bombing up constantly in fear of having no mags for the next attack. I hope I didn't come off as being rude; I was only laughing at the fact that there are so many different Mag alottments for Courses and Ops even. As for what we had to carry, it constantly varied from 210 rds (4 mags + 3 boxes) to 300 rds (4 mags + 6 boxes) as well as pyro (riflemen carried 2 T-Flashes, 1 smoke) and Sect and PL ammo. This was back when the Webbing was still used a lot thus we had a buttpack (held most of the spare ammo) and could request the Admin NCO to get spare pouches for ammo or water as needed from the CQ.


----------



## Kal (29 Mar 2005)

NATO Boy said:
			
		

> I hope I didn't come off as being rude; I was only laughing at the fact that there are so many different Mag alottments for Courses and Ops even.



Not offended by the least.  I can somewhat understand mag and ammo allotment being lower than ops because, if I can fight with 5 mags, then I shouldn't have a prob with 8 mags.  However, that is still somewhat unrealistic in that you never know what to really expect in combat.  I find it even more funny, no wait, scratch that, I find it sadder that some people still think 5 mags enough to get the job done... ???


----------



## NATO Boy (29 Mar 2005)

Kal said:
			
		

> some people still think 5 mags enough to get the job done... ???



They'd be correct...if it weren't for the whole "having to win the firefight" stuff we do during any knid of assault... :threat:


----------



## KevinB (29 Mar 2005)

Canadian Sig said:
			
		

> you think thats funny. when we arrived in Kabul for roto 0 we were only issued 5 mags each. (we did b*tch and got topped-up to 250 rounds but still 5 mags)



Unfortunately it is becasue you likely fell under the NSE - and they figured - screw him he's a sig he does not need ammo.

The bayonets had more mags - maybe why we hated the TV  ;D


----------



## Devo (30 Mar 2005)

well i personally think the small pack system is garbage. the thing weighs 10 lbs empty, and for light infantry, we don't need our things to be heavy, when empty. as for that whole rain coat business, toss the rain coat and rain pants out of your kit, don't be cheap and go buy a complete stealth suit, u won't regret it one bit. and i think its only 250 complete now, probably less. and as for the whole light dicipline thing with the rain coat, use your poncho, lighter than a ground sheet, and smaller... does the same job. And as for your tac vest, if ur worried about not carrying enough mags or anything like that, go buy your own LBV. maybe its just 3vp but we can pretty much wear what we want, as long is its black/green/camo

sorry just my two cents


----------



## NATO Boy (30 Mar 2005)

Devo said:
			
		

> if ur worried about not carrying enough mags or anything like that, go buy your own LBV. maybe its just 3vp but we can pretty much wear what we want, as long is its black/green/camo



I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but...

What about units that don't allow you to buy LBVs? What about reservists that have to go overseas? I know, some might say "Meh, you're reservists, it's not like you'll be in harm's way like the Regs" or "quit yer b#tchin' ya spoiled weekend warrior" and it would be justified. But the question remains: "How are we gonna be able to carry the same combat load (or close) if the issued vest (which is cramped for space) is our only option?" Perhaps it's only unit-level and (with luck) you'll be deployed with a more lenient (sp?) group.

Is there anyone who has used the issued vest on tour with the same combat load as KevinB (or similar?) It'd be interesting to hear what remedies you made to use the issued vest but still carry everything (other than in a daypack.)


----------



## mudgunner49 (30 Mar 2005)

Having compared "hands-on", the TV with my SOTech Hellcat Mk1, SOTech Rifleman's rig and a custom chest rig from Jon Nelson @ Recce Gear, I can tell you unequivocally that you cannot carry the same load that KevinB has laid out just with the TV.  As soon as I get my digital camera up and running I will post a review of these load-carriage systems (less the RCH which I no longer have) for all to see.  I will reiterate however that the TV is at least 2, and possibly 4, generations behind the stuff currently on the market.  We have saddled our troops with a substandard piece of s*** and continue to punish those who show some initiative by attempting to field a better system at their own expense.


Blake


----------



## KevinB (30 Mar 2005)

Blake - cool can't wait for the pics.



NATOboy -  Find a gear producer that makes CADPAT and CADPAT AR gear - It would be VERY awkward for your chain to try to tell you to ditch a piece of kit that works and fits in well to the uniform - especially if you dig up a few copies of the UCR's on the TV...


----------



## BillP (30 Mar 2005)

Piper,
As much as I agree with you on mod'ing the existing mag pouches into doubles, there are several reasons why it won't work:
1) You would be setting yourself up to facing serious charges!!!
2) A buddy picked up a TV on Ebay awhile back, you know one of those that fell off the back of a truck : and modified it to carry 8 mags! Didn't pan out at all, the TV's mesh body was too flimsy to support the additional weight of the 4 extra mags! The whole thing fully loaded out and cinched up, just sagged too far forward, and bounced around alot during rapid movement! Wound up reselling back on Ebay, as a modified CF TV ;D
 A co. in Edmonton, Dropzonetactical has made a modular TV, nearly identical to the issue item. Main body is covered in MULES/PALS webbing, whereby modular pouches can be secured anywhere!


----------



## NATO Boy (31 Mar 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Find a gear producer that makes CADPAT and CADPAT AR gear


Tiger Tactical's Operation Vest (despite mixed reviews) seems like a great alternative...TT even used to have an interesting CADPAT repro of the British Battle Vest that looked really well built (although most of the pockets were around the waist like Webbing, no biggie as long as you figure out a better way to go prone with it) and ideal for a rifleman.


----------



## KevinB (31 Mar 2005)

Several of us had Tiger gear in Afghan - the only problems we noted with the Brit type vest is it was very bulky (whi I went with an intergrated system)

 I was out at Tigers place and we came up with a few ideas to a hybrid RAV system, and a Chest rig in MOLLE.


----------



## JimmyPeeOn (31 Mar 2005)

Website?


----------



## ss109 (31 Mar 2005)

www.tigertactical.com    thats the web site Kevin means when he says "tiger" on the above topic. S.


----------



## Infanteer (1 Apr 2005)

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/29097.0.html

I've got a Tiger Tactical Vest for sale here.


----------



## Grunt (2 Apr 2005)

What do you know...my issued crapvest has already started to fall apart due to poor sitching.   :   :rage:

The Tiger tactical vest looks pretty good.


----------



## NATO Boy (2 Apr 2005)

Grunt said:
			
		

> my issued crapvest has already started to fall apart


heh...CrapVest...I saw one of my buddies pull the zipper right off his (without even trying) the first night he had it.


----------



## stukirkpatrick (2 Apr 2005)

> heh...CrapVest...I saw one of my buddies pull the zipper right off his (without even trying) the first night he had it.



really?  I pulled off the zipper loop without trying the first time I pulled it up, but the whole zipper?


----------



## NATO Boy (2 Apr 2005)

Kirkpatrick said:
			
		

> the whole zipper?  Shocked


Yep, he did (even I couldn't believe it.) I even saw people that had the fastex buckles on their field dressing pouches rip themselves out (after a few weeks) because the pockets were stuffed with kit (ouch.) Yep, it's not just lack of modularity and carrying capacity that make CTS's creation suck...


----------



## BillP (3 Apr 2005)

Zippers coming off, I've yet to see that!! 
 I've seen the cheapostitching on the pals webbing fror the bayo frog rip out, also the drag handle on the rear yoke, female buckle portion pulling out from the material, mesh starting to seperate from the main body, the daisy chains on the rear yoke coming un-stitched! 
 Keep this quiet, but the best thing to do is to take the TV to a backpack/shoe repair place, and have them reinforce all the existing stitching ie. double stitch/bartcak everything! Replace the weak buckles with more higher profile/durable fastex captive buckles, and add a more durable ykk zipper  
 LOL don't get to rough on your TV's or else DND will figure out a way to blame you for the TV's failings, LOL :dontpanic:


----------



## NATO Boy (3 Apr 2005)

BillP said:
			
		

> LOL don't get to rough on your TV's or else DND will figure out a way to blame you for the TV's failings, LOL Dont Panic


Yeah, anything but that, don't give them a reason to blame us for the vest's fragility (even though it's supposed to be mil-spec) and thus design something better (or, with our luck, something worse.)


----------



## BillP (3 Apr 2005)

Actually the materials on the vest are mostly mil-spec, however they definitely cheaped out on the buckles, single stitching only and zipper though! The problem is it was assembled somewhat poorly, by a Co that had zero experience, prior to receiving the DND contract, in producing mil spec gear! :
 Awhile back ago, I got to use the M-35 tac vest. made by PSP, basically identical to the TV, however this was made by a Co that knows what it's doing! The quality of the M-35, with the CTS issue item was night and day ie.. much better stitching, resulting in a more solid 'feel' to the vest overall! 
BTW it's the same Co(Fellfab) thats also producing the small pack system, and the eventual rucksack!!


----------



## George Wallace (3 Apr 2005)

Always Remember:

Your Kit is made by the Cheapest Bidder!


Double stitching costs more.  Stronger buckles and snaps cost more.  ETC.


----------



## aesop081 (3 Apr 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Always Remember:
> 
> Your Kit is made by the Cheapest Bidder!
> 
> ...



Dead soldiers due to faulty equipment cost way too much


----------



## MJP (3 Apr 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Double stitching costs more.   Stronger buckles and snaps cost more.   ETC.


So very true but some times they lose sight of the fact if they had just made it properly in the first place they wouldn't have to replace so many shoddy ones.  CTS might have made their budget, but all the replacement vests and parts gotta cost someone somewhere else down the line.


----------



## George Wallace (3 Apr 2005)

It is what I call the "Mcdonald's Generation" - "Get in and Get out with your money as fast as you can!"

Ever notice how many Government Contracts are let to companies who go bankrupt soon after they fill the contract, and sometimes even before they finish a contract?


----------



## NATO Boy (4 Apr 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Your Kit is made by the Cheapest Bidder!





			
				BillP said:
			
		

> they definitely cheaped out on the buckles, single stitching only and zipper





			
				BillP said:
			
		

> it was assembled somewhat poorly, by a Co that had zero experience, prior to receiving the DND contract, in producing mil spec gear!


...and this is why so many "Tac Vest Sux" threads and horrible stories of the Vest's failure are abundant. With all the other shortcomings (could fill a page,) the Tac Vest needs a revision (at least improved manufacture.)


----------



## NATO Boy (4 Apr 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Stronger buckles and snaps cost more


It not just the cheap buckles; it's mainly how they are attached to the fabric, because of...


			
				NATO Boy said:
			
		

> people that had the fastex buckles on their field dressing pouches rip themselves out (after a few weeks)


----------



## BillP (4 Apr 2005)

MJP said:
			
		

> So very true but some times they lose sight of the fact if they had just made it properly in the first place they wouldn't have to replace so many shoddy ones.   CTS might have made their budget, but all the replacement vests and parts gotta cost someone somewhere else down the line.


 You pretty much hit the procurment nail on the head!  :-\  As long as it's going to cost 'someone else' down the line, then really all that needs to be done is to get the kit into the sytem posthaste, thus making them look good in the eyes of their superiors! Too much pork-barreling from Gov't, giving the nudge to career minded desk jocks at DNDHQ, to see to it that a firm, in a gov't friendly constituency, gets the nod! By the time the kit is in the system, those that were responsible for it are either out of politics, transferred to another dept, or have gone to the private sector! Either way, not their problem anymore, it has now become that of the user/soldier in the field!


----------



## Grunt (4 Apr 2005)

The mesh on it really sucks too...got a large rip forming in it above one of the mag pouches, funny thing is...ive never carried anything in there but empty mags so far     ???

crapvest designer nerd

*nerd voice* "PALS, whats that? nnnnnrrrrraahh this velcro should hold these pouches on"   :
"nnnnnnrrrrrah lets add a minimag flashlight pouch" :rage:


----------



## The_Falcon (4 Apr 2005)

I know I tried this with an early thread, but I will mention it here.  A company called Rogue Modular in Toronto makes what they call a "mesh vest" (http://www.roguemodular.com/products/_mesh/mesh.html) It's panels are similar in design to the issue Tac Vest (more similar than CP Gear stuff), and when I emailed them, they said they can make items in CADPAT by request.  So I was wondering if anyone has had any dealings with them, and if their products are worth purchasing.


----------



## BillP (4 Apr 2005)

Hatchetman,
 Haven't had dealings with RM in T.O., however if you're looking for a modular mesh vest, nearly identical to the issue TV then check out www.dropzonetactical.com. The owner Brian produces all sorts of high quality milspec kit in cadpat(TW,AR), including modular LBV's.  Many Co's in Canada make cadpat kit, but there's only a few that make it very well! 
BTW I don't work for the co mentioned ;D just a very satisfied user of their kit!!


----------



## Jarnhamar (17 Apr 2005)

I didn't want to make a new thread for my bitching.

I just spent 45 minutes wrestling with my tacvest trying to get one of the side pockets off, i just had to cut the velcro off and will have to sew it back on later.
Are we suposed to be able to get these things off in a hurry?  Maybe with a knife. These little shitty velco straps are insane to try and manipulate.

I know tacvest bashing is a dead horse.  The more I use use the tacvest the more and more i am disipointed with it.  I'm glad the CF took a step in the right direction and decided we needed something new. I really wish they would have took a much bigger step.

I'm trying to put everything into it i'm required to as per kitlist for a reserve infantry soldier. I don't have enough room. I can't imagine how what it's like for the guys in afghanastan right now trying to use this.  There is absolutely no room for food or ammo or anything operational.

This vest may be acceptable for soldiers wearing it on gate guard duty or driving in a truck but it's criminal to send out guys out on patrol with this thing.
Just venting..



I think i'm going to say fuck it and buy some aftermarket kit. Maybe i can sneak by using my own ruck or tacvest on an ex or if i'm lucky enough to deploy.

Could you guys throw up a few links to some companies that sell (in your opinion) good vests and rucksacks?  (in addition to the ones below)
I did a little shopping on Canadian Peacekeeper. Some of their prices are ridiculas. I don't mind paying good money for good kit but after $209 for that cadpat patrol pack I'm going to pull my head out of my ass and shop around.


----------



## Andyboy (17 Apr 2005)

Ghost 778,

PM me.


----------



## LMN (17 Apr 2005)

Lets be realistic, everyone is going to have differing opinions on whether or not they like the issued kit.  I think one of the few exceptions to that rule is the bivi-bag. 

With that said, there does appear to be certain adaptability flaws with the design, particularly in respect to the M203.  One thing I'm certainly disappointed with is the fact that there's no extra room for more mags.  To be honest, who really only carries 5 mags unless they have no choice in the matter?  There's nothing more useless than a box of ammo in the middle of a firefight.

I think perhaps they approached the whole design from the wrong viewpoint.  I really think they should have had two different designs: one for the combat trades and one for the support trades.  The TV works perfect for what I do in the field as a lineman but I certainly wouldn't want to use it doing a whole lot of infantry-style fighting.  Although it'd cost a lot more to put out two types of webbing/vests, it might suit more people and make everyone happier.

In any case, I also noticed that the TV works excellent when doing FIBUA operations.  If anyone hasn't noticed by now, the world is moving towards urban combat more and more and Iraq is just another perfect example.  I think it would be foolish to think that they didn't have that in mind when they designed the vest in the first place.

Anyways, just my 2 centz


----------



## Britney Spears (17 Apr 2005)

1) This has already been addressed in the old tac vest thread. 

2) This is exactly the kind of "us vs them, I'm not infantry so I don't need real webbing" mentality that we should all be trying to eliminate. What other army in the world issues a seperate set of webbing for CSS troops? Do you need your webbing to type pay sheets or fix trucks or drink coffee in the rad van? I can do all of those things wearing shower thongs and a light coat of oil (on the friction bearing surfaces).  Some of you guys don't seem to realize that your webbing is used for INFANTRY COMBAT, nothing else. 

Now within a section, different roles require different webbing configurations (for medics, engineers, signallers), that means you carry MORE stuff, not less. That's why the dumb infantrymen all wish they could be like you right? The modular stuff would solve this problem. 

The whole point is still to win the firefight and kill the enemy. You do NOT need a seperate vest so you can carry LESS ammo.


----------



## KevinB (18 Apr 2005)

LMN said:
			
		

> In any case, I also noticed that the TV works excellent when doing FIBUA operations.   If anyone hasn't noticed by now, the world is moving towards urban combat more and more and Iraq is just another perfect example.   I think it would be foolish to think that they didn't have that in mind when they designed the vest in the first place.



REALLY.  and you noticed this on your Urban Op Insructor course....  I figured in MOUT/FIBUA/CQB envintonment I might want fast acess to my mags, and pyro  :

  The TV blows dead donkey dick.


The PSP DHTC ChestRig - wow room for mags (pistol/carbine) and bangers etc...  Golly Gee wilikers it also works with the M203 - Imagine that, all that in ONE vest...   (of course it does not work for LMG gunners very well - but we can fix that by making the center rifle/carbine pouches modular like the rest of the vest)


----------



## Britney Spears (18 Apr 2005)

So those pants, can you do a #2 without taking them off?


----------



## Kal (18 Apr 2005)

And where did you happen to find this vest, Kevin?.....


----------



## KevinB (18 Apr 2005)

Britney - yup in theory, though I'm not sure I that co-ordinated I'd want to chance it  :-\

 Kal - it followed me home  ;D

The 101st recently had a vest made that is somewhat similar.  If one looks down south their individual Brigades are buying kit specifically made for their missions.  

IMHO the Chest Rig could be improved by going 100% MOLLE/PALS - and extending the chest section 2" to make room between the pistol/m203/banger pouch and the rifle/carbine mag pouches - also it would give the option of adopting a more slimline front if one did not feel they needed as many magazines or if one was a LMG gunner.  Plus the H harness instead of X etc.

 I hope to be able to work with a few people on this and get an example built this month, and a hybrid RAV/Warhammer setup that is releaseable but with a full front cumberbund and integral to vest mag pockets on the front.


----------



## LMN (18 Apr 2005)

It's good to see all the flames I've sparked on my first ever post...

Britney, I understand where you're coming from but I think perhaps you're not seeing the whole picture here.   Lets try and remember that not all CSS troops make coffee in the back of a rad van and file pay sheets.   What I'm getting at, is that during normal work in the field, most combat support people just need the basics, and preferably something that is not going to interfere with their normal tasks.   Cumbersome and bulky kit just gets thrown aside when it gets in the way especially when working with heavy equipment and in vehicles.    Indeed they'll need to defend themselves as neccessary, but they probably don't require the type of ammo/equipment that perhaps an infantryman would need during daily operations.   Perhaps building a second type of webbing/vest is a bit extreme; maybe it just requires a lot more adaptability than it already has.


----------



## Britney Spears (18 Apr 2005)

> Cumbersome and bulky kit just gets thrown aside when it gets in the way especially when working with heavy equipment and in vehicles.   Indeed they'll need to defend themselves as neccessary, but they probably don't require the type of ammo/equipment that perhaps an infantryman would need during daily operations.



Fair enough. Personally I'd just keep things simple and drop the kit if I needed to(if you don't need it, leave it in the truck) , but you see my point, we are merely nitpicking over personal preferences.


Although I, too, was a little perplexed as to why you think the TV is "perfectly suited" for FIBUA. Unless by "Urban" you mean Tim Horton's........


----------



## KevinB (18 Apr 2005)

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> Unless by "Urban" you mean Tim Horton's........








Dude stop your killing me...


----------



## LMN (18 Apr 2005)

I don't believe I said perfectly suited, but it works well.  If you look at any SWAT team around the world...where do they wear the gear?  Now obviously the TV has certain adaptability shortcomings, but the concept is on the right track.


Fighting the civies standing between me and my toasted bagel in the morning is more than enough to be classed as a FIBUA OP.


----------



## Infanteer (18 Apr 2005)

SWAT teams do not fight urban battles.


----------



## Blackhorse7 (18 Apr 2005)

Infanteer....

I would have to disagree with your last comment.  True, SWAT/ERT may not have to fight PROLONGED FIBUA battles, but the very essence of what they do is just that, in a shorter timeframe.  That being said, our needs are different.  Police are restricted to the type of clearing they can do (ie no frag thru the door, and then dynamic entry).  As well, in an urban environment, I shudder to think about the scenario that an ERT Team member would need any more than five mags.  A rural setting, again, entirely different.  Look at Oka and Gustafson Lake.  I would personally want to bomb up with as much ammo as I could carry in those incidents.  I know our ERT Team has different load carry capabilities for both.


----------



## Canadian Sig (18 Apr 2005)

Blackhorse7 said:
			
		

> As well, in an urban environment, I shudder to think about the scenario that an ERT Team member would need any more than five mags.



  Think Bank of America robbery in LA.


----------



## Infanteer (18 Apr 2005)

Blackhorse.

As far as I understand it, SWAT teams are used for tactical arrests.  There is a cordon thrown around the area and the team makes a dynamic entry in order to detain the suspects.

Conversely, soldiers have to fight through an urban environment - the battle is much more fluid and dynamic and the target/enemy is constantly popping up and shifting around (this is why soldiers don't (or shouldn't) stack like SWAT teams).  As well, the mission is alot different - it may be to destroy the enemy, it may be to occupy certain strategic areas and hold them, etc, etc.  

It seems to be that although they do the same thing (go into a building) and have some similarities, tactical policing and and MOUT are two different animals.


----------



## Blackhorse7 (18 Apr 2005)

I'm certainly not suggesting that they are the same, but not all ERT callouts are one's where a barricaded suspect is in a know location.  There is often times where ERT has to go looking for the suspect in a silent search.  Once he (them) are located, the search goes dynamic, with noise discipline out the window.  The game now becomes speed.

As for the LA shootout, I knew someone would bring that up.  I can't say I have all the facts, but my understanding was that the SWAT teams down there did not have their AR 15's, and the average patrolman was forbidden to carry slugs for their shotguns.  Without getting into the whole body armour debate, we have slugs in our cars, and our ERT team rolls with all their weapons.  But getting back to the point, just from looking at the TV, and the FIBUA battles that are being fought, I agree that it is substandard.  I think the right way to go would be modular, with a complement of pockets issued to all soldiers.  That way the SAW gunner could bomb up the way he wants, the grenadier the way he wants, and the infanteer the way he wants.

Someone else said it earlier... a step in the right direction, but not thought out well enough.


----------



## BetterThanTheBest (18 Apr 2005)

I think what LMN was saying by mentioning the SWAT teams is that switching to any type of chest rig was a good thing compared to webbing. While the TV is the type of thing we need, It is inadequate. In my opinion it seems very rushed and not completely thought out.


----------



## Blackhorse7 (19 Apr 2005)

Totally agree, and maybe I got off topic too.  What I was driving at is that is is stunningly retarded to think that five mags would suffice for the fluid combat of FIBUA.  Many of the aftermarket vests and chest rigs I have been seeing have space for at least 9 mags, if not more.  And like I said before, what if you are a SAW gunner or a grenadier?  The current issue TV is an infantry man only vest, and a poor one at that.  That being said though, I wish we had it when I was still in.... be much more comfortable than webbing when doing route recce's.


----------



## Britney Spears (19 Apr 2005)

> be much more comfortable than webbing when doing route recce's.




Ha! that's what YOU think!  ;D  


I give up trying to convince you guys.Although, to be fair, the comfort advantages of the webbing are negated somewhat by the advent of hard armour vests. For a militia ex, the webbing wins hands down in comfort......


----------



## a_majoor (19 Apr 2005)

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> Ha! that's what YOU think!  ;D
> 
> 
> I give up trying to convince you guys.Although, to be fair, the comfort advantages of the webbing are negated somewhat by the advent of hard armour vests. For a militia ex, the webbing wins hands down in comfort......



Maybe it has to do with your body type, but I found that the TV distributed the weight more evenly than the webbing, and that was much more comfortable *for me*. This even held during live fire training with body armour on. This might not be true with the much bigger systems holding 9 mags or more which some posters are talking about, but personal preference and your build do have a lot to do with you preceptions of comfort and utility.


----------



## Britney Spears (19 Apr 2005)

Eh? Why would you WANT weight evenly distributed on your body? Some parts of the body are stronger than others. Weight on your hips is much more comfortable than weight on your shoulders, no matter how "evenly" it's distributed. It's true for rucksacks so why not webbing? You can achieve the same effect with the vest if the torso straps are done up tight, in which case it IS quite comfortable,  but the vest designers must have noticed this and decided to make the straps impossible to adjust without taking the vest off and pulling out a gerber. 

Must be my child bearing hips.....

You'll also notice that the larger systems we are talking about ALWAYS  place the heavier stuff(mags, C-9 drums, water)  lower on the body and the lighter stuff on the chest.


----------



## KevinB (19 Apr 2005)

Here is the Harris Assault Vest (done by LBT) that our vest was poorly modeled after.





I had M203 pockets added after the fact.

Using the issue TV at the killhouse - with plates and armour the mags are to hig and awkward





No real solution other than an added pack for your breacher





Using the PRR basically cuts off a magpouch


----------



## COBRA-6 (19 Apr 2005)

Here's a question for those that have been using the TV for a while, what sort of mods can/have you do/done to make it more user-friendly? I find the buckle are hard to use, particularly on the mag pouches. Also extracting the mags is kinda tricky, I guess I'll have to get magpul ranger plates...

Any advice would be appreciated!

Cheers


----------



## KevinB (19 Apr 2005)

several directives have come down about not modifying the TV - so It was easie to buy an aftermarket one that met your needs.

I tried to buy one 'off the books' via a equipment exchange off a website - but the guy ripped me off (go figure someone who stole a TV to sell then ripped someone else off...  Live and Learn)

 Mags - I've found the Magpul or Magpul Ranger rplates to be the only fix - or you can do the paracord loops with guntape but I know some CQ's are funky about gun tap on mags - so the Magpul option is better that way (but costs).

 Some idiot spec'd those buckles - no idea why, as they dont work as good as normal fastex setups, and cost more...


----------



## kyleg (21 Apr 2005)

I've barely been in a year, but I got the TV just before my SQ (summer 2004) and have used it ever since. The one thing I really like about it is comfort with the ruck, as I've always preferred having the weight on my hips rather than on my shoulders and the old buttpack made me feel like i was thrusting my pelvis like duffman. To solve the load carriage problem I tried out attaching the buttpack to the bottom right of the vest on those black plastic rings, but I took it off soon after as the damn thing was bouncing all over the place while running around Fort Drum for a day. When it comes to carrying extra kit on a march though the buttpack setup isn't so bad IMO. For future exes I think I'll stick with my nukebag though. It might make me look like a pack mule but it holds alot and gets the job done for me. These are the opinions of a pretty new soldier, and I wouldn't surprise myself if later on I look back and say "what the f*ck was I thinking??"

Cheers


----------



## Blackhorse7 (22 Apr 2005)

Does anyone out there know of a new ISSUE vest that is in trials at the time?  Our local ERT team commander was going on and on about a CADPAT vest that one of the guys is testing out, that is supposed to be issue.  He described it as having two pouches large enough to hold 2 C-mag 100 rnd mags, plus 8 C-7 mags.  I tend to think one of two things.  He either does not know issue kit to the CF from his own (expletive deleted), or it's an aftermarket vest.  I have not seen it, so no, I can't describe it any better.


----------



## KevinB (23 Apr 2005)

He's talking about the DHTC Chest Rig from PSP


----------



## Canadian Sig (23 Apr 2005)

Gotta pic of that Kevin?


----------



## Kal (25 Apr 2005)

Canadian Sig said:
			
		

> Gotta pic of that Kevin?



     It's on page 9, but Kevin, if you got any others...........


----------



## Bomber (26 Apr 2005)

The Mystery vest Blackhorse7 is talking about is most likely the issue tac vest.  If the ERT he is talking about is RCMP and not a local police department.  The RCMP got about 30 vests from us to run their own trials on.  They were in Ottawa for a while and then distributed all over the place for a user trial.


----------



## Bomber (26 Apr 2005)

There is a plastic mag divider being built.  to increase load carriage, attach your canteen carriers on the vest along with the c9 pouches.


----------



## Blackhorse7 (26 Apr 2005)

Bomber, indeed it is the RCMP.  It's just that the way my Sgt. described it, it didn't sound like the issue vest.  I'm going to corner the guy who has it and get a good look at it.


----------



## KevinB (26 Apr 2005)

The Hill vest
(and Kifaru EMR - it was a unrelated request from infanteer that I decided to combine)











and RAV


----------



## D-n-A (26 Apr 2005)

Off-topic, but....

Kevin, what do you think of the integrated kneepads in the multicam?


----------



## BetterThanTheBest (26 Apr 2005)

Kevin, How many mags does each of those vests carry? And are those loops on the mags in the RAV just for assisting in getting them from the vest?


----------



## D-n-A (26 Apr 2005)

The loops are magpull ranger plates, makes it easier to get a magazine out of the mag pouch, especially if their packed in tight.
http://www.lightfighter.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=1025


----------



## PhilB (26 Apr 2005)

God Kevin your such a gear slut I LOVE it lol. All I can say is mmmmmmm multicam


----------



## COBRA-6 (26 Apr 2005)

I second PhilB's comment!  ;D

Kev do you ever show up for inspection like that, just to see the Sergeant Major do cheetah backflips??


----------



## Bomber (27 Apr 2005)

To bad PSP submitted the tac vest instead of the "Hill Vest", these massive threads could have been avoided.


----------



## KevinB (27 Apr 2005)

Bomber, Roger that.


 All the kit is my own.  M203's are 100% legal under Canadian Law


----------



## chrisf (27 Apr 2005)

They're rather short though... do they fall under restricted or non-restricted firearms?

And can you actually purchase rounds with an inert projectile?


----------



## Infanteer (27 Apr 2005)

I think this is been addressed on these forums before - they don't fire rounds fast enough.  You can't buy HE rounds though - but flares work.


----------



## Andyboy (27 Apr 2005)

Bomber said:
			
		

> To bad PSP submitted the tac vest instead of the "Hill Vest", these massive threads could have been avoided.



Its kind of like saying too bad they didn't submit the F22 instead of the F18 (I have no idea if these came from the same company). Two different projects, two different clients, two different eras. It was not an either/or type of thing. The TV was developed for CTS, the other vest for a different client. CTS got what they wanted and you probably won't see anything else issued for another twenty years.


----------



## Bomber (27 Apr 2005)

When the call went our for a Vest, PSP threw what they figured as the best thing back.  Tac Vest, model 7120.  It won the competition and was adopted.  If they had of fired over the "Hill Vest" instead, it may have been adopted.  Both cost approximately the same to produce, price per unit, not development cost, and one is what we wear now(and some love) and the other is what some dream of...

I never went to Bosnia, but for those that did, in the later years, did you ever yearn for 10+ mags?  Didn't most people try to keep their LBV's after their tours?  Are the TV's an improvement over the LBV's?  Or did we regress in technology?


----------



## Andyboy (27 Apr 2005)

Bomber said:
			
		

> When the call went our for a Vest, PSP threw what they figured as the best thing back.   Tac Vest, model 7120.   It won the competition and was adopted.   If they had of fired over the "Hill Vest" instead, it may have been adopted.   Both cost approximately the same to produce, price per unit, not development cost, and one is what we wear now(and some love) and the other is what some dream of...



Ok I understand now. I was under the impression that it went somthing like this:

Clothe the Soldier let out a contract to design the TV. PSP won the contract to design the TV and worked with representatives from CTS to design the TV. Once the design was approved by CTS and the funding approved companies bid on the manufacturing contract. Fellfab of Hamilton won this contract. 

At a later date yet another different client approached PSP to design a load carriage system. PSP agreed and worked with this client to design the Patrol Vest and Chest Rig. Once the design was complete and the client satisfied that same client then purchased, through a sole source contract of course, several of these patrol vests and chest rigs.

Thanks for clearing it up, where did I steer wrong?


----------



## Bomber (27 Apr 2005)

No wrong steering, just different times.  If the Vest was identified as a requirement now,and not in the Bosnian time frame, it would probably have come out different.  Remember that everyone may have been living in the past.  The vest had to be trialled before it was accepted.  Troops resoundingly approved of it.  The whole process you described of design and manufacture, most likely started in mid 90's in a response to a need for better webbing in the Balkans.  It takes forever for all this to happen.  Other clients that did a limited run of less than 500 did so under different procurement rules than the rest of the government works with.  Didn't they have a receipt for a coffee maker released under the ATIA, but it was classified for almost 10 years?  And as much as we want to see the infantry kitted out beyond compare, our vest needed to be serviceable to all trades, theirs is a much more focused and specific task, requiring a more specific tool.  Kind of rambling, but they go out and buy whatever they want and need, we must contract, tender, evaluate.  Unfortunately, we aren't like the Marines, when they all went to MOLLE, and everyone loved it, till they needed to use it, then they hated it.  The Marines fixed the problem by throwing it in the garbage and getting ILBE.


----------



## Kal (27 Apr 2005)

Let me see if I understand this correctly.  The TV, chest rig and patrol vest are all designed by the same company. They are all designed for basically the same customer, the CF.  There aren't any major procurement cost differences between the three.  This bring me to my main question: Why can't the army procure either the patrol vest or chest rig for combat troops?  The TV seems well suited for the CSS types, there would just be a little more stock for them if another vest was procured.  More orders will have to be made, why not just get another vest?  Yes, this whole situation could have been avoided with a more user friendly design, but why not just make the best of bad situation?  Besides, is two different vests that big a deal?  Wouldn't it be more pressure on the stock system if a molle product was in service with all the varying pockets and pouches?  Let's just get the patrol vest....  Everyone write their MP and Stephen Harper saying his first act of prime minister in the new next election should be to get the vest needed!  Well, maybe not that far, but I think you get the point...


----------



## Andyboy (28 Apr 2005)

Oh for the love of Pete you boys is slow.


----------



## Thorvald (28 Apr 2005)

By the way, what the devil is that flap of velcro used for on the strap for the flashlight holder of the TV? (or what was it originally intended for).

I've seen people use it to hang car keys, access tokens, you name it.


----------



## NATO Boy (29 Apr 2005)

Thorvald said:
			
		

> By the way, what the devil is that flap of velcro used for on the strap for the flashlight holder of the TV? (or what was it originally intended for).
> 
> I've seen people use it to hang car keys, access tokens, you name it.



It's meant for holding "colour filters" for the mini mag lite. There's a little cutout in the mini mag flap that is secured by the velcro.


----------



## mudgunner49 (29 Apr 2005)

Andyboy said:
			
		

> Oh for the love of Pete you boys is slow.



It's OK Andy - I got the sarcasm, if no-one else did : : :


----------



## Andyboy (29 Apr 2005)

Thanks Blake, Iwas beginning to wonder if my sarcas-o-meter was broken.


----------



## KevinB (29 Apr 2005)

Andyboy said:
			
		

> Thanks Blake, Iwas beginning to wonder if my sarcas-o-meter was broken.



Not broken - I've just gone numb to this thread


----------



## Infanteer (29 Apr 2005)

Funny, we closed down a monster thread that targetted the TACVEST and, sure enough, we have another 12 page thread that trashes the thing....


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (29 Apr 2005)

Turn that frown upside down peaches.


----------



## Andyboy (30 Apr 2005)

So are you going to combine them?


----------



## Black Watch (30 Apr 2005)

I had the 892 pat. webing on my bmq and I found it rocks. But since my biq, I have the tv. Let's just say it lacks of room to place all your gear and even come ammo. Also, it's just damn too hot in summer time, and what happened to winter cammo? But, when (or if) we are issued small pack system, tv will be much improvement over older pieces of kit.


----------



## Infanteer (1 May 2005)

8-12 mags seems to be the concensus I've run into.


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 May 2005)

I found a stalwart defender of the tacvest this week-end.

"Lots of people complain about the lack of room for spare magazines, little do some soldiers realise is that there is a 5 magazine insert pouch becomming available for the tacvest. It takes the place of your canteen".

What a clever idea.


----------



## Infanteer (2 May 2005)

No doubt.... :


----------



## Britney Spears (2 May 2005)

Well that in itself is not a bad idea. I think the basic frame of the vest is pretty good, and for a general issue item the build quality is reasonable. With the following minor modifications it would be an ideal piece of gear:

- Remove the kidney pouches and bayonet.
- Place modular attachement points where the kidney pouches are, so C-9 pouches can be attached in their place.
- Replace the mag pouches with modular attachement points. so small pouches for M203, Grenades, PRR, pistol mags can be attached.
- Issue those extra pouchs, along with inserts for the C-9 pouches for M203 and C-7 mags
- Replace the torso straps with bungie cords, or ANYTHING that can actually be adjusted on the fly.
- Add a wide belt at the bottom.
- Grip pads on the shoulders


See? How hard could it be?


----------



## Infanteer (2 May 2005)

Apparently, hard enough for a multi-million dollar CTS program....


----------



## Kal (2 May 2005)

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> Well that in itself is not a bad idea. I think the basic frame of the vest is pretty good, and for a general issue item the build quality is reasonable. With the following minor modifications it would be an ideal piece of gear:
> 
> - Remove the kidney pouches and bayonet.
> - Place modular attachement points where the kidney pouches are, so C-9 pouches can be attached in their place.
> ...



So basically a whole new vest?     perhaps a CADPAT paraclete RAV, crye precision armoured chassis hybrid.....


----------



## KevinB (2 May 2005)

A buddies rig (same mod's as mine - we did them when he was back on leave)







They are using AK's  :'(


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (2 May 2005)

"They are using AK's   :'("


That ought to make a good story.


----------



## KevinB (2 May 2005)

He's in Iraq dressed like the Haj...

 If I could figure out how to privatise my photo album I'd put some good stuff up and put pics in the low ground...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (2 May 2005)

if in doubt
individual pics vs album in the low ground
I can send you a site that allows you to post pics one at a time or in bulk that you chose and the ablum is your own not community shared.


----------



## KevinB (2 May 2005)

I just locked my photobucket account

SO I think you can only see pics I post?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (2 May 2005)

Patiently waiting in the low ground.


----------



## mudgunner49 (3 May 2005)

Kevin,

I also await pics - and will hold your upper hostage until i see them!!!


Blake


----------



## KevinB (4 May 2005)

Unfortunately the senders did not want them put up on the net.

 I will have to look at a way to get you access Blake...


----------



## mudgunner49 (4 May 2005)

Well, if you EVER want to see that "thing" from Wes... 

Blake


----------



## KevinB (4 May 2005)

:'(

Your making me cry...

I have two pics that one guy will let me send out (pretty vanilla ones) since they are Canadians they tend to be very PERSEC oriented as the local responce to their work has not been "overwhelming..."


----------



## RossF (4 May 2005)

I just quickly read something about some pic hostings or what not, not sure if this has to do with anything, but here's a link to free image hosting if this is the problem.

http://www.imageshack.us


----------



## KevinB (6 May 2005)

Thx,

 I have a photo account at Photobucket - my concern is that IF I put up some pics that I can restrict acess to those pics into threads/boards that I chose, and that the pics be private so noone can go in and view my gallery.


----------



## Black Watch (6 May 2005)

OK TV is great. But what happened to winter camouflage? All in whites, except for that CADPAT vest. They should make one for winter, or manufacture some coveralls or something.


----------



## Infanteer (6 May 2005)

I've never used a Load Bearing Rig in winter training, you put the stuff on the tobaggan and in the big pockets on your parka.


----------



## Britney Spears (6 May 2005)

> Insert Quote
> I've never used a Load Bearing Rig in winter training, you put the stuff on the tobaggan and in the big pockets on your parka.



As if you've ever used a parka or tobaggan.....


----------



## Infanteer (6 May 2005)

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> As if you've ever used a parka or tobaggan.....



As if you'd know.


----------



## Britney Spears (6 May 2005)

Sure I do, I've been to the west coast once.


----------



## Canadian Sig (6 May 2005)

Aww come on Brit, it snows on the west coast at least once a year.  :dontpanic:


----------



## Black Watch (6 May 2005)

still, for winter cammo, tv is still not good, agree????


----------



## Canadian Sig (6 May 2005)

Black Watch,

  Long and the short of it is most units don't use the vest in Arctic/winter dress. Thats what the big pockets on winter dress are for.


----------



## Infanteer (6 May 2005)

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> Sure I do, I've been to the west coast once.



Well, I have left the parade square once or twice.... :

Here's some pics from some training with Brits in Republic Srpska.

Notice

a)   How well the camo covers work for arctic ops.

b) You don't wear LBE - you don't want it getting you all hot and sweaty by clamping down the movement of air inside your body.   The new Arctic Gear is superb, with pockets on the pants and legs probably supplying better load carriage ability then the Tacvest.   Also, the Tobaggan (which you never go without) carries alot of section gear.


----------



## stukirkpatrick (7 May 2005)

He must need it all to keep his head warm in those undoubtedly cold temperatures (especially without a toque)


----------



## Black Watch (7 May 2005)

Man! nice hair


----------



## Jarnhamar (8 May 2005)

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/29987.15.html

It would be nice if the designers/supporters of the Tacvest were to visit the site (like Mr Kroon has) and adress some of the issues that people have raised regarding their vest.


----------



## KevinB (8 May 2005)

They don't care...

We are wrong and they are right  :


----------



## Hunter911 (9 May 2005)

Sorry this is kinda off the track of hair cuts, but i was just wondering, do you get your tac vests while your on your BMQ, SQ, and q3? or do you get them when your all done? if anyone could help me on this one it would be great. thanks


----------



## Spartan (9 May 2005)

Hunter911 said:
			
		

> Sorry this is kinda off the track of hair cuts, but i was just wondering, do you get your tac vests while your on your BMQ, SQ, and q3? or do you get them when your all done? if anyone could help me on this one it would be great. thanks


Should be after BMQ; but can be delayed up until after your 3's/dp1
Same goes with your goretex - they in Ottawa have just flipped it _again_ till after your 3's. I found this out by going down to supply for something else last week.


----------



## Suter_A (10 May 2005)

I just finished my reserve BMQ and everyone on my course has had their vest since their first kit issue. I don't see the point in waiting in issuing the vests...they're pretty good to have even on BMQ


----------



## Black Watch (10 May 2005)

Suter_A said:
			
		

> I just finished my reserve BMQ and everyone on my course has had their vest since their first kit issue. I don't see the point in waiting in issuing the vests...they're pretty good to have even on BMQ



Yeah, might be good on your BMQ, but in field ex tac vest isn't so good, especialy on patrol. Tac vest does not allow you to carry much kit around.


----------



## Suter_A (10 May 2005)

I agree completely. I find it really awkward for some things...and I can't seem to get a good position for the butt of my C7 when I'm wearing it. The C9 pouch on the left side is usually hard to get into since the clip is angled towards the rear. It's better than nothing though.


----------



## Hunter911 (10 May 2005)

Alright thanks alot  :warstory:


----------



## Black Watch (10 May 2005)

Suter_A said:
			
		

> I agree completely. I find it really awkward for some things...and I can't seem to get a good position for the butt of my C7 when I'm wearing it. The C9 pouch on the left side is usually hard to get into since the clip is angled towards the rear. It's better than nothing though.


To add to your comment, I would say the lack of omfort when youre at the prone.


----------



## BetterThanTheBest (10 May 2005)

I actually dont find it too bad in the prone. I wear it high and when in a fire postion it barely even touches the ground. Although it does get stuck in all manners of branches and s*** once you start to crawl.


----------



## Britney Spears (10 May 2005)

BetterThanTheBest said:
			
		

> I actually dont find it too bad in the prone. I wear it high and when in a fire postion it barely even touches the ground. Although it does get stuck in all manners of branches and s*** once you start to crawl.



You need to get some FPV lovin'.


----------



## BetterThanTheBest (10 May 2005)

FPV?


----------



## Britney Spears (10 May 2005)

Fragmentation Protection Vest. Makes crawling more fun than ever.


----------



## NATO Boy (10 May 2005)

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> You need to get some FPV lovin'.





			
				Britney Spears said:
			
		

> Fragmentation Protection Vest. Makes crawling more fun than ever.



That has to be the greatest thing I've read today! Thanx for the laugh, Britney.


----------



## kyleg (11 May 2005)

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> Fragmentation Protection Vest. Makes crawling more fun than ever.



I can only imagine. What do those plates weigh anyways?


----------



## Blackhorse7 (11 May 2005)

I've weighed front and back plates for my hard armour, and they came to about 15 pounds, with carrier.  But the FPV if I am not mistaken is also a stand alone level III vest.  Add another 10 pounds....


----------



## KevinB (11 May 2005)

IIIA

 IIRC the wieght is pretty close to 25lbs as BlackHorse suggests.


----------



## Black Watch (11 May 2005)

what's a level III armour???


----------



## Infanteer (11 May 2005)

You have to pass Level II to get it.

(If you haven't figured it out yet, Google is your friend)


----------



## KevinB (11 May 2005)

Pacific Safety Products(formerly known as Pacific Body Armour) 


2821 Fenwick Road, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada V1X 5E4
Phone: 250-491-0911 Foreign Phone: 250-491-0911   Foreign Fax 250-763-9730 
http://www.pacsafety.com/

Models Comply with NIJ Standard 0101.04



THREAT LEVEL II
As a result of independent testing, the following vest models were found to be in compliance with NIJ Standard-0101.04 requiring protection against .357 Magnum JSP 158 gr. bullets to a velocity of 1400 ft/s and 9mm FMJ 124 gr. bullets to a velocity of 1175 ft/s. 


Threat ID Model Name Style Female 
II PTIIXLT31     
II UG204TW8     
II UG204TW8-F   X  
II UG214ZGF     
II UG214ZGF-F   X  
II UG2BA8-F     
II UG2LGK6     
II UG2LGT8     
II UG2LGT8-F   X  
II UGIIXLT31     
II UGIIXLTPF     



THREAT LEVEL IIIA
As a result of independent testing, the following vest models were found to be in compliance with NIJ Standard-0101.04 requiring protection against .44 Magnum SJHP 240 gr. bullets and 9mm FMJ 124 gr. bullets, both to a velocity of 1400 ft/s. 


Threat ID Model Name Style Female 
IIIA PT3AT15     
IIIA PT3AZHY     
IIIA UG304SK8     
IIIA UG304ZGS     
IIIA UG3A2170     
IIIA UG3AT840-2     
IIIA UG3AXLTGF     
IIIA UG3AZHY-F   X  
IIIA UG3BXLTGF-F   X


----------



## Andyboy (21 May 2005)

Well I died last weekend, twice, trying to wrestle a mag out of my TV (and I was using Ranger plates) while under close contact. I suppose I should spend more time practicing with the TV trying to build up some new muscle memory, then again the "designers" could have thought a little bit about motor skills, legacy muscle memory and stress when they came up with this thing. Somehow they managed to completely ignore the muscle memory we've all built up over the years of using the webbing and introduce a completely new series of actions required to open and retreive a mag. On top of that they used buckles that require fine motor skills to operate and arranged the pouches in sucha  way that you have to go to a fairly drastically different part of the vest to retreive every new mag. The pouches aren't even on the same plane for the love of pete!


----------



## McGowan (25 May 2005)

I don't mind wearing armour but...SQ 13 k march :


----------



## RossF (25 May 2005)

McGowan said:
			
		

> I don't mind wearing armour but...SQ 13 k march :



Man, your profile confuses me.


----------



## Adrian (26 May 2005)

> Well I died last weekend, twice, trying to wrestle a mag out of my TV (and I was using Ranger plates) while under close contact. I suppose I should spend more time practicing with the TV trying to build up some new muscle memory, then again the "designers" could have thought a little bit about motor skills, legacy muscle memory and stress when they came up with this thing. Somehow they managed to completely ignore the muscle memory we've all built up over the years of using the webbing and introduce a completely new series of actions required to open and retreive a mag. On top of that they used buckles that require fine motor skills to operate and arranged the pouches in sucha  way that you have to go to a fairly drastically different part of the vest to retreive every new mag. The pouches aren't even on the same plane for the love of pete!



Would having the clips undone make it much easier to take out a mag? This way, one must only pull at the velcro in order to open the mag pouch...I've tried it a few times and it seems to work.  It would be a good idea to undo all the clips if you know you're about to be engaged and expecting it...the velcro should stop the mags from falling out if you do have to run or drop.

I think the greater problem is not taking the mags out, but putting them back in during an unload.  Its a pain trying to fit them into that tiny mag pouch slot, so I just dump them into my left leg pocket...which has recently become much harder to do because of the higher ups decision to make us attach our respirators to our tacs   Ah well...

Honestly though, it boggles the mind to figrue out why they couldn't have doubled the size of the mag pouches so that you could fit two into one pouch.  I mean come on, it's so simple of a design enhancement and it would double the carrying load...why the hell not?!


----------



## Andyboy (26 May 2005)

Actually they were undone which is how I have them most of the time, they are pretty much impossible to undo under stress, expescially if you are wearing gloves. I think they will get someone killed for real one day. Part of the problem I neglected to mention was the miles200 harness, radio cables etc getting in the way. It doesn't help that I have a large vest and the mag pouches usually end up under my armpits somewhere. Either way I am not a fan of the layout of the mag pouches OR the buckles. 

As to your point about the mag pouches, you have to understand that the vest was designed to be worn such that NO weight is on the hips (where the belt for the ruck is meant to go) and as such the weight had to be kept to a minimum (that is my understanding of hte matter anyway, I could be wrong). Besides which the doctrine (at hte time) called for five mags. What are you gonna do? The army spent it's allowance, the best they can do now is allow for aftermarket kit. 

I agree witht he point about spent mags, I've been eyeing dump pouches lately. I might just make my own.


----------



## prom (27 May 2005)

no problem using thigh mag pouches are there? I know that some have complained that the thigh holster si a psin over long distances, and i would imagine that this would be a problem as well. However this may be a nice alternative keeping the mags down and away from the TV.


----------



## KevinB (28 May 2005)

A quote from one of the Delta boys (basicload) on Lightfigher:


> I used to run a leg bag or leg panel, but after OEF-1, I quit using them unless I was on a hit.
> 
> I actually removed my SDS leg panel while on a mission (in order to lay on my side while prone) and ended up leaving it on target. I gave the enemy 2X 5.56 mags, one banger, 2 flex linears, and my personal 5 megapixel digital camera.
> 
> ...



 and the thread in question on droploads
http://lightfighter.net/eve/ubb.x/a/tpc/f/2106044761/m/458103067/r/109106167#109106167

 I ran a TCC bag on my left and my 6004 on my right - but after awhile I moved the TCC bag to my day bag.  As well we had some guys wearing M203 pouches as a subload - but after a little walking most where moving it up or putting it in day bag.
 A pistol is about 2.5lbs - or the weight of two loaded mags (ish) - any much more ona  leg and it get s uncomfortable for wearing over a long period of time in my experience.  I also found that it was impossible to drive the Gwagon or the SUV's with the TCC bag in place on my leg.

 I know most are geting sick of my bad mouthing the TV but I found that the pouch setup and layout is not compatible with an effective layout - the subload is another band-aid good for some roles but not for others 

YMMV


Cheers

Kevin


----------



## PhilB (28 May 2005)

I recently purchased a set of the "accessory panels" that dropzone produces for the TV. Basically the panel is covered in PALS and attaches onto the velcro panels on the side of the vest with velcro and clips. The panel is slightly (2 PALS channels) larger than the side panel of the vest , there are loops on the panel to run the adjustment straps at the back of the TV through. Although, again as Kevin stated, this is a bandaid it is an excellant concept. It allows you to increase the carrying capacity of the vest quite easily. I am currently running a large bren gun pouch on each side, and still have room for a gps pouch on on of the panels and my bayonet and a surefire pocket on the other. Additionally it allows you to add mag pouches (3 double stacks per side), or 40mm pouches. It rides quite well, and doesnt overly change the appearance of the vest. I am trying to track down a digi cam to take some pictures of my setup. At $49 for the set of panels its not a bad deal.


----------



## Adrian (30 May 2005)

PhilB,

Could you show us a picture of your TV with these access panels?

As far as add-on's go, I've begun thinking about putting the issued US canteen pouch somewhere on the TV.  This would help just about everyone, especially C9 gunners, as now you could have two C-9 pouches for ammo/utilities and a canteen (soft skin) as well.  If only I could figure out how to attach the ALICE clips to the TV...


----------



## Black Watch (30 May 2005)

another glitch would be the lack of 9mm pistol holster


----------



## Britney Spears (30 May 2005)

> another glitch would be the lack of 9mm pistol holster



We have holsters, they come with the pistol. If you've ever been issued/actually seen one you'd know that.


----------



## Canadian Sig (31 May 2005)

Actualy Britney, last time I was issued a pistol I was told "sorry but there is a shortage of holsters in theater so just make do without one".


----------



## Black Watch (31 May 2005)

2332Piper said:
			
		

> How so? Not everyone has/needs one. And while I'm no expert, I would say drawing your weapon from the thigh is easier and quicker then reaching up to your vest (I could very well be wrong, but its often a matter of personal preference). Although again, issues arise when travelling any major distance.
> 
> I would rephrase your statement to say that 'the TV needs to be modular'.


TV is modular, but not as the good old 82pat. webbing


----------



## spacelord (3 Jun 2005)

you can do more than just switch the C9 and canteen pouch. Don't forget that you can have two of either, or even rotate them 90 degrees.


----------



## NATO Boy (3 Jun 2005)

spacelord said:
			
		

> you can do more than just switch the C9 and canteen pouch. Don't forget that you can have two of either, or even rotate them 90 degrees.



Wow, that's awesome! Too bad none of the other pouches are movable... :

The Piper has brought back a good point; the modularity the vest "kinda" offers is not enough. As for the "band-aid" option PhilB went with; it sounds like a very good solution for guys who don't have money to completely banish the POS.


----------



## MikeM (3 Jun 2005)

Haha, nice one Piper    ;D

Are you implying the TV is not Uber modular? :blotto:


----------

