# Latest tease the soldier kit



## genesis98 (16 Feb 2007)

Can we get a list of all the latest Tease the soldier kit that has been issued in the last few years on the go as well as a link to the latest complete field allocation scale, I'm sure it will help a lot of new guys that come on to the site as well answer a lot of questions.


----------



## Michael OLeary (16 Feb 2007)

Clothe the Soldier (CTS)
http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/Chief_Land_Staff/Clothe_the_soldier/hab/2/2_e.asp


----------



## Nfld Sapper (16 Feb 2007)

Damn beat me to it Mr. O'Leary :mg:


----------



## PhilB (16 Feb 2007)

Looking on the website it now states that the rucksack is in contracting. Not that I am expecting much, based on the small pack, but does anyone in the know have any idea when it will start being issued?


----------



## Sig_Des (16 Feb 2007)

PhilB said:
			
		

> Looking on the website it now states that the rucksack is in contracting. Not that I am expecting much, based on the small pack, but does anyone in the know have any idea when it will start being issued?



I'll try going downtairs tomorrow and asking one of the LCMMs. Maybe shoot off an email.


----------



## HollywoodHitman (16 Feb 2007)

I think the rucksack has been in contracting for about 7 years now....


----------



## PhilB (16 Feb 2007)

Good point TM, I dont know what I was thinking expecting decent kit in a timely manner form CTS! :rage:


----------



## NL_engineer (16 Feb 2007)

PhilB said:
			
		

> Good point TM, I dont know what I was thinking expecting decent kit in a timely manner form CTS! :rage:



It may be decent when they design it  :, but by the time we get it, it is 10 years out of date.  For example the new ruck is outdated now when compared to any new civi model   :


----------



## genesis98 (17 Feb 2007)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> Clothe the Soldier (CTS)
> http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/Chief_Land_Staff/Clothe_the_soldier/hab/2/2_e.asp



Thanks but not quite what I meant. But great reply. I was thinking more along the lines of the kit that has not been posted on the website. 
Ex. The new ranger blanket, and knee pads etc.


----------



## TN2IC (17 Feb 2007)

New Ranger blanket is in the system.


----------



## aesop081 (17 Feb 2007)

TN2IC said:
			
		

> New Ranger blanket is in the system.



Its pretty nice, i recently got a hold of one......i like it.


----------



## armyvern (17 Feb 2007)

TN2IC said:
			
		

> New Ranger blanket is in the system.



Please tell me that you are not talking about the thermal blanket that's been issued out of some clothing stores for the better part of 3 years now? Not necessarily new kit. New to you maybe but not new to the system. Just another one of those pieces of kit that takes years to makes it way onto the soldier through the system.

And this one wasn't even a Clothe the Soldier item!!


----------



## aesop081 (17 Feb 2007)

The Librarian said:
			
		

> Please tell me that you are not talking about the thermal blanket that's been issued out of some clothing stores for the better part of 3 years now? Not necessarily new kit. New to you maybe but not new to the system. Just another one of those pieces of kit that takes years to makes it was onto the soldier through the system.
> 
> And this one wasn't even a Clothe the Soldier item!!



Are we talking about the CADPAT one with the zipper around the edge and the zippered hole so it can be used as a poncho liner ?


----------



## armyvern (17 Feb 2007)

cdnaviator said:
			
		

> Are we talking about the CADPAT one with the zipper around the edge and the zippered hole so it can be used as a poncho liner ?



Yep that would be the Thermal Blanket.


----------



## aesop081 (17 Feb 2007)

The Librarian said:
			
		

> Yep that would be the Thermal Blanket.



well, whatever its called i like it......good on long transit flights


----------



## TN2IC (17 Feb 2007)

I love it... it is great when the wife kicks me out of bed.

 ;D


----------



## Nfld Sapper (17 Feb 2007)

The Librarian said:
			
		

> Yep that would be the Thermal Blanket.



Guess I will have to make a visit to 3ASG Clothing  ;D as I can't seem to find it here at Station or my Unit.


----------



## silentbutdeadly (17 Feb 2007)

That blanket has no thermal in it whats so freakin ever! haha had it in Afghanistan. Went out in the hills for a few days and lets say it lined my bunk for the rest of the tour and i switched back to the american one but hey it looks good and has some nice add on's.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (17 Feb 2007)

Some people think it is a new sleeping bag linner too


----------



## armyvern (17 Feb 2007)

Nfld Sapper said:
			
		

> Some people think it is a new sleeping bag linner too



It *IS* the new sleeping bag liner. The thermal blanket is a one for one exchange. You bring in your SB liner and ranger blanket and we take the two of them to issue you the thermal blanket. 

Pers serving on certain tours (Ie TFA) are entitled to be re-issued their SB liner for the tour. Once the tour has ended though, entitlement to continue holding both ceases and the SB liner is supposed to be returned as part of your kit AAG.

I don't know why, and I don't know who came up with that wonderful scale entitlement. Nobody I've met is happy with the TB as the SB liner. That old flannel was nice...and warm too.


----------



## aesop081 (17 Feb 2007)

silentbutdeadly said:
			
		

> That blanket has no thermal in it whats so freakin ever!



Thats disapointing to hear. I'm not too concerned mind you, it does a good job in the back of the aircraft but i was hoping the CF had got it right this time.


----------



## armyvern (17 Feb 2007)

cdnaviator said:
			
		

> Thats disapointing to hear. I'm not too concerned mind you, it does a good job in the back of the aircraft but i was hoping the CF had got it right this time.



It's meant as a SB liner/ranger blanket. It does make a snuggly warm ranger blanket but as a sleeping bag liner...nyet.


----------



## aesop081 (17 Feb 2007)

The Librarian said:
			
		

> It's meant as a SB liner/ranger blanket. It does make a snuggly warm ranger blanket but as a sleeping bag liner...nyet.



Does it come in AR ?


----------



## armyvern (17 Feb 2007)

Not that I'm aware of.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (17 Feb 2007)

Interesting tidbit there Vern a buddy of mine exchanged is ranger blanket and got the thermal one and still keeped his liner (but read this was about 2 yrs ago).


----------



## mover1 (17 Feb 2007)

cdnaviator said:
			
		

> Thats disapointing to hear. I'm not too concerned mind you, it does a good job in the back of the aircraft but i was hoping the CF had got it right this time.



I thought you guys used stolen bedding from the Airport Hilton? ;D


----------



## armyvern (17 Feb 2007)

Nfld Sapper said:
			
		

> Interesting tidbit there Vern a buddy of mine exchanged is ranger blanket and got the thermal one and still keeped his liner (but read this was about 2 yrs ago).



Well if he was slated for tour that's quite likely. And some places were not aware that it was the replacement for the SB liner when it was first issued and mistakes were made. A message was cut re-iterating that the SB liner had to be turned in, along with the ranger blanket, to be issued the TB though so that shouldn't be happening any more.

In our case, with TF1-07 ramping up there really was no point in making 2RCR guys turn in their SB liners to receive it only to have to have them return to clothing for another kitting to get it back for the tour.

Some lucked out and got theirs issued after the official word for mounting came down the line. Others who received theirs before the TF frag was out, ended up coming back.

That sucks. They should just let everyone retain their SB liner. It's much more comfortable to sleep with in the bag anyway.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (17 Feb 2007)

Nah this was way before TF1-07 he had a call out with the bird gunners.


----------



## PAT-Platoon (18 Feb 2007)

In the Reserves right now, how likely am I to see kneepads from the CTS soon? Or is it a matter of "Kneepads are currently being contracted" (i.e. 2-3 years)


----------



## R031button (18 Feb 2007)

Your not. It's very advisable to go and purchase your own pair, good knee padsl ike Alta's or Hatch's will run you about 30 bucks.


----------



## PAT-Platoon (18 Feb 2007)

R031button said:
			
		

> Your not. It's very advisable to go and purchase your own pair, good knee padsl ike Alta's or Hatch's will run you about 30 bucks.



Alright, thanks. Lets hope my unit allows...or better yet, lets hope SQ and BIQ course allows it! (not bloody likely eh? haha)


----------



## armyvern (18 Feb 2007)

PAT-Platoon said:
			
		

> In the Reserves right now, how likely am I to see kneepads from the CTS soon? Or is it a matter of "Kneepads are currently being contracted" (i.e. 2-3 years)



Kneepads are not a clothing stores item. The CTS kneepads were issued out to Unit QMs on the pri basis that was set up by CTS. I have no idea which units were deemed priority or when issues to those QMs occured. I can speak for Gagetown where the kneepads have been received at some Units as long as 3 years ago.

If you want to PM me your Unit UIC then I can pull it up on the system to see what info is avail. Without that UIC I can't really tell you much.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (18 Feb 2007)

PAT-Platoon said:
			
		

> Alright, thanks. Lets hope my unit allows...or better yet, lets hope SQ and BIQ course allows it! (not bloody likely eh? haha)



Yeah you won't be allowed to use that on those courses unless every member of the course has it issued.


----------



## Laps (21 Feb 2007)

Well, putting aside the Ranger/Thermal/whatever you want to call it blanket and the knee pad aside, I have a question for the good supply folks LCMM and other knowledgeable staff here (always told to be nice to support folks...).

Is there a common sense explanation about scale of issues for TacHel?  I mean, we have field gear, probably spend more time in the field than some crossed-swords people and yet, everytime I go to supply to ask for something to make my life easier in the field, I get told "not for aircrew".  Now, after all the ah-ah jokes about aircrew and the field (I have heard them all, go ahead), I would appreciate if someone can shed some light on the matter.  I mean, I look at the CTS website and they have "family of gloves"... wow... that would be great!!!  I have one pair of flying gloves that I cannot get wet or dirty otherwise someone freaks out if I fly with them and 1 pair of arctic mitts for my survival kit or when it is really cold... oh, and dress gloves for those 1-2/yr parades (well, make it rememberance day parade and that is about it...).

My favorite is being a liaison officer in the field... how can you spot us in the crowd???  we are the ones with the webbing amongst all the tacvest-clad people, no-gloves (flying gloves left in the flying-kit MLVW), aircrew turtle-neck under our cadpat shirt (no fleece issued!!), a pair of 1950's model boots 'cause this is all we can get AND NICE FREAK** BLUE/GREEN SLIP-ONS because the Airforce thought it was a great idea  :brickwall: 

In all fairness, as a chopper driver, we are not too bad as we can even start the 2 heaters on top to stay warm and dry, but I can think of our techs out there fixing machines in the wet/cold/windy/s*** weather out there.  I am wondering why we could not have a scale of issue similar to a CS or CSS trade unit???  Their guys fix trucks in the field, or guys fix choppers in the field...

All right, rant off...  any constructive comments would be appreciated...


----------



## TN2IC (21 Feb 2007)

Laps said:
			
		

> In all fairness, as a chopper driver, we are not too bad as we can even start the 2 heaters on top to stay warm and dry, but I can think of our techs out there fixing machines in the wet/cold/windy/s*** weather out there.  I am wondering why we could not have a scale of issue similar to a CS or CSS trade unit???  Their guys fix trucks in the field, or guys fix choppers in the field...
> 
> All right, rant off...  any constructive comments would be appreciated...




That makes too much sense. All I want is the flashy air force rain jacket... shall we make a trade? j/k..


----------



## Nfld Sapper (21 Feb 2007)

Maybe Vern  err... TheLibrarian can shed some light on the matter.


----------



## navymich (21 Feb 2007)

TN2IC said:
			
		

> All I want is the flashy air force rain jacket... shall we make a trade? j/k..



Interesting how people bash the other elements until someone might have something they want....  (btw, what are you offering??    j/k)


----------



## armyvern (21 Feb 2007)

Laps said:
			
		

> Well, putting aside the Ranger/Thermal/whatever you want to call it blanket and the knee pad aside, I have a question for the good supply folks LCMM and other knowledgeable staff here (always told to be nice to support folks...).
> 
> Is there a common sense explanation about scale of issues for TacHel?  ....



Laps. Absolutely agree with you on this post. It does make sense for Tac Hel pers to have the Army kit that they require as they do support land ops. I also know that I've responded to probably the very same question as yours in another thread...discussing gloves IIRC. What you say absolutely makes sense.

Here's the situation:
Army Kit: Belongs to the Army and the scale of entitlement applies to "personnel employed in *LFC* positions *directly* supporting land ops, regardless of environment."

Tac Hel personnel: Are serving in Air Force posns not LFC positions. Yes, they directly support Land Ops, but they are 'owned' by the AF and thus it is the Air Force scale that comes into force. I have addressed the issue before trying to get the Field kit (gloves etc) for the Tac Hel pers at my last Base and a whole bunch of factors came into play. The big issue with the AF CoC (who must authorize their Tac Hel pers to wear _Army _ kit) was flight safety, anti-static, fire-retardency etc etc. Gloves or whatever piece of kit would have to be put through the anti-static testing, trials & tribulations etc. If the AF did this and then auth the kit for issue to Tac Hel pers and amended their scale of entitlement appropriately, we at clothing could then issue.

Essentially what it all comes down to is 'ownership' of the pers serving in Tac Hels...and flight safety. The AF side of the house needs to test it, authorize it for wear on their scales, and then we can issue it.


----------



## Loachman (23 Feb 2007)

In the Good Old Days (how I miss the Soviet Union) we got the same scale of issue.

This testing thing is nuts at times, and very inconsistent.

I still have my good old black combat gloves with the woolly liners.

As for the tac vest vs webbing thing, we should have an aircrew tac vest as switching from webbing/tac vest to survival vest and back and forth has always been stupid and annoying PLUS the first Sh*thook guy shot down in Afghanistan isn't going to have much use for a fishing kit and jelly candies.


----------



## medaid (23 Feb 2007)

um... maybe it's just me, but what about all the army personnel that routinely transit on our TacHel and other aircrafts? Their clothing aren't static, blah blah blah blah blah proof... what bout them?


----------



## riggermade (23 Feb 2007)

MedTech said:
			
		

> um... maybe it's just me, but what about all the army personnel that routinely transit on our TacHel and other aircrafts? Their clothing aren't static, blah blah blah blah blah proof... what bout them?



Good point MedTech

I can't remember how many jumps I have made from various AC and nobody ever told me I couldn't get on the plane because my kit didn't meet AF standards


----------



## Laps (23 Feb 2007)

riggermade said:
			
		

> Good point MedTech
> 
> I can't remember how many jumps I have made from various AC and nobody ever told me I couldn't get on the plane because my kit didn't meet AF standards



Sounds like the one time I boarded an Airbus in Trenton: "Sir, do you have any nail files or such other dangerous items in your carry-ons?"  Well...  Normally, the guys flying behind me have way more dangerous things than nail files...

Thanks for the input guys...  In all fairness, the folks are trying: they have been "trialing" new boots for us for longer than it took us to get rid of Nazi Europe...


----------



## TN2IC (23 Feb 2007)

I just still think it is funny... static issue. I can't get any of the other stuff... but in my trade we do REFUELING!!!
SPARKY SPARKY


But then again, I am in the army.
Nothing has to make sense. Me talking to the neighbours dog makes no sense either. Beats me.   

BTW AirMich.. I got pair of gumbies that have about 10 years of dust on them (<-- bonus). Also some PT shorts... one may have a skid mark in it.  :dontpanic:


----------



## orange.paint (23 Feb 2007)

Nfld Sapper said:
			
		

> Yeah you won't be allowed to use that on those courses unless every member of the course has it issued.



I wouldn't say that.The field is the field.More and more instructors are lenient towards after market kit.Personally when I'm teaching section attacks,if a kid wants to wear knee pads all the power to him.Now if some people are around who cares (old crusty bastards who use the old phrase "If you need it,QM will issue it".I'll just tell the student to put it in under his combats/windpant etc.

I hate kit sl*ts.However if a guy buys a piece of kit to save strain and damage to his person, I won't tell him not to wear it in the field.Garrison....they better look like carbon copies. 

But that's just me personally.And my theory's are subject to change,when I'm told what my theory's are by higher.


----------



## DirtyDog (23 Feb 2007)

I recently did 2 very cold weeks in the field for BMQ.

Our staff was reluctant to allow us any gucci kit at first, but the extremely cold temperatures created some leaniency.  The black combat gloves and liners were absolutely useless once things got decently cold so a pair of aftermarket gloves was a must if you didn't want to wear the gawd awful artic mitts.  Infact, most people's gloves were still ineffective and many wore the "dopey mitts" constantly.  Blinding sun and blowing snow made eye protection a must at times and the issue googles are a little unwieldy.  Sunglasses were popular.  The combat scarf was in use by many but I found it way too bulky and a pain (I didn't use anything but the collar of the parka) and some people had the fleece neck warmer/mask that they bought from the Canex.  The rest made do with the white belaclava (or some combination of it, the neckwarmer, combat toque, and skull cap).


----------



## armyvern (23 Feb 2007)

MedTech said:
			
		

> um... maybe it's just me, but what about all the army personnel that routinely transit on our TacHel and other aircrafts? Their clothing aren't static, blah blah blah blah blah proof... what bout them?



Uhmmm Blah blah blah,

Ask the freakin' Air Force OK?? It's their damn rules. And while your at it, ask them why they won't let their guys serving in Tac Hels wear Army kit... maybe they're having another one of those identity crises'. The Air Force decides what AF pers wear, not supply. Period. Full stop...blah blah blah.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (23 Feb 2007)

+10 Vern.

Now what the new rain gear that was modeled on the Air Force one?  ;D


----------



## medaid (23 Feb 2007)

The Librarian said:
			
		

> Uhmmm Blah blah blah,
> 
> Ask the freakin' Air Force OK?? It's their damn rules. And while your at it, ask them why they won't let their guys serving in Tac Hels wear Army kit... maybe they're having another one of those identity crises'. The Air Force decides what AF pers wear, not supply. Period. Full stop...blah blah blah.



HEY HEY~ Dont jump on me Vern   I was just asking a question and in NO way was I blaming supply at all! YOU KNOW that you guys are my favourite people!  ;D


----------



## orange.paint (23 Feb 2007)

MedTech said:
			
		

> HEY HEY~ Dont jump on me Vern   I was just asking a question and in NO way was I blaming supply at all! YOU KNOW that you guys are my favourite people!  ;D



Always third place.Cook's,clerks,supply.I cant do without food or pay.And I always like new kit.

Supply is great if you treat them good.I find once you get a rapport with them they treat you like gold.More so here in Gagetown than Petawawa I found.


----------



## Loachman (24 Feb 2007)

MedTech said:
			
		

> um... maybe it's just me, but what about all the army personnel that routinely transit on our TacHel and other aircrafts? Their clothing aren't static, blah blah blah blah blah proof... what bout them?


They're not playing about with the fuel and such.

We don't make you all suit up in flashy multi-zippered Nomex or wear life preservers for all flights either, as your exposure to our set of constant risks is considerably less than ours.

Although, personally, I believe that everybody should be wearing flame-proof clothing in any operational environment...


----------



## Sig_Des (24 Feb 2007)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Although, personally, I believe that everybody should be wearing flame-proof clothing in any operational environment...



Now why would you go and ruin a perfectly good thread by making sense?


----------



## medaid (24 Feb 2007)

: hehehehehe


----------



## aesop081 (24 Feb 2007)

DirtyDog said:
			
		

> I recently did 2 very cold weeks in the field for BMQ.



2 weeks ?

Oh the horror....... :crybaby:

(just kidding)


----------



## DirtyDog (24 Feb 2007)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> 2 weeks ?
> 
> Oh the horror....... :crybaby:
> 
> (just kidding)





Heh, I loved getting out for my first taste of the field.  

It really was frigggin' cold though, with lots of wind and snow.  I don't know if there's any instructors on here who can testify to the conditions in Farnham over the last month or so, but they've been a good test for recruits, that's for sure.  It was fun (and frustrating as hell sometimes) watching some fellow recruits really fall apart and shut 'er down.


----------



## Loachman (24 Feb 2007)

Sig_Des said:
			
		

> Now why would you go and ruin a perfectly good thread by making sense?


One would think that that would have been beaten out of me long ago, but I try not to be too reasonable.


----------

