Army Combat Kit

[army]

Army Combat Kit





Posted by Jason Jason from The Pas MB Canada on March 16, 2000 at 22:12:32:



I was wonder if anyone out there could rate Canada‘s current webbing and issue rucksack. How much better is this new stuff from "Clothe The Soldier?" Do soldiers in the combat arms often use other pieces of gear like American ALICE rucksacks or aything like that?

 

[army]

Re: Army Combat Kit





Posted by Matt Fisher from Manassas VA USA on March 17, 2000 at 13:30:37:


In Reply to: Army Combat Kit posted by Jason on March 16, 2000 at 22:12:32:



Jason...

As far as the current webbing and rucksack goes...

The webbing is lacking in several areas...
The pouch attachment system relies on plastic "teeth" that clip into metal grommets...Unfortunately the grommets have a nasty habit of popping off the web belt.

The Web belt itself could be greatly improved by making it padded...the original idea of a wide waist belt was sound, it‘s just lacking in some areas.

The nylon that the webbing is made from is also not good quality...it‘s a cheap ripoff of Dupont‘s Cordura nylon. The nylon tends to break down when exposed to sunlight...and has a great tendency to fray...although this is more due to the poor stitching quality of the pouches and rucksack.

The pull tab closure system that the mag. pouches, C9/utility pouch, and canteen carrier uses is also lacking in quality...the plastic parts tend to break..and once one piece breaks the entire pouch is useless as the pouch cannot be securely closed.

A better system, which they use on some of the newer buttpacks would be 1" fastex side release buckles...or for the mag pouches 1" webbing with snaps and velcro for rapid opening/closing.

When it comes to the 82 pattern rucksack, I shake my head and wonder what the designers were thinking...The actual rucksack bag is not too bad, although it is seriously too small to hold the required "72 hours", especially during winter ops. the ruck lacks any means of attaching additional pouches, or kit onto it, other than on the 1" webbing side compression straps...one one each side of the ruck.

The worst part of the ruck is the frame...it‘s basically a spot welded clothes hanger type wire frame which the ruck is laced onto...again detrimental to proper load carrying, as the grommets which are on the ruck tend to pop, and the nylon seriously frays where the ruck is in contact with the frame.

When I was in the CF‘s Medium Alice packs were popular with the unit in which I served, however the use of non-issue kit was always controversial with the higher ups most of whom hadn‘t worn a ruck or webbing in years.

As far as the clothe the soldier program is concerned...don‘t get your hopes up too high...

While CTS promises great things...with the way that the CF‘s budget keeps getting slashed, don‘t expect to see much of the new kit unless you‘re reg. force or going on deployment or more likely reg. force going on deployment *laughing*.

With the new ruck and loadbearing vest the pouches are attached using a "daisy chain type system", which is better than the current ‘82 pattern, and better than ALICE slide clips, but not as good as the NATICK snap system, which the Americans are converting too. With daisy chain‘s you still will get a significant amount of instability with pouches, especially when you‘re moving fast, ie running.

The new load bearing vest doesn‘t have capacity for enough ammo at the ready...it will only hold 4 mags. whereas I think that a system that has 8 mags is much more realistic of the demands of combat shooting.

I‘ve considered starting a private business to produce high quality kit for the CF‘s using mil spec. materials, but utilizing a better system...one modelled on the new US MOLLE kit. However I‘m concerned as to whether units would authorize non-issue kit to be worn, and also if the market is large enough to justify the large start up cost for such a venture.

 

[army]

Re: Army Combat Kit





Posted by PCD on March 17, 2000 at 22:00:53:


In Reply to: Re: Army Combat Kit posted by Matt Fisher on March 17, 2000 at 13:30:37:



Only comment I‘d throw in is using velcro as a fastener. Once it‘s dirty and wet it‘s next to useless and when it‘s dry you have to be extremely careful with it if you don‘t want to make any noise. I know you specified this for just the mag pouches but that last thing you want is to be trying to get at something silently when it‘s next to impossible.

PS - The reasoning behind putting four mag pouches on the vest is that is the basic combat load. One in the weapon, four ready access. The remainder go in the buttpack/ruck or even back at the carrier...at least so sayeth the doctrine. -

 

[army]

Re: Army Combat Kit





Posted by Gunner from Canada on March 20, 2000 at 11:10:40:


In Reply to: Re: Army Combat Kit posted by Matt Fisher on March 17, 2000 at 13:30:37:



Don‘t be so cynical about the CF and the CTS program. All the Reg F in LFWA have been issued with the new Gortex items and the Res F will be issued shortly note HQ pers REG OR RES will be the last to be issued the items. The remainder of the CTS items will be forthcoming in the next couple of years.

The new CADPAT disruptive pattern uniforms will begin being issued in the next 6 months. Note there will be a period of both uniforms new and old being used. I think the entire CF is to be issued the CADPAT by 2004.

I agree with you comments about the 82 style webbing and rucksack. I was never convinced that the rucksack was better then the one it replaced. However, considering what we used for webbing in the early 80s a belt, a yoke, and a canteen - pouches if you bought them yourself. I think it was a significant improvement.

There is no reason to be cynical about the army these days...there are too many new eqpt projects and programs to decry the "poor state of the army". In a couple of years we will be better eqpt and better trained then the "cold war days".

Quit your bellyaching!

 

[army]

Re: Army Combat Kit





Posted by Coyo from Petawawa Canada on March 20, 2000 at 13:20:49:


In Reply to: Re: Army Combat Kit posted by Gunner on March 20, 2000 at 11:10:40:



You say we‘ll soon be better trained then in cold war days?! What training have you undergone that has brought you anywhere near effective, especially when you have to fit that training in with diversity, harassment and all the other PC trg? We are a joke today due to lowered trg standards and no amount of Gucci kit is going to change that! It‘s time to start traing like a military, not a political token.

 

[army]

Re: Army Combat Kit





Posted by Coyo from Petawawa Canada on March 20, 2000 at 13:21:02:


In Reply to: Re: Army Combat Kit posted by Gunner on March 20, 2000 at 11:10:40:



You say we‘ll soon be better trained then in cold war days?! What training have you undergone that has brought you anywhere near effective, especially when you have to fit that training in with diversity, harassment and all the other PC trg? We are a joke today due to lowered trg standards and no amount of Gucci kit is going to change that! It‘s time to start training like a military, not a political token.

 

[army]

Re: Army Combat Kit





Posted by Coyo from Petawawa Canada on March 20, 2000 at 13:23:09:


In Reply to: Re: Army Combat Kit posted by PCD on March 17, 2000 at 22:00:53:



With reference to the noisy velcro mag pouches... if you‘re going to get a new mag, chances are you‘ve fired off your last one and those bullets and the ones most likely flying towards you are a lot louder the a velcro closure.

 

[army]

Re: Army Combat Kit





Posted by Matt Fisher from Manassas VA USA on March 20, 2000 at 16:27:03:


In Reply to: Re: Army Combat Kit posted by Coyo on March 20, 2000 at 13:23:09:



I agree with coyo...chances are that if you‘re changing mags, the situation around you is less than silent...

About the velcro too...good quality hook and pile "velcro" is pretty tough stuff...a lot of people have bad ideas of velcro, but their views are based on cheapo chinese/taiwan ripoffs...

The mag pouches would also be secured using quality brass "durasnaps" as the primary means of closure, and the velcro would be used as the secondary means of closure.

Another innovative means for closing mag pouches is what‘s known as a "Positive tension release" which utilizes a metal hook that is attached to elastic and hooks under a 1" piece of webbing. This system is totally silent, and impervious to dirt etc.

I don‘t see how the CF‘s can utilize a 5 mag. ready load? While in theory every shot fired should be an aimed shot at a target, I personally feel that having more rounds that are readily accessible makes me feel more secure...

 

[army]

Re: Army Combat Kit





Posted by PCD from Canada on March 20, 2000 at 21:47:00:


In Reply to: Re: Army Combat Kit posted by Coyo on March 20, 2000 at 13:23:09:



I can think of numerous instances that I‘d like to do a silent mag change: ie. house clearing with 5 rds left, suspicion of a nasty in the next room, last thing I want is him to know I‘m about to dump my mag so I can follow my partners grenade with a full 30...fer instance.

 

[army]

Re: Army Combat Kit





Posted by Coyo from Petawawa Canada on March 21, 2000 at 10:31:49:


In Reply to: Re: Army Combat Kit posted by PCD on March 20, 2000 at 21:47:00:



Once again, there is nothing quiet about houseclearing and if you‘re changing mags then your partner should be covering.

 

[army]

Re: Army Combat Kit





Posted by Gunner from Canada on March 21, 2000 at 11:20:52:


In Reply to: Re: Army Combat Kit posted by Coyo on March 20, 2000 at 13:20:49:



I disagree. If your telling me you are spending all your time on diversity, SHARP, and other PC trg, then, I don‘t know what unit you are with 1st PC Rifles?. SHARP is over, Diversity is over, there are no new programs on the horizon. It was a one time event for the CF and the army to show they have given "due diligence" to the problem of harassment and gender integration.

Secondly, training. I was around in the 80s and let me tell you the trg we did was useless. We trained because we had money to train, not for any purpose. As I stated in another post, the idea of going to the field a so called campaign season was so entrenched in our minds, we didn‘t know what we were doing. At least now at least in 1 CMBG our trg over the last two years has been focussed Ex PRAIRIE RAM say live BG level trg for 3 of 4 manoeuvre units and Bde level dry trg. I guess you could say there was more higher level CPXs, however, most of them were a waste of money and only benefited a few LCols, Cols and perhaps a couple of BGens. After trg them they were shipped off to a static admin job somewhere.

How has our trg been decreased? Secondly, when you take into account the roto schedule when do you propose we send units to the field for 4 months to sit on a bald *** hill for the sake of "trg" of course...or was it for unit NPF mess profits - there always seemed to be too much of that happening.

It‘s easy to criticize what is happening now, however, I think the future is brighter then the general malaise the army was in 80s and early 90s. It had been so long since we did anything, we forgot how to be warriors.

Gunner sends...