Helmet Visor
- Thread starter HItorMiss
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Bzzliteyr said:
This reminds me of a story one of my Cpls told me. It sort of goes like this:
An Experiment was conducted at some university, where they took 5 monkeys and put them in a cage with a metal floor. In this cage was a wooden staircase, and at the top of the staircase was a basket full of bananas. Now the monkeys would see the bananas, go up the stairs, and eat the bananas.
After a couple of weeks, the staircase was fitted with an electrical switch on the top step, and wired to the floor. When a monkey stood on the top step to eat the banana, the electrical circuit was closed, and the other four monkeys in the cage were electrocuted.
After about two weeks, the monkeys knew not to go eat the bananas! In fact, they stayed away from the staircase all together. The electrical power was disconnected, but the monkeys still wouldn’t go for the bananas.
Once the monkeys wouldn’t go near the staircase, the researchers removed one of the monkeys from the cage and replaced him with another one. This monkey had never been electrocuted, so it didn’t know any better. It saw the bananas at the top of the staircase and decided to go have one.
Well, that monkey didn’t make it up two steps, when the other monkeys in the cage grabbed him, through him down on the floor of the cage and beat the crap out of him! This went on for about three days. After that, the new monkey didn’t go near the stairs for fear of being beaten again!
Another of the original monkeys was replaced and again, the new monkey of the group saw the bananas, tried to climb the stairs to have one, and he was beaten by the other four! After about 4 days, this new monkey wouldn’t go near the stairs either.
Over time, this same scenario was played out until all the original monkeys were replaced with new monkeys who had never been electrocuted. And every time one of the new monkeys would see the bananas and try to climb the stairs, he would then have the crap beaten out if him. None of the monkeys had any knowledge of the electrocutions that occurred with the original monkeys, but they continued to beat the crap out of each other for trying to go up the stairs to the bananas
So, the moral of the story is, when people ask why things are done they way the are? The answer is “Because that’s just the way its F#*kin’ Done!”
Armynewsguy,
Too slow. Scroll up and you'll see I posted the same link about two weeks ago. These things always look good in a sterile environment like an armouries. Perhaps the story would have been more effective had it actually be shot in the "field", and interviews done with the troops using it.
Too slow. Scroll up and you'll see I posted the same link about two weeks ago. These things always look good in a sterile environment like an armouries. Perhaps the story would have been more effective had it actually be shot in the "field", and interviews done with the troops using it.
Bzzliteyr
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 17
- Points
- 430
<rant>
Um, can't have an Oakley version.. it isn't CTS approved EVEN THOUGH IT MIGHT HAVE THE SAME MILSPEC RATING.. oops, was I yelling while thinking of the ballistic goggle situation?
I mean, I can't go buy Wiley-X GOGGLES (versus ballistic <u>glasses</u>) to keep the dust out of my eyes in the DESERT! Can someone actually tell me that with all the advances in technology, my "goggles, sun, wind and dust" dated <b>1974</b> are actually safer than any highly reserched lenses/googles on the market today that have been accepted as usuable by the US forces???
Another question: I saw a memo stating that Wiley-X was not allowed outside the wire. Why must they generalize like that?? There are many different models of Wiley-X. That's like saying no Ford vehicles would be used because Explorers roll over.. GEEZ!!!
</rant>
Um, can't have an Oakley version.. it isn't CTS approved EVEN THOUGH IT MIGHT HAVE THE SAME MILSPEC RATING.. oops, was I yelling while thinking of the ballistic goggle situation?
I mean, I can't go buy Wiley-X GOGGLES (versus ballistic <u>glasses</u>) to keep the dust out of my eyes in the DESERT! Can someone actually tell me that with all the advances in technology, my "goggles, sun, wind and dust" dated <b>1974</b> are actually safer than any highly reserched lenses/googles on the market today that have been accepted as usuable by the US forces???
Another question: I saw a memo stating that Wiley-X was not allowed outside the wire. Why must they generalize like that?? There are many different models of Wiley-X. That's like saying no Ford vehicles would be used because Explorers roll over.. GEEZ!!!
</rant>
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Uh Bzzz
There are bopdy armour systems that the US servicemen were buying and using - for a variety of reasons - till they too were told not to use em - use only the approved kit.
IMHO If you want to buy em and use em, that would be fine by me
But the problem here is that there are a multitude of quality levels available....
no telling what you can afford and what you are willing to pay.
Does that mean that if you get hurt while wearing them, you're willing to also buy the medical services to make you well?
There are bopdy armour systems that the US servicemen were buying and using - for a variety of reasons - till they too were told not to use em - use only the approved kit.
IMHO If you want to buy em and use em, that would be fine by me
But the problem here is that there are a multitude of quality levels available....
no telling what you can afford and what you are willing to pay.
Does that mean that if you get hurt while wearing them, you're willing to also buy the medical services to make you well?
Bzzliteyr
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 17
- Points
- 430
Kev, thanks.. We leave in one month.. probably too late to request them. We heard rumours of ESS V-12s coming, mind you we also heard rumours of new pistol holsters too!! Go Vandoos!!!
Geo, I know that they were indiv. purchases. My point is the necessity of such "add-ons". I have seen side panel, leg panels, neck panels... how many rich cpls would go out and buy all that stuff only to findo ut they couldn't move after they put it all on?? How many troops might have been saved if they were wearing it? I don't know. And as for quality levels, they set a minimum standard, and then you must at least match it. Pretty simple. Kind of like what we should do with our ballistic googles.
Geo, I know that they were indiv. purchases. My point is the necessity of such "add-ons". I have seen side panel, leg panels, neck panels... how many rich cpls would go out and buy all that stuff only to findo ut they couldn't move after they put it all on?? How many troops might have been saved if they were wearing it? I don't know. And as for quality levels, they set a minimum standard, and then you must at least match it. Pretty simple. Kind of like what we should do with our ballistic googles.
M
MG34
Guest
FWIW,the veh techs were issed with the Bolle tactical glassses, they are nice,I went through a couple of pairs of them. Eyeware are like gloes, very necessary and very disposable, unfortunately the CF doesn't quite get the fact that once they are scratched they are useless.
I threw away my WileyX SG1 and CQCs after have serious issues with lens retention and fogging, the V12 Advancer by ESS is bar none the best set of " eye pro' that I have owned, but once again I consider them disposable, any agency purchasing them should realize this and hopefully will get spares (assuming you get them in the first place).
My views on aftermarket kit are well know here, if it is better go with it, and damn those who can't grasp that tidbit of common sense.
I threw away my WileyX SG1 and CQCs after have serious issues with lens retention and fogging, the V12 Advancer by ESS is bar none the best set of " eye pro' that I have owned, but once again I consider them disposable, any agency purchasing them should realize this and hopefully will get spares (assuming you get them in the first place).
My views on aftermarket kit are well know here, if it is better go with it, and damn those who can't grasp that tidbit of common sense.
Bzzliteyr
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 17
- Points
- 430
MG, I hear you on that. I try to convince my chain of command of the fact that certain equipments meet (or exceed) the mil standards that our own equipment has. I told the boys in Bliss to look for mil-spec goggles if they were going to buy any as they had a greater chance of being accepted. That went out the window with the latest memo from the sandbox reference eye-pro.
G
Gaz
Guest
Bzzliteyr said:
Like you said it sit's pretty far off the face, but maybe it reduces fogging. Or one of the testers had a huge nose.
NL_engineer
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
After watching the video on the DWAN, I don't know what to say :
. Besides for look, it can't stop the darn projectile shot at it.
. Besides for look, it can't stop the darn projectile shot at it.
Bzzliteyr
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 17
- Points
- 430
But it SLOWS down the projectile, protecting your eyes IF you are wearing the ballistic glasses at the same time...
I heard they will be issuing us WALLS to put in front of us to protect us againts bullets that might hit us too, another CTS project to be loved by all!!
I heard they will be issuing us WALLS to put in front of us to protect us againts bullets that might hit us too, another CTS project to be loved by all!!
- Reaction score
- 17,541
- Points
- 1,260
Uhm your helmet will not stop a lot of rounds either...
(Its not stopping 7.62x54R AP)
The idea of the visor is to reduce facial damage from spalling etc. Keep in mind rounds that dont hit you tend to hit things near you -- those fragements can be just as dangerous to eye etc. Fragments from explosions kick up all sorts of things too.
The Visor is not for all -- but if your up in a turret exposed - you may appreciate it.
I would say that 99% of the American soldiers I see here in the hummer turrets have a visor on.
(Its not stopping 7.62x54R AP)
The idea of the visor is to reduce facial damage from spalling etc. Keep in mind rounds that dont hit you tend to hit things near you -- those fragements can be just as dangerous to eye etc. Fragments from explosions kick up all sorts of things too.
The Visor is not for all -- but if your up in a turret exposed - you may appreciate it.
I would say that 99% of the American soldiers I see here in the hummer turrets have a visor on.
I tested this POS with the CTS team last summer when I was in TSC FD TRG in Wainwright Alberta.
You wear the ballistic eyewear underneath that thing.
It is not quick release, takes a good 5 mins to install everything/remove (or else I are Infantry darrrr)
Its pretty heavy.
Scary part was, the test officially called for 20 Regular Force Infantryman (only a few reg force tested it with us the rest were reservists, and many of them not infantry).
The nose hole is actually meant for your rifle stock to go into so you can take up a "firing position" (its IMPOSSIBLE to take up a good fighting stance and be able to see through your weapon sights with this POS) You have to cant your head into a rediculous position in order to see through your optical sights half decently.
The test was a joke and did not even include a live fire portion (i would have loved to see if anyone would have got any hits on target if we had ball instead of blank ammunition on the jungle lanes). The reviews they had us fill out at the end of each test were multiple choice and pretty much worded in favour of the visor. Ie theyre was no...do you like the visor...yes/no,can you see a sight picture through your the visor yes/no (def NO), Does the visor reduce your situational awareness yes/no. All of the questions were along the lines of. How do you rate the optical clarity of the visors lens? 1-10 (1 for bad, 10 for good)
It has a stupid rubber stopper on the top of the lens that partially obscures your vision (CTS response, thats the way its designed, deal with it).
It tended to fog, even with the antifog they gave us. Makes the whole world like looking through a fish bowl reducing situational awareness (imho though oppinions on that varied). Most of the guys got headaches from wearing multiple lenses (ballistic eyewear with the visor over top)
The LAV guys HATED IT
When I brought up concerns about not being able to take up a sight picture with my C7 rifle to the CTS team, they didnt sound very interested in my oppinions. They responded with, "under contact you flip the visor up", "your only here to assess the visual clarity of the visor" or my all time favorite, "at close range you dont need to use your sights". It takes both of your hands to flip the visor in the upwards position so basically you will have to sling your rifle to do it (I have no overseas experience, but that sounds a pretty silly to me, trying to mess around with a visor when you should be putting rounds down range).
Over all the Regular Force guys and most of the Reserve Infantry guys HATED it. However alot of the non-infantry reservists (a few of them who didnt even have their trade qualification) loved the thing. So....it passed .
While the CTS team stated its for static positions only, I can see someone in an office making it mandatory to wear 24/7
Over all the only good part was I got a free pair of ballistic eyewear at the end of the trial ;D
You wear the ballistic eyewear underneath that thing.
It is not quick release, takes a good 5 mins to install everything/remove (or else I are Infantry darrrr
)Its pretty heavy.
Scary part was, the test officially called for 20 Regular Force Infantryman (only a few reg force tested it with us the rest were reservists, and many of them not infantry).
The nose hole is actually meant for your rifle stock to go into so you can take up a "firing position" (its IMPOSSIBLE to take up a good fighting stance and be able to see through your weapon sights with this POS) You have to cant your head into a rediculous position in order to see through your optical sights half decently.
The test was a joke and did not even include a live fire portion (i would have loved to see if anyone would have got any hits on target if we had ball instead of blank ammunition on the jungle lanes). The reviews they had us fill out at the end of each test were multiple choice and pretty much worded in favour of the visor. Ie theyre was no...do you like the visor...yes/no,can you see a sight picture through your the visor yes/no (def NO), Does the visor reduce your situational awareness yes/no. All of the questions were along the lines of. How do you rate the optical clarity of the visors lens? 1-10 (1 for bad, 10 for good)
It has a stupid rubber stopper on the top of the lens that partially obscures your vision (CTS response, thats the way its designed, deal with it).
It tended to fog, even with the antifog they gave us. Makes the whole world like looking through a fish bowl reducing situational awareness (imho though oppinions on that varied). Most of the guys got headaches from wearing multiple lenses (ballistic eyewear with the visor over top)
The LAV guys HATED IT
When I brought up concerns about not being able to take up a sight picture with my C7 rifle to the CTS team, they didnt sound very interested in my oppinions. They responded with, "under contact you flip the visor up", "your only here to assess the visual clarity of the visor" or my all time favorite, "at close range you dont need to use your sights". It takes both of your hands to flip the visor in the upwards position so basically you will have to sling your rifle to do it (I have no overseas experience, but that sounds a pretty silly to me, trying to mess around with a visor when you should be putting rounds down range).
Over all the Regular Force guys and most of the Reserve Infantry guys HATED it. However alot of the non-infantry reservists (a few of them who didnt even have their trade qualification) loved the thing
. So....it passed .While the CTS team stated its for static positions only, I can see someone in an office making it mandatory to wear 24/7
Over all the only good part was I got a free pair of ballistic eyewear at the end of the trial ;D
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Well, regardless of what everyone and anyone is saying, if the visor goes over with FO 3/07, it will get a real life evaluation and, if it is complicated, heavy, and / or POS, it will be pushed off to the side, along with all other ideas that didn't make it
Similar threads
