New CF helmet in testing

[Tuna]

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/land-terre/news-nouvelles/story-reportage-eng.asp?id=5591

this is a hyperlink to an army news report on new helmets that are currently being tested, does anyone have any opinions on these helmets? I personally think that the mandible will probably get a lot of twigs and such stuck in it, but it would probably make a good crew helmet. that is just my opinion though, worth watching

 

[jollyjacktar]

Interesting.  I am intrigued by the visor.  I personally find that the ballistic glasses fog up for me and I found them almost unwearable for that reason.  If there was a visor that gave the ballistic protection but gave stand off so that it could breathe better and maybe prevent/minimize the fogging that would be a plus for guys like me.  Nice to see that they are looking at making things better at any rate. 

 

[Tom_Swift]

I think Crye has the right idea, the helmet in that video looks crazy heavy/huge.

 

[Troopasaurus]

Modular eh... will probably end up just like our body armour. Designed as modular to fit different situations (shoulder guards, Arm pads, and neck Kevlar) that gets pushed by the chain to the level of most protection regardless of the role. Not to mention the fact that as seen towards the end of the video it is causing issues with shooting effectively (note the crazy system to raise the EOTech). Sometimes less armour and more mobility is the way to go and I think the R&D side of the house gets that idea but anything less than the highest level of armour is a chargable offence in some places and this prevents a modular system from actually occurring. 

For example after an Incident overseas my body armour was inspected by a Maj in the R&D area he asked if I was wearing my shoulder pads. I responded that as ordered I was. He inquired about this order and upon hearing that everyone was required to wear such armour attachments replied "that's not the way it was designed... If your in a LAV your supposed to wear the full armour but if your on a dismounted patrol it is to be adjusted." I can see this turning out the same way. 

 

[buzgo]

Sometimes less armour and more mobility is the way to go

Agreed 100% Also, yet again, the mighty Canadian Army is spending time and money redesigning  (over designing even) something that could likely be met with a COTS solution...

 

[Towards_the_gap]

You should have seen the storm of smelly stuff that ensued when a photo of one my guys, with sleeves partially rolled up, lying on a stretcher wounded, was on the front page of the Star. Cue furious e-mail exchanges promising that the troop commander would be charged and so on and so forth.

Regardless of the fact that he took frag to the leg anyways and sleeves or no sleeves would have done nothing.

 

[Troopasaurus]

OTW shirts were first allowed in 2008 however the zipper had to be removed due to the fact that it could melt to your skin... never mind our issued uniforms melting.

And Oakleys will "melt to your face" so they are not allowed to be worn... the issued eyewear will not.

 

[RCDtpr]

Regardless of what it is designed for, I suspect that it comes from the highest of levels that because the full system costs money, it will be worn regardless of how useless it is.  I'm referring to everything when I say this, ballistics, and especially those worthless neck guards and shoulder pads that started getting issued in the last few years overseas.

I'm still in disbelief we were actually allowed to purchase our own chest rigs in lieu of the tac vests.

Back on topic though, I'm torn on this helmet.......obviously I've never used it, but a modular helmet seems like it could be a pain in the ass.  I was also VERY unimpressed when I saw the mods that had to be done to weapon sights.  If you can't fire a weapon properly with that mandible, then it shouldn't even be considered when it comes to purchasing.  I'll sacrifice some face protection if it allows me to actually be able to fight back properly.  Just my $.02 though.

 

[ModlrMike]

It's been done before:

 

[HollywoodCowboy]

Fugly

 

[Retired AF Guy]

It's been done before:

Ancient history. Much better design.

 

[Snaketnk]

That's exactly what I want, a helmet that's even larger and more cumbersome.  They look like bobble-heads. I want a low profile helmet that actually is practical to wear when shooting not a total hindrance.

I'm astounded at the stupidity in the design of these things.

Just to add, when I see stuff like this It makes me wish they would cut military spending... because when we give them the money all they do is throw it away on useless, overpriced, junk that's often worse than the stuff it's replacing.

 

[Robert0288]

I wonder if the issued visor will come with an issued ice scraper?

 

[FlyingDutchman]

That helmet almost looks to big.  Like 'well thats a nice big target' big.

 

[McG]

I suppose the upside is that the with the new sight adapter, the simunition armour will work with the rifle the same way that the "battle armour" works (ie. no cheek weld).

In any case, you guys are all wrong.  This helmet does not go far enough.  I won't be happy until we're fighting in this outstanding piece of kit:

 

[Fishbone Jones]

;D

 

[FlyingDutchman]

How about this?

 

[Silverfire]

Is anyone noticing the similarity to the HALO style helmets?

 

[Arctic Acorn]

So, there's a lighter version for the "more logistical trades", but come on...if there's a chance it's going to be needed, everyone will likely wind up having to wear the whole thing anyway.

Also, how much does that thing weigh? I wonder if they're going to include a pamphlet with special neck strengthening exercises.

If I've gotta wear something that heavy and awkward...ya might as well go with something a little more fetching...like a Batman cowl!

 

[buzgo]

Check out what Norway is doing:

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/gearscout/2011/09/07/ops-core-helmets-for-the-whole-norwegian-army/

They are buying the Ops Core FAST helmet, with the full option set including MANDIBLE protection...