New Rucksack
- Thread starter Bomber
- Start date
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 29,101
- Points
- 1,160
Bzzliteyr said:
It must have been designed by a hungry paratrooper....
- Reaction score
- 94
- Points
- 530
George Wallace said:
Of the ruck.
The MWO just moved into CTS this summer ... and the one who left had been there pretty much since the beginning.
Neither are even near rank enough to be "Project Officers" and, although both those MWOs are suppies --- they work for some superiors of the "0" MOCs.
- Reaction score
- 94
- Points
- 530
Wonderbread said:
Not if he was speaking of their current incarnation (and the beginning of CTS involvement in a "new ruck" process) ... which were jumped at CPC (or that CF CLAW thing my buds there go by now ... >
) only in the past few years.But I6 has it pretty much down pat. With the initial introduction of the 82p ruck we just got rid of (well, most of us anyway) and the deeming of the jump ruck "obsolete" by the system ... CPC (and before that name - the CABC) were jumping ruck prototypes to determine and find something suitable for the jumpers to use. They weren't looking for something for the CF to use ... rather the jumpers.
Then ... CTS decided a whole bunch of people needed new rucks anyway ... and here we sit today.
And we all lived happily ever after. >
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
ArmyVern said:Not if he was speaking of their current incarnation (and the beginning of CTS involvement in a "new ruck" process) ... which were jumped at CPC (or that CFLAWC thing my buds there go by now ... >
But I6 has it pretty much down pat. With the initial introduction of the 82p ruck we just got rid of (well, most of us anyway) and the deeming of the jump ruck "obsolete" by the system ... CPC (and before that name - the CABC) were jumping ruck prototypes to determine and find something suitable for the jumpers to use. They weren't looking for something for the CF to use ... rather the jumpers.
Then ... CTS decided a whole bunch of people needed new rucks anyway ... and here we sit today.
And we all lived happily ever after. >
;D
And the new ruck is jumpable using the PDB I believe
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Some of you have been asking noneck and I to provide pics of the new 64 Pattern Rucksack designed by Integrated Combat Equipment, so here are some teaser pics that we took of it last weekend. The pack is unique in the sense that it allows the user to use either an ALICE, MOLLE or 64 Pattern Jump frames as a frame base for the ruck. Needless to say that this pack is extremely versatile, allows for MOLLE add on of different mission oriented pouches. This will be extremely useful to those who are in the PRes or RegF who don't like the new pack, and wants something more then the original 64 Pattern Ruck. ICE will also offer the original Jump Ruck with improvements. The same type that was provided to the 39CBG Cambrian Patrol Team.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
The last four shows the ruck on its own. The suspension system is re-tuned and offers incredible support and comfort for those of you who hump rucks allot. This pack is approximately 60L. With a floating hood, storm collar, and MOLLE all around the side and the front for attachment of a variety of pouches. The hip belt is padded and lined with non-slip material.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
I apologize for not being able to make the pics bigger, but the limit in size requires them to be only so big. I also don't have a firm price for the production units. But rest assured those would come out relatively soon, middle of October at the latest. Things that will be up for sale includes:
Improved 64 Pattern Jump Ruck
Improved 64 Pattern 60L Jump Ruck
New Suspension
New Hip belt
Once everything is figured out, Milnet.ca will be the first ones to know. Stay tuned for noneck's review.
Improved 64 Pattern Jump Ruck
Improved 64 Pattern 60L Jump Ruck
New Suspension
New Hip belt
Once everything is figured out, Milnet.ca will be the first ones to know. Stay tuned for noneck's review.
As for reviews it's pretty simple, it carries like a 64 pattern ruck! I initially spoke to Hobey about extending the 64 pattern bag when he produced the bags for the 39 CBG Cambrian Team this time last year. I requested that he add side pockets like a Bergan, however I now prefer the cleaner lines and have confirmed with him that subsequent runs will have MOLLE/PALS and Daisy chain on the sides( in order to use small pack issue pouches). As I said previously there is no voodoo concerning this set up, it's merely a top loading 60l 64 pattern bag with improved harness and padding. I have taken it on exercise and it has passed the CSM test.
As you see it in the pictures there is the following packed inside: inner/outer socks, 2 x tshirt, 1 x underwear, 1 x longsleeve thermal shirt all compressed in an ortleib bag. 1 MEC hybrid sleeping bag, US poncho liner, small pillow, all packed in an issue biv bag and then stuffed inside the ruck. Finally in the main bag I have an issue goretex rain jacket/pants and fleece in another ortleib on top. In the top pouch are gaitors, shemagh, brew kit, shave kit and a small hand towel. Strapped to the outside is a ridgerest and a Integral Designs Sil Dome.
I spoke with Hobey regarding price, as some of the troops were already asking how much it was going to cost and he quoted me around $160 for the bag, he will also offer packages for harness, pads, bag complete depending on interest.
I don't work for the company this is just something that I asked Hobey to make, that may fill a niche in the CF.
Noneck
As you see it in the pictures there is the following packed inside: inner/outer socks, 2 x tshirt, 1 x underwear, 1 x longsleeve thermal shirt all compressed in an ortleib bag. 1 MEC hybrid sleeping bag, US poncho liner, small pillow, all packed in an issue biv bag and then stuffed inside the ruck. Finally in the main bag I have an issue goretex rain jacket/pants and fleece in another ortleib on top. In the top pouch are gaitors, shemagh, brew kit, shave kit and a small hand towel. Strapped to the outside is a ridgerest and a Integral Designs Sil Dome.
I spoke with Hobey regarding price, as some of the troops were already asking how much it was going to cost and he quoted me around $160 for the bag, he will also offer packages for harness, pads, bag complete depending on interest.
I don't work for the company this is just something that I asked Hobey to make, that may fill a niche in the CF.
Noneck
M
MikeL
Guest
Looks good; I'd be in for one of those rucks as soon as they get produced.
In the mainbag is their a sleeve to slip a camelbak? And would the future models have a sternum strap on the shoulder straps?
In the mainbag is their a sleeve to slip a camelbak? And would the future models have a sternum strap on the shoulder straps?
M
MikeL
Guest
Beadwindow 7 said:
I'm pretty sure I'am gonna OT into the Air Force, so I'd have to turn in the ruck. Plus, I like having an external frame more; not that it really matters much, on tour all I did was toss the ruck in the back of a Bison or strap it onto the side of a LAV when I was out an about. I'am pretty sure the frame on my ruck is all kinds of f*cked up after that though haha.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
New ruck is approx 80L.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 29,101
- Points
- 1,160
noneck said:
Any idea what the 'empty' weight is?
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 29,101
- Points
- 1,160
Question: what happens when you wear the CTS ruck with the Frag Vest and Tac Vest? Answer: it hurts.
Assessment of the effect of No Stay, Bent Stay or Straight Stay
when the Clothe the Soldier Rucksack is worn with the
Fragmentation Vest
Executive Summary
The Clothe the Soldier (CTS) load carriage system includes the Tactical Vest (TV), the
Rucksack, and a Small Pack System which have been designed to be compatible. This
permits various components to be combined to support the operational objectives at hand.
In addition to wearing the TV and one of the packs, soldiers are increasingly attempting to
wear the Fragmentation Protection Vest (FPV), with Bullet Resistant Plates (BRP) beneath
the TV and Rucksack. This work assessed the effects of this practice. The purpose of this
work was to examine the effects of various stays in the rucksack (straight stays, bent stays,
and no stay) on pressure effects and load distribution to the body. Loads carried in the
CTS rucksack often exceed the officially recommended 25 kg and are reported to approach
45 kg. Under these conditions, optimizing load distribution onto the torso becomes even
more essential. A Load Distribution Test Mannikin consisting of a human form with two 6
degree of freedom load cells, positioned at T12/L1 and beneath the body, was used to
assess the force distribution and pressure effects on the body of the following conditions:
1) TV and Rucksack, stays bent to conform to back as designed, 2) TV, FPV with BRP and
Rucksack, stays bent to conform to back, 3) TV, FPV with BRP and Rucksack, straight
stays, 4) TV, FPV with BRP and Rucksack with no stays. All were tested with 25 kg in
the rucksack.
Results showed that wearing the FPV and BRP under the rucksack will increase the
compressive load on the upper body by 50 to 100 percent, depending on the stay
configuration compared with wearing just the TV and Rucksack configuration. Stays bent
to conform to the body were the most effective configuration while removal of the stays
caused the greatest increase in compressive loads. Edges of the BRP caused multiple peak
pressure points of with values on the mannikin of 60 to 110 kPa. These pressure values are
expected to considerably exceed the tissue tolerance of skin and underlying muscle and are
expected to result in localized skin damage and bruising.
Assessment
5.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
Analysis of the load distribution results leads to the following conclusions:
1. The straight down compressive force on the upper body was increased by +90 N in
all cases where the FPV with BRP was worn.
2. The increase is at least 1.5 (i.e.1.5 to 2.8) times the compressive load experienced in
the baseline condition.
3. The upper body carries a greater portion of the load when the FPV with BRP was
worn.
4. Stays were still able to transfer a portion of the rucksack load directly to the hips,
even when worn with the FPV and BRP.
5. The bent stays were more effective at unloading the shoulders than the straight stay
or no stay conditions.
6. The no stay condition disproportionably loaded the shoulders, shifting 95 N of the
rucksack load onto the shoulders, in addition to the 90 N weight of the FPV.
7. The effect of the FPV with BRP weight had a minimal effect on the forward lean
moment.
Analysis of the pressure distribution results leads to the following conclusions:
8. The multiple layers of the FPV have some ability to equalize pressure distributions
onto the body by attenuating discontinuities in geometry.
9. Peak pressures under the corners and edges of the ballistic plates greatly exceeded
recommended contact pressures for long-term exposure. This occurred at multiple
locations around the edges of the plates in all conditions when they were worn under
the rucksack.
In summary, the fragmentation protection vest with ballistic plates increases the compressive
load on the spine and adds to the inertia of the soldier. Even with the fragmentation
protection vest on, the stays, particularly bent stays, were effective in transferring the
rucksack load directly onto the hips. Finally, the edges of the ballistic plates caused multiple
high pressure points all of which are expected to cause discomfort and in some cases will
likely cause bruising, blisters and other tissue damage.
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA477254&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
Assessment of the effect of No Stay, Bent Stay or Straight Stay
when the Clothe the Soldier Rucksack is worn with the
Fragmentation Vest
Executive Summary
The Clothe the Soldier (CTS) load carriage system includes the Tactical Vest (TV), the
Rucksack, and a Small Pack System which have been designed to be compatible. This
permits various components to be combined to support the operational objectives at hand.
In addition to wearing the TV and one of the packs, soldiers are increasingly attempting to
wear the Fragmentation Protection Vest (FPV), with Bullet Resistant Plates (BRP) beneath
the TV and Rucksack. This work assessed the effects of this practice. The purpose of this
work was to examine the effects of various stays in the rucksack (straight stays, bent stays,
and no stay) on pressure effects and load distribution to the body. Loads carried in the
CTS rucksack often exceed the officially recommended 25 kg and are reported to approach
45 kg. Under these conditions, optimizing load distribution onto the torso becomes even
more essential. A Load Distribution Test Mannikin consisting of a human form with two 6
degree of freedom load cells, positioned at T12/L1 and beneath the body, was used to
assess the force distribution and pressure effects on the body of the following conditions:
1) TV and Rucksack, stays bent to conform to back as designed, 2) TV, FPV with BRP and
Rucksack, stays bent to conform to back, 3) TV, FPV with BRP and Rucksack, straight
stays, 4) TV, FPV with BRP and Rucksack with no stays. All were tested with 25 kg in
the rucksack.
Results showed that wearing the FPV and BRP under the rucksack will increase the
compressive load on the upper body by 50 to 100 percent, depending on the stay
configuration compared with wearing just the TV and Rucksack configuration. Stays bent
to conform to the body were the most effective configuration while removal of the stays
caused the greatest increase in compressive loads. Edges of the BRP caused multiple peak
pressure points of with values on the mannikin of 60 to 110 kPa. These pressure values are
expected to considerably exceed the tissue tolerance of skin and underlying muscle and are
expected to result in localized skin damage and bruising.
Assessment
5.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
Analysis of the load distribution results leads to the following conclusions:
1. The straight down compressive force on the upper body was increased by +90 N in
all cases where the FPV with BRP was worn.
2. The increase is at least 1.5 (i.e.1.5 to 2.8) times the compressive load experienced in
the baseline condition.
3. The upper body carries a greater portion of the load when the FPV with BRP was
worn.
4. Stays were still able to transfer a portion of the rucksack load directly to the hips,
even when worn with the FPV and BRP.
5. The bent stays were more effective at unloading the shoulders than the straight stay
or no stay conditions.
6. The no stay condition disproportionably loaded the shoulders, shifting 95 N of the
rucksack load onto the shoulders, in addition to the 90 N weight of the FPV.
7. The effect of the FPV with BRP weight had a minimal effect on the forward lean
moment.
Analysis of the pressure distribution results leads to the following conclusions:
8. The multiple layers of the FPV have some ability to equalize pressure distributions
onto the body by attenuating discontinuities in geometry.
9. Peak pressures under the corners and edges of the ballistic plates greatly exceeded
recommended contact pressures for long-term exposure. This occurred at multiple
locations around the edges of the plates in all conditions when they were worn under
the rucksack.
In summary, the fragmentation protection vest with ballistic plates increases the compressive
load on the spine and adds to the inertia of the soldier. Even with the fragmentation
protection vest on, the stays, particularly bent stays, were effective in transferring the
rucksack load directly onto the hips. Finally, the edges of the ballistic plates caused multiple
high pressure points all of which are expected to cause discomfort and in some cases will
likely cause bruising, blisters and other tissue damage.
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA477254&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
Similar threads
