Small Pack Issue

[Scoobie Newbie]

"rucksack"

speaking of such things when are we supposed to get the new one Vern?

 

[48Highlander]

Perhaps then he should be referred to the project documents for these items by your Supply staff?

Sounds quite like an internal problem to me. 

Yep, I'll be sure to do that!

"Hey, RSM, you're RTFO.  Sgt Vern in supply says I don't have to take my ruck".

 

[armyvern]

Yep, I'll be sure to do that!

"Hey, RSM, you're RTFO.   Sgt Vern in supply says I don't have to take my ruck".

;D

One must approach this with extreme caution. Much as we had to do with a certain Capt who insisted on us wearing our headress at our desks in Pet many years ago so that we could salute her. But it is in the IC CSGs job description to keep the CSMs/RSMs current on changes to the Kit/Clothing policies... that's why I suggested his Supply Clothing Section, they can do it with tact and documentation and it is part of the job.

 

[Matt_Fisher]

OK I'll say it again for all you who are still trying to figure out how to carry both....

They are NOT meant to be used together at the same time.

A quote from the Clothe the Soldier Web-site:

"Concept of Use â “ The Small Pack System will be a basic issue to CF personnel conducting land operations. It will provide load carriage in operations where soldiers are required to wear fragmentation protection and carry combat supplies and sustainment items sufficient for up to 24 hours. In addition to the soldier's own carriage requirement, the Small Pack System will provide a means to carry the soldier's share of section/platoon weapons, amunition and mission-oriented stores."

Now for trips longer than 24hrs....that's what the rucksack is made for.

And when you finally get your new rucksack..here is the concept of Use for that:

"Concept of Use â “ The Rucksack will be a basic issue item to dismounted CF personnel conducting land operations. It will provide the primary load carriage means in operations where soldiers are required to carry combat supplies and sustainment items for greater than 24 hours and sufficient for up to 72 hours. Additionally, the rucksack has been designed to be worn over fragmentation protection if necessary. While it will be used in conjunction with the Small Pack System and either the TV or 82 pattern webbing the Rucksack cannot be worn at the same time as the Small Pack. It will have the capacity to store the items normally carried in the Small Pack system."

So when you deploy etc, you take both..that way when you go out on a patrol or 24 hr mission, you can wear your small pack vice the rucksack.

If you're going to the field for a weekend...your small pack will do just fine.

http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/Chief_Land_Staff/Clothe_the_soldier/hab/2/273_e.asp

Ok,

But what about guys that don't have the luxury of leaving their ruck behind in a base camp, or in a vehicle?   The guys in the light formations are invariably going to have to have a system that will allow for long-term sustainment (read longer than 24 hours), yet have a platform for shorter-term sustainment (read 24 hours and less).   So, with the CTS setup, you've got the choice of either or...rather than a system that allows for the ruck to carry the patrol pack.

It seems that the CFs have completely ignored what other forces such as the Brits and US have done with detachable patrol packs that work in concert with the main ruck.

The best integrated patrol pack/main ruck system I've seen to date is the Kifaru 'Piggyback' setup.   http://www.kifaru.net/MGpiggy.htm Which is probably the reason why 'certain CF user groups' are using Kifaru rather than CTS fielded stuff.

 

[48Highlander]

Ok,

But what about guys that don't have the luxury of leaving their ruck behind in a base camp, or in a vehicle?  The guys in the light formations are invariably going to have to have a system that will allow for long-term sustainment (read longer than 24 hours), yet have a platform for shorter-term sustainment (read 24 hours and less).  So, with the CTS setup, you've got the choice of either or...rather than a system that allows for the ruck to carry the patrol pack.

It seems that the CFs have completely ignored what other forces such as the Brits and US have done with detachable patrol packs that work in concert with the main ruck.

The best integrated patrol pack/main ruck system I've seen to date is the Kifaru 'Piggyback' setup.  www.kifaru.net Which is probably the reason why 'certain CF user groups' are using Kifaru rather than CTS fielded stuff.

I've been attaching my NBCW bag to my rucksack for the past 7 years without much difficulty.  I'm sure sticking the small-pack on top of the new ruck won't pose a huge problem either.

 

[Farmboy]

It seems that the CFs have completely ignored what other forces such as the Brits and US have done with detachable patrol packs that work in concert with the main ruck.

It's that stubborn CF mindset that says "We don't want to be anything like the Americans" even if they come up with a good idea  :

 

[kyleg]

It's nothing a little (or a lot) of gun tape and swearing can't fix ;D

 

[The_Falcon]

I've been attaching my NBCW bag to my rucksack for the past 7 years without much difficulty.   I'm sure sticking the small-pack on top of the new ruck won't pose a huge problem either.

Yeah but have checked out the small packs that three of the guys in our unit have?  They are a wee bit bigger than a nuke bag (especially when they have the extra pockets attached).

 

[kyleg]

They compress pretty flat when they're empty, which they should be when attached to the ruck

 

[KevinB]

DItto to MattF's comments.

Kifaru really has cornered the market -- too bad CTS does not take feedback...

 

[NL_engineer]

I had a nice post done up for this but I guess it got lost in siber space.

The compression straps on the SPS can probably be used to attach it to the new ruck. This should be possable because it is made to hold the same pockets as the small pack (I haven't seen the ruck its self but, from what I read on CTS there should be no problem attaching the SPS to it). as for the old ruck you can do what Pte. Pinkey said "compress it between the valise and the ruck" or you could put your valise in the SPS and then attach it to the ruck.

just my 2 cents, and a Merry Christmas to all especially our troops over seas

 

[brihard]

I would like to point out that the SPS has the same internal capacity as the rucksack. , as well as more capacity once the outside pockets are added. To argue that the rucksack is necessary for a longer haul is false, since they share the same capacity. Once all four pockets are attached (sides, back, bottom), the total 'on paper' capacity is 49L

At the Camerons we're still fighting a bit of bureaucratic inertia in using the SPS, however we have used them instead of rucksacks on exercise, and soon enough we hope that the sr. NCOs will realize that there's no reason not to substitute it for ruck marches as well- far from it, since using it on ruck marches for first period PT on Thursdays will let each troop get a bit more familiar with it and figure out their own ideal setup for comfort.

I'm looking forward to the new 80L ruck, but as an R031 I don't expect to see it any time soon. The SPS will more than suffice in the interim, and I've got a CADPAT nuke bag I picked up in Kingston that I can use to hump C6 ammo or other misc kit on patrol.

the other nice thing about the modular pouches is that you can pack 'mission' kit in them, and simply detach them from the SPS and clip them to your vest, leaving all your spare clothes, valise, and other snivel kit back at the hide... I'm a bit leery of the strength of the modular attachments still- I predict some serious buckle breakage on winter Ex, but nothing duct tape won't fix in the interim until you pick up some metal buckles at a surplus shop...

 

[NATO Boy]

I would like to point out that the SPS has the same internal capacity as the rucksack. , as well as more capacity once the outside pockets are added. To argue that the rucksack is necessary for a longer haul is false, since they share the same capacity. Once all four pockets are attached (sides, back, bottom), the total 'on paper' capacity is 49L

While I agree it seems silly to carry both, the ruck has one thing going for it that the SPS doesn't: The FRAME. Hauling awkward items on your ruck like the SF kit (or other cargo, like jerry cans) is a lot easier with a frame than without one. Also, a frame also gives you something more secure for attaching other awkward (albeit, lighter) kit such as snowshoes. From what I've come to understand, this is why some CF members are skeptical of the CTS ruck; it doesn't have an external frame. Now this probably doesn't phase some people; ie "Why not just carry the awkward gear separately?" Carrying an SF Kit in the issued bag sucks; carrying it pre-assembled while on-the-move makes you momentarily ineffective with your personal weapon (also sucks carrying a jerry can of water on your shoulder sucks. Carrying it your ruck at least addresses the issue somewhat. Now, imagine doing that with the SPS; I don't know about you, but I don't think it would work too well (for the SPS anyway.)

At the Camerons we're still fighting a bit of bureaucratic inertia in using the SPS, however we have used them instead of rucksacks on exercise, and soon enough we hope that the sr. NCOs will realize that there's no reason not to substitute it for ruck marches as well- far from it, since using it on ruck marches for first period PT on Thursdays will let each troop get a bit more familiar with it and figure out their own ideal setup for comfort.

If it's just a weekend ex, and you're not hauling wierd kit around the training area, fill your boots. As for using the SPS for PT WRT familiarization, I like the idea. It would help reveal the load-bearing features on the SPS and help troops better to "fit" their kit.

the other nice thing about the modular pouches is that you can pack 'mission' kit in them, and simply detach them from the SPS and clip them to your vest, leaving all your spare clothes, valise, and other snivel kit back at the hide... I'm a bit leery of the strength of the modular attachments still- I predict some serious buckle breakage on winter Ex, but nothing duct tape won't fix in the interim until you pick up some metal buckles at a surplus shop...

Amen to that. I especially like the 522 "soft-shelf" and the aluminum stay inside the main bag; feels more secure than the one in the '82 bag. As for the buckles, I'm thinking of making a repair kit (like the one at MEC) for when buckles start bursting or getting cracked (from throwing kit off the bus, ha ha ha.)

 

[Bomber]

There is a theory, that you will put your SPS into the CTS ruck, Picture it.  In the bottom of the ruck goes your valise, above that is a shock corded opening, that when sealed makes it into two seperate compartments.  In the compartment goes your "24-72 hour" kit.  Like changes of clothes, shave jazz, that fun stuff.  Then for your "8-24 hour" stuff, you toss it into the SPS, which when devoid of pouches is designed to fit into the CTS Ruck, on top of the other kit, on top of the valise.  Then clip all the pouches onto the outside of the ruck, which comes with an extra 2, for a total of 6.

Is this plan good?  Maybe, is it better than what we currently have?  Yes.  Will everyone be happy?  Nope.  Should the Light infantry be given thier own mission specific kit, I figure sure, if they have to carry thier stuff, stop worrying about how a bag will fit or look in a LAV, and worry about how Homer is going to daisy chain 200 pounds of kit onto himself.  I am still blown away at the comments of "Not everyone is on a tour" or "Sure it is great over there, but how about people back in Canada?"

So anyway, This rucksack stuff is interesting, uniquely Canadian "re-inventing the wheel" style, but we do it every time, why would we really change. 

And Remember, the bigger pouches on the SPS have belts on them, so you can deal with bad guys wearing a manly fanny pack.  Hillier better look a bit harder at the "Our job is to kill people" if we are expected to wear fanny packs.  FANNY PACKS.

 

[NATO Boy]

You think the Fanny packs are bad? I've seen one guy use the quad fanny pack as a mini nuke bag. He sticks his arms through the quad straps and actually wears it as a daypack on our Driver's course. Quite hilarious, yet effective for toting notes and a CD Player.

 

[COBRA-6]

And Remember, the bigger pouches on the SPS have belts on them, so you can deal with bad guys wearing a manly fanny pack.  Hillier better look a bit harder at the "Our job is to kill people" if we are expected to wear fanny packs.  FANNY PACKS.

This is part of the psyops plan. The enemy will have a hard time hitting you if they're laughing too hard to aim properly!  ;D

 

[NATO Boy]

This is part of the psyops plan. The enemy will have a hard time hitting you if they're laughing too hard to aim properly!  ;D

Somehow, that wouldn't surprise me.... :rofl:

 

[Matt_Fisher]

Nothing wrong with a 'fanny'/lumbar pack:
http://www.kifaru.net/MG_TGhome.htm
http://www.kifaru.net/MGscout.htm

I use a Kifaru Scout and I've never had a patrol pack that has interfaced so well with my body armor and fighting load carrier, that also mates as a system with my main ruck.

As for the comments about how the SPS being all you need when loaded up with the side pouches, etc. Let's do some real world ops with a combat load of ammo, and sustainment kit and see if your opinion changes.  What works for a weekend ex with snivel kit and 4 mags of blanks isn't a good basis to evaluate the kit you've got to go to war with.

 

[brihard]

I don't see any validity to the complaints about the fanny packs- it simply replaces the old webbing butt pack for me. That was my one regret when I went from webbing to the tac-vest after I got my trade quals; not having a buttpack. As long as the fanny pack will stay where I put it and not slide around, I don't care if it looks manly or not. It seems to be big enough to hold a can of C6, which settles my butt pack requirements on the spot.

Good point earlier on the external frame of the old ruck- which begs another question; will the new CTS ruck be jump-sturdy, or will jumpers keep using the 64 frame?

About the buckles on the modular pouches- I like to collect dead helmet straps from buddies when they break theirs and salvage the metal buckle for the chin strap. I've never had one of those open on me when it wasn't supposed to, and they sure as hell won't get brittle in the winter. If I can find a suitable metal alternative with a wider strap loop though, I'd pick that up in a pinch too.

 

[48Highlander]

Yeah, the only mistake as far as the fanny-pack is concerned was in the naming.  If they'd called it a butt-pack, nobody would be complaining.

Now, can ANYONE explain why the small-pack system comes with TWO fanny packs?  I'm assuming most of us only have one ass.