Tac Vest does not make the grade.

[Britney Spears]

Okay, fine, but first, I nominate myself for appointment to the position of Army.ca Fashion Consultant. Do the mods approve?

 

[KevinB]

To get back on topic...


Another concern we came up with after farting around "diss'in" the vest  It is not releaseable - so any waterborne ops (not that we do any anymore... but) are a fatality waiting to happen.

We where playing around trying to come up with a viable M203 system

However some US folks on the Lightfighter board pointed out that the grenades shoudl be easily detached incase the operator goes down and another member has to take over the 203.


Infanteer I'll take a few pick of my Ruck and pack locked together....

wait one

 

[Britney Spears]

I've always wondered about those, how are the mags kept in place? Are the slots stretchy elastic or something?

 

[KevinB]

More pics coming..
Something to do on my Friday night

 

[KevinB]

I would go with the TT pouches, as they are good and made in CADPAT

The DZ and CP ones are not good pouches.

Anyway I was doing some pouch pics for something else here goes.

RAV with assorted pouches

BHI M203 vest parts and SOTECH Hellcat MkI

Rav again

Paraclete TXM4 pouch - friction fit

TXM4 and Paraclete TX-II pouch - M4 mag with elastic retension - pistol via elastic or velcro top cover

TT Mag shingle - bungy retension

TT and Hellcat (Hellcat has snap fasteners on integral mag pouches)

same

Paraclete M4 double mag pouch (elastic retension - spacer between and velcro cover

same

same

Eagle (friction fit - felt type material over polymer insert, optional verlcro top closure)

same

same

Ruck with Pack

 

[KevinB]

I forgot to mention, that I personally do not feel the ruck should be taken into combat.  I typically stick my pack (empty) inside my ruck and then fill it with what ever mission essential (and possibly snivel) gear that I require (that wont go in my LBE)

I don't see how we can wear the Kifaru tailgunner while in a vehicle (especially a small foreign SUV...)

 

[Infanteer]

Hey, I got the same carpet....

 

[KevinB]

Infanteer (whoops near PERSEC violation)
Do you have the US Army's combat load carriage PPT file?
I have it and can email it to you - it is an interesting bit of info.

 

[Britney Spears]

I don't see how we can wear the Kifaru tailgunner while in a vehicle (especially a small foreign SUV...)

My first thought, the first time I got into a vehicle with webbing, was " Man, it would be cool if I could take the buttpack off and quickly attach it to my chest, while in a vehicle, and wear it like a chestrig on the front web straps."

Seemed to make sense at the time. If there was an easy way to attach and dettach the buttpack on either the chest or the back........

 

[bossi]

... If there was an easy way to attach and dettach the buttpack on either the chest or the back ...

You're such a tease ... everybody knows you've had yours done/enhanced, Britney ...

 

[Radop]

Considering the large amount of kit an infantry soldier (or perhaps armored or artillery in a similar role?) has to carry while doing their job compared to a CS or CSS type, it's crazy to think there is an acceptable level of compromise. A sort of one size fits all.   The infantry simply need something better to do their job.   Someone who keeps their tacvest locked in their barracks box (not intended as a jab) can easily get by with it holding 4 magazines and limited storage space.   The guys who carry 15 or 20 magazines, water, medical supplies, GPS, maps, tools so on and so on simply need something better suited to their job.

I don't know if you have been near the "Coy Signaller" in an infantry unit before, but they are one of the most heavily burdened members of the unit.  I was also an infanteer when I was younger.  By the way, my tac vest was never stored in my barrack box in Afghanistan.  I crew commanded a Bison and set up comms for those infanteers who went out on ops.  I may belong to a CS trade, yet, we often play a role that is equally important. 

When I was an infanteer on the advance, we wore our webbing.  Local defence, we wore our webbing.  When we went on patrol, we took min equipment and put everything in our pockets rather than carry webbing.  We now tend to carry way too much equipment on patrols.  We have a lot of concearns within our trade regarding the new pack we are getting.

 

[baboon6]

How do GPMG/C6 teams usually carry their ammo? I've seen the 7.62 100rnd and 200rnd pouches from London Bridge Trading. Does anybody actually use them? It amazes me to still see troops from all armies with belts of 7.62 link wound all around them.

 

[KevinB]

Baboon - We are supposed to get the LBT system according to Tease the Soldier.  I have carried ammo in a LBT assault pack (they call it the Ranger backpack - I just think thats gay as I don't have my "TAB" and dont think my bag should be a ranger if I can't be  )

The problem with when I have been a C6 gunner is that the powers that be think you should wear webbing etc just so you fit in...  - it is changing though. 

Basically if a gunner want to get a decent Load Carriage system for the C9 or C6 he has to go out of pocket.

 

[Infanteer]

I never really thought of that - why would you really require a C-6 gunner to wear webbing at all?  Shouldn't a fragvest and an Assault pack satisfy the requirements and keep the weight down on this crucial member of the platoon.

 

[KevinB]

It SHOULD
But stupid is as...

 

[Britney Spears]

Its great to be constantly pummeled by how important the plt MG is, how it is the linchpin of the plt's firepower, etc. during our careers as infantrymen, while the procurrment fashionistas continue to pretend (for decades!) that it doesn't exist. Same thing can be said about the M203.

Now that's synergy.

 

[Roger]

I do not know about everyone else but for static positions I think the Tac Vest is perfect. It seems to me by everything that has been posted that when they designed and approved the Tac Vest they where trying to find a vest that would work for ground and support troops. Maybe they should have made two of them, use the existing one for support troops the have one for the line troops that offers us all of what we need, extra amo carrying capacity and small packs that attach to the back for gear and so forth.

 

[48Highlander]

I do not know about everyone else but for static positions I think the Tac Vest is perfect. It seems to me by everything that has been posted that when they designed and approved the Tac Vest they where trying to find a vest that would work for ground and support troops. Maybe they should have made two of them, use the existing one for support troops the have one for the line troops that offers us all of what we need, extra amo carrying capacity and small packs that attach to the back for gear and so forth.

There's no NEED for two of them.  All you need is a comfortable harness with a decent attachment system, and an assortment of pouches.  Issue out the harness to everyone, and allocate the pouches according to operational need.  There's plenty of perfectly good, totaly customizable systems available on the market, but the clowns in charge of the procurement proccess decided we'd be better off designing a half-assed vest which cannot be modified.

 

[Andyboy]

Well geeze, everyone has to look the same, don't they?

 

[Armymedic]

We could always go back to that modulized piece of load bearing kit we all used to own, the 82 pattern webbing.

We could add more mag pouches, more water bottles, switch pouches around as needed. And it fits better over the ballistic vest better then any tac vest could....

sounds good?