"The stuff the army issues is useless" and "no non-issue kit over seas!"

[ZipperHead]

I think CFL's earlier post (#46) is the most logical and reasonable of the many that I have read so far. I have taken a "sit on the fence" approach so far, in that I like a lot of the kit we have been issued (in that I would use it no questions asked, and not think about replacing it with aftermarket/non-issue stuff), but I hate some, and have gone the aftermarket route for a lot of items: boots, gloves, eyewear (before the Ballistic Glasses, but I would prefer to see a Ballistic Dust Goggle that is better than what I have seen issued in the past), knee-pads and elbow-pads (before they were issued), toques, etc, etc. I don't think that there is room for either A) NO NON-ISSUED KIT, PERIOD!!!!! or B) a kit free for all (anything goes). Aesthetics doesn't keep soldiers warm, dry, comfortable, effective and/or safe, but LCF doesn't guarantee protection or effectiveness. There has to be a middle-road, and perhaps a certain amount of blind-eyes turned in some regards (commanders accept that the issue kit may suck mad ass, and allow their soldiers to adapt as neccesary, spending the unit's budget is required, or allowing soldiers to replace CERTAIN pieces of kit out of their own pocket).

When we have soldiers on the ground overseas (or training for overseas deployment), we have to lose the Garrison mentality. But when a soldier is in Garrison, accept that you will wear what you are bloody well told. If think we CAN have it both ways: uniformity/conformity when in the public eye (DEU parades, dress of the day at work), but the ability to allow commanders on the ground the leeway to dictate what their soldiers wear/use to perform their tasks. That requires a change in attitude (from our Garrison-style mentality), but also a willingness to understand that there are reasons (how valid could be argued until the cows come home) that any given piece of gear is the way it is, just BECAUSE.

One last note: when I was a young soldier in Petawawa, I really, really wanted to buy a pair of Matterhorns, because I recognized that the issue boots sucked ass. This was before Goretex socks were issued (I'm not saying they didn't exist in the civilian marketplace, I'm just saying they weren't issue - if you follow my drift). Anyway, non-issue boots were a somewhat grey-area, with the SSM having final say, and I didn't like the prospect of dropping ~$250 on boots I might be able to wear. Anyway, when I asked if we could wear them, I was told no. When I asked why, here is the explanation I was given: "Well, if you are in a trench with your buddy, and he has wet boots because he has Mk III's and can't afford Matterhorns, his morale will drop [because I would be warm, dry and most likely alert]". THAT type of mentality is what has got us to the point where we are. Yes it would suck if Pte Bloggins can't afford/doesn't want to buy the "Gucci" gear, but should that stop Cpl Snrub from buying it? Well, depending on your viewpoint is what will effect whether you answer "Hell, no!!!" or "Well, yeah, cuz that ain't fair for Pte Bloggins".

Al

 

[GO!!!]

To echo CFL, we are not insufferable individualists that will purchase every available piece of kit in existence to satiate our desire to be different. I find it personally insulting to imply otherwise.

I purchase kit when I find that the army stuff does not suit my uses for it, and I can do it without making too many waves. The best kit is the stuff that keeps you warm and dry and under the CSMs radar. The idea that troops would spend hundreds on kit to "look different" is stupid, and harkens back to a time when all troops were treated like children, all the time. If my issue kit was adeuate, I would use it, FULL STOP.

Al is right when he states that we must get away from the Garrison, or Garatrooper mentality, it is simply not practical. When I am strutting around edmonton, I blouse my boots, and wear issue gloves and headgear. When we are in the field, I have a green wind-proof touque, gloves which do not absorb water and a nice pair of Danners.

To extend this argument to the load carriage equipment issue, a great number of soldiers (including several officers) have posted here that the standard load for troops overseas is 10 mags. Whether or not the school, or anyone else agrees that this is the case is immaterial - That is the reality on the ground. Given that Kandahar can hit 50 degrees celsius in the summer, it is impractical, nay, just plain dumb to expect troops to sacrifice water for ammunition. As a result, the commander on the ground authorised the use of adequate equipment. It was/is a good call, and should not be sacrificed on the altar of "uniformity".

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Wow I think there is a blue moon out there tonight.

 

[darmil]

Is there anybody thats on TF108 get the O group stating that we are not allow to wear any non issue kit over seas?No chest rigs, no boot,gloves,pistol holsters not  even goggles.WTF. :

 

[medaid]

Is there anybody thats on TF108 get the O group stating that we are not allow to wear any non issue kit over seas?No chest rigs, no boot,gloves,pistol holsters not  even goggles.WTF. :

no boots? That sucks mate... I guess fighting would be pretty hard in bare feet... heard it's cold right now

But seriously on boots, didn't a CANFORGEN come out saying that if it's Black, Military looking, and has been utilized at one point or another by the CF, issued out to soldiers, airmen and sailors, that it's now GTG? Vern?

 

[COBRA-6]

Is there anybody thats on TF108 get the O group stating that we are not allow to wear any non issue kit over seas?No chest rigs, no boot,gloves,pistol holsters not  even goggles.WTF. :

I think this has happened to every roto so far, when the TF hits theatre and gets outside the wire things tend to loosen up from what people have posted here.

 

[Armymedic]

Re: boots. There is not so much of a debate of black boots in Afghanistan....as everyone wears tan.

Like Cobra said, every tour get told that at least once during predeployment and in theater. You've read it here I am sure.

 

[KevinB]

So basically every piece of kit that units put in UCR's for...

Hmm 

 

[WLSC]

The current JTFA staff make a point, a really strong point to make sure that wath is seen on TV and in newspaper ic Cdn issue kit.  Not even the shamag is accepted  :-\ 

 

[Osotogari]

The current JTFA staff make a point, a really strong point to make sure that wath is seen on TV and in newspaper ic Cdn issue kit.  Not even the shamag is accepted   

It's all part of the effort to counter the fact that the emperor has no clothes WRT the issue tac vest, boots, and combat jacket, just to name a few.  Hopefully this is as close as my generation will come to the Ross Rifle debacle.

 

[Old Sweat]

The current JTFA staff make a point, a really strong point to make sure that wath is seen on TV and in newspaper ic Cdn issue kit.  Not even the shamag is accepted

That fails the "so what" test on a number of counts. I suspect the average Canadian doesn't sit in from of the tube watching for non-uniform items. Now, it may be a different matter for the CTS crowd . . .

 

[WLSC]

That fails the "so what" test on a number of counts. I suspect the average Canadian doesn't sit in from of the tube watching for non-uniform items. Now, it may be a different matter for the CTS crowd . . .

Yap but their is people in Ottawa that doing just that, look at TV and pic in the paper...

 

[Danjanou]

Yap but their is people in Ottawa that doing just that, look at TV and pic in the paper...

And that boys and girls is your tax dollars at work :

 

[armyvern]

That fails the "so what" test on a number of counts. I suspect the average Canadian doesn't sit in from of the tube watching for non-uniform items. Now, it may be a different matter for the CTS crowd . . .

I'd go even further on this point -- I'd argue that the average Canadian doesn't even have a clue as to what IS a Canadian piece of kit or not, even were they sitting watching us on the tube and are further in the dark as to whether or not the kit item actually serves the pointy end well. Then again, the average Canadian would also assume that because the soldier they see IS wearing it -- that it MUST work.

I guess, the "making it seen" is enforcing the erroneus belief that "it works" in the public eye. Saving someone an explanation as to why there are so MANY unsats, noted defeciencies, and UCRs on some of those same "seen" kit items from those who are actually using the kit when the shit hits the fan ... 

 

[WLSC]

I guess, the "making it seen" is enforcing the erroneus belief that "it works" in the public eye. Saving someone an explanation ...

I would agree totally.  And the big visual ''every bidy look the same factor''  In general, not bad kit but need evolution.  But by doiing so, someone will have to explain why their scientific answer do not match reality

 

[Kiwi99]

Whats disturbing about this possible comment about non issue kit, and yes I know every roto says it, is the fact that even after two years in Kandahar, people refuse to listen to the comments made by previous tours that state quite simply-theis piece of kit is crap!  From the TAC VEST to the glare of lights on ballistic goggles.  Boots and gloves.  It's all the same.  If a commander wants to be all cool and regimental and stuff, good for him.  But at least take the time to read previous reports about the quality of kit first.  Oh well, such is the professional envy\jealousy in this army today.  How many new commanders in theater have sauid that they are going to do it the right way and not take any casulties, won't make the same mistakes as the roto they were replacing, blah blash, blah.

 

[armyvern]

I would agree totally.  And the big visual ''every bidy look the same factor''  In general, not bad kit but need evolution.  But by doiing so, someone will have to explain why their scientific answer do not match reality

The answer is ...

"Because the troops are not using the kit properly."  :

The truth is though that the soldiers aren't using it properly, because the kit won't/doesn't/can't and ISN'T performing when used "as per the CTS instruction manual" on the front line ... in real world battlefield time. And those guys & gals keep on saying so ... over and over and over ...

My personal thoughts? It's been battlefield tested -- and a heck of a lot of it failed miserably.

 

[WLSC]

Yep, but hey, who are we tu disagre with a scientific evaluation by bureaucrat in unuform in an office in Ottawa !!  :-\

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

I hope they start cracking down on haircuts and boot blousing while they are at it.

 

[vonGarvin]

I hope they start cracking down on haircuts and boot blousing while they are at it.

And shaving.  I mean, why issue troops water if all they are going to do is drink it?

: