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

[geo]

Heh...
It's a section task... all 10 members of the section put their heads together to figure this one out.
When that doesn't work, they go see their Troop WO for the DS solution - but as he does not have the DS solution, he reaches over to the phone and gets the SQMS to come down and help his boys & girls .....

Works every time

 

[daftandbarmy]

I've seen platoons solicit input from each member (who wanted to give their input) on the forms, then bundle them together with a cover sheet, staple, and off they go through Bn Ops along with all the other bundles from the unit. The Bn Ops Offr and Coy 2ICs managed it. Does that still happen?

 

[dangerboy]

I've seen platoons solicit input from each member (who wanted to give their input) on the forms, then bundle them together with a cover sheet, staple, and off they go through Bn Ops along with all the other bundles from the unit. The Bn Ops Offr and Coy 2ICs managed it. Does that still happen?

That is how I did it, after winter Ex I did up a bunch on the new Ruck, sent it to my Coy 2IC and he sent it to QM.  From there the TQ told me he forwarded to the next level (I can't remember the precise term at this time). The chain of command works, just got to give it time.

 

[Yrys]

Re: the Quebec based soldier's comments to the media regarding kit;

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080213/soldier_equipment_080213/20080213?hub=TopStories

Military denies sending ill-equipped troops to Afghanistan

...But the department explained that the equipment is already pretty heavy for the hot weather and that soldiers can count on their comrades for more supplies.

The CFB Valcartier-based soldier also blamed the boots for many injuries soldiers suffer in Afghanistan, saying they are not fit for the long walks in the rugged desert.

The military replied that it regularly receives feedback from soldiers about equipment and that a new model of boots is currently being tested. The boots will be sent to Afghanistan when ready.

 

[daftandbarmy]

The UK seems to be facining similar issues:

A CORONER accused the Ministry of Defence today of breaching British soldiers’ trust by sending them to Afghanistan without basic equipment. Andrew Walker spoke out at the end of an inquest into the death of Captain James Philippson, 29, of 7 Parachute Regiment Royal Horse Artillery, in a firefight with Taliban troops on June 11 2006 in which British forces were “totally out-gunned”.


http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article807495.ece

 

[RHFC_piper]

REF: Military denies sending ill-equipped troops to Afghanistan


[quote author=Col. Jean-Marc Lanthier, director of land requirements for the military]Is it perfect? No. Does it satisfy the vast majority of soldiers? Yes.[/quote]

Hmmm... I think, just by reading posts here, it is definitely not perfect... Does it satisfy the vast majority? perhaps... but are the vast majority engaging the enemy on a daily basis? Definitely not.  Perhaps the vast majority has no need for equipment that suits the battlefield, but the leading edge of the sword definitely does.  Inadequacies for the fighting few cost lives. Simple as that.

[quote author=Col. Jean-Marc Lanthier, director of land requirements for the military]
I can guarantee you that the equipment on the field is absolutely adequate. [/quote]

I suppose I can agree with this statement, at least from my experience... all the equipment I used overseas was adequate... after I spent $2000 buying adequate equipment.  He didn't specify issued or not.

But, I'm sure he does mean "issued equipment"... and judging by that statement, I don't think the UCRs are getting to the people who really need to read them... or its just a smoke screen.

 

[421 EME]

Quote from: Col. Jean-Marc Lanthier, director of land requirements for the military
I can guarantee you that the equipment on the field is absolutely adequate.

The vest and the POS holster are adequate if you never step one foot out of KAF or never leave your office in Ottawa.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Why the fawk should troops in contact have to settle for adequate?  I could adequately empty a swimming pool with a 3 gal pail and a lot of free time, but sure wouldn't feel good about it.

 

[RHFC_piper]

Is it just me, or does the term "Absolutely adequate" seem a little, uh, farcical...  Like saying "perfectly mediocre".


Oh... one other quote I missed...

[quote author="the department"]
equipment is already pretty heavy for the hot weather and that soldiers can count on their comrades for more supplies
[/quote]

This is in reference to;

[quote author="Cpl. Daniel Beaulieu"]
the tactical vest can only hold four ammunition clips, or magazines, and that ideally they should be able to hold 10 to 15 clips.
[/quote]

as "heavy" as the equipment is, this doesn't change the fact that we were given 15 mags to carry anyway.. and more... so how is a 4 mag vest "adequate"?

'count on their comrades for more supplies?' So, are my comrades carrying more than 4 mags in their TVs... or are they just not shooting...  I am just confused...
We need a rig that carries 10 to 15 mags cause we're using 10 to 15 mags in prolonged contact... time re-bombing mags is time rounds aren't going down range, thus the reason why we're given 15 mags.

 

[Greymatters]

Is it just me, or does the term "Absolutely adequate" seem a little, uh, farcical...  Like saying "perfectly mediocre".

+1 to that, there's a big difference between something being perceived to be 'adequate' and something that 'works well'.  The old C1 bayonet, perfectly blunt and barely useful as a tool for spreading butter, was also at one time considered 'adequate'...

 

[NL_engineer]

I look at it like, you have young kids and are buying a new car.  Do you go with the one with an adequate safety rating, or the one with a high safety rating.  Hard choice  :

Woh, I never new the people in NDHQ were that far out it to give the responses they did

 

[Gunner98]

Quote from: Col. Jean-Marc Lanthier, director of land requirements for the military
I can guarantee you that the equipment on the field is absolutely adequate.

The vest and the POS holster are adequate if you never step one foot out of KAF or never leave your office in Ottawa.

Perhaps the 'absolutely adequate' statement was another poor translation - between brain and lips?

 

[KevinB]

FYI when we tried to UCR the holster -- we made a complaint that it was not sized correctly as the UM-84 series Bianchi is for the bigger 9mm M9 Beretta -- and they said "that is ridiculous they are both 9mm's"  -- the fact the barrel is longer and the slide was fatter went sailing right over the heads of those idiots.

Frankly I can see how troops despondent with the systems failure to evolve to support the warfighter would start to use the public as a force for change.

 

[RHFC_piper]

Frankly I can see how troops despondent with the systems failure to evolve to support the warfighter would start to use the public as a force for change.

As much as I'm not an advocate for that method (using media and the public to force a reaction), as I believe the system can eventually work, I can understand the reasoning behind it.  We are not in 'grin and bear it' times.  Equipment has to work or lives are put at risk.  Equipment that is simply "adequate" and "generic" isn't going to be enough in the eyes of the soldiers who are facing the enemy directly... and at the end of the day, these are the soldiers for whom the equipment has to work best.
If the system isn't, or doesn't seem to be working fast enough to get what's needed to the front, and all other routes have been taken, I can understand why taking it to the media and the public seems like a good last resort... but, it doesn't make it right.

 

[PJOsborne]

I'm glad that the load-carriage issue has resurfaced in the mainstream media again. I don't understand though, why the member felt that we need two sidearms.. unless it was a translation error and sidearm was supposed to mean 'small arms' or something like that, in which case one would be the primary weapon and the other the pistol ...?

On another subject, if the good Col. is certain that our vests are perfectly adequate for the task, then why did DLR approve the whole Try-And-Buy affair? Actually, it'd be good to see what that project has come up with..

 

[armyvern]

I'm glad that the load-carriage issue has resurfaced in the mainstream media again. I don't understand though, why the member felt that we need two sidearms.. unless it was a translation error and sidearm was supposed to mean 'small arms' or something like that, in which case one would be the primary weapon and the other the pistol ...?

On another subject, if the good Col. is certain that our vests are perfectly adequate for the task, then why did DLR approve the whole Try-And-Buy affair? Actually, it'd be good to see what that project has come up with..

Already addressed in this thread --- misquote.

Not two side-arms ...

 

[ark]

I'm glad that the load-carriage issue has resurfaced in the mainstream media again. I don't understand though, why the member felt that we need two sidearms.. unless it was a translation error and sidearm was supposed to mean 'small arms' or something like that, in which case one would be the primary weapon and the other the pistol ...?

On another subject, if the good Col. is certain that our vests are perfectly adequate for the task, then why did DLR approve the whole Try-And-Buy affair? Actually, it'd be good to see what that project has come up with..

It was a translation error. You can watch the original interview in French here http://lcn.canoe.ca/cgi-bin/player/video.cgi?file=/lcn/actualite/national/20080213_dion.wmv where he talks about extra mags and not extra side arms.

By the way, according to this video http://lcn.canoe.ca/cgi-bin/player/video.cgi?file=/lcn/actualite/national/20080213_raymond2.wmv (towards the end) Cpl Beaulieu could be sanctioned by the forces because he went public with this. At the moment, CF do not want to elaborate more as the matter is in hands of lawyers.

 

[MdB]

REF: Military denies sending ill-equipped troops to Afghanistan


Hmmm... I think, just by reading posts here, it is definitely not perfect... Does it satisfy the vast majority? perhaps... but are the vast majority engaging the enemy on a daily basis? Definitely not.  Perhaps the vast majority has no need for equipment that suits the battlefield, but the leading edge of the sword definitely does.  Inadequacies for the fighting few cost lives. Simple as that.

Totally agree. Tactical vest is for combat, the name says it. I wonder for how many years the modular concept has been around and if it could have been integrated to the TV in time for production. Now that it is so long to field, what are the impediments to perfectly adequate equipement fielding timetable? Is it the identification of the problems (as it appears to be), the R&D, procurement process (hmmm?), and what not (insert here what escapes me yet)?

Another thing, why is there that we need to produce A LOT of them before it reaches the people that really needs it?? I mean, a TV is important for the 4 combat arms primarily, what's the right way to field equipment?

As I learned in the Forces, do it in the way that you reach the end effect in the right time. Train as we fight? Does the equip as we fight apply? We need 15 mags vest, now what? That what I would like to see and hear from CoC, like we so often saw from Gen Hillier.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Perhaps if the 85% solution applied to combat arms and not the Military in general we'd be getting somewhere.  As far as being sanctioned what are they going to sanction him on?  The cardinal rule (as mentioned here already) is that you shouldn't get in trouble for speaking on what you know.

 

[Farmboy]

The problem lies in in the whole Canadian system.

DLR is not a private company, it doesn't have to be innovative, it doesn't have to make money or answer to shareholders.  They came out with the Tac Vest many years later than it should have been released.  If a private company had done this they would be losing money big time.

The problem is with any company that is government owned.

Private companies are years ahead of what the government is doing.  The military needs to purchase direct from private companies without trying to add their own features.  Quick, easy and cheaper than years of development on obsolete equipment.

Key example is isotopes, Canada has a world monopoly however they still lose money because it's government owned.