CAF Combat boots policy 2005-2018

[Nfld Sapper]

Lol!! Actually, it is! We have the CANLANDGEN posted, and I actually went a step further and posted the SAM references along with Sandra's email (her full name redacted of course) and the new, revised LOTB Implementation Order.

You know as well as I do - I can stamp it on people's foreheads and some will still not get it!

Now that I want to see....

 

[George Wallace]

You know as well as I do - I can stamp it on people's foreheads and some will still not get it!

Unless they look in the mirror, they won't get it.  Even if they do, it will all be backwards to them.  Might as well be Greek.

 

[BinRat55]

Unless they look in the mirror, they won't get it.  Even if they do, it will all be backwards to them.  Might as well be Greek.

Leave it to a zipperhead to turn my sarcasm into logic!

 

[Nudibranch]

Sizing isn't medicalized though and never has been.  Issues with special sizing have always been dealt with via the SAM and are a Supply problem.

Medical Issues with feet are a Medical Chit issue (fallen arches, requirement for mesh-sided due to skin condition, ortho footwear, ortho soles with lift etc)

No, it was the "I wannas" that were medicalized (same as with the majority of beards). Given the huge drop-off in med chits for boots once it went from MO to Physio, that's quite clear - MOs just scribbled a chit. Foot-for-boot assessment isn't something they ever get taught, and frankly, as a group they don't care. It wastes their time, here's a chit, get lost.
Physios will actually assess the foot. And if mbr has a legit med reason that can't be handled via the various orthodics they have, mbr will still get a chit.

But the "I wannas" that slid through under the MO-chit system have been largely controlled by giving boot chit control to Physio.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Enough already.  For MEDICAL, that is a medical Chit:  The rules have never changed:  that's a medical chit with MO authorization to LPO boots.

Every damn time we go through this ...  :facepalm:

I guess I took the wording the email literally (too literally?)..."LPOs will no longer be approved for any COTS Army boot replacements"  :dunno:

But...I do want to note...I said "the LOTBs do not fit my feet properly ";  I would bet a months pay that the staff at the MIR/BHosp will say that is a FIT issue, not a medical one...

So, for the end user it will likely end up being the same now as it has been as of late;  supply will require mbr's to go to the BHosp because supply says its a medical issue.  Mbr will go to the BHosp and medical will say it is a fit issue.

I've been the monkey in the middle of the Supply/Medical  :slapfight: over 'who pays for special issue boots' before, and suspect it will happen to myself, and others, despite the LOTBs now being available.  It is unfortunate and not likely to change.  Ever.

It's a big FU to no one.  Medical requirements haven't changed; you have the ref - I've sent it you before - nil change.

Again, I took the wording of the email you posted too literally I guess.

BUT...you know of the run around I went thru.  In the end, the CWWBs I started trying to get last June, I picked them up...the end of March.  Yup, fan-fucking-tastic.

This whole boot thing is a flash-point for me;  I've gotten the run around so many times over 13ish years since being put in orthotics I am pretty tired of it at this point.  It is never just as easy as "take worn out boots into supply, get new ones ordered, get phone call when they arrive, go to supply to get them".  It always seems to be an exercise in  :brickwall:.

Copy what they mean about LOTBs being issued to RCAF pers for IMPACT.  But, again the way that is worded also looks like all RCAF pers can be issued the LOTB for IMPACT, which is almost exactly what we have been trying to do since IMPACT started - get the army hot weather boot on the SOI for deploying aircrew. 

 

[Eye In The Sky]

The Physios are harsh mistresses&misters of boot chits, and will assess and trial any number of orthodics before you'd get a med boot chit out of them.

My experiences with them the last 13 years is the opposite, I must say.  Most recent being last summer, when I had to 'update' my chit with Supply.  Physio huffed and puffed about how ridiculous that was, that my feet weren't going to 'get better by some miracle', and wrote me out a new chit saying I require LPO to fit my orthotics.  Other than that, I was asked if my current boot/orthotics are working together.  I said "yup" and was on my way inside of 4-5 minutes.  :2c:

 

[armyvern]

No, it was the "I wannas" that were medicalized (same as with the majority of beards). Given the huge drop-off in med chits for boots once it went from MO to Physio, that's quite clear - MOs just scribbled a chit. Foot-for-boot assessment isn't something they ever get taught, and frankly, as a group they don't care. It wastes their time, here's a chit, get lost.
Physios will actually assess the foot. And if mbr has a legit med reason that can't be handled via the various orthodics they have, mbr will still get a chit.

But the "I wannas" that slid through under the MO-chit system have been largely controlled by giving boot chit control to Physio.

Seen.  Thank you!

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Wasn't actually hinting at me, personally, but rather "Sup techs" in general ... we always get the rants and blame for "the rules" that we have neither input into nor control over.

Never at you, I know which side of the argument you're on.  At sup techs in general?  Not so much...but the current system, the  :slapfight: over 'who pays' between the Supply and Medical world, which people like me end up getting caught up in.

 

[armyvern]

Never at you, I know which side of the argument you're on.  At sup techs in general?  Not so much...but the current system, the  :slapfight: over 'who pays' between the Supply and Medical world, which people like me end up getting caught up in.

Med for Med; Sup for sizing (out of Command allocation).  It isn't an issue for me.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

The problem is, though, that not everyone in the Supply of H Svcs worlds do know, and in those cases the mbr is caught between the 2 competing branches and without the kit they need/should have to do their primary function in the CAF.  I've been the monkey in the middle and it is very frustrating. 

Hopefully the LOTBs take some of the strain off the system. 

 

[armyvern]

The problem is, though, that not everyone in the Supply of H Svcs worlds do know, and in those cases the mbr is caught between the 2 competing branches and without the kit they need/should have to do their primary function in the CAF.  I've been the monkey in the middle and it is very frustrating. 

Hopefully the LOTBs take some of the strain off the system.

Medical policy does not impact Supply activity.  Supply policy does not impact medical policy/activity.

The problem seems to be that everyone automatically assumes supply has a say or dictates medical issues of footwear.  We don't, this is their area and none of the communications we put out regarding footwear LPOs are applicable to medical requirements.  That's their domain. 

Our footwear comms relate only to our footwear domain:  special sizing and stocked items.

 

[PuckChaser]

So far I find the LOTB to fit far more like a commercial boot. No rucks or field training yet, but seems like a step in the right direction.

 

[LPike]

Update on my end:

Went to the Dockyard supply, and they had a pair of LOTBs with a minor issue, they're missing the lower quick-lace eyelet (Lace can be threaded through the hole, so no big deal.

In my quick once over and try on, they're really nice. Cut a lot lower than the black Cripplers, but I like them.

Thanks for all your help!

Sent from my XT1563 using Tapatalk

 

[Old and Tired]

So far I find the LOTB to fit far more like a commercial boot. No rucks or field training yet, but seems like a step in the right direction.

It's the quality of these boots that I found lacking in November.  They just could take the hard use in the field.

 

[BinRat55]

Saw this and had to comment - this is what happens when we try to make EVERYONE happy...

 

[Harris]

Received my first pair of LOTB Thur.  Refused the zippered version and received the other style.

First issue - The mondo point size I'm supposed to wear doesn't fit.  In fact the opening to insert my foot is too small for me to do so due to high arches.  The supply pers said that that was happening a lot and people have to get larger sizes.  I had to get a size two sizes too large in order for my foot to fit.  Wore for the weekend and they were terrible.  Will give them a few weeks of wear to see if they break in.  One problem I'm seeing already is because they are so large my toes have a ton of room and are nowhere near where they are supposed to be and the bend in the toe when I walk digs into my toes.  Not looking forward to a ruck march in them.

Another of my soldiers received the zippered version and once he did up both the laces and zippers, undoing the zipper only wouldn't allow him to get his foot out.  He now has to use the laces anyhow.

Yet my 4 pairs of various self purchased boots, both gortex and non have never had any of these issues.

 

[Loachman]

Saw this and had to comment - this is what happens when we try to make EVERYONE happy...

Unsatisfactory. How do they expect one to open one's wine without losing half of the contents of the bottle with the corkscrew in that location? Are we supposed to become contortionists now?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Received my first pair of LOTB Thur.  Refused the zippered version and received the other style.

First issue - The mondo point size I'm supposed to wear doesn't fit.  In fact the opening to insert my foot is too small for me to do so due to high arches.  The supply pers said that that was happening a lot and people have to get larger sizes. I had to get a size two sizes too large in order for my foot to fit.  Wore for the weekend and they were terrible.  Will give them a few weeks of wear to see if they break in.  One problem I'm seeing already is because they are so large my toes have a ton of room and are nowhere near where they are supposed to be and the bend in the toe when I walk digs into my toes.  Not looking forward to a ruck march in them.

Another of my soldiers received the zippered version and once he did up both the laces and zippers, undoing the zipper only wouldn't allow him to get his foot out.  He now has to use the laces anyhow.

Yet my 4 pairs of various self purchased boots, both gortex and non have never had any of these issues.

If the boots have to be 'too long' to fit your feet, then...they don't actually fit your feet (either pair, the 'right length' ones, or the 'can get it on my feet now'.  If there isn't enough depth to the boot, issuing someone ones that are longer doesn't 'fix' the fit issue, it simply creates a different one.

:facepalm:

 

[armyvern]

If the boots have to be 'too long' to fit your feet, then...they don't actually fit your feet (either pair, the 'right length' ones, or the 'can get it on my feet now'.  If there isn't enough depth to the boot, issuing someone ones that are longer doesn't 'fix' the fit issue, it simply creates a different one.

:facepalm:

Yep.  If the boots don't fit - they don't fit!

 

[TCM621]

Saw my first pair of these recently. They look like kids shoes. The white band around the sole is particularly bad.  Maybe I'm just getting old but what is wrong with black? These new one look horrible with CADPAT. Early reports of comfort aren't promising but I have no personal information on that.