New ballistic eyewear

[Eye In The Sky]

Nice to have an answer and ones that makes sense at that.

 

[jollyjacktar]

The SISIP guy at the scam I recently attended said that we were covered 24/7 here and at home, period.  Of course if my dependants are put into a situation to put that to the test, I personally won't  be giving a damn.

 

[Dirt Digger]

As a SME, even if in general terms, what 'risks' are involved with non-issue kit, specifically PPE?  Any input would add value to our 'spec fire' on the topic.

I'm not one of the Human Factors types within the trade (I do Industiral Hygiene), so I'm limited to my own personal experiences providing assistance on some of the projects when I was at DRDC-T.

A lot of the concerns are due to the thermal capabilities of the item....foam gaskets around the lenses on Wiley X's and polyester fablic blends in UnderArmour products come immediately to mind.  Having them melt to your skin makes a bad situation worse for the medical folks (and for you!).    This was an issue with aircrew wearing those US-issue polypro long johns (those shiney brown ones), as they go up like a roman candle if they get anywhere near a heat source.  Saw it happen when I was working at CFSSAT and a guy on a SERE course was trying to dry a pair over a fire...instant pile of goo. 

Remember as well that just because someone is willing to go out and buy brand-name products from reliable retailers, doesn't mean that everyone does.  You'd think that people would know better than buy knockoff products, but you still see people buying genuine $20.00 "Oakeys" in the markets that offer zero UV protection.  Caveat emptor just isn't good enough when it comes to PPE.

The other question about medical and pension coverage has already been discussed.  What I can add is that any incorrectly worn, modified or non-issue item would be documented during the PPE recovery process.  I was involved with several of those and the purpose is not in any way, shape, or form towards laying blame - it's about seeing how the gear failed and making it better.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

This makes alot of sense and should also be applied to things like boots, IMO.  I recall a thread on boots where, IIRC, Vern spoke about the issue of it being tied to PWGSC/Industry Canada type issues as to why this will not happen.  AFAIK, isn't Revision based in Qc? (aka a Cdn product). 

Never underestimate the power that lobbying groups hold.  I am certain the higher ups would love nothing more than to go out and give every Canadian Soldier a 100$ to go buy their own boots; however, the political ramifications of such a move would be a untenable.  The textile industry in Canada is an incredibly powerful lobbying group and if the CF were to do something of this nature the PMO would have loud angry people knocking on there door if something like this were to happen. 

Our present boot situation is IMO a disaster at the moment.  I walk around the unit and am hard pressed to find anyone wearing issued boots.  The fact that if I blow out a boot it can take upwards of 3 months to get a replacement is laughable.  I personally haven't worn issued boots in over 2 years.  Mind you I do love the Mark IIIs with Vibrams, blew my last pair out unfortunately and have not been able to find a replacement pair.

On the issue of insurance coverage for soldiers not wearing issued equipment.  Fact is, soldiers have been modifying their kit since the beginning of time and this is not suddenly going to magically change.  I always got a kick out of hearing people say you wouldn't be covered if you didn't wear XXX.  All it would take would be one nastygram from Bloggins Mom to the local MP and a quick media conference and the situation would rectify itself.

 

[Panzer Grenadier]

I have the ESS NVG version in Tan I used on 1-10 doing hel-ops - It was the only way to see the choppers coming in to pick up their sling loads.  They worked really well.