Possible Clothe the Soldier dropleg setup?

[LordOsborne]

As some of you know, the CLS authorized a try-and-buy for new load carriage options for the army. An email I read about DLR sending some people to Afghanistan and conducting interviews and questionnaires about kit issues was awful to read. As usual the conclusion of DLR was that the kit wasn't inadequate- soldiers just weren't using it as they intended and were therefore to blame. 10 magazines? nope. We have to stop thinking we need to carry so much ammo, says DLR. I will try to see if I'm allowed to post the email in full.

I digress, but some of the try-and-buy options that I read about included some new drop-leg items that were to be developed through CTS (in addition to that mythical C9-pouch divider I've heard about). I took a look at FellFab's website (they make the TV and the Small Pack) and they have posted an image of what looks like a dropleg M203 setup.

http://www.fellfab.com/canada/military/index.shtml

Thoughts? Comments?


(Edited to include URL)

 

[medaid]

WHY MUST WE REINVENT THE WHEEL EVERY FREAKING TIME!!! Cant we just go with the systems that have been battle proven and have received thumbs up from the troops in the field rather then the ones in chairborne ops?!


*sigh* *shakes head*

 

[HItorMiss]

As some of you know, the CLS authorized a try-and-buy for new load carriage options for the army. An email I read about DLR sending some people to Afghanistan and conducting interviews and questionnaires about kit issues was awful to read. As usual the conclusion of DLR was that the kit wasn't inadequate- soldiers just weren't using it as they intended and were therefore to blame. 10 magazines? nope. We have to stop thinking we need to carry so much ammo, says DLR.

Less ammo HAHAHAHAHAHA yeah well since they haven't been in the situ how the hell would they know. My experience with DLR has generaly been them telling me what kit I need and of course telling me it's the best kit in the world I just don't use it right, they always justify thier failure with that little creveat. Ahh well it wont ever change so why even get worked up over it.

 

[LordOsborne]

I hear you, MedTech. I am, by no means, able to comment much since I don't have much Time In and i have no tours to speak of. However, I refuse to become a yes-man officer. It's not hard for me to see what's wrong with our kit today. I've read some of the excellent threads here and listened to those who are older and /or wiser than me about kit and how to fix it ("Tac Vest does not make the grade" was a good example).

I think this dropleg thing is a bandaid solution, and a bad one at that. I think CTS has once again dropped the ball (and let it roll under the couch).

 

[Farmboy]

That junk looks like it's meant to replace a utility pouch/canteen pouch instead of being a drop leg.

 

[HItorMiss]

To add to my last post...Saw it, used it and like just about everything that comes from DLR....




                                                                                      JUNK!!!!

 

[Donut]

HoM, tell us how you really feel  ;D

Have any grenadiers from TFA used as few as 7 rounds during a serious TIC?  (I mean without running back to the LAV to rebomb  :)

DF

 

[medaid]

Why must we have chairborne operators design our kit?? WHY WHY WHY???!  :crybaby:

 

[ArmyRick]

Thanks Clothe the clown. And DLR maybe should go out and get into an intense fire fight with ONLY 5 magazines and demonstrate to us that is all you need.

 

[LordOsborne]

After searching a bit on DWAN, I found the name of the Technical Assistance Visit that i was emailed and referred to earlier. If someone can find it, and post it, I think we'd all see just how backwards CTS and DLR is. From the DWAN page, it is an unclassified document. I can send the DWAN link to the page in question through PM.

"DLR 5-4 AFTER ACTION REPORT - TFA TAV (4-19 JAN 2006)"

**Warning, if someone does actually post it, you may notice small to large amounts of vomit in your mouth after reading it.**

 

[Good2Golf]

...it got pulled...

 

[HItorMiss]

I know of 1 TIC where one guy when through 30 mag's, now granted that shows to some extent lack of fire discpline you most also take into account the lenght of the TIC being 5 hrs.

As for M203's well 10 was common.


G2G PM incoming on unrelated topic.

 

[Good2Golf]

HoM, PM's not working from work computer.  Good to see you're home...well done! 

I'll PM you when I get home...until then, I'll keep you up at night burning JP-8!  ;D

G2G

 

[MJP]

After searching a bit on DWAN, I found the name of the Technical Assistance Visit that i was emailed and referred to earlier. If someone can find it, and post it, I think we'd all see just how backwards CTS and DLR is. From the DWAN page, it is an unclassified document. I can send the DWAN link to the page in question through PM.

"DLR 5-4 AFTER ACTION REPORT - TFA TAV (4-19 JAN 2006)"

That TAV was before all the fighting started up when we were basically running only the PRT and moving massive amounts of equipment down from Kabul to KAF.  I'd be more interested in what came out of the DLR visit during TF1-06 and/or3-06 .  I participated with a few others in the company for TF1-06 and we hit some salients points and the DLR guy was pretty receptive.  Not that it means anything......

 

[LordOsborne]

MJP: I probably quoted the wrong TAV. It's hard to say, since i couldn't actually see the document proper. I'm still trying to find a copy of the email though.

Some of the conclusions i read were simply astonishing. The report chastised troops and junior leadership for pushing what DLR felt were unnecessary loads onto combat soldiers. They stated that although some M203 gunners insisted on 24 rounds, they felt it was excessive. They also said one thing while doing another: Despite 10 mags being "too many", they still promised to field the C9 pouch divider to increase loads.

The TAV also looked at the shoulder pockets. They said the mods were expensive and inefficient from "a bio-design" standpoint. They then quoted a USMC study saying arm pockets added a "10% effort increase". What got my goat was that they then suggested to look into making an armoured shoulder brassard that would have a pocket and a velcro patch for IR patches. Somehow, they must have concluded that that was less expensive.... I really wish i had it in front of me to quote from though.

 

[a_majoor]

It would seem the best way to deal with this is put DLR on "ignore" and use DIY kit with the support/concurrence of the Sergeant Major. Of course if you are stuck with a dinosaur, this might not work for you.

As for DLR, keep pushing the rope, send UCR's on issue items and well written suggestions on alternatives. Use the CoC so everyone from the Pl 2I/C to the CO are aware (they might even have useful suggestions too). They might finally give up and listen when they watch CTV "Newsnet" and can't see anyone wearing issue kit..........

 

[HItorMiss]

Some of the conclusions i read were simply astonishing. The report chastised troops and junior leadership
MJP: I probably quoted the wrong TAV. It's hard to say, since i couldn't actually see the document proper. I'm still trying to find a copy of the email though.  for pushing what DLR felt were unnecessary loads onto combat soldiers. They stated that although some M203 gunners insisted on 24 rounds, they felt it was excessive. They also said one thing while doing another: Despite 10 mags being "too many", they still promised to field the C9 pouch divider to increase loads.

That divider doesn't help the real situation anyway sure I can carry 10 mags but where does my 2 quart go now?  The point is the TV is useless!

The TAV also looked at the shoulder pockets. They said the mods were expensive and inefficient from "a bio-design" standpoint. They then quoted a USMC study saying arm pockets added a "10% effort increase". What got my goat was that they then suggested to look into making an armoured shoulder brassard that would have a pocket and a velcro patch for IR patches. Somehow, they must have concluded that that was less expensive.... I really wish i had it in front of me to quote from though.

I saw these on the some of the newest roto that they were trialing, lets just say that the shoulder pads made it hard enough to get the rifle into the shoulder (it's why I don't use them plus a button and some Velcro is going to stop Sh1t) Let alone this to the elbow monstrosities, seeing guys on the range try and get into the prone ans shoot was almost comical if it hadn't been so damn frustrating and sad.

 

[Matt_Fisher]

The TAV also looked at the shoulder pockets. They said the mods were expensive and inefficient from "a bio-design" standpoint. They then quoted a USMC study saying arm pockets added a "10% effort increase". What got my goat was that they then suggested to look into making an armoured shoulder brassard that would have a pocket and a velcro patch for IR patches. Somehow, they must have concluded that that was less expensive.... I really wish i had it in front of me to quote from though.

I'm USMC and never heard of that arm pocket study, and if the design was that inefficient, then why's it being carried onto the new Marine FROG uniform?  Most Marines that I know like the arm pockets on the Combat Utility Blouse, although personally I'd have preferred a zippered style similar to the Crye Combat Shirt or Dropzone's Ops Shirt, as those types are a bit easier to get into and re-secure, but the fact that the current design of arm pockets were put on is better than no arm pockets.

 

[LordOsborne]

HoM: I agree with you on the divider issue. It's not ergonomic at all. It's much more natural to get at mags when they're in front of you, not on your hip. I also think it'd be tough to re-insert a mag under stress. I think that shoulder/upper arm protectors might have some merit (although i'm sure it's a topic of some contention), since the US army uses them. Naturally that starts the big debate on how much armour is too much, etc etc.

Matt: I think there is now no question that our combat uniform needs a redesign and overhaul to reflect the changing nature of operations. I was impressed with the FROG setup that the USMC came up with. I'm envious of how they can push things out much faster than we can... *sigh* If I can track down the email, I'll make sure to quote the study that DLR cited.

 

[aesop081]

Just a quick question. no offence intended...

How many afghanistan Vets would be willing to take a posting to DLR ?

I know in some trades, being posted away from the line units to a office-type job is seens as undeirable by most members, therfore how many combats arms guys with recent time in the sandbox would accept a posting to Ottawa with DLR ?