• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Policy on Personal Combat Gear?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ArmyBrat
  • Start date Start date
I was with the Calgary Highlanders for 3 years, and got out in 96‘ because of my injured leg. However, I am looking to get back in - however, it is uncertain whether or not I will have to do the BMQ series of courses, because I was already QL5 qualified when I was in. I may start training at the unit level come June though.

I ask this question, because from when I was in - until now, things seem to have changed quite a bit. I know this isn‘t necessarily the case in Canada, but I have read stories from soldiers in Iraq who have had their wives or girlfriends go by them good LBVs, and ship them over to them. Also, from talking to some old army buddies from when I was in, they‘ve mentioned they have bought all sorts of knives and kit that they wear/bring with them on ex. and deployment, that wasn‘t issued to them.

A few examples are black combat boots, non-issued. Usually for cold weather or wet environments, they‘ll buy high civilian boots, and nobody says anything about them because they look like regular issue. Fingerless gloves. Additional pouches/packs for their webgear. Load Bearing Vests. Balaclavas. Googles. Small/Light Ghillie suites put on throughout/overtop of their webbing. etc, etc.
 
Alpha-Charlie, quit yapping about your BMQ time, it means nothing in the whole scheme of things. Try getting at least 1 hook before you start bragging.


Da man: Why you would waste money at Wheelers (which is over-priced to begin with) for CADPAT google covers is beyond me. If you want to set yourself up for mockery, go ahead.

ArmyBrat:

Gucci kit (especially the big things) varies from unit to unit. If you poke around the threads on this board, there is a really good post pertaining to 3 PPCLI‘s kit in operations in Afghanistan. They were allowed to wear pretty much whatever they wanted in terms of Load Bearing Equipment, as long as it looked Canadian. Some units are a little more anal-retentive, and small things like boots and stuff are for exercise only. Take the time to get a feel for the unit before making a $1,000 order from Lightfighter.com.

My personal opinion. Every soldier is going to have his or her personal preference on kit. I don‘t understand the reason for Sergeant‘s Major going totally anal over silly things like an extra pouch on the webbing. I have played around with the issue webbing (Which I prefer a million times to the crap-half-jacket thing) and modified it enough to get something I like. Its green and its webbing, so whats the harm.

I would say on longer term stuff like overseas ops, if your going to bring some gucci item, try and bring the corresponding CF gear. For example, I never wear my gortex jacket, but I brought overseas for times when it was required on parade, and the fact that the CQ wouldn‘t one-for-one exchange a piece of gucci kit that went south.

On the other hand, it is important to keep things within reason. We had one unit (won‘t name names) show up to an ex wearing everything; black balaclavas, headbands, Woodland Pattern vests and odd coloured chest rigs. The Platoon commander was even wearing black gaitors, despite the fact that it was rainless and sunny the entire weekend. Needless to say these guys looked like a pack of wankers, and from what I could tell, their performance in the field wasn‘t much better. There is something to be said about an overall impression of uniformity.
 
Army Brat Before you start asking questions out of left feild you should think about what your asking. Your question ranks up there with that guy who asked if he could buy his own assult rifle for military purposes. The CF is not a bunch of morons even though some of the kit you are issued is sketchy from time to time it does serve a purpose. I‘m assuming you had some sort of head trauma after you left the army because any CF member with the most minescule amount of knowledge knows that only issued kit is allowed with minor exceptions. So you should use your head before you show up for your next ex looking like someone from a Tom Clancy game!
 
What is with all the s***-talking FNG‘s lately?

Rocky-Infanteer, you obviously didn‘t read my post did you. Since your too busy talking smack and not looking where I told you to, I‘ve gone out of my way to find the post I was referring to.

"Since 3 PPCLI became a light infantry battalion in 1997, we have afforded our soldiers considerable latitude in their selection of personal clothing and equipment. Although the degree to which this is permitted varies slightly as COs and RSMs come and go, the latitude that 3 PPCLI soldiers can exercise in selecting their own gear is far greater than that encountered in any mechanized battalion. Indeed, I suspect that this degree of freedom is unheralded in the post-Korea Canadian Army. More's the pity, because in situations where what you are wearing or carrying on your back is all that you have, it is nice to have the kit that happens to work best for you.

This freedom to choose personal kit within 3 PPCLI long pre-dated our deployment to Afghanistan. However, I will be the first to admit that it reached new heights once we got the word for our mission. After all, if you're going to war you might as well go prepared, right? Once the mission was confirmed, there was a flurry of orders placed to many of the better known after-market gear providers within Canada and the U.S. Those who had been hesitant to spend money on custom gear before, were understandably willing to â Å“drop some coinâ ? in preparation for deliberate, real-world combat operations.

Provided the boots were black or green, the load-carriage system was green, the gloves were black or green, the headgear was green, etc, soldiers were able to wear whatever they determined worked the best for them. The "measuring stick" if you will, was that the external appearance had to remain unmistakably Canadian. That wasn't terribly difficult to achieve when wearing Temperate Woodland CADPAT in the desert....

We were issued the 1st Generation "jean jacket" LBV for Afghanistan, however most of us at the "pointy end" elected to go with suitably modified 82 Pattern web gear. There were a number of reasons for this. First off, the LBV rides too high on the body when worn over top of the Generation III Frag Vest with ballistic plates inserted front and rear. As a result, the mag pouches interfere with proper placement of the buttplate against the shoulder. The 82 pattern web gear does not pose this problem.

Second, the heavy-weight NYCO Combat Jacket material of the 1st Gen LBV is far too hot for a desert climate where temps often reached 60C towards the end of our tour. The web gear allows for superior ventilation, although the issue is admittedly somewhat moot when you must constantly wear your Frag vest anyways.

Third, is the issue of carrying capacity. The 1st Gen LBV was designed for mechanized and peace support operations, and carries only 4 magazines in addition to the one on your rifle. In combat operations, we found the Canadian Army‘s "traditional" basic load of 150 rounds for a rifleman to be grossly inadequate. The long-standing solution of carrying an additional 100 rounds in a bandolier is ridiculous. Not only does the bandolier flop around and get caught up in everything, but why would you deliberately place your soldiers in a position where 50% of their ammunition is not readily available for use? Dumb. We went with a standard basic load of 10 x 30-round magazines for riflemen. Our basic loads of belted ammo for the C9 LMG and C6 GPMG were also proportionately increased.

Common mods to the 82 pattern web gear in Afghanistan included the addition of 2 extra magazine pouches, plus an old 51 Pattern "bren pouch" for use as a magazine dump-bag. Pouch attachment points were typically reinforced with small cable-ties, and in many cases the troops chose to modify their pouch closures (especially mag pouches) with fastex buckles and/or velcro rather than the antiquated "tab & loop" fastening system. 2 x M-67 fragmentation grenades were carried in the holders on the left-hand mag pouches, with smoke grenades carried in the utility pouch. An IR glowstick with an 18" length of para-cord was taped to one of the front Yoke straps for use in signalling helicopters at night (the SOP being to swing the glow stick in a circle over your head). IR Strobes were either cable-tied to the shoulder of the Yoke, or more commonly to the back of the helmet. Small "key-ring" style carabiners were attached at various points on the webbing Yoke to allow attachment of the rifle (see below), Camelback, etc. Some chose to paint their web-gear and frag vest covers with the Tan vehicle paint.

Above and beyond the LBV versus 82 pattern web gear choice, many troops chose to deploy with private purchase load-carriage gear. There was a pretty even mix of high-quality chest webbing versus commercial LBVs, all purchased from the usual dealers (Arktis, Eagle Industries, etc). You will see at least one "non-issue" rig in just about any picture of 3 PPCLI BG troops in Afghanistan. In fact, I defy anyone to find a photo of the unit‘s members on operations where 2 soldiers are dressed/kitted exactly alike. We had the kind of "operational focus" for equipment selection and modification that gives anal RSMs and clothing project managers conniption fits. Tough - it worked in combat operations, and that is the bottom line.

For weapons, 3 PPCLI has a similarly progressive practice of allowing the troops to choose the weapon sighting system of their choice. The unit requested as many iron sighted C7 rifles as it could get from the supply system back in 1998. The same with C9 LMGs, as the fitting of a scope to the LMG was always (and will remain) a stupid idea. I won‘t get into all of the "real world" (vice rifle range) short-comings of the Elcan C-79 sight here, but suffice it to say the majority of those who do the business up close and personal far prefer iron sights in the absence of a single-reference "reflex" type sight. This is why you will see far more iron-sighted C7s and C9s carried by 3 PPCLI troops than the scoped C7A1/C9A1.

The unit requested C8 Carbines specifically for the Afghan mission. We eventually acquired enough for every member of the Battlegroup "F" echelon (eg. the fighters). The only troops who couldn‘t carry a C8 were the designated M-203 grenadiers (2 per section) and of course, the C9 gunners (2 per section). There was no system available to mount the M203 on the C8 (although we tried), because we bought the "pencil-thin" Dutch barrel rather than an M-4 style contour. Hence, the grenadiers had to stick with the C7.

Overall, the C8 was an ideal choice for Afghanistan. Notwithstanding the open terrain of the desert around Kandahar during our defensive ops, all of our offensive combat operations occured in the mountains along the Pakistani border where engagement distances were surprisingly close due to numerous re-entrants, nooks, crannies and caves (eg. complex terrain). The only problem with the C8 were those thin Dutch barrels that we bought when the weapons were modified a couple of years ago. Although they are a heavy-contour barrel underneath the handguards and up to the front of the foresight/gas block assembly, the forward portion of the barrel is turned down to the same "pencil-thin" contour as the original C8 tube. Big mistake as they tend to overheat very quickly, are much more prone to damage (bending), and do not have the correct contour to mount an M203. Aside from that, the modified C8 was outstanding. Acceptable accuracy (despite the shorter sight radius), reasonable muzzle velocity range (thanks to the 16" barrel vice the M4‘s 14.5" tube), comfortable/compact carry, and excellent reliability. I carried my C8 bone-dry due to the talcum dust over there, and would frequently fire a double basic load (600 rounds) during weekly range practices without a single stoppage.

Most of us removed the slings from our rifles/carbines in favour of attaching the butt-stock directly to the shoulder of the web-gear using a short loop of para-cord throught the rear sling swivel, hooked through a small carabiner attached to the front shoulder of the web-gear yoke. This way, the weapon can be carried in the "alert" position without undue fatigue, it rotates instantly up into firing position (the butt-plate is already positioned), the weapon can be easily controlled with the firing hand if the support hand is required to open a door, etc, and the weapon "hangs" down the front of the body out of the way when both hands are required to do something else. Slings on rifles just get in the way, especially the 3-point C7 patrol sling.

For rucksacks, most used the 64 pattern frame with an 82 pattern bag or a custom bag. The durable 64 pattern frame is common in 3 PPCLI, and is still issued to the Para Coy. The 82 pattern frame is a piece of coat-hanger crap. The 1 RCHA Mortar Platoon attached to the BG broke 50% of their 82 pattern ruck frames the first time they did a march with the 81mm Mortars. Most rucks were fitted with private-purchase shoulder straps, kidney belt, etc.

The typical load in fighting order (helmet, web-gear/LBV, frag vest with plates, weapon) was about 90 lbs. A "light" ruck during offensive operations weighed another 70 lbs, but most weighed more due to the requirement to carry spare ammo for support weapons, radio batteries, etc. Water was the big killer, as aerial resupply could not always be relied upon. You drink 12 litres per day when humping the mountains in the summer over there, and the water weighs a ton. Personal gear (aside from rations) was limited to spare socks, a t-shirt, a poncho liner, sleeping pad, survival kit, and that‘s about it. The rest was ammo, rations, water, and group equipment. The fact is, there is nothing "Light" at all about the Light Infantry. Especially when you are advancing to contact at 10,000‘ elevation, up and down the most rugged mountain terrain imaginable. "300 pounds of high-speed lightweight kit", as we like to say....

Hope you found my comments of some interest/use. There are lots of photos on the internet where you can see what I‘m talking about, but if you need a link let me know."
This quote is from a combat proven officer who posts around here and on other boards once in a while.

Read carefully. I am sure the 3 PPCLI battlegroup appreciates your bogus information. Like I said before, personal kit has a time and place. I consider myself a CF member with "the most minescule amount of knowledge" and I use gucci kit all the time.

Let this serve as a warning: If your a snot-nosed FNG, quit trying to talk smack on these boards. Unless you‘ve walked the walk, we don‘t really want to hear about it.

PS: Change your name, your making me look bad.
 
All the ranting aside thats a good article Infanteer I‘m going to keep that for future reference down the road.
 
If you just started highschool and you‘ve been to a total of 4 classes you wouldn‘t be in a position to tell someone who‘s going to start highschool what it‘s like, would you?

Now if you were a senior at that highschool and you saw this kid with 4 classes under his belt dishing out advice wouldn‘t you think it‘s silly?

Now if you were a senior at this school, saw this kid giving people advice (which was wrong more than half the time) took him aside and said "hey kid your heart is in the right place but your doing more harm then good because half the stuff your passing on is wrong and the other stuff is just rumors (ie the no more carl G thread) and the kid said ya ok your right then turned around and continued to pass on rumors ignoring you (whos put a few years in that school) you might get a little pissed off right?

DONT BE THAT GUY
 
Originally posted by Infanteer:
[qb] Alpha-Charlie, quit yapping about your BMQ time, it means nothing in the whole scheme of things. Try getting at least 1 hook before you start bragging.

[/qb]
Bragging? What the fark? I‘m simply stating what I know. I don‘t go around saying things about stuff I havn‘t learned, now do I? (the CarlG thread... I thought I saw 2000m somewhere else but I was mistaken, shyte happens)....
 
It means there are other people on board who are better qualified to answer the question instead of you, a no hook private recruit with very limited experience.

Unless you know something that you‘re sure the others don‘t know, keep your trap shut.
 
All of this ranting and oversold bulls**t really isn‘t helping. Instead of talking about the issues, 95% of what you say is nothing but ranting on about some s**t I didn‘t even write. ****.

My question has nothing to do with "buying my own assault rifle" or anything like that, read the post before you jump down my throat infanteer. Was simply curious if things today are different than they were about 10yrs ago, when I was in - in regards to buying your own personal combat gear such as better wet weather boots, goggles, etc. That article about the guys in Iraq getting their wives to send them good LBVs just sparked my curiosity as to whether or not soldiers THESE DAYS can buy some of their own combat equipment, if they want. (With certain regulations, obviously).
 
Although I‘ve not had any experience in the military yet, I personally like the look of webbing versus the best. I‘ve worn webbing before (paintball) and have never had a problem with comfort or use.

I know my opinion doesn‘t count for much, but there it is.
 
For webbing I use the South African M83 ptrn in AUSCAM cordura, with fastex, velcro, and press studs. really comfortable, and nice to wear. durable, and of good quality.

Holds 10 F88/M4 30rd mags, two large kidney pouches for gortex, and pers kit, plus a map pouch, and a few others for mag lite torch, etc. Also a 3 litre Camelbak hydration pack too. More room for F1 frags, and M203 40mm rds also.

Bayonet is M9 Aust contract, and my CF 82 ptrn KFS holder.

The other non-issue kit are my boots, the US desert boots with Panama sole, just likemthe CF issue ones.

As for a hard time, not really, as its fd, and webbing and footwear are a personal thing. Going on 10yrs in, and 3 units later, not a wisper or a whinge from anyone!

BTW... 110% tax deductable too!

Cheers,

Wes
 
I know for BMQ you can only use issued kit, however a hydration pack looks very useful for my SQ and MOC courses this summer, that and stalwart Guardian.

I have seen 1 guy on a leadership course wearing that CADPAT hydration pack from wheelers, some staff on my course have been wearing black / olive drab camel packs.
 
How would you use a camelbak with your ruck? do you take the bladder out and put it in the ruck itself?
 
put the bladder into the radio pouch inside the ruck, or on the top pouch
 
Originally posted by D-n-A:
[qb] put the bladder into the radio pouch inside the ruck, or on the top pouch [/qb]
I would disagree with separating the bladder from the remainder of the assembly having carried one for the last 7 years. For what the camelback weighs, keep it intact and strap it to your ruck, or inside your daypack/IPE bag as a complete unit. When you drop your ruck, you may still want to use your camelback, and it becomes problematic without the remainder of the assembly. There are countless ways to strap it to your ruck. It is very easily worn as a complete unit, with either the webbing or the tac vest.

Undoubtedly, a camelback is worth every penny that you spend on one (as an infantryman) if it comes to that and you do not have one issued.
 
I have a camelbak, but I dont know of a good way to attach it to the outside of the ruck(with just the straps on the camelback itself), having it on the webbing isnt a problem for me, just cant wear it on the webbing, when your carrying the rucksack also
 
There are those two cinch (sp?) strap loops on either side of the ruck above the small pockets. Tighten up the straps on the hydro pack and loop them through the straps...I just tried it with my mountain biking Hydrapack, and it worked pretty well. Quick question though...What are those loops for?
 
Originally posted by D-n-A:
[qb] I have a camelbak, but I dont know of a good way to attach it to the outside of the ruck(with just the straps on the camelback itself), having it on the webbing isnt a problem for me, just cant wear it on the webbing, when your carrying the rucksack also [/qb]
Try looping some lightweight bungy cord around the top corners of the ruck, off of the main frame. Use the bungy to hold down the camelback and to wrap the camel back straps around.

Alternatively, use the crappy fake carabiners from those sport drinks to hook the camel back to the tiny loops on either side of the zipper on the top pouch of the 84(?) pattern ruck.

If all else fails stuff it (complete) in the top of the 84(?) pattern ruck and strap the top down good and tight.

64 pattern is simple. Throw it under the valise straps and tighten. Or as an alternative strap it around the valise, then it slips off and on without a problem.

There really are countless solutions to these and other kit dilemmas. Most can be solved with gun tape, carabiners, fastex, para cord(or 550 cord) and bungy cord. Experiment a little bit and find out what works for you. Always take a look at other guys kit, as there is always someone out there with a better way of rigging things.
 
Back
Top