Tac Vest does not make the grade.

[Fishbone Jones]

We're also toying with pitching the idea of the Modular Marsupial Pouch, or the MMP.  But only if the whole thing starts to go south.

Basically, one big pouch with an inner coating of pink, gelatinous goo to hold all your kit inside of it.  Evolution cannot be wrong, marsupials are the wave of the future!  You'll soon see the highest speed, lowest drag of operator's sporting the MMP!

Great : A big, pink pouch to go on top of my big, pink paunch. Sheesh  :blotto:

 

[Fusaki]

Canada institutes a Draft geared at bringing back all the experienced Ex-military, and we get a whole crop of GreenLovingBirkenstockWearingTreeHuggingLeftWingCommieHippies caught up in the process......All of a sudden common sense is back to SOP and SALY.

Funny thing is, I actually did buy a pair of Birkenstocks recently.  I wore them to see the release clerk to ensure I wouldn't be stoplossed. ;D

For the record though, I'm not hanging up my spurs just yet (despite what those in The Regiment would like to believe).  If all goes well I should be a member of the QOR of Canada very shortly - and they didn't even make me turn in my new rucksack as part of the transfer.

Airborne! HUA!

 

[Farmboy]

To my knowledge the PPE system I've described above doesn't yet exist.

Tactical Assault Gear Releasable Rampage Carrier.

 

[Kokanee]

There is a "working group" sitting in Ottawa soon to find a replacement (for overseas use) for the tacvest. To the best of my knowledge, there is only one (1) junior NCO and the rest are all SM's and officers.

The good news is that they have invited private industry, and are interested in a OTS purchase.

 

[Ecco]

There is a "working group" sitting in Ottawa soon to find a replacement (for overseas use) for the tacvest. To the best of my knowledge, there is only one (1) junior NCO and the rest are all SM's and officers.

It occurred 14 to 16 July. 
33 active participants:
-1 x Pte, 5 x Cpl, 10 x MCpl, 5 x Sgt, 6 x WO, 1 x MWO, 3 x Capt, 1 x Maj, 1 x LCol
-Representation from 1, 2 and 3 PPCLI, 1, 2 and 3 RCR, 1, 2 and 3 R22eR, 1 and 2 RCHA, LdSH(RC), RCD, 12 RBC, 5 RGC, 2EW Sqn, CTC Inf School, DAT
-more than 100 operational tours (from 1 to 7)
-more than 450 years of CF experience

By the way, units were tasked to provide users and they decided who (and what rank) to send. 

 

[dangerboy]

It would be interesting to read the results from this working group, and then to read clothe the soldiers rebuttal.

 

[RCR Grunt]

I'm working on it ... wait out.

 

[Kokanee]

It occurred 14 to 16 July. 
33 active participants:
-1 x Pte, 5 x Cpl, 10 x MCpl, 5 x Sgt, 6 x WO, 1 x MWO, 3 x Capt, 1 x Maj, 1 x LCol
-Representation from 1, 2 and 3 PPCLI, 1, 2 and 3 RCR, 1, 2 and 3 R22eR, 1 and 2 RCHA, LdSH(RC), RCD, 12 RBC, 5 RGC, 2EW Sqn, CTC Inf School, DAT
-more than 100 operational tours (from 1 to 7)
-more than 450 years of CF experience

By the way, units were tasked to provide users and they decided who (and what rank) to send.

Thank You for the correction, I've been misinformed. What you are describing sounds great and some good feedback should come out of a session like that. I'll pass that news along w/ a wrap on the head to the fellow who gave me that info

 

[PuckChaser]

There is a "working group" sitting in Ottawa soon to find a replacement (for overseas use) for the tacvest. To the best of my knowledge, there is only one (1) junior NCO and the rest are all SM's and officers.

The good news is that they have invited private industry, and are interested in a OTS purchase.

The member my unit sent said the original message called for Snr NCOs and Major and above to attend. The members of the board that did attend all had the same ideas in mind, and stress-tested the equipment and came up with their top 3 recommendations. I won't mention the ones he told me, in case they are out of order or somehow not on the final report.

 

[ArmyRick]

I find in the CF we too often have the 50% solution instead of the 80% solution. The TAC VEST is an example. It was designed in 2002 and that was prior to our boys being heavily involved in shooting matches (the days of 5 mags to battle).

Some other things I would like to have seen

-HK416 with heavy 16" inch barrel (or a similar design) instead of the C7A2
-SWAT boots instead of the CTS Cadpat boot
-A rucksack designed to be worn with body armour (the new one is not, but we make do)
-Working radios instead of the clownery of 522 and 521 (although I don't mind the PRR for what they are meant for)

 

[daftandbarmy]

I find in the CF we too often have the 50% solution instead of the 80% solution. The TAC VEST is an example. It was designed in 2002 and that was prior to our boys being heavily involved in shooting matches (the days of 5 mags to battle).

Some other things I would like to have seen

-HK416 with heavy 16" inch barrel (or a similar design) instead of the C7A2
-SWAT boots instead of the CTS Cadpat boot
-A rucksack designed to be worn with body armour (the new one is not, but we make do)
-Working radios instead of the clownery of 522 and 521 (although I don't mind the PRR for what they are meant for)

If we're using Maslow's principles, right now I'd settle for decent raingear and a shirt that doesn't launch items into space from your top pockets (dang, there goes my cellphone again!)

 

[Infanteer]

If we're using Maslow's principles, right now I'd settle for decent raingear

Been issued.

and a shirt that doesn't launch items into space from your top pockets (dang, there goes my cellphone again!)

What does a shirt need a top-pocket for?  The body armour covers that.

 

[Dog]

Passed on to the troops of 2 CER from the meeting that occured wrt the tac vest replacement:

http://www.specopsbrand.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductID=40

That was the piece of gear that was selected.

 

[Matt_Fisher]

Passed on to the troops of 2 CER from the meeting that occured wrt the tac vest replacement:

http://www.specopsbrand.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductID=40

That was the piece of gear that was selected.

Rather than post second hand speculation, why don't we wait until RCR Grunt (who actually participated in the working group) put up his AAR on what actually took place.

 

[Towards_the_gap]

Hmm. As far as I recall, our SSM had a list of points from each section with regards to what the troops would like to see. The one I most remember as most common/oft mentioned, was NO ZIPPERS.

And what have they gone and selected? A vest with a FOGB zipper running down the front. If in fact they have selected this one. Nice one......

 

[Fusaki]

Hmm. As far as I recall, our SSM had a list of points from each section with regards to what the troops would like to see. The one I most remember as most common/oft mentioned, was NO ZIPPERS.

And what have they gone and selected? A vest with a FOGB zipper running down the front. If in fact they have selected this one. Nice one......

There's no need to get all poopy pants just yet. 

As Matt_Fisher has pointed out, we have a member of this forum who was actually at the working group.  I don't want to be stealing anyone's thunder, so I'll just say that Dog's info is more than likely incorrect.

I'm sure RCR_Grunt will be by shortly to pass on some first hand info...

 

[Matt_Fisher]

OK,

As I said earlier, guys need to stop speculating about rigs and wait for the AAR to come out from somebody that was actually on the ground at the working group.

FWIW, CPGear had 2 rigs (our MoFOCR and KISS Rig) being evaluated as part of this process, both of which were found to have positive and negative points.  Regarding the negative points, I've been informed informally as to what some folks thought of our rigs and will be doing an updated version of the MoFOCR and KISS Rig to satisfy those criticisms.

Negative points regarding the MoFOCR:
-Buckle closure on the front was found to be difficult to secure.  This will be addressed by doing a version with a more conventional side release buckle opening; The snapdragons serve to reduce the amount of gap between the vest panels, however there must be a consideration made whether reducing vest gap vs. ease of donning the vest is more important, and as such a new buckle system will be developed for an updated version of the rig.
-D Rings on shoulder harness and rear of rig.  This will be addressed by doing a new version of the shoulder harness without the articulted D rings; we've been selling the rig for over 2 years now and have yet to have one be returned for repair or customer reports of a broken D ring, however troops and our customers must have absolute confidence in our equipment, and as such an updated version will be produced.

Negative Points Regarding the KISS Rig
-With the 1.5" webbing shoulder straps, the rig can become entangled when attempting to put the rig on.  We offer a shoulder harness upgrade which eliminates a large part of this entanglement issue, however the rig shown at the working group did not have this shoulder harness upgrade.  To reduce the risk of this entanglement, we're considering making the shoulder harness upgrade a standard feature of the KISS Rig, however the price of the rig would be increased to account for this.
-The Side Release buckles on the front of the rig interefered with shouldering of the rifle.  I'm awaiting some clarification on this point, as there is a large range of variation at which the rig can be positioned on the body, either high on the chest, or lower around the abdomen.  I can see how when wearing the rig higher on the chest, the buckle may interefere with shouldering of a rifle, however a great many other similar rigs on the market would experience the same issue, i.e. Tactical Tailor MAV (both 1 and 2 piece), SO Tech Hellcat/Tomcat rigs, ESSTAC Boar family of rigs, Original SOE MWR, HSGI rigs, etc.

From my contact within DLR-5 that sponsored this trial, the next stage in the search for an interim load carriage platform (interim meaning replacing the tac-vest for operational usage until ISSP comes on line) is to take the data that was gathered at the working group to build a statement of requirement which will allow for another batch of rigs to be purchased for a larger (i.e. company level) trial to take place.  The rigs most likely to be purchased for this trial will be those which most closely match the requirements identified by the working group, i.e. the top 3 rigs chosen by the working group.

After the company level trial takes place, and the feedback will be analyzed, the folks within DLR and DSSPM will develop a load carriage platform and pouch design based on that feedback, i.e. pattern drawings, material and construction specifications, etc.  From there a Request for Proposal (government tender) for approximately 1-2 battlegroup's worth of kit will take place through the normal acquisition channels, i.e. PWGSC/MERX and the Army will have hopefully have a workable load carriage system for operational use, which is modular (i.e. MOLLE/PALS based), and multi-functional.  It's highly unlikely that for the Battlegroup level purchase that DND/PWGSC will go out and buy a commercial off the shelf rig, i.e. Eagle Rhodesian Reconnaissance Rig, or Tactical Tailor MAV, however what they may spec out could be a near clone of that sort of system, which ends up getting made by the most cost compliant/best value bidder here in Canada.

So again, rather than spit out conjecture as to what the outcome of this working group is and what the tac-vest replacment's going to be, lets wait for the AAR, and then follow what happens with respect to DLR-5 pushing this thing forward onto a larger scale trial and the possibility of an eventual buy of 1-2 BGs worth of kit.

 

[Fusaki]

Matt, thanks for the insight.

As an aside, I'm looking forward to seeing a snapdragon-free MoFOCR.  Have you considred incorporating a TT MAV style center adaptor?  This would let you claim back a couple MOLLE rows you lose from the switch to side release buckles.

 

[Matt_Fisher]

Matt, thanks for the insight.

As an aside, I'm looking forward to seeing a snapdragon-free MoFOCR.  Have you considred incorporating a TT MAV style center adaptor?  This would let you claim back a couple MOLLE rows you lose from the switch to side release buckles.

IRT MAV-esque center adaptor, I'm considering some options with that, however if I put on a center flap, it'll block access to the center map pocket zippers, so I've got my thinking cap on concerning how I'm going to get around it and come up with something that works.  Stay tuned for details.

 

[len173]

Just curious, are they looking to replace the tac vest completely (eventually)? Or are they simply looking for a modular system for the TF's in the sandbox?

I've heard guys say that the tac vest is fine for domestic stuff, but not operations. But shouldn't you train with the gear you will deploy with?