The Integrated Soldier System Project (ISSP)

[Matt_Fisher]

As this is a clear ripoff of a presumably patented design, does SORD have any legal recourse to prevent this rig from being contracted for manufacture by the CF?  If this was the MoFOCR, let's say, even though you are no longer associated with them, would CP Gear have grounds for legal action if this was done without their consent?  Is this patent infringement?

As for the plate carrier issue, some questions come to mind...

Are our plates rated as stand alone plates?  That is, can they be worn without a soft armor backing?  If not, then some changes need to be made.  I see one of three routes being taken.

1) Procure new plates that are rated as stand alone;
2) Procure a special cut of soft armor to back the plates and insert them in the carrier pockets as well; or
3) Remove the plate carrying option from this rig altogether.

Option 3 is most likely.  Simply stitch the vertical bar-tacks that divide the MOLLE/PALS columns right through the body of the rig and sew the opening in the bottom shut.  Remove the extra bits that hold the plate out of the back panel.  I say it's most likely as there are times when armor is desireable, but not kit i.e. filling sandbags, riding in a turret in an armored vehicle, etc.  A plate carrier would be desireable in certain situations, however the risk averse CF makes the chances of seeing one issued (at least for that purpose) slim to none.

Using the plate carrier pockets for hydration is a typically Canadian thing to do.  To take something that is inadequate or unsuitable and make the best of it, or take something built for one purpose and employ it in a completely different manner is something our Infantry Corps has been doing quite successfully for generations.  In order to become properly equipped, this attitude of "we'll make it work" needs to be stimied, especially during the T&E phases of equipment procurement.  We deserve better.

Don't get me wrong, it's a good idea, but we shouldn't have to go to those lengths.


This could be somewhat easily done as a non-permanent mod using field repair hardware, some extra 1" webbing, and some DIY ingenuity by the user.


Again, the end user shouldn't be required to modify a brand new piece of gear.

I was told a few months ago through the grapevine that DND had licensed SORD's design for their rigs and pouches.  With that said, even if they hadn't unless something is specifically patented or has some other sort of IP protection, i.e. registered industrial design, design patent, trademark, etc. there's virtually nothing other than crying "Hey you *******, you copied my stuff..." that can be done.  Lots of companies in the nylon business either take somebody else's design and modify it, or outright copy it.  Eagle did some mods to London Bridge's Riverine Warfare H-Harness, and came up with the 'Maritime Load Carriage System', which was then cloned by Blackhawk as their STRIKE line back in 2003.

I don't know for certain, but believe the current CF issued plates are not for stand-alone use.  CANSOFCOM may be different, but not for big Army.  It's a fairly simple fix to build a nylon pouch for a SAPI plate that has the appropriate soft armor on the rear for back face deformation/spalling issues.  Pacific Safety Products, Armorworks Canada, and Allen Vanguard  (the major soft body armor producers in Canada) could easily fabricate something like this, and have it tested and certified.  The SAPI plate would be inserted into that pouch and then the ensemble would be placed into the plate carrier pocket inside the MLCS rig.  Now you have a modular plate carrier platform.

So as long as the rig is adjusted snugly, the extra bulk for the plate carrier pockets probably won't really affect the performance of the rig, as they'll be compressed under the rig against the body.  It's not like you're wearing a CIRAS, which has alot of play in the material because it's designed to accomodate soft body armor panels.  I've worn a SO Tech Callahan plate carrier, and an older TAG plate carrier for range training sessions and they fit fine without the plates inserted.  Plate Carriers without plates are more like a chest rig type system with a full back panel. 

Regarding 'Jerry Rigging' hydration bladders into plate carrier pockets:  You'd be surprised as to what some very high speed units (non-Canadian) are doing with respect to inserting that Source LPS 2L into plate carrier pockets, placing the bladder in front of the strike face.  They want to reduce weight and extraneous bulk, and because they can get away with doing what they want in respect to PPE they actually approached Source to develop a system specifically to do this.

 

[RCR Grunt]

...It's a fairly simple fix...

Fairly simple fixes in the CF still take years... look at the WWB re-sole project.

 

[Matt_Fisher]

Fairly simple fixes in the CF still take years... look at the WWB re-sole project.

I wouldn't be surprised if before too long either CPGear, ICE Tactical, Dropzone, or somebody else have a commercial version of this thing available, with or without some improvements.

 

[RCR Grunt]

So once again troops will have to pay out of pocket for proper equipment... Awesome.

Does the release of these documents indicate that the T&E phase is over?  If not, who's trialling this rig in Canada?

 

[PuckChaser]

If not, who's trialling this rig in Canada?

Probably someone at NDHQ who hasn't been in the field since St.Jean. Then they'll give it to an Inf Bn for a 12 hour assessment period just before the final T&E report is delivered.

 

[RCR Grunt]

Probably someone at NDHQ who hasn't been in the field since St.Jean. Then they'll give it to an Inf Bn for a 12 hour assessment period just before the final T&E report is delivered.

The river of bitterness runs deep I see.

Don't forget, during the 12 hour assessment period the only thing the science wienies will be concerned about is "do you like the color?"  All other objections will be waved aside.

Nothing is too good for the troops, so nothing is what they'll get.

 

[McG]

... who's trialling this rig in Canada?

Where there are eqpt trials in the Army, it should be these guys: http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/cfb_gagetown/english/units/lfteu/index.asp

 

[alexgold]

This is the exact same vest we have in theatre right now actually, we've had them since Wainwright.  It is an awesome vest except it is extremely difficult to put on with the new arm brassards on the frag vest, you almost need a buddy to put it on.  But no its very good and lots of pouches come with it (27 are the baseline plus more for specialty jobs).  So far nobody has tried to make standards at all, but section commanders do have to make sure their guys don't try to put on all the pouches at once because they can and which becomes not practical.  But all in all very good vest, however, we were told that this was only one of three models they were testing so I wasn't aware that they went ahead with this project.  It would be good tough, cause this system looked the best out of the three.

 

[RCR Grunt]

...It is an awesome vest except ...

Please ensure you make this point known to those running the trial along with the other points this thread has brought up regarding this rig.  If your unsure who to bring these points to ask you CoC.  Those participating in the trial are the only chance we have to ensure that proper kit is procured.

...this system looked the best out of the three.

Looks can be deceiving.  IMO it's a POS.

 

[BCBoy]

All of 3VP has been issued this MFR, along with most (if not all) of TF 1-11. We have been using it for the last 5 months or so. The specialty pouches have finally come in.. C9 gunners got issued 2 pouches, grenadiers got 2x quad carriers plus a 12 bomb bandolier. I'd say the general consensus is fairly positive. The only thing i've had a problem with is it's very front heavy, and quite annoying while lying in the prone. Obvious ways to counter that, you just have to switch the pouches around to better suit the user. I've switched my pouches around a few times now, just trying to figure out what I like best. I sure hope they keep this rig around and issue it to all combat arms.



...better than the old rig, designed by Chair Force and completely useless...

 

[medaid]

... *sigh* another case of CF equipment stupidity...

 

[Snaketnk]

Would the front heavy problem be solved if you carry water on your back?

 

[RCR Grunt]

Would the front heavy problem be solved if you carry water on your back?

Yup, right up until you drink the water. 

 

[a_majoor]

I inherited a rig with a somewhat similar layout, and the front strike plate carrier served as a map pocket and FMP holder for me. I don't see a kangaroo pouch as being a total waste of time even if you don't have a plate to put inside.

 

[PJOsborne]

Update on the ISSP Modular load carriage subject - looks like we're getting close to seeing a Request for Proposals soon...

from the site:

Update - Nov. 17, 2011

The ISSP Team is pleased to inform you that we are making every effort to finalize the Request For Proposal in preparation for a February 2012 release to the Government Electronic Tendering Service (GETS).  Due to the upcoming release, all RFP related content will be removed from this website sometime during the month of January 2012.

The feedback and questions received so far have been of great assistance. As a result of several inquiries, we realized that some additional clarification may be required to help potential Bidders better understand the sequence of events related to Systems deliveries and participation in the Performance Evaluation (PE) following the Solicitation closing.  A graphical representation of this sequence of events is available, with tentative timing blocks so that potential bidders have a better time appreciation of the activities involved.  Specific dates on these activities cannot be provided before the Solicitation process is well underway.  Amendments to the schedule may occur should circumstances change.

 

[Redeye]

Odd that they're tendering already. TF 2-12 (Op Attention Roto 1) is going over with SORD rigs - not contracted versions, but actual SORD Australia kit. We were told it's one system on trial, but we're only just getting ready to head over in February.

We've hardly gotten to use them for the time being, but I'm liking mine. The only problem, as someone mentioned, is that it's a bit of a pain in the ass to don. It's a two-man job, really.

We did, however, get told in no uncertain terms that no standard setup/uniformity was to be enforced, other than that the med pouch should be accessible to either hand. People have been experimenting with a variety of configurations.

 

[Matt_Fisher]

The only problem, as someone mentioned, is that it's a bit of a pain in the *** to don. It's a two-man job, really.

What's the worst issue with donning the rig?  Having to put it over your head each time you put it on/take it off?  Or the way that you have to reach to the  back to fasten the buckle?

 

[Snaketnk]

I see dozens of non-combat types donning them perfectly fine every day at work...by themselves.

 

[Hurricane]

I have minor difficulty putting mine on. It can be buckled up successfully alone, however a buddy system always makes things easier. As far as the front being heavy that I noticed someone mentioned may be a problem, myself I have it adjusted so that the top of the back portion of the rig nestles right into the collar of the issued fragmentation vest and its working for me so far. Also, the mention of a lack of "water bottle" pouch, the 1L Canteen fits into the supplied Large Utility Pouch perfectly however many people I have seen choose not to utilize it. The only issue I have come across so far is the large velcro flap on the triple mag pouches could be somewhat of a hindrance when changing mags. Overall, I would prefer this over the current issued tac vest (No not just because it is new).

 

[PuckChaser]

We've hardly gotten to use them for the time being, but I'm liking mine. The only problem, as someone mentioned, is that it's a bit of a pain in the *** to don. It's a two-man job, really.

Are you using the X straps or the harness for the back? I can get my SORD rig on with the x straps just fine alone, but have noticed the harness is very loose unless you're more round than tall and it can be difficult to reach the buckles behind your back.

One thing I'd like to see is the straps on the X harness being a lot longer. I'm 6'1" and 170 lbs and have to have them straps maxed out to wear it. It would be a no-go for anyone wanting to use those straps if they were any larger than I am. I agree the pouches leave something to be desired, but hopefully that can get captured in the feedback session mid-tour. I like the velcro SORD uses for the pouches, just not the pouches themselves.