RCPalmer
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I think the real question becomes, how many times are we going to through this process, only to see it fail again? I remember seeing the first trial temperate boots in CADPAT (which, apart from being as ugly as sin, were not a terrible design) in field use back in 2005. That is a longer time period than WW2 and the Korean Wars combined. Soldiers who joined during that trial will be up for their CDs in a few months. At some point, the CoC needs to say uncle, and make hard decisions to find workable solutions.
The combat bra (individual allowance) option appears to have been investigated and rejected due to the associated TB regulations.
At this point, we would be better off to publish a list of acceptable boots, make soldiers buy them with their own money (which so many are doing already), and then consider that expense as part of the next compensation review. If it works for the U.S. Army, I see no reason it couldn't work for us. They capture that expense through a uniform upkeep allowance. Maybe we will decide that the personal expense is reasonable considering existing compensation, or perhaps we can parlay that into a .5% salary increase in a year or two.
Ultimately, the CoC has a responsibility to deliver on government directed defence capabilities, and boots are an essential component of delivering on virtually any defence capability, just like rifles, helmets, pencils and toilet paper. Would the CoC tolerate a failure of the supply system to deliver toilet paper? Additionally, the cost of the staff effort associated with this program is likely quite prohibitive, and could have been much more usefully allocated to the acquisition of more complex systems like vehicles or weapon systems.
I attended a briefing a few months ago where a very smart WO challenged the visiting DLR rep on this topic. His comments went something like this, "Stop worrying about boots, the troops are solving that problem for themselves...focus on something they can't buy like anti-armor weapons".
One way or another, they should have figured out a way to solve this problem before now, and given the current state of play (which does not fill me with confidence), should still be looking at sustainable alternatives.
The combat bra (individual allowance) option appears to have been investigated and rejected due to the associated TB regulations.
At this point, we would be better off to publish a list of acceptable boots, make soldiers buy them with their own money (which so many are doing already), and then consider that expense as part of the next compensation review. If it works for the U.S. Army, I see no reason it couldn't work for us. They capture that expense through a uniform upkeep allowance. Maybe we will decide that the personal expense is reasonable considering existing compensation, or perhaps we can parlay that into a .5% salary increase in a year or two.
Ultimately, the CoC has a responsibility to deliver on government directed defence capabilities, and boots are an essential component of delivering on virtually any defence capability, just like rifles, helmets, pencils and toilet paper. Would the CoC tolerate a failure of the supply system to deliver toilet paper? Additionally, the cost of the staff effort associated with this program is likely quite prohibitive, and could have been much more usefully allocated to the acquisition of more complex systems like vehicles or weapon systems.
I attended a briefing a few months ago where a very smart WO challenged the visiting DLR rep on this topic. His comments went something like this, "Stop worrying about boots, the troops are solving that problem for themselves...focus on something they can't buy like anti-armor weapons".
One way or another, they should have figured out a way to solve this problem before now, and given the current state of play (which does not fill me with confidence), should still be looking at sustainable alternatives.