"The stuff the army issues is useless" and "no non-issue kit over seas!"

[vonGarvin]

As some have stated, the wearing of rigs other than the TV is only for the look cool factor.  I'm left wondering that if the TV is so great, why don't the JTF2 use it, or any other SF unit for that matter?  When these world-class fighters buy their own RAVs, CIRAS, or quality made rig, they're doing it for LCF? 
Cheers

The JTF-2, and other SF units have other needs that the TV doesn't meet.  They do a different job than an infantryman "of the line".  Take the example I gave earlier: why don't all cops have the stuff that the SERT teams have?  Remember that the cop on the beat has more "mundane" tasks to do, yet all of them can potentially lead to a gunfight.  The SERT guys are going in doors with a specific job in mind.
Our JTF 2 guys don't have LAVs to jump out of, or LUVWs for that matter: they have (according to their ads) Hummers and the like.  (Hum-Vees?)  Whatever.  Heck, they don't even use GPMGs in the SF role for what I can figure.
So, don't compare apples and oranges.

 

[Kal]

I'm speaking way outta' my lane here, so please forgive me.  Do most SF guys first and second line gear differ that much from a light infantry soldier?  Rifle mags, pistol mags, smoke, frags, 40mm, LMG ammo, GPS, water, personal med kit, personal radio, strobe, chem lights, writing material, flashlight, NVGs, gummy bears ;D etc.  Sure they'll have a extra things that go in their third line, but is their first and second line load-out so different?  I may be wrong, but GO!!, CFL, KevinB, Mike_R23A, BigRed, I'm sure they can correct me.

Cheers

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

So what about those that do have our needs in other militaries.  I don't see our vest being copied by them.
"Heck, they don't even use GPMGs in the SF role for what I can figure."
I don't think you can back that up.  The JTF are more functionally then door kickers.  They do what's called Green ops as well which is similar to what we do.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Not door kicking in this role either.

 

[GO!!!]

Von Garvin,

You are obviously of the "old school, because I said so" crew.

YOU ARE WRONG.

If everyone thought like you we would still be forming squares in puttees and kilts while officers rode on horseback.

<nasal british accent>

"Hogwash, I do say Higgins, these troops only want breech loading rifles because they would look more dashing, and be equipped like the imperial guard"

"We shall overcome the enemy with fire discipline and marching in ranks - it worked for my father, and it will work for your son"

The reason advances in military technology were made in the first place was that dinosaurs were told to sum up and the new kit was adopted. The militaries that adapted the fastest and best were the most successful.

Remember the Poles charging German tanks on horseback?
Iraqi Republican Guard tank units being destroyed at range by US armour with superior weaponry?
Russian t-34 rounds bouncing off Panzer tanks?
Toothless, luddite taliban helplessly shaking their fists at US fast air right before being incinerated?

We have superior technology available, we are a wealthy nation with vast resources and relatively few soldiers to kit. You are arguing just for the sake of doing so, and attitudes like yours will require the dying words of a section of Privates to be "if only we had a few more mags" before being changed.

Give it up.

 

[Troopasaurus]

I think the overall outcome of this discussion is that modular kit would be the best for the job. That is the reason why i would still rather use the 82 pattern webbing over the tacvest... i can actually carry all the kit i need to get the job done on with that kit, not to mention my tacvest is already ripping after 1 year of reserve use.

MOLLE would work best in my mind because it is already a well known way of creating a stable modular platform and is used by many different allied countries, ie Germany, US, Dutch, Polish are getting it, heck the Iraqi army is using molle. I'm sure there are more but that's just from a quick scan of pictures i have.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Remember the Poles charging German tanks on horseback?

Never happened. And the Poles had the most professional army in Europe, probably the world, in 1939.

Bad example.

 

[Britney Spears]

Come along now vonGarvin, you know as well as the rest of us that JTF-2 can and often do operate as essentially light infantry with beards and long hair, and they sure as heck would not use something as silly as our issued TV. If JTF-2 is too high speed for you, try the 75th Ranger Rgmt, or any half modern light infantry outfit.  The "LCF" argument is ass-backwards. I have much more important things to do that "look cool". The only person who is out for LCF is the guy who wants his entire unit kitted out like the clone army so they "look cool" on the parade square. 

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Michael Dorosh I'm fairly sure I was told in high school history that Poland tried to defend itself against the Blitzkrieg with horse Calvary amoungst other outdated equipment (compared to Germany).

 

[Michael OLeary]

Michael Dorosh I'm fairly sure I was told in high school history that Poland tried to defend itself against the Blitzkrieg with horse Calvary amoungst other outdated equipment (compared to Germany).

CFL,  see "Tank" by Patrick Wright, Viking 2000 (ISBN 0-670-03070-8).

The author describes the evolution of the Polish Lancers vs. German tank myth, and based on interviews with Polish cavalrymen of the 1939 period and Polish historian, found no sunstantive evidence to uphold the story.

 

[MJP]

O'Connor said he and Prime Minister Stephen Harper spoke to hundreds of troops on a tour of the Middle Eastern country last week.

"Nobody complained about equipment to us. In fact they were giving us the opposite story."

He said the critical question to his review is whether the complaints are isolated or widespread.

Nobody complained to him about the equipment because we were told point blank that it wasn't the time nor the place to do so.  We (as a TF) launched on the CDS when he came to town about issued kit among a thousand other things.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Michael Dorosh I'm fairly sure I was told in high school history that Poland tried to defend itself against the Blitzkrieg with horse Calvary amoungst other outdated equipment (compared to Germany).

It's a myth, as Michael O'Leary points out. Check out Polish September Campaign on wikipedia also, one of the best military articles on that site.  It's also a myth that the Germans used their armour every effectively in Poland; they were mostly relegated to infantry support rather than shock action.

The Poles had a first rate army; being stabbed in the back by the Russians didn't help, nor did their geography which meant they had to defend their borders instead of pulling back to easily defended river lines.

 

[vonGarvin]

Not door kicking in this role either.

So, you want NIKE hats too? 
"Door kicking" is an idiom for what they do.

 

[vonGarvin]

Von Garvin,
You are obviously of the "old school, because I said so" crew.
YOU ARE WRONG.
If everyone thought like you we would still be forming squares in puttees and kilts while officers rode on horseback.
<nasal british accent>
"Hogwash, I do say Higgins, these troops only want breech loading rifles because they would look more dashing, and be equipped like the imperial guard"
"We shall overcome the enemy with fire discipline and marching in ranks - it worked for my father, and it will work for your son"
The reason advances in military technology were made in the first place was that dinosaurs were told to sum up and the new kit was adopted. The militaries that adapted the fastest and best were the most successful.
Remember the Poles charging German tanks on horseback?
Iraqi Republican Guard tank units being destroyed at range by US armour with superior weaponry?
Russian t-34 rounds bouncing off Panzer tanks?
Toothless, luddite taliban helplessly shaking their fists at US fast air right before being incinerated?
We have superior technology available, we are a wealthy nation with vast resources and relatively few soldiers to kit. You are arguing just for the sake of doing so, and attitudes like yours will require the dying words of a section of Privates to be "if only we had a few more mags" before being changed.
Give it up.

Thank you, "Go!", because you've just displayed your ignorance.
Ever hear of a place called Koresten?  Probably not (hint: a very successful Russian Cavalry attack in WWII)
As for the T-34 rounds "bouncing" off of "Panzer tanks" (sic), well, let me tell you something about the T34.  When the Germans first encountered it in July, 1941, they were shocked.  Along with the KV tanks.  The result?  In mid 1943, the germans fielded the Panzerkampfwagen V, also known as the Panther.  Very similar lines to the T34.  Better 75mm gun, but until then, various versions of the Mk IV Panzerkampfwagen had to "make do".
How's about YOU giving it up, or provide sound arguments why we need something other than the TV.  And, how it could be improved.  Some arguments have made sense (eg: GPMG gunners don't need mag pouches, roger that).  Don't just offer a problem, offer a solution.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

I guess I'll go back and bitch slap my history teacher.  Thanks I had no idea.
Nike hats sure I'll take one if your buying.
P.S.  I have already stated that I don't want a chest rig to look different or for the LCF. 
You can call them pizza pie men for all I care you implied that they do different jobs and therefore have different kit.  I have showed in 2 different pictures that they also do similar jobs to us as well.  (and there not using the TV in those situations)

 

[KevinB]

.  Some arguments have made sense (eg: GPMG gunners don't need mag pouches, roger that).  Don't just offer a problem, offer a solution.

C9 gunners dont either 

We have offered a number of solutions - so far you've alluded to them being impractical. 

 

[vonGarvin]

I guess I'll go back and ***** slap my history teacher.  Thanks I had no idea.
Nike hats sure I'll take one if your buying.
P.S.  I have already stated that I don't want a chest rig to look different or for the LCF. 
You can call them pizza pie men for all I care you implied that they do different jobs and therefore have different kit.  I have showed in 2 different pictures that they also do similar jobs to us as well.  (and there not using the TV in those situations)

You'll have to buy your own hat  
Point taken re: similar jobs, however, consider the first.  Circa 2002.  It's hard to tell what they're wearing (other than CADPAT), and IIRC, the TV was issued late 2002/early 2003. I first got mine in April or May 2003.  Incidentally, I wore it on two deployments, and numerous FTXs, and it was "undamaged" when I turned it in upon posting. (This is in regards to others who have had theirs fall apart after two or three exercises).
As for the second shot, that guy is doing a definately different role that you or I would do (unless you're on a close protection detail, perhaps).
In order to elaborate on the differences, one argument stated the need for 10+ magazines (plus other stuff, naturally).  That's fine, and the TV can accomodate it.  Also consider that the guy in the second picture probably doesn't have a CQ/SQ/BQ readily available to resupply him as required.  He is a more "stand alone, because you are alone" type of guy.  An infantryman in a rifle company isn't.  He/she is part of a larger group of people, and yes I understand that there are times when they could be alone.
But one point not brought up (just thought of it) is regarding the old-school "raids" we used to do.  Remember how we dumped this, brought extra that?  VERY specialised.  We weren't like that all the time, just for those "mission specific" operations, lasting a few hours or so. 
But for the run-of-the-mill guy out there, the kit we have is actually pretty good: it ain't junk.
Besides, it's not about the kit.  If it were, the German "Panzer Tanks" would never have defeated the French in WWII.  The French had better tanks, with much more armour protection  than the Panzer Mk II and Mk III (which made up the majority of the German Panzerwaffe in 1940).  It was the application of the tools at hand, ALL available tools (STUKAs, local air supremacy, concentration of force, surprise, etc etc) that won the battle for the Germans.  Same in Poland.  Same in Russia (for the most part).
The T 34 was mentioned earlier.  It outclassed ALL German armour in terms of Firepower, Mobility and Protection (the three key characteristics of tanks anywhere).  Yet the Germans destroyed a brazilian of them.  How?  Through the application of that which they had (think of the Anti Aircraft gun, the 88, which turned out to be the most effective tank destroying weapon they had)
So, anyway, these are just my opinions.  It was free, and IMHO, worth every penny

Garvin out

Now, on to more important topics: will the Leafs or Habs emerge victorious tonight and Saturday?

 

[DG-41]

Besides, it's not about the kit.  If it were, the German "Panzer Tanks" would never have defeated the French in WWII.

But that being said, if I was going to send you back in time to fight in WW2, would you want a Sherman or a Panther?

I know I'd want a Leopard....

And while the Canadian Corps was arguably the best fighting force in Europe in 1918, and unarguably amongst the top 5, they were only able to achieve that level of success - almost all of which was driven by training and doctrine - after they had ditched the Ross, and replaced it with the Lee-Enfield.

Kit doesn't win wars by itself, but those who want to win wars are better served by having the best kit. And seriously poor kit can undermine the best soldiers.

Now I don't think the TV is anywhere near as bad as the Ross Rifle was, so don't accuse me of hyperbole. But if shortfalls have been identified with the current kit, and if replacements that don't suffer from the same shortfalls are readily available, why not address the shortfalls?

DG

 

[mudgunner49]

But that being said, if I was going to send you back in time to fight in WW2, would you want a Sherman or a Panther?

I know I'd want a Leopard....

And while the Canadian Corps was arguably the best fighting force in Europe in 1918, and unarguably amongst the top 5, they were only able to achieve that level of success - almost all of which was driven by training and doctrine - after they had ditched the Ross, and replaced it with the Lee-Enfield.

a. Kit doesn't win wars by itself, but those who want to win wars are better served by having the best kit. And seriously poor kit can undermine the best soldiers.


Now I don't think the TV is anywhere near as bad as the Ross Rifle was, so don't accuse me of hyperbole. But if shortfalls have been identified with the current kit, and b. if replacements that don't suffer from the same shortfalls are readily available, why not address the shortfalls?
DG

a. EXACTLY; and

b. Because the replacements don't come from the fevered, self-aggrandizing minds at CTS, and would (therefore) reflect poorly on them...


blake

 

[Recce41]

Fellas
When I was at selection in 93 and called in 98 for a position. You had a chose what to wear. IE issued, or loc purch. So unless that has changed, what would you take. Remember they have a Loc Purch budget.
You cannot compare regular units with JTF. They are tasked with different tasks as we all know. Even their green tasks could be different as in Bosnia.
Who knows, the CSOR may soon be different just as the Rangers have some different kit issued.