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

[armyvern]

No one takes issues during training as serious as issues when bullets are flying...
Thanks.

Bullshit. STOP making excuses. Why don't you put some effort where your words are. Write one up and photocopy it.

Don't talk about passing it on. Write it up -- AND pass it on.

Cripes almighty -- it's NOT that difficult of a concept to grasp.

So, as I've tired to make clear; I AM NOT AGAINST THE SYSTEM... I like the system.. I think it could work... I'm more annoyed at the people who impede the system or just don't get involved.. and I can see room for improvement.  But that's just me.

Yes, all those soldiers who talk but don't action. Me too.

 

[Roy Harding]

What she said.

 

[aesop081]

No one takes issues during training as serious as issues when bullets are flying...

So now who's fault is it ? Is it the system's fault that soldiers dont take things seriously during training ? Or is it the systems fault for not taking the soldiers seriously ? If they dont do their part, how can the system know to take them seriously ?

And as much "experience" I have (all 3 weeks), it doesn't amount to much more than war stories and bad dreams.

BS

You have enough to see a problem and you have enough to know what to do about it. You want to be a leader some day, get off your ass and do something about it.

 

[RHFC_piper]

Leave a stack by the Class A sign in sheet - along with a sign detailing what it's all about.  Twist a few arms if you have to - get a few Pl WOs and/or Sect Comds onside - I'm sure you can make it happen.  While you're at it - talk to friends in OTHER units - give THEM a stack of the UCRs you've filled out.

Heh... yeah... 'bout that.  It may come as a surprise (sarcasm), but I'm not exactly well liked at my unit... at least not by those in the rifle coy who have any say in anything...  I've pretty much been buried in a corner of the building until something happens to change my situation... and I pretty much stay out of the way of the TRG coy... for many reasons... mostly 'cause I don't "fit" into the trg plan.

This isn't a new thing either.  Otherwise I would have picked a different screen name other than PIPER.... Before I deployed I was shuffled off to the band because of personal issued between me and those of greater tactical importance... long story...

Anyway, the point being; if I go a-meddling, I will not get a happy response.. but I do what I can..

But... either way... I want things to change, not for my sake... I'm pretty sure I won't be in the need of good tactical kit again... but for the sake of others going over.

So now who's fault is it ? Is it the system's fault that soldiers dont take things seriously during training ?

oh no... I'm not touching that one. 

You have enough to see a problem and you have enough to know what to do about it.

I've seen just as many problems in the 9 years I've been in, the only difference now is the extra holes and the glory stories I'll probably be telling when I'm 80, drinkin in a legion... but it will, of course go from 3 weeks to 3 years... and it will be winter... knee deep snow... and the taliban will be cyborgs with lazers... millions of them.  And it wouldn't be an A-10; it will be 30 A-10s and a couple guided missiles...

But... as it stands... my say is a drop in a bucket.  and the way I see it; I'm not unique in any way.  There are lots of us who've been there, and most of them have been there longer than me. 

I'll do my part to affect change, but I'm just a bit pessimistic... I can't help it.

You want to be a leader some day, get off your *** and do something about it.

To be quite honest; I'm thinking of being able to run some day...  I'm not so worried about being a leader... especially with my unit. 
besides... for now, I can deal with where I am... but only for so long.  I have a lot of decisions to make in the near future and the forces seem to be slipping away from them more and more.


But, back to the topic.  Yes, I believe the system can change.  No, I don't think it will be soon.. Call me a pessimistic asshole, but all I've seen since I've been home is roadblocks.

 

[armyvern]

10000 drops in the bucket will fill and overflow the pail.

 

[aesop081]

Piper, i give up....i realy do.

:

 

[RHFC_piper]

Piper, i give up....i realy do.

:

Fair enough... we'll call it a draw.

 

[aesop081]

Fair enough... we'll call it a draw.

Certainly not a draw.

I'm not the one stuck with this inferior and inadequate kit.

 

[Roy Harding]

Piper:

You can't reasonably take an argument about a system that you dislike and turn it into a personal story.  And that's what you've tried to do.

It doesn't MATTER if you're "well liked" in your unit.  You have a valid point of view and the experience to back it up.

DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

You've been given some extremely good suggestions by Vern - backed up by others.  What's stopping you?  If you're already unpopular in your unit, then you have little to lose - and much to gain for those following you.

 

[RHFC_piper]

Certainly not a draw.

I'm not the one stuck with this inferior and inadequate kit.

True.. But honestly; neither am I. 

My original post which started this heated debate, was simply to point out the obvious reasons why kit is needed and a lot of troops aren't doing anything about it.  I am pretty much in agreement with you and vern in that people need to get off their asses and fix the problem... but at the same time, I see why it's not happening. 
Really, I'm not trying to bring up the issue of what I need to do... I know what I need to do and I've done it... hell, I pissed and moaned to the LFCA commander about kit and deficiencies with said kit during an LFCA leadership conference I was asked to speak at, as well as a meeting with him directly and on many other occasions when I am in the company of those who are in a position to address the issue.  I just have a hard time believing there isn't a better way... or that it should take so damn much to see the problem and address it... thats the point I'm trying to make.

I know what needs to be done.. I've done what I can... I'll probably do a little more before I'm done here... But I just can't have faith in a system in which I have seen very little results.
But before I go any further... I think I'm done here. 


I'm sure we will see a million more posts and threads on these boards about kit issues and like I said before; there should just be a Sticky with instructions on how to address the problem... beyond that, the whole discussion on the issues of kit can be summed up as I've stated before;  This piece of kit sucks ===> here's a UCR ====> here's how you submit it.... this is the reoccurring theme for every discussion on kit... of any kind.




and as for what I meant by "draw";  Ref; Monty Python and the holy grail (black night sans limbs). 

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Temporary lock for a cool down.
Bruce


EDIT: Open

 

[KevinB]

Okay I aksed Bruce to re-open this thread so I could post this one.  I had been trying to post for a bnit but the firewall where I was was letting me IM but not post -- I'm over at my Team Villa now and so I am GTG.

As part of the B Coy 1VP UCR guys from RotoII we sat down and wrote several UCR’s on items like the TV, Body Armour GenIV, Holster, TRIAD-I, etc.
It was collated from the company – and formulated into one UCR for each item – and send off on the Coy 2 I/C (Hollywood Dale) ‘s signature – after being reviewed by Maj. B who had CO status for the Op.
  CTS had asked the units 3VP, 1CER, LdSH and us to write one per unit (and I think they then later asked for just one from the TF) – the justification was that one concise one taking in the thoughts from the units was better than a whole slew of individuals ones.  That made sense at the time to us.  However it seems now that these specific units UCR’s are now being use/viewed as an individual complaint – rather than 400 peoples thoughts about what a piece of shit this stuff is.  So obviously CTS is playing a game, and is being proven not to care about the needs of the combat troops, but to protect several ego’s involved in this.  This is why several troops who have devoted a lot of time and effort have not seen the results.  I have heard from some TF1-06 troops that CTS asked the same things (hmm wonder why  : )
  Its utterly immoral and bordering on criminal to me – if Canada had a useful Parliamentary system I’d be urging troops to phone their MP – its a great tool in the USA to get your congressman(or woman) to dig into the corruption and rot sometimes occurring in the system.

Additionally UCR complains have also been deleted and altered online -- having the paper copy and the #'s of some I can only ask myself -- what sort of solider would so such a thing and is ones ego/pet project really more import than troops lives?

  Vern has brought up the best method to get this situation rectified.
Do a collective UCR
Copy them
Sign them
Forward them to the UCR dude at your unit and have the CO sign them
  *Vern points out a UCR Officer and CO may get a little incited if some MWO or Cpt is deleting or moddifiying their UCR's - and its trackable...

I would recommend that any of the Officers and NCO's reading this -- sit down with their troops - put pen to paper and make a UCR on each and every item that is deficient.
  Collated them - and do as vern recommended.


lastly put in a big dip of Skoal or redman and dont let the TV get you down  ^-^

 

[armyvern]

*Vern points out a UCR Officer and CO may get a little incited if some MWO or Cpt is deleting or moddifiying their UCR's - and its trackable...

I'm sure I used a harsher term in that PM than "incited" to describe how the CO & Unit UCR co-ordinator should react if/when this occurs!!  >

Nice pic Kev.

Nada oaklies?

 

[McG]

On checking the open UCRs to DSSPM, I found only 2 on the Tac Vest (though I did not go through every one of the thirty-one UCRs without any subject and it is possible there may be one or two more).  On looking through some of the no-subject UCRs, I found that they all typically lacked NSN, official name & any common name for the item being reported.  How do the individuals submitting the UCR expect Ottawa to know what to fix if the originator cannot even manage to identify the problem kit (or identify themselves so that the LCMM can ask questions).

It seems to me that, in addition to emphasising the need to do UCRs, there must also be an emphasis on including enough information for someone to understand and resolve the problems.  Consider the following no-subject UCRs actually submitted with only the following information:

ROPE TOO STIFF KNOTS BECOME UNTIED

Which rope?

SNAPLINK FAILURE ON FIRST DAY USAGE

Which snaplink & how did it fail?

SUNGLASSES ARE UNSUITABLE FOR DESERT CONDITIONS

Why are they unsuitable?

IMPROPER MATERIAL OF LENSE FITTED INTO SAFETY GLASSES

What is the deficiency in the material (scratch resistance, ballistic protection, colour, other)?

DIFFICULTY IN REMOVING EMPTY MISSILE TUBES FROM LAUNCHERS

What is the difficulty & which missile system?

INABILITY OF EQUIPMENT TO MEET SPECIALIZED OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Which equipment, what specialized operational requirements, and how does the unnamed equipment fail to meet the undefined requirements?

Without hunting down any formal UCR guide, I would recommend (based on the information requirements that I would have) the following information be included as a minimum:
What is the equipment (I wouldn’t care if you can’t find NSN or formal name, just give me something to identify the item)?
What was the deficiency/problem?
How, when & where was the deficiency/problem noted?
What is the operational impact of the deficiency/problem?
How can the deficiency/problem be rectified (if known)?

.. most importantly, GIVE THE UCR A SUBJECT THAT IDETIFIES THE KIT OF CONCERN!!!  This subject is what will be seen by anyone done a casual scan of UCRs & if you don’t identify the kit in the subject then the kit will not stand out as needing attention.

Finally, when you submit a UCR, an email is generated to inform the tech authority in Ottawa.  Add your immediate supervisor to be CC’ed.  Your supervisor should then add substantiating comments to the UCR and CC his/her supervisor on the email generated from that.

FILL OUT THIS PAPERWORK AND SUBMIT IT HERE!! (add link and address).

From DWAN: http://dgmssc.ottawa-hull.mil.ca/ucrs/frameset.asp

 

[McG]

... and here is the official guidance (DWAN): http://dgmssc.ottawa-hull.mil.ca/ucrs/Documents/UCR_CFTO.pdf

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

With all due respect, and acknowledging that I have never even seen a 'tacvest'........I find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe that the number of UCR's is at the level they[whomever they are] say it is.


I would like to see the inside of their shredding machine because, unless just about everyone on this site is lying, there should be more than that just from army.ca members.......

 

[armyvern]

With all due respect, and acknowledging that I have never even seen a 'tacvest'........I find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe that the number of UCR's is at the level they[whomever they are] say it is.


I would like to see the inside of their shredding machine because, unless just about everyone on this site is lying, there should be more than that just from army.ca members.......

As KevB pointed out, Units had been requested by CTS to file one/Unit and, in one case, ONE UCR on behalf of the whole TF. Kev also stated that some UCRs were "disappearing" off the system. I recommended then, if that's the case, WHY isn't the CO or the Unit UCR co-ordinator (who assigns the serial tracking number to the UCR and submits electronically) screaming bloody blue murder when their UCRs disappear? If this has occured, the Unit UCR co-ord SHOULD have the copy -- and he should be tracking them, hastening them & raising the alarm bells when they disappear or are modified from the original. If this IS occuring -- then the UNit UCR co-ordinator would be the person with the "proof" and that should be actionned immediately via other means to obtain an explanation as to it's occurance at a higher level in the CoC than those who would be able to delete those UCRs.

I posted the below links that MCG has reposted today on this very site, along with the user guide and step by step instructions for their proper and full completion and processing. They were posted in a TV bitch thread 2 years ago with a comment to PM me to obtain a copy of the UCR.

As I also posted yesterday a full TWO people actually contacted me to obtain the UCR form (the linked version below was 'down' at that time, ergo I would have to send out a copy via email). ONE more person asked me for a copy yesterday. Eerily enough, no one who's complaining openly in the threads about this kit has requested that UCR from me.

You make a good point though -- there's a whole lot of bitching on this site, but very very little action by those pers doing the bitching.

 

[COBRA-6]

On the other hand, how many UCR's are initiated but due to incorrect/incomplete information, procedural confusion or CoC inaction don't make it to the end OPI? Just like many of the CF98's that I've submitted through the years...

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

As KevB pointed out, Units had been requested by CTS to file one/Unit and, in one case, ONE UCR on behalf of the whole TF.

But yesterday you said something the lines that the ONLY way to make CTS notice is to "flood the system".

Sounds to me like they already had a reservoir dam built beforehand......

I'm not disagreeing with ya Vern, but niether am I disagreeing with someone like RHFC Piper, its just that sometimes knowing SFA is a luxury that makes it easier to sit in the middle and question things that have been presented.

Kinda like our criminal system Judges,........know nothing but expect everyone to listen. ;D

 

[KevinB]

I think Vern is just politely explaining how to work the system.

  CTS wants 1 UCR per item for ea. unit
  which then allows for
  CTS/DLR to use those UCR's as "individual complaints

The counter to that method - is to flood them.  They may not like it -- but they broke the rules when they rebutt the UCR filled out in good faith by troops of the unit.