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

[PJOsborne]

FYI the switch from 7.62 to 5.56 was in 1986.
Thanks for all the input.
ST
----- Original Message -----
From: Pat Osborne
To: staylor@herald.ca
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 7:57 PM
Subject: Your article ref: Cpl Beaulieu


Mr. Taylor,

I would hope that you will take the time to educate yourself on a few points in your article:

1. The C7 magazines in fact hold 30 rounds of 5.56mm. Normally we are issued with five of these magazines, which means a total of 150 rounds. On paper, we are supposed to carry a bandolier of 100 rounds on stripper clips for reloading. This is a practice that was probably started back in the cold war. I've yet to actually see one of these bandoliers, let alone be issued one of them for fighting in the course of my 3 years as an Infantry Officer.

2. Granted, I don't have operational experience, but I am fortunate to talk in person to members of my unit who have in fact served in Afghanistan. Soldiers leaving the wire are required to carry ten (10) magazines, minimum. You might question the wisdom of doing this given the fact that most of our casualties are indeed from IEDs etc; however, all of the Afghanistan veterans i have talked to have repeated to me the common sense and the basic wisdom in having more ammunition on hand. "It is better to have it and not use it than to not have it and want it when you need it" comes to mind.

3. You condescendingly suggest that the good Cpl wear a vest designed to carry the 15 magazines, extra sidearm magazines, and force him to wear it all the time. Load carriage is an issue of great contention between the soldiers on the ground who fight with the vest and those in charge of issuing the vest. Modular, combat proven vests have been in existence for some time that allow soldiers to tailor the pouches on their vest for whatever combat task they are assigned. You make it seem like the CF needs to design a vest for the Cpl since no vest exists that could possibly carry those horrific loads... when in fact finding a vest that can carry 15 magazines and 2x 9mm magazines plus all the rest is not only easy; it's very likely that the vest in question is more durable and much more comfortable than the issue vest. And that doesn't even touch on how much more versatile the modular vest is in comparison. I have worn a chest rig that carried 10 loaded C7 magazines, three pistol magazines, two smoke grenades, maps, message pad, compass, gps and radio PLUS 6L of water, and it was actually quite snug and comfortable. If i was allowed to wear it during my training and into combat, i certainly would, without a second thought.

4. Soldiers loads weigh quite a bit. This is a fact of life. I don't mind carrying extra ammunition and I don't mind the weight involved either, provided at least that the load carriage system is up to the task. In case it needs stating, the Tactical Vest being issued certainly is not.

5. With regard to the Bianchi UM-84 holster in question; it isn't actually designed for the Browning Hi-Power. It's designed to fit the larger M9 Beretta. As such, the fit is not perfect and the pistol isn't secured properly, nor is it seated in such a way that it prevents people (other than the wearer) from drawing the pistol. A modern holster like the Safariland 6004 or the Blackhawk Serpa holster are sized to fit the pistol and have locking mechanisms that hold the pistol in place and prevent someone from wresting the pistol from the holster unless they're wearing it. Military thinking with regards to pistols is always behind the curve, usually a decade or two. Pistols, by the way, can also be used for more than simple self-defence. As an example: If police officers can conduct cordon and search operations in side a building, there's no reason a soldier can't (provided he is properly trained for the task). In a confined space, a pistol is sometimes preferable to the rifle.

I hope you would take the time to educate yourself on the above points. It kind of hurts your credibility when you write articles as an expert on the subject - and you haven't done your homework. FYI - we stopped using the 20rd magazines back in 1982 when we first got the C7s.

His reply is at the very top. I got the 1982 reference from Wikipedia, which was probably not a good idea.
Also I realise that the point I made about the use of pistols may be controversial; I added it just as food for thought.

 

[daftandbarmy]

As for Scott Taylor -- the guy in an utter idiot, a clueless moron from a bygone day ( with what 4-6 years in and ZERO combat experience) -- he should STFU before he makes a bigger *** of himself, or someone walks up and throat punches him.  My left toe has more knowledge about militayr and combat operations than he does.

Hold on there, I'm pretty sure that he's the most lethal weapon in our arsenal. Didn't he help destroy the whole Airborne Regiment, single handedly, with one roll of film? As I recall, he thought he was doing the troops a favour....

 

[Charon]

Well I am not impressed by the overwhelming dialog that he started up with the statement of the 7.62mm being replaced in 86 and then ignoring the rest of your statements.  But one the plus side I haven't heard him refer to himself as a former soldier in awhile, so there is a small grace there LOL

 

[PJOsborne]

I'm just impressed he replied! Maybe he'll mention my correspondance with him in the next issue of EDC  :blotto:

 

[The_Falcon]

I am still waiting for my reply.  Perhaps, he is now being deluged with e-mails pointing out his errors, and can't really muster anything other than a curt one sentence reply. 

 

[Charon]

I know a few people that have written to him about his take on various things and from what I've seen, don't hold your breath unless you agree with him apparently

 

[OldSolduer]

I've got the skinny from KAF last night. I have someone there....
The non issue kit order is very real. No toques before sundown, no non issue gloves or sunglasses in KAF. The chest rigs etc the troops bought are not allowed, even outside the wire. Issue kit only.
Watch and shoot...

 

[Gunner98]

Give ST some credit - he did reply and 'thank him for his input'.  That may be his humble way of saying, I hear you and I have nothing to offer in rebuttal other than one date correction.  Perhaps this is a HUA (Hoohah) - Heard, Understood, Acknowledge.  In this case, silence is golden.

 

[dangerboy]

I've got the skinny from KAF last night. I have someone there....
The non issue kit order is very real. No toques before sundown, no non issue gloves or sunglasses in KAF. The chest rigs etc the troops bought are not allowed, even outside the wire. Issue kit only.
Watch and shoot...

Just remember they have not had transfer of command authority yet, so they are working under the old TF rules, once TF 1-08 takes command things hopefully will change. 

 

[OldSolduer]

Thank you danger boy for pointing that out....yes you are correct command has not been transferred......my source tells me this came from way high up....

 

[westernarmymember]

There was clear direction passed through the BG sometime ago outlining what rigs are auth for wear. Those members of the BG should have received it.

 

[MdB]

Does the no non-issued kit directive is for security reasons or uniformity? Security for placing kit at the same place for everybody and uniformity to look like we all come from the same army.

 

[MikeL]

Security for placing kit at the same place?


As for the looking like we're all in the same Army.. well if someone wearing a different Tac Vest/Chest Rig throws you off an you can't tell that they're still a Canadian Soldier, etc you have problems. We still wear the same uniform, wear Canadian flags an all the IFF patches, etc.

 

[Sig_Des]

Does the no non-issued kit directive is for security reasons or uniformity? Security for placing kit at the same place for everybody and uniformity to look like we all come from the same army.

I hate this argument. Even if everyone wore the same vest, no two people have them arranged exactly the same. And I don't care about the kit list. Are you left or right handed? Do you have a canteen pouch, or two c-9 pouches, or what? Are you a c-9 gunner, grenadier, rifleman?

And uniformity? You're in the desert. It's tan, OD, or Cadpat? Good to go.

It's my firm belief that the reason we have the non-issued kit directives is because of the "We issued everyone this piece of kit. It's the best piece of kit out there, because we obviously care, so you will wear your CF-provided piece of wonderkit" mentality.

 

[RCR Grunt]

"Uniformity" is an antiquated term that has absolutely NO place on the modern battlefield.  No two soldiers are built the same, move the same, do the same job or carry the exact same kit, so why should they all look exactly the same.  This isn't "Zulu."  The days of "Front rank kneeling, rear rank standing, volley fire!" are long over and its time the dress code changes to reflect reality.  I can tell who plays for the Flames and who plays for the Oilers, even if they all wear different jocks.

"Security," if by this you mean "Can Johnny Two-shoes find my mags, map, and first aid kit if I go down....."  Well mags are simple (they are the rectangular looking gray thingys in the front!), maps are big (and should be sanitized before going on an op where capture is possible), and its not hard to place an IFAK where the RSM prescribes.  If you meant something other, please clarify and I will reply in kind.

 

[PJOsborne]

My unit is still in the middle of sussing out the kit list. It's not nearly as bad as the one I had on basic: foot powder & bug spray in the C9 pouch - i was even told to fold my raingear top so it would fit into my Tac Vest map pocket so i would be as uniform as the rest of the course who still had the 84 webbing.

 

[Panzer Grenadier]

i was even told to fold my raingear top so it would fit into my Tac Vest map pocket so i would be as uniform as the rest of the course who still had the 84 webbing

For some reason the phrase "The wheels spinning but the hamsters dead" popped into my head when I read this portion. Not referring to you PatrickO, just how bizarre it does sound and how one could get uniformity between a TV and 84 webbing. (Both of which I have.)

 

[Haggis]

My unit is still in the middle of sussing out the kit list. It's not nearly as bad as the one I had on basic: foot powder & bug spray in the C9 pouch - i was even told to fold my raingear top so it would fit into my Tac Vest map pocket so i would be as uniform as the rest of the course who still had the 84 webbing.

:

Uniformity between at TV and 84 Webbing?  That's, by far, the dumbest thing I've seen or heard of today.... and I work at NDHQ.

Haggis
"Old-school" Sergeant Major
"New School" realist.

 

[Matt_Fisher]

My unit is still in the middle of sussing out the kit list. It's not nearly as bad as the one I had on basic: foot powder & bug spray in the C9 pouch - i was even told to fold my raingear top so it would fit into my Tac Vest map pocket so i would be as uniform as the rest of the course who still had the 84 webbing.

I'm trying to visualize and conceptualize this, but my Marine lobotimized brain is having some difficulties...
If YOU have a tac-vest and are putting it in your map pocket to be uniform (read, the same) as those with '82 pattern webbing, where is the rain gear going on the '82 pattern webbing, as there is no chest mounted map pocket?  Unless they're lashing it to the left front yolk web strap?

 

[Teeps74]

I'm trying to visualize and conceptualize this, but my Marine lobotimized brain is having some difficulties...
If YOU have a tac-vest and are putting it in your map pocket to be uniform (read, the same) as those with '82 pattern webbing, where is the rain gear going on the '82 pattern webbing, as there is no chest mounted map pocket?  Unless they're lashing it to the left front yolk web strap?

Hmmm, that would be an interesting way to carry a rain jacket with the webbing... Oh, and thanks. Beer out the nose sucks!