- Reaction score
- 114
- Points
- 680
MG34 said:You want to know what's wromg with the new ruck?? It's design for one, an internal frame is pretty much useless as there is nothing to strap equipment on but the outer shell of the pack of stuff it into the pack itself. I've used the new pack, it sucks for this reason we tried strapping an SF kit to it, the damn thing was so unweildy that it couldn't be carried for more than 2 or 3 kn at a time. The only place to strap the SF kit was to the front of the pack so the SF kit was about 21/2 feet off of theback of the soldier carrying it and the damn thing caused the pack to flop back and forth on his back. The same problem with the 84mm and Eryx missiles.
The so called trial was about 50 or folks walking in circles around our building with nothing strapped on the ruck and a minimal load in it, of course it's much more comfortable than the issued wire frame piece of crap, but not as versatile as the 64 patten ruck. When we asked about load carriage the CTS clown's answer was to place the items inside the ruck...fine if it fits. For what it's worth I'll stick to the 64 pattern ruck.
Ah now see, there's the difference. You've actually used it and humped it ... you are in your lanes.
Interestingly, I find your point about the internal frame the most interesting ... because an internal framed ruck was one of the biggies being asked for by troops a few years ago.
Edited to add: I'll be keeping my 64 pattern too -- just so you know.