CBC: "An 'embarrassing' gear shortage has Canadian troops in Latvia buying their own helmets"

[IRepoCans]

I have not, but I would not be surprised to see some instances of frag penetrating where the helmet would have covered. Same issue faces plate carriers vs frag vests with plates such as ours or the US IOTV.

Is active hearing protection worth the trade off of less protection? I would argue yes, I am not as convinced that plate carriers are the right answer if you’re facing a large fragmentation threat.

Ideally the system would be able to issue stuff to allow the commanders to tailor their load outs and protection levels.
Some of the helmet designs now do allow that modularity in protection.

So, a common myth with plate carriers, they can actually offer greater ballistic protection from both fragmentation and high velocity threats if configured correctly... they also cover the critical vitals much better if also worn correctly (the issued frag vest doesn't actually hold the ballistic plates at the positions they're supposed to occupy to properly cover your vital organs).

Cool thing is you can scale the amount of hard and/or soft armour depending on the threat and operating environment, with the added benefit of quick donning and doffing.

A place I was working at had soft armour inserts sourced by CJOC where we had front, rear and side soft armour for plate carriers: so we had soft armour sized to the ballistic plates we were using, and 6 x 9 soft armour inserts inside the cummerbund.

My friend from 2/75 has a similar setup where instead of soft armour on the sides he has 6x6 hard armour plates, but they have a slightly larger cut soft armour insert for their front and rear plate bags.

 

[RedFive]

I'd settle for a helmet that isn't nearly as old as I am and being issued armour of any kind for the first time in my 11 year career.

Not holding my breath.

 

[markppcli]

Its almost like the insistence people use issued equipment actually had a purpose. Can’t have articles about troops using personal equipment if they are using what they are supposed to be equipped with.

This article makes us seem like we are not providing the equipment, which is untrue. We have the equipment it just isn’t as nice as things could be. But nothing like a negative article on our military to get views and make us out to be worse than we actually are.

We have the equipment ? Fine. Tell me where to place the 152 and an ifak in the issue tax vest ? My unit right now have 15 NVGs total, and it’s regular force, front line, combat arms. It still has PSV 7s. Our state of equipment it’s abhorrent, and I applaud articles that do this and speak truth to power.

 

[markppcli]

Has anyone else seen reporting that the cut down helmets are funning into issues in Ukraine due to frag injuries to the ear areas that used to have protection? I thought I saw this somewhere but wasn't sure.

I’d be curious as to how they could really come up with definitive metrics that would point to specific cases that were actually statistically relevant.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I remember having this argument when I was working with the ANZACs in Egypt.

The Canadian CoC touted our PPE as superior because of the coverage and frag protection it offered. The ANZACs very pointedly said "I guess, if you can get it all on in time without getting shot first..."

I find we have ignored the Mobility, Speed, and Flexibility aspects of CoAs in favour of solely Security and Survivability when it comes to kitting folks out. Hard to maintain proper SA if you're momentarily deaf, and even harder to react to effective fire if you cannot access shit on your battle rattle.

 

[markppcli]

I remember having this argument when I was working with the ANZACs in Egypt.

The Canadian CoC touted our PPE as superior because of the coverage and frag protection it offered. The ANZACs very pointedly said "I guess, if you can get it all on in time without getting shot first..."

I find we have ignored the Mobility, Speed, and Flexibility aspects of CoAs in favour of solely Security and Survivability when it comes to kitting folks out. Hard to maintain proper SA if you're momentarily deaf, and even harder to react to effective fire if you cannot access shit on your battle rattle.

Ever mind trying to shoulder and fire your weapon, the best part about being in a position with a high cut helmet now is that I can go prone and my body armour doesn’t push the lip of my helmet down.

 

[OldSolduer]

It is none of their business. Operational dress is the business of the chain of command. That is one of the many reasons brown or tan boots as well as non standard rigs were allowed in 1VP and later 1 CMBG...well before bootforgen

Fully agree. Niner tells me what he’s ok with and we go from there.

Not to say I wouldn’t recommend a few things.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Fully agree. Niner tells me what he’s ok with and we go from there.

Not to say I wouldn’t recommend a few things.

I remember the TF SM we had on REASSURANCE was very much a proponent of "wear what you need to do your job. We'll look proper for Combat Camera when we need to."

It was a really refreshing take lol.

 

[markppcli]

I remember the TF SM we had on REASSURANCE was very much a proponent of "wear what you need to do your job. We'll look proper for Combat Camera when we need to."

It was a really refreshing take lol.

If the general public things we look like a rag tag bunch bunch of misfits, then hopefully that question starts getting asked. Worste equipped troops in Latvia isn’t exactly a moral boost when you get there.

 

[dapaterson]

And then there was LGen Caron briefing the Army HQ, and stopping on the first slide to complain that a soldier in a photo from Afghanistan wasn't properly dressed, and ordering the Army SM to find out what had happened.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

And then there was LGen Caron briefing the Army HQ, and stopping on the first slide to complain that a soldier in a photo from Afghanistan wasn't properly dressed, and ordering the Army SM to find out what had happened.

That.... wow. Priorities right there.

 

[Haggis]

And then there was LGen Caron briefing the Army HQ, and stopping on the first slide to complain that a soldier in a photo from Afghanistan wasn't properly dressed, and ordering the Army SM to find out what had happened.

A student of Jimmy Cox?

 

[Navy_Pete]

If the general public things we look like a rag tag bunch bunch of misfits, then hopefully that question starts getting asked. Worste equipped troops in Latvia isn’t exactly a moral boost when you get there.

Especially when the Danes are rolling up with modern Canadian made gear; that kind of 'job creation' 'economic benefits' stuff just blows over actual operational capability discussions, even when we are talking to politicians about projects in the billions.

NSFW, but the Letterkenny coach motivational speech seems appropriate;

 

[Underway]

This smacks of troops wearing what they want without proper testing and trials.

I'm looking at you "ballistic eyewear" that works great vs ballistics but melts to your eyes in an explosion (unlike the issued ballistic eyewear which does not do that). Is there an approved helmet list? Is ear protection a priority? Or are troops just doing what they want because army guys can't help but buy their own stuff.

If its not approved or tested by Canada than the second order effects are unknown and you might be wearing gear that gets you killed. People talk that this an that is better but they never have the proper engineering to back it up. Or their tests mean nothing related to the requirement. When it comes to safety you don't screw around with personal gear, you take the issued stuff.

Things like rain gear and tactical vests, well that's like a boot problem. One size does not fit all. Those are not safety items so there could easily be an "approved list" of brands/types. That's a personal comfort issue for the most part.

As far as ear pro, I haven't had a set of yellow earplugs issued to me since 2008. Have military issued earpro that fits in my ears and cuts out the sharp noises of rifle fire while letting me hear properly. Probaly a CQ budget item though.

(not to say that we don't have issues, we do... god knows, I've worked in projects).

 

[daftandbarmy]

And then there was LGen Caron briefing the Army HQ, and stopping on the first slide to complain that a soldier in a photo from Afghanistan wasn't properly dressed, and ordering the Army SM to find out what had happened.

Don't tell me ..... let me guess.

Their trouser bottoms weren't bloused?

 

[dapaterson]

Don't tell me ..... let me guess.

Their trouser bottoms weren't bloused?

"Why isn't he wearing gloves!?!?!?"

 

[rmc_wannabe]

@Underway Tested by Canada to do what exactly? The things the vendor spent their own R&D budget on to test? Or the "we need this specific piece of kit to do everything and anything or it's not appropriate for use" testing?

I ask because I have seen enough SORs written for equipment to be a complete "multitool" item that has no basis in reality. That's where we get Canadian companies bidding with pie in the sky concept designs and taking 10-15 years to deliver on them. There is a lot to be said for "if it works for X it's good enough for Canadians."

We are our own worst enemy believing we can create a better wheel than those who have a much larger budget and market than we do

 

[OldSolduer]

This smacks of troops wearing what they want without proper testing and trials.

I'm looking at you "ballistic eyewear" that works great vs ballistics but melts to your eyes in an explosion (unlike the issued ballistic eyewear which does not do that). Is there an approved helmet list? Is ear protection a priority? Or are troops just doing what they want because army guys can't help but buy their own stuff.

If its not approved or tested by Canada than the second order effects are unknown and you might be wearing gear that gets you killed. People talk that this an that is better but they never have the proper engineering to back it up. Or their tests mean nothing related to the requirement. When it comes to safety you don't screw around with personal gear, you take the issued stuff.

Things like rain gear and tactical vests, well that's like a boot problem. One size does not fit all. Those are not safety items so there could easily be an "approved list" of brands/types. That's a personal comfort issue for the most part.

As far as ear pro, I haven't had a set of yellow earplugs issued to me since 2008. Have military issued earpro that fits in my ears and cuts out the sharp noises of rifle fire while letting me hear properly. Probaly a CQ budget item though.

(not to say that we don't have issues, we do... god knows, I've worked in projects).

Good point. Same goes for certain tshirts that melt when exposed to heat.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

@Underway Tested by Canada to do what exactly? The things the vendor spent their own R&D budget on to test? Or the "we need this specific piece of kit to do everything and anything or it's not appropriate for use" testing?

I ask because I have seen enough SORs written for equipment to be a complete "multitool" item that has no basis in reality. That's where we get Canadian companies bidding with pie in the sky concept designs and taking 10-15 years to deliver on them. There is a lot to be said for "if it works for X it's good enough for Canadians."

We are our own worst enemy believing we can create a better wheel than those who have a much larger budget and market than we do

Problem: I need to remove or clear snow.


CAF: I need the Binford 9000 snowblower leaf mulcher precision weeder that can also be tied into reserve pay, and all on CSNI


Sometimes, if not most,CAF is the problem

 

[Kilted]

I remember having this argument when I was working with the ANZACs in Egypt.

The Canadian CoC touted our PPE as superior because of the coverage and frag protection it offered. The ANZACs very pointedly said "I guess, if you can get it all on in time without getting shot first..."

I find we have ignored the Mobility, Speed, and Flexibility aspects of CoAs in favour of solely Security and Survivability when it comes to kitting folks out. Hard to maintain proper SA if you're momentarily deaf, and even harder to react to effective fire if you cannot access shit on your battle rattle.

But at that point you're talking tin helmets if any. And suppose those remarks they made to you were from before the lessons of Gallipoli?