• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

EO Tech Sight

Just as a point of clarity this is straight from the pub:

The purpose of the UCR is to:

A:  identify deficiencies in materiel (e.g. faulty design or workmanship, inadequate for the intended purpose, unreliable, inadequate operational performance, difficult to operate
or maintain);

B:  identify deficiencies in policies or procedures (e.g. change in policy, poor operator or technical manuals);

C: identify potential and actual hazards to personnel, materiel and property; and

D: allow a formal means to transfer equipment (including software) knowledge and experience between user Units and the Technical Authority (TA) located in a Headquarters (HQ).
 
Yeah, I got a UCR instruction manual/document I've been meaning to read, but any and all suggestions are welcome.
 
Being on the Navy side of the house, I'd never heard of a TFR.  Looking at the Mat KNet, it mentions this:

The Unsatisfactory Condition Reporting System (UCRS) is an ADM(Mat) web-based application sponsored by DGMSSC/DMPP 5. It provides automated tools for submitting, processing and tracking notifications related to unsatisfactory conditions.  It may be used by all members of all branches of the Canadian Armed Forces, from units in the field, to various headquarters. Access is available to anyone having DIN capability. It should not be used where other reporting methods take precedence for operational reasons or Federally and/or Provincially legislated reporting procedures exist.

The UCRS is divided into four major areas:

Unsatisfactory Condition Reporting Module (UCR)
Technical Failure Reporting Module(TFR)  - for Army only
Suggestion Award Module (SA) – for Army only (for submissions on Army Centrally Managed Equipment and Material)
Material Authorization Request Module (MAR) – for Army only

The UCRS also provides quick access to Equipment and Materiel search engines, such as CGCS and EID web sites.

Each of the four major areas are described in further detail below:

UCR: (Used by all environments) The electronic UCR captures Trouble Reporting data from Operations personnel, Qualified User Operators, Maintenance and Support Staff, specialist authorities, LCMM's and technical authorities in a structured relational database that is easily portable to other external systems and makes them visible and accountable to the Customer.

TFR: (used by Army/Land Maintenance System (LMS) supervisors and technicians) The electronic TFR captures Trouble Reporting data from the technician directly involved with the maintenance of the equipment in a structured relational database that is easily portable to other external systems and visible to the Customer. The TFR should normally be completed by the maintenance organization that diagnoses the failure. The intent of the electronic TFR is to advise all levels of the Land Maintenance System (LMS) technical net, including the Life Cycle Material Manager (LCMM), of technical failures of materiel for which the LMS has maintenance responsibility. It may also be used by LCMM for other projects such as reporting warranty failures, monitoring major modifications or gathering support to validate a particular failure trend. It is not intended that the TFR replace the Unsatisfactory Condition Report (UCR)

SA: (used for submissions on Centrally Managed Army/Land Equipment, Items & Material only). A suggestion is a written proposal, plan or practicable idea for improvement of the operations, safety, as well as details of policy and processes related to the in-service phase of the equipment life-cycle of any federal department or agency, that, if adopted, could result in tangible or intangible benefits

MAR: (used by Army/Land units only) The MAR is a vehicle for the army field units to request entitlement increase on given materiel. The workflow manages, and routes the MAR electronic documents from the originator to the assigned OPI and then to the MAR Coordinator, dictated by critical fields being correctly populated within the document

There, I've learned something today.  Time for a coffee!
 
Sadly that MatKnet writeup, like so many of our still official LEMS policies is outdated and badly in need of a rewrite.  Only UCRs are still done in UCRS, TFR's are in DRMIS now, SA's are dead period...and I have not seen a MAR used since the 90's either...

 
Old EO Tech said:
Sadly that MatKnet writeup, like so many of our still official LEMS policies is outdated and badly in need of a rewrite.  Only UCRs are still done in UCRS, TFR's are in DRMIS now, SA's are dead period...and I have not seen a MAR used since the 90's either...

I recently saw a bunch of MARs go through the online portal.  I have to follow up ( thanks for the reminder) but they are at the LCMM level right now.
 
I haven't seen this posted and if it has feel free to delete

http://soldiersystems.net/2015/09/30/ussocom-issues-safety-use-message-eotech-enhanced-combat-optical-sights-plus-goings/

Seems the weapon won't hold its zero in very hot and very cold temps.
 
I posted about it in another thread. you may have missed it. Seems they have been removed from service?
 
There has even been a lawsuit where L3 paid out in the realm of 26M to settle. The days of seeing EOTech on USSOCOM rifles are done. The anecdotal side says that this wasn't an issue before L3 took over the company so earlier ones would be good to go according to some.
 
This isn't the same holographic sight that we have on the Navy's new C8s, is it?
 
Lumber said:
This isn't the sane holographic sight that we have on the Navy's new C8s, is it?

If the Navy is using the C8A3 then those have EoTech sights on them.
 
NavyShooter said:
We are, and yes, we do.

So, are they removing them from service as Bzzliteyr was saying? I rather liked them last time I didby C8 qual, and it was damn f***ing cold that day in Bedford with the cross wind.
 
Lumber said:
So, are they removing them from service as Bzzliteyr was saying? I rather liked them last time I didby C8 qual, and it was damn f***ing cold that day in Bedford with the cross wind.

USSOCOM is currently seeking a replacement for them.

Sources: http://soldiersystems.net/2015/11/09/ussocom-evaulates-replacement-for-eotech-sights/
http://soldiersystems.net/2015/09/30/ussocom-issues-safety-use-message-eotech-enhanced-combat-optical-sights-plus-goings/
 
Lumber said:
So, are they removing them from service as Bzzliteyr was saying? I rather liked them last time I didby C8 qual, and it was damn f***ing cold that day in Bedford with the cross wind.

I think the issues isn't if they function or not in the cold but rather that they lose their zero when changing temps.
 
Acknowledged issues:
1- Zero shifting in various temperature.

Unacknowledge issues:
1- Short battery life
2- Prism migration/unglueing
3- Can't leave batteries in
4- Sights turning off while firing
5- Sights turning off due to heat

The Eotech is a turd. It has taken way too long for big army to catch on to this. For the life of me I can't understand why I am/was having such a hard time to get through to some (often very) good people.

Now our C8s are BUS only for now. Looks like we will be getting C79s as replacements. When I consider that an improvement, that should tell you something.
 
NinerSix said:
Acknowledged issues:
1- Zero shifting in various temperature.

Unacknowledge issues:
1- Short battery life
2- Prism migration/unglueing
3- Can't leave batteries in
4- Sights turning off while firing
5- Sights turning off due to heat

The Eotech is a turd. It has taken way too long for big army to catch on to this. For the life of me I can't understand why I am/was having such a hard time to get through to some (often very) good people.

Now our C8s are BUS only for now. Looks like we will be getting C79s as replacements. When I consider that an improvement, that should tell you something.

I would question whether UCRs were put in for them. If the military doesn't know there's something wrong, they can't do anything about it.
 
NinerSix said:
The Eotech is a turd. It has taken way too long for big army to catch on to this. For the life of me I can't understand why I am/was having such a hard time to get through to some (often very) good people.

Now our C8s are BUS only for now. Looks like we will be getting C79s as replacements. When I consider that an improvement, that should tell you something.

Cause they look cool, some more senior people carry them.  Those people don't always fire a lot of rounds combined with the fact that they still want to look cool has probably led to not much being said about performance.

I have always laughed at who carries C8s and other special kit.  Less about function for many (looking at you Infantry Bns) and more about having cool kit.



 
Back
Top