Field Gear

[monty67t 0]

Roger that, I hope I didn't come across as a prick. You know how people can be in these forums.

Monty

[Wilco 944]

No problem Monty, thanks for serving in the Armed Forces, will be joining you soon

[Necromancer- 0]

My god, relax man. I don't know what you do for a living but I am in the military and I can tell you that we constantly make fun of each other. It's just for fun.

Monty

Exactly.... Chairforce

[Sneaky 0]

Just the usual stupid norwegian conscript here.

I served as something that rougly translates into coastal rangers, recon (istar).

There are some things I`ve never understood about what I`ve seen of other countries armed forces: Where are all their gear?

I cant remember seeing say US or UK forces carrying large backpacks, and I cant quite imagine that you can drive all the way to the mission area (for the sake of stealth) in some cases.

We always carried a shitload of equipment, which means a 125l+36l recon pack, a 45l+10l escape pack clipped on to the recon pack, and a vest loaded down with as much stuff you could fit, and still we had problems getting room for everything.

Now I guess theres a rather big difference between operating in warm and hot climates as opposed to the semi-arctic climates of the coast in norway, and we used zodiacs for transport, no land vehicles, which means alot of walking, but still, everyone need a bit more equipment then what appears to fit inside say the molle pack on the previous page, right?

Hope someone can clear this up. Im fairly sure theres a simple reason for this, but I cant see it so far:)

[monty67t 0]

I would say it's probably because of good logistics and support. If you have someone there to constantly resupply you, then you don't need to carry everything on your back. Not to mention putting gear in vehicles and containers. For example, I just got here to Fort Campbell, and they are just getting back from a year in Iraq. My company has a bunch of containers, big containers, all full of supplies and stuff. Now, it also depends on your job and where you are, etc. Someone from the infantry is probably going to have to carry a lot more in his rucksack than myself here in aviation. I am in the rear and he is up in the front, so it would be easier for me to get supplies. Another example would be Special Forces. My buddy over at the 5th Special Forces Group was telling me that on some training mission he was carrying a very, very heavy rucksack because he is a weapons sergeant and he was carrying a ton of ammo. Anyways, I hope this might help clear things up.

Monty

[Sneaky 0]

yeah, were getting there:)

But in the type of missions I did, lying in an OP and observing the enemy "behind enemy lines", it isnt so very smart having people coming and going in and out all the time, so we carry enough equipment for up to one week (thats how long were supposed to be able to survive whitout resupply).

about heavy rucksacks.... Ive at times carried packs closing up to (and in a few cases, exceeding) my own body weight.

Its really fun to sit in a zodiac for about 10 hours straigh, 15c below 0, during night, storm, and thinking that when we finally reach land and can begin moving and getting a bit warm, were gonna walk som 10km in montainous terrain before we leave the reconpack in a cache, and take the escapepack the last say 10 or so km to the point were gonna set camp for the next week.

In my opinion, "welcome to the cold version of hell" is a suitable descripion

Im glad Im done with that

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

There are some things I`ve never understood about what I`ve seen of other countries armed forces: Where are all their gear?

I cant remember seeing say US or UK forces carrying large backpacks, and I cant quite imagine that you can drive all the way to the mission area (for the sake of stealth) in some cases.

We always carried a shitload of equipment, which means a 125l+36l recon pack, a 45l+10l escape pack clipped on to the recon pack, and a vest loaded down with as much stuff you could fit, and still we had problems getting room for everything.

Brits at least do have the equivalent of all that kit, and we use it. A lot. You won't see it on tv because you don't typically patrol with it on. If you watch some of those 'SAS- are you tough enough' type programmes you'll se the kit.

[Sneaky 0]

I guess I should have been able to think that far

I dont watch much tv any more, so I havent seen such programs.

But thanks alot

[MontyVCB 0]

Quote[/b] ]DPM combats: Aside from the fact that the ripstop trousers were never issued due to cost issues, and have to be purchased if wanted by individuals, and the ease at which the lightweight standard issue (DPM) trousers tear (one weeks shooting guarantees ripped combats). They do dry very fast and are quite comfy. Jacket is rainproof if idiots don't make you iron it. Overall a lot better than the temperate kit.

Waterproofs - very good. Work fine. Trousers tend to slip a bit, need better fastening.

Having rank slides in the centre of the chest works ok. Can be a bit hard to see sometimes but so can arm rankslides.

NBC : it WORKS better than US equipment (hence why you saw US generals and Saudi Princes on the news wearing it instead of US gear) - but it could be more comfortable/ less hot. Although I wouldn't sacrifice protection for them. Can be difficult/ painful* to shoot in the respirator if you aren't used to it.

yeah i hear you m8, when i was exersice (btw im a Reservist in 168th pioneer regiment, 101 sqdrn) i triped and tore my trousers needless to say i was not a happy bunny , NBC gear is good but its just to hot, even when we are just in the CS gas chamber its like your own personal suana , the overboots are quite cumbersome and cotton gloves don't do their job properly after half an hour the sweat has gone thro them and your rubber gloves get soaked . A1 mags are wank, but the new HK designed mag is super hi quality. the L85A2 is a dream to fire. super smooth on single shot hardly any recoil. the webbing is quite old now but does its job not as 'gucci' as the kit the yanks get anyway.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Yep. Only real issue with the L85a2 is the weight, which is just getting silly. The a1 was already the heaviest modern rifle on standard issue, and the a2 is even heavier.

[MontyVCB 0]

to be honest mate i haven't really noticed the weight, i don't find it that heavy but if i were given a m16 for the week then had to switch back i'd porperly notice, but still an improvement on the SLR, 21lbs! no thank you our new Minimi's are only just heavier then that

[USSoldier11B 0]

Quote[/b] ]FOr the 50th time:

'The Army' doesn't use any of that stuff.

The US Army does.  

The Army = trademarked/ copyrighted whatever of the British Army.

........our Army is bigger, meaner, and also beat yours just over 200 years ago. "The Army" = U.S. Army

Quote[/b] ]Are you deploying to Iraq, USSoldier?

Sorry, can't discuss it, it's sensitive info.