Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kit (Canadian Forces Gear)
Farfromcanadahar | Tue 17 Jan 2006 | Captain Dave

Posted on 01/28/2006 4:33:36 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4

Every time anything happens to Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan, everyone with a beef against the current federal government seems to feel the need to ratchet-jaw on about the poor, wretchedly equipped Canadian military. As someone who’s been issued all the kit, and who has had access to the stuff other countries are using, I find this tendency extremely irritating.

Canada doesn’t have a big navy. We don’t have guided missile cruisers, (working) submarines, or aircraft carriers. Our air force is suffering from decades of neglect, and we are stretched mighty thin just sustaining our forces in Afghanistan with our brace of C-130s. We are mothballing our tanks. It’s safe to say that as far as the big-ticket stuff goes, we pretty much suck.

But the soldier stuff, the vehicles and the clothing and the protection and (sorry, Gen Hillier) the gizmos… now there, we have another story.

I’ve posted before about the G-wagon. I’m not going to link to it, just scroll down and you’ll see what I think about that particular item.

I haven’t posted about the LAV-III. I haven’t felt the need. That thing is simply the best armoured fighting vehicle in the world. Armour, protection (yes, there is a difference), armament, optics, navigation, suspension, every single subsystem is state-of-the-art. The Yanks have their own version - which differs only in the lack of a turret, as an American officer involved in evaluating the Canadian version told me, only because of a difference in deployment philosophy - and it has saved countless American lives in Iraq.

The Canadian C7 rifle has been adopted, over the American M16 rifle on which it is based (although it looks similar, it has been heavily modified for the CF), by a number of foreign militaries, among them the Netherlands, and reportedly the British SAS. We have just been issued with a still newer model, the C7A2, which has so many useful and innovative improvements that I despair of listing them without putting my civilian readers to sleep (Collapsible stock! Green furniture! Cruciform Weaver rails! Oh, alright…).

Our new camouflage pattern, CADPAT, was adapted by the USMC, then the US Army, and rumour has it that several other countries are looking at adopting their own versions.

New night vision equipment. New communications equipment (Brits are buying our stuff). New NBCD equipment. New boots. New packs. New (only just invented) artillery with precision-guided ammunition. New mine- and blast-resistant vehicles (Nyalas). New clothing. Grenade launchers. C9A2s. It goes on and on.

Is it perfect? Hell no. Combat uniforms, designed to be worn under fragmentation vests, that have chest pockets? And no arm pockets? WTF!? And seriously, mate, what genius came up with a ‘modular’ tactical vest that doesn’t allow the user to carry more than 4 magazines? After every other fighting force in the world, not to mention your own soldiers, has come to the conclusion that soldiers require up to 10 or more magazines in modern battle? By the way, great job in making grenade pouches that the grenades you give us don’t fit into. That’s especially useful. I put my Garmin in one of mine. Maybe I can use another for an MP3 player. And don’t even get me started about the absurd, almost criminally negligent administrative system under which we suffer. I really didn’t enjoy not getting paid for over two months this fall.

But for the love of God, I think back to the Army I joined in 1987, and the 1950’s pattern webbing and 1950’s vintage equipment I was originally issued with. I think back to the vehicles we used to drive, the clothing we used to wear, and frankly the attitudes we used to have, and I don’t even recognize us.

Gen Hillier is right. It isn’t about the gizmos. Gizmos are just a manifestation of something that’s been going on, largely unnoticed by the society we serve, for many years now. We have been changing. Not getting a shiny new paint job or plastic surgery. In very many ways, we are a fundamentally new, and different organization than we used to be. Still with problems, but baby steps, people, baby steps.

For all of those that pity the Canadian Forces: keep your pity.

You will shortly find that ‘pity’ is entirely misplaced.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: afghanistan; banglist; canada; canadiantroops; kandahar; miltech; oparcher
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 last
To: R. Scott

Yowch.
We'd set up 180 out once [1600 mils out], but didn't have any fire missions until the next day.
Come first light, we all scratched our heads and said, "Aren't we facing the wrong way?"

From there we set up in a nice sand pit, and actually got something done.

We had contact with the opfor team.
After a couple shots, everyone is out of ammo.
Captain starts yelling at us.
My wiseguy response: "Yes sir, we WERE issued four magazines, but only 20 total blank rounds per soldier."

We also once left a troop behind by himself.
We were checking out an area, and the Captain tells the guy pulling Air Guard duty to dismount the vehicle.
Since I was out in the middle of the field we were checking out, I wasn't aware of this.
So we come bustling out of the field due to the neighbors being there, hop in the vehicles and head to the next position.

We get to our destination, I look for our machinegunner.. and then go "where is he?"

I then get told that somehow it is my fault the guy got left behind.


41 posted on 01/29/2006 12:30:20 PM PST by Darksheare (And baby says "RAAAAR!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
Ah! The mistakes we’ve seen!

I then get told that somehow it is my fault the guy got left behind.

Who was supposed to do the headcount? You know the Captain is never at fault.
42 posted on 01/29/2006 1:56:57 PM PST by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

Splendid links in this article.


43 posted on 01/29/2006 6:26:45 PM PST by Ciexyz (Let us always remember, the Lord is in control.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Chode

TACPATT

44 posted on 01/29/2006 8:42:21 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (‘There are only two types of ships, submarines and targets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Clive; fanfan; NorthOf45
Pages 16, 17, 18, 32 & 34, Soldier of Fortune magazine, March 2006

Afghan Patrol

With Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry

Peacekeepers Help Make Kabul Safe For Democracy

Text & Photos by

Warrant Officer Tracy Sapera

After receiving detailed orders and conducting rehearsals, we mounted up in our Light Armoured Vehicles or LAVIIIs. Dressed in our new digital-style Canadian Pattern, (cad-pat) combat clothing for desert operations, we wore our armoured vest with chest and back plates, load-bearing vest, (LBV) for carrying our rifle magazines and other essential equipment, and Kevlar helmet with a Mounted Monocular Night Vision Goggle (MNVG) for observing in the dark. We carried our heavy-barrel C8 [M16A2] rifle with infra-red, (IR) pointer and SureFire flashlight, both mounted on a rail system. We also had two C9 [M249 SAW] gunners with us as we depart Camp Julien.

45 posted on 01/29/2006 9:04:40 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (‘There are only two types of ships, submarines and targets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ciexyz

Yeah.
They're makin' me somewhat jealous.
I see some of the gear and think, "If we'd had that in my old unit.."


46 posted on 01/29/2006 9:56:41 PM PST by Darksheare (And baby says "RAAAAR!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott

The guy who was supposed to do the headcount was the Gunny.
I asked if we had everyone, got told to shutup, and that we indeed had everyone.
(oops!)


So we were down by one guy, and one machinegun.
(I'd have loved to have the updated -249 from the article links!)


47 posted on 01/29/2006 10:34:05 PM PST by Darksheare (And baby says "RAAAAR!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
The guy who was supposed to do the headcount was the Gunny.

And yet – it was your fault! Sounds like maybe you were on the CO’s “S” list. Been there – done that.
48 posted on 01/30/2006 2:28:03 AM PST by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
kool, thankx... it looks almost like the old German Leopard or OakLeaf pattern from a distance.

to these old eyes, small pattern cammo works great up close(0-50yds)but at range it sometimes looks like a solid mass since the small pattern blends together to form one large pattern.

large pattern cammo doesn't always work so good up close but at range blends in very well.

that's why i thought the new stuff might be designed more toward urban fighting where most engagements are relatively up close and personal.
49 posted on 01/30/2006 9:04:05 AM PST by Chode (American Hedonist ©®)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Clive
He speaks well of the effectiveness of the camo pattern, (also needed by the wearer to do his job) and points out that the pattern has been adopted by other forces including US forces.

Are they fireproof/fire resistant/fire retardant?

Having once exited the ramp of a CH47 $hithook and peeled off to the side where the engine exhaust set my yowie suit on fire, I'm more than a little curious. [Since my camo suit was based on an oversize helo pilot's Nomex flight suit turned inside out, I suffered only minor discomfort, aside from that to my dignity which was mortally wounded by laughture and requests by my pals to do it again once they'd pulled their cameras out of their rucks.]

Anyway, mech/heloborne troops really do need Nomex or other fireproof outfits.

50 posted on 01/30/2006 9:45:21 AM PST by archy (The darkness will come. It will find you,and it will scare you like you've never been scared before.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
" And seriously, mate, what genius came up with a ‘modular’ tactical vest that doesn’t allow the user to carry more than 4 magazines? "

Someone who is fashion conscious?

It was remarkably fortuitous that the Vietnam-era M1962 web gear ammo pouch that held two M14 magazines flat across the belt would also work with three of the smaller M16 magazines stuffed in sideways. But there were never enough of them, and ammo bandoleers that held seven were the field expedient substitute that unfortunately didn't fare very well in the monsoon season. Others preferred canteen covers or BAR belts, which held 18 magazines- a good start.

Until the 30-round magazines came around, circa 1970 or so, depending on what unit got to call firsties. Then it was canteen covers, AK magazine pouches [with a first-aid dressing or a half-dozen loose rounds stuffed in the bottom, or if you were real lucky, a couple of the magazine pouches used by the Ozstraylions.

51 posted on 01/30/2006 10:12:14 AM PST by archy (The darkness will come. It will find you,and it will scare you like you've never been scared before.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
I was in the pistol belt and suspenders army. We carried our water in canteens. Christ had made buck sergeant by then.

The VC had *tactical vests* for their AKs'/Type 56s in the 1960s, helpfully supplied by the Chinese, even if we didn't. By the mid-1970s, I had mine.

Pretty basic, they were good for three magazines [6 if you liked 'em no-rattle tight] a frag grenade on either side and a first-aid pouch or compass.


52 posted on 01/30/2006 10:22:00 AM PST by archy (The darkness will come. It will find you,and it will scare you like you've never been scared before.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

Amazing what the "clothiers" come up with for the comfort and safety of the troops.


53 posted on 01/30/2006 2:11:09 PM PST by Ciexyz (Let us always remember, the Lord is in control.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4

Good for another bump


54 posted on 01/31/2006 4:24:33 PM PST by Ciexyz (Let us always remember, the Lord is in control.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson