New Rucksack

[Nfld Sapper]

I must concur with the majority of statements, if it needs an instructional video and a bunch of BFT's to get it to fit right then really it isn't much of a ruck is it?.

On a personal front I grabbed a Low Alpine ruck loaded it up set the shoulder straps to my height and set off. Not a single issue and is IMO the most comfortable ruck I have worn. It still boggles my mind that we cannot just buy off the sshelf items and reinvent the wheel every damn time.  :

Sounds like someone justifying thier job.

 

[Quag]

You really do not need an instructional DVD to assemble this ruck.

For the most part, it is an off the shelf hiking pack with some slight military deviations due to our specific job.

You can assemble and wear the ruck properly without any instuction for any guy with half a brain.

Do you not remember getting the instruction on how to put the '64 pattern together?  Way back in BMQ? And as a matter of fact, you probably received some class or some direction even at a unit.

You do not have to string together this ruck.  In my opinion, it is easier to assemble than the '64.  This being said, it is typical army where you have to attend a morning lecture on its assembly and proper use.  Afterall, the snowblower lesson lasts 3 hours

It was best stated by someone else where this ruck is the 80% solution.  Like boots, its not a one size fits all.

 

[HItorMiss]

My 64 was never strung to the frame that was the 82 pattern, granted my 64 pattern was aftermarkt except the frame.

My issue is some have said it was designed to be worn with the TV and frag vest others have said the project manager has said it's not to be worn with that at all and to be fitted with a T-shirt. If the vast majority of reviews I have read her read accurate and it is fitted to you wearing only a Tshirt then I am thinking it's not design to be worn with those which means in terms of the Infantry which does the vast majority of dismounted ops it's a useless piece of kit.

In the end like I said I picked up an aftermarket ruck by Lowe Alpine adjusted for heights (about 2 mins worth of work) loaded it up with my ME kit and off I went. I wont get into load weight but it was heavy and it was not a short walk, best ruck I have ever worn. I didn't have to do multiple adjustments ,not twist this bend that over and over...No multi hour instruction non of it.

Now explain to me why ours needs that again?  :

 

[Quag]

Sorry, I meant '82.  There is not doubt that there is a plethora of other rucks on the market to superior to the issue.  I was just comparing to our rucks in service.

 

[Fide et Fortitudine]

Now explain to me why ours needs that again?

It seems to me that this ruck has been overcomplicated. I just received mine and found the lecture on it could've been cut down to an hour... maybe less. There are parts of the ruck that are smart but many aren't. The fact that the hip strap is the main source of load bearing and it becomes useless when wearing a TV is ridiculous. When you look at the ruck and see the features you can tell they tried to copy Kifaru or its idea a few times. I recall a few years ago on the clothe the soldier website, it showed the patrol pack being able to hook up to the ruck, that disappeared.

I found that the quick release system method was altered due to a problem with the sternum strap popping off. Now you pop off the hip strap pull one quick release, and take off the bag... doesn't sound so quick release to me.

Mind you I may be a bit pessimistic, and I have not truly tried it (gone on ex, BFT) and when that occurs I will say more, but so far it was a good idea that just failed to live up to the hype.

MPF

 

[Bzzliteyr]

I remember quick releasing the 82 pattern once.. the metal frame bit me right in both achilles tendons.. OUCH!

 

[Fide et Fortitudine]

Yeah but at least it gets off your body almost instantaneously, while the new ruck takes too much time in my opinion,

MPF

 

[JSR OP]

The fact that the hip strap is the main source of load bearing and it becomes useless when wearing a TV is ridiculous.

Why would you say that the hip strap is the main source of load bearing ridiculous? IMO, you're better off to have the majority of the weight directed on your hips rather than on your shoulders.  I would guess your one of those pers who don't use the hip belt on your '82 ruck aren't you.  IMO, using the belt is a world of difference.  Its helped save my back.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I must concur with the majority of statements, if it needs an instructional video and a bunch of BFT's to get it to fit right then really it isn't much of a ruck is it?.

On a personal front I grabbed a Low Alpine ruck loaded it up set the shoulder straps to my height and set off. Not a single issue and is IMO the most comfortable ruck I have worn. It still boggles my mind that we cannot just buy off the sshelf items and reinvent the wheel every damn time.  :

There are dozens of similar bags that would do the trick.

Mine is a Serratus pack that weighs in at 3 lbs when empty, and holds up to 100litres. It cost less than $200, on sale. I've carried it with up to 90lbs of gear (yes, I weighed it) on multiple long range trips including an 11 day traverse of Baffin Island via Auyuittuq National Park, and an 8 day high level traverse of Strathcona Park on Vancouver Island including a summit of the highest mountain on the island - the Golden Hinde. I would say that this pack has been through just about everything I would have put it through as a soldier in all seasons (e.g., just got back from a winter ski/mountaineering backcountry trip) except parachuting, which I will address one of these days, and wearing with body armour. It has come through with flying colours and is going strong even after 4-5 years of moderate to heavy use. I have worn similar types of packs - internal lightweight flexi-metal frame with waist belt - in the UK with body armour and chest rig in a trials scenario and they worked fine.

IMHO, we could easily do better, and save lots of money at the same time - with something off the shelf.

 

[Fide et Fortitudine]

Why would you say that the hip strap is the main source of load bearing ridiculous?

I did not say that, I said that the fact that it becomes almost useless when wearing a TV is ridiculous, I love using hipstraps because they do save your back, and I used them when I could on my 82.

 

[Fusaki]

As stated by Quag this systems is very different from anything that most people are use to using. I was part of the trials and it took a long time to get into a different mind set.
The entire pack/carriage system and Ballistic vest are all designed to intergrate together. As with everything that CLS designed it is 80% solution and there will always be a few people that will have difficulty.

Then maybe you can clarify this for me:

- The Rucksack Instructing Cadre told myself and the rest of the class that the concave waist belt is designed to fit around the Iliac Crest. 

- According to the information pamphlet distributed with the Ballistic Vest, it is cut so that the bottom edge of the vest will be level with the Iliac Crest.

What we have here is an overlap between the bottom couple inches of Frag Vest and the top couple inches of waist belt.  What results is the frag vest pushing the waist belt lower then designed, causing severe chafing. Eventually, the troops just say "fuck it" and undo the waist belt altogether. 

So I ask you this:  Did the Ballistic Vest guys fuck up by cutting the vest too low, or did the rucksack guys fuck up by cutting the waist belt too high?

 

[medaid]

The majority of the system is frigged up...

 

[NL_engineer]

- The Rucksack Instructing Cadre told myself and the rest of the class that the concave waist belt is designed to fit around the Iliac Crest. 

- According to the information pamphlet distributed with the Ballistic Vest, it is cut so that the bottom edge of the vest will be level with the Iliac Crest.

What we have here is an overlap between the bottom couple inches of Frag Vest and the top couple inches of waist belt.  What results is the frag vest pushing the waist belt lower then designed, causing severe chafing. Eventually, the troops just say "frig it" and undo the waist belt altogether. 

So I ask you this:  Did the Ballistic Vest guys frig up by cutting the vest too low, or did the rucksack guys frig up by cutting the waist belt too high?

I knew I should have posted pictures of my hips after my BFT, because I was wearing the ruck the way they told me to wear it, and my hips were destroyed.

 

[JSR OP]

I did not say that, I said that the fact that it becomes almost useless when wearing a TV is ridiculous, I love using hipstraps because they do save your back, and I used them when I could on my 82.

Well, that might not have been what you were trying to say, but the way I read it, it's what you said.

Anyhow, glad to hear you do wear the hipstraps.

 

[Bzzliteyr]

Okay, we did a 8km "pre 13km" this morning, two people with new rucks.

One seemed to have no issues but the other seemed to have needed more time to set his up correctly.  He lacked the knowledge of what all the straps do.  He had the hip belt nicely tightened on his hips but hadn't use the "pull tabs" to snug it in.  Same with the top snug straps.  I think people who have no hiking/camping experience may have bigger learning curve to tackle than someone such as myself who will lay one bag (mil.) beside the other (civi.) and adjust for torso length, etc..

 

[PhilB]

I think the problem/confusion comes when people say that the new ruck is bad in general.

Yes the CTS ruck can be complicated, yes there is a learning curve for packing an internal ruck as opposed to an external ruck, and yes there is the tendency to over pack. All of these can be overcome, and IMHO the ruck is quite comfortable being worn how it was designed i.e. wearing only combats/pt shirt. It works fine with the TV, but poorly with other non-issue rigs (particularly webbing type rigs), but it fails horribly when worn with the protective vest and plates. Anyone that has had to use the ruck while wearing plates cannot tell me it worked well.

I still use my CTS as a PT ruck, but will not use it while in the field, or deployed.

 

[RHFC_piper]

I think the problem/confusion comes when people say that the new ruck is bad in general.

Yes the CTS ruck can be complicated, yes there is a learning curve for packing an internal ruck as opposed to an external ruck, and yes there is the tendency to over pack. All of these can be overcome, and IMHO the ruck is quite comfortable being worn how it was designed i.e. wearing only combats/pt shirt. It works fine with the TV, but poorly with other non-issue rigs (particularly webbing type rigs), but it fails horribly when worn with the protective vest and plates. Anyone that has had to use the ruck while wearing plates cannot tell me it worked well.

I still use my CTS as a PT ruck, but will not use it while in the field, or deployed.

Not to be facetious, but is not the point of tactical load baring equipment that it be usable in an operational environment effectively?  It was made for operations, correct?

The Department of National Defence spent a ridiculous, almost obscene, amount of money to develop, produce and distribute this piece of equipment which; a) requires so much training that it has a "learning curve", b) doesn't work effectively with other equipment which it must work with to be effective and c) the troops don't want to use because of reasons A and B.
Does this make sense to anyone?

There are countless ruck sack systems employed by several forces, including our own, with great success; why didn't CTS (or whoever) just look at what works and use it... why to we keep reinventing the wheel?

We seem to over-complicate things too much... why?

But, I digress... by the time the new rucks make it down to the PRes, a "simple fix" will be found to adapt the new rucks to the armour and we'll get the 'hand me downs'... and since we don't have BVs, the ruck will work great for us.
;D

 

[Fusaki]

I think the problem/confusion comes when people say that the new ruck is bad in general...

IMHO the ruck is quite comfortable being worn how it was designed i.e. wearing only combats/pt shirt... but it fails horribly when worn with the protective vest and plates...

I still use my CTS as a PT ruck, but will not use it while in the field, or deployed.

PhilB, you're right and I stand corrected:

The new ruck only sucks for those of us who's job requires the use of a rucksack.

 

[daftandbarmy]

And, ironically, we have a well known Canadian outdoor equipment company selling gear to the US Army and Marines: Arc'teryx

"Due to dissatisfaction with the MOLLE gear, the United States Marine Corps chose Arc'teryx's Tango design for their new backpack, the ILBE." http://leaf.arcteryx.com/Tango.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arc'teryx


Here's their military division 'leaf' website. All serving military members are eligible to 'apply' here. There are a few former CF folks working there, mostly reservists as I understand it.

http://leaf.arcteryx.com/

 

[geo]

Should I point out tha Wesleydownunider has pointed out that the grass isn't necessarily any greener in the other armed forces we are on operations with?

Americans don't like their kit, Canadians don't like their kit, Australians don't like their kit.

Does anyone see some pattern forming here ?