Thread: PECOC

Originally Posted by kitmonster

or in eyewear that doesn't stop the same fragments as the person stood next to you?

Like those of us who wear glasses have to?

MSR

Unless they do this exactly right first time (which would be a glorious first for the Army), we will be lumbered with hundreds of little faults and tens of major ones, and DERA or the DCTA or whoever does kit design these days will be overwhelmed. If a total overhaul of kit is required, then it needs to be staged, so that each class comes out separately (clothing, then load-carrying, then armour etc), meaning that bugs can be ironed out quickly before the new lot is issued. Otherwise, we'll just have a pile of modular stuff lying around, which no-one will have a clue how to use, and the army will grind to a halt as QMs frantically try to organise and issue it, and work out what it all does.

Originally Posted by msr

Originally Posted by kitmonster

or in eyewear that doesn't stop the same fragments as the person stood next to you?

Like those of us who wear glasses have to?

MSR

No..... wrong

There is a well used but sometimes misunderstood requirement for all our eyewear to be compatible with corrective lenses. There is a specific set that fits in the lightweight and medium weight ballistic eye protection. Units are told to ensure that all personal deploying to TELIC or HERRICK are fitted and issued with the corrective lens. The specifications are matched to the protective eyewear and tested on the range to make sure the performance is maintained.

The IPT is constantly fighting with units and individuals that get corrective lenses fitted outside of the system. Many opticians have no idea about the tortures that our kit goes through and people have been found in theatre with GLASS corrective lens.

The ESS system was chosen over its rivals, in part, because it could be fitted with one corrective lens in either system instead of two like many of the others.

When someone tells you that the military is not offering anyone with glasses eye protection take a step back and think if that sounds likley...

Originally Posted by kitmonster

Originally Posted by msr

Originally Posted by kitmonster

or in eyewear that doesn't stop the same fragments as the person stood next to you?

Like those of us who wear glasses have to?

MSR

No..... wrong

There is a well used but sometimes misunderstood requirement for all our eyewear to be compatible with corrective lenses. There is a specific set that fits in the lightweight and medium weight ballistic eye protection. Units are told to ensure that all personal deploying to TELIC or HERRICK are fitted and issued with the corrective lens. The specifications are matched to the protective eyewear and tested on the range to make sure the performance is maintained.

The IPT is constantly fighting with units and individuals that get corrective lenses fitted outside of the system. Many opticians have no idea about the tortures that our kit goes through and people have been found in theatre with GLASS corrective lens.

The ESS system was chosen over its rivals, in part, because it could be fitted with one corrective lens in either system instead of two like many of the others.

When someone tells you that the military is not offering anyone with glasses eye protection take a step back and think if that sounds likley...

Merely presenting my experience from TELIC6 (Chilwell) where I had to get the storeman to drag a set of AFV commander's goggles out of the skip.

MSR

Originally Posted by kitmonster

The specifications are matched to the protective eyewear and tested on the range to make sure the performance is maintained.

Clearly you do not wear the respirator lenses then....

MSR

Originally Posted by Bravo_Zulu

Unless they do this exactly right first time (which would be a glorious first for the Army), we will be lumbered with hundreds of little faults and tens of major ones, and DERA or the DCTA or whoever does kit design these days will be overwhelmed. If a total overhaul of kit is required, then it needs to be staged, so that each class comes out separately (clothing, then load-carrying, then armour etc), meaning that bugs can be ironed out quickly before the new lot is issued. Otherwise, we'll just have a pile of modular stuff lying around, which no-one will have a clue how to use, and the army will grind to a halt as QMs frantically try to organise and issue it, and work out what it all does.

kitmonster you should give this bloke a job. Maybe he could teach your Grandmother to suck eggs too.

Originally Posted by Bravo_Zulu

Unless they do this exactly right first time (which would be a glorious first for the Army), we will be lumbered with hundreds of little faults and tens of major ones, and DERA or the DCTA or whoever does kit design these days will be overwhelmed. If a total overhaul of kit is required, then it needs to be staged, so that each class comes out separately (clothing, then load-carrying, then armour etc), meaning that bugs can be ironed out quickly before the new lot is issued. Otherwise, we'll just have a pile of modular stuff lying around, which no-one will have a clue how to use, and the army will grind to a halt as QMs frantically try to organise and issue it, and work out what it all does.

This would also be a glorious first for the army.

MSR

Originally Posted by msr

Originally Posted by kitmonster

The specifications are matched to the protective eyewear and tested on the range to make sure the performance is maintained.

Clearly you do not wear the respirator lenses then....

MSR

Nope I don't wear any lenses! Can't comment on what the CBRN IPT does; have only seen the GSR briefly for some integration work.

Originally Posted by Lady_Macbeth

Originally Posted by Bravo_Zulu

Unless they do this exactly right first time (which would be a glorious first for the Army), we will be lumbered with hundreds of little faults and tens of major ones, and DERA or the DCTA or whoever does kit design these days will be overwhelmed. If a total overhaul of kit is required, then it needs to be staged, so that each class comes out separately (clothing, then load-carrying, then armour etc), meaning that bugs can be ironed out quickly before the new lot is issued. Otherwise, we'll just have a pile of modular stuff lying around, which no-one will have a clue how to use, and the army will grind to a halt as QMs frantically try to organise and issue it, and work out what it all does.

kitmonster you should give this bloke a job. Maybe he could teach your Grandmother to suck eggs too.

The mans right....It will be a mother of a problem to overcome. That said there is lots of new kit already on ops and also people are buying stuff that may now get issued. The issuing should be ok as it will be a planned roll out. Lets face it what ever gets issued will be modified by the user; its part of what makes us Brits. Individuals always take a piece of kit and make minor changes to it so it suits them. Remeber it will be tested on a couple of Bns so loads of snagging problems will be sorted out then. Also its been agreed that what comes out of the door is not set in stone and if the user wants a change or a manufacturer comes up with a better piece of kit it will be integrated into the system. Thats what is happening now on ops.

Looking at Ops kit and FIST as long as people get it for pre-op trg they will be ok. The staged roll out is likely to happen because of financial and manufacturing restraints but I would think that units will get the complete system in one go; so staged across the forces not by components...time will tell.

Personally I never found a great trg issue when I moved from putties to combat highs!

The biggest problem with modular kit is that someone has to decide what bit of kit gets used when and that decision is creeping down the rank structure on ops now.

When/if the project gets through Main Gate there are various groups charges with doing the trg plan, fielding plan etc. However the Front Line Commands decide how it goes out.

At the risk of reigniting the Digi Cam debate how are the trials going?

I recall your comments on a thread sometime ago regarding trials against DPM and other patterns. Any observations from those?



Edited to add: stop staring at my avatar!

Is there any way that those of us who have a particular fetish for shiny new items of kit would be able to view this PECOC roadshow as it heads off around the place?

I've sort of been on the periphery of PECOC and I've been impressed, both by the equipment they are looking at but more so by their attitude.

A few things. Firstly webbing. It has been accepted that soldiers will mess with their webbing and customise it to death. Therefore, PECOC will most probably see options for belt, vest and on-armour load carriage. The individual will get a bag of pouches - more than they need - and will set about rigging it up as they find best.

Much of the clothing is comparable with current good civi otdoors kit; think buffalo, lowe, sealskin. They are also looking at keeping labels on the kit, meaning that if it's made by a known company their label will be on it so the blokes know what it is and like to use it. Oakley eye protection, anyone? Also, as well as being functional, the blokes will have to like the kit. If it looks duff it won't be bought.

On cam. Digi isn't doing very well in trials; DPM is much better. The first to get digi were Canada. This was by accident. The first step to developing a new cam is to digitise it, before developing further. However, people saw the prototype and liked it, mainly because it looked all "starship troopers". The Yanks then jumped on the bandwagon and the rest is history. We may end up with a slightly modified DPM; same colours and patterns but perhaps a different balance of colours. There is talk of webbing being a hybrid cam which will work in both temperate and arid, so that you don't need new pouches when off to Iraq or Afghanistan.

All of this may sound like a waste of money, but when you see defence spending you'll see what a real waste is. Camouflage stops you being seen and therefore shot - a bonus I would have thought. Our current load carriage is good, but could be better; and anyone who's carried the real Infantry load on ops will know we need all the help we can. Amongst the things being looked at is a Daysac that sits properly over Osprey and/or it's replacement. Surely a good thing and a development driven by need? New kit, most importantly FIST, is being developed so current loadbearing kit may not match the new requirements at all.

One advantage that the DC IPT dealing with PECOC have is the relatively low cost of manufacture and the fact that clothing is really a consumable. Struff can be fielded and then observations and lessons learned can be introduced as clothing is replaced through wear and tear. PECOC will be good. It's not a waste of defence money; not like aircraft carriers, the third tranche of Typhoon and the posh chairs in the MOD.

Oh, and the boots!! The plan is to have three or four types available and the individual chooses which ones he likes most and finds most comfortable. Tell me that's not very sensible.

Originally Posted by BedIn

I've sort of been on the periphery of PECOC and I've been impressed, both by the equipment they are looking at but more so by their attitude.

A few things. Firstly webbing. It has been accepted that soldiers will mess with their webbing and customise it to death. Therefore, PECOC will most probably see options for belt, vest and on-armour load carriage. The individual will get a bag of pouches - more than they need - and will set about rigging it up as they find best.

Much of the clothing is comparable with current good civi otdoors kit; think buffalo, lowe, sealskin. They are also looking at keeping labels on the kit, meaning that if it's made by a known company their label will be on it so the blokes know what it is and like to use it. Oakley eye protection, anyone? Also, as well as being functional, the blokes will have to like the kit. If it looks duff it won't be bought.

On cam. Digi isn't doing very well in trials; DPM is much better. The first to get digi were Canada. This was by accident. The first step to developing a new cam is to digitise it, before developing further. However, people saw the prototype and liked it, mainly because it looked all "starship troopers". The Yanks then jumped on the bandwagon and the rest is history. We may end up with a slightly modified DPM; same colours and patterns but perhaps a different balance of colours. There is talk of webbing being a hybrid cam which will work in both temperate and arid, so that you don't need new pouches when off to Iraq or Afghanistan.

All of this may sound like a waste of money, but when you see defence spending you'll see what a real waste is. Camouflage stops you being seen and therefore shot - a bonus I would have thought. Our current load carriage is good, but could be better; and anyone who's carried the real Infantry load on ops will know we need all the help we can. Amongst the things being looked at is a Daysac that sits properly over Osprey and/or it's replacement. Surely a good thing and a development driven by need? New kit, most importantly FIST, is being developed so current loadbearing kit may not match the new requirements at all.

One advantage that the DC IPT dealing with PECOC have is the relatively low cost of manufacture and the fact that clothing is really a consumable. Struff can be fielded and then observations and lessons learned can be introduced as clothing is replaced through wear and tear. PECOC will be good. It's not a waste of defence money; not like aircraft carriers, the third tranche of Typhoon and the posh chairs in the MOD.

Oh, and the boots!! The plan is to have three or four types available and the individual chooses which ones he likes most and finds most comfortable. Tell me that's not very sensible.

A sensible idea, but what about senior officers' obsession with uniformity (to the extent that people are not allowed to wear glasses on parade, even the CSM who can't see his watch without them). Everyone will end up being forced to look uniform, even if that means the LMG and GPMG gunners wearing IW ammo pouches or the female soldiers wearing boots that don't fit.

And if we do overcome this, then we need a distinctive helmet, so that we can tell who's British, who's septic and who's Terry on ops, because everyone will look different.

Talking of ressy specs I've had the same ones for ...shit 20 years

But whats this all about ?

http://www.specslab.co.uk/news.php?id=23

Bravo Zulu - I don't see where you're coming from.

CSM not allowed his specks on parade? What unit are you with?

Ref uniformity of webbing. I know of nowhere where this happens now. When I was an OC on Ops my blokes wore belt order, assault vests both issue and non-issue, old style chest rigs, stuff on their osprey, "man-bags", thigh rigs and mixes of all the above. I can honestly say that in 13 years in the Infantry I have hardly ever seen two sets of belt order the same.

Uniformity of dress in barracks, yes. But on exercise or ops? Trops, windproofs, para smocks, arctic smocks, SAS smocks, Danners, Scarpas, Lowas, Hanwags etc Again, probably no two blokes the same.

Look at film from Afghanistan. There are blokes in t-shirts, shorts, with beards etc. The helmet and weapon are the key identifiers.

At least PECOC will go some way to allowing guys choices without having to spend their own cash.