NSN for PLCE infantry Longback Bergen

Discussion in 'Weapons, Equipment & Rations' started by cokecan, Dec 3, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. hi,

    sounds deeply sad, but i need to find the NSN for the longback version of the infantry bergen.

    not a walt, but i need something of that size to do a fortnight-long backpacking trip in the North-West highlands in Feburary and i can't /won't afford a vulcan or similar. so its off to Fleabay for a bargain, but so very few sellers will put whether its a longback or shortback on the description. i've tried asking some, but they go 'dunno, but i've gorra part number.....' which, not knowing the different part numbers, is fcuk all use to me!

    and yes, i will stick a bright yellow rucksac cover on it.

    cheers, grateful for your help.

  2. You can probably get a comparable civvy rucksack for around the same price.

    Why the long back anyway?

    It's the same capacity as the short back, just longer and narrower (the sleeping bag practically fills it!)
  3. 8465 99 978 9220
  4. cheers folks!

    i love arrse...

    i can't get a both large and heavy duty 'sac for a similar price, (believe me, i've tried) normally i use a POD 47+12 Cragsac for backpacking and climbing trips, but while it'll do 3 days in winter it'll burst at a week!

    i would go for a Berghaus Extrem Expedition - an 80+ltr very strong but ridiculously lightweight beast, but because it was the best 'sac they'd done in years BH stopped making it and they're like rocking horse shit 2nd hand.

    has to be a longback because the shortback version has the hip-belt going around my ribs, fcuk knows why, i'm a dwarf!

    cheers m'dears!

  5. You should never use the belt on the bergen anyway! Shortbacks are far much better!!
  6. "You should never use the belt on the bergan any way."

    Why not? It is there for a reason. Usually it clashes with webbing but he (hopefully) won't be wearing any. It usually helps spread the load, questionable with the belt the issue bergan, but still better than a kick in the teeth.

    "Shortbacks are far much better!!"


    If you are a stunted little drag arrse then the short back is indeed for you. On me it looks like a day sack leaving about 18 inches between top of pouches and bottom of bergan. The frame is particularly uncomfortable if I lower it down as well (they are shaped according to size). They are made in two sizes for a reason. One size does not fit all. I don't hear everyone clamouring for a short doss bag for the same reason.

    6 foot or more - long back.
    Shallow end of genepool - short back.
  7. Short backs are a lot easier to tab with as told by our P-Coy staff. I am 6ft and find it a hell of a lot easier than a long back, as do most of the other blokes I know.
  8. Agreed Ronnie. I have a shortback I got from a mate and by far prefer it to the longback I was issued.

    I'm 6'2"
  9. Shortback is the way ahead.
  10. danke gentlemen, i now have a spanking new longback bergen - with pouches - for the silly price of £40!

    the fitting of the bergens is bizarre, i'm 5'8'' but the shortback ends 6 inches from my hips and the hip belt (clue) goes around the bottom of my rib cage.

    not being a reet sad fcuker i woun't be wearing belt kit on a civvy climbing/walking trip, and in February in the north-west highlands there's very little tabbing to be done.... so the long back is definately the right 'sac.

    nipped down to Galloway for a daytrip carrying the 'sac with a load for four days and it did really well, there was ice everywhere so i was skidding about like a mong on roller-skates, but the 'sac stayed where it was put and didn't cause balance problems. i was a little concerned about carrying that much weight with a wierd centre of gravity on scrambles, but again no problems.

  11. shortback probably best if you have belt kit little point having a fancy back system on a military pack there designed to transfer weight from the back to the hips utterly pointless if your going to have a load of pouches on and around your hips.
    I quote I member of the berghaus design team for some reason soldiers like to get into there sleeping bags with muddy boots why?
  12. I'm about 5'5 tall
    should i use the short back or just stick with the normal version that I've got
  13. Hey Mini, for comparison I'm 5'9 and find shortback the way to go.

    Used a longback and was a bit of a pallaver when you've got webbing under it and helmet on to be honest. Used it on AT (minus helmet and beltkit of course) and it was fine, mind.

    I wish our current lot would get some shortbacks in stores, as the long ones aren't much fun for a shortarse like me, but there we go.
  14. I think you just got waaahed...

    T C
  15. wat do u mean by this?