CBC: "An 'embarrassing' gear shortage has Canadian troops in Latvia buying their own helmets"

[OldSolduer]

Problem: I need to remove or clear snow.


CAF: I need the Binford 9000 snowblower leaf mulcher precision weeder that can also be tied into reserve pay, and all on CSNI


Sometimes, if not most,CAF is the problem

Perfect is the enemy of good enough.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Good point. Same goes for certain tshirts that melt when exposed to heat.

When you have FR clothing, that's definitely the way you want to go. When in doubt, add some velcro, some plastic morale patches, and the plastic DEU belt for extra style. Nobody short circuits strict safety and design standards quite like the RCN!

Nothing more satisfying then spending years and tens of thousands of dollars to qualify something to very strict safety standards and then have the shock proof high quality drain cover sitting next to an arcade machine some genius has zap strapped onto plywood coated in whatever laquer was cheapest at Kent plugged into a jury rigged outlet cut into softwood paneling on a warship.

 

[Remius]

But at that point you're talking tin helmets if any. And suppose those remarks they made to you were from before the lessons of Gallipoli?

If we are talking about helmets that may have been used at Gallipoli…

“Shocking” Results When WWI Helmets Were Compared to Modern Military Designs

WWI helmets protect against shock waves just as well as modern design. French Adrian helmet suggests simple geometry may save brains from overhead blasts. Biomedical engineers from Duke University have demonstrated that, despite significant advancements in protection from ballistics and blunt imp

scitechdaily.com

 

[rmc_wannabe]

But at that point you're talking tin helmets if any. And suppose those remarks they made to you were from before the lessons of Gallipoli?

They had EXFIL integrated helmet systems and SORD plate carrier rigs for everyone, including their RAN PO2 Chief Clerk....

We weren't in a position to throw stones in our dilapidated glass house

 

[Brad Sallows]

Wondering about the intersection of "approved/tested" and the issue raingear I had c. 1983.

 

[markppcli]

This smacks of troops wearing what they want without proper testing and trials.

I'm looking at you "ballistic eyewear" that works great vs ballistics but melts to your eyes in an explosion (unlike the issued ballistic eyewear which does not do that). Is there an approved helmet list? Is ear protection a priority? Or are troops just doing what they want because army guys can't help but buy their own stuff.

If its not approved or tested by Canada than the second order effects are unknown and you might be wearing gear that gets you killed. People talk that this an that is better but they never have the proper engineering to back it up. Or their tests mean nothing related to the requirement. When it comes to safety you don't screw around with personal gear, you take the issued stuff.

Things like rain gear and tactical vests, well that's like a boot problem. One size does not fit all. Those are not safety items so there could easily be an "approved list" of brands/types. That's a personal comfort issue for the most part.

As far as ear pro, I haven't had a set of yellow earplugs issued to me since 2008. Have military issued earpro that fits in my ears and cuts out the sharp noises of rifle fire while letting me hear properly. Probaly a CQ budget item though.

(not to say that we don't have issues, we do... god knows, I've worked in projects).

No one is buying their own helmets. The ones in question are issued on a trial.

The Army write large 100 percent hands out foam ear plugs in every range / training event. Active ear protection is a proven product that is in use across the CAF, just not by the green army at large. The issue isn’t testing its cost. Similarly I’m issued a high cut helmet that’s been tested why isn’t Bloggins in the rifle company? Cost.

re the tacvest. It’s not simply comfort, it’s literally that it doesn’t carry what a soldier needs on the battle field. Ie water, ammunition, grenades, ifak, and radio.

 

[Furniture]

No one is buying their own helmets. The ones in question are issued on a trial.

The Army write large 100 percent hands out foam ear plugs in every range / training event. Active ear protection is a proven product that is in use across the CAF, just not by the green army at large. The issue isn’t testing its cost. Similarly I’m issued a high cut helmet that’s been tested why isn’t Bloggins in the rifle company? Cost.

The troops are asking for more than the CAF can give...

 

[KevinB]

This smacks of troops wearing what they want without proper testing and trials.

I'm looking at you "ballistic eyewear" that works great vs ballistics but melts to your eyes in an explosion (unlike the issued ballistic eyewear which does not do that). Is there an approved helmet list? Is ear protection a priority? Or are troops just doing what they want because army guys can't help but buy their own stuff.

If its not approved or tested by Canada than the second order effects are unknown and you might be wearing gear that gets you killed. People talk that this an that is better but they never have the proper engineering to back it up. Or their tests mean nothing related to the requirement. When it comes to safety you don't screw around with personal gear, you take the issued stuff.

Things like rain gear and tactical vests, well that's like a boot problem. One size does not fit all. Those are not safety items so there could easily be an "approved list" of brands/types. That's a personal comfort issue for the most part.

As far as ear pro, I haven't had a set of yellow earplugs issued to me since 2008. Have military issued earpro that fits in my ears and cuts out the sharp noises of rifle fire while letting me hear properly. Probaly a CQ budget item though.

(not to say that we don't have issues, we do... god knows, I've worked in projects).

I will acknowledge that can be a concern.
But it’s also mostly an overblown concern and sometimes a point of embarrassment for the CAF when a lot of the personal purchase gear has better protection than issued stuff.

FR clothing for years was ignored by the CA, the old OD Combats and first few CADPAT versions were absolutely awful for that.

Ballistic protection is often an arguable point, as like @IRepoCans pointed out the CA ballistic vest isn’t a good fit, and the plates aren’t generally properly fitted.
The other issue is Fragmentation protection isn’t the same as small arms projectile protection.

The old (well 2007 era) US Army Interceptor Body Armor is a prime example of a useless system that was just too bulky to be effective for a combat soldier.
Now it had some good ideas for scalable additions, but was just as bulky and awkward as the CAF best (albeit the ESAPI plates where contoured correctly in it with the soft armor to allow correct alignment and spread out the impact so the plate would stay together on impacts).

Having taken the older Gallet helmet to the range, and see what it does compared to a MICH/ACH, I don’t think that a lot of the CAF tests are done very well as far as trying to replicate reasonable environmental usage conditions - and as a result like the Ballistic Eyewear often turns up doing better than some other models, but don’t always work out to be a reflective result in operations.

 

[Blackadder1916]

I’d be curious as to how they could really come up with definitive metrics that would point to specific cases that were actually statistically relevant.

ICD codes. That's how the medical world (and military medical world specifically) keep track of injury, disease and death trends.

2023 ICD-10-CM Codes S00-S09: Injuries to the head

Look up free coding details for ICD-10 code range S00-S09 that cover Injuries to the head.

www.icd10data.com

2023 ICD-10-CM Codes Y36*: Operations of war

www.icd10data.com

 

[Baloo]

As a note to anyone referencing the photograph in the first post, it is not taken in Latvia. It depicts a soldier from the UK Training Element during the CDS' visit in the fall of 2022. Not only is the geography incorrect, it makes assumptions about the individual's purchase. Yes, they are 3 PPCLI.

 

[markppcli]

As a note to anyone referencing the photograph in the first post, it is not taken in Latvia. It depicts a soldier from the UK Training Element during the CDS' visit in the fall of 2022. Not only is the geography incorrect, it makes assumptions about the individual's purchase. Yes, they are 3 PPCLI.

And 3 VP is / was trialling helmets as part of the DICE project.

 

[CBH99]

Are we going back to the first Khandahar go around where a friend of my Dad's was raising money for desert camouflage uniforms because we didn't have any?

In all fairness...

- We had just accepted the idea that peacekeeping was going to be our jam for the rest of time (hence our tactical vest being designed for low intensity UN operations, not combat...why some units insisted their members wear them when we were in Kandahar is fucking mind boggling)

- It wasn't THAT much worse than the US Army's universal camo that turned out to be not so universal (or even camo, really, like anywhere...)

 

[KevinB]

ICD codes. That's how the medical world (and military medical world specifically) keep track of injury, disease and death trends.

2023 ICD-10-CM Codes S00-S09: Injuries to the head

Look up free coding details for ICD-10 code range S00-S09 that cover Injuries to the head.

www.icd10data.com

2023 ICD-10-CM Codes Y36*: Operations of war

www.icd10data.com

The point being how could you attribute it to a ‘higher’ cut helmet - the difference in actual coverage is fairly minimal as the days of the outrageously high cut SEAL helmets are over - and there would only be a very small degree of explosions that occurred that would injury the soldier with one and not the other.

 

[KevinB]

)

- It wasn't THAT much worse than the US Army's universal camo that turned out to be not so universal (or even camo, really, like anywhere...)

if you ever get in a gun fight in a gravel pit, that pattern would be great.

It sucks for 99.9999% of other things.

 

[CBH99]

I'd settle for a helmet that isn't nearly as old as I am and being issued armour of any kind for the first time in my 11 year career.

Not holding my breath.

Dang, I genuinely didn't realize the current state of things.

I got out in 2011, but most of my career had Afghanistan as the primary focus.

We were doing do much training, then pre-dep training, then deploying, etc - I thought body armour had just become a standard issued item at the unit level



The more I learn about some day to day stuff currently, the more I feel like I was spoiled when I was in

 

[markppcli]

I will acknowledge that can be a concern.
But it’s also mostly an overblown concern and sometimes a point of embarrassment for the CAF when a lot of the personal purchase gear has better protection than issued stuff.

FR clothing for years was ignored by the CA, the old OD Combats and first few CADPAT versions were absolutely awful for that.

Ballistic protection is often an arguable point, as like @IRepoCans pointed out the CA ballistic vest isn’t a good fit, and the plates aren’t generally properly fitted.
The other issue is Fragmentation protection isn’t the same as small arms projectile protection.

The old (well 2007 era) US Army Interceptor Body Armor is a prime example of a useless system that was just too bulky to be effective for a combat soldier.
Now it had some good ideas for scalable additions, but was just as bulky and awkward as the CAF best (albeit the ESAPI plates where contoured correctly in it with the soft armor to allow correct alignment and spread out the impact so the plate would stay together on impacts).

Having taken the older Gallet helmet to the range, and see what it does compared to a MICH/ACH, I don’t think that a lot of the CAF tests are done very well as far as trying to replicate reasonable environmental usage conditions - and as a result like the Ballistic Eyewear often turns up doing better than some other models, but don’t always work out to be a reflective result in operations.

I’ve also shot at a Canadian Helmet and the issued frag vest. The results were not encouraging. I think the Ballistiv Eyewear example gets touted when frankly it’s probably the exception vs the rule, for all the melting UA t shirts, no one complains about the issues thermals.

The point being how could you attribute it to a ‘higher’ cut helmet - the difference in actual coverage is fairly minimal as the days of the outrageously high cut SEAL helmets are over - and there would only be a very small degree of explosions that occurred that would injury the soldier with one and not the other.

thank you, that’s was what I was trying to say

 

[KevinB]

Dang, I genuinely didn't realize the current state of things.

I got out in 2011, but most of my career had Afghanistan as the primary focus.

We were doing do much training, then pre-dep training, then deploying, etc - I thought body armour had just become a standard issued item at the unit level



The more I learn about some day to day stuff currently, the more I feel like I was spoiled when I was in

Hey the first armor I was issued in the CAF was the old US Army OD Vietnam era flak vest.
.22LR went through it if anyone cares.
Then the OD FYR Frag Vest, .22LR went thru it too

 

[Blackadder1916]

The point being how could you attribute it to a ‘higher’ cut helmet - the difference in actual coverage is fairly minimal as the days of the outrageously high cut SEAL helmets are over - and there would only be a very small degree of explosions that occurred that would injury the soldier with one and not the other.

The question that was asked was how they could come up with the metrics. The data has been traditionally gathered using ICD codes or other systems for decades at least going back to the major wars of this and the last century. Most developed militaries will routinely make comparisons of mortality and morbidity statistics with previous war/operations timelines. Or individuals may note what they consider abnormalities and make specific study of the differences.

While it doesn't specifically address this question, this journal article is in that vein.

Combat Helmets and Blast Traumatic Brain Injury

Abstract Background: The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and the prominence of traumatic brain injury (TBI), mostly from improvised explosive devices, have focused attention on the effectiveness of combat helmets. Purpose: This paper examines the importance of TBI, the role and history of the...

jmvh.org

 

[markppcli]

The question that was asked was how they could come up with the metrics. The data has been traditionally gathered using ICD codes or other systems for decades at least going back to the major wars of this and the last century. Most developed militaries will routinely make comparisons of mortality and morbidity statistics with previous war/operations timelines. Or individuals may note what they consider abnormalities and make specific study of the differences.

While it doesn't specifically address this question, this journal article is in that vein.

Combat Helmets and Blast Traumatic Brain Injury

Abstract Background: The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and the prominence of traumatic brain injury (TBI), mostly from improvised explosive devices, have focused attention on the effectiveness of combat helmets. Purpose: This paper examines the importance of TBI, the role and history of the...

jmvh.org

No my question was how you’d a ) determine the injury was a result of a low cut vs a High cut and b) gather statistically significant results

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Hey the first armor I was issued in the CAF was the old US Army OD Vietnam era flak vest.
.22LR went through it if anyone cares.
Then the OD FYR Frag Vest, .22LR went thru it too

I treated my PPE in Afghan like Linus' security blanket;

"I'm sick shleping this stupid shit around, but so far so good so I guess it works."

That said, I knew I was toast if a 7.62 hit me anywhere other than square in the plate, as well as if I won the leg lottery with an IED.

I wonder how much of that "wear issued PPE" was to ensure plausible deniability by the GoC if well..."war" happened. Bad press an all that if any of those transfer cases at 8 Wing were because of something that could be pinned on the CAF. "We take the safety of our troops seriously... we test our PPE extensively... and so on...."