After talking with vonGarvin at work today, I had to keep reading this thread to see where I would jump in: now is as good a time as any, I guess.
I suppose when people are as passionate about something (such as their hatred of the TV) there has to be something behind it. I myself am a School weenie, and have only worn the TV while instructing courses here in Gagetown and to do ruckmarches. Other than getting the wrong size (typical, ain't it) I don't mind it (once I figure out where the optimal place for everything is), but I have never had to use it "in the shit". Having said that, I think it is leaps and bounds better than the webbing it replaces, and the LBV/LCV it replaced on operations (that I wore for 2 tours in Bosnia). My opinion is this: it fit's the 80% solution (as mentioned by somebody in regards to how trials work). Perhaps the Infantry Corps should look at developing something for themselves, separate from the TV, much the same that the Armour Corps has C8's for vehicle crews (yes, I know other arms (and the squirrels) carry them, but I am speaking in general terms).
So, rather than venting spleens here (though getting valuable feedback from people after the rant's have cooled down) approach the powers-that-be at the Infantry School (or Corps headquarters, which I assume is one and the same). MAYBE, something along the lines of an IOR (or at least high priority T&E process) could be done with current OTS gear (I don't follow the "Gear Whore" scene, so won't embarass myself by naming the "wrong" company), and have reps from ALL the battalions rather than whomever happens to end up always trialling the gear (if you know what I'm getting at.....), from the crusty career Cpl's on up, rather than just the aging MWO or CWO who's last operation was for his hip replacement after falling off his M548 in REFORGER '83 >
. It needs to be done quickly, I would say, but efficiently (remembering to cover the 80% solution), because it always seems that once we pass the point of no return (picking one "winner" and then not turning back even after everyone realizes they backed the wrong horse (LSVW, TCCCS, old rain jacket (the one with detachable hood, and that was more effective (which didn't amount to much of an improvement) when worn inside out), new combat belt (which, BTW, can no doubt be used to mount a saddle on an elephant based on the length of it)), something better comes out, and we always seem to end up with "buyers regret".
Personally, I really like the idea of being able to buy things through authorized dealers, but that opens up a can of worms. Places like Edmonton and Valcartier would be laughing, but the more backwater bases (yes, I mean Gagetown) would be screwed (has anybody here ever tried to find decent kit - that has to be tried on, like boots - here? Yes the internet, eBay, etc is wonderful, but I am NOT going to buy a pair of boots or gloves (been there......) over the internet unless I can be sure that it is going to fit (a size 11.5 by Matterhorn isn't the same as 11.5 by Corcoran, etc, etc). And as for "authorized": who is going to be the approving authority??? CTS pers? Supply pers? Medical pers (for boots, etc)? RSM's??? Soldiers (in other words, people who vote with their wallets)? Wouldn't this just cry out for cronie-ism (you have to buy from retired RSM Bloggins' store..... or company). I heard a story (which I related in one of the "Mk III combat boots suck" posts) at one of the local outfitters (the only one, so do the math) that the Base RSM had say in what boots were authorized for LPO (when they ran out of MkIII's on base, I was authorized to LPO boots), and he had decreed that there would be no canvas sided boots allowed. Was this based on safety? Aesthetics? Ergonomics? I don't know if anybody truly knows (BTW, I bought the Model 1944 Corcorans (canvas sided) with money out of my own pocket, and don't regret a penny spent).
Anyway, I have to admit that we have come a loooonnnnngggg way from the bad old days, and yes, it has taken an inordinately lengthy period of time to get even what I consider the "basics" out to the troops, but I'm not sure what is accomplished by people "whining" in the media that "this sucks, and that sucks, and I HAD to buy a civvie GPS because they wouldn't give me one [so says the Pte rifleman, who doesn't really NEED one, but Joe Sixpack in Canmore doesn't know that, but writes his MP complaining about it anyway 'cause he feels sorry for the youngster, and causes a shitstorm at NDHQ for no real reason]". There is some truth to the complaints, but there is a much better means to get what one needs than to cry to the media (sorry Globe and Mail reporter....). It might not have the immediacy that we would all like, but it prevents knee jerk reactions made by politicians (or politicians in uniform) such as "buy the first chest-rig that the first soldier you see suggests!!" and then that lackey bumps into, say, me, and I say "Go to Wheeler's, dude!!!" and then EVERYBODY will want to kill me. Or the dreaded "No chest rigs will be worn on this TF!!!!" because the TF commander (or the CLS) has egg on his face, and shit rolls down hill. Life is like chess: always be thinking more than one move ahead. I'm sure that more than a few blind eye's would have turned, but the glare of the media that this has brought will likely result in nothing good due to the pressures felt or forced by commanders.
Anyway, fight the good fight, and hopefully, someday, someway, everybody will be happy with the equipment we have (bloody unlikely, but one can dream, no!?!?)
Al
Editted for clarity
