Our boy Greg Grant passed this information down to us that he obtained from someone on the plane with SecDef Gates on his trip to the AO:
And I’ll be asking about equipment in general. For example, one of the members of Congress told me offline at the hearings the other day that he heard some complaints from some of the soldiers about the straps on their backpacks being too thin and putting too much pressure on their shoulders in ways that leave their hands numb; so just little stuff like that. I’ll be asking the soldiers what kind of equipment issues they have that we can do something about back in Washington…
So, this is interesting; the issue of backpack straps has filtered its way down to the Gates level (had any of you heard about this?) and shows that the executive level is looking at these issues as much as the legislative likes to. Maybe some lessons were learned from the Iraq experience where seemingly innocuous Soldier requests become political clubs to batter the administration (body armor, vehicle armoring, MRAPs, drones, etc.). A little preemption on DoD’s part?
Let us know through the TipUsOff line if you’ve heard anything about this pack strap issue…
– Christian
{ 27 comments… read them below or add one }
Restricted blood flow has been a common complaint ever since we started wearing Interceptor vests with ruck sacks. Hardly sounds like an issue that needs to be brought to Congress or SecDef's level. Although, if Gates is concerned about little things like that, someone ought to bring up these damn berets.
I can deal with thin straps. Personally I feel that soldiers wearing glasses in theatre are a much greater issue. One fragile customized peice of euipment lost/broken, and the soldier is totally out of the fight.
Perhaps DOD should start getting lasik for everyone. :) Or the new HD vision implant that was in the news recently (apparently gives you 50/50 vision!)
Glasses are becoming a thing of the past (just not fast enough).
Actually Zach, the Army has been paying for lasik and PRK for those of us who qualify for it since 2004. I had mine done back in 2005. The army considers good vision a combat necessity and not something cosmetic. The only catch is you have to meet certain medical prerequisites to get the surgery.
Jay, if a soldier requires glasses he's supposed to get a couple pair of more durable army issued glasses before he deploys. We're issued shatter-resistant Oakleys or Wiley-X sunglasses and I think they can be fitted with prescription inserts.
TMB,
We are issued inserts with the Revision and ESS, I am not sure about Wiley-x or Oakley. From personal experience the only inserts i could get were for the revision and UVEX The problem is the vision imparment from those inserts. When i wear my inserts i get a fish bowl effect and it distorts the vision. I know other soldiers whom I was deployed with that had the same problem so the spent the $200+ on the stick on inserts for the Oakleys
TMB, you say the army, but what about the other services? Airforce, Navy, Marines, and even the coast guard? I never heard of any of the services getting lasik, last I heard it was banned. This is news to me.
I can't speak for other services, but I've heard certain jobs can't get the surgery such as pilots or some people in the airborne community because it can be dangerous.
I know the Marines and Navy can get lasik unless like TMB says you're a pilot or certain other jobs.
The USAF does allow lasik but I believe it goes back to meeting prerequisites. I just know you have to be 21 years of age. I’m in ATC and I can tell you it is allowed for our occupation so I’d imagine it would be good for pilots, since we go through the same medical tests and must meet the same requirements. Oh and it is free, however, there is a very long waiting list.
Once again, Christian goes out of his way to politicize an issue in defense of the Bush/Rumsfeld command. "Innocuous soldier requests used to 'batter' the (previous) administration?" Oh, my heart BLEEDS for them. How about using the fact they ignored the real enemy in Afghanistan and Pakistan, allowed the U.S.'s #1 fugitive of all time to escape, and lost over 4000 brave American souls in Iraq for still inexplicable reasons? How about using that to "batter" the previous administration? Really Christian. When you become a shill you lose your credibility…
You might be well served by a nap in a quiet room, followed by a nice cup of tea.
Just sayin'.
Democrats lost their credibility, and the media lost all their credibility more than three decades ago.
Rest easy GI Joe, this administration will be blaming the Bush administration for the remaindere of it's one time term. No one seems to see the total lack of LEADERSHIP ABILITY in the Obama administration. He and his CZARS are great at passing the buck to the past administration, and they are wonderfully capable in passing the cost of their "remaking of America" to the next 10 generations, and no one notices. BY THE BY, since everyone seems to believe GORE'S global warming fiction, the country will be flooded by both oceans and there will be no country left to defend.
"Once again, Christian goes out of his way to politicize an issue"
No, "GI Joe", it is YOU stirring up politics here.
"they ignored the real enemy in Afghanistan and Pakistan, allowed the U.S.'s #1 fugitive of all time to escape, and lost over 4000 brave American souls in Iraq for still inexplicable reasons"
I see you recieved your Democrat-issue taking points! Bravo!
"When you become a shill you lose your credibility"
Unlike you, who never had any credibility to begin with….yet, still you shill.
A classic examle of the broken US system when the Sec Defence has to get involved with the issue of… backpack straps! Pathetic.
Backpack straps, beans, bullets.. the better it is the better it is.
The backpack strap lobby, hard at work
Indeed the better the straps are somewhat important but getting the Sec Defence involved? All I can say is no wonder the system is so broken!
When your packing up to 130lbs of gear on your back defective straps can be a problem. Also the fact that a soldier may pack less due to that fact and leaving mission essential items out to lighten the load possibly. If its a problem its a problem. Its the little things that make a difference really! I agree that it shouldn't be Gates problem yet, sounds like we need accountability farther down the chain first!
The SecDef is concerned about pack straps… I’mna thinking that there’s a herd of majors, lt. cols. and assorted senior noncoms that should be getting their walking papers for letting this get by them… at the micro level this is important stuff, at the macro level…I’m glad the SecDef’s staff doesn’t think he has anything better to do.
Gates ought to be looking at the problem BEHIND the too-narrow straps — namely, how did that design make it through testing without being identified and fixed before the gear was ever adopted, procured, and issued.
THAT problem isn't just about the shoulder straps on rucksacks; everyone who has ever served has had to deal with various items of equipment that was just badly designed for the job.
Admittedly no piece of gear is ever going to be a perfect fit for every user under all conditions, but the are certainly a lot of assorted items in the inventory that simply don't fit or don't accomplish the intended purpose adequately. Often these are things where the fix is reasonably obvious to the users.
Congress has thousands of staff who are to "oversee" purchases and never seem to get around to it.
It is eaiser to blame someone else when it is their responsibility, once the money is authorized, to make sure the product delivered is as advertised.
Congress is too busy with "fact finding and fault finding," to do what they are supposed to do.
I hope someone brings up the ACU issue! God, that uniform has to go….
I wonder if outdoor companies would design a better pack than the people working for the government right now. But 130 pounds sounds excessive, and maybe that's the problem that needs to be addressed even more.
I always understood it to be a good thing if Joe is complaining….means he's healthy enough to bitch. As soon as they get quiet,…watch out. Just sayin'.
If they used NiTiNOL bulletproof vests the casualties would probably drop. See NiTiNOL Technologies website. Also armor and projectiles.
When did this become Obama vs Bush issue? Nowhere does the article say that anyone is blaming the Bush administration for bad backpack straps. Gates heard some complaints and he's gonna ask around. Isn't that just good leadership? And anyway, Gates was a Bush appointee…
Not everything is political. The U.S. military is one of the world's largest beaurocracies. Sometimes imperfect designs make it through the system. It's good that the leadership (whether R or D) cares enough to poke around and see if there's a potential solution. Enough already with adding political comments out of nowhere!!
I'm just a woman on this sight—I believe we need to take better care of our men going to war!! The conditions they are in are the worst of any.It isn't any walk in the park!! Their lives are at stake, they need to be given equipment that will make their lives more comfortable, AND safe.Our police officers are better equiped!! They should all be granted time to talk to family also.Equipment to better protect them ,and keep warm,or cool., water proof equipment.,light weight gear,''comfort boots'',that will with stand a mine.they protect their vec.'s better than their men. Can't we protect the better-Their protecting us all.