Ultralight Tac Nylon

[Diz]

After recently attending the SOFIC, I have been thinking about some rigs I saw there and how to apply those concepts to my own gear. There were several pieces of kit, some chest rigs and small rucksacks that were designed specifically for SOF units that were really interesting. To give you a little background, right after we went into Asstan, these guys came to the conclusion that they just had to lighten up their loads. So looking at the civilian ultralight concepts, they began working on ways to make their kit lighter. One of the things to come out of that was ultralight LBE. Let me say right here that this is not for everybody. This is something the top 1% of the SOF community is experimenting with, so I am not saying let's all go out and get some. First off, it isn't available commercially, and secondly, it may not be suitable or necessary for your needs.

The chest rigs were a double mag format, with GP pouches on the sides. The big differences were the pouches were direct sewn and all the extra webbing associated with PALS/modular designs were dispensed with. The next step was to go to a 330d material, which is 1/3 the weight of "std" cordura. These two features alone prolly account for a 50% weight-savings. They were other details added to the mix, such as minimum hardware, cordura straps (vs webbing), and lighter 337 webbing (vs the heavier 668 "PALS" webbing).

The rucksacks were an interesting mix of features, very similar in size and layout to some of the Camelbak rigs. Again the materials were lighter and some interesting features added such as a mesh and cordura helmet holder on the back.

Looking at these designs made me re-evaluate what I've been doing as of late. I am now thinking in terms of what I can do to reduce the weight on my designs. I think over the years as I've added features, I've also added weight, so I'm gonna take a hard look at that.

You may think, what's the big deal in saving a few onces here and there. But if you have to do any extended patrolling in your gear, it can be significant. As always, terrain and situation.

My thoughts were, what's the big deal with the LBE if the armor still weighs a ton? But I think you will see that weight paired down a bit as well. And yes, it's a trade-off, between protection and mobility. No one can tell you what to do here. But there are some guys who are trading a bit of armor (and nylon)for a lighter load and therefore increasing mobility. And as GearGuru said, if everyone reduced the weight of the gear they make by 10% across the board, then the soldier's load would be reduced by 10% total. So yes, the ounces add up to pounds and it's something I definately think it's worth taking a look at.

[m.adams]

As a fan Diz.. I'll be watching to see what you come up with.

[Dave L.]

Great idea!

I started thinking along those lines a few months ago when I bought an American Made, Iraqi Military, Point Blank Vest(with 3A & Plates).
The carrier itself seems to be made from single layer 500D Cordura or less- With all the armor removed it weights nothing- but also made me think how much heavier it would be made from 2+ layers of 1000D.

[Diz]

I have been researching the civilian ultralight initiatives as of late but was still pretty much in the mulling it over mode until I saw this new gear.

The question in my mind was how much of it is directly applicable to someone in the tactical mode, versus non-tactical trekking. I have watched with great interest as the SOF has fielded things like the PCU system, which is very close to what civilian mountaineers would be wearing. The new shelters, sleep systems, and stoves are also very much cutting edge. As well as boots, socks, gloves, gaitors, etc.

Next comes the question of the rucksack. Military rucks, especially custom made, tend to be much heavier than their civilian counterparts. While there are good reasons for this, the question is, have we gone too far, and can we lighten up? I think the answer is yes. A good civilian ruck will be at or under 1 lb per 1,000 cu". Most military rucks are over (some way over) 1.5 lbs per 1,000 cu".

Finally you have to look at armor and weapons. First armor. Once SOCOM standardized on the CIRAS or RBAV I, that became the gold standard. Now we have the new RBAV II from SDS/BAE. Even so there are those who still feel this is too heavy and cumbersome. Now we are seeing separate, lighter weight, packcloth armor carriers, combined with light weight chest rigs. For many, this package gives much better versatility. For some, the armor package is even being cut back. Again, terrain and situation.

Speaking of chest rigs, the ultralight concept has slowly made it's way down to LBE. And this is where I must say that I was among the crowd that pushed for "bomb-proof" gear. I advocated 1,000d cordura gear to replace our issue packcloth. I put PALS webbing all over everything I made. The result was much heavier gear, but we felt it was worth it to get the extra durability. Well, after talking with several folks at the show, I have re-oriented my thinking. I think we need to re-balance the need for durablity versus light weight.

Again I feel I must post a disclaimer stating this is for the top 1% of SOF and those in similar situations, especially in high altitude, rugged terrain. I'm not saying everybody go out and chase this trend just cuz the big dogs are doing it.

[Erick Gelhaus]

Diz-
Understand the Who, What and Why portions, but it is encouraging. Most especially in the armor area as that will (someday) trickle down to the Big Mil. Appreciate you taking the time to post this.

[Tim]

Diz,

I have worked in the tactical nylon industry for a couple of years now and have been trying to make new products "lighter, stronger, better." I have a background in the military and as a backpacking guide; therefore, I think I understand both sides of this industry pretty well. The amount of wear and tear a product takes over the course of a year with a military user is equal to a lifetime of wear for most civilian users so concepts, materials etc. don't jump right over. Also, when something fails for a commercial user, it is an inconvience for that week or weekend and then while it is being repaired but for a military user the consequences for a equipment failure could be much greater. As you know, repairs and replacements aren't available at the local REI in Afghanistan.

So, continue to "push the envelope" in making new things, as materials continue to improve they will get lighter and stronger. Our troops will be better for it and the concepts will make their way to the Big Army programs. We just need to design them intelligently - not putting extra stuff that isn't reallly needed and adds weight and costs.

Tim

[Ben Lenett]

As someone that is involved in this end of things as well, I can say that most units put a lifecycle of no more than 6-12 months on this type of kit. They do not expect it to accept 2-3 tours on one kit.

The problem is when you have an end user who is more active than the six month replacement schedule, and now he is in the middle of nowhere with a damaged chest rig.

Saving weight is good, but it comes with a rather significant price and you need to make sure that your needs fit these requirements. A cop doesn't need to dress like CAG.

I would appreciate it greatly if people would not dicuss what color patterns certain groups may or may not be using. That is going a great injustice to those men.

[Diz]

Well, it will certainly be interesting to see how this 330d ultralight gear holds up. Military use can be extreme use but so is civilian trekking and mountaineering. I have been researching it as well and have not found evidence of catestrophic blow-outs happening left and right. But I have found reports of it wearing out more quickly, especially when overloaded or subject to abraision, so yes it is not going to last anywhere near as long as current beefy gear.

There is definately a trade off between durablity and weight savings. I think the trick is to balance the two. I may not build any 330d ultralight gear, but I will certainly look for ways to lighten up my designs, like single layer construction, and direct sewing pouches vs PALS webbing and so forth.

Should LEOs be concerned with this? I dunno. For SWAT type direct action missions, maybe not so much. For extended, search and rescue type missions, I'd say it's worth looking at.

[Stephen_H]

In many ways, this is not a new concept. It is one that a select few units are re-examining for certain roles. The advent of MOLLE has also helped return it to the limelight, but for years soldiers that "knew" would replace as much metal hardware as possible with 550 cord for comfort and weight. The long lived ALICE pack was/is made of 430d pack cloth; not twice as heavy Cordura (except by some aftermarket manufacturers). I used the same ALICE pack all but the last year of my 9 years in service and was unable to wear it out. With MOLLE you accept a certain amount of weight as part of being in the modular business, but those onces can quickly become pounds if good packing and equipment discipline is not used.

Like Ben said it is certainly something to be explored, but is not for everybody and can easily be taken too far in the interest of saving another ounce of weight.

Stephen

[ToddG]

One of the teams I dealt with when at SIG was issued P226 pistols, but a number of their guys opted for the P228 instead as a weight savings measure. The difference, I think, is less than two ounces for a fully loaded gun. Add three loaded mags and the difference between the two is right about one quarter of a pound. The guys doing it claimed it made a huge difference for them.