Just wanted to cross-reference this here, since we tend to talk about this stuff in other threads.  I have been looking at several different rucks and belt kit combinations over the past few years.  For my money, if you live a sub-tropical place like I do, and make no mistake, if you're in the south east US, you are in this category,  it pays to take a look at  this combination.

I've mentioned a few I've been "kit-bashing", such as the Large ALICE and TT/LBT updates, the short back Bergen, the Jarhead FILBE, and the Doggy Molle Large.  Most of these revolve around the Down East 1606 frame.

I've also seen the Jay Jay's Jungle ruck w/1606 frame.  And someone else mentioned the Platatac Jungle ruck, and the Crossfire DG-16, which features a new DE frame (and suspension) that looks phenomenal.

I find it fascinating that guys are in totally different locations around the globe and working towards the same solutions.  Probably would never meet up in the past.  Nowadays we can communicate and cross-pollinate, if that's the right term, our ideas, and designs.  

I am pretty low-tech, more akin to field mods with some limited technical capability.  Jay Jays is more state of the art, with a very competent and skilled workforce.  Crossfire has pulled out all the stops with cutting edge technology in frame and suspension design.  Any dim-wit can do what I'm doing; Jay Jay's strikes a nice balance between quality and price; Crossfire gives you the very latest in ruck design for the working professional.  So you have a  range of choices here, from mild to wild.  

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

Original Post

Man, too many threads. 

But this will do. You have mentioned the concept of a short ruck that rests on top of a waistbelt/fannypack. Right? 

I sorta like that you are going there as I did that in the waywayback. A pack like a 3DAP with frame sheet before they existed (a sort of padded back ascent pack I had) and I sewed straps and camlocks to the bottom of it, and to the top of a big fanny pack. Did 3 day weekends in the flinthills, etc. with it. Worked fine. 

So... poking at options I remembered the Kifaru Tailgunner. And lookie:

That pad with black on it is the belt retention pad for any of their rucks. So you can add a molle waist belt. And shoulder straps, though I would try not to. 

Stick pouches on the waist belt, and you have a big-fannypack battlebelt. Use compression straps judiciously and don't overload it. 

But then, find a nice short back ruck, toss the waistbelt, and get something to allow you to clip it to the top of the tailgunner. Might work immediately. If not, then it would seem also possible to be crazier and get all custom. Like, make the ruck stays extend down so they dock into the buttpack somehow. I can see it in my head. 

If I hadn't just settled into two new rigs and a new ruck/transport system, I'd try this just for funzies. Hell, I could have kept the Zulu as my short back ruck for the top of it, but I sold it. 

Anyway, it's an idea. 

The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living and the get rich quick theory of life. – Theodore Roosevelt

 

Joined: 19NOV2004   Location: Mission, Kansas

Attachments

Photos (2)

My bad, I thought I was putting the topics where they belonged so a guy looking for info could find it, but it did make a bunch of different posts.

Yeah, the docking concept with two rucks.  Always was a great idea, just tough to pull off.  You are essentially back to a short back and belt kit, with a bit more room for E&E or sustainment kit.  The "buttpack" top and the rucksack bottom need to be shaped to work together; and yeah some way of extending a lumbar pad to tuck in behind the belt.  

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

I guess I'm late to the party!

What you have described above is in production and testing with the US Soldier enhancement program, as well as many unit level purchases. The battle belt has a holster on the back to receive the bottom of our pack frame. The belt and pack can be connected, like every other pack on the market; it can also be left disconnected so you can remove your pack while retaining your belt kit.

The frame and pack contour perfectly to the back plate or your back, without pontoons/extra pieces. The parts are interchangeable very quickly for mission customization. The frame can be attached to an ALICE medium pack.

Does this seem like what you are looking for?

Also, we are working on a new frame shape that will provide more standoff for even better ventilation when not wearing a PC.

Thank for pointing out this thread Jon.

 

 

Yeah that's not a bad system.   Your stock pack would work for me, but I think the military guys would prefer an external frame for heavier loads.  So yeah, if you could put a DG-16 frame on it, it would be GTG.  Even better, instead of top sleeve, if it had tabs to integrate with the frame.  I'm getting a bag from Crossfire that will be a cross between the DG-16, and the legacy Mk 6.  The tabs that fit the bag to the frame make all the difference.  Instead of all the weight just hanging down for the sleeve, it is evenly loaded around the frame.       

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

What Shoobe shows is a great way for ultralight trail backpacking.  Almost no weight on shoulders, all on hips, and minimal heat retention on the back.

Are there any studies showing where/how the human body releases heat?  It seems the back/lumbar region is a huge surface area for sweat and heat radiation, and any internal frame pack, in a hot/humid environment, is not the right direction.

Tankersteve

In Yorktown, VA.          Joined August 2008

Gov't Civilian, after retiring from active duty in 2015. 

 

'One's own open sore never smells.'  - Haitian proverb

Good question. Found this which seems to support that idea indeed:

http://www.lboro.ac.uk/service..._sweat-research.html

Research at Loughborough University to find out where athletes sweat the most has revealed surprising results. Scientists at the University’s Environmental Ergonomics Research Centre investigated sweating in male athletes in a research project sponsored by global sports company adidas.

(sorry, best image is behind a paywall or something)

...

The results showed unexpectedly high levels of sweating on the central and lower back, particularly in the area of the spine.

High sweat rates were also found on the forehead whilst the lowest were towards the extremities, in the research published by the European Journal of Applied Physiology.

Academics were surprised by high levels of sweating along the spine. The back of the body is less exposed to airflow – wind speed due to running – and thus less efficient at cooling the body – the primary function of sweat. So, more sweat will drip off the body without cooling it.

Discussions with colleagues with expertise in evolutionary biology raised a speculative explanation.

Prof Havenith said: “Our research records scientific data but asking ‘why’ raises an interesting question.

“If this pattern that we observe is a remnant from when we moved on all fours, before we walked upright, then sweating on the back would make sense.

...

 

The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living and the get rich quick theory of life. – Theodore Roosevelt

 

Joined: 19NOV2004   Location: Mission, Kansas

Ha, yeah some eggheads speculating on a bunch of bullshit they'll never be able to prove.  The only time I put on a dog collar, get down on all fours and bark is for my wife.  But let's keep that between us and the internet.  

But anyways, sweat glands, ok, all we got to do is keep the wind at our backs, no problemo.

Huck brings up an interesting point, before this degenerates into a firefight; there are good LBE solutions to carrying 35-50lbs, which may be of interest to civvy's doing whatever they're into.  Then there are solutions for heavier loads, say in the 50-75 lb arena.  Add into the mix are weather and terrain considerations.  

So, in regards to military applications, where a squaddie may have to carry a bunch of shit, I think the external frame is king.  Others may agree or disagree, but when it comes to really heavy-hauling, this is what I've seen, time and again.  So this is why I like the short back, external ruck concept, in conjunction with a belt kit.  I still believe this is the best all-around LBE solution, for military ops.    

In regards to para-military activities, the insurgent still has to carry a bunch of shit, but in most cases, will not have the loads of a uniformed soldier.  So this becomes a gray area, in that a short back external ruck and belt kit may still be worn, however, within this "weight class", so to speak, there may be viable alternatives, such as an A-PAK type design.   I won't comment on competition or other activities, only to say if you are using that as a training tool, great; if not, well, wear whatever you want man.   

However, when we get into hot/humid weather ops, another consideration is ventilation around back.  Now I am not a scientist, but I can fucking-well tell you what an internal frame ruck on your back feels like on a hot summer day, humping up a mountain side.  You are literally drenched.  You are now wearing that 3L bladder.  So, whether you are humping 35 or 75 lbs, if you are in hot temps, then an external frame ruck makes a lot of sense.

Then again, for cold weather ops, the internal frame may be a very good choice.  If you don't have to worry about excessive sweating, then you might not need the stand-off of an external.  You may even opt for chest-mounted LBE.  And this opens up space for a long back ruck, with hipbelt.  Which is beyond the scope of this thread, but here for illustrative purposes.

So yeah, again, tools in the tool box.  In my personal opinion, the Crossfire DG-series, with external frame, and integrated bag and harness is the best solution for an armed citizen, doing longer range patrols, in extreme hot weather.  If I was doing the same patrol in cold weather, I might use the same ruck, or go to an internal design.  And to briefly touch on terrain.  A road march on mostly smooth and level terrain is a far cry from a rocky trail up a mountain.  Not to mention land nav in the woods.  An internal might be a better choice for when balance becomes an issue.  And good Lord, I don't even want to throw this one in, but, IF you have to wear BA, the external gives you room for that.  Ideally I would want both.  A design that converts back and forth would be nice.  If not, then I'd pick an external.          

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

Diz posted:

...I can fucking-well tell you what an internal frame ruck on your back feels like on a hot summer day, humping up a mountain side.  You are literally drenched.  You are now wearing that 3L bladder.  So, whether you are humping 35 or 75 lbs, if you are in hot temps, then an external frame ruck makes a lot of sense.

Then again, for cold weather ops, the internal frame may be a very good choice.  If you don't have to worry about excessive sweating...

They did say they were speculating as to why. But the sweat map comports with what TankerSteve brought up and I agree that we have known also. We sweat a lot through the back. More than anywhere, it turns out, so that's good to know really. 

 

Internal frame designs vary a LOT. I have been unhappy with them for a few decades as everyone went to the molded backplane with full contact. I was raised on these old ones with a few contact pads, not dissimilar to an external frame. 

In my old-days ruck I'd keep the map (I was always the point/nav guy) between my back and the pack, as there was a hole there that dropped down to the waist belt, so a folded map would not fall out. Yes, that much space between me and the pack bag. 

(Bonus: carry things that poke at the pack body), they don't stab you in the spine_

My current Kifaru internal frame ruck is back to that basic method. A few contact points and lots of ventilation. I won't carry above a small assault pack that's all against my body. Even that, on the hottest days, can be a bit of a pain. 

 

Winter:

I have had to deal with "heat casualties" (dehydration) in the winter. And sweating can soak your warmth layers which even when high tech are less effective. Moisture control is at least as important in the cold. Want that same ventilation if you are in a gore-text shell. 

The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living and the get rich quick theory of life. – Theodore Roosevelt

 

Joined: 19NOV2004   Location: Mission, Kansas

For clarification, this is a LBT 2657 (uh highly modified) on a DG-16 frameset.  It is configured for a short back ruck, to use with a belt kit.  If I wanted to go long back, in conjunction with a chest rig (or God forbid BA), I would raise the shoulder harness, to drop the lumbar pad down, and add back the side pads and hip belt.

Since this bag was originally made for an ALICE frame, it has a top sleeve.  I started out by modifying the bag to take a 1606, but then found the DG-16.  So it's a hybrid of sorts; still uses a top sleeve, but then is tied into the frame along the sides.

A DG-16 bag has tabs for tie in around the whole circumference of the frame, not only sides, but top and bottom.  This allows for what they call a "live" load, in that the weight is evenly distributed around the frame, which twists and turns with you, much like an internal, but still with the load-hauling capability of an external.  As soon as I get one of their bags I will post it.   

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

Yeah and I do agree, you can sweat your ass off just as much in winter, as you do in summer.  But I would add another consideration is for balance.  If you have technical (or hell just any) climbing and what-not, then you might have to choose.   

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

Great commentary Diz!

What is the distance between webbing tabs, to make the pack fit that frame? Ours are 4" on center, and 14" wide fully stretched, double bar tacked and triple stitched. The top and bottom tabs actually go all the way across the back of the pack so they do not rely on seam stitching for strength.

I consider our frame a "hybrid frame." It gives the advantage of the internal frame carrying the load close, and the external frame for heavy load control. It has a ventilation channel up the center and between the belt and pack, but lacks large stand off space like some external frames (penalty for having the load further away from CG). It may not be ideal for some humid conditions, but what is? We are working on a new frame shape that will have a larger air gap and a full mesh trampoline style back panel.

As for heavy loads, we have lots of hunters who swear by this design to carry meat quarters out of the woods. Not my load range as an old guy, but it does work. One unit put a 120 lb Talon Robot on our MOLLE Frame Cover.

That DG-16 frame looks bitchin'. In the photo, it looks like the mesh panel is pressed against the loaded pack bag? What keeps the separation?

 

shoobe01 posted:

Good question. Found this which seems to support that idea indeed:

http://www.lboro.ac.uk/service..._sweat-research.html

The results showed unexpectedly high levels of sweating on the central and lower back, particularly in the area of the spine.

High sweat rates were also found on the forehead whilst the lowest were towards the extremities, in the research published by the European Journal of Applied Physiology...

 

...

 

Shoobe, great stuff.  I think many of us got this intuitively but it is nice to have science backing this up. 

From the chart, there are some interesting smaller take-aways.  Head/neck, got it.  Shoulders, ok, back, understood.  Front of shins was a surprise.

Diz, I think you laid it out.  A convertible pack that can use a frame for general duty, super heavy and jungle ops, and an internal frame setup for cold weather, climbing and other high-agility/balance environments, would be optimal for GP troops.

Tankersteve 

 

In Yorktown, VA.          Joined August 2008

Gov't Civilian, after retiring from active duty in 2015. 

 

'One's own open sore never smells.'  - Haitian proverb

Hey man I think the A-Pak actually looks pretty good and may have to check it out.  

I think the tab spacing is about the same.  Both on 1606 and Crossfire frames.  So yeah if you're doing that, then GTG.  Versus a top sleeve that the weight just hangs down from.  OK for road marching, but get into off-road and/or high angle and the load can shift around.  I think the difference between a 1606 and the Crossfire frame is the amount of tie-in used.  The 1606 relies on a cross-beam kind of support, whereas the Crossfire uses a complete rectangle (two on top, 3 per side, and two on bottom).  Which actually flexes with you under load.  The reason the 1606's shit the bed up in Norway was because the inherent weakness of this design; it cannot flex with the shoulders, at the same time it flexes in the opposite direction with your hips.  Well that and the material cold-soaked and became brittle.  

I have no doubt your design can be over-loaded.  I have carried heavy loads in Brit issue Bergens; there's no doubt it can be done.  However, I would love to see a pack, with a stiffener panel or stays, to be used as an internal, but also tabs to be used with a good external frame, such as the DG-6, or DG-3.  Best of both worlds really.

In the end, as concerns using with a belt kit, some guys may find the internal frame just works better for them.  Lots of guys have difficulty getting an external frame ruck to work with a belt kit.  So you may have to decide what features are more important to you.   Although I think the new DG-3 frame, which is smaller than the DG-6 might help out in this dept.  Also be perfect for a Medium ALICE sized bag.  

As far as stand-off, yeah you're right I basically negated that by hanging a 3L water bladder down the spine, which when loaded up, is pressed outward into your back.  So yeah, my SOP is gonna have to change on that one.  The mesh panel will normally give you some nice stand-off.    

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

As concerns, an A-PAK design, if I may hog in here, yeah I think a pack bag with an internal stiffener and direct-attach harness, that can be integrated with a DG-3/6 frameset would be awesome.  This external frame is the best I've ever used for mil-spec applications.  If someone made a bag set (assault, Med ALICE-size, Large ALICE-size) that would convert from internal to external, you would have the ultimate ruck set-up IMHO.  No one in the states is doing that; and I think Crossfire frames are going to become the new go-to external frame.    

One of the cool things about the DG-6 frameset is it can be sized to sit high as a short back ruck, or adjusted to sit low as a long back ruck.  With a suite of bags you could virtually fill any mission requirement.  

As to canteen shelves for rucks, yeah any bottle would basically work, however, the GI ones (both US and Brit) will bounce much less than the longer Nalgenes (because the pouches are rigged to be flush with the top of the belt).  .  Now if you have shorter, squat Nalgenes like GI bottles, sure why not.  As for turning upside down, I don't see why not.  The Brit canteens have the cup fit on top, so they will go in either way the same.  On US, probably still ok, although I'd see if it would fit in the cup that way.

But yeah that is the key; if the back of the ruck sits flush with the top of the belt kit, and you still have enough adjustment to cinch up the shoulder straps, with no gaps, you're  GTG.      

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

Huck, Diz knows way better than me.  I'm just a spectator that was curious about science behind the benefits of a frame for cooling - turns out it is pretty important.

Maybe some simple tunnels for internal stays, that are removable, and the ability to integrate a frame like the DG-6 - well, it seems doable.  Tiny extra weight for the ability to set up your pack for your mission and environment = win for GPF, to me.  For SOF, 2 purpose built packs likely more optimized.

Now, I also have to say that generally packs could come down quite a bit in weight IMO.  500 denier or 420 along the bottom, and a real lightweight material for the body is doable.  I think we are overly concerned about durability - rucks take some abuse, but how tough does it really have to be?   1000 or even 500 for the whole pack seems excessive.

Tankersteve

 

In Yorktown, VA.          Joined August 2008

Gov't Civilian, after retiring from active duty in 2015. 

 

'One's own open sore never smells.'  - Haitian proverb

tankersteve posted:

 

...Now, I also have to say that generally packs could come down quite a bit in weight IMO.  500 denier or 420 along the bottom, and a real lightweight material for the body is doable.  I think we are overly concerned about durability - rucks take some abuse, but how tough does it really have to be?   1000 or even 500 for the whole pack seems excessive...

I have seen a few day packs blow out, and unlike failed hydro bladders or rigs or so on, they are hard to recover from. You have to find room for all that stuff now and it's a pain. So I think the tendency has been to make the pack un-failable, without thought except Moar Fabric for a long time. 

But, I've started to see some clever work here. Not just in the civvy side with some nutty fabrics, but in the "tactical" manufacturers, with things like better design for weight bearing (as discussed above about stress points etc) and with lighter fabrics on the insides. I like this last as a point of departure, as the pack body is a unit sealed from the outside. It's annoying but not catastrophic to have an interior blowout. 

I think next something like a bombproof "cage" would be good. A fairly small number of straps, such as the reinforcements extending from pack strap/frame attachments, but fairly lightweight pack body fabrics. A serious tear (burn, blast, etc) would only cause so much damage, and at worse repacking would allow you to continue using the pack for a fairly long time. If burn/fragment damage that cuts the webbing, that has more to hang onto so is even more field expedient repairable than trying to pucker some fabric together and coddling the pack, 

 

Just thoughts though. 

 

The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living and the get rich quick theory of life. – Theodore Roosevelt

 

Joined: 19NOV2004   Location: Mission, Kansas

Is there ayone left here who has experience with the SOURCE Virtus load carrying system, selected by the British Army in 2015?

It is better that they do it imperfectly than that you do it perfectly. For it is their war and their country and your time here is limited.

 

                                                                                                                        —T. E. Lawrence

 

 

POSREP: UAE

Drat. Well, maybe sometime it'll emerge, especially as we move more into modeled and engineered solutions, it would be cool. 

The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living and the get rich quick theory of life. – Theodore Roosevelt

 

Joined: 19NOV2004   Location: Mission, Kansas

Ultralights are wonderful rigs.  Not enough manufacturers put the time and money into (as shoobe noted) engineering, let alone the fabrics.

A Z-po fabric, reinforced with binding tape (vice MOLLE) would be pretty stout.  It might not take (military) over-loading, prolonged salt and UV exposure, or a lot of abrasion. 

Kifaru use to make their KU line out of the same sil nylon they make their tipis/shelters. If I recall correctly they dropped them because it was harder to sew that material into packs. When they come up for sale they tend to get premium prices.

Image result for kifaru ultra light

Joined  4/5/03  Location Maine

We are onto a new topic, but adding to other knowledge base stated above.

There are some nice engineered solutions that already exist for light weight materials. We made a sample pack for SOF with laminated cuben and ripstop. It saved about 12 oz off a 500d pack. The cost v weight savings was not appitizing to the client. It added about $120 to each pack. 

We also made a bunch of 330d packs for .mil testing and general consumers. None have come back. The weight savings was more like 6oz for the same cost as 500d. 

Cuben fiber does not rip easily, and dulls scissors quickly! Lol. You need carbide Fiskars or a razor blade to cut it. Good news, it’s very abrasion and rip resistant. Bad news, it’s noisy. 

We also sewed some sil nylon packs for Kifaru. It wasn’t horrible to sew, but it is only suitable for experienced machine operators; novices turn it into a mess and stitch removal is obvious forever! Although super lite, they got a large number back due to durability. It seemed like sil did not make sense for something like a pack, but is great for pouches. 

Little bit more on the KU packs. This is Patrick Smith's reply to why they dropped the line that I got off the Kifaru forum.

"Hello Norinco, thanks for asking about the now-discontinued KU Ultralights. They were the lightest heavy load packs ever built. To achieve that distinction I designed them using our own Rhino Skin tipi fabric. Double layer. If the outer layer abraded, or experienced a nick, the inner layer would prevent penetration all the way through the bag. And this worked! In our sales specifications we made it clear to customers that abrasion and nicks could be expected but would not compromise the integrity, the functionality, of the KU packs and accessories. That such dings were only cosmetic. In essence, we were asking folks for a "compact" of accepting cosmetic blemishes over time in order to get the lightest gear of it's class ever invented.
But it turned out that a minority of users persisted in returning their KU units for "repair" of these cosmetic dings. These above normal "repair" requests--compared to the rest of the Kifaru line-- plus the fact that building the KU gear from exceedingly difficult to work with Rhino Skin fabric resulted in our pulling the plug on the project. 
We continue to keep an eye out for material that could be used for reprising a KU lineup, but so far nothing offers enough weight savings, certainly not in the league of the original double layer Rhino Skin, to warrant adoption."

Joined  4/5/03  Location Maine

Yeah the upshot of this is 500d is probably the best material for us to do R&D with.  I have done a little light weight work, mainly with chest rigs, pouches, etc. and for sure, it doesn't take long for your reinforcement to tip the scales more than heavier base material.  I think the original ALICE packs had some of the best pack material I've ever seen ("pack cloth"?  430d?).  Right before, in my wisdom, I thought 1,000d was the bare minimum for SERIOUS work.

So maybe taking 500d, and reinforcing it with 1" binding tape, versus webbing; it's incredibly strong, used extensively in parachutes, where opening shock stresses are no joke.  The biggie is getting rid of as much molle, Velcro, zips and hardware as possible.  Take it back to a simple top-loader.  Use loop and tabs to attach stuff.  

I've even experimented with surplus OCP Cammie material, as a base for certain LBE.  Not exactly lighter, dunno what the abrasion resistance will be in this app, but cheap and plentiful to experiment with.  It is A solution to getting reduced NIR glint from your LBE.  If I get a hair up my ass might even try a pack bag.   One thing I'm thinking is that for small teams, in an austere environment, it would be easier to run shit like this across home sewing machines; for custom kit, mods, and repairs.   

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

Diz posted:

...The biggie is getting rid of as much molle, Velcro, zips and hardware as possible...

Been doing this a bit lately and surprised how much it impacts even just when modding stuff. When I did the recent tube mod to my "old school" Hellcat, I also incidentally ditched a fair amount of other stuff on the front attachment, and slicked up the rear by dropping from 2" and SRs on both sides to with 1" webbing and much less plastic for my pull-forward arrangement. 

The stuff I ditched I saved and weighed. Was... I forget what, but double-digit ounces. AND is more comfortable to boot. 

The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living and the get rich quick theory of life. – Theodore Roosevelt

 

Joined: 19NOV2004   Location: Mission, Kansas

OMG, I did so many of those Hellcat mods, back in the day, when TT first came out with pull tabs, and everybody wanted them retro'd to their Hellcat.  From there I made my first chest rigs.    

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

Relevant to lightweight fabrics, I see a lot that seem cool, but where I cannot identify them. Like this: 

https://matadorup.com/products...?variant=34861130950

I got this a few days ago (didn't buy it per se, was in my Cairn box. A subscription service for outdoor gears). Anyway, crazy thin, weighs nothing, and seems entirely indestructible. It is so puncture resistant it's poke-resistant. With zero padding, it's comfy to lay on But what IS it? They sure don't say anywhere. 

I somewhat feel the perfect fabric is out there, but everyone working in trade secret mode means other industries won't know what things are. 

The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living and the get rich quick theory of life. – Theodore Roosevelt

 

Joined: 19NOV2004   Location: Mission, Kansas

Diz posted:

Yeah the upshot of this is 500d is probably the best material for us to do R&D with.  I have done a little light weight work, mainly with chest rigs, pouches, etc. and for sure, it doesn't take long for your reinforcement to tip the scales more than heavier base material.  I think the original ALICE packs had some of the best pack material I've ever seen ("pack cloth"?  430d?).  Right before, in my wisdom, I thought 1,000d was the bare minimum for SERIOUS work.

So maybe taking 500d, and reinforcing it with 1" binding tape, versus webbing; it's incredibly strong, used extensively in parachutes, where opening shock stresses are no joke.  The biggie is getting rid of as much molle, Velcro, zips and hardware as possible.  Take it back to a simple top-loader.  Use loop and tabs to attach stuff.  

So what causes 500d to fail?  Wear?  Blow out? Failure where something load bearing is stitched to it?

Would a 500d 'ripstop' variant work?

All the above.  If the construction (and design) is good, then the material might fail when pushed pasts it's limits.  This could be an abrasion, or a cut, or well getting blown up or burnt.  

If the construction is shit, or the design is questionable, then seams fail, straps tear off, etc.

Two examples.  First you are humping through really rugged terrain, and the surface of the pack is really abraided, to the point where the fabric fails.  Second, you are humping through really rugged terrain and the pack strap rips out of it's anchor point.

In military circles, I see more packs get torn up from outside forces.  In civvy circles I see more packs blow out from poor quality.

On the ALICE pack itself, for example, most failures I've seen have been abrasion, rips, tears, etc.  If anything, the rubber coating on the lid material would dry rot, way before it failed.  

Then your typical book bag that blows out the shoulder straps.  

OK where does all this leave us.  I think 500d is gonna work just fine here.  If properly designed and made, it will serve you well.  It will take your, or other actions to cause it to fail.  The question is merely if we can improve on it by lightening the build.      

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

Would something like over-stitching an area cause it to fail?

For example, layering on straps or something and laying down a heavy bartack over the entire area.

_____________________________________________

 

Doug

If I mention Corona, I ain't talking about beer.

 

"It's your turn to do until it's not."  TA

 

"Afterall.... if you get yourself into a fair fight.. you really haven't learned anything in all the time you have spent on Lightfighter, your tactics suck, and you don't deserve to breed."  David Reeves

 

JOINED:  9/20/09     LOCATION:  Outside of KSA Finally!

Yeah, at some point, you are merely perforating the material, and actually subtracting strength, instead of adding it.  Bartacks are incredibly strong, but, are best when joining similar materials.  So webbing to webbing-awesome, but, webbing to cordura, sometimes not so much.  When there is such a disparity in material thickness and strength, guess where the failure point is?  That's right, the stitch pattern will tear right out of the cordura.  So a better way around that.  If you want to lay on a piece of webbing to cordura.  First make a "doubler" of the same base material.  It should be twice as big (at least) as the webbing being joined.  Radius the edges.  Now sew this directly to the base material first.  Then sew webbing to base, centered on doubler.  This does a couple of things.  First, it gives you twice (or double) the base material for the stitch pattern to anchor into.  Secondly, it spreads the stress of the joint over a much wider area, over the surface area of the patch, rather than the narrow area of the stitch pattern.  And using a box-"X" pattern to join the webbing to the cordura is actually stronger because again, we a spreading the load across a square pattern, rather than concentrating it into a narrow zig-zag pattern.  There are formulas for all this stuff, where you can calculate strength, based on the sew pattern, stitches per inch, how long per side, how many stitches total, etc.  But basically a rough rule of thumb is to keep a pattern at least as wide as the webbing being used.  So 1" webbing with a box-"X" pattern of roughly 1" square, will give you an average strength of about 500lbs, which is probably double that of the hardware you're using, so GTG.  

        If you look closely at the 1" loops for side pouch attachment, you will see the stitch pattern of the doublers underneath.

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

I would say the number one reason you see these cheaper book bags fail is because the straps were simply inserted into a seam ands sewn in, with no thought as to what kind of load might be there or how to sew a joint that would meet or exceed it.  Even if it's bartacked in, it's no guarantee it won't pull out, especially with a single layer of cordura.    

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

A fair bit of my technical clothing (e.g. rain jackets) are "glued" or something else non-stitch attached for most or all seams. 

Is that the coming thing for structural stuff also? Should we expect, sometime, to be able to use some other materials and in different ways because we're not perforating the material to join them? 

The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living and the get rich quick theory of life. – Theodore Roosevelt

 

Joined: 19NOV2004   Location: Mission, Kansas

Yeah different joining methods are definitely out there.  The question is, in the applications.  Glued and sonic welded construction have been around for awhile.  Used extensively in the dive industry.  And in clothing as mentioned.  I remember Arctyrex was playing around with it a bit a few years back, dunno whatever became of that.  In theory It would reduce the cost of manufacturing but probably cost the same or more in the beginning.  

My experience with glued construction has been the joints dry out, become powdery and loose strength.  But this could also be exposure to repeated salt water immersion.  But I think at the present time, glued construction definitely has an expiration date.  

Sonic works very well, in that the pieces are essentially welded together, so you're back to the strength of the base materials.  I think the earlier stuff was pretty thin, light weight, which sounds good, but then you may be running into excessive wear issues until you can weld thicker stuff.  

It may well be the wave of the future, but we're not there yet.  Until we get the technology to weld in tight corners/complex structures, and join stacks of dissimilar materials/ thicknesses, or the glue that will remained bonded indefinitely, sewing will reign supreme.     

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

Ok back on point, I linked up with my buddy today and we are modifying his Mayflower jungle belt kit.  I brought the DG-16/LBT bag mod along and tried them out together.  These two thing were made to go together.  I never had a belt kit and rucksack integrate that well.  So yeah, he is definitely re-considering his rucksack choices.  It's down between a MR Improved NICE/Overload, or a Crossfire DG-series ruck.  

They just finished up a month-long full mission profile exercise and much was learned.  Or re-learned as the case may be.  In regards to gear, the upshot is that TT ruck/frame combos are just too fucking big and carrying 100+ lb loads is a big fucking ask.  So coming back down to slightly smaller, and a lot lighter rucks is the order of the day.  

With this in mind, we will be testing out modified Mayflower belt kit, along with DG-16 and DG-3 systems (the Medium ruck option).  If he gets the MR, we will test them head-to-head.

He is using the Brit canteen and cups around back for a shelf.  This still catches the corners of the frame, even if the buttpack slopes away in the middle.    

"Pacifism is a shifty doctrine where a person claims all the benefits of the body politic, without any of the responsibilities, and then claims a halo for their dishonesty." Heinlein

Add Reply

Post
Copyright Lightfighter Tactical Forum 2002-2019
×
×
×
×
×