Molle gear vs Old Y or H harness with belt and ruck gear.

[HorseSoldier]

The MOLLE pouches are a big improvement. The ruck system is a POS, in my opinion.

[cavtroop]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

The MOLLE pouches are a big improvement. The ruck system is a POS, in my opinion.

I was issued the old Y harness system back in the early 90s. I remember we'd scrounge around looking for the older H harness system, as it was much more comfortable. Never played with MOLLE gear, though.

[Abbott Shaull]

Yeah, when I was in they had Y and H harnesses mixed in. I was issued the Y harness, but I could see where the H harness would work.

The thing that surprises me about the Molle system was it like 1980 something when they were supposedly testing in various units including some sub-units of the 1st Cavalry. I quite surprise it took until 9-11 for it be so widely issue. Especially since many Special Operation units seemed to love and improve upon the system.

It one of the reason of why as GM, I didn't mind if someone wanted to use this system over regular LBE since, it was testing and to throw a wammy into the party.

[waiting4something]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

The MOLLE pouches are a big improvement. The ruck system is a POS, in my opinion.

I agree with that. I liked the MOLLE system as long as you didn't have a M203set up. They had no room from 40mm shells. I had to put my magazine pouches on the last loops on the bottom just to have room for the 40mm pouches and it still only carried like 7 or 8 40mm shells. I usually ended up wearing the old school grenadier vest over the MOLLE vest instead, and that solved the probelm. My last year in I switched to a different battalion that gave more leeway on gear, so I bought the old school Y harness since I still had the M203. I found it was just a pain in the ass and liked to get tangled up. I never got to liking it. The MOLLE and LBE vest where way better as a M16 gunner only. Now the MOLLE pack, that just sucked. Those plastic frames broke on a few guys packs and they never felt right. I bought a large ALICE pack when I had the chance and liked it a lot better. Lots of guys always wanted to buy it off me. I must have bought one of the few ones the PX had, so I gave it to someone when I got out.

[Abbott Shaull]

Ah thanks. Now I understand why it took 15-20 years to get it to the troops in general and why Special Forces and Rangers had modified the system heavily since it first came out. The pack for the MOLLE seems to be one downside that probably help keep the system from distribution Army and Marine Corps wide for several reason. Then again looking at LBE with H or Y harness, pistol belt, and the units flavor of rucksack with metal frame hadn't change much except for improvements with the ruck and frame over the years. Lot of it not much different with the exception of the material pieces were made out of over a couple generation of troops.

Yeah being a 203 gunner with the old equipment it was one of the perks with the vest, and with the MOLLE system it seemed too busy for the M203 gunner. I also know one of the real world reason why they didn't roll out the MOLLE system before 9-11 was the issue that everyone in unit knew where certain items would be on the old LBEs. Medical pouch, flash light, ammo pouches were fairly standard locations where with the there was the worry with the MOLLE troops would move stuff around to where they were comfortable.

[jester]

We also forget the issue of budget, which would have also hampered the aquisition of new items durring the 90s when alot of developement especialy for smaller items was just not there.

[HorseSoldier]

For T2K purposes it's probably also worth remembering that the early version of the Molle ruck used some weird single point attachment to the LBV at the waist, instead of a conventional waist belt (so the weight of the ruck was partially carried on your pistol belt/LBV instead). That set up apparently caused a bunch of Marines lower back injuries during initial fielding (besides lacking durability in the frame), and made use of the MOLLE Fighting Load Carrier obligatory, limiting alternate LBE options like Rhodesian rigs and such. I'm not sure how that rucksack set up was supposed to work with IBA or other body armor options, either, though it may not have been contemplated during R&D that far back.

[headquarters]

I must admit that a good H yoke with all the padding extras available on the shoulders and the web belt was better than an Y - but it seemed to be a little bit flimsier and more liableto get tangeled up than the Y yoke .

We originally got issued X yokes similar to the ones issued in the Korean war .This was sturdy gear ,but not very comfortable nor very flexible in applications.They then issued a Norwegian made kit that was a vest with some modular pockets and some sewn on ones .It was more comfy , but the sice of the pouches made laying prone inconvenient .As things tend to drag out in the army regarding getting new kit I jumped of the supply-train here and got myself a south African rig. Great for patrols etc with a gazillion pouches all sown on the kit and straps etc to adjust in many fashions .But again , to many and too big pouches .I also tried an Israeli rig that in effect is pretty close to the SA one .In between I tried the Y and H yokes
In the end I settled on a commercially available "BlackHawk Tac v-1" vest .Sewn on pouches and something like the MOLLE -ish lops on the back to fasten gear that I only ever use to attach the LFR /radio pouch.

It has got a web belt module that I use to attach the big pouches so in the end I would say that I prefer the "V" over both the X,Y and H

[Abbott Shaull]

I think issues with the pack seem to be much larger problem that the people who wanted the switch to the MOLLE gear they were trying to solve before fielding system wide. Budget issue probably kept the R and D on that aspect limited. With the wide spread re-issuing of gear it sounds like the Army and the Marine Corps had been in process of acquiring the gear, but R and D wanted to fix the pack.

I would go to say that because the events of 9-11 and the people who had created the gear who had proclaim the next best thing to the wonder bra and what not. The military had so many other issues with lack of supplies of other important items and they knew it. Having these on hand, and still out of troop hands, when other important item were still far shorter. It sounds like it was push out, just to be able to say they were trying to equip the troops with the best equipment.

It the one thing I have always thought of the MOLLE system, especially SAW gunner set up. Pouches too big in location where laying in the prone would be an issue.

Interesting note it seems when the MOLLE Vest was issue to replace the old ALICE gear that much of the gear such as ammo pouches, canteens weren't issue, the troops used the old ALICE attach to the new vest. So that answer one of my question in that the old butt-pack probably were used too...

[Targan]

Originally Posted by headquarters

As things tend to drag out in the army regarding getting new kit I jumped of the supply-train here and got myself a south African rig. Great for patrols etc with a gazillion pouches all sown on the kit and straps etc to adjust in many fashions .But again , to many and too big pouches.

I have a South African assault vest. Very comfy and it breathes very well but too many of the available spaces for pouches etc have the pouches sewn into place. I would prefer a similar item that is easier to customise. Still a great peice of kit for going hiking etc. I've also got a big 1990s era Australian Army pack. I use it when travelling instead of a suitcase. Very sturdy and spacious.