Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Good Kit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Arktis Large in a smock is about 180/104 - so thats (roughly) a 42/45 inch chest, with a baselayer, buffalo and then smock.

    I've got a stowaway shirt in large that is a bit smaller than that - it's 62 cm from pit-to-pit, 58cm from cuff-to-pit, and 72cm from collar to hem. so, 42-44 inch chest with a baselayer. You could put a thin fleece top under it as well, but it would feel a bit less loose than the smock.

    That said, my smock is relatively new (5 years),while the stowaway shirt is about 17 years old, do you might want to check with Arktis on the current sizing.

    Comment


    • Or just do the course and earn it
      Sir I cant find my peltors........Private they are on your face

      Comment


      • I've just been for a walk - 2 hours or so, dog +kids - in my Arktis Stowaway shirt: sunshine and showers, 8c or so, bit of a breeze, over a t-shirt.

        Comfortable/silky next to the skin, kept the rain of my t-shirt, and it was dry within a few minutes of the end of each shower. Rolls up to the size of a can of coke..

        Would recommend.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by DeV View Post
          Anyone got one of these?
          https://store.arktis.co.uk/collectio...hirt-irish-dpm

          They aren’t issue but available in Irish Pattern
          Yep spotted that a couple of weeks ago on their FB page
          Interesting....
          "Well, stone me! We've had cocaine, bribery and Arsenal scoring two goals at home. But just when you thought there were truly no surprises left in football, Vinnie Jones turns out to be an international player!" (Jimmy Greaves)!"

          Comment


          • For those who want to look as gucci as f**k on their next range practice, Arktis gives you,

            https://store.arktis.co.uk/collectio...39293391339575
            What are you cackling at, fatty? Too much pie, that's your problem.

            Comment


            • Oh! I could do with a new boonie. Wife hated the old one, and it went missing shortly before we moved house (If you recently bought a house in east Cork, check under the shed for a Boonie).
              Great for keeping the sun off when mowing the lawn...
              German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
              German 2: Private? I am a general!
              German 1: That is the bad news.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ODIN View Post
                For those who want to look as gucci as f**k on their next range practice, Arktis gives you,

                https://store.arktis.co.uk/collectio...39293391339575
                Melt to fit polyester body fabric... I think I'll keep the issued fire resistant one.
                Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Captain Edmund Blackadder View Post

                  Melt to fit polyester body fabric... I think I'll keep the issued fire resistant one.
                  The RDF deploying to high IED threat areas now?? Seriously. Those Arktis UBACS should be ok on Island for Ranges/Exercises etc. Plenty of people still rocking the original UBACS for same.The only time the FR variant is mandatory is when deployed overseas.
                  "Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by apod View Post

                    The RDF deploying to high IED threat areas now?? Seriously. Those Arktis UBACS should be ok on Island for Ranges/Exercises etc. Plenty of people still rocking the original UBACS for same.The only time the FR variant is mandatory is when deployed overseas.
                    I haven't a clue what the RDF are up to. All I do know it that I'm not mad about wearing melty things when I'm working around fire risks, at home or abroad. If you want to, that's your call.
                    Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Captain Edmund Blackadder View Post

                      I haven't a clue what the RDF are up to. All I do know it that I'm not mad about wearing melty things when I'm working around fire risks, at home or abroad. If you want to, that's your call.
                      Are you not RDF? Always thought you were.My bad.

                      And no.I will stick to issue tissue myself as why pay for something I can get for free? I am just saying that the melt risks for RDF pers are lower than for PDF with regards the occasions when UBACS would be worn.

                      Of course if you want to go down the route of never wearing uniform items in case they melt than you would have to go around in the current t-shirt with a UBACS over it.And nothing else. As those are the only issued FR Garments at present.Everything else we have is polycotton or Polyester or polyurethane from our DRFLO undies to our waterproofs and everything in between.
                      "Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by apod View Post

                        Are you not RDF? Always thought you were.My bad.

                        And no.I will stick to issue tissue myself as why pay for something I can get for free? I am just saying that the melt risks for RDF pers are lower than for PDF with regards the occasions when UBACS would be worn.

                        Of course if you want to go down the route of never wearing uniform items in case they melt than you would have to go around in the current t-shirt with a UBACS over it.And nothing else. As those are the only issued FR Garments at present.Everything else we have is polycotton or Polyester or polyurethane from our DRFLO undies to our waterproofs and everything in between.
                        It'll be grand until something happens. Then everyone will ask why.
                        Same as with Hearing Protection. Asbestos. Mattresses.
                        German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
                        German 2: Private? I am a general!
                        German 1: That is the bad news.

                        Comment


                        • I bought one of those UBACS during the week in the hope we will get to range again at some stage,also a stowaway shirt a while ago

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post

                            It'll be grand until something happens. Then everyone will ask why.
                            Same as with Hearing Protection. Asbestos. Mattresses.
                            Not quite sure the point that is being made here. If we take the current issued UBACS on it's own and say "no wearing of non issue because they are not FR" then that's a BS position to take IMHO.

                            Only because when they changed to the current FR version from the previous melty one they conveniently forgot that it's no use only having the top half of your body protected by FR clothing!!!

                            As I stated above. None of our current issue kit besides the UBACS and T-shirts is FR. Not our gloves (ARW ones are and I think the incoming GS Operational ones will be) nor our trousers or anything else.

                            If we had head to toe FR issued kit and someone choose to wear non issue then they would (Rightly) not be covered in the event of an incident and it's aftermath.

                            There is a move on to change to FR properties in the uniform when we update in a few years time (based on the NSV DPM research) but that's not for a while so we will continue with the half (assed) protected clothing for now.
                            "Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.

                            Comment


                            • It's down to risk appraisal.
                              If you routinely work in an environment where an igniter is present, and your clothing could act as a propellant, then you need to wear FR clothing. The NS were slow to the game here, though diesel is far more inert than petrol, and there are very few RHIBs using petrol any more. You could throw diesel on a frying pan and it would take a long time before you got a reaction. (but it would be dramatic). GASU crew wear boots that are FR down to the laces, and lack of metal eyelets (because Metal eyelets can heat up and cause burns as you are escaping from your burning crashed aircraft).
                              Armoured vehicle crews should be in the same boat, same for anyone who routinely operates with armoured vehicles. Same for the Gunners, or anyone who operates support weapons. Some ammo does not respond well to static electricity. Should you also wear non static generating clothing to prevent possible discharge?
                              Just because nothing has happened so far does not mean the risk isn't real.
                              I take your point on UBACS though. UBACS is there to aid other PPE, of which risk is greater than fire, i.e being shot or be close to a fragmentation explosion. So you have to weigh which is the bigger risk.
                              German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
                              German 2: Private? I am a general!
                              German 1: That is the bad news.

                              Comment


                              • Isn’t the reason why the Tshirt and UBACS are FR that they are melty but the trousers etc (especially the older ones) aren’t ?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X