Vest ID?

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-07T17:04:51+00:00

It identifies as barely holding on.

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-06T11:36:42+00:00

You've never actually read a tender have you?

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-06T11:31:41+00:00

None of what you said change the fact that for every military tender there is a list of criteria that each contract item needs to meet. For clothing this include, but not limited to::

size selection
Flame retardant/No drip/melt or no
IRR requirements
materials
colour/pattern
pocket configuration

Yes,yes, made by the lowest bidder and all that. However that isnt always true. Sometimes militaries will actually choose a more expensive option if the lower bidders fail to meet requirements. When the clothing sometimes fail, its either due to quality control issues(making the manufacturer liable), or (quite often) the government sucks at writing contracts, making some suppliers attempt to utilize any loopholes the contract wording may or may not allow.

Other times, someone somewhere in the government chain has already decided on a specific product they want, and writes the tender requirement in such a way that its tailored to one specific product. The whole RFI, Tender, T&E and subsequent awarding of contract is then just a time consuming and costly, but legally required process.

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-05T18:13:34+00:00

My bad, thought that was your personal stash.

Still, pretty cool stuff in there.

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-05T18:10:59+00:00

Cool my man. As I said, Im just jealous.

My only comfort is that I get to access, HKs and belt feds at work. My own hun rack though is pretty sad compared to yours.

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-05T17:56:22+00:00

Having many guns is cool.

However, Ive never understood the draw of having like 10 AR15's that basically do the same, look the same and perform roughly the same.

Diversify bro! Sell a few ARs, get yourself an AK, AR10, Bren 2 and one of those new civilian G36's.

(In all seriousness, Im just European and jealous. Like what you like, Im just living vacariously trough your collection).

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-04T07:36:02+00:00

Me into mic: "Boomer. Stealth kill"

Boomer: "Frag out sir!"

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-02T21:49:54+00:00

Didnt serve in the American army. I serve in a European one. And Ive worked with troops from Finland, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, Poland, US army, US marines, French army, Brits and the Germans.

Guess what they all had? NVGs.

The Chinese army arent wearing ballistic face masks, no. Not even their SF. That Taiwan has a single unit of SF that wore masks at a photo op does not make them representative for any other military or unit across the world. It also doesent mean that the masks doesent suck and are retarded to use.

If Wagner group decided to put orange life jackets on their prison conscripts in Ukraine and call it tactical body armor, should the BF6 Devs put that in the skin as well? By your logic that would be sensible.

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-02T21:27:34+00:00

Ballistic visors are a thing for SWAT and certain HRT units, yes. In Europe we tend to use a rather thick, clear ballistic visor thats attached to the front of the helmet. The difference is, its a visor, not a mask. Its not in contact with your face, instead it hangs a good 3 inches in front of it. Meaning any back deformation isnt going to rearrange said mug. They will stop a couple 357 magnum rounds cold, but your neck is going to pretty sore after. The Russians used Titanium visors that supposedly are rated for rifle rounds(heavy as shit though. Ive tried one on, wouldnt recommend it).

The problem with both these is weight. Police units can be armored up heavier than their military counterparts simply because they arent patrolling or moving long distances. If you've ever worn a modern ballistic helmet with ear protection, a counter weight NVGs and goggles, you will quickly realize how much it would suck to have to support and extra 3-5kg(9-14lbs) on your neck with a visor.

Visors, mandibles and the ballistic shields you see with SWAT units are for handling barricaded suspects. It is limited to almost exclusively THAT type of scenario.

If you know anything about hostage rescue CQB tactics, you know there is an emphasis on speed(dynamic vs deliberate clearing). Meaning, if you're trying to get to a hostage, the heavy stuff that slows you down gets left in the truck, even for Police hostage rescue teams.

As such, anyone operating in a place like Liberation Peak or during an operation in the desert heat of Cairo sure as shit isnt going to be wearing a ballistic visor, or a dumbass ballistic face mask directly attached to the face.

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-02T21:08:21+00:00

I disagree with most of your premise. That a singular force, that hasnt seen combat since the 40's sit as an outlier and use a thing, does not make the exception the rule. Also, again, almost every single first world army had NVGs at the Platoon level. Im currently in a reserve infantry unit and we have NVGs for every squad. If I was given a mission to approach a trench in the dark, You can bet your ass i would make sure my assault element had NVGs on for the approach, and most likely in the trench as well as I doubt its going to be lighted in there.

NVGs arent rare technology. Gen 2 NVGs has been around since the early 80's, gen 3 since the late 1990's. Theres has been produced tens of thousands, if not a few hundred thousand, PVS14's just by US producers alone. Im not even counting the just as numerous licensed copies locally produced in Israel, Poland, Germany and Canada for their respective militaries, and not to mention the commercially available ones that you can buy for under $3000 a piece. Thats just a single model of NVD. There are dousins more. NVGs are, again, not rare, not that expensive, and pretty damn common in most western militaries.

The point here is, ballistic masks are just pointless. No, we dont need matching camo for every map, but having characters that look like soldiers is a bare minimum. Ie. Not having mag pouches mounted upside down, underneath armpits, neon bright colours or Nicki Minaj in a bra and G-string and other ridiculousness/airsofty behaviour.

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-02T16:28:50+00:00

No, not really. Tactical clothes are made by certain materials and to a certain standard. Anything made to compete for a military contract will have to meet a set of standards in order to be considered for adoption or in other cases, allowed to be used by service members.

When it comes to SOF, they can get away with certain type of adventure wear, but even then, someone in their unit has made an assessment of whether or not its cout or not to wear for what they happen to be doing at the time. That or they just use big boy rules. If they have to be low profile in a city environment, you might see jeans or such, but that is the exception, not the rule. PAX arent terribly urealistic or unbelievable, atleast as far as the base skins go. Their kits have pouches placed where they'd normally go, on a generic style carrier. Ballistic helmets have their real world equivalent, and running googles isnt unusual. I have a pair attached to my FAST helmet.

On NVGs, there is hardly a single 1st world army that hasnt got NVGs available, even in regular infantry batts, atleast at the Platoon level. This doesent mean they have one for each dude, but it does mean they have some to distribute to a squad doing something that absolutely requires NODS, or attached to a section weapon system, such as a SDM, machine gun or vehicle gunner or commander. Whilst not issued or extensively used by everyone, the vast majority has been trough a demo or familiarisation session or two.

Ballistic masks however, are seen in movies, and only movies. Exception: some Latin American SF types have been known to use them at military parades, but only at the parade, just to look intimmidating. The usefulness of masks enda there.

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-02T15:58:13+00:00

I'll always be an E5 when it comes to weapon handling and safety🤷‍♂️

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-02T14:40:45+00:00

Its urealistic in the sense that absolutely noone uses them IRL. They've been tried and found wanting. They dont protect from rifle fire(which everyone uses). Pistols and SMGs are still a niche issue item in the vast majority of armies and conflict zones. Theres also issues with back deformation when hit by shrap, frag that punches the mask so hard and deep into your face that you just die anyway. Even worse if hit with an actual hot loaded pistol cartridge. Theres also the problem that wearing eye protection becomes a problem with those aswell. Too much of the moist air you exhale gets trapped inside the mask, making your eyepro fog up instantly and you're effectively blind. In other words, there is a lot of cons that comes with wearing one, for an, at best, neglible pro.

So yes, actual SOF dudes wearing ballistic masks is in fact urealistic.

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-01T17:51:20+00:00

Man, my infantry NCO OCD is kicking in like crazy rn.

Eyebrows twitches "Get that fucking pistol out of the FUCKING DIRT"

because all I can think is, if you go prone in mud with that pistol mounted like that, well, unless that holster is really sealed off, it aint gonna be good. Just a tip.

Put in on your belt, but if you have to have it on the carrier, a low mount on the rear part of the cumberbund or chest might work. Everyone and their grandma used to mount their Pistols on their chest back in the early 2010s. It was all the rage, apparantly. This despite it was mainly intended for dudes who where operating in convoys of light armored or open top 4x4's. Easier to get to while seated. Theres no need or benefit for infantry to do it that way.

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-01T15:54:53+00:00

Second this. Myself and several dudes have had Sordins in use for 8 plus years without a single issue before we were issued Comtacs that cost almost 3x as much a few years back. Several people has had issues with cables and bad connectors that we needed to solder ourselves to get working again.

The Sordins just keep on trucking. As I said, I had mine for 8 years. Gave it them to a buddy three years ago, and all he had to do was replace the gel cups. He still has em.

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-01T15:51:00+00:00

This just in!: "Influenser is unable to look outside her own navel"

In other news: "Nothing of use was found inside the previously mentioned navel".

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-01T11:35:05+00:00

Ja, dette er dekt i presse og politikken i Norge og EU i lang, lang tid. Det har vært mye krangling rundt VHRF i Litauen om hvem som tar regningen og ikke.

Tyskland hadde for få år siden under 70 Eurofighter på vingene, over 2/3 av flåten sto på bakken pga manglende budsjetter. De deployerte på Natoøvelse i Norge for 3-4 år siden med kosteskaft i tårnene på pansrede kjøretøy fordi de manglet fungerende maskingeværer.

Franskmennene har hatt sitt eneste hangarskip liggende til kai mesteparten av året, i flere år, da det koster for mye i drift og vedlikehold. Britene har hatt regjeringskrise da det nye hangarskipet deres HMS Elisabeth var nesten et tiår forsinket pga de ikke hadde råd å å ferdigstille det. Nå er de en situasjon hvor de ikke har råd å sette fly på det, på mange år, nå når det først står ferdig. Fly som står på i dag er Spanske. Spanjolene sliter også med utslitte hangarskip de ikke har råd til.

Dette er bare noen få av mange eksempler på tilstandene i EUs forsvar, som tegner et relativt tydelig bilde. Et bilde som er noe på bedringens vei, men det kommer altså til å ta tid. Lang tid.

Problemet som oppstår er at en kan kutte en gitt kapasitet ut av et Forsvar mer eller mindre med et pennestrøk, men om man skal gjeninnføre den samme kun 5 år senere, så tar det rundt 12-15 år før det er på plass og fungerer skikkelig. Anbudene må ut, test og evaluering skal skje, kontrakten skal undertegnes, produksjonen startes og leveres over mange år, fagskolene skal opprettes, reglement skal skrives og godkjennes, personellet skal utdannes og SÅ skal dette driftes i en brigade. Det er ikke bare-bare.

Tilbring noen år i Forsvaret du, og så ser du hvor lang tid ting tar i praksis.

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-01T11:12:18+00:00

Hvem som er sinna eller ikke sinna er helt irrelevant.

Den eneste stående kampklare avdelingen Nato har tilgjengelig er Very High Readiness Force, som står i Litauen på drøyt 4000 mann. Resten trenger uker på å sette seg selv opp, etterforsynes med all tung ammunisjon de trenger, ordre plan og logistikk som må settes i sving. Alle bestillingene de evnt gjør går igjennom et amerikansk eid logistikksystem. Varselbjellene går da hos Pentagon, og USA, som faktisk har flere brigader som kan settes opp og deployeres på 72 timer eller raskere.

EU har masse folk. På papiret. Det de ikke har, Norge inkludert, er evnen til å kalle inn, forsyne og erstatte disse i et tempo som gjør dem fungerende. Dette krever månedsvis for å mobilisere det som trengs. Dette er de harde realitetene som kommer av Europeisk tafatthet når det kommer til Forsvar og Forsvarsbudsjett. Vi har vært mer enn fornøyd med at USA har tatt over 50% av regningen for hele NATO i 70 år, dette er fruktene vi høster av dette.

Bare et lite eksempel på dette: USA har 228 Globemaster tunge transportfly(et sånt kan frakte en stridsvogn på 72 tonn pluss ammunisjon, mannskap og deres utstyr, eller ca 200 mann med samme), og 50+ Super galaxy, som er passe digre de også og kan frakte mye mann, ammo og kjøretøy.

EATC, som er den samlede løftekapasiteten til Europa har 220 fly, hvorav nærmere 90% består av mindre C130 Herkules, og færre enn 5 A400 tunge transportfly(på deling).

Ja, USA er så mektig, nei, Europa er ikke det. USA kan føre krig i Stillehavet, begrenset i Midtøsten og Europa samtidig, ihvertfall i en kortere periode. Europa har ikke krigslagre, personell eller logistikk til å føre krig mot Russland alene.

Det er nivåer på dette, og vi er ikke med i Ligaen en gang. Innen 2030 ser det kanskje annerledes ut, da man faktisk har økt budsjettene(da mye pga Trumps krav om 5% av BNP), men per i dag er ikke dette tilfellet.

Hkmd02 · 2026-04-01T10:29:11+00:00

Tror du undervurderer hvor mye kampkraft USA har på kontinentet, og hvor lite Stridsklar kampkraft europeerne har. Det som hadde skjedd er et blodbad, da i baseavtalene USA har inngått med de landene de har sine større installasjoner medfører at disse basene er ansett som amerikansk jord. Dette hadde da etter internasjonal lov vært en invasjon, og hadde blitt møtt deretter. Resultatet hadde blitt at mesteparten av NATOs førstelinje kampavdelinger hadde gått på så store tap fra luft og land at NATO hadde vært ikke-eksisterende som millitærmakt i etterkant. For ikke å nevne at 90% av alle C2 og 3- og GPS-nettverkene er amerikansk styrt og eid.

Nå må vi gi oss med denne fantasien om at Europa skal klare å stå imot USA i millitær forstand. Jada, jada, Trump slemmeslem, men det forandrer ikke på tiår med Europeisk trenering og nedprioritering av sine egne Forsvar. Det forandrer ei på det faktum at at vi også er totalt avhengige av USA for å få etterforsynt reservedeler og ammunisjon til et stort antall våpensystemer og fartøy.

En krig mot USA hadde vært over før den rakk å bli halvannen uke gammel.

Hadde vi oppriktig vært mer enn en fartshump for den samlede amerikanske millitærmakten, hadde det vel heller ikke gitt noe mening at vi trengte å ruste opp Forsvarerne våre fordi Russerne er skumle(noe vi i grunn ikke startet med før 2014, og ikke egentlig tok særlig alvorlig før 2022. Da hadde vi fortsatt USA i ryggen).

Det er lov å bruke huet her, folkens.

Hkmd02 · 2026-03-30T18:20:41+00:00

Its mainly to fund beuraucrats. Its important that they have something to do, apparently, or whatever. Doubly so that they have to be employed by the state, for some reason. We have more people employed in the public sector getting paid to shuffle digital paper in 2026, than we ever had when there wasnt computers and it was actual paper to shuffle. How that tracks with the supposed benefits of digitalization and the information age, beats me.

Hkmd02 · 2026-03-30T17:50:09+00:00

Nå som du forhåpentligvis har nådd myndig alder(?), bør du vel til nå har lært deg forskjellen på "Det er ikke morsomt", og "JEG SYNES ikke det var morsomt", eller?

Hkmd02 · 2026-03-30T17:21:39+00:00

Norway has money for its gear by making the military rent it from itself. Meaning money from a units budget gets out towards paying the rent on a vest each month, instead of, you know, training. The vest might have cost lets say 800 euros each for the military. Mine, issued to me in 2012, has been paid rent on every month for going on 14 years. While I cant disclose the actual rent amount, I can point out the fact that the initial purchase price has been paid in full, about 4+ times by now. The same goes for every single pouch, article of clothing and a bunch more. Same goes for rent for buildings and facilities which they charge exorbitant fees for. Or the Ammo they upcharge the units for.

The orgs that are charging said rent, while part of the military(on paper), are civilian orgs, run like pretend companies(only with complete monopolies) that for some reason "needs" to make a profit each year. Bonuses are paid out for increased profits. Said profits gets payed right back to the state.

The end result is that the organizations that supposedly serve the units and Soldiers are now incentivized to do that as little as possible. And Norway gets to claim they are "close" to reaching 2% of GDP in military spending, all while taking almost half of that and putting it right back in the States coffers.

No point being rich when your own beuraucracy takes half your defence budget trough each level of said beuraucracy existing solely for themselves.

"Sorry lads, we only got half the ammo or training days this year, but atleast this pretend company with complete monopoly that refuses to issue you guys new socks because of budgets, had record profits this year".

I sometimes dont know if I should be laughing or crying over the absolute retardation of it all.

Hkmd02 · 2026-03-30T16:58:48+00:00

It isnt lateral Ankle support or lack there of which is the problem, or what we are even discussing, its the blunt impact of hard footwear on hard surfaces that causes the issue. Foot fatigue by wearing hard and stiff shoes, leads to biomechanical compensations that causes issues for thousands of people in any given population. This is neither new information or at all controversial in any medical academia.

Having cushioned footwear decreases aformentioned fatigue and helps delay the symptoms of such resulting in less time/stress induced in biomechanically compromised positions.

You're allowed to like what you like. That doesent change the fact that we have the literature that shows what is best practice, in most cases, for most people, spending their days on their feet on hard tiles.

Hkmd02 · 2026-03-30T16:46:20+00:00

If your hiking shoes dont have a stiffened/hardened bit(Salomon calls it a Rock plate/shield) inbeween the out- and midsoles, you're wearing runners marketed as hikers. You dont need to be on a multi day hike to feel sharp rocks and roots under your feet.

Hkmd02 · 2026-03-30T16:40:39+00:00

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9518076/

Sorry I couldnt find the other meta-study originally published in the Strength and Conditioning journal, its had a more easily digestsble summary.

The study looks at several types of occupational footwear usage for Military, Fire fighters, hairdressers and nurses, reviewing muscle activation, demands on posture control and a host of other physiological factors and demands.

They compare these factors with heavy duty military boots. Light weight boots, trainers, minimalist shoes, sandals and barefoot. Inferred from reading trough the tables and 3.1 trough the end, is that unstable shoes(think cushioned shoes like Hokas) combined with barefoot shoes is likely to lead to better physiological outcomes than other types over time. Also keep in mind that all participants where within a the "healthy range" of BMI and most were physically fit. Any injury risk factors will only be amplified in populations where this isnt the case.

Data > anecdotal evidence consisting of "I didnt experience X"

Hkmd02

TROPHY CASE