Equipment list

[Ken White]

Cleaning -while a personal responsibility with NCO oversight- does not require an individual kit.

What you wrote is accurate but it is subject to misinterpretation IMO.

The way it's seen by too many senior uniformed people -- Officer and NCO -- is that old saw "An organization does well onlt those things the Boss checks." That's a dangerous statement. It is indicative of a terribly flawed approach which actually relieves the individual of responsibility, is subject to misapplication, charges NCOs to 'supervise' or oversee a function in a manner that leads to oversupervision and micromanagement and which far from least important and in this particular case, causes troops to over-clean / over-maintain their weapons and equipment. Far more military small arms are ruined by excessive maintenance than by over use...

The individual has to be charged with and held responsible for all his own equipment and NCOs should check -- minimally -- only sporadically and somewhat superficially. In good units, this is the norm and the good NCOs simply keep an eye on their people and know who's taking care of their gear and who is not. Individual equipment checks and maintenance at all lulls and halts are vitally important habits.

Any suggestion that implies supervision is a key attribute will be misinterpreted to segue into micro management.

[Fuchs]

Micromanagement is by definition impossible if the NCO meets all his duties with adequate time effort each.
To micromanage means to spend much time on one or few things, which equals neglect of others because there's so much to do.

This is especially true if said NCO is forced by his supervisor to not exhaust himself (enough sleep on campaign), which is necessary because an exhausted NCO cannot lead by example any more.

[Ken White]

To micromanage means to spend much time on one or few things, which equals neglect of others because there's so much to do.

In US parlance, to micromanage generally involves excessive 'supervision' and failure to trust subordinates. Whether one task or a number, the degree of generally superfluous meddling is the issue.The US problem with micromanagement is, as someone stated elsewhere, generally at the Field Grade and above level. The Generals learned to do it in Korea after the line stabilized and they had little to do; Viet Nam merely made it worse and the current 'wars' have continued that. I recall someone in Afghanistan back in 2005 telling me that one operation required the approval of five General Officers and I'm sure that's worse today...

This is especially true if said NCO is forced by his supervisor to not exhaust himself (enough sleep on campaign), which is necessary because an exhausted NCO cannot lead by example any more.

True -- and a recurring US problem induced by our five day a week, forty hours of work mentality. While that 40 hours is rarely more than a floor in the Armed forces; how productive the usually extra 20 plus hours a week in garrison or on base are happens to be a separate question...

We're focused on short term efforts and the normal routine of four five days of field training a couple of weeks a month is not helpful. Everyone can stay awake for most of that so no one sets up rest and sleep plans...

[Fuchs]

We're focused on short term efforts and the normal routine of four five days of field training a couple of weeks a month is not helpful. Everyone can stay awake for most of that so no one sets up rest and sleep plans...

Reminds me of reports how company leaders inadvertently fell asleep in ODS and OIF on the fourth and fifth day, exhausted by not having had enough sleep.

Also reminds me of post-WW2 opinions that infantry and other combat troops should not use a garrison during their training phase, but live in woods for the duration of their training (this may be influenced by German early WW2 training shortages which were caused by a lack of garrisons for the training of more recruits, though).


It doesn't help regarding the weight problem, though.

[Firn]

- A knife: Something this should be standard as long as the same person doesn't already a multi-tool. Oh it already is...

I'm a bit surprised that the German version has no tweezers, as they come in handy (not so toothpick) and no hole in the awl. I would miss the small gut hook which works very well on not too fat and strong game and to quickly cut cord and all sorts of binding material. The long blade is lockable and serrated in the right place, strangely some put the serration exactly where you want a normal edge to do fine work like carving. The long wood saw works well. A scissor could be more useful then the can opener but as so much this depends. Red might be the better colour choice even in military service.

Got my first personal Swiss knife at the age of 6 and never looked back. Multitools are much heavier and could be shared.

[Fuchs]

I had a primitive Luftwaffe 'Swiss Officer'-style knife by comparison, but hat was back in the 90's before the world suddenly began to gadget-up everything.

Funny; with all the Pedantry, they forgot to take back said knife in the chaos of my last day in office. They checked the list without getting it. A comrade of mine had to hand it back. Still got it - as a kind of prize.

Related: Brace yourself for an awesome multi tool
___________

I did mention a ballistic boonie hat (don't think such a thing exists, though):
Does anybody know the weight of a state of the art ballistic helmet with coverage and protection of a 80's helmet and the NVG interface in front? Today's helmets are rated up to NIJ class II, which is in the corresponding German system 2 levels above mere fragment protection of old - necessarily with higher weight per area.

[ganulv]

- A knife: Something this should be standard as long as the same person doesn't already a multi-tool. Oh it already is...

I know the object of the exercise is getting the weight down, but as knifes go I believe that a folder is secondary to a fixed blade. That is, if you are going to have only one of the two, you should ditch the folder and its weight rather than the other way around.

[Firn]

I know the object of the exercise is getting the weight down, but as knifes go I believe that a folder is secondary to a fixed blade. That is, if you are going to have only one of the two, you should ditch the folder and its weight rather than the other way around.

Fair enough. I'm used to folders like the Victorinox Hunter knife which combine tools of sterling quality and design in a light package of the right dimensions. I carry it pretty much daily and can understand why countries like Germany and Switzerland selected it a similar one as their standard issue knife. But a fixed, not too big blade certainly also has it's merits.

As usually it is all about using a sensible combination of tools. Personally I arguably never saw the use of a big knife as I mostly used/use a Roncola/Billhook/Hippe for the lighter woodstuff or an axe for the heavier stuff. The latter is arguably the more versatile. From skinning and partitioning game, hammering and all sorts of woodwork a universal axe with a lenght of a bit over half a meter does it all. A claw at the back is nice, Saturday I helped to reroof the house of my paternal grandmother and did most of the work with an old carpenter's axe with a claw. Arguably nothing as simple and light is better at getting nails out of lumber.

All in all it depends pretty much on the task ahead but an decent axe per squad/stick might be a sensible thing to carry under various circumstances in certain environments. Knowing when and where is the difficult part.