Twitter Facebook Google RSS
Soldier Gear 

Soldiers’ Backpacks Not Likely to Get Any Lighter 

10  2,009 

By Sandra I. Erwin 

For a three-day mission in Afghanistan, a soldier carries about 130 pounds worth of stuff. The Army for years has promised to “lighten the load” by providing troops equipment that weighs less.

But the plan has not worked out as expected. Some of the gear that soldiers take to war is lighter than the older equipment it replaced.

Collectively, however, the combat load has not become lighter because most of the weight consists of essentials — food, water, and ammunition — that soldiers need for survival and cannot be replaced with lighter items.

There is one piece of equipment that would dramatically reduce a soldier’s load: a water purifier that would enable him to drink from rivers or lakes. But no such purifier exists, at least not one that meets U.S. safety standards.

“Everyone wants to know what we are doing about water,” says Brig. Gen. Peter N. Fuller, the Army’s program executive officer who oversees soldier equipment.

The Army and Marine Corps have endlessly studied ways to reduce the combat load, but in the end, it’s water that contributes considerably to the heavy load, Fuller says in an interview at his office in Fort Belvoir, Va.

“We are looking for technologies everywhere,” he says. There are purifiers overseas that troops from other countries use, but those don’t meet U.S. certification standards, Fuller laments. “We have freeze-dried water. But you have to pour water to make the water.”

Failed attempts at lowering the weight of troop loads cannot be blamed on lack of trying. The Army has practically reduced the weight of nearly every piece of gear in the inventory, but it still can’t make a dent in the overall kit.

It’s a losing battle, says Fuller. “Every time we take something out, the soldier makes up the weight with other things.”

Items such as sensors, tripods, cold weather clothing, boots, sleeping bags, flashlights, protective eyewear, all have been replaced by lighter variants. It costs $22,000 to $26,000 to equip each soldier with the newer lighter equipment.

The Army even tried to reduce the weight of rations by making them smaller but packing in more nutritional content. That is still an experiment in progress.

No revolutionary breakthrough has yet emerged to dramatically lower the weight on soldiers’ backs.

“That is the biggest challenge we’re having,” says Fuller. “Right now we treat the soldier as a Christmas tree, and we keep hanging things on him. Let me give you this great lightweight this, lightweight that.” In the end, he still has to carry 130 pounds worth of gear.

Fuller often gets questions from soldiers on when the Army will have GI Joe-like stuff that they can only dream of: nearly weightless gear and barely there body armor.
“Soldiers want what GI Joe has,” Fuller says.

That won’t happen any time soon. For now, the best the Army can do is try new ways to trim small amounts of weight.

Two battalions in Afghanistan recently began a “soldier load assessment” to compare one unit’s gear versus the other.

“Every ounce has to be considered,” Fuller says.

One battalion was outfitted with new equipment (lighter armor plate carriers, T-shirts, handheld GPS, and countless other pieces of gear) and the other has older equipment.

The Army is now evaluating how the weight may or may not affect soldiers’ performance and health. “What’s really wearing out the kids” is the big question, says Fuller. It’s not clear yet that weight is the primary driver. Soldiers’ fitness levels and diet also are major factors. “We’ll look at everything,” he says. “At 8,000 feet, what’s really hurting your body? We don’t precisely know yet.”

Reader Comments

Re: Soldiers’ Backpacks Not Likely to Get Any Lighter

Is this a joke?

“...'We have freeze-dried water. But you have to pour water to make the water.'...”

Kevin on 09/25/2009 at 16:08

Submit Your Reader's Comment Below
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Please enter the text displayed in the image.
The picture contains 6 characters.
*Legal Notice

NDIA is not responsible for screening, policing, editing, or monitoring your or another user's postings and encourages all of its users to use reasonable discretion and caution in evaluating or reviewing any posting. Moreover, and except as provided below with respect to NDIA's right and ability to delete or remove a posting (or any part thereof), NDIA does not endorse, oppose, or edit any opinion or information provided by you or another user and does not make any representation with respect to, nor does it endorse the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or reliability of any advice, opinion, statement, or other material displayed, uploaded, or distributed by you or any other user. Nevertheless, NDIA reserves the right to delete or take other action with respect to postings (or parts thereof) that NDIA believes in good faith violate this Legal Notice and/or are potentially harmful or unlawful. If you violate this Legal Notice, NDIA may, in its sole discretion, delete the unacceptable content from your posting, remove or delete the posting in its entirety, issue you a warning, and/or terminate your use of the NDIA site. Moreover, it is a policy of NDIA to take appropriate actions under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and other applicable intellectual property laws. If you become aware of postings that violate these rules regarding acceptable behavior or content, you may contact NDIA at 703.522.1820.

  Bookmark and Share