The orange one looks perfect for ground team and they're on sale. Has anyone tried this?
https://true-north-gear.myshopify.com/products/aero-vest?variant=8368733443
I see no mention of being ANSI 2 or ANSI 3 compliant for visibility, and it doesn't appear to be so, based on a casual look. The surface area seems a little short. I'm sure it's not ANSI 3 compliant, since there are no sleeves.
Remember, the primary purpose of the vest in this application is visibility, not as a gear tote.
I've rocked the orange one for years, which I thought was discontinued a long time ago. Not ANSI 2, which hasn't been an issue for me but may be for you depending on the local personalities. I recommend getting the hydration carrier. I like mine but you may find that you can't fit all of what you want or need in there - I can't fit rain gear and I can't carry a tarp, for example. It also doesn't travel well, in that it tends to get tangled up on itself on the floors of vans or closets.
Edit: just noticed that this is the urban version. I have the "woodland" version, which is a little different, but substantially similar. Mine doesn't have zippered main pockets, it has flaps with snaps over the main pockets.
They have the Wildland available in orange for $80. From what I read it seemed like the same vest with a saw cover and a tool bar carrier, but I may be mistaken. If that's the case, neither of those things are applicable with CAP.
The big problem I see with the safety vests is that people then cover them with back packs or other vests which defeats the purpose. So I was thinking this would serve both purposes.
Quote from: taylor914 on April 26, 2017, 07:24:10 PM
They have the Wildland available in orange for $80. From what I read it seemed like the same vest with a saw cover and a tool bar carrier, but I may be mistaken. If that's the case, neither of those things are applicable with CAP.
The big problem I see with the safety vests is that people then cover them with back packs or other vests which defeats the purpose. So I was thinking this would serve both purposes.
There are people who would tell you that safety vests should be worn over backpacks because of the "outermost layer" rule.
I'll take one ANSI II tent, please.
CAPR 62-1:
7.a.(5).
b. Safety vests are approved for wear over the outermost garment of AF-style uniform or corporate uniform and must be ANSI compliant as defined in paragraph 7d below.
c. Safety apparel is approved for wear as the outermost garment over the corporate uniform only and must meet ANSI Class 2 or 3 standards as noted on the ANSI classification tag which must be affixed to the garment. Examples of safety apparel are coats, jackets, rainwear and may include orange or lime green reflective pants in conjunction with upper-body wear.
d. ANSI and non-ANSI compliance standards are as follows:
(1) ANSI compliant – All Safety Vests or Safety Apparel worn by CAP members must meet the American National Standards Institute, Inc (ANSI) Class 2 or Class 3 requirements. To ensure compliance with federal law, CAP members must comply with this anytime duties exposed them to public vehicular traffic such as directing traffic, investigating crashes, handling lane closures, obstructed roadways and disasters within the vehicle traffic lanes.
(2) Non-ANSI compliant – Safety vests and safety apparel that does not meet ANSI class 2 or 3 visibility and reflectivity standards are not authorized. CAP's policy on safety vests and apparel required that all members, by October 1, 2012, meet ANSI Class 2 or 3 visibility and reflectivity standards as stated in 7 (d) 1, above.
I have the wildland and I like it. The hydration carrier is discontinued as far as I can tell.
I wear a matching orange backpack for full visibility and haven't had an issue yet.
That does not look to me to be ANSI-2 or ANSI-3 compatible.
If you compare ANSI compatible and non-ANSI compatible, you can see the difference.
The orange on an ANSI-compatible is more orange-looking. Under a strong light, the ANSI orange shines by itself over the non-ANSI orange. In addition, there is a minimum number and length of reflective straps. Just one strap on each side over the pocket and over the top, one inch long is not going to cut it.
I have not seen the lime green vests, but I gather the lime green is shinier on the ANSI one than on a non-ANSI one.
By law, an ANSI compliant vest will usually have a large statement sewed on the inside of the garment stating how it is ANSI compliant.
I also looked at the company that makes it. I may be mistaken, but if the item is ANSI compliant, the company would want that be visible. Their features would say in big, bold letters "ANSI 2 COMPLIANT." Or ANSI 3 compliant. The fact the company does not show that is a flag against it being compliant, at least to me.
Buy it, wear your ANSI 2/3 vest over your uniform's outermost layer, and then put this on. You're still compliant per 62-1 as noted above.
Quote from: Gunsotsu on April 26, 2017, 09:19:02 PM
Buy it, wear your ANSI 2/3 vest over your uniform's outermost layer, and then put this on. You're still compliant per 62-1 as noted above.
Maybe the letter, but not the spirit. Integrity something something as well.
Letter is the only thing that can be enforced. Spirit is not a regulation. And compliance with the letter of the stated regulation has nothing to do with integrity.
Quote from: Gunsotsu on April 26, 2017, 11:39:26 PM
Letter is the only thing that can be enforced. Spirit is not a regulation. And compliance with the letter of the stated regulation has nothing to do with integrity.
The intent is safety and visibility. Obstructing it with non compliant gear does not seem to me as the intent.
I bet the Rangers bought them and then went on a mission.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Quote from: Майор Хаткевич on April 27, 2017, 02:03:58 AM
The intent is safety and visibility. Obstructing it with non compliant gear does not seem to me as the intent.
That way be true, but that's not what the regulation requires. Outermost garment, equipment that may cover it is not mentioned. Just another glaring omission in the myriad of regulations.
Then people dare talk about common sense, how common sense will preserve life, how common sense should guide one's actions in winter... yada yada yada...
This is why we cannot mandate common sense...
BWAHAHA
Quote from: LATORRECA on April 27, 2017, 05:53:58 AM
I bet the Rangers bought them and then went on a mission.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Probably... But the Rangers are NOT CAP! >:D
HaaAAAA AHaa aha ahaa aaHHHAAAAA! ;D
You'll hardly be invisible in the orange reflective vest, even if it's not "compliant". It's still more visible than the requirement for going into the woods during hunting season by most states' laws. I'd wager you're not significantly more likely to be hit by a car or shot by a hunter because you don't have a lime green stripe or two on your chest.
If your concern is only the regs, wear your ANSI Class II vest under the Tru North vest. And we'll all float on okay.
*Edited for clarification
Ummm... no.
That defeats the purpose of the mandated vest, and potentially reduces the person's visibility. The reg pretty clearly states that the compliant garment must be outermost, and that non-compliant items are not authorized.
Quote from: SarDragon on April 30, 2017, 08:30:16 PM
Ummm... no.
That defeats the purpose of the mandated vest, and potentially reduces the person's visibility. The reg pretty clearly states that the compliant garment must be outermost, and that non-compliant items are not authorized.
Negative, Ghostrider, this has already been covered several posts up:
Quote from: CAPR 62-1 7.a.(5).
b. Safety vests are approved for wear over the outermost garment of AF-style uniform or corporate uniform and must be ANSI compliant as defined in paragraph 7d below.
The defined order is uniform then safety vest, with the obvious implication that equipment is the top-most layer. This allows unimpeded access to equipment and eliminates the possibility of decreased mobility caused by an excessively large vest.
We see it differently, then.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
That guy appears to have never been in serious missions with aircrews.
Aircrew will see him differently as well. Or maybe not at all...
Quote from: Майор Хаткевич on April 27, 2017, 02:03:58 AM
The intent is safety and visibility. Obstructing it with non compliant gear does not seem to me as the intent.
So what about letting folks just wear what they like, and then as they start a mission, have them all line up and spray 'em down with this:
(http://d3i8mp0f89f2zp.cloudfront.net/store/pc/catalog/Sprayon-Krylon/Reflect-a-lite_2.jpg)
Quote from: Майор Хаткевич on April 26, 2017, 10:40:37 PM
Quote from: Gunsotsu on April 26, 2017, 09:19:02 PM
Buy it, wear your ANSI 2/3 vest over your uniform's outermost layer, and then put this on. You're still compliant per 62-1 as noted above.
Maybe the letter, but not the spirit. Integrity something something as well.
Did you look at the back of the vest? There doesn't seem to be anything there that would significantly cover up an ANSI rated safety vest and what is covered up in front is "replaced" by the reflective material on the front of the vest.
Quote from: Panzerbjorn on May 01, 2017, 02:10:21 AM
Quote from: Майор Хаткевич on April 26, 2017, 10:40:37 PM
Quote from: Gunsotsu on April 26, 2017, 09:19:02 PM
Buy it, wear your ANSI 2/3 vest over your uniform's outermost layer, and then put this on. You're still compliant per 62-1 as noted above.
Maybe the letter, but not the spirit. Integrity something something as well.
Did you look at the back of the vest? There doesn't seem to be anything there that would significantly cover up an ANSI rated safety vest and what is covered up in front is "replaced" by the reflective material on the front of the vest.
Nope.
Assuming 1" wide reflective stripes, with a total length of 22", that's a total ares of 22 in
2, less than half of the 52 in
2 area of the front of the ANSI 2 compliant vest in my flight bag. The vest in the OP would cover up almost all of the reflective material on the front of mine.