Rucksacks for Ground Teams (24 & 72 hour packs)

[etodd]

NHQ is intentionally not installing DF equipment in new airplane purchases, it would seem NHQ thinks DF gear is no longer critical.

Our 2015 C-172 has a Becker unit. We just used it a month ago for a non-distress find.   I guess at this point as long as you have a couple planes in each Wing that is capable of finding that ELT in a hangar, its enough.  IDK

(Ours last month was actually in a boat on dry land. LOL)

[Paul Creed III]

NHQ is intentionally not installing DF equipment in new airplane purchases, it would seem NHQ thinks DF gear is no longer critical.

Our 2015 C-172 has a Becker unit. We just used it a month ago for a non-distress find.   I guess at this point as long as you have a couple planes in each Wing that is capable of finding that ELT in a hangar, its enough.  IDK

(Ours last month was actually in a boat on dry land. LOL)

My unit's 2018 182 has a Becker installed. Not sure if NHQ is handling brand-new 172s and 182s differently or we got the upgraded trim level (pun intended) but DF gear is still alive in my unit anyway.

[xyzzy]

All of my ground team gear,( i.e. backpack, Load carrying vest {24 hour kit}...) is Blaze Orange with Reflective strips on it. It meets the ANSI II requirements and then I do not have to have an additional vest on top of it.

I believe the relevant standard is ANSI/ISEA 107. From everything I've read, the standard simply doesn't apply to backpacks, so a back pack can't possibly meet the standard.

If I'm wrong about that, the back pack should have a label from the manufacturer certifying the back pack meets the requirements contained in the standard.

[SarDragon]

Here is a good description of the ANSI standard.

To summarize - there are specific requirements for front and back visibility, including area of reflective material, contrast areas, and body coverage. A back pack would not meet the frontal visibility requirement.

[Spam]

ANSI standards - hmmm... formerly run by Ollie Smoot? 

Y'all should be very careful in taking the word of any man who measures things in Smoots. Smoots, forsooth!

[GZCP31]

Here is a good description of the ANSI standard.

To summarize - there are specific requirements for front and back visibility, including area of reflective material, contrast areas, and body coverage. A back pack would not meet the frontal visibility requirement.

This is why the 24 Hour kit is in a Blaze Orange Load carrying VEST.

[Gunsotsu]

You still have to wear the Safety vest on top of it. Yes, I can understand doing it to keep the cost down.

Per regulation, the safety vest must be the outermost GARMET. There is no requirement that it be worn over carried equipment.

[NIN]

You still have to wear the Safety vest on top of it. Yes, I can understand doing it to keep the cost down.

Per regulation, the safety vest must be the outermost GARMET. There is no requirement that it be worn over carried equipment.

Uh oh.. careful, we're straying potentially into a uniform thread.... this was going so well, too...

[Eclipse]

You still have to wear the Safety vest on top of it. Yes, I can understand doing it to keep the cost down.

Per regulation, the safety vest must be the outermost GARMET. There is no requirement that it be worn over carried equipment.

Assertions that it's OK to wear a safety vest under packs and gear are ridiculous.

This cadet is basically invisible from behind, and it would be worse if this was a camo pack,
or he was wearing a plate carrier.


Clearly the intent, and also common sense, is that the safety gear be over everything else, or the gear itself be
orange or yellow.

Why anyone would want to encourage people to be less visible is beyond me.

[Stonewall]

We're our own worst enemy. This discussion turned embarrassing.

I can't even engage with this crew anymore.