It doesn’t have a bayonet mount, so it’s hardly usable.
Sounds to me like it’s a relatively ordinary backpack (probably made in a foreign country and full of cyber-bugs!) it’s just black. I’m pretty sure that black color is what makes it “assault” worthy.
Skinny zippers can get you killed.
Maybe they meant strategic.
I’m waiting for the appearance of a concealed carry product for pets. The idea would be to have your dog carry a backup gun for you in his dog vest. So if you’re walking along and Joe Badguy gets the drop on you, and takes your gun, you kneel down by your dog and whip the gun out from its doggy hiding place. Seriously, you just know some paranoid gun fan has been thinking about doing this for a long time.
What’s an “expandable mobile system”?
“Everyday Tactical Backpack”??!!! When was the last time you wore a backpack? If the answer is not “today” or “yesterday”, why in the Wide World of Sports would you buy this thing?
And just BTW, it looks like it sucks eggs to me. I’ve carried a lot of backpacks in my days on Earth (though definitely not *everyday*) and the way that thing hangs down on the model’s shoulders does not encourage me. Please also notice how the model is gripping the “walking stick” (it’s actually a “standing stick”) as though his life depended on it. Gosh, doesn’t that look comfortable.
Also, does “assault bag” mean people will assault you if you wear it?
perhaps they hope the rifle looks like an errect penis and they’ve named it tactical.
only 15 compartments? where does one keep the ginormous barrels of rations jimmy bakker sells?
@3 timgueguen — I see a dog vest harness with MOLLE straps, and you can get all sorts of carry pouches for the MOLLE system, so… yes, concealed carry for dogs.
Anybody who does that, I don’t want them to be allowed to have dogs or guns any more.
Assault bag?
I nearly snorted my beer.
Well it does seem to have a flag on the back of the most violent country on the planet…
@3 @8:
Final scene of eXistenZ (punchline at 5:50):
Sigh. And it previews as a link, but auto-embeds and strips out the start time specified in the URL. (Which was t=310, or 5:10 in.)
xohjoh2n, it’s the platform. Wrap the link in an anchor tag to get around it.
—
Regarding ‘tactical’, it’s a rather vague term. If one needs to carry supplies to achieve a goal (like, say, camping) then the strategy is to carry supplies and the tactic is to use a backpack to do so.
(Oh, and attempting to change your profile email sends you a confirmation link to the new address (but nothing to the old one…) which gives a permission error when you open it.)
@13 maybe so, and I have seen others point just links before, and I’ll try and remember that for next time. But *it previewed as a simple link and only changed to an embed after posting*. Gah!
ridana @4 – I believe that’s “expandable MOLLE system”
-it’s an attachment system – you see it on a lot of backpacks now, especially anything “tacticool” its a bunch of ~3/4″ nylon straps, stiched in every inch or so. Different attachments (magazine carriers, canteen holders, pouches, etc.) have straps that you kinda basket-weave through to hod the item on. I guess it makes things sorta modular and customizable, but as a civillian, I don’t think I’d have much use for it.
ridana@#4:
What’s an “expandable mobile system”?
A backpack?
xohjoh2n@#15:
But *it previewed as a simple link and only changed to an embed after posting*. Gah!
Welcome to the wild world of auto-everything WordPress.
timgueguen@#3:
I’m waiting for the appearance of a concealed carry product for pets.
(Man reaches under his coat)
(Everyone ducks and runs for cover)
(Yelling) “LOOK OUT HE’S GOT A SCHNAUZER!”
xohjoh2n @11: I get this error message anyway:
I use a backpack that some stores market as everyday tactical backpack (I use it multiple times a week). It has some shortcomings, but it is generally OK. I still do not know what makes it tactical or even assault. So when choosing backpack, take look at those too.
Molle is nice but if you use it, your pack grows in size (walking through a store between shelves is hazardous) and it can mess the balance of the pack. Also, you do not want to put valuable stuff into external pouches strapped to the side of your backpack.
What does it mean to “test” it for free? Is that like a trial period and then you have to send it back if you don’t want to pay for it?
I have heard of backpacks that are bulletproof, marketed to parents of schoolchildren. That sounds like a nice tactical feature, but the above product must not have that feature or they would surely list it.
Reginald Selkirk@#23:
I have heard of backpacks that are bulletproof, marketed to parents of schoolchildren.
I have also heard of those. I suppose if someone is shooting at you, bulletproof-anything is better than bullet-ready anything. But there is something innately horrifying in the idea of schoolkids trying to improve their chances of survival in a gun-battle. The whole idea seems to be to keep kids away from gun-battles. That’s what long range air strikes are for.
The descriptor “tactical” is good for a significant markup.
I suppose this is related to the idea that the military uses only the highest quality equipment. Technical sophistication went up as we transitioned from big wars, WW1-2, to small wars in Korea and Vietnam. And again as we switched to an all-volunteer force. But issue gear is still a compromise between dependability, function, and cost.
Used to be the term of choice was “military issue”. Irony being that most people never quite understood the qualities embodied in issue gear for conventional warfare where you are fielding literal millions of soldiers in situations where the equipment is expendable. Dependability is important, but so is cheap and easy, both strategic material and labor, to manufacture.
A good example is the K-bar knife. It was in no way the finest knife made. Cheap to manufacture from mostly non-strategic resources and requiring only relatively unskilled labor it was produced in great quantities. Marines, the primary users, didn’t typically carry any one knife for long. Even with oil and wax the high carbon steel blade rapidly rusted and the leather handle and sheath didn’t last long in salt water. Although the steel was specifically selected to be sharpenable (gasp) on rocks or concrete most K-bars didn’t last long enough to ever require sharpening. They worked, and then they were left behind or traded in on a new one. I carried one in the 80s that I kept sharp, oiled, and free of rust. It was effective, but also expendable. While I babied my particular knife my loyalty was always to the crude and functional beauty of the design, not just the one I schlepped around.
The more modern version is less likely to self destruct in field use but it is more expensive and loses some of the charm of a easily expendable tool. I left a K-bar on the side of a mountain when I really needed an anchor point and had nothing else to use. A small sacrifice easily made. I’m not sure I would even think of doing that with a more expensive knife I had loving maintained for decades. As it was I had a new K-bar the next day.
lorn@#25:
I left a K-bar on the side of a mountain when I really needed an anchor point and had nothing else to use. A small sacrifice easily made. I’m not sure I would even think of doing that with a more expensive knife I had loving maintained for decades. As it was I had a new K-bar the next day.
What? You didn’t use a hand-ground and hand-forged damascus stainless knife for a piton?
Yes, regarding the overall quality of military issue goods. The boots, particularly, were terrible. US soldiers generally get away better than the British or the French, though. Although, I understand that the British concluded something to the effect that their uncomfortable rucksacks and mediocre rifles were an encouragement to toughen up and soldier better. That’s some brilliant “make lemons out of lemonade” right there.
Reginald Selkirk @23
The thing is, most of these items being described as “bulletproof” are only capable of protecting against typical handgun ammunition. And a lot of these mass shootings involve assault rifles, which typically use ammunition that has much greater power and penetration.
Also, it’s just patently absurd that we have parents purchasing armored backpacks for their kids, teachers and schools purchasing armored whiteboards, and schools keeping buckets of rocks in classrooms. We will go to any length to avoid discussing reasonable gun control.
Iorn @25
prior USMC, and for fuck’s sake, the KaBar is overrated. Granted, it’s not a horrible knife, but you can do a lot better, even at the same price point.
But, I agree with you, I feel like a lot of military issue stuff is a convenient intersection of low-cost and durability. And then there is the nonsense with how the particular unit decides to use that gear. When I was enlisted, we were pretty new to the MOLLE system, and for whatever reason, our command loved having us take the daypack/assault pack, strapon all the extra pouches, pockets, etc., and wear that around. It ended up having maybe about the same total capacity as the main MOLLE pack, but none of the support, and it was just this frankenstein of pouches and straps, unwieldy, and would snag on a doorway across the hall. But, that’s what our company CO decided was “best”, so that’s what we had to do. :/
16 @ lochaber:
Ah, so it is. I didn’t blow up the image big enough for these pathetic eyes. Thanks for the clarification.
The only thing that bag assaults is good taste.
And speaking of good taste – I received the pink knuckles today, thank you Marcus! For some reason I thought it would be more rubbery based on the photo so the hard plastic surprised me. I was also surprised by how big it is, but that makes sense for the size of hands and fingers that would actually use the item in brass. Also catching me off guard? I forgot they were on the way and had no idea why Canada Post was here with a package for me (I was fortunately (?) at home thanks to an injured ankle). Once I saw the return name though…
@ 23 Reginald Selkirk
I do not remember kids with armoured backpacks but a week or so ago I was reading about a commuter cyclist who had bought armour for their backpack.
I am still shaking my head disbelief. One should never carry a backpack while cycling. He should have had decent panniers.
ridana @28
it does look like mobile, and I believe MOLLE is an acronym and should be capitalized.
The only reason I noticed was because I was wondering what would make a pack “tactical” and MOLLE panels were all I could think of, so I was already looking for it. :)
It’s to be kept next to the pepper bag.
Tabby Lavalamp@#29:
For some reason I thought it would be more rubbery based on the photo so the hard plastic surprised me. I was also surprised by how big it is, but that makes sense for the size of hands and fingers that would actually use the item in brass.
It was the glow in the dark ones that I did in silicone. The Pouncing Panther Pink Pounders(tm) are poly/resin. By the way, they are not indestructible and if you hit a nazi with them they may break on its thick skull. They’re for looks, not tactical use. Enjoy!
I really enjoy sending people weird bits of randomness. Mostly because, otherwise what would my house look like? I’d be a case study on “news of the weird” when I accidentally died under a collapsing mountain of bars of soap.
Lots of people, most not old enough to remember a non-volunteer army, have a hard time understanding old-style war where men were drafted, trained, and equipped by the hundreds of thousands. As lousy as the field gear from WW2 and Korea was it was, for the most part, head and shoulders above what other armies used.
Equipment for a million men, quickly, cheaply, and using only a minimum of strategic materials means compromises have to be made.
That strategic materials thing resulted in some quirky historic events. Such as the fact, confirmed by an electrician that worked there, that the buildings and labs in the town built to produce the first atomic bombs were largely wired with silver instead of copper. Copper was in short supply but silver was relatively plentiful,
According to one source, the AP, the cost of equipping a soldier in WW2 was $170 in inflation adjusted dollars. Cheap, until you figure that there were 11.3 million of them.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/21105586/ns/us_news-military/t/gis-gear-costs-times-more-wwii/
Corners have to be cut. For many European armies, and Russia into the 21st century, some savings were had by not buying socks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footwraps
Of course necessity is also the mother of invention and not a few really great ideas, like the lowly, but beautifully functional, P-38:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-38_can_opener
Call me a Luddite, or a glutton for punishment, but I always liked the old Vietnam era ALICE Load Bearing Equipment (LBE) over the more modern MOLLE. Yes, I know, modern packs can carry more weight. That is IMHO just an invitation to overload your men.
The Army forgot the lessons of WW2 where you had regular troops and supply columns, Sometimes literal mules. This meant some folks concentrated on cargo and other troops concentrated on fighting. Instead of this very wise system we now have most troops in the field schlepping up to 200 pounds of gear, and trying to fight like that. Which is why so many of our opponents compare our troops to shambling and slow moving cows. They are good men being misused by being overloaded because we far too easily commit to too many wars and refuse to pay the financial and political cost of a larger army of draftees.
Of course this is all of a piece. Dividing duties requires more people. And that contradicts the modern military fashion of fighting entire wars with small units that deploy more frequently, for longer duration. In WWI front line service was limited to a week. Followed by a week of rest and another week of second line service.
We send soldiers out for months, No big surprise that PTSD, stress, substance abuse, and suicide are problems.