I like the woodland DPM pattern.

Looks like they had 3 load carrying variants for PLCE, a chest rig, a "modular" vest and a "waistcoat".

I'm gonna get a DPM chest rig.  Still interested in hearing what your observations are no matter what you might have.

If you've used any variant, any general observations, pros/cons you wish to pass along would be appreciated.

If I didn't have so much MOLLE gear, as well as other projects, I 'd get an MTP PLCE set. Looks like a good setup. I feel like MTP is a hair more effective than Multicam/Scorpion, at least here in Central AZ.

I have one of the chest rigs, They call it chest webbing fwiw
Like most British gear, it is very well-built. Capacity is huge it holds something like 12 loaded AR mag & like 4 L of water.
I honestly have one more for posterity sake, and because so many knock offs and copies were made it was nice to grab one of the originals.

I kind of want a set of their belts/yoke  PLCE,  because supposedly that’s one of the tightest patrol rigs around. The Brits have ground-pounding figured out pretty damn well from all accounts, and their gear setups reflects this.

I have one of their belt kits.  It wasnt a complete set, but a belt, yoke (suspenders), one six mag ammo pouch (two cells, 3 mags each), and three utility pouches.  Definitely a better set up than old LBE in my day.  More configurable and more comfortable.  Plus DPM is awesome.

Dixies Corner and Jay Jays have MTP webbing that is MOLLE compatible.

Was the waistcoat vest ever made in MTP? I've seen it in desert & woodland DPM, but never MTP.

Worth noting that the original PLCE chest rig and the vest (General ops waistcoat) were copied by Blackhawk for their extremely successful Commando chest rig and DOAV vest.

Every style of british field gear is cheap and is very nice quality

The chest rig was born for carrying a combat load While patrolling Northern ireland using transport, so it is one of the old style with heavy carrying capacity (originally made in Olive, was then made in woodland DPM and they still make it in MTP). It has snap attachments for a radio pouch or one shoulder and mates well with the 35lt Northern Ireland Patrol pack to carry a day worth of military useful items. Commercial made variants were also popular (arktis 42 or 45 are a classic, or other more obscure brands like Ventura or Magro).

The non modular vest is nice too, the standard one has two ammo pouches with dividers for 3 AR15 mags each, the other 6 are simple buckled pouches with small storm lids. one or two small 10l pouches can be attached to the back as small daysacks (which are side pouches for the large "bergen" ruck). There is another slightly different variant (ALL arms vest). Commercial variants have different added features (different pouch placement, hydration pouch, velcro closed ammo pouches, gas mask carrier attachment). A common mod is putting PLCE belt kit pouches instead of the ammo pouches as they are more rigid and retain their shape when not full (also spanish tab closure is better).  ACE hydro vest was a popular commercial one. Used issue ones are always modified in various ways.

The plce Belt kit is more condusive to carrying a full load (as it was born to carry also sustainment items unlike the ALICE concept that relegated every sustainment item to the pack). Pouches are more stable than alice but more difficult to mount. Again, up to two sustainment pouches can be mounted on the shoulder straps. Over time a lot of mods have been made by users, the base kit sure benefits from the "roll pin" buckle belt instead of the standard Fastex buckle one. the belt pad "hippo pad" is extremely useful too.  Another common mods is ziptying the pouches together and cinch them down with elastic band to make a everything solid mass. Commercial "airborne webbing" is referred to premade webbing sewn altogether (which is generally more solid and of better quality, albeit non modular).   Another amazing thing is the Bergen rucksack is made as to rest over the back pouches and distribute weight without using a pack waist strap. MTP plce has been made, as of today VIRTUS kit has a modular belt and pouches plus a shoulder harness meant to be worn under body armor ("Under armour yokes" were already sold commercially since years ago).

this is a nice plce belt kit of mine with the textbook "airborne" mods, let me guide you to them. First of all, notice the lack of entrenching tool and bayonet pouches, only ammo, canteen and utility pouches. You can see the roll pin buckle (for adjustment on the fly, originally these came from air cargo straps). You can see the left ammo pouches modified with velcro closure for quick access.

next to the belt there are a smoke grenade and frag grenade pouch added



from insede, the pouches are tied together


the large belt pad "hippo pad"


last but not least a spring clip "helmet clip" scrounged from older webbing to hold the helmet that when carried but not worn sits on the back over the pouches, left side (as per SOP)

Trivia: Us forces have used british rigs from time to time. Most famous set of pics are from Operation Shining Express in Liberia, 2003. Robert o'neill (the men who shot bin laden) squad arrived from the sea in rubber boats. They were photographed wearing H-M Supplies brand Waistcoats and Arktis brand chest rigs inDSPM camo  

Back to uk items, this is a USE brand vest out of Hereford, which then became the "ACE HYDRO" vest. the chest area has a different pouch layout than the standard vest, plus it had an hydration pouch on the back and fastex buckles in the lower part to attach a gas mask carrier. Ammo pouches too have been modified with velcro closure. Note that every waistcoat has two large zippered compartment inside, one of which always has a cordura pistol holster stitched inside. Not immediate to reach, but makes sense in a military setting.

Italian military relied a lot on british style items (lot of UK issue vests and chest rigs came in) and at various times Arktis rigs or locally made copies were made.

This is my issued British style vest,  made by RADAR. our alpine troops version had two fixed upper pouches and two more modular ones, big infantry ones has no fixed chest pouches.
it came with an hydration pouch as standard, i removed one pouch lid to hold a radio with a paracorded fastex buckle


pistol holster inside, as british rigs have


I then bought the epitome of british style vests, the  Arktis 1601 Jungle Battlevest. The old model was a masterpiece, very different from the k170 you find today, i'll dig it up someday. If you buy Arktis buy old items.

Last for today are a couple of arktis chest rigs i was given by UK guys. The top one is till made as the M170, it has 3 4 mag pouches with buckles. It came from an artilleryman and he modified it with two sets of buckles to cinch the pouches more or less depending on their content (looks weird, but it works.)

The second is a classic arktis 42 (9 magazines) that belonged to a driver. since it used it mostly as a grab bag stashed in his vehicle he had removed the two large slanted canteen pockets and substituted them for a double ACU pocket for smokes and a Holster for his issued sig pistol. It was camouflaged with automotive tan paint brushed as usual for uk guys, but since we dragged that rig around a lot using it as a stash bag most of the paint came away. Never used these two back home, they are just souvenirs.

I took some time to dig out my old Arktis rig (which may be a model 1602 Hybrid battlevest and not the 1601 as i mentioned earlier) and crammed it with stuff to give an idea of its carrying capacity. I used it a lot and it worked perfectly. In my opinion it's still a viable option for soldiers when quick access to magazines it's not vital and lot of items need to be carried in generic pouches. As far as other uses....i doubt that it would be practical unless you do Brent0331 things. i don't know if people in America hike or hunt with tactical vests, but for the other uses i have in mind (recreational range shooting, competition) that load carrying capacity is not needed.

https://images2.imgbox.com/88/a8/abJrJb5X_o.jpg
quick rig rundown
1-4xField dressing pouches (nato bandage, israeli fits as well), snap closure
2- 2x hand grenade poches, no lid, spoon strap and snap closure.
3 and 4 (my fault :))- 4x magazine pouches, can hold 4 .223 mags each or 3 HKG3 mags if you push hard enough, no dividers
5- double pouch, made for NATO compass in the back, folding knife in front.
6-2x smaller utility pouches
7-2xlarge utility pouches (hold canteens with room to spare, the right one has a Tactical tailor hard case in it)
8-2x tunnel pouches, can hold brick size radios
9-long camelbak pouch
10- small mesh pouch (folded panel marker size)

large zippered compartments, belt loops and holster inside obviously.

Track down a hippo pad and it'll be even better.

20 years ago PLCE was the shit.

ETA - it seems they're all gone...

@joeviterbo

Great info! thanks for posting it!

I’ve always wanted an Arktis 42 but could never snag one for cheap. Such a good KISS chest rig just like the similar SADF one.

I had a 5.11 padded belt that I used as a hippo pad. Works pretty good.

Grazie mille, Sr. Viterbo!

My will to resist is being steadily eroded, and I'm a slut for good LBE. Damnit!

"Old" DPM pattern webbing here has fell through the floor price wise

It is around in decent quantities in the surplus stores, mainly marketed at cadets & the like as the MTP issue gear & copies of are the ones aimed at serving personnel = though with operations being scaled back even some MTP kit is sitting on the shelves

Good to see Arktis getting a mention - used their stuff on & off since they came out with their first chest rig
See them at a few UK shows, they also trade as Country Covers - so check them out under that name as they do some good deals online, etc. & have a US presence

The PLCE nylon UK issue gear has a bit of a mixed history.
The MoD designed some great items, which weren't adopted. Got to see a few prototype pieces in the Stores & Clothing R&D section opposite the barracks I worked in.
The funny ha-ha part about the green PLCE kit - had to be quickly replaced as the material was not IRR = it glowed in the dark when seen through some night vision optics

If anyone needs any items sourcing let me know as I can put the word out & see what turns up at the shows & surplus stores

If you are not searching the old OD ones or the ones with snap buttons closure they are quite cheap in UK even if they are getting scarcer.  There was a model intended for the longer barreled support weapon version of the L85 that had 5 mag pouches, no large utility pouches. These are less common but are also less cumbersome under the armpits while still having good cargo capacity (mag pouches are generously sized and can hold 1lt water easily)....copies were made by london bridge trading as the LBT0291A

Now that you mention the SADF, SADF surplus was very popular among UK guys. Pattern 83 vest being slighlty more common than the chest rig but both were in widespread use.

In the first post  "modular vest" was mentioned...Well, UK had (and still uses, go figure) a police style bulletproof vest, called in its last iteration The "enhanced combat body armor" or ECBA (as per SOP it was worn under the smock). When Iraq kicked in it became insufficient then the OSprey was developed (A standard Molle body armor). Along the osprey a modular vest with pouches was issued. Vest is more or less cut like a standard OPS vest but it never became popular because:

1: a modular vest has more material (more weight) and it offers a less solid package than a sewn in vest
2: vest over a bulkier modern style body armor than the old ECBA was less comfortable
3: Pals webbing on osprey set has slightly different sizing than the US pouches

So unissued sets  can be found very cheap.

BTW Desert DPM pattern work wonders here in the temperate central italy, like Desert Tiger Stripes. We have all year round yellowish/tan colours and it blends very nicely.

Moving to the Packs, Brits have always had positive reputation for their packs. General philosophy is:
-short, so it can rest over belt pouches
-no waist belt
-wide and soft but not heavily padded shoulder straps.

A staple of the kits as mentioned are the detachable 10lt "sustainment" pouches that can be zipped or clipped from the packs to the vests or plce harness (one or two). They can also be mounted as a standalone 2 compartment pack via a spare plce harness.

There are big Rucks (Bergens) and small patrol packs.

For the large ones the best bang for your buck you can find is the simple infantry Bergen in DPM. It comes in two lenghts, "shortback" (shorter and wider) and "longback" (thinner and longer). Be sure to buy the shortback to make it rest over your back pouches. They are still made in MTP camouflage. 100 liters+you can add two 10lt pouches.
Other types exist, the "all arms engineer bergen" and the "medical bergen", up to the monstrous 150lt "air support bergen". They take two extra day pouches, the air support one takes 3.

For patrol packs a lot of commercial items are popular (berghaus munro, karrimor, dragon supplies, lately camelbak), but sticking to the issue ones the DPM 30lt Northern ireland patrol pack is a globally loved item (they made it in MTP, too), but unless you take it to the tailor it can't accept sustainment pouches, having two fixed side pouches instead. A nice bargain can be found by buying the PRI (made by karrimor) 40 liters patrol pack in Desert DPM or MTP, which has place for 2 sustainment pouches + molle in front.  Another weird but neat pack to buy is the Electronic Countermeasures Lightweight ECM bergen, which is a 40lt patrol pack with most of the body made in mesh (it only comes in MTP camouflage, but there are older different version in DDPM that are nice, too).

FIFY
The side pouches when they zip together are carried by a dedicated PLCE harness - it's not the normal harness

Used either a single or double for a long time as a general daily pack. Great capacity, easy to carry & not too obvious (if you get the green one)

Thanks, my fault.

I don't know because when we get our  issued "bergens" (patterned more like the Lowe Saracen afaik) the side pouches had integrated shoulder straps

pics taken from the net, the Pack is made by famous italian brand Ferrino, model is Toblin Alpine Troops


BTW i think my favourite one is the Dragon Supplies Patrol pack, very nice pack, it's basically what a Medium Alice without Frame should have been with some practical touches. I'll dig it out to take some pics.

Ok, this topic gave me an itch so i browsed ebay and found this Dragon Supplies Webbing for the whopping sum of 15€ (as said by Saddler, price for DPM is rock bottom).
This is an aftermarket PLCE, basically a pre assembled one with the "Airborne" mods i showed earlier.



the whole thing is sewn together to that large belt pad. UK aftermarket molle Belts for webbing are very large to US standards, being up to 4 full MOLLE rows high

looks like what's old is new again. These are pics from a week ago, guys still wearing old Airborne rigs (one has a standard issue MTP plce, only one has a modern molle one) under a stripped down plate carrier.

Looking closely you'll see that the harness is not made by suspenders, but it is made basically from a stripped down mesh tactical vest, without pouches (those are called patrol yokes)

I had a brownish (Nutria?) SADF vest, and some other knock-off clones.  IIRC, very specific as to what caliber rifle was used, as the mag pouches were intended for certain size magazines, and could not be changed-out.  One either had a 7.62 rig, or a 5.56 rig.

Well-made kit, but not user-configurable.  I never was able to find any sort of instructions on how the rig/vest was supposed to be "run", so to speak.  While some features were self-explanatory, others were not.  Why the multiple rows of long straps on the sides of the dorsal platform on the back of the rig?  Certainly to attach something, but what?  To be fair, only the ALICE system was user-configurable back then, and not over much in that regard.

I sold-off my SA rig--and its' clones, once I discovered that the PALS system was better for most uses.  I doubt that modern militaries would field such rigs.  They were at the forefront back then, but modern designs have come a long way.

Of course, this is all said entirely aside from the collector point of view; that is a world unto itself.

These are definitely wise words.

As i told, quality is there, but definitely in a package that's not civilian/competition shooter/hunter friendly. Corollary to this, Molle surplus pouches are available that are good quality as well, but again design is more military friendly (No KYWYs there). American surplus may be more akin to what a casual shooter could need, new VIRTUS may have sometime useful as well, but prices are still high.

You correctly say that militaries won't field those kind of non modular items anymore, this is true for the most part. On the other hand there has been a drift away from the "everything modular" craze of the early days MOLLE was introduced. Many, expecially whoever shells money out of their pockets to buy gear are leaning toward fixed or partially modular. There is no doubt that a fixed rig offers a more stable package and a lighter overall weight, hence why uk soldiers are still using their old non modular rigs, if it works.....

BTW, back straps on the p83 vest are for securing sleeping gear (or rigged for mortar rounds even if it wasn't their original use) ; you'd also put a mess tin in the lower back zippered pouch and a machine gun belt on the upper one, pulling it out through the hole in the top, not the place for an hydration bladder

Appreciate the informed comments on the mysterious webbing on the SADF vests.  Makes sense, and no reason do doubt the comment.

Concur in that combat rigs made for a very specific purpose can be made lighter than multi-purpose rigs.  However, this can be over-done; witness the SADF rigs not being supported with ancillary equipment, and reasonable instructions on their use.  Nice rigs, but NOT capable of being user-modified, whatsoever.  One gets less weight with a specifically-constructed rig, but gives away the possibility of its' being modified due to the demands of the field troops.

The PALS system, while being imperfect, and heavier than a purpose-made rig, at least has the advantage of being user modifiable.

I prefer chest rigs, that will slip over any sort of body armor, with suspenders, and are capable of being used over no body armor at all.  I understand that this is a very contentious subject, and user opinion will vary.

We were exposed to a lot of British and NATO LRRP/Commando/SOF kit when I was in Corps LRS out of Fort Lewis, since most of the NCOs attended ILRRPS in Germany, and we sent teams to compete in the International Long Range Surveillance Competition known as Cambrian Patrol in the Brecon Beacons in the UK.  A lot guys would trade things they had for British kit and bring it back for use on their teams.

A common thing for some of the guys to do was to use the British DPM (or made in USA Virginia Beach Blackhawk) chest rigs over your modified US LC-2 ALICE belt kit to carry a double basic load and separate your movement phase load from your R&S load.

You could ruck in with the LCE on first, followed by the chest rig, and then the ruck.

Once we set into our hide sites where the rucks (radios and sustainment gear) were placed, when you'd do your R&S patrol or leave the hide for any reason, you could just use the chest rig with your map in the map pocket, 4-6x 30rd 5.56 mags, M18 smoke grenades, and your Team internal radio along with a Camelbak or 1Qt canteen if you wanted.  It was a lot better than trying to lug your LCE or LBV with ALICE pistol belt/canteens/4x M16 30rd mag pouches, etc.



I modified my British DPM chest rig so that the utility pockets were switched with each other so it's easier to get into them when worn, and made my own strobe light, flashlight, and multi-tool pouches that I sewed to the outside of one of those utility pouches.  I also added faster closure to one of the utility pouches, and planned to do the rest that way, but then LRS got deactivated, much to the detriment of the Army.  You really had to be there to feel what kind of unit it was, far better of a place than any other unit I was in, including working with SOCOM units (besides Ranger Regiment).  At least half of our NCOs came from 2/75, and the rest were from other LRS units, Recon Platoons, Pathfinder Detachments, with a few Vicenza, 1-508th (Panama Airborne Battalion), and 82nd guys.  We loved the mission and were encouraged to use our own resources to be as good at it as possible, with competition between the Teams for missions.



I've seen several variations of the chest rig used by the Brits, to include ones that had radio pouches on the left harness strap, grommets on the utility pouch flaps, and different closure methods.

Mine is an older one that has none of those.  I saw some UK folks in OIF 2003 with Desert DPM chest rigs that had more up-to-date features I hadn't seen before.

I also have the DPM mesh-based vest, which is a great piece of gear that is still relevant today for a one-stop shop surplus vest.

What a great insight, thanks!

A close friend of mine in the Italian army Pathfinder platoon did the Cambrian too (I asked him to take a Pic of his modern multicam UK lbe harness to show here but he couldn't atm). 2013 iirc

There are some pics around of US LRS soldiers wearing UK rigs on gwot deployments. (BTW the blackhawk one was born as a ripoff of the UK issue one).

As you said, great quality items but as Raf correctly said their design isn't always well suited to the civilian-hunter-competition shooter.

Load carrying concept is leaps and bounds better than the rest of the world.

Did you in LRS get accustomed also to the smock concept from your UK colleagues? Here in Europe it's very common.

Good discussion.  You guys have about covered it, but a few thoughts.

I love the Brit style LBE.  I think they are/were light-years ahead of us in this regard.  I have a bunch of it, modified US stuff, and my own designs which combine them both.  Here are a few things I have found.

The old school "ranger patrol belt", aka "belt order", "deuce gear", "TA-50(?)", etc. is still legit, for specific uses, such as "jungle patrol" (which the US southeast damn sure qualifies as); for when BA is not worn; and/or for use with a full-sized ruck.  In general, for dismounted patrolling, especially longer distances, where you are literally carrying everything on your back.  Some times it is just too damn hot to wear BA, chest rigs, etc.  If you are not required to wear it, you have a choice to keep your chest clear which sometimes is a very good idea.  And if you are wearing a full-sized ruck (something bigger than an assault pack, or even a 3-day pack), the Brit style belt kit sits flush with the top of the belt, as Joe mentioned, which allows your ruck to sit nicely on the shelf the rear pouches create.  This is bigger than you think.  US canteen pouches sit up too high, with the caps interfering with the ruck/ruck frame.  By moving the pouches down, flush with the top of the belt, your ruck actually sits on top of the belt kit, which for those of you that know, is a huge improvement.  This is the number one reason PLCE is worth looking into, IMHO.  It allows you to integrate your whole load out into something you can hump for long distances, without a lot of unnecessary pain and suffering.

Chest rigs, with/without BA are more common these days.  Although I loved the old SAS/SBS chest rigs back in the day, I think here is where our designs actually are better.  A low pro, light weight PC, with a micro or full sized chest rig works well for when BA is required; working from vehicles; and/or cold weather ops.  In general, mounted patrolling where you don't have to carry everything.  Or for colder weather and "long back" rucks.

Brit Bergens have long been one of my favorites.  I especially like the way they have fielded two types, to work with whatever LBE you're using.  Again as Joe mentioned, the "short back" ruck is roughly like a Large ALICE, in that it is designed to be worn slightly higher on the back, in order to work with belt gear.  So it fits perfectly with their belt order.  The "long back" ruck is more alpine style, in that it is longer and narrower, sits down lower, and designed to work with a full padded waist belt.  These rucks work well with chest rigs (and so-so with BA).  And cold weather/mountain ops, where more gear is required.  The trouble comes, IMHO, when you try to combine belt kit with a long back ruck.  Or even a short back ruck with the wrong belt pouches.  Trying to get two waist belts in the same place has made for some interesting combinations over the years.

And that leads me to my final point, which is waist belt.  Again, as this pertains to PLCE, if you drop your pouches flush with the top of the belt, the (short back) ruck sits nicely on the rear pouches.  A waist belt isn't really needed, in most instances.  In effect, the belt kit becomes the waist belt.  But, if you run a long back, then of course the waist belt becomes critical to carry the load.

The biggest thing you notice right out of the gate with British and a lot of European kit is that it seems like it was actually designed by seasoned soldiers, for soldiers, to be comfortable and relevant to performing combat duties while also sustaining them with practical provisions for carrying things they actually carry.  The little tea packet pouches inside the top flaps of the utility pouches on British PLCE is one example.



US gear is designed for a much larger army force structure and is more focused on quantity than quality, since our Army is so much bigger than any of our NATO partners.  For that reason, those of us in the recon community made, modified, bought, and acquired a lot of our own gear.

Eagle Industries also made an AK chest rig that was nice, with the general pattern of the chest panel seemingly modeled after the British chest rig, but with pouches that were meant for AK mags and better construction with Cordura, double stitched binding tape, fastex, etc.  There was a London Bridges one as well that was high quality.



When I was in LRS, Logan Coffee (Tactical Tailor) was asked to make a specific 2/75 Ranger Battalion Rack harness for them that was a really slick magazine chest rig with breeches shotgun rounds on the outside of the magazine pouches, and utility pockets on the sides.  It was the impetus for the TT MAV and Ranger Regiment Rack, which Eagle and Blackhawk immediately followed with their own versions.

The British cold weather items were some of the most sought after gear in LRS.  I used an SAS DPM bivy cover in Phase I (Patrolling and Small Unit Tactics Phase) of the SFQC, which was way too warm for even the worst of Camp Mackall weather.  Looks like this:



I've done a lot of training and advisory work with NATO and Nordic coalition partners in the reconnaissance and sniping communities primarily, so I've seen a lot of different cold/wet weather gear and different LBE.  I really like the Danish M84 kit a lot.





I also noticed that the Russians use a lot of smocks based off the Wehrmacht-Era smocks and jackets, and I have adapted that approach to my combat shirts and BDU tops along with lightweight Ghillie hoods.

I agree with the above.  I remember taking my modified LBV down to Panama for 28 days of Jungle Operations Training Center deployment.  The shoulder harness was too wide and thick for high humidity with the LBV, so I got prickly heat pretty bad.  Same thing happened when I was in Korea the year before on the DMZ in 1-506th Scouts.

The old school LC-2, previous LC-1, M-1967, M-1956 US LBE suffered from this stupid canteen pouch design with exposed lids, whereas the British pouches are fully-enclosed and can be used for canteens, extra mags, extra 40mm rounds, smoke grenades, sniper veils, MREs, radios, whatever.

Your points about mission profile and load bearing kit configurations are spot-on.

One of the bets dismounted patrolling configurations for long range, long endurance with a larger ruck was used by the OPFOR at JRTC.  I think Eagle made a micro chest rig even back in the late 1990s, early 2000 time period, and it was issued to the OPFOR guys at JRTC then.  It only held a few mags, a small squad radio, M18 smoke grenades, a map, and maybe a multitool, but was about perfect for wearing with a large ruck.

They would work out of caches for hitting all the visiting units so they weren't reliant on vehicle-borne resupplies, but you would catch them during movement phase sometimes with their rucks.  With that little micro rig chest kit, they were able to still be quite maneuverable even when carrying a large ruck.  They had all OD gear and uniforms as well, to include specific OD Gore-tex parkas.  My first Scout Platoon would do very frequent OPFOR augmentee rotations down there working with them to make life hard for visiting units, which was actually far better training for us than typical home unit-driven training.  My first deployment to JRTC was actually as an OPFOR augmentee and it wouldn't be until many years later that I deployed there as a blue unit with 82nd, which sucked.

I agree that the British PLCE belt kit configuration with large Bergen is about ideal for long-range patrolling while carrying a longer endurance load.

The other ideal option is to carry the micro chest rig while using a waist belt-equipped ruck.

Reacting to contact is easier with the PLCE belt kit/Bergen when you ditch rucks because you don't have to mess with releasing the waist belt, but you're left with much heavier kit than a micro rig.

Once you ditch the ruck and only have the micro rig, you are almost as maneuverable as being totally slick.

I made a system where you can configure things however you want, to include connecting the micro rig to the ruck straps.

Great info there, thank you.

Here (Italy) we'd use also British style smocks, only thing I'd never get along with is the Sop of putting 1qt canteen in a pocket (hard and forced you to reinforce that pouch).

As far as us kit good for jungle ops I suggest you to check reviews of "state of the art" jungle rigs. I think the UK made c2rfast jungle rig is leaps and bounds better than the  US made Velocity systems jungle rig

https://redbeardtactical.home.blog/2019/08/09/review-velocity-systems-jungle-kit/#like-218

https://thereptilehouseblog.com/2019/08/21/run-through-the-jungle-c2r-fast-hereford-jungle-webbing-overview/

UK has a longer tradition. They would supplement old canvas pattern 58 with the better Alice, but when they started tailoring plce kits they took the lead.

In the humidity of the tropics, you're going to be soaked through with sweat no matter what.

Just carrying any actual combat load, you're going to be soaked through your top no matter where you are.  I can't think of a time when I've been dry when carrying even just an old school LCE for anything other than something admin with hardly any movement.

For that C2R rig, I would have made the layer against the body gear mesh or spacer mesh, not solid like they did.  I think they might have done it so it would serve as one side of the internal pocket of the hippo belt.

I like what they did with the suspenders and back panel.

I made my own hippo belt with MOLLE before we even got issued MOLLE in 2002, because I knew it was already coming down the pipe.

I used mesh for the body side, and 1000D Woodland Cordura for the outer side.  If I was doing it again, it would be 500D.

I made the ends of the split front come together so that it looked like a single piece.

I suspended it with an LC-2 style H harness so that I could kinda blend in, but since I was using MOLLE M4 mag pouches all around, it stood out because I wasn't using the LC-2 30rd M16 mag pouches or garbage canteen pouches.  It was basically a PLCE/LC-2/M-1956/MOLLE hybrid.  I also made a channel for the Camelbak hose in the LC-2 harness, with one of the side bladder pouches hidden in the buttpack because the flapping Camelbak hose had always been a problem I wanted to solve without creating a pressure point with the hose on your traps when you donned a mission ruck.

LRRPF52 has it going on; his experience way trumps mine in any category.  Guys like this, who frequently worked dismounted (I hate having to say that), for long distances, are SME's at what works and what doesn't.  My experience mirrors his own; when we cross-trained with the Brits, we saw just how good their kit actually was, and conversely, how much our stuff sucked.  I think this is a very important point, for us civvies, because your possible mission requirements, and how you might have to carry them out, are closer to what these guys have done, rather than "Big Army" (or Mother Green).  So taking a look at PLCE is a very good idea, IMHO.  It is optimized for carrying, long distances, versus being trucked/tracked/flown to work.

I think we are also thinking along similar lines.  I like the concept of a "jungle" patrol belt, with Brit style pouches n load out, a chest rig, and a ruck, sized as required.  The chest rig is optional, but gives you some versatility.  For close target recce and such, you can drop both ruck and belt kit, and yeah, be much more mobile, hostile, and/or stealthy.  Split front, 4 pouches carry up to 8 mags (and/or radios), and two side pouches for NVD's, IFAK, 1 qt canteen, etc.

I am also partial to a winter or mountain load out, which drives you to a full long back ruck, and a supporting chest rig.  The belt kit may be dropped, to make way for a full waist belt, for heavier loads.  A smaller "assault" pack may also be carried, in lieu of sustainment pouches, for when the full ruck is not required.

Not to jack thread, but knowing these things is important to understanding the usefulness of PLCE.

Smocks can be a separate thread on their own, but yeah, I'm a big fan of them myself.  Again, going back "old school", to what may actually work better, for us, than current issue stuff.

I am personally not to keen at the idea of having a chest rig+a lbe+a ruck and ditching everything minus the chest rig....

To be correct UK had somehow a similar system, that was rooted to the early malayan days up to the 80's tradition of blokes wearing belt kit without suspenders. Ever heard of the Allen belt? Arktis made (and still makes) a variant of their chest rigs that don't have the cross straps, but only a larger waist belt. You wear them backward on your waist. This can be done with a degree of usefulness because ammo pouches double well as utility pouches. That way you can wear a chest rig, Allen belt and bergen and ditch everything minus the chest part with ease.... If you can bear up with wearing a heavy belt kit without suspenders

AH yes, I remember that.  I saw the Artkis designs but never understood the rationale behind it.  Thanks for that insight.

Well, I can sympathize about not liking chest rigs.  If your part of Italy is like the south-east US, then you might favor "belt order", which leaves the chest uncovered.  For at least half of the year, we are in complete agreement.  But, when it gets colder, up in the mountains, I find I do like a chest rig, simply because it's the best way of carrying some things, like radios, bleeder kits, not to mention go-to mags.  Especially when I have bulkier base layers and a smock on, and/or when I need a full sized ruck.  And if your are required to wear BA, you might as well throw some other stuff on top of it.  The technique of ditching everything and going with a chest rig is very specialized; not saying that should be a common technique.  But it is valid under certain circumstances.

That being said, I am still partial to "belt order", just because it fits my terrain and weather, not to mention mission requirements.  And yes, I do recall when the Brits did some strange things, like not wearing "ranger straps" (belt yokes) or even using rifle slings.  I think some of that may have been regimental traditions and so forth.  But they did get the PLCE right so we have to give them that.  Sort of.  I have recently done some kit mods for a mate in Old Blighty.  He said their new Virtus(?) stuff is OK but still could use some improvement, which we have been working on.  So yeah, it's a continuous process.

Many a Brit will tell you their kit is shit, which might be partially true, in execution, but the basic concepts are sound.  Funny thing is, the US is just the opposite.  We have semi-custom, even Gucci gear, but sometimes the concepts are flawed  (at least in regards to long range recce patrolling).  Kind of like, if you combined the two (much like V/M), you would have some really good (but pricey) kit.  This is also what I am attempting to do.

Diz, thanks for the insight.

At the end, mission requirements drive what you wear.   When i was AD i'd have liked to wear a belt kit, but even without body armor you were basically forced to wear a smock, chest rig and a very large pack with a detachable "small" patrol pack (as you couldn't cache sensitive electronic items). No physical space to fit a belt kit instead of a chest rig, best you could do was using a split chest rig and, after caching the big pack, loosen the straps and wear it  more or less like a LBE. And it wasn't due to jump restriction as you packed everything in the drop bag.

i heard good reviews of Virtus, far from perfect but it works for the average Joe and left commercial manufacturers in some of a bad spot, as issue pouches are good enough for most guys.

Back on topic, Arktis (as soon as plce came in) started making, and still makes a tiny (12 magazines capacity ) clip on chest rig that would snap on d-rings on harnesses and even pack straps. Not my cup of tea, but another interesting solution for sure.

Very true.  The bottom line is what you need to do the job (and sometimes what some others think you need as well).  The beauty of being off AD now is we can make these decisions based on what we actually need, not what someone else dictates.  So we can now take kit from around the world, like PLCE, and use it however we like.  And it used to be we would have to deploy and meet guys from other countries to get this info.  Now we can cuss and discuss this stuff on line, which is pretty amazing when you think about it.  Thanks to Joe and our resident Lurp for sharing this stuff with us.

In regards to PLCE, the surplus stuff ain't bad, although you might have trouble attaching the yoke, depending on what system you get.  The top after-market stuff, like Jay Jays and Dixies Corner have loop hardware on the belts; some issue stuff only has the loops on the pouches.  So depending on how you want to rig it up, you have to pay attention to which one you are looking at.  I prefer attachment to the belt; others prefer to the pouches.   Case in point, I have a mate who was issued the Virtus stuff but wanted to use V/M pouches.  One of the pouches didn't have a loop, so he couldn't attach the yoke strap to that position.  We are fixing that, but be aware some belts do not have loops, so if your pouches don't either, you're kinda hosed.

If you are unfamiliar with it, I would buy a complete belt order system, so you know the whole thing fits together.  To get a good look at actual MOD issue stuff, check out kitmonster.co.uk.  In fact, they currently have custom-modified belt orders from Jay Jays on offer.  That's top of the line, IMHO.

For chest rigs, even thought it's not PLCE-related, I prefer the newer Spiritus systems style rigs.  Something that integrates well with BA, when required, but also works well as stand-alone.

For rucks, the issue Brit Bergens, especially the short backs, are superb for working with belt kit.  But lately I have discovered Crossfire Australia (another international brand, go figure) and now run their DG-3 as my go-to ruck.  You can see a review of it at the Redbeard site.  (Full disclosure I am now a rep for them for North America.)  It also works exceptionally well with PLCE-style belt kit.

Not to jack the thread, I know the original thrust was towards chest rigs, but when you talk about PLCE, I think you need to talk about belt order as well.  Not to mention rucksacks.  The beauty of it is how it all fits together.

Some more belt kit + chest rigs from SOG in SEA:







The biggest problems with wearing belt kit and chest rigs together in my experience are:

* Retained heat on the chest leaves only your neck and head to shed thermal energy.

* When you run while doing IADs, your quads have to fight the belt kit load when lifting your legs up if you have any pouches up front.

* When you don the ruck, it gets really warm.

For infiltration/long distance movements, some guys would stash their Chets rigs under the top flap of their rucks between the assault pack and main ruck, or put them inside the assault pack since there was ammo and other emergency essentials in them.

Everything is a constant experiment.  With the first Land Warrior MOLLE gear we tested, the rucksack waist pad was your kit belt, and it had this big socket in the back for the bottom of the ruck frame to plug into.  You could pull the quick releases on the straps and the ruck was supposed to fall off behind you without losing your belt kit.  The belt kit connected to a mesh-based split-front vest that had mag pouches on it and an integrated radio/GPS/computer built into the vest about the size of an iPhone in a hard case 7 years before the iPhone came out.

Very cool.  I remember reading about some of those experiments, and saw some examples of other designs.  Most recently there was a guy who made a stiffener plate that slid back behind the patrol belt, so you almost had a waist belt for the ruck.  As an added bonus you didn't lose the lumbar space on the belt line normally associated with these designs.

My own take on it was to run two 1" straps from the ruck back, to the patrol belt, just in front of the mag pouches.  Connect with SR buckles.  So in effect, use the lower "stab straps" to connect to the "waist belt".   Or neck the ruck waist belt down to 1" and drive on.   It works well for when enemy contact is not likely, but needs to be undone once contact is possible.

By adjusting the tension on the straps, you can pull the ruck into the belt, and transfer a little weight forward.  By alternating the SR buckles, you can still also use as a "torso" strap to stabilize ruck in hilly/mountain terrain.

I would'n consider the xhicom like rigs (original Rhodesian, 80s delta force rigs and such) being in the same category as the plce one. The first being a bandolier for ammo that was paired with belt kits, the plce one being born because of the need to carry a "full" load when doing mounted ops.

The whole thing got mixed sometime in the late 80's I think, but as of today the various commando rigs, the large hsgi ones, tt rigs, even who puts a central ammo pouch and side utilities on a Rhodesian owes it to the brits.

I think you know that the original issue molle had the belt socket thing (I have a set). It was a pioneer idea, as of today Virtus has a similar load lifter thing on the belt to transfer weight of the plate carrier (high end us ones exist too, but the UK one is i think the only one in general issue)

found the pic i searched that shows a Italian navy SF soldier wearing bith a belt kit mated with some of a big chest rig. the chest is a copy of a 80's  Us design and have 5x3 magazine pouches with velcro flaps than can stretch up to a brick size radio. That is...well, a lot of carrying capacity.

Have you seen that French model, where the guy "just" throws the ruck over his head to mount it on the belt chassis?  I always thought that's fine and dandy, but a fully loaded ruck?  Yeah, if you can do 100 lb kettle bell swings I suppose.

The chest rigs have gone through some interesting development, much the same as everything else since the G-WOT.  Of course the Brit ones were the gold standard; everything else came off of that.  HSGI went "high right" with their stuff, then the micro rigs came out, so yeah pretty full range to pick from.  I am currently working on one that is a micro rig base but expandable to a "std" size.  I like this concept because it works well with a PC as a micro rig, but then you can add on side panels for utility pouches and have a std or regular sized rig.  Playing with the idea of making the side panels so they rig onto the ruck as side pouches when doing the "infil" phase, but then rig onto the chest rig, after dropping rucks and into the "actions on the obj" phase.  This frees up the shoulder straps on the ruck from the under arm pouches.  Kinda playing on the idea of the two PLCE side pouches zipping together as a small pack.

Yeah I get that SF dude.  I have a buddy much the same way.  When they want to go in heavy, the chest rig augments their ammo load out.  Of course you gotta train to carry that load.  But they do it.  This current chest rig was originally inspired by his team requirement, for 4 x 2-mag pouches, which could also take 152's, and two side pouches for 1 qt canteens, and other stuff.  When combined with a belt load of another 6-8 mags, plus frags and smoke, you are ready to storm bunkers n shit, which was what they had in mind.

But you are correct to point that this is a lot shit.  If you aren't working out to handle it, you will be blowing it out your hoop.

If I get a chance, I think I'll make my variation of the PLCE belt kit with modern materials, a lot of my lessons-learned additions, and integral hydration to the waist belt and suspenders.

Looking at my DPM chest rig, I want to take it all apart and re-build it, but it would be better if I had new DPM material instead.

I'm not a fan of criss-cross straps on chest rigs for obvious reasons that all of those who have used them are well aware of.

I want to make the utility pockets with universal grenade carriers like the US M-1956 ammunition pouches on the sides, with all the small pouches for specific items on the outside front of them like I did with the one on mine.

For the PLCE belt kit, I would use coyote spacer mesh for against the body, and 500D Cordura for the pouches.  The harness is one of the best LBE harnesses ever made in my opinion.

For the waist belt, I would incorporate some of the latest approaches from civilian hiking pack closure and adjustment that have a mechanical advantage, as opposed to the old school methods of trying to pull the excess backwards when tightening, since the belt kit and pouches work as a shelf for the Bergen.

UK Pathfinders

I want to see those Pathfinders rucking and running with those drop leg holsters. The results would be entertaining.

I like the PLCE concept, but that picture illustrates well the things I don't like: shit accommodation for a sidearm and those pouches stick out a ways from the body. My chest rig/PC and MOLLE belt keep things much closer to the body.

The region and climate has a lot to do with what gear you will use.

You aren't going to break out a brew from a PC and MOLLE belt.

It's cold and wet most of the year in the UK and Northern Europe, so PCs with battle belts only work well for short duration mission profiles, not so much for extended patrolling, advanced recon and surveys of DZs and LZs, etc.

Those guys don't look that big either, so the depth of the pouches really is drastic on the little guy.

That pic illustrates that a full loaded PLCE type beltkit can be cumbersome (but hey, cubic inches of items have to go somewhere) and that is not very leg holster friendly.

I think that the leg holster was mounted just for range training, as they are usually not carried, or if carried they are in a place that often is more comfortable than quick to access ; as weird as it may sound if you are required to carry a pistol in a patrol situation you may find guys with pistols put in some utility pouches or even inside the pack (just because you HAVE to carry one and can't leave it home).

That pic is nice, the center guy is wearing i think a complete PILGRIM FCSR kit (dragon supplies being the OEM and selling it themselves these days after Pilgrim stopped marketing them). The Pilgri harness is i think the best harness i've ever seen, my friend uses it.

I asked him for pics but still he didn't, i have this pic only, he upgraded some of the pouches.



Pilgrim FCSR yoke
JAYJAYS 6 row belt with cobra buckle
PAraclete dump pouch used as a commander pouch

That pic illustrates that a full loaded PLCE type beltkit can be cumbersome (but hey, cubic inches of items have to go somewhere) and that is not very leg holster friendly.

I think that the leg holster was mounted just for range training, as they are usually not carried, or if carried they are in a place that often is more comfortable than quick to access ; as weird as it may sound if you are required to carry a pistol in a patrol situation you may find guys with pistols put in some utility pouches or even inside the pack (just because you HAVE to carry one and can't leave it home).

That pic is nice, the center guy is wearing i think a complete PILGRIM FCSR kit (dragon supplies being the OEM and selling it themselves these days after Pilgrim stopped marketing them). The Pilgri harness is i think the best harness i've ever seen, my friend uses it.

I asked him for pics but still he didn't, i have this pic only, he upgraded some of the pouches.



Pilgrim FCSR yoke
JAYJAYS 6 row belt with cobra buckle
PAraclete dump pouch used as a commander pouch
Various standard issue osprey pouches and i think a Karrimor drop pouch with reinforced collar to maintain shape

Last time i've seen it he had upgraded to a ripaway IFAK pouch by karrimor and Emdom dump pouch (as it stays rigid in place)

I think this is why there is much misunderstanding of "classic" PLCE belt webbing.  Guys who aren't very familiar with it will point out why they think it sucks and their PC/chest rig combos are superior.  We look at pics on-line and comment from our own POV, which might be true of our particular terrain and sit, but ignores the simple fact that situations around the planet are different and require different approaches.

This is not to trumpet the idea of using one set over the other, simply to say that there are vastly different situations that require different T,T,P's, including what kind of LBE will work the best in that particular sit.  I have a PC/chest rig set up, in conjunction with a "pistol" belt, or what is called a warbelt these days.  I also have a "jungle" patrolling set up, that consists of a Brit-style belt kit (which usually doesn't include pistol gear).  And I have chest rigs, which can stand-alone or be used with BA.  Or a belt kit for that matter.

You may have favorite set ups that are optimized for your sit, but that is not to say that you might never be a in a sit where something else actually works better.  So I would say, hey, drive on, to anyone who has found a set up that works for them; I would only add that perhaps we need to keep an open mind and look at what other guys are doing around the world, in case one day you might find yourself in something similar.

I have patrolled in the jungles of Okinawa, and the Philippines; I have also patrolled in the mountains of Korea.  Not to mention the desert southwest, woodland midwest, and the swampy southeast.  In each case there are different requirements, for not only terrain and weather, but individual missions.  The LBE I would select might be different for each area/mission.

As pertains to this discussion, I would only add that PLCE is optimized for a wide variety of woodland/jungle patrol, where missions are such that regular re-supply is not anticipated, due to enemy activity, terrain, and/or a lack of vehicles.

Dismounted Patrolling away from any vehicles for extended duration favors the belt kit, especially in the jungle and temperate regions.

The minimal profile of the harness allows heat shed up and away from your body.

Living out of Kit
With PLCE belt kit/pouches, you can live out of your belt kit for most of what you do during the day.

They are awesome for stashing broken down MREs, lightweight snivel gear, sniper veils, extreme cold weather canteens with cups, mini stoves with heat tabs, energy bars, mini binos, LRFs, IFAKs, LW ponchos, bungee cords, tent stakes for building a hide site or poncho hooch during rainy season, survival kit, etc.

Show me on your PC and war belt combo where you carry any of that outside of the IFAK.

There's a huge difference kitting up for vehicle-borne, short duration ops, vs dismounted extended duration missions, especially in densely vegetated terrain.

Heat considerations
As I mentioned before, the LBV with its wide shoulder harness was terrible in Panama for 28 days, major prickly heat.  I was in a Scout Platoon in 25th ID at the time right after F Co 52nd LRSC was deactivated, and LBVs were issued/mandatory in 25th ID then.  Since we were playing OPFOR for 2nd Ranger Battalion and could wear whatever we wanted when doing OPFOR, I should have taken my modified LBE instead and used unscented baby wipes more often for preventive skin cleaning.

We also got prickly heat very often in Korea because 2nd ID mandated and issued the LBV.  These are examples where the big Army pickle machine fails regularly at not understanding regional orientation to climate, terrain, mission profile, and tailoring the force.  The British Army, with those 3 different options, understands regional orientation and force-tailoring because of their long history of the empire and working with the local conditions and constraints, rather than prescribing a one-size-fits-all approach like the US still does.

If you did what we were doing in Panama or even most of the missions I did in JRTC (Louisiana swamps) wearing Body Armor and belt kit, you would go down from heat stroke within hours and have to be evac'd.

Airborne Operations
Another thing almost nobody talks about is rigging your fighting load under your parachute harness.  This was already not ideal with LBE/LC-2. When IBAs became standard, you should have seen the 82nd spin their wheels with multiple good idea fairies trying and failing at problem-solving with how to rig the IBA with the parachute harness and rucksack. It led to the adoption of a totally new parachute system because they never went to 75th and asked, "How are you guys doing this?" For 82nd parachute insertion missions doing airfield seizures, you don't need large rucks.  Assault packs are plenty for airfield seizure.

We could even break down each of the categories into sub-categories.

Different Vehicle Considerations
Not all vehicle-mounted operations are the same.  Some trucks and APCs have more room than others, which can get really tight and don't even allow much on your back when you sit in them.  Razors and 4-wheelers have their own passenger/driver space, with 4-wheelers obviously being totally open.











One of the best vehicles I've ever ridden in is the Finnish Pasi APC, which is very spacious and comfortable while wearing BA and full vests.  It's easy to get in and out of, comfortable to ride in, and has superior armor and resilience to mines and IEDs than what we have in the US.