it is scandalous

IT IS SCANDALOUS

Canada is a small country compared to America so large government expenditures that fail, as is the case of the sleeping bags does not go unnoticed by the general population. A similar situation in the USA the general population never hears about.

When it comes to sleeping bags, we spend several hundred million dollars on sleeping bags. Before a contract is awarded the contractors bidding have to demonstrate that the bag they are bidding meet or surpasses the requirement set forth in the specifications. But what if the specifications pertaining to temperature rating are incorrect but the bidders meet them. That means if the sleeping bags fail to perform the bidders doing the manufacturing are not responsible if they fail.

In Canada they use temperatures of F or C, while in the USA when the specifications are published for the bidders to comply with the temperature rating is in “clo” values. If the bag one is bidding with meets the published “clo” value that is good.

I have spoken about “clo” values many times in the past. To review in the late 1930’s two guys came up with a measure of the temperature of a man wearing a wool suit business suit [that is what was made back then] and in stead of saying the temperature rating of the suit was either F or C. They said it was a clo value and the clo value for the suit.

“CLO is a value that describes the degree of insulation provided by an article of clothing. 1 A CLO value of 1 is equal to the amount of clothing required by a resting human to maintain thermal comfort at a room temperature of 71 degrees F.” This is the first time I have read a temperature associated with one “clo”. In the past when Natick Labs tested sleeping bags on the copper manikin and I was told my Antarctic bag had a 6 “clo” I asked for the F equivalent they told me they did not know. When I sent a bag to KSU ENVIRONMENTAL LAB, they told me the bag had a 4.6 ”clo” but no temperature in F. so, now we know from some one 1 “clo” is equal to 71 degrees F.

For years Natick labs has used as a bench mark a 5 “clo”. So, if you offer a bag that tests to 5 “clo” you are in the acceptable range with your bid.

My opinion: these sleeping bags are never as far as I know tested in the field at various temperatures to learn were they perform. And the creators of the specifications certainly wouldn’t do it.

These bags are issued to our soldiers who are of the belief will keep them warm in the environment they are sent too. As far as I currently know only one model bag is being manufactured. We deploy soldiers all over the world and again as far as I know there is only one bag issued. I have received orders for jungle bags, desert bags, 0 degree bags and -20 and -60 degree F bags. The buyers are small SFG’s. They know because they have told me the issue stuff is worthless.

Over the years my sales to active duty military personnel has been increasing particularly the Ultima Thule and Antarctic bags who are deploying to Alaska. We have already supplied a number of Alaska based units.

Unfortunately, we do not have soldiers bring to the attention their superiors like has taken place in the Canadian military expressing the critical issues with the bags supplied. As we know the most critical issue was in ability to keep the soldiers warm. If we had the same setup, we would hear from many more since our army is larger but would they at Natick listen? My opinion the answer is NO.

I am of the opinion they know who I am and read every article I publish. They chose not to believe all of the information I have acquired learned from the many customers who have so graciously written to me of their experiences with the various temperature rated sleeping bags. I can only assume many buyers of my bags have done so because they have read the testimonials or someone told them of the Wiggy bags. Actually, many have told me of the firsthand information from a Wiggy bag owner.

I do not know what the Canadians will be doing in the future, I can only hope.

I have tried years ago to work with Natick all to no avail.