Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
MOLLE
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Background == Even prior to the introduction of MOLLE, another lightened system of load-carrying equipment had been developed. Known as the [[Individual integrated fighting system|Individual Integrated Fighting System]] (IIFS) and also TLBV, it intended to replace the older [[All-purpose lightweight individual carrying equipment|All-purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment]] (ALICE). The IIFS load-bearing vests (rifle and 40mm grenadier configurations) had their origins in the vests used by [[United States Navy SEALs|US Navy SEALS]] and other [[Military Assistance Command, Vietnam β Studies and Observations Group|special operations forces]] in [[Vietnam War|Vietnam]]. Though the IIFS did not live up to its expected purpose, it did lay the groundwork for future equipment.<ref name=":4">{{Cite web |last=Sampson |first=James B. |date=August 2001 |title=Human Factors Evaluation of the Modular Lightweight Load-Carrying Equipment (MOLLE) System |url=https://archive.org/details/DTIC_ADA393792 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.org/download/DTIC_ADA393792/DTIC_ADA393792.pdf |archive-date=4 May 2018 |access-date=14 May 2025 |website=archive.org |publisher=US Army Soldier and Biological Chemical Command (SBCCOM), Soldier Systems Center (SSC), Natick, MA |pages=II / pdf p. 2; p. V (5) / pdf p. 6; p. |via=[[Defense Technical Information Center]] (DTIC) |id=ADA393792, Natick/TR-01/014 |quote=An earlier program to replace ALICE with a radically different internal frame system based on commercially available backpacks did not succeed, in part, because of the failure to appreciate why certain features, such as the external frame, existed. Fortunately, the effort was not a complete loss since the program did introduce useful design concepts and provided valuable learning experiences for the MOLLE program."; "In 1988 the US Army adopted a new internal frame load-carrying system. The design was based on commercial backpacks modified for military use with the addition of a special fighting vest and a detachable patrol pack. The original focus was to develop a load-carrying system for use in cold weather. However, in the end, the US Army decided the new internal frame pack would be the replacement for the external framed All-purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment or ALICE system. Production and distribution started in 1990 but by 1993 it was evident that the new internal frame pack was unacceptable to a large number of combat personnel."; "In March 1994, the Training and Doctrine Command System Manager for the Soldier, the Program Manager Soldier, and the U.S. Marine Corps Systems Command issued a joint call for a front end analysis (FEA) to determine the best design for a load-bearing system for soldiers and marines. The FEA was used in drafting a new user requirements document and initiating the development of a modular load-carrying system which ultimately became known as the Modular Lightweight Load-carrying Equipment (MOLLE).}}</ref> === ALICE and IIFS packs === In 1988, the US Army adopted a new [[internal frame pack]] system, a subsystem in IIFS. The design was based on commercial backpacks modified for military use with the addition of a special fighting vest and a detachable patrol pack. The original focus was to develop a load-carrying system for use in [[Cold-weather warfare|cold weather]]. However, in the end, the US Army decided the new internal frame pack would be the replacement for the external framed [[All-purpose lightweight individual carrying equipment|All-purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment (ALICE) system]]. Production and distribution started in 1990 but by 1993 it was evident that the new internal frame pack was unacceptable to a large number of combat personnel.<ref name=":4" /> Although a key problem with the internal frame was durability due to poor manufacturing, the IIFS pack system was also judged to have some basic design flaws. Based on a survey of users by the [[US Army Training and Doctrine Command]] (TRADOC), soldiers claimed the pack was too hot against the back in [[warm climates]], and was unstable and uncomfortable when heavily loaded. While many of the features of the system were liked (e.g., the patrol pack, and capacity of the main pack), it was judged not to meet the overall requirements of the Army. In spite of this rejection, most units surveyed (6 of 9), still favored having both load-carrying systems: the ALICE for warm and temperate climates, and the internal frame system for cold weather operations.<ref name=":4" />
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)