View Full Version : Prior military backpackers...
As a soon to be retiree who aspires to someday walk the AT I am having a hard time wrapping myself around the obsession with weight. Am I just accustomed to carrying the heaviest equipment possible? Is it that the military mindset is that you can always carry more ammo or water? Do I have that far to go before realizing that I can choose what goes into my packing list? Someone please help me with this!
Lyte-w8-hyker
07-31-2012, 19:07
Thanks for your service, I'm AD Airforce right now too. Back packing is my little escape from the military mind set. Remember it's supposed to be fun. There's no mission, objective or destionation. Only fun, less weight equals more fun imho. You'll see best of luck.
Thanks to you as well! I look forward to enjoying a hike instead of just putting my head down and bearing it.
It's about optimizing your hike. When your goal is to move fast and far for many back-to-back months, you get rid of superfluous gear and are picky about what's used for the remaining gear. Planning (logistics) is also part of it. If you're carrying twice or half as much food and water as you know you need to get a certain distance, then you've planned poorly. Carrying extra slows you down and increases the risk of injury, and carrying too little might prevent you from reaching your goal.
Think about the airborne laser. It's not viable because a system doesn't exist that's small and light enough. Think about some of the military rifles. They use lightweight designs with lightweight materials. As Lyte-w8-hyker can probably tell you, the AF's bombs and warheads have been getting lighter over time. Examples could come all day.
Colin Chapman is one of the most reknowned race car engineers of all time, and his philosophy was to simplify and add lightness. It's one you should adopt if you want to enjoy the walking portion of your trip, reduce risk of overuse injury, and be able to walk faster and further.
Wolf - 23000
07-31-2012, 20:06
RamQuad,
I'm also currently Active Duty - serving in the United States Army for the past 13 years. At the same time on the trail, I am also know as an extremely lightweight backpacking (carrying right around 10 - 12 pounds including 5 days of food). My point is serving in the military does not mean you have to carry a heavy pack. When I'm on the trail, I leave all my military equipment at home and take what works for me as you are going to have to figure out what works for yourself.
Hiking light weight on the AT is fairly simple if that is your choice. No matter what you carry, remember this is not a military hike - No long road marches, you choice to carry what you want, hike how ever far you want and above all have fun.
Peace,
Wolf
Moved this thread to the "General" forums.
fiddlehead
08-01-2012, 01:03
Up to you how much weight you carry.
But, you'll find that it's a lot easier on your body (ankles, knees especially) to carry less.
So, it's not rocket science when making some choices before you start.
If you have a choice between a large tube of toothpaste vs. a smaller one, most experienced hikers will take the smaller (lighter) one.
Same with your spoon, sleeping pad, hat, flashlight (some don't even carry one), shoes (when I go into a shoe store anymore, I pick them up first as that's my no. 1 priority, next to fit), stove, cook-kit, knife, stuff sacks, etc. (just about everything really, unless you already own something you're very attached to)
Then, during your hike, you'll figure out ways to fine-tune your system even more after carrying it day after day up and down mountains.
Even though you are used to that, if you overload yourself, you are submitting your body to more chance of injuries.
Yeah, the important thing is to have fun (for most hikers anyway)
gunner76
08-01-2012, 01:06
Do you want to hump gear or enjoy the hike ???
I like to enjoy the hike and so I try and hump as little gear as possible and just take what I need.
Semper Fi
PD230SOI
08-01-2012, 06:12
One of the main differences is means versus ends.
Depending on your Branch and MOS it is possible the hike was the means to get you to the your military end (meet with villiagers in Marja, set up OP, control canal, etc). Backpacking is, in and of itsself, the end.
Another point is that its possible the more water, batteries, and ammo you carried the more you reduced the risk of failure of the mission. In backpacking the lighter you go the more you reduce the risk of failure of mission. I'm not trying to get you to do a 5 step RM of your backpacking, but you do need to recognize that they are very different activities.
But to be honest the great thing about backpacking is that if you have your mind in the game you will have fun. Just be realistic about your objectives and the capabilities of your fellow hikers and over time you will slowly lighten your pack. Nothing says you must be lightweight at the start.
I would however recommend you read up a lot about your BIG THREE before you spend your very hard earned money. The right bag, ruck, and tarp/tent will keep you happy for a very long time. Some of my gear I depend on has served me well for over 20 years.
yellowsirocco
08-01-2012, 07:01
I met a retired military guy trying to thru hike this year. He hadn't left the military mindset and was carrying way too much. He ended up getting hurt pretty bad and had to go home. I think if he was carrying a bit less things would have gone differently. It is not just about fun, but a lighter pack is a lot safer as well.
Can relate to having the grunt mindset carry over. The AT is about fun. Just worry about staying warm and dry. Having enough water and food. Experimenting with what to carry can be as fun as the hike.
Rain Man
08-01-2012, 10:29
As a soon to be retiree who aspires to someday walk the AT I am having a hard time wrapping myself around the obsession with weight.
I led a section hike on the AT with a group of nine hikers, including my youngest daughter and a brand new hiker "young" guy right out of the military. We immediately climbed a moderate mountain. The eight of us made it up just fine, with the usual huffing and puffing. The young ex-military guy went behind the first tree at the top and threw up! He had a 70-something pound pack and felt compelled to keep up with us older, younger, whatever civilian hikers, compelled to be "macho." At the first shelter, he began leaving stuff. To his credit, he finished the hike, though not without twisting a knee.
These days, he hikes with an under-20 pound pack! The "obsession" isn't with weight. The obsession is with health, enjoyment, and the ability to hike without injury and being a problem for yourself or others.
Rain:sunMan
.
Feral Bill
08-01-2012, 11:42
Somewhere between ultimate ultralight and pack mule heavy is a sweet spot for you. No need to go to extremes either way. The biggest cause of heavy packs is, I suspect, not heavy gear, but unneeded items. I assume yo have a couple years left to serve. That's plenty of time to research what might work for you.
You'll find you don't need to carry anything you don't want, and can generally carry less stuff if you want. You can move at your own pace, and will be responsible for all of your own decisions. I don't buy into the ultralight thing either, and don't really care if my pack weighs 20 pounds or 35 pounds -- Think of your conditioning as an advantage in that you can be more flexible with your load. Want to go light? Fine. Want to carry a little bit more? Fine too - it'll still be a hell of a lot lighter than what you're accustomed to. My primary two-week pack is a tactical/hunting pack - anathema to your typical cuben fiber baggie type hiker, but it's got the modularity I grew accustomed to.
I plan to try to go light but not ultra light. I would guess that I am at least 18 months away from hitting the AT. I plan to work out the bugs between now and then. I am going to guess that my two severe limitations are going to be the fact that I like to eat and want to be comfortable when I lay down at night.
gram cracker
08-01-2012, 17:38
I retired from the Air Force in 1993. I had no problem taking less. I never took much backpacking anyway.
The difference I see from others is I tend to make a detailed plan and stick to it. It generally turns out pretty well.
rocketsocks
08-01-2012, 17:41
I always felt that those packs that the troops carry were so far from the center of gravity, and that the suppliers could take a lesson from the backpacking or mountaineering community, came to find out that Kelty makes packs for the military...Awesome! didn't know that...any others?
The Old Boot
08-01-2012, 17:47
I plan to try to go light but not ultra light. I would guess that I am at least 18 months away from hitting the AT. I plan to work out the bugs between now and then. I am going to guess that my two severe limitations are going to be the fact that I like to eat and want to be comfortable when I lay down at night.
Don't think of them as 'limitations', think of them as 'qualifications' - as you're researching and choosing gear, nighttime comfort and good food prep are going to be a priority!
Take these 18 months to research and then research some more - don't buy now - either you'll find something better later or you'll have stuff sitting around somewhere unused.
Eating better might mean that you want a stove that simmers and a pot set rather than a beer can stove and a tin cup. Sleeping better might mean either a really comfortable pad, a down sleeping bag and a two man tent so you have room or it might mean a hammock and the quilts/tarps etc. that go with it.
None of it needs to be heavy - at least not as heavy as you're used to carrying.
coach lou
08-01-2012, 17:52
No Com gear, no 200 rounds, no kevlar body armour, nite vision gear, full utilities! Man, your already ultralite:banana
Stepinwolfe
08-01-2012, 18:15
I'm a retired infantry officer who has been section hiking the AT the past 3 summers. Minimizing weight is very important to your well being. No need to get carried away with ultra lite, but as a beginner I suggest a limit of 20 lbs +/- a few lbs based on how many days you are going to be out, the water situation, and the terrain. Heavy loads will tear down your body over time on the AT. As others have said, you are supposed to be having fun out there, so carry as little as possible while meeting caloric, water, shelter, and medical, and satety requirements.
I plan to try to go light but not ultra light.
I hate it when people get wrapped up in terms. In this case, it might be self limiting. Go as light as you can. Better planning, experience and confidence will get you as light as you can go as long as you don't resist getting stuck with a label.
I am going to guess that my two severe limitations are going to be the fact that I like to eat and want to be comfortable when I lay down at night.
Eating a lot does result in a heavier pack weight, but has little to nothing to do with the weight of your gear. For the last couple of years I've consumed 4500 calories a day on the trail. Next year I hope to push that up to 5000 calories by slightly tweaking my diet.
I like to sleep comfortably too. I keep myself so warm I actually overheat. It's a bad habit, but I've always slept that way and do it on the trail too. I go back and forth between air mattresses and foam pads, but I'm favoring air mattresses. I never go with shorter pads--always full length. I even have a big down air mattress that is fairly light. I always sleep fully netted, which is a bivy at a minimum.
Having a very light pack becomes almost easy if you get your gear from a specialized business that uses premium materials. Let's say you go with fairly traditional gear made with premium materials.
31 oz - Western Mountaineering 20°F sleeping bag
31.4 oz - Big Sky International 2 person free standing dome tent with Let-it-por (cuben fiber) fabric and carbon fiber poles
20 oz - Exped Downmat UL full length down air mattress, 2.5 inches thick
48 oz - ULA Catalyst
This puts you at 8.15 pounds with a regular sleeping bag, a big tent, a plush and overly warm mattress and a pack that would probably end up being too big if you carried this exact gear. You can easily go lighter at a lower cost without sacrificing comfort if you're open minded about less traditional gear.
To be less all that equipment!
I like the idea that I am not the only person on here talking about section hiking!
Wolf - 23000
08-02-2012, 22:57
I hate it when people get wrapped up in terms. In this case, it might be self limiting. Go as light as you can. Better planning, experience and confidence will get you as light as you can go as long as you don't resist getting stuck with a label.
Eating a lot does result in a heavier pack weight, but has little to nothing to do with the weight of your gear. For the last couple of years I've consumed 4500 calories a day on the trail. Next year I hope to push that up to 5000 calories by slightly tweaking my diet.
I like to sleep comfortably too. I keep myself so warm I actually overheat. It's a bad habit, but I've always slept that way and do it on the trail too. I go back and forth between air mattresses and foam pads, but I'm favoring air mattresses. I never go with shorter pads--always full length. I even have a big down air mattress that is fairly light. I always sleep fully netted, which is a bivy at a minimum.
Having a very light pack becomes almost easy if you get your gear from a specialized business that uses premium materials. Let's say you go with fairly traditional gear made with premium materials.
31 oz - Western Mountaineering 20°F sleeping bag
31.4 oz - Big Sky International 2 person free standing dome tent with Let-it-por (cuben fiber) fabric and carbon fiber poles
20 oz - Exped Downmat UL full length down air mattress, 2.5 inches thick
48 oz - ULA Catalyst
This puts you at 8.15 pounds with a regular sleeping bag, a big tent, a plush and overly warm mattress and a pack that would probably end up being too big if you carried this exact gear. You can easily go lighter at a lower cost without sacrificing comfort if you're open minded about less traditional gear.
WHAT??? How much food you eat makes a huge different on your gear. 85 – 95% of my total weight is food. What type of pack you are going to carry to handle the weight. The stove you choice to cook your food is going to vary with how much food and cooking you plan on doing. Your clothing is another. If you planning on doing a lot of cooking, well you need to carry extra clothes to keep you warm while you cook your fest. It all adds up.
“Go as light as you can.” Why? You don’t backpack as light as you can go so how can you tell someone else to do something that you’re not doing yourself? Some hikers like lightweight backpacking others don’t. It is all up to the hiker to decide how much he/she is going to carry.
Wolf
How much food you eat makes a huge different on your gear.
It doesn't for me. Perhaps you have a weak back and need an extra supportive pack to carry a few extra pounds of food. Since this guy is a military guy used to heavy loads, this shouldn't be an issue.
Your clothing is another. If you planning on doing a lot of cooking, well you need to carry extra clothes to keep you warm while you cook your fest. It all adds up.
Cooking a lot of food and cooking a lot aren't necessarily the same thing. Assuming you do cook at all, how you cook is a much bigger factor than how much you cook. For example, your point is mute with freezer bag cooking. Now if you have problems eating without getting food all over your clothing, that's another issue, and a serious one at that.
“Go as light as you can.” Why? You don’t backpack as light as you can go so how can you tell someone else to do something that you’re not doing yourself? Some hikers like lightweight backpacking others don’t. It is all up to the hiker to decide how much he/she is going to carry.
Read my post and use some sense man. Obviously I don't mean 'can' in the extreme literal meaning. If you had used some sense, you would have easily understand that the point was to go as light as you 'can' within a given set of requirements and limitations. Comfort. Safety. Finances. Fears.
As far as saying some hikers don't like lightweight backpacking, that's preposterous. I can't accept that there's a single intelligent sensible hiker that would prefer the heavier of two pieces of gear that perform equally aside from weight. I would have accepted that some hikers don't like the minimalism that often goes along with lightweight backpacking, and it should be obvious that I don't care for minimalist backpacking.
Rain Man
08-03-2012, 11:22
I hate it when people get wrapped up in terms.
You mean when people speak and write with a modicum of precision? :D
Rain:sunMan
.
Wolf - 23000
08-03-2012, 18:42
It doesn't for me. Perhaps you have a weak back and need an extra supportive pack to carry a few extra pounds of food. Since this guy is a military guy used to heavy loads, this shouldn't be an issue.
Ok Austin Powers but the year is 2012 not the 1960. If you use a pack with a good suspension system and not a light-weight backpack then you won’t notice the different. A lightweight backpack in the 2 – 4 oz range is going to make you feel the weight more because they don’t have the suspension system. Now you said, “Going as light as you can” which would mean going with around imply a 2 ounce pack. Adding more food in a 2 oz pack is going to feel like a rock inside your pack. So which one is it or don’t you backpack as light as possible? It has nothing to do with how strong you are, If you knew a little bit about backpacking you would know this.
Cooking a lot of food and cooking a lot aren't necessarily the same thing. Assuming you do cook at all, how you cook is a much bigger factor than how much you cook. For example, your point is mute with freezer bag cooking. Now if you have problems eating without getting food all over your clothing, that's another issue, and a serious one at that.
Freezer bag foods also don’t have many calories. There are different types of stoves some lighter than others with their own strong points and weakness. If you are doing a lot of cooking or hard cooking (food that take a long time to cook such as rice) then you are better off carrying a gas stove. Eating cold food does not give you external source of warmth and heavier foods.
Read my post and use some sense man. Obviously I don't mean 'can' in the extreme literal meaning. If you had used some sense, you would have easily understand that the point was to go as light as you 'can' within a given set of requirements and limitations. Comfort. Safety. Finances. Fears.
I did read your post. Comfort, safety, finances, fears all mean different things to different hikers. There are some hikers that don’t feel safe unless they are carrying 60 pounds on their back. It not either one of our place to say they don’t need to carry that much. Making a comment and then back paddling because you can’t backup what you said … well how can anyone take you seriously?
As far as saying some hikers don't like lightweight backpacking, that's preposterous. I can't accept that there's a single intelligent sensible hiker that would prefer the heavier of two pieces of gear that perform equally aside from weight. I would have accepted that some hikers don't like the minimalism that often goes along with lightweight backpacking, and it should be obvious that I don't care for minimalist backpacking.
As for the comment “a single intelligent sensible hiker that would prefer the heavier of two pieces of gear that perform equally aside from weight.” well you must be carrying heavier of the two so what is that saying about you? I’m 6’2 weight 215 pounds in Excellent shape. You are carrying a lot more than I do. There are some hikers that prefer the camping part of hiking or prefer one piece of equipment over another for their own reasons. It is their hike, so who are you to tell them different?
Cooking a lot of food and cooking a lot aren't necessarily the same thing. Assuming you do cook at all, how you cook is a much bigger factor than how much you cook. For example, your point is mute with freezer bag cooking. Now if you have problems eating without getting food all over your clothing, that's another issue, and a serious one at that.
Read my post and use some sense man. Obviously I don't mean 'can' in the extreme literal meaning. If you had used some sense, you would have easily understand that the point was to go as light as you 'can' within a given set of requirements and limitations. Comfort. Safety. Finances. Fears.
As far as saying some hikers don't like lightweight backpacking, that's preposterous. I can't accept that there's a single intelligent sensible hiker that would prefer the heavier of two pieces of gear that perform equally aside from weight. I would have accepted that some hikers don't like the minimalism that often goes along with lightweight backpacking, and it should be obvious that I don't care for minimalist backpacking.[/QUOTE]
Wolf - 23000
08-03-2012, 18:54
Please disregard the last three paragraphs. They are leaftye's comments but I include it in my reply twice by mistake. I apology for the confusion.
Wolf
LostinAK
08-07-2012, 16:31
RamQuad,
When I'm on the trail, I leave all my military equipment at home and take what works for me as you are going to have to figure out what works for yourself...
...hike how ever far you want and above all have fun.
Peace,
Wolf
This is honest concern to have, and a very reflective question! I was a backpacker long before I was a veteran, but I can see how the experiences can become intertwined. Hiking, like any sport, takes practice- don't sell these weekend trips short. Just like conducting a military operation, make a packing list, look at it while planning, then go back over it again later, figure out what you didn't use, think about why you didn't use it, then scratch it from your packing list, use these packing lists over and over again for future trips- excel is a great place to digitize and catalogue these lists.
One of the things I love about "civilian camping" versus "military camping" is you get to use brightly colored, exceptionally light, fun equipment. There are a couple military cross overs in my pack: 550 cord, 100 mph tape, and a woobie on colder trips...
The military taught me several things that make me a better backpacker. I was pretty good at reading a map before the military, now I'm exceptional at land navigation because I got to practice this skill time and time again in the military. Enduring less than hospitable conditions on the trail. Ever hear the chant, "if it ain't rainin' we ain't trainin." In the military you have no choice but complete the mission despite an onslaught of odds against you, most especially weather. On days when other hikers want to crawl to the bottom of their sleeping bag- it won't be so bad for you. I also learned to make the most of what I had with me. As you begin to eliminate gear from your packing list you don't need you'll find new ways to use the other gear. Maybe this is specific to some Army schools I attended and units I was in, but I feel it could be universal.
I second the statement that this is fun that was work.
Having to be self reliant changes some gear choices i.e. rather than a heavy MRE cause you can be resupplied by aircraft or convoy daily, carry light dehydrated meals ( I mean dude LRS rations are pretty much MTN House meals)
Just forget it. Except for general mental toughness and being in decent shape I didn't find being a soldier to translate to anything useful on the AT. I suppose land nav could have been useful if bad things had happened. Your going on vacation not on a mission. Oh and above all do not attempt to hike the AT in your old boots when you could be in your awesome new trailrunners, I learned that one the hard way.
How Far?