course measures ‘fightability’ - army · course measures ‘fightability’ see page 6. ......

Natick, Massachusetts January-February 2004

Coursemeasures

‘fightability’See Page 6

Installation Commander Col. David J. Bongi

Garrison ManagerLionel E. Dube’

Chief, Public AffairsJeremiah A. Whitaker

EditorCurt Biberdorf

Staff PhotographerSarah E. Underhill

Contents

3 Carbs aplentyEnergy drinks and bars fill a need for warfighters.

4 Loaded studyTeam examines weight carried by dismounted infantrymen.

6 Fit to fightObstacle course helps determine individual equipment andclothing performance.

8 Tents under pressure Future Medical Shelter System displays another use

of airbeam technology.

10 Kitchen in a cartonRemote Unit Self Heating Meal puts everything into onedisposable box.

2 The Warrior♦♦♦♦♦ January-February 2004

The Warrior is published bimonthly bythe U.S. Army Soldier Systems CenterPublic Affairs Office in Natick, Mass., andis available online at:www.natick.army.mil/about/pao/pubs/warrior/index.htm

The Warrior is authorized by ArmyRegulation 360-1. The views and opinionsexpressed are not necessarily those of theDepartment of the Army. Questions andcomments concerning any articles in thispublication should be addressed to:

U.S. Army Soldier Systems Center Public Affairs Office ATTN: AMSSB-OPA(N) Bldg. 45, Kansas Street Natick, MA 01760-5012 (508) 233-4300/5340 DSN 256-4300/5340 [email protected]

U.S. Army Soldier Systems CenterInternet link

http://www.natick.army.mil

U.S. Army Soldier Systems Center

Printed by Document Automation andProduction Service, Natick, Mass.

Cover photo: Dan Harshman, an equipment specialistwith the Operational Forces Interface Group, walks upthe interior stairway of the MOUT obstacle building inHudson. (Warrior/Underhill)

The Warrior♦♦♦♦♦ January-February 2004 3

By Curt BiberdorfEditor

Extra energy for strenuous military operations is nowconveniently supplied with the Carbohydrate Supple-ment Pack, or CarboPack, developed at the U.S. ArmySoldier Systems Center in Natick, Mass.

The CarboPack contains one carbohydrate-rich barand two packages of flavored carbohydrate-electrolytesports beverage powder to mix two eight-ounce serv-ings, and is intended to complement current and futuremilitary rations.

“Studies show that Soldiers in intense, prolongedphysical activity for morethan three hours need thecalories beyond what’sprovided in rations,” saidJulie Edwards, a foodtechnologist at the Depart-ment of Defense CombatFeeding Directorate here.“Most of what they needis provided in their rations.This is designed to makeup the difference in calo-rie needs during prolongedexercise.”

The CarboPack addsanother 400 calories to thebattlefield diet. By com-parison, a day’s worth ofMeals, Ready-to-Eat(MRE) is more than 3,600calories. Research thatwent into the CarboPackwill give troops a productthat’s proven to performwhile saving troops money.

“We identified a needbecause Soldiers werebuying their own bars anddrinks,” Edwards said,which opened up potentialpitfalls. “By providing sol-diers with the right prod-ucts we can decrease thechances that the Soldierwill bring the wrong typeof item to the field with them that may potentially hurttheir performance.”

Combat Feeding’s Individual Combat Ration Team,the U.S. Army Research Institute of EnvironmentalMedicine at Natick, Office of the Surgeon General andArmy Center of Excellence Subsistence worked to-gether on product guidelines.

The drink mix is similar to Gatorade, with a combi-nation of electrolytes and carbohydrates meeting mili-tary specifications, according to Edwards, and has a

lower sugar content than an MRE mix. Fruit punch,grape, orange and lemon-lime flavors were chosen be-cause they are the most popular for this type of bever-age, and each CarboPack holds two different flavors.

Each mix is stored in a trilaminate pouch with a tear-off top used to pour in water, shake and drink sowarfighters can avoid using a separate drink holder, suchas their canteen cup.

A resealable drink pouch was one of the recommen-dations of Soldiers from Fort Campbell, Ky., and FortPolk, La., who participated in focus groups and evalua-tions, and is in development, Edwards said.

The drink pouches are folded over twice and fit in-side another trilaminatepouch along with thebar wrapped in theoriginal manufacturer’spackage.

Chocolate and applecinnamon HooAH!,and oatmeal-raisin andchocolate bars similarto Gatorade andPowerBar brands werechosen as the energybars because of theirnutritional content, ac-ceptability rating intaste-testing and abilityto reach at least a two-year shelf life, Edwardssaid.

All three types intheir respective flavorswill be represented inthe CarboPacks. Hav-ing a variety of productsand flavors for thedrinks and bars helpsincrease acceptabilityand consumption, shesaid.

HooAH! is a cre-ation of the CombatFeeding food scientistsand is getting anotheropportunity to befielded as a new com-

mercial manufacturer has picked up the production.Another product evaluated was commercial gels, but

they were a concern of the Soldiers because the gelswould burst inside their full rucksacks, Edwards said.They will be considered again when the packaging ofthe product has improved.

The first 42,000 CarboPacks are scheduled for de-livery to Iraq in January after receiving an urgent re-quest last July for the product from the 101st AirborneDivision and 3rd Corps Support Command.

CarboPack restores energy

The CarboPack combines two Gatorade-like drinkmixes and an energy bar wrapped in a pouch.

Warrior/Underhill



Nowhere in Afghanistan did Lt.Col. Charles Dean see the folkloric120-pound rucksack reputed to becarried by a dismounted infantrymanin combat, but what these soldiersdo carry continues to weigh toomuch.

Dean, an infantry officer servingas the Army’s liaison to the Institutefor Soldier Nanotechnologies at theMassachusetts Institute of Technol-ogy (MIT), presented findings of astudy on the modern warrior’s com-bat load at the U.S. Army SoldierSystems Center in Natick, Mass.,Nov. 20.

He field trained and then led a

team of seven carefully selectedAirborne Rangers who volunteeredto collect combat load data this pastspring from paratroopers within the82nd Airborne Division operating inAfghanistan.

They weighed combat loads andinventoried individual items of equip-ment carried by 764 out of 1,305paratroopers assigned to the infan-try rifle companies within Task ForceDevil. Team members then packedthe identical gear, rehearsed with theunits and finally served as membersof rifle platoons and squads withinthe task force on 15 separate dis-mounted combat missions againstthe enemy. Almost all of these op-erations included combat helicopterassault landings.

“If we want to reduce weight andbulk, you can throw a gazillion dol-lars into technology, but weight to-day is twice where it should be, andyou can’t reduce weight by technol-ogy alone,” Dean said, who servedat Natick as the Operations andCustomer Interface director beforehis assignment at MIT. “The solu-tion is to get the weight off the Sol-diers. The reality is to accept thatsome things have to come off theguy’s back.”

He said the study, sponsored bythe Center for Army LessonsLearned, collected historical infor-mation to help units in training, thosegoing overseas into combat, and thepeople who research and developnew equipment.

WeigheddownStudy suggests tapping vehicles to reduce heavy combat load

Courtesy photo

A Soldier from the 82nd Airborne Division stands on a scale to weigh his approach march load in Kandahar,Afghanistan. The Soldier was among 764 paratroopers from the unit who were weighed in a study thispast spring examining the dismounted infantryman’s combat load.


Major findings from the study are:!Soldiers have increased capa-

bilities, but these continue to increasetheir weight burdens. It’s weight, notcapabilities, that wear out troops.

!Vehicles should be used to carrycertain less essential items to reducecombat load.!Body armor needs to be light-

ened. Its protective ability is well-documented, but it’s uncomfortableand still heavy.

!Modern load carriage shouldcontinue to be improved.!Soldiers are easily exhausted in

extreme operations because of theclimate and terrain. Daytime tem-peratures in Afghanistan duringthese springtime operations reached116 degrees F. Nighttime tempera-tures plummeted enough to feelfrigid.

“I think we can drop 10, 20, 30pounds off these guys by paringdown some items that they are cur-rently carrying as long as these itemsare readily available when neededin a hurry,” Dean said. “If we canoffload some items, then we canwork on reducing the weight of theremaining items through technology.The big monkey is to look at logis-tics and redesign logistics practicesto get the weight off Soldiers.”

The last time a comprehensivebattlefield load study was conductedwas in 1942 when the Marines ex-ecuted their Making Island raid, ac-cording to Dean.

He said this recent study in Af-ghanistan appears to have been afirst for the Army. Times havechanged with better equipment andmore of it.

Standards developed for theArmy field manual titled “FootMarches” printed in 1990 list maxi-mum weights troops should carry fora fighting load, approach march loadand emergency march load, figuresdetermined with help from researchat the Natick Soldier Center andU.S. Army Research Institute ofEnvironmental Medicine.

A fighting load is everything wornor carried except a rucksack andshould be held to less than 48pounds, according to the fieldmanual. The next level, approachmarch load, adds a light rucksack andshould not exceed 72 pounds. In theworst-case scenario, emergency

approach march loads require alarger rucksack, raising the totalweight to 120-150 pounds.

Past research has provided moreinsight into combat loads. A Britishstudy from the 1920s concluded thatthe fighting load should not exceed40-45 pounds, and S.L.A. Marshall,author of the 1950 book “The Sol-dier Load and the Mobility of a Na-tion,” advised that the combat loadshould remain less than about 40pounds.

Viewed another way, the loadshould not exceed 30 percent of aperson’s body weight when carry-ing an approach march load. Dean’steam weighed and photographedtroops at every level, from wearingonly their basic uniforms and bootsto what they carried for their emer-gency approach march loads for 29different positions in rifle companies.

After reviewing the data, the av-erage rifleman’s fighting load was63 pounds, which meant he was car-rying on average 36 percent of his

body weight before strapping on arucksack. The average approachmarch load was 96 pounds or 55percent of average rifleman’s bodyweight, and the emergency ap-proach march load average was 127pounds or 71 percent of averagerifleman’s body weight.

Riflemen carried less weight thansome soldiers, such as 60mm mor-tar squad leaders who on averagecarried emergency approach marchloads of 142 pounds or 97 percentof the average mortar sectionleader’s body weight.

Soldiers wore an approach marchload most of the day, according toDean, and even when not carryinga light rucksack, their fighting loadat all times averaged more than 30percent of their body weight.

“We were careful to get enoughdata to be significant,” Dean said.“We’re pleased we brought homeenough data for the Army and Sol-dier Systems Center to use to betterhelp the American soldier.”

Courtesy photo

A squad leader with Task Force Devil uses sling rope to assist aSoldier crossing a stream in Afghanistan. At times, some Soldierscarry up to 150 pounds of clothing, equipment and supplies.


Developing the best cloth-ing and individual equip-ment for the military con-

sists of a multi-pronged approach,with laboratory research of physiol-ogy and biomechanics at the U.S.Army Soldier Systems Center inNatick, Mass., along with off-sitefield-testing and evaluation.

Constructed in 1998, the Cloth-

ing and Individual EquipmentFightability Course has provided an-other way to assess performancebefore fielding. Located 15 milesfrom the installation at the HudsonAnnex, the course combines a se-ries of obstacles along with buildingsto simulate rural and urban terrain.

“The purpose of the course is toallow developers to do controlled

studies in a somewhat realistic labo-ratory setting to quantify mobility,agility and ability to negotiateMOUT (Military Operations in Ur-ban Terrain) obstacles,” said JohnKirk, Load Bearing and IndividualEquipment Team leader, who cre-ated and manages the course.

Once the site of various testingin airdrop, clothing and other stud-ies, the fightability course is the lastremaining research activity on theproperty.

Kirk learned about a vacantWorld War II era barracks sched-uled for demolition on the site andthought it would make an ideal placefor the course, which led to the sal-vage of the building and course con-struction.

Surrounded by several hundredacres of state-owned forest, the 11/2 acre rectangular course is bor-dered by a chain link security fenceand contains eight obstacles alongwith the converted barracks and asmaller “Shoot House,” which hascatwalks and skylight windows oneach side to enable observers toview training inside.

Obstacles allow test subjects toscale over a wooden fence, balancethemselves as they walk along a logbeam, charge over and down aramped bridge, step throughstraddled tires, squirm through thepipe crawl, low and high crawl un-der wooden decks and jostle throughclustered pipes, which represent athicket of saplings, as quickly as pos-sible.

The entire course from start tofinish as well as each individualevent are clocked electronically witha light-beam-activated timer.

Adjacent woods with trails or the500-yard paved road on the perim-eter enable researchers to incorpo-rate road marching before sendingtroops through the course.

That gives engineers the ability to

Course of study‘Fightability’ of gear assessed through obstacles, former barracks

Story by Curt BiberdorfPhotos by Sarah Underhill

Eight obstacles are spread along the fightability course. The entirecourse from start to finish as well as each individual event are clockedelectronically with a light-beam-activated timer.


compare pack designs to quantifythe negative effects that roadmarching with that pack has on sol-dier performance, Kirk said, andhaving a paved perimeter road ishelpful because they can monitor thetest subjects closely, which is morecomplicated on a course on the trails.A timed course gives researchersquantitative measurements of fa-tigue.

A similar but smaller obstaclecourse is located at the Biomechan-ics Lab, a joint facility of the NatickSoldier Center and U.S. Army Re-search Institute of EnvironmentalMedicine (USARIEM) at the Natickinstallation.

“(The Hudson course) gives usthe ability to work with larger-scaleobstacles. The two complementeach other nicely,” said PeterFrykman, a research physiologistwith the Military Performance Di-vision of USARIEM. “The nice thingabout (the Hudson course) is thecombination of the MOUT obstacleswith the standard obstacles. Be-cause both of these courses haveroad marching venues as part ofthem, we also get the chance to ex-amine the role of fatigue in negoti-ating these obstacles.”

He added that the course insidethe Biomechanics Lab allows qual-ity research to be completed duringthe inclement weather of winter.Access to these two courses pro-vides the partnership betweenUSARIEM and the Soldier SystemsCenter unique resources to investi-gate human performance with andwithout a load.

Unlike MOUT centers that re-semble towns at places such as FortBenning, Ga. or Fort Polk, La.,MOUT at the relatively tinyfightability course is focused onequipment performance rather thantactical training.

The main two-story building has4,000 square feet of space withrooms of various sizes. Since thebuilding was vacant, conversion wassimple, according to Kirk.

Timed MOUT obstacles incorpo-rated into the building consist of stair-ways, doorways ranging from 24-36inches wide that include one shapedlike a ship’s hatch, and windows ofvarious widths and heights to cap-ture as many variables as possible.

The “Shoot House” was built newto augment the larger building.

“That’s all for urban fighting,which the Army trains extensivelyfor,” Kirk said.

Products that can be evaluatedspan almost anything troops wear orcarry, from helmets to boots.Frykman said it’s a place that mim-ics the field without the time andexpense to find a quick answer thatcan determine the direction of aproject.

At least six studies with theALICE, MOLLE, and developmen-tal rucksacks with Marines fromCamp Lejeune, N.C., and SpecialOperations SPEAR rucksack withRangers from Fort Benning havebeen conducted since the courseopened, Kirk said.

“We looked at how the volumeof the pack affected performanceand had (troops) running with dif-ferent sized loads to determine theiroptimal load volume,” he said.“Those studies resulted in technicalreports on load-bearing equipmentthat are useful in defining require-ments for pack designs. We’ve beenable to make modifications to gearand product improvements.”

Other uses for the MOUT build-ing have been training for the De-partment of Defense police and In-stallation Defense Force who pro-tect the Soldier Systems Center, aswell as local police departments.

“A lot of times police have to usean old warehouse on a city block,”Kirk said. “This gives them some-where discreet in a secluded area.”

An existing building at the location has 4,000 square feet of spacewith rooms of various sizes and timed obstacles (above). The “ShootHouse” was built new and is set up to observe urban warfare training.



Unpack, unroll and inflate. Withairbeams, setting up a soft shelter isthat easy, and the Future MedicalShelter System is the latest effort ofthe Fabric Structures Team at theU.S. Army Soldier Systems Centerin Natick, Mass., using the technol-ogy.

The Future Medical Shelter Sys-tem is an advanced medical shelterdesigned to be the next-generationChemically Protected DeployableMedical Systems (CP DEPMEDS)to improve shelter quality for medi-cal personnel, according to AmyLeighton, a chemical engineer on theFabric Structures Team.

“Our main driver is to allow Sol-diers to rapidly deploy and allowmedical personnel to quickly get towork in a clean environment,” shesaid. “Even if there’s not an imme-diate (chemical or biological agentcontamination) threat, it gets themout of the dust and sand.”

The current CP DEPMEDS con-nects a series of TEMPER tents andISO containers linked together withpassageways to offer nearly 32,000square feet of treatment space. Upto 140 staff members can treat asmany as 236 patients for three daysin a clean, climate-controlled atmo-sphere.

As a forward-deployed combatsupport hospital, mobility is high pri-ority. This type of treatment facilitygives troops immediate medical careto stabilize them enough to transferto a more permanent hospital if nec-essary, according to Leighton.

Reduced logistics and speedysetup and takedown are prominentadvantages of the new system.

A 64-foot length of connectedTEMPER tents takes 18 troopsabout 40 minutes to set up comparedto four troops in 15-20 minutes forthe same length of airbeam shelters.Instead of locating, connecting andinserting the metal frame parts intothe TEMPER tents, troops handle a

single item with four airbeams inte-grated into the rugged yet lighterfabric of each 32-foot section of theFuture Medical System shelter.

Once spread out, the airbeamsare inflated to 40 psi with a com-mercial air compressor that auto-matically shuts off when filled. Agenerator is needed to power thecompressor, although one variationof the system uses a self-poweredair compressor operating on liquidfuel. The tent is then anchored intothe ground with stakes for stability.

Weight of the shelter plummetsfrom nearly 2,700 pounds to 1,200pounds. Manufactured by Vertigo,Inc. in Lake Elsinore, Calif., thebraided high-strength polyester ma-

terial of the airbeams has also cutthe cost significantly and improveddurability, Leighton said.

“Some people are under the im-pression that you have to frequentlycheck the (air) pressure,” she said.“It’s a lot more reliable today. Leak-age had been a problem. You had tocheck the pressure every few daysto every few weeks, but we’ve hadshelters like this up for months at atime without losing pressure.”

Higher pressure allows the Fu-ture Medical Shelter System to bedesigned with four instead of eightairbeams. The Chemical and Bio-logical Protected Shelter nowfielded uses low-pressure beamswhile the developmental Wide Span

Inflated tentsFuture Medical Shelter System latest to use airbeam technology

The Future Medical Shelter System rises as the airbeams are filledby a compressor during a demonstration at Natick in October (above).Within minutes, the shelter is up and ready to be filled with equipmentto run a field hospital. (Courtesy photos)


Air Beam Shelter for aircraft main-tenance uses high pressure.

In development for about oneyear, the Future Medical Shelter Sys-tem was first demonstrated at theSoldier Systems Center in October.Two 32-foot by 20-foot modularairbeam tents were connected, rep-resenting pre- and post-operativecare areas. Leighton said it’s the firsttime two airbeam tents have beenconnected.

“This gives medical personnel anopen architecture without connect-ing passageways or tent poles ob-structing their view,” she said.“That’s important so that staff cansee a larger area and watch patientsmore easily.”

As with the CP DEPMEDS, asystem of litter and ambulatoryairlocks, protective entrances, blow-ers and filters will be included in thesystem.

Contaminated air is kept out bycreating a steady overpressure bydrawing in outside air, filtering it andthen blowing it into the shelters.Lighting and power distribution arestandard items with an optional hardflooring available.

The Fabric Structures Team andVertigo have scheduled anotherdemonstration of the Future Medi-cal System in Fort Detrick, Md., inFebruary. The next step will be totake shelters to training sites for fur-

ther evaluation.Although the major push is with

medical shelters, shelters for otheruses, such as command posts, mayadopt the technology in years ahead,Leighton said.

Litter and ambulatory airlocks are installed at the end of the shelter(top). Lighting and power distribution are standard in the FutureMedical Shelter System. (Courtesy photos)



Steam pouring out of this fiber-board box is no cause for alarm. Itmeans lunch or dinner is almostready.

The Remote Unit Self HeatingMeal (RUSHM), also referred to as“Kitchen in a Carton,” takes thehassle out of serving warfighters hotfood in far away places by provid-ing everything necessary to feed upto 18 troops in one tidy package.

Developed by the Department ofDefense Combat Feeding Director-ate at the U.S. Army Soldier Sys-tems Center in Natick, Mass., thelatest prototype of the remote mealreduces the carton’s volume com-pared to previous prototypes by 20percent by reconfiguring the pack-age, trading larger dining trays forsmaller ones, and swapping papercups and beverage mixes for newresealable drink pouches.

“We’ve redesigned the wholemodule,” said Lauren Milch, a physi-cal scientist on the Equipment andEnergy Team. “Reduction in cubeand weight is critical because theseare designed for remote units thatmay have to carry it out to the fieldwith them. It could be airdropped ortaken by vehicle, but in the worstcase, they’re walking out with it.We’re still on the heavy side, but it’scarryable.”

Troops who don’t have access tofield kitchens, such as Signal unitsor Special Operations Forces, atbest settle for hot food taken to themin thermal containers, only it’s notalways hot by the time the remotetroops are located or are ready toeat the meal, said Milch.

Kitchen in a Carton fills the va-cant niche in remote feeding rationsfor small groups because the troopsheat it themselves when they areready to eat.

“Overall, it was very well-re-ceived,” said Peter Lavigne, a chemi-cal engineer on the Equipment andEnergy Team, referring to the latestRUSHM field evaluation with Rang-

ers in Fort Lewis, Wash., in Decem-ber 2003. “It clearly met the needsof remote group feeding with mini-mal logistical support.”

Each 40-pound box contains four6-pound polymeric meal trays, thesame used in the Unitized GroupRation Heat and Serve, with a mainentrée, starch, vegetable and dessertstacked upon each other.

These trays, plus heating ele-ments and activator, comprise whatis called the heating module.Squeezed into two sides of the boxare 18 drink packs providing 12-ounce servings of a flavored bever-age, 18 packages of candy, a serv-ing spoon for each meal tray, a knifeto slice open the tray lid, salt, pep-per, a bottle of hot sauce, and18 din-ing trays and utensil packets with afork, knife, spoon and napkin.

An instruction sheet is glued atopthe heating module cover foundwithin the outer carton. Within theheating module, each meal tray offood sits in a flameless ration heatertray activated when salt water satu-rates the chemicals.

Ripping out a plastic tab that ex-tends through the heating modulecover breaks a plastic pouch of wa-ter at each level to start the heatingprocess. The heat of the shelf-stabletray rations is safely raised from 40degrees to 140 degrees F in 30-45minutes.

A technical challenge in the pack-age design is to make the activating

water pouches strong enough to sur-vive shipping and handling yet easyenough to tear open when desired,according to Milch.

Another prototype uses an en-closed collapsible bottle containingsalt that’s filled with water and in-serted into a tube on top when troopsare ready to activate the heaters.

Lunch boxPackage carries complete ‘kitchen’ to distant troops

Pulling out the tab (above) on theheating module of the RemoteUnit Self Heating Meal begins theheating process. Steam escapesfrom the modules as thetemperature of the food trays risesto 140 degrees F in 30-45 minutes.(Courtesy photos)


This further reduces the overallweight of the RUSHM since it doesnot contain the activation water, andwould ensure performance by elimi-nating the possibility of accidentalactivation during shipping and han-dling, according to Milch.

“The Soldiers liked having time todo other activities while the trayswere heating,” Milch said aboutfeedback from the latest evaluation.

She said they also liked havingeverything in one box, the numberof servings provided per box, theremote meal’s size and weight, andthe new drink packs, which are alsobeing considered for use in otherrations developed by Combat Feed-ing.

User suggestions for improve-ments included providing individualhot sauce bottles, a trash bag for foodwaste, wet napkins, slotted spoonsand bread.

Now in the advanced develop-ment stage, the project has maturedto the point that the team is workingon creating menus, Milch said. Fourvarieties were available for the tech-nical demonstration, but selectionswill expand to reflect menus similarto the Unitized Group Ration Heatand Serve.

Another demonstration is sched-uled for this year to gather more data.Other potential changes include theuse of group-serving pouched foodsas an alternative to tray rations,which could be packaged in threepouches instead of four trays to fur-ther reduce weight, she said.

“It’s another option, and pouchesheat more efficiently than the trays,which could further reduce theamount of activation water andchemical heater material needed,”Milch said. “We’re also testing a newtype of flameless ration heater that’ssafer and more environmentallypreferable.”

The RUSHM could be availablefor purchase as soon as 2006.

Army Rangers serve dinner on asmaller serving tray (left) andtried a new drink pouch for thefirst time during a technicaldemonstration of the Remote UnitSelf Heating Meal at Fort Lewis,Wash., in December 2003.(Courtesy photos)

The latest prototype of the RUSHM consists of tray rations placedwithin heating trays (enclosed in box), candy, drink pouches, servingspoons, dining trays, utensil packets, salt, pepper and hot sauce.

Courtesy photo

Public Affairs O

fficeU

.S. Arm

y Soldier Systems C

enterATTN

: AM

SSB-O

PA(N

)K

ansas StreetN

atick, MA

01760-5012

TO:

course measures ‘fightability’ - army · course measures ‘fightability’ see page 6. ......

Documents