Uncontrolled Evaluation of the Modular Fighting Rigs


  1. Ste-Croix, C.
  2. Pajuluoma, G.
  3. Angel, H.
  4. Mangan, B.
  5. Karthaus, C.
Corporate Authors
Defence R&D Canada - Toronto, Toronto ONT (CAN);Humansystems Inc, Guelph ONT (CAN)
The Modular Fighting Rig (MFR) extended user evaluation took the form of a series of surveys and focus groups conducted with three tasks forces. Each task force drew from one of the infantry regiments (PPCLI, R22ER, and RCR) from across Canada, who were the primary target for collection of feedback on the MFRs. A total of three MFRs (800 sets of each) were evaluated in this study, all of which were issued by the Directorate of Land Requirements (DLR) regardless of this study. Once DLR issued the MFRs to the battle group they determined which soldiers would be issued the MFRs. The three MFR design alternatives under evaluation in this study have been labelled Alpha (A), Bravo (B), and Charlie (C). MFR A is a multi-part system that uses interchangeable front and back panels. Three front panels (A1, A2, A3) and two back panels are provided with MFR Alpha. All of the trial vests performed well across the duration of the trial. The majority of the ratings for each criterion for each of the MFRs were acceptable for both the mid-deployment and post-deployment questionnaires. In terms of the mid deployment data collection we received feedback from 265 soldiers for MFR A (33%), 239 soldiers for MFR B (29.9%), and 226 soldiers for MFR C (28.3%). In terms of the post deployment data collection we had responses from 96 soldiers for MFR A (12%) and 140 soldiers for MFR B (17.5%). Across the vast majority of criteria MFR A had higher acceptability ratings compared to MFR B and MFR C. The m

Il y a un résumé en français ici.

Modular Fighting Rig
Report Number
DRDC-TORONTO-CR-2013-034 — Contractor Report
Date of publication
01 Jan 2013
Number of Pages
Electronic Document(PDF)

Permanent link

Document 1 of 1

Date modified: