User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/26/2016 11:20:21 AM EDT
I posted this in General but figured it was more suited here...
I wanted to have a very minimal setup without an overly large medical kit. I take a large loop of the RAT and run it through/behind the MOLLE, then take the rest of the strap and roll it up into a spiral and place it into the cummerbund. This allows me to reach it with both hands. When I pull it out it unrolls inside the cummerbund. I can barely feel its on me. I'm likely going to add one to the other side as well. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2016 11:35:51 AM EDT
[#1]
Why the RAT and not a proven /Vetted Real TQ? Between the lack of testing and shady biz practices , I'd avoid it like the clap. You have all of that First Spear kit, why not a proven piece of life saving equipment?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2016 11:39:45 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why the RAT and not a proven /Vetted Real TQ? Between the lack of testing and shady biz practices , I'd avoid it like the clap. You have all of that First Spear kit, why not a proven piece of life saving equipment? I like the size of the RAT... It really doesn't matter to me whether or not the military has tested them. I have CATs, just prefer the RAT. After all, you can make a TQ from nearly anything... I don't see this *not* working. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2016 12:18:18 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I like the size of the RAT... It really doesn't matter to me whether or not the military has tested them. I have CATs, just prefer the RAT. After all, you can make a TQ from nearly anything... I don't see this *not* working. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Why the RAT and not a proven /Vetted Real TQ? Between the lack of testing and shady biz practices , I'd avoid it like the clap. You have all of that First Spear kit, why not a proven piece of life saving equipment? I like the size of the RAT... It really doesn't matter to me whether or not the military has tested them. I have CATs, just prefer the RAT. After all, you can make a TQ from nearly anything... I don't see this *not* working. When have you seen a RAT in action? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2016 12:37:29 PM EDT
[#4]
I am not a big fan of the RAT either, but we all make gear choices others don't like. The only real problem I see with that setup is the hooks on the RAT are really close to the bungees on your mag pouch. Now the chance of ever needing a fifth magazine, probably not so high, but the RAT getting tangled up in that elastic when you are trying to pull it out could present a problem if you ever need that tourniquet. I know it works right now, but gear never stays exactly how you put it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2016 12:57:31 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am not a big fan of the RAT either, but we all make gear choices others don't like. The only real problem I see with that setup is the hooks on the RAT are really close to the bungees on your mag pouch. Now the chance of ever needing a fifth magazine, probably not so high, but the RAT getting tangled up in that elastic when you are trying to pull it out could present a problem if you ever need that tourniquet. I know it works right now, but gear never stays exactly how you put it. Yeah I thought that too... no problems so far. Was thinking about bending the RAT hooks back and down. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2016 1:51:41 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am not a big fan of the RAT either, but we all make gear choices others don't like. The only real problem I see with that setup is the hooks on the RAT are really close to the bungees on your mag pouch. Now the chance of ever needing a fifth magazine, probably not so high, but the RAT getting tangled up in that elastic when you are trying to pull it out could present a problem if you ever need that tourniquet. I know it works right now, but gear never stays exactly how you put it. This type of response is why I do little more than post pics in this subforum. People tend to get defensive instead of maturely handling legitimate critiques. If the OP likes the ability to tuck the RAT into the webbing then there are options out there that would allow him to keep a proven TQ in that area that makes it easy to deploy. I understand his desire to keep a piece of gear that can be a literal life saver quick to get to. That is no excuse for using a piece of unproven equipment, especially one that if it is being used, needs to work in real life as opposed to on a Youtube video. OP, I use a Tourniquet Now! It looks like it would fit into the webbing slots you have between the mag pouch and aid kit. It just requires one column of webbing to be secured, which from the looks of you have available. 
A less expensive way would to be some of the thin elastic hair ties like bcauz3y uses. That being said, it is a good that you did think of having it ready to go as it is pulled out of your carrier. CATs and SOFTT-W's can be primed to be ready to use as soon as it is removed from however you decide to keep the TQ ready on your gear. Since you said you have a CAT: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2016 3:06:14 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am not a big fan of the RAT either, but we all make gear choices others don't like. The only real problem I see with that setup is the hooks on the RAT are really close to the bungees on your mag pouch. Now the chance of ever needing a fifth magazine, probably not so high, but the RAT getting tangled up in that elastic when you are trying to pull it out could present a problem if you ever need that tourniquet. I know it works right now, but gear never stays exactly how you put it. This is not a matter of preference; it's a matter of proven efficacy, or, rather the lack thereof. If the OP wants to trust life-saving equipment from a company with a sketchy track record and no verifiable testing on the device, that's his business. We can debate CAT vs. SOFFT-W all day, but the fact is that both of those work well and are backed up with loads of real-world results. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2016 4:02:05 PM EDT
[#8]
My only comment would be to still carry at least one visible CAT. All EMT, first responders, and US military are trained with the CAT and in the event that your not the one putting it on yourself I'd want the most recognized hemorrhage control device available.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2016 6:23:41 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My only comment would be to still carry at least one visible CAT. All EMT, first responders, and US military are trained with the CAT and in the event that your not the one putting it on yourself I'd want the most recognized hemorrhage control device available. You'd be surprised how many first responders don't know how to apply a TQ. Those that are either know the CAT or SOFTT- it's usually one of the other with very few knowing both systems and the proper application( at least in my experience throughout CONUS). I was at a very large Med conference where one of the sessions was on hemorrhage control. There were numerous paramedics ( Civ EMS and Tac Medics from various agencies ) who thought you sprinkled your hemostatic ( Quick Clot / Celox ) on the wound like Parmesan cheese. This was last year, so no 1st gen variants of the two. They also didn't know you had to pack the wound/apply pressure - thought it was instant blood stopping magic! I'll agree with you that the CAT is probably the most recognized TQ out there . |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2016 7:10:39 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You'd be surprised how many first responders don't know how to apply a TQ. Those that are either know the CAT or SOFTT- it's usually one of the other with very few knowing both systems and the proper application( at least in my experience throughout CONUS). I was at a very lathe Med conference where one of the sessions was on hemorrhage control. There were numerous paramedics ( Civ EMS and Tac Medics from various agencies ) who thought you sprinkled your hemostatic ( Quick Clot / Celox ) on the wound like Parmesan cheese. This was last year, so no 1st gen variants of the two. They also didn't know you had to pack the wound/apply pressure - thought it was instant blood stopping magic! I'll agree with you that the CAT is probably the most recognized TQ out there . Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
My only comment would be to still carry at least one visible CAT. All EMT, first responders, and US military are trained with the CAT and in the event that your not the one putting it on yourself I'd want the most recognized hemorrhage control device available. You'd be surprised how many first responders don't know how to apply a TQ. Those that are either know the CAT or SOFTT- it's usually one of the other with very few knowing both systems and the proper application( at least in my experience throughout CONUS). I was at a very lathe Med conference where one of the sessions was on hemorrhage control. There were numerous paramedics ( Civ EMS and Tac Medics from various agencies ) who thought you sprinkled your hemostatic ( Quick Clot / Celox ) on the wound like Parmesan cheese. This was last year, so no 1st gen variants of the two. They also didn't know you had to pack the wound/apply pressure - thought it was instant blood stopping magic! I'll agree with you that the CAT is probably the most recognized TQ out there . Hemorrhage control is only like a 2hr block of instruction and most of it is focused on putting a "gloved hand" over the wound, so I'm not surprised at this, I'm more impressed that they even know what quick clot was. I actually carry a (unused) blue "training only" CAT on my civilian carrier because thats what most people are accustom to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2016 10:05:58 PM EDT
[#11]
It was a 2 hrs breakout session- really a time filler for me. It was very disappointing
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2016 10:57:06 PM EDT
[#12]
Don't know shit about a RAT TQ. I did, however see the post in GD and will admit that I do enjoy the random old mil dudes who pop out of the wood work talking about how TQ's causing amputations and what not 
I will also agree w the guys above and say go with the proven TQ designs and try out the BFG TQ holder. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2016 10:24:44 AM EDT
[#13]
It's hard to beat a CAT attached to webbing with a few simple rubber bands.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2016 1:40:36 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is not a matter of preference; it's a matter of proven efficacy, or, rather the lack thereof. If the OP wants to trust life-saving equipment from a company with a sketchy track record and no verifiable testing on the device, that's his business. We can debate CAT vs. SOFFT-W all day, but the fact is that both of those work well and are backed up with loads of real-world results. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I am not a big fan of the RAT either, but we all make gear choices others don't like. The only real problem I see with that setup is the hooks on the RAT are really close to the bungees on your mag pouch. Now the chance of ever needing a fifth magazine, probably not so high, but the RAT getting tangled up in that elastic when you are trying to pull it out could present a problem if you ever need that tourniquet. I know it works right now, but gear never stays exactly how you put it. This is not a matter of preference; it's a matter of proven efficacy, or, rather the lack thereof. If the OP wants to trust life-saving equipment from a company with a sketchy track record and no verifiable testing on the device, that's his business. We can debate CAT vs. SOFFT-W all day, but the fact is that both of those work well and are backed up with loads of real-world results. Better don your flame suit. There's also the fact that the RATS folks have been playing very fast and loose with the term TCCC, which most folks in the field recognize, listing their TQ as "TCCC Approved", as shown here and in their advertisements: 
This implies the approval of Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care, doesn't it? There's a problem with that. Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care doesn't "approve" anything, they recommend based on documented field experience and clinical trials. Also, the parent company for the manufacturer copyrighted the term "Tactical Combat Casualty Care", then started using it in marketing, as outlined in this post at Imminent Threat Solutions. Anyone engaging in that kind of BS makes me doubt more than just their marketing savvy. There are several of us who have the journal published studies of the CAT and SOF-T available that demonstrate their efficacy as well as the pre-adoption comparative studies if you really want to investigate the issue. As for what you carry? If you want to ignore the advice of those who have used these items under a variety of circumstances IRL, the opinion of trauma surgeons and orthopods who patch up the surviviors and reams of referenced documentation and focus your concern on space or CGF who am I to judge? BTW, most folks in the field recommend placing your TQ in the center of your gear where it can be accessed with either hand, as you can't predict where you're getting perforated, and it's where someone coming to your aid who's familiar with the setup will look for it if you're unconscious - but again, it's your rig, run how you want. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2016 4:47:39 PM EDT
[#15]
After becoming EMT certified, CAT is what we learn on....RAT is no good.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2016 8:43:24 PM EDT
[#16]
I did not even know people took shit like the RAT seriously.
Its junk from a company that is okay playing sketchy games with "approval" statements. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2016 11:13:48 PM EDT
[#17]
I'm not even sure why you would go for an unproven RAT tourniquet, when a flat packed SOFTT-W has such a miniscule footprint.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2016 1:30:59 AM EDT
[#18]
SWAT Tac Medic here. I wouldn't carry a RAT. CAT or SOFT-W or hell, even the SWAT-Ts are okayish and cheap
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2016 10:10:26 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Better don your flame suit. There's also the fact that the RATS folks have been playing very fast and loose with the term TCCC, which most folks in the field recognize, listing their TQ as "TCCC Approved", as shown here and in their advertisements: http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f21/TangoSierra7/Gunstuff/RATS_Tourniquet_TCCC_Approved_02_zpspiyztnex.jpg This implies the approval of Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care, doesn't it? There's a problem with that. Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care doesn't "approve" anything, they recommend based on documented field experience and clinical trials. Also, the parent company for the manufacturer copyrighted the term "Tactical Combat Casualty Care", then started using it in marketing, as outlined in this post at Imminent Threat Solutions. Anyone engaging in that kind of BS makes me doubt more than just their marketing savvy. There are several of us who have the journal published studies of the CAT and SOF-T available that demonstrate their efficacy as well as the pre-adoption comparative studies if you really want to investigate the issue. As for what you carry? If you want to ignore the advice of those who have used these items under a variety of circumstances IRL, the opinion of trauma surgeons and orthopods who patch up the surviviors and reams of referenced documentation and focus your concern on space or CGF who am I to judge? BTW, most folks in the field recommend placing your TQ in the center of your gear where it can be accessed with either hand, as you can't predict where you're getting perforated, and it's where someone coming to your aid who's familiar with the setup will look for it if you're unconscious - but again, it's your rig, run how you want. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I am not a big fan of the RAT either, but we all make gear choices others don't like. The only real problem I see with that setup is the hooks on the RAT are really close to the bungees on your mag pouch. Now the chance of ever needing a fifth magazine, probably not so high, but the RAT getting tangled up in that elastic when you are trying to pull it out could present a problem if you ever need that tourniquet. I know it works right now, but gear never stays exactly how you put it. This is not a matter of preference; it's a matter of proven efficacy, or, rather the lack thereof. If the OP wants to trust life-saving equipment from a company with a sketchy track record and no verifiable testing on the device, that's his business. We can debate CAT vs. SOFFT-W all day, but the fact is that both of those work well and are backed up with loads of real-world results. Better don your flame suit. There's also the fact that the RATS folks have been playing very fast and loose with the term TCCC, which most folks in the field recognize, listing their TQ as "TCCC Approved", as shown here and in their advertisements: http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f21/TangoSierra7/Gunstuff/RATS_Tourniquet_TCCC_Approved_02_zpspiyztnex.jpg This implies the approval of Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care, doesn't it? There's a problem with that. Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care doesn't "approve" anything, they recommend based on documented field experience and clinical trials. Also, the parent company for the manufacturer copyrighted the term "Tactical Combat Casualty Care", then started using it in marketing, as outlined in this post at Imminent Threat Solutions. Anyone engaging in that kind of BS makes me doubt more than just their marketing savvy. There are several of us who have the journal published studies of the CAT and SOF-T available that demonstrate their efficacy as well as the pre-adoption comparative studies if you really want to investigate the issue. As for what you carry? If you want to ignore the advice of those who have used these items under a variety of circumstances IRL, the opinion of trauma surgeons and orthopods who patch up the surviviors and reams of referenced documentation and focus your concern on space or CGF who am I to judge? BTW, most folks in the field recommend placing your TQ in the center of your gear where it can be accessed with either hand, as you can't predict where you're getting perforated, and it's where someone coming to your aid who's familiar with the setup will look for it if you're unconscious - but again, it's your rig, run how you want. Get out of here with that fact filled, informative post!  
There should be a post of the day award...... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2016 4:25:28 PM EDT
[#20]
Yes, Tango said everything that needs to be said about the RATS.
I will include this abstract - Preliminary Comparison of New and Established Tactical Tourniquets Very simple read but here is the conclusion: CONCLUSION: All three tactical tourniquets showed substantial capacity for hemorrhage control. However, the two new tourniquet models (RATS and TMT) did not offer any improvement over the C-A-T, which is currently issued to military services. Indeed, one of the new models, the RATS, was inferior to the C-A-T in terms of speed of application and simulated loss of blood. Opportunities were detected for refinements in design of the two new tourniquets that may offer future improvements in their performance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 7:45:42 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Snip. Thanks for posting that. I got lazy and didn't feel like digging it up. :beer: |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 11:02:20 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SWAT Tac Medic here. I wouldn't carry a RAT. CAT or SOFT-W or hell, even the SWAT-Ts are okayish and cheap So you would carry? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 11:12:24 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So you would carry? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
SWAT Tac Medic here. I wouldn't carry a RAT. CAT or SOFT-W or hell, even the SWAT-Ts are okayish and cheap So you would carry? I think his wording was bad. He dislikes: RAT Carries: CAT or SOFT-W Cheap but acceptable: SWAT-T |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2016 11:34:36 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think his wording was bad. He dislikes: RAT Carries: CAT or SOFT-W Cheap but acceptable: SWAT-T Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
SWAT Tac Medic here. I wouldn't carry a RAT. CAT or SOFT-W or hell, even the SWAT-Ts are okayish and cheap So you would carry? I think his wording was bad. He dislikes: RAT Carries: CAT or SOFT-W Cheap but acceptable: SWAT-T Gotcha. That makes sense |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 1:02:55 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think his wording was bad. He dislikes: RAT Carries: CAT or SOFT-W Cheap but acceptable: SWAT-T Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
SWAT Tac Medic here. I wouldn't carry a RAT. CAT or SOFT-W or hell, even the SWAT-Ts are okayish and cheap So you would carry? I think his wording was bad. He dislikes: RAT Carries: CAT or SOFT-W Cheap but acceptable: SWAT-T Yes. I personally carry CATs exclusively |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 2:09:40 PM EDT
[#26]
I recently got training on the use of the RAT tourniquet and I must say that if you are around children or dogs (pets or the working kind) you owe it to them to keep a RAT on you even if your preferred TQ for self aid is the CAT or SOF-T. Try and get one of those cranked down around the arm of a toddler or even skinny adolescent and you're going to have a bad time. Tools in the box for multiple scenarios.
Stephen |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 4:41:31 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SWAT Tac Medic here. I wouldn't carry a RAT. CAT or SOFT-W or hell, even the SWAT-Ts are okayish and cheap I won't carry a RAT because it's far too thin to be truly effective. It takes longer than 30 seconds to apply, and you have to pull the hell out of it to get it tight enough to occlude blood flow. This makes it HURT like a motherfucker. Yeah sure, pain is the patient's problem and all that, but no need to cause unnecessary suffering to people, especially for the dudes that are more likely to end up working on civilians. You cause undue pain and suffering due to shitty equipment, you ARE going to get sued. And if you have to apply it to yourself, you are NEVER going to get it tight enough because it hurts too damn much. The SWAT-T while being "okay" to some is garbage when time is of the essence. It's also wide as hell, which brings it's own limitations to what you can treat with it. The whole wrapping around a limb for 5 feet is dumb, and when it's in the hands of the untrained, they lose the tail. That ensures you'll never get enough pressure, and further complicates application because now your rubber TQ is getting caught in fucking everything. More time, more blood loss. Plus self application is impossible. Carry a tried and true TQ, CAT, SOFT-W, etc. And if you absolutely HAVE to carry something because it's different, get the M2 Inc RMT. The reason CATs are standard is ease of use, rapid application, and super high success rate. Same with the SOFT-W. Use your brain, because a life may very well depend on it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 6:01:22 PM EDT
[#28]
the SWAT T is great for pediatric/K9 use- along with it being able to be used as backup pressure dressing from a tested design and a good, ethical company. I'm not advocating the SWAT-T be used as a primary TQ, but does come in handy in a multifunctional role. It's also great for slinging water balloons !
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 6:07:40 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the SWAT T is great for pediatric/K9 use- along with it being able to be used as backup pressure dressing from a tested design and a good, ethical company. I'm not advocating the SWAT-T be used as a primary TQ, but does come in handy in a multifunctional role. It's also great for slinging water balloons ! I wouldn't bust on anyone for carrying it. It isn't the best TQ but it can work in a pinch and like you alluded to, has a million other applications. You think a rubber band hurts when someone snaps one on you.....lol.....try a SWAT-T.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 8:37:25 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the SWAT T is great for pediatric/K9 use- along with it being able to be used as backup pressure dressing from a tested design and a good, ethical company. I'm not advocating the SWAT-T be used as a primary TQ, but does come in handy in a multifunctional role. It's also great for slinging water balloons ! This is my reasoning, too. I'll have to remember the water balloon bit, too.  I have plenty of CAT's for general TQ use.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/30/2016 9:35:06 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This type of response is why I do little more than post pics in this subforum. People tend to get defensive instead of maturely handling legitimate critiques. If the OP likes the ability to tuck the RAT into the webbing then there are options out there that would allow him to keep a proven TQ in that area that makes it easy to deploy. I understand his desire to keep a piece of gear that can be a literal life saver quick to get to. That is no excuse for using a piece of unproven equipment, especially one that if it is being used, needs to work in real life as opposed to on a Youtube video. OP, I use a Tourniquet Now! It looks like it would fit into the webbing slots you have between the mag pouch and aid kit. It just requires one column of webbing to be secured, which from the looks of you have available. http://i1355.photobucket.com/albums/q713/bedouin2w/gear/20160308_170044_zpsud4o0wv0.jpg https://blueforcegear-cakc6ifvxd.netdna-ssl.com/image/cache/data/M-TNS/TKS-On-Plateminus-armor-2-600x400.jpg A less expensive way would to be some of the thin elastic hair ties like bcauz3y uses. That being said, it is a good that you did think of having it ready to go as it is pulled out of your carrier. CATs and SOFTT-W's can be primed to be ready to use as soon as it is removed from however you decide to keep the TQ ready on your gear. Since you said you have a CAT:  http://youtu.be/VnAlIIQEapMQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I am not a big fan of the RAT either, but we all make gear choices others don't like. The only real problem I see with that setup is the hooks on the RAT are really close to the bungees on your mag pouch. Now the chance of ever needing a fifth magazine, probably not so high, but the RAT getting tangled up in that elastic when you are trying to pull it out could present a problem if you ever need that tourniquet. I know it works right now, but gear never stays exactly how you put it. This type of response is why I do little more than post pics in this subforum. People tend to get defensive instead of maturely handling legitimate critiques. If the OP likes the ability to tuck the RAT into the webbing then there are options out there that would allow him to keep a proven TQ in that area that makes it easy to deploy. I understand his desire to keep a piece of gear that can be a literal life saver quick to get to. That is no excuse for using a piece of unproven equipment, especially one that if it is being used, needs to work in real life as opposed to on a Youtube video. OP, I use a Tourniquet Now! It looks like it would fit into the webbing slots you have between the mag pouch and aid kit. It just requires one column of webbing to be secured, which from the looks of you have available. http://i1355.photobucket.com/albums/q713/bedouin2w/gear/20160308_170044_zpsud4o0wv0.jpg https://blueforcegear-cakc6ifvxd.netdna-ssl.com/image/cache/data/M-TNS/TKS-On-Plateminus-armor-2-600x400.jpg A less expensive way would to be some of the thin elastic hair ties like bcauz3y uses. That being said, it is a good that you did think of having it ready to go as it is pulled out of your carrier. CATs and SOFTT-W's can be primed to be ready to use as soon as it is removed from however you decide to keep the TQ ready on your gear. Since you said you have a CAT: http://youtu.be/VnAlIIQEapMJust a PSA for those watching the NAR training videos on YouTube: they still have some old videos up showing the pre-Gen 7 CATs (Gen 4? Gen 6?). Among other things, the buckles are different on the older models; you don't have to route the velcro through the buckle twice on the Gen 7s. On the older models, not doubling back through the buckle could cause the velcro to fail when applying the device to larger limbs, like the upper leg. The Gen 7 buckle is a pretty big change (and improvement) in the function of the tourniquet - I would bet a lot of the cheaper CATs you see on eBay and Amazon from private dealers are fakes or old model CATs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2016 9:43:31 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I won't carry a RAT because it's far too thin to be truly effective. It takes longer than 30 seconds to apply, and you have to pull the hell out of it to get it tight enough to occlude blood flow. This makes it HURT like a motherfucker. Yeah sure, pain is the patient's problem and all that, but no need to cause unnecessary suffering to people, especially for the dudes that are more likely to end up working on civilians. You cause undue pain and suffering due to shitty equipment, you ARE going to get sued. And if you have to apply it to yourself, you are NEVER going to get it tight enough because it hurts too damn much. The SWAT-T while being "okay" to some is garbage when time is of the essence. It's also wide as hell, which brings it's own limitations to what you can treat with it. The whole wrapping around a limb for 5 feet is dumb, and when it's in the hands of the untrained, they lose the tail. That ensures you'll never get enough pressure, and further complicates application because now your rubber TQ is getting caught in fucking everything. More time, more blood loss. Plus self application is impossible. Carry a tried and true TQ, CAT, SOFT-W, etc. And if you absolutely HAVE to carry something because it's different, get the M2 Inc RMT. The reason CATs are standard is ease of use, rapid application, and super high success rate. Same with the SOFT-W. Use your brain, because a life may very well depend on it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
SWAT Tac Medic here. I wouldn't carry a RAT. CAT or SOFT-W or hell, even the SWAT-Ts are okayish and cheap I won't carry a RAT because it's far too thin to be truly effective. It takes longer than 30 seconds to apply, and you have to pull the hell out of it to get it tight enough to occlude blood flow. This makes it HURT like a motherfucker. Yeah sure, pain is the patient's problem and all that, but no need to cause unnecessary suffering to people, especially for the dudes that are more likely to end up working on civilians. You cause undue pain and suffering due to shitty equipment, you ARE going to get sued. And if you have to apply it to yourself, you are NEVER going to get it tight enough because it hurts too damn much. The SWAT-T while being "okay" to some is garbage when time is of the essence. It's also wide as hell, which brings it's own limitations to what you can treat with it. The whole wrapping around a limb for 5 feet is dumb, and when it's in the hands of the untrained, they lose the tail. That ensures you'll never get enough pressure, and further complicates application because now your rubber TQ is getting caught in fucking everything. More time, more blood loss. Plus self application is impossible. Carry a tried and true TQ, CAT, SOFT-W, etc. And if you absolutely HAVE to carry something because it's different, get the M2 Inc RMT. The reason CATs are standard is ease of use, rapid application, and super high success rate. Same with the SOFT-W. Use your brain, because a life may very well depend on it. I agree with your assessment here. I like to have a SWAT-T in my kit because of its versatility but it will never replace my CATs |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2016 9:02:40 AM EDT
[#33]
My Militia Patriot 3% Freedom - 15 is an amazing rifle. I haven't fired yet, and no one else has fired one, but I would take it to war and trust my life to it.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
