So I'm a plain ol' civilian, learning about things tactical. Partly for the history aspect, partly for prepping. I have read about the 1st/2nd/3rd line approach to field gear. The division between 2nd and 3rd line gear makes perfect sense, at least in a WWII context; approach march, then maneuver to contact.

But I'm skeptical about the division between 1st and 2nd line gear, at least for a field-only context. Is it common, or even heard of, for light infantry, guerrillas/partisans/whatever, to dump their 2nd line gear? I can see soldiers in a suburban/urban situation dropping their 2nd line gear at the door when visiting locals, but out in the wilderness, does this ever really happen?

I think there is a famous story of some SEALs ditching thier "2nd line" gear in Grenada when they swam away from pursuers. As far as I know you are correct though. The division between 2nd and 3rd line is more commonly used than 1st and 2nd. If your down to 1st line gear then your situation has gotten pretty bad.

Think about this:  as a civilian, your second line gear is probably for supporting a rifle and other fighting activities.  In the guerrilla example that you gave, by dropping or caching your overt fighting gear, you still can have your short-term survival, navigation, gear on your person.  This allows you to escape and evade, and to disappear back into a civilian population:  e.g., the gray man concept.

The point, both tactically and organizationally, is to be able to scale your gear as necessary.  Mission drives the gear train.  Less gear means lighter, faster, and stronger, so long as you haven't compromised any mission-essential equipment.

First, what are your essential tasks?  Second, what additional capabilities can you afford (money, time, weight, size, visibility)?  Finally, how can your gear be configured to meet those needs as efficiently as possible?  Many of us need to spend more time on the first two questions before dwelling on the third, but as gear guys, that's not as much fun.  

The way it was taught to me was ditching 2nd line gear was only for situations where the weight of the gear was enough of a detriment to justify the lose of that gear. After more than 5 years of being deployed, I never had to dump my gear. We did however, drop our armor to show our confidence in a warlords security. It's reassuring to know you have frags, 40mm and mags on your belt just in case.



That being said, I prefer to have a battle belt, plate carrier and chest rig because it offers the most options and versatility. To this day I keep a battle belt next to my bed.

It does happen.

We dropped our bags before moving on objectives or poking around at night. The patrol base/rp concept only works if you have enough people with you to be able to leave a security element with the shit you left.

That kind of argues for 1st-line gear being in some sort of man-purse rather than battle belt or whatever.

Which has some overlap with the get-home bag for urban-suburban worker bees.

As above, the bailout bag concept is what I use as a 1st line if I'm not dressing the part. It still accomplishes everything. It's not as fast but if I have a ccw or a rifle, it gives me accessible reloads, and a way to be helpful, regardless of what I'm wearing.

The way I apply the concept of a 1st line and a 2nd line is this: My first line is my CCW gear, which is for reacting to situations. 2nd line is what I grab for responding to situations. I think reacting vs responding is more accurate than defensive vs offensive in my civilian world.