Bug Out Bag: Is your BOB an anchor?

Girls have been forced into the Boy Scouts, but watch the fur fly, If a boy were to try being a Girl Scout. It is true of most places where women want entrance to men's groups, but refuse to reciprocate.

 

I would agree with everything the OP stated. BOB philosophy is a last ditch effort IMHO and skills tend to replace items. This has the added benefit of increasing survivability.

 

I never realized my name or posts were being used in vain lol

Here's the thing about sticking out. I can get by with wearing Realtree, US military uniforms and gear (current or past) or a bright pink shirt with a neon yellow hat by virtue of my environment. Of course I take a more practical approach.

My BOB is a Grey Ghost Gear copy of the Tactical Tailor Extended Range Operator pack in coyote brown with all sorts of pouches on the outside. I can get by with it out here because A) It's Oklahoma. B) There is a military base in town. C) Because my bug out plan takes me well away from the beaten path. D) I need extra space for seasonal items as well as additional food/water. And furthermore, based on planning, I needed a minimum of three days to get from what was my work (retired from the .mil) to my home. A minimum of three days so I will have to take into account I may not be able to scavenge off the land along the way as folks out here will shoot before asking if you're lost once you get away from the urban areas. Now there are times I will need to traverse on the open roads, but by and large, I can take the back paths and get where I need to go.

And bug out clothing...a reasonably simple affair that works in either urban environments or rural areas. Khaki or coyote cargo pants, olive drab polo (summer) or olive drab Henley shirt (winter) along with a Wrangler olive drab button up work shirt (carried in the summer, used as needed), black undershirt (cause I'm a fashion pimp lol), hiking boots and have a nice day. Blends in decently well with the crowds minus the pack, blends in decently well in the backcountry, but most importantly, is functional for what I need it for.

Someone mentioned the gray approach which is what I am striving for. The biggest thing is risk management. I ask myself the question "do I accept the risk of standing out in this environment versus having the capability to blend in later?" Sure the pack stands out in the urban setting, but I accept that risk since it also means the neutral color of the pack works exceptionally well in the wooded areas I will encounter and works well even when trying to conceal myself in urban areas from interested parties. Do I accept the risk of wearing khaki pants since I blend in better in an urban environment and the crowds where that color won't work as well in a wooded environment? Is the crossover color of olive drab okay for both?

More in the second post...

 

So further on the risk management and the OP in particular.

Here's the thing. If you are willing to run the risk of knowing for certain you won't need item X, Y and your spare toothbrush, by all means, accept that risk. However, making full on statements about "you will fail if you carry a Esbit stove and 600 ml pot!" does not mean you are evaluating the risks of the situation. Redundancy is key to preparedness. I have a water filter. Why? Because as I mentioned in the previous post I have (or had) three days between my work and home. I cannot carry that much water @ a minimum of 1.5 gallons per day (4.5 minimum/36 lbs water alone). So I need a filter. Why do I have a pot? Because during the winter foods can and will freeze in your pack. And the added benefit of hot foods into my system in cold environmental conditions means I stay warmer. So I accept the risk of additional weight by carrying the aforementioned stove and pot for heating water, boiling water if my filter fails (and they can/will fail) and my lightweight spoon.

Nobody argues the point that you should have the bare minimum to escape. But risk management (you might see this term again) means you base that packing list on a best and worst case scenario. I can plan on making a bug out in three days. But what I cannot accept the risk of is cutting myself significantly short in case I get delayed. I won't foot stomp the military pack area since it's already been well covered.

Won't see any disagreement here. However, having some shiny gadgets that can/will prove useful for an extended stay should be considered along with the risk management of the additional weight. We aren't talking about taking your spare can of .45 ACP along, but having a lightweight compass to back up your lightweight GPS might prove invaluable and adds almost no weight.

Again, I think this has been stomped. I accept the risk of traveling through the crappy parts of the OKC metro area with a military style bag just as much as if I would with a fire engine red Kealty.

I'd probably be careful invoking the allied pilots in WWII analogy. Those that were shot down in France stood a far better chance of escape and survival because they had a friendly (for the most part) population assisting them. Those that were shot down in Germany on the other hand were normally handed over to the German government and put into POW camps. So your analogy doesn't always apply as location is paramount.

Along with risk management.

 

All depends on the place, time and time of year, not to mention the type of travel. Car, Train, Air, Motorcycle, Bike.

Years in the mil, just travling around taught me more than all the Internet Commadoes can write.

Along with spending one really bad night on a small boat pier along Kam Hwy in the rain. Well and the time on Isle Of Palm as I slithered down a ditch in the rain, avoiding an unhappy JP. But how was I to know the woman I was dating was his mistress???

 

It never ceased to amaze me how I could pack six months worth of stuff into three bags.

 

"Just my opinion, but it is not unsupported, during WW2 many allies shot down behind enemy lines made it out of hostile territory. I have yet to find one instance where any soldier had a BOB. In fact there are many recorded accounts where they attribute the fact they had little gear to their success. They could blend in and not stand out."

Just an aside... while a number of valid points have been made I think I should address the above statement...

There is a big difference between a E&E /SERE situation and a prepared bug out... while most WWII aircrews had minimal escape kits when the bailed out there was an organization and a population willing to place themselves at risk to help them escape... in a SHTF situation there will be a multitude of people trying to escape the situation instead of a small number (i.e. aircrew)... pretty much apples and oranges...

That being said I support caches/ alternate storage /logistical positioning that can mitigate the need to carry everything on your person...
As, well as a a number of alternate carry containers... for example a nylon guitar case will hold a weapon and enough room for some other items... as to the question of backpack either ex military or otherwise... any town/city with a college or reasonable sized population will have a plethora of them... mil-surplus is a cheap alternative... I see "homeless" folks using every thing from duffels to old school ALICE packs... in the south remember the 3 "C's" casual, cammo, or Carharts and you should be ready to go...

YMMV based on AO and funds...

 

I don't think that the experience of WWII air-crew bailing out or crash landing in hostile territory is a useful analogy for formulating a BOB that is likely to be needed or used in an entirely different context.

Air crew were limited in what they could carry with them on an aircraft and bailout with. though many would have some kind of bailout bag with them. What items they had were mainly for survival until they either hooked up with an escape network or were captured and interned. It was not expected that shot down flyers would make it to friendly territory with what they bailed out with, unless they bailed out close to the FEBA.

Escapers had slightly different problems, in that anything useful for E&E would be confiscated from them upon capture. Much imagination and ingenuity was used to manufacture and counterfeit escape gear that would pass for civilian baggage in occupied territories. Escapers had load bearing equipment suitable to the identity that they were assuming, well enough put together to pass inspection by police, gendarmes and soldiery. An airman posing as a commercial traveller would have had his (covert) BOB look like a suitcase of salesman's samples. (food usually); An airman posing as a labourer or foreign worker might have a knapsack or haversack with the kind of necessities that such a person in that occupation would get by with on a day to day basis.

Although most bug out bags will have similar categories of items...shelter / food /weaponry / medical / water capture-storage / essential tools (knife etc) / hunting/trapping requisites etc....the detailed composition will vary significantly according to the anticipated needs of the owner...and the kinds of circumstances that the owner reasonably needs to factor in. Bulk, weight, and ability not to attract undue attention may be limiting factors, as might be the person's health, mobility and physique. Gucci gear is not absolutely necessary; pay for functionality, durability, and portability rather than brand recognition, with items capable of multi functionality being a desirable attribute over single function items (in most circumstances).

 

No one has mentioned the M6-Scout, which is what lead me to this site many years ago. Made and carried for air crews who had gone down behind enemy lines. A light weight, combination weapon that could fire .22's (several versions) or .410 shotgun with the flip of a switch. Even carried it's own ammo in the comb of the stock. 15 .22's and 4, .410 shells. And could be broken down into two smaller pieces easily. This made it easy to pack carry, and hide Springfield Armory M6 Scout - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The scout is a little light and short range. My choice, some years back was the SP1 Colt Carbine. At the time it could not easily be broken into two sections. And I had to pull some strings to even buy one, for at that time they wre only sold to LEOs. But having a clean record and "in the know" I managed to have one.

Light weight, two sections when you unscrew the forward pivot screw and very securable when you remove the bolt carrier group. With a 20 round mag it will handle most anything in the lower 48.

 

The AR has come a long way since the SP1 days.

Now? You could do a flattop receiver, LW pencil barrel with gas block, free float the front (that A frame actually weighs more than one thinks) with a Midwest Industries SS Gen 2 or BCM KMR, put an Aimpoint Micro or Vortex Sparc on top, MBUS BUIS and have an even lighter setup than what you have there. And generally not break the bank.

I haven't seen a screw takedown in years.

 

Ah well you use what you got. Also that SP1 did not have forward assist. Nor the scope.

But it is still around, maybe at the bottom of a lake?

 

House fire...

 

I really like your plan, but I may well try it with a full stock first, since that is what I have in the $299 kit I just bought. I just plain like a full stock for a service carbine. For s&g I'll weigh the front sight and the stock hand guards v the Midwest Industries SS Gen 2 or BCM KMR. I doubt it will be much different for the handguards and delta ring are pretty light.

Checking "The Parts Box" I find I have a sest of Magpul MBUS.

 

You'd be really surprised at how much difference it makes even with the issue stuff.