• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

JOs vs Aquaflage (standing duty in NWU)

helolumpy

Apprentice School Principal
pilot
Contributor
I've tried to find the message (came out around 1999-2000) about the patches that were authorized on the flight suit. It went into a long litany of the patches that were authorized. For the name tag it was to be first, last names, rank & USN/R only (or you could have CO/XO in lieu of rank & USN/R). No callsign only patches.

The right shoulder could be any type of aircraft patch (TMS or 1000 hour etc), a Wing/CAG patch, or some other professional patch.

The Left shoulder was specified place for WTI patch.

The next day Rev A came out that said basically, "we forgot to authorize the American flag on the left shoulder... It's OK to wear that one too!"

So this is by no means the first time Big Navy has cracked down on flight suit patches.
 

Gatordev

Well-Known Member
pilot
Site Admin
Contributor
Maybe I should rephrase. It's not sea lawyering, it's English comprehension, which many in the P-3 world round about the time I was leaving the fleet for VTs, lacked. I actually got into this debate with our CMC right before I left when he was standing around saying that we (aircrew, which he was not) wouldn't be able to have any more "fun" patches. I asked him if he had read the reg. He had, but lacked the basic English skills and frame of reference to know what was meant by that single sentence. When I explained it to him he basically said, "Well, we'll see about that" with a tone of voice that said, "I don't like being corrected by JOs" and/or "I'll make the uniform regs whatever I want and you can't stop me."

Fortunately, your CMC didn't/doesn't make the rules. Tact still applies and is required, but it's fun to come back to a fleet squadron with a CMC that doesn't have a clue and educate him/her to the fact that an O-3/O-4 doesn't actually take orders from an E-9. It's not fun for anyone that you're in a position where that's required.
 

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Somebody show me where in the uniform regs shit hots are currently authorized, and where in the NAVADMIN they are banned. Hint: it ain't there. They are another unofficial yet tolerated tradition in TACAIR, just like patched up Nomex jackets. Just like people who you see walking around with American flag patches on their leather jackets. Technically outside of regs, but no one cares enough to crack down on it.
 

wink

War Hoover NFO.
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Not that I don't sympathize with the whole NWU thing, but I want to question/point out some things. First, it is correct, bags are organizational clothing. So I am particularly disappointed that the navy is dictating how they be worn. The "organization" should be free to do that. If Khakis are hot, then why isn't the long sleeve flight suit hot? Moreover, where the hell are you standing duty? Every duty desk I ever manned was in an air conditioned room. Well wait, maybe not Fallon, but that was a long long time ago, and temporary at that. And how can one claim NWUs don't look good, in terms of fit, and then promote flight suits for duty wear. It is called a bag for a reason. It is comfortable because it isn't fitted. Be honest. Hate NWUs for their color, but you can't claim a flight suit looks sharper then a proper fitted NWU. Lets make some coherent arguments.
 

KBayDog

Well-Known Member
Lets make some coherent arguments.

"Poopie trim!"

thumb0_2e77461d4797ff1dabe00b0c65ac7d37.jpg
 

Recovering LSO

Suck Less
pilot
Contributor

I think the thread started off as a complaint about how NWUs have replaced khakis (particularly shipboard washed khakis). My particular beef is that in an effort to "fit in" around the five sided circus we've adopted a camouflaged uniform to satisfy the hunger for all things "warrior"...

To the flight suit question - I prefer the rules the way they are. Bags are okay for "brief" stops. I know some of you sea lawyers will contest what constitutes a 'brief" stop. If you need to ask - it's probably not ok. The people who are excited about the bag changes coming in October so they can go out in town wearing them - I suspect are people who really want to make sure people know they're aviators. Really want to be seen out in town in a bag. Maybe even carried helmet bags to books a million in Pcola to "study" (read: be seen).

Paint me a grumpy old jerk though.
 

AJB37

Well-Known Member
I think the thread started off as a complaint about how NWUs have replaced khakis (particularly shipboard washed khakis). My particular beef is that in an effort to "fit in" around the five sided circus we've adopted a camouflaged uniform to satisfy the hunger for all things "warrior"...

To the flight suit question - I prefer the rules the way they are. Bags are okay for "brief" stops. I know some of you sea lawyers will contest what constitutes a 'brief" stop. If you need to ask - it's probably not ok. The people who are excited about the bag changes coming in October so they can go out in town wearing them - I suspect are people who really want to make sure people know they're aviators. Really want to be seen out in town in a bag. Maybe even carried helmet bags to books a million in Pcola to "study" (read: be seen).

Paint me a grumpy old jerk though.

What is the point of being an aviator if other people don't know you're an aviator?
 

squeeze

Retired Harrier Dude
pilot
Super Moderator
Contributor
To the flight suit question - I prefer the rules the way they are. Bags are okay for "brief" stops. I know some of you sea lawyers will contest what constitutes a 'brief" stop. If you need to ask - it's probably not ok. The people who are excited about the bag changes coming in October so they can go out in town wearing them - I suspect are people who really want to make sure people know they're aviators. Really want to be seen out in town in a bag. Maybe even carried helmet bags to books a million in Pcola to "study" (read: be seen).Paint me a grumpy old jerk though.

I don't always bag strike, but when I do, it's because I'm lazy.
 

wink

War Hoover NFO.
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
I think the thread started off as a complaint about how NWUs have replaced khakis (particularly shipboard washed khakis). My particular beef is that in an effort to "fit in" around the five sided circus we've adopted a camouflaged uniform to satisfy the hunger for all things "warrior"....
I was shocked to see the NWU replace Khaki. I thought it was only going to be a dungaree/swojammie replacement. I was ok with wash khaki on the boat. I wore it almost as much as my bag. In my day at NASNI, on the VS side anyway, you wore khaki until you had a brief. Maybe hung around in it for some time after the hop if it was convenient, but eventually went back to the khaki. I can't see anyone doing that with NWUs.


To the flight suit question - I prefer the rules the way they are. Bags are okay for "brief" stops. I know some of you sea lawyers will contest what constitutes a 'brief" stop. If you need to ask - it's probably not ok. The people who are excited about the bag changes coming in October so they can go out in town wearing them - I suspect are people who really want to make sure people know they're aviators. Really want to be seen out in town in a bag. Maybe even carried helmet bags to books a million in Pcola to "study" (read: be seen).
Agree 100%. It was more traditional, unifying, and just plain fun when we could do just about anything to our flight suits and jackets. Squadron shit hots, club bags, cruise patches, foreign military patches, etc. I would have never traded that to wear my bag out in town. Be careful what you wish for.
 
Top