I don't think it's an Army specific regulation. . .it's specific to the award. For instance, I earned the GWOT-E and the ICM . . . but from two separate deployments. On my first deployment, during the transition phase, I was given the option of selecting either the GWOT-E or the ICM. I chose the GWOT-E, as I was told it would be going away for deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan due to there being awards issued for those specific deployments. For my second deployment, there wasn't a choice, the ICM was the only award given In addition to the GWOT-S and all the other chest candy that comes along with a deployment.
When I was on a Strike Group staff when the GQ alarm sounded, the SWO's would start rolling their sleeves down and tuck their pants into their socks. All us aviators would start yawning and start making our way to our staterooms since it was time to take a nap... I guess it's a culture thing between the communities.
Funny, after numerous deployments on an FF, DD, CG, FFG's and CVN's, I never heard of a single safety issue from someone not tucking their pants into their socks . . . . .
Only in peacetime and exercises did I ever tuck my pants into my socks... but war and/or disaster were different. It affects your perspective. Then some stuff is petty and some stuff is real. Then real people rise to the occasion, like after the A-6 crash on deck I witnessed long ago that killed and seriously injured many. After the disaster, one was a young dentist barely out of dent-school, who was called upon to amputate a man's leg to save his life! "...The dentist had performed the amputation. He was just about in shock. He said that he had never worked on a human in that type of operation. His only experience had been with a cadaver, when he was in pre-med." LINK (Scroll down to VA-115 A-6 pilot Dave Kelley's comments.)
Tucking your pant legs into your socks isn't just to reduce trip/snap hazards, but also to reduce flash burn potential. That's why flash hoods and gloves are also given.
We don't tuck our flight suits into our boots. I'll try to get my guys to do that the next time we set 5 for take off. I guess we just figured wearing socks like we aren't retarded is safe enough... SWOs, giving the air force a run for ridiculous nonsense since 1775.
Flight suits are specifically designed NOT to be tucked in, unlike the coveralls. No, I don't know why (I'm guessing because our legs go lower and zip, unlike coveralls), but that's why aviators don't/aren't supposed to tuck their junk.
WOW - this thread just suffered a high speed come-apart... Tales of heroic dentists and award regulations quickly turns to implied pictures of full "tuck backs".... Only on AW
Probably because GQ is the time to "expect" flash burns, while routine underway steaming allows for more relaxed conditions. Probably the same reason why we have X-ray, Yoke, and Zebra fittings and different Material Readiness Conditions at all.
How many flash burns came when they were expected? It doesn't seem that unreasonable to (assuming that it actually works) just keep your pants tucked into your socks and button up your shirt all the time. Kind of like blousing your boots. The hood doesn't seem that cumbersome either. If its a legitimate safety step, then it should be done all the time. If only there was some kind of readily available uniform item made of flame resistant/retardant material that we could all wear instead. Perhaps something with pockets.....
Funny you should mention this... The standard Navy Coveralls are actually one of the worst things you could wear for a fire since they're about 90% polyester. A fact no one really cared to address when I would ask the shoes as a JO. Having gone back to the boat since, I've seen that people would be sporting the Aramid coveralls, mostly the engineers, but they were very expensive, so not everyone got them for normal wear. Instead they'd just stay down in the DC lockers for use when they'd go to GQ 3 times a week. At least that's a little progress, I guess.
Well I don't make up the material readiness conditions, but I'm hella glad we don't steam at Condition 1 (General Quarters) 24/7. If anything, there's probably a feel-good or other psychological considerations to the battle dress. Coveralls tucked into socks may never have or might never do anything physically beneficial, but its role may just be an important part of the choreography of combat readiness. General Quarters eventually became a fantastic time for me to catch up on my reading, but there was no doubt about being in a heightened state of readiness in part because my pant legs were tucked into my socks. It's kind of like there being "no real reason" to stick recruits into the confidence chamber at RTC other than to make their life suck even more for half a day, but there probably could be some actual benefits related to combat readiness when people during heightened MOPP levels don't have freak-outs when wearing their gas masks. But in all honesty, you're just splitting hairs. There are different levels of readiness for a reason and virtually every prescribed action in the Navy has a bona fide purpose to it.
