We used to wear wash khaki shorts with flight boots (instead of shoes & knee socks) & pith helmets on Diego Garcia back in the mid to late 1980s. Why the pith helmets? They were $1.50 at the store so why not.
-
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
Navy Working Uniform Type II and III - finally something sailors can wear....
- Thread starter ChuckMK23
- Start date
I love that. Is that an original term?
Brett
Dependapotamus? Not sure where I heard it first, but it describes so many commissary wives very well...
I can't help but wonder if that's a bag of cookies in her hand.
100%
I honestly don't expect the Type II restriction to last long for that reason, plus the fact that it makes no sense to develop an entire uniform for limited use by a very small community alone.
That said, the new ones are a huge functional improvement over BDUs/DCUs.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
Saw a cartoon from Terminal Lance of a dependapotamus.
http://terminallance.com/comics/2010-08-06-Strip_56_Dependapotamus_web.gif
http://terminallance.com/comics/2010-08-06-Strip_56_Dependapotamus_web.gif
What a boondoggle and waste of taxpayer money.... We currently have 8 patterns across the different services:
Airman Battle Uniform
Universal Camouflage Pattern (used in the Army Combat Uniform)
MultiCam
Navy Working Uniform (shipboard, Type II, and III)
MARPAT (woodland and desert)
The camo uniform you wear should be a function of where you are going and not be a function of what service or unit you are in. If SF/Ranger/CCT/PJ/SEALs wear multicam in Afghanistan, then so should everone else in that theater.
And don't get me started on the fact that the Navy and the Marine Corps don't use the same woodland and desert camo.
Airman Battle Uniform
Universal Camouflage Pattern (used in the Army Combat Uniform)
MultiCam
Navy Working Uniform (shipboard, Type II, and III)
MARPAT (woodland and desert)
The camo uniform you wear should be a function of where you are going and not be a function of what service or unit you are in. If SF/Ranger/CCT/PJ/SEALs wear multicam in Afghanistan, then so should everone else in that theater.
And don't get me started on the fact that the Navy and the Marine Corps don't use the same woodland and desert camo.
fattestfoot
In it for the naked volleyball
I'm actually pretty sure it's everyone in the Army in Afghanistan that's wearing multicam now (I know for a fact that guys in a signal unit, infantry unit, and SF unit are all wearing it). It seems like they realized they screwed up with the ACU, but aren't willing to completely dump it for multicam (they did just dump the Class A uniform for Dress Blues, and ACU's aren't even 10 years old yet).
I saw a similar thread at BaseOps, only with AF uniforms. They dump the BDUs to go with the Airman Battle Uniforms (ABU). They look close enough to ACUs that all the gear can be in the ACU pattern. Then they figure out that the uniforms don't do well against fire, so they come out with the Airman Battle System-Ground (ABSG) uniform. Well, when the Army decides that ACU doesn't work too well in Afghanistan, the AF decides to join along in the switch to MultiCam. So now stateside the Air Force wears the airman BATTLE uniform yet they do battle in the MultiCam uniform. Does that make any sense?
Why don't we have theater-specific (vice service specific) uniforms?
Why don't we have theater-specific (vice service specific) uniforms?
The simple answer is that the Services are responsible for Title X issues, which is everything involved with manning, training and equipping the force.
The Services are worried about world-wide deployability of their force, so they don't consider many Theater specific issues.
The Combatant Commanders are worried about theater specific issues, but with the exception of SOCOM, the CCDRs do not have the ability to procure equipment.
Canada went to a single uniform for all it's forces years ago and went away from it about 2 years later for a few reasons.
First, you lose Service identity. If you don't think that is an issue, then I challenge you to wear black shoes with your khakis to your next AOM.
An additional issue is if you consider when you walk into a Joint HQ and need a question answered, who are you going to look for? Most likely it would be someone who is wearing "your tribal garb". If you have an aviation question, you'll walk over to a guy in a flight suit. If you have a question about Marine Corps stuff, you'll look for someone wearing a Marine Corps uni.
So, why do we have different uniforms? It's because the Services want their own uniforms. They want to have something that is unique and clearly identifies members of that Service.
As for the problems with uniforms, the Army tried to do a one-size fits all. It didn't work in Afghanistan.
The Army going away from BDUs and DCUs meant that the Services couldn't just just buy into the Army's uniform contract which is what had happened for years. Since the Services had to do their own thing, they decided to do something unique. You may agree or disagree with that decision, but that is why we all have different unis now.
What are you, a communist? Of course I'm not going to wear...shoes! As for the Canadians, they were all wearing one uniform in Afghanistan (regardless of Army or Navy) this year when I was in Kandahar.
I don't buy this argument because it is no different from asking for directions from someone. "Hey, who is the Marine LNO?" will get you just as much success as looking for the distinctive MARPAT.
I agree that the services should have different uniforms, but let that be at the service and service dress levels. Our tradition is maintained there and not in any working/battle uniform.
I think the Marine Corps jumped ship on those uniforms before the Army went to its abomination of a uniform that doesn't camouflage on anything except grandma's couch.
While I will agree that the Marines went their own way first, the problem was that the Army owned the contract for BDUs and DCUs.
Once the Army allowed that contract lapse, then each Service could either let their own contacts (which the Marines had done and then the Air Force and Navy followed suit) or they could try to buy into the ACU contract.
As for everyone in the same uniform, we did that with BDU's for decades. We all wore DCU's for years as well. So, like the Canadians in Afghanistan, we all wore the same uniform. But once each Service decided to do its own thing, then there was no way to stop it.
If you really want to standardize things in an AOR, then you could put something in hee reporting instructions for that AOR that all service members must wear X.
However, you would have the Services push back since they are the ones who have to pay for uniforms for the
forces that deploy into the theater.
I agree that it is foolish to have so many different uniforms (not to mention that absurbity that the NWU's are) but it's a fact of life now.
Once the Army allowed that contract lapse, then each Service could either let their own contacts (which the Marines had done and then the Air Force and Navy followed suit) or they could try to buy into the ACU contract.
As for everyone in the same uniform, we did that with BDU's for decades. We all wore DCU's for years as well. So, like the Canadians in Afghanistan, we all wore the same uniform. But once each Service decided to do its own thing, then there was no way to stop it.
If you really want to standardize things in an AOR, then you could put something in hee reporting instructions for that AOR that all service members must wear X.
However, you would have the Services push back since they are the ones who have to pay for uniforms for the
forces that deploy into the theater.
I agree that it is foolish to have so many different uniforms (not to mention that absurbity that the NWU's are) but it's a fact of life now.
