Army Uniforms Redesigned After 20 Years

Troops still don't have adequate armor. If I had to pick, I'd take the armor.

The pentagon has decided for you. You will get new uniforms, which you will pay for. If you want armor, you'll have to buy your own, but that's not mandatory.

"clothing bag" issue. All enlisted troops will get several sets for free, after which they must pay for them. I benefitted from several clothing bag changes when I was in.

Can't say I like the new "pixilated" look, though.

but when the Navy 'changed' our dungaree uniforms, I recieved zero compensation... the changeover was supposed to be done over several years, with old style uniforms worn until 'worn out' and then replaced, with the new replacements paid for out of your annual uniform allowance, but every command I knew about basically gave you a month: on 01 Jan 99 the 'new' uniforms were authorized, and by 01 Feb you had to have and wear them... no transition. When the Navy's new 'coverall' uniforms came out, it was the same thing: no transition, have them in your seabag NOW, at your own expense.

Maybe the Army does it better.

These are a shade lighter.

For the life of me I can't imagine how velcro would be preferred over silent buttons, or quick release snaps.

It's loud, it gets full of crap, and it wears out. How'd ya like to be setting up an ambush, and during an ammo check the whole damn squad lets a RIIIIIIIIIP!

but I digress, even in a non-combat situation, like the ironing/dry cleaning you have to give them they're going to get ruined.

to make so much noise?

Your point about the velcro is alarming; I'm hoping it is the silent velcro someone mentioned in this thread.

I don't understand. With money being scarce, and the lack of effective protective armor, it seems to this old lady, that the uniform redesign and the refitting of our military during wartime is not only not cost effective, it is nuts!

Restructuring the military has been one of Rummy's goals since the 2000 coup, I guess he's getting his way.

gastrointestinal noise...

:hippie: The Incorrigible Democrat

I heard that there was R&D going on on silent velcro. I wonder if this was the reason.

would look really spiffy on there. Remind them who tey're fightin' for

I don't know what they're like but I read that sailors at Brunswick NAS here in Maine will be the trial outfit. (Sorry no pun intended.)

Airforce

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/graphics/newafuniform1.bmp

USN

My dad retired in '85 and I don't remember him ever having a camo uniform. Then again, that was twenty years ago....

So nobody will see them. The beter to sneak those carriers into the Persian Gulf.

I looked for some history on the web and couldn't find much, but it looks like the camo is for sailors serving alongside Marines. Google wasn't much help in finding out much else.

And I mean JUST started. They aren't even in the stores yet, and the recruits aren't being issued them.

Of course, the camoflauge will be extremely useful, since when a radar guided Exocet missile comes at your ship, it won't be able to see you... what's that? You say that Exocet's don't target the people, just the ship itself, and since it 'sees' by radar it wouldn't matter what color you were wearing? Well... at least if your ship sinks, the plain gray color will be easily seen against the ocean... except... they paint warships grey because that color is hard to see against the ocean...

n/t

Originally found at http://www.diggerhistory.info/00-pages-top-level/full_index.htm .

US Army Soldiers = Nazi SS Gestapo?

Democrats are always acusing republicans of being stuck in the 1950s, I think it's about time some democrats crawl out of the 1940s. :eyes:

little by little though, they are being transformed by * and his minions of darkness to eventually become worse than the SS.

And yes the "interrogators" at Abu Ghraib did take their moves from the Gestapo. See also: Operation Paperclip

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

So we should never ever under any circumstance draw the completely obvious parallels and conclusions between this new 4th Reich and the 3rd Reich before it.

According to O'Reilly, Hitler would be a card-carrying member of the ACLU.

But NervousRex's pic really is better. Search harder next time! :) Hah hah.

See!

high school students! Shit! He's just a kid!

I know all the guys just looove them.

And I just know that those new uniforms will be so effective camouflaging our guys (and gals) in the city.

As I read it, this camo is supposed to be dual purpose so two different sets of uniform (forest and desert) won't be needed. You wonder if a dual purpose item can really be as effective as the others, though, designed specifically for a given environment.

The well-dressed US soldier will be fashion-ready for the hip Iran season. Style-conscious soldiers can accessorize this new fashion look with color co-ordinated body-bags.

Give them some fucking body armor and vehicle protection you stupid fucking Army assholes!

As a member of the Army, I like these new uniforms quite a bit. To answer a few questions:

1. They're using velcro because it saves the low enlisted soldiers money. Normally, with sew on badges and name tapes, you have to pay a few bucks per item to have it sew on. Anytime you change units, earn a "tab" or gain rank, the old stuff has to be cut off and new insignia sew on.

2. While I agree that more armor is badly needed, it doesn't mean a halt to improving other aspects of keeping me alive. Additionally, it cuts down significantly on a very long list entitled "crap I have to carry around." One uniform, all the time. I like it.

3. Goes better with my pink bunny slippers than standard desert camo.

As a whole the Army BDU uniforms of the 1980s were an huge improvements over the previous Army Utility Uniform ("Greens"). The patrol hat was an immense improvement over the Vietnam Era baseball type that I was issued in Basic in 1981.

On the down side, the switch to a 50/50 Cotton/Polyester Material from the old Utility Uniforms 100% Cotton made the BDUs hot in the summer. Within 5 years the Army was issuing 100% rip-stop Cotton ("Hot Weather Uniforms") to the troops do to how hot the BDUs made the soldiers. One of the reason for this was the Black and other dark colors in the Uniform tended to retain heat in bright sunlight. This difference was significant in that the difference between a Light Tan colored BDU and the regular cameo BDUs could be as much as 10-15 degrees in "Felt" Temperature" i.e. how hot the Wearer thought it was compared to how hot it really was.

Looking at this new Uniform I suspect that finding is the reason Black is NOT in this uniform, i.e. NOT because black is so noticeable but that Black just absorb all that heat from sunlight. The Less Noticeable Argument in the article was probably given as a more acceptable reason for dropping black from the uniform than that Dark colors absorb absorb light (and thus heat) while light colors reflect light (and thus heat).

As to the Velcro, Velcro has been used for decades in parts of the Uniform (My Field Jacket had a Velcro tabs). The noise Velcro give off is only when it is pulled thus in the areas it will be on in this uniform not a problem (Used for rank and Insignia placements). Even if used in keep the pockets button not a problem unless pulled by someone or something (i.e. as going through trees the pocket is pulled by a tree limb as a soldier walks through, happens but the general movement of the soldier will be the greater problem).

I do not like the removal of the bottom jacket pockets, even if those pockets were covered by the Body Armor still usable for non-essential items that make life comfortable i.e. socks, razors, etc. The troops have said those pockets are hard to get to when wearing body armor, and I agree pockets on the arms will be more useful when wearing body armor, but I would retain the Bottom jacket Pockets just for holding such non-essential items that make life easier.

Thus the uniform will be an improvement (Except for the dropping of the Bottom Jacket Pockets) given its "Lighter" Color. Please note in the area where the BDU was design to be worn in Combat, Europe, the BDU would still be a superior Uniform. Its color reflects the colors of trees in Europe and Eastern North America better than this new Uniform. On the other hand this uniform is a better uniform for Iraq and Iran and the rest of the Persian Gulf. Thus you can see where the US plans to use its troops over the next 20 years and it is NOT in Europe or North America (And the Vietnam Era Jungle Strips Uniforms are still the best for Jungle Fighting, thus Venezuela should feel better given the adoption of this uniform rather than one more like the Jungle Strips of Vietnam).

:toast:

Velcro! Great! That will win this damn war. This is just another un-necessary item that is driving the obscene DOD budget through the ceiling. Sew your buttons and patches or have them done by locals for pennies. That's what I did in Vietnam. BFD.

Again: Give them some fucking body armor and vehicle protection you stupid fucking Army assholes!


Hamburger Hill (Hill 937), where Velcro would not have mattered.
Vietnam, Republic of
Ashau Valley (the Biblical "Valley of the Shadow of Death")
May 11-21, 1969,
U.S. 101st Airborne Division
Result: Kennedy's speech stopped the war

I have nothing against improving the uniforms - I'm sure it's actually a good idea - but that price tag seems steep.

Its a lot of uniforms Lisa...and honestly I don't think anyone is going to accuse the army of spending money wisely anytime soon.

As I understand, these uniforms are going to be issued free for the initial issue, as opposed to having to be bought out of pocket, also good for soldiers. The "old style" BDUs cost about 55 bucks and the new sets run about 85-90 if the info I've seen on the net is true. This increase is mostly due to the computer generated patterns on the cloth.

Also:

These new uniforms are permanently pressed (or they're supposed to be), which cuts down on the cost of dry cleaning (and you dont have to press them which means I get to sleep an extra 10-15 mintues...kick ass). The new uniforms are also mildly fire retardant and not having to starch and press them means a longer overall life span. They also have lots of nifty built in pockets for things like inserted elbow and knee pads, and (thank goodness) zips instead of buttons on most pockets.

I believe the desert boots (tan) will be the standard in this uniform, which means no more polishing black boots, which means more precious sleep!

Also, from a cost standpoint, the army plans to phase this uniform in from April 2005 through December 2007, so the cost is over a 2.5 year period, not a lump sum.

I laundered my BDU's when I was in. Must be nice to be able to afford dry cleaning. :eyes:

Your posts are creepy!

:scared:

I am sorry, but if you are scared by the way people type you need to adapt.

:eyes: Just another drop in the balance of trade bucket - off-shoring taxpayer dollars.

...will be making these uniforms? Will it be the prison-slaves working for $10 a month (before rent, medical, restitution, gym deductions, etc.), or the Chinese children working for pennies a month, or...?

..like some spiffy new togs!

(shaking head)

I mean, don't they need helmets for gods sake?

Looks like that wasn't a priority.

FYI, helmets are not part of the basic uniform, which is what the original article is refering to. They are issued in a different distribution process.

why the new uniforms are necessary and cost effective, would you be so kind as to advise if new helments will be necessary and if so, are those costs included in the Pentagon figures? I would assume, but with this admin that may not be the wisest choice, that the helments are issued to the soldier and the soldier is not required to purchase the helment at his/her own expense. Am I correct?

Please Something of Reason, provide me with more information! How about that body armor, will that be forthcoming? You seem to know so much.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

why the new uniforms are necessary and cost effective, would you be so kind as to advise if new helments will be necessary and if so, are those costs included in the Pentagon figures

Depends on how you're using the word necessary. Hope that doesn't sound silly, but its important. The new uniforms are "necessary" only from the prespective that they truely are a better camo pattern, they reduce the need for a large number of uniforms, and (in theory) they're going to last longer. No, I dont think there is currently a need for a new helmet because as far as I know, the ones we have are the best avalible. The standard helmet has pretty good stopping power...it will deflect shrapnel (as from a gernade or IED) fairly effectivly. It will also deflect most small arms (pistol) fire. It will generally NOT a rifle round except at long range. Could it be better? Yes. However, if I were making the "list of things I want" we'd make a ligher helmet with the same stopping power before working on one with more stopping power.

I would assume, but with this admin that may not be the wisest choice, that the helments are issued to the soldier and the soldier is not required to purchase the helment at his/her own expense. Am I correct?

Yes, you are correct. When a new soldier goes to basic training, they are issued basic equipment (uniforms, boots, shirts...the list is something like 87 items long...ranging from the boots and uniforms all the way down to 7 pairs of brown underwear for men and 7 pairs of white granny panties for women). If, after basic, that soldier is going on to a combat zone or is in a combat unit, then they will get another issuance of gear, which includes the helmet.

Please Something of Reason, provide me with more information! How about that body armor, will that be forthcoming?

I may get raked over the coals for this part of my answer...however as I understand it the body armor issue is one of production, not of the gov buying it and shipping it out to us. Bottomline is, there's not enough (quality) body armor being made. And YES YES YES this is an issue that should have been addressed prior to a single soldier being sent to Iraq. Keep in mind however, that body armor is not the be-all, end-all of keeping soldiers alive. In fact, I didn't wear mine except when traveling in vehicles. There is a trade-off we face when wearing body armor, and that is decreased mobility. The more armor I put on, the slower I move. So, to stop being longwinded and get to your question, yes, more armor will be forthcoming but No, it will not be forthcoming as fast as it needs to.

Also, the POCKETS are not using Velcro, only the areas where one would apply their name-tape, unit patches and rank. The pockets will use zippers...which beat the heck out of the buttons we currently use.

(Sorry if this post is to long, I notice that most posts here are short, mine is not, but the questions were asked so I wanted to answer as best I could. If you're interested or have more questions, feel free to e-mail me at metsisme@yahoo.com).

I may get raked over the coals for this part of my answer...however as I understand it the body armor issue is one of production, not of the gov buying it and shipping it out to us.

Civilian relatives and friends have no problem finding body armor to send to their soldiers. The armor is there.

Propaganda Engineer is appropriate moniker for you. The military provides the uniforms you list to "ACTIVE DUTY" soldiers, but the poor schmuck reservists serving over there are not provided the same issue.

Good try, but I ain't buying and since you put such a stupid statement in your post that the lack of body armor is a production issue, you lose all credibility.

The production issue involves the humvees and if your nation really wanted to help you out, they would buy any and all armor available and provide it to you until the humvees can be adequately equipped.

Having worked in law enforcement and being aware of the costs of ordering equipment and the availability of such equipment, I know that there are many resources or types of armor produced, available, in existence and ready to be shipped if EVER ORDERED by our government, if the admin really cared.

As I have said, your posts have no credibility.

The Army uses Common Table of Allowances (CTA) 50-900, Clothing and Individual Equipment, to govern the issue of the soldier's uniform.

CTA 50-900 breaks down into two parts--individual issue and organizational issue.

Everyone's seen movies where the characters are being processed into the army, and there's always a line of guys standing there in their underwear being handed huge piles of clothes that don't fit. This stuff is your individual issue...somewhere in the archives I listed everything that's in the individual issue. It's a shitload of stuff. And you haul this shitload of stuff from assignment to assignment.

Organizational issue consists of your combat equipment. Every soldier in a combat unit will have at least these things:

A helmet, which is issued on six lines: the helmet shell, the suspension, the headband, the chinstrap, the camo cover and the camo retaining band. They don't want the headband back because it's contaminated by your precious bodily fluids, and they don't want the retaining band back because you have to write your name on it.

A backpack of some description--the old one is much better than the new one.

Some sort of load-bearing equipment--either the pistol belt and harness we wore for decades, or the newer load-bearing vest.

A shelter half, three pole sections, five tent pegs and a hunk of rope. (In the support units, most of us immediately went to Clothing Sales and bought the other half of the tent...these things aren't very large.)

A sleeping bag and a foam mat to put under it

Some woolen clothing

A set of wet-weather gear and a poncho

There is always a pile of other stuff that is dependent on your unit and your job...cooks get cook whites, mechanics get mechanic coveralls, people on flight status get fireproof uniforms...

and wear comfortable duds.

think about the V.C.


the Rebel Alliance->



and the Wolverines;)



none of the preceding ever lost a war, and they "went to war with the (fashions) they had"

hell even the privateers and mercenaries over there prefer business casual, as we see with this privateer who is wearing Perry Ellis' spring Destruktor line of silken luxuriance.



from a strategic standpoint it makes a lot of sense the more i think about it.

The current camouflage style is the hot new look in the "young warrior" bedroom, and it's soooo sad to think it's already passe. Oh, bummer. /sarcasm off

Free Stewie Now !

Free Stewie Now !

Free Stewie Now !

Free Stewie Now !

Free Stewie Now !

Free Stewie Now !

Free Stewie Now !

;-)

I guarantee it's benefiting *'s campaign contributors. :wtf:

should make it easier to strip down for mud wrestling.

in theory, of course.

BLACK BERETS for the soldiers!!Seriously, that's the very first thing he did.
Everyone wondered why the hell that would be first on his list.
FUNNY- THE IRONY IS:
The were MADE IN CHINA !!!
Murikkkan hats made in China!!

...but that fuckup was entirely on the head of Eric Shinseki.

Of course, he was correct about the numbers needed to invade and occupy Iraq, so I have forgiven him the beret lunacy.

wait a minute they ARE getting holes in their heads due to no armor and no ammo. Was this Laura's idea?? This looks like the new mountain with snow on it look...who's next? Norway? Canada??

hmm...decisions, decisions...

large problem (patches being dropped all over the battlefield when the velcro gets clogged with sand, rain or snow or simply from rubbing up against the corner of a wall) the suits appear to be well designed (although while they are more expensive, initally, they look cheaper for some reason - maybe it's the velcro, again).

http://slate.msn.com/id/2106359/fr/rss/

. . . on the front and rear of the fatigue shirt.

That way, if the troops are trying to keep hidden from the enemy, and open a pocket on their shiny new uniform, they'll be really loud! RRRIIIPPPPPP!!!!! The enemy will love it! :eyes:

why the new uniforms are necessary and cost effective, would you be so kind as to advise if new helments will be necessary and if so, are those costs included in the Pentagon figures

Depends on how you're using the word necessary. Hope that doesn't sound silly, but its important. The new uniforms are "necessary" only from the prespective that they truely are a better camo pattern, they reduce the need for a large number of uniforms, and (in theory) they're going to last longer. No, I dont think there is currently a need for a new helmet because as far as I know, the ones we have are the best avalible. The standard helmet has pretty good stopping power...it will deflect shrapnel (as from a gernade or IED) fairly effectivly. It will also deflect most small arms (pistol) fire. It will generally NOT a rifle round except at long range. Could it be better? Yes. However, if I were making the "list of things I want" we'd make a ligher helmet with the same stopping power before working on one with more stopping power.

I would assume, but with this admin that may not be the wisest choice, that the helments are issued to the soldier and the soldier is not required to purchase the helment at his/her own expense. Am I correct?

Yes, you are correct. When a new soldier goes to basic training, they are issued basic equipment (uniforms, boots, shirts...the list is something like 87 items long...ranging from the boots and uniforms all the way down to 7 pairs of brown underwear for men and 7 pairs of white granny panties for women). If, after basic, that soldier is going on to a combat zone or is in a combat unit, then they will get another issuance of gear, which includes the helmet.

Please Something of Reason, provide me with more information! How about that body armor, will that be forthcoming?

I may get raked over the coals for this part of my answer...however as I understand it the body armor issue is one of production, not of the gov buying it and shipping it out to us. Bottomline is, there's not enough (quality) body armor being made. And YES YES YES this is an issue that should have been addressed prior to a single soldier being sent to Iraq. Keep in mind however, that body armor is not the be-all, end-all of keeping soldiers alive. In fact, I didn't wear mine except when traveling in vehicles. There is a trade-off we face when wearing body armor, and that is decreased mobility. The more armor I put on, the slower I move. So, to stop being longwinded and get to your question, yes, more armor will be forthcoming but No, it will not be forthcoming as fast as it needs to.

Also, the POCKETS are not using Velcro, only the areas where one would apply their name-tape, unit patches and rank. The pockets will use zippers...which beat the heck out of the buttons we currently use.

(Sorry if this post is to long, I notice that most posts here are short, mine is not, but the questions were asked so I wanted to answer as best I could. If you're interested or have more questions, feel free to e-mail me at metsisme@yahoo.com).

Army soldiers are being issued new fatigues with easy-to-use Velcro openings and a redesigned camouflage pattern that can help conceal them as they move rapidly from desert to forest to city in places like Baghdad.

This doesn't say to me they are only used for unit patches, etc., this says to me 'pockets'. Perhaps the news report got it wrong?

From what I understand Gator, the pockets are going to be zippered.

Here is my source: http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/read.php?story_id_key=6042

and to quote from the article "The pockets were also tilted forward so that they are easily accessible. Buttons were replaced with zippers that open from the top and bottom to provide comfort while wearing armor."

My issues with zippers is that they'll jam, but I'm going to see how it works before I dog them out. They certainly can't be worse than the poorly designed button pockets we have now.

Another nice thing about these new uniforms that I haven't mentioned. The current desert uniforms were designed with armor comfort as an after-thought. When the DCU's (desert camo uniforms) we currently used were being issued, there was no body armor. These new uniforms are (again, in theory) designed to work with body armor.

I can understand velcro being less expensive, but I'd hate to see "cheap" being put ahead of "safe"

Because those old BDUs are SO unhip, and we have to appeal to the 18-25 year olds! (sarcasm off)