SERGEANT MAJOR of the ARMY WEARING NEW UNIFORM

[patches]

Begs the question on what the top coat will be if this is adopted right, they gonna keep that Black one.........or

 

reintroduce the OD one, or a variation on it.

 

[32sbct]

This is a horrible idea and a terrible waste of money. The ASU was introduced in 2008. It took over seven years to get one to every Soldier. The wear out date for the Army Green service uniform was just three years ago in 2015 now they want to change it .....again. When I enlisted we had the Army Green uniform. Then in 1993 they changed the color to a slightly different shade of green (AG344 to AG489) and placed pleats on the shirt pockets. So everyone had to go out and buy a new uniform. You couldn't even tell the difference between the two unless you saw the old and new green next to each other. Then another new uniform in 2008, just 15 years later, and now this thing.

 

Having just retired a couple years ago I can tell you that the average enlisted Soldier (unless working at the Pentagon other high HQ) almost never wears their service uniform. Even when I first came in back in 1985, I only remember wearing my service uniform twice in the first six years.

 

The earlier comment about the Army having a large stock of ACUs and looking to re-dye them is not correct. Basically, all of the uniforms have been issued. They are still authorized for wear until 1 Oct of next year. What they are looking at re-dyeing is all the gear, ruck sacks, pouches, ponchos, etc. They are looking at dyeing them a brown color but no decision has been made on that. All the old UCP gear is only used by state side units only, so it really doesn't matter what color it is.

[VolunteerArmoury]

This is a horrible idea and a terrible waste of money. The ASU was introduced in 2008. It took over seven years to get one to every Soldier. The wear out date for the Army Green service uniform was just three years ago in 2015 now they want to change it .....again. When I enlisted we had the Army Green uniform. Then in 1993 they changed the color to a slightly different shade of green (AG344 to AG489) and placed pleats on the shirt pockets. So everyone had to go out and buy a new uniform. You couldn't even tell the difference between the two unless you saw the old and new green next to each other. Then another new uniform in 2008, just 15 years later, and now this thing.

 

Having just retired a couple years ago I can tell you that the average enlisted Soldier (unless working at the Pentagon other high HQ) almost never wears their service uniform. Even when I first came in back in 1985, I only remember wearing my service uniform twice in the first six years.

 

The earlier comment about the Army having a large stock of ACUs and looking to re-dye them is not correct. Basically, all of the uniforms have been issued. They are still authorized for wear until 1 Oct of next year. What they are looking at re-dyeing is all the gear, ruck sacks, pouches, ponchos, etc. They are looking at dyeing them a brown color but no decision has been made on that. All the old UCP gear is only used by state side units only, so it really doesn't matter what color it is.

Im with you. From a collectors standpoint yes we can say yea another uniform to collect or bummer another to collect but we including myself forget the poor young soldier & the burden out upon him or her with a new uniform. I do personally like the uniform & hope I can get a decent deal to have one as a retiree but I think it is absolute waste of money. Hoping maybe one of my buddies that went to the Reserve Components & is in supply may have end up with an extra in my size. But, it does not have the troops best interest in mind. Ive talked to many soldiers who do like the uniforms but they dont want to fool with another uniform. Most seem to like it. That burden especially goes the seasoned folks who have been in for a while since theyd have to change again. Yes theyll now have a Dress Blue whereas they may not have had one before but thats because they may not have wanted one. I had the old AG uniform then then the later AG then when I because NCO I bought that nicer darker authorized shade one from Marlow White then had to buy the ASU. I spent over a grand on them a couple months before being sent to a medical board & retired. The only time I commonly wore dress uniforms was when I worked at a couple major headquarters but other than that we were lucky to wear it at all during a calendar year. Sometimes not even to the Christmas party. The troops dont wear dress uniforms these days like the soldiers of the Cold War & before. Theyre jumping into their skinny jeans & stuff as soon as they can get out of uniform. Regardless of their youth I wouldnt want them to be burdened theres enough trouble going on in todays Army as is without that.

 

As for the dying, what he said is what Army Times out a while back that gear would be collected & dyed & yes whats out there in the old patterns is worn mainly stateside (the local Reserve unit still is seen with woodland or DCU gear occasionally & even some ALICE gear). Ive been hoarding what I can get of ACU pattern stuff for it may become scarce.

[oakleaf777]

So close to being a sharp looking uniform, but they just couldnt help themselves with adding the stupid belt. Ugh. In this day and age, I dont understand why they just dont make a dress uniform optional for lower enlisted. God, the money the government must be spending on uniforms that most soldiers hardly ever wear must be staggering.

[doyler]

So close to being a sharp looking uniform, but they just couldnt help themselves with adding the stupid belt. Ugh. In this day and age, I dont understand why they just dont make a dress uniform optional for lower enlisted. God, the money the government must be spending on uniforms that most soldiers hardly ever wear must be staggering.

 

 

Its ok...they are spending other peoples money

[Brig]

So close to being a sharp looking uniform, but they just couldnt help themselves with adding the stupid belt. Ugh. In this day and age, I dont understand why they just dont make a dress uniform optional for lower enlisted. God, the money the government must be spending on uniforms that most soldiers hardly ever wear must be staggering.

When I joined the Marine Corps in 2004, dress blue blouses were actually optional, we were only issued the blue pants and white cover top. Around 2007 I believe they stopped issuing the blue trousers altogether, and if you went to a unit that required them then you were issued them (8th & I, Yankee White, MSG, etc). Then a few years later the whole uniform became mandatory, blouse and all. I didn't own a blues blouse for years, I rented one once for a wedding

[oakleaf777]

Heh - I had a platoon sgt who referred to the Class A dress uniform as your court martial uniform

[skautdog]

I wonder what the life span of a US Army uniform has been over the last 15-20 years?? Seems to me the only advantage to the frequent uniform changes is to bolster the uniform manufacturers' bottom line. Has the US Army offered a rationale why the "Pinks" is "needed?" Guess there doesn't need to be a reason to spend taxpayers' money. This "Pinks" idea seems, to me, to be as silly as implementing the black beret so non Rangers would feel good and then spending more money for the Ranger's tan beret to have the distinction they should have.What a waste.

[Edelweisse]

The famous US Army black beret SNAFU...Gen Shinseki wanted it and Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Philadelphia awarded the beret contract to a British firm/company but they sub-contracted it to a Chinese firm. Congress freaked out about the "Chinese thing" and Gen Shinseki stepped back and let the DLA Director at the time (LTG Glisson, US Army) "fall". LTG Glisson was a real soldier that cared about his troops.and he was tagged to be a 4-star....but the "GEN Shinseki black beret" did him in...and a really great logistician retired.

 

Again...a waste of taxpayers' funds.

 

This all started when the USMC picked their two color utility camo utility uniforms. Once they did that....the US Army wanted their camo utility, then the USAF tiger stripe, and then the US Navy "blue" ocean color utility uniform.....Pick one utility uniform(i.e. fatigues, multi-cam, etc.) for all services....and stop with all these uniform changes.

[Brig]

 

 

This all started when the USMC picked their two color utility camo utility uniforms. Once they did that....the US Army wanted their camo utility, then the USAF tiger stripe, and then the US Navy "blue" ocean color utility uniform.....Pick one utility uniform(i.e. fatigues, multi-cam, etc.) for all services....and stop with all these uniform changes.

 

So the USMC decided to improve the concept of camouflage in uniforms by adding a second color, then everybody decided they wanted their own patterns? Seems like that clears us of fault, so I'll accept that blame

 

The USMC changed it once in the 21st century and we've stuck with it, and I have seen no intent to change it in the near future unless forced to. Our issue is we keep changing FLAKS due to directed safety requirements. We changed it so much that it became a cause of creating back problems (MTV was a frikken nightmare), until we were finally allowed to implement the plate carrier concept we all wanted since the start, anyway. Sad side-effect of changing flaks meant changing packs to accomodate the designs.

 

However, the new PC world is starting to affect the good idea fairies with "standardized gender neutral" dress uniforms. Problem is, the proposed blues blouse for females, while similar cut, lacks pockets...so it's still different. Personally, I say we go pack to the pocketless pre-47 blouse, save money by not putting the extra pocket fabric and buttons, which we're not allowed to put anything into, anyway. I'm fairly convinced the addition of pockets was to allow us to put ribbons on straight, as that was always a difficult thing to do without points of reference, I would imagine

 

I have no problem with different services having different utilities...if the patterns are based on mission...but they need to stop all the changes. The Navy's switch to blues made ZERO sense...the ship gives your position away on sea, and it is useless on land. Worst is they still have digi greens for land duty, and those on greenside still usually wear USMC cammies...so why did the blue cammies come into existence?

 

I'm curious if any of you Army guys with field-intensive jobs were ever asked your thoughts on any of the utilities before they were implemented, or if they were dreamt up in the lab and approved by the guys who never leave the office?

[MastersMate]

" .so why did the blue cammies come into existence? "

 

From the USN itself

 

 

Navy Working Uniform Concepts Talking Points/ Frequently Asked Questions These FAQs were developed as part of the NWU concept development and wear test in 2005. For updated information regarding the manner and occasion for wear of the NWU, please refer to the latest NWU and Uniform Update NAVADMINs found at http://www.public.navy.mil/BUPERS-NPC/SUPPORT/UNIFORMS/Pages/default2.aspx.

 

PROPOSED QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS:

 

Why are we doing this? Why a new working uniform?

One of the four main objectives to the Task Force Uniform charter, which was signed out by VCNO in February 2003, was to develop a working uniform for wear at sea or ashore, across all communities, from E-1 through O-10. The more than 40,000 Sailors who took part in the fleet-wide survey told us that the current working uniforms are not practical for the Navy working environment, are too costly and difficult to maintain, and do not reflect a professional military appearance. The majority of those surveyed said they preferred a BDU-style uniform.

 

Why these colors?

We wanted to choose colors that would be distinguishable to our naval service, to give our Sailors a recognizable uniform apart from other services and appropriate to the maritime environment. The colors we chose were haze gray, deck gray, navy coverall blue, and black. The name tapes on these uniforms will be gold for chiefs and officers and silver for E-1 through E-6 members.

 

By using colors that are traditional Navy colors, we continue to uphold our naval heritage, while giving our Sailors a uniform that is much more practical for our working environment.

 

Why the ‘camouflage’ pattern? The concept uniforms are not intended to be ‘camouflage’ uniforms as is the case with similarly patterned uniforms of the other services. We have no need for camouflage. However, by learning from our past working uniforms as well as the uniforms from other services, the Navy realized that a solid cover uniform shows heavy wear areas much more predominantly than a multicolored pattern. The solid color uniforms also show wrinkles in the fabric more predominantly and often a small stain or spot of paint renders a solid colored uniform not wearable. A multicolored uniform alleviates those problems as well.

[sigsaye]

Reality is that dress uniforms are worn so rarely by the regular Troops, as to be a waste of time. I made CPO in (1985). Wore the dress whites 3 times until I retired in 1999, for Summer Change if commands. No one wears Dress Uniforms except for Firmal occasions. Total waste.

[MastersMate]

Agree.... E-6 and below only need a basic summer/winter service type uniform. E-7 and above MAY be required to have a more formal dress type uniform..

[MattS]

In this century, the Army has gone from BDU (1981) and DCU (1991) to ACU (2005) and OCP (2009) while changing the AG Class A (1956) to ASU (2010).

Gotta love acronyms.

[MAW]

The two best looking Army uniforms from the 20th Century are, in my opinion, the WW1 uniform with blackened buttons, etc.; and the WW2 officer pinks and greens.

 

I think the new dress uniform is an improvement over the dress blues...which are pretty bland in appearance.

 

Agreed that they aren't worn often, however.....

[Martinjmpr]

The two best looking Army uniforms from the 20th Century are, in my opinion, the WW1 uniform with blackened buttons, etc.; and the WW2 officer pinks and greens.

 

I think the new dress uniform is an improvement over the dress blues...which are pretty bland in appearance.

 

Agreed that they aren't worn often, however.....

 

Personally, I would have been fine with keeping the old Army greens from 1956. Hell, I was born in 1961 and so it's the only Army service uniform I've ever seen (other than the khakis - which were phased out just a couple of months after I entered the Army in 1980.) There was nothing wrong with the greens, nothing "broken" that needed "fixing."

 

Honestly, I think what happened was the wars. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq all of a sudden made uniform contractors get those cartoon $$ signs in their eyes. Because we were at war and because nobody wants to deny "our troops" anything they need, the contractors IMO prompted some of their friends in uniform to push for a uniform change that nobody asked for and that very few people cared about. And because it was designed by committee they got the awful, awful ASU. But because they were introduced in the 2004 - 2005 time frame, Congress basically gave the military a blank check to buy anything it wanted including an all-new dress uniform.

 

The only thing worse than the full class A ASU is the class B which makes the soldier look like a mall cop.

 

I don't support uniform changes, especially for a uniform that real soldiers rarely wear, but in this case, I'm in favor of anything that gets rid of the abominable ASU. (Actually I'd be in favor of just going back to the dress green uniform because why not? There's probably still warehouses full of them somewhere.)

[12A54]

It’s official - announced today.

 

https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/11/11/for-veterans-day-the-army-has-a-present-a-long-awaited-new-service-uniform/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=Socialflow+ARM&fbclid=IwAR1Crtpb4ApbIPeFiCwquZmjZ6MXSd5D6vDUNUts4gXO-OM1ZuQGs-hYfqA&fbclid=IwAR1lwOyfVmIz3x8jm6NvNHL1DArdRdyJ4e5Vq8ho8TDbm_7KAUd6XE2BhtE

[Brig]

Everyone gets a bomber jacket, too?

 

Ten year implementation plan...bet they change uniforms again before 2028

[MattS]

"Everyone will also be able to buy a leather bomber jacket as an outerwear option." I wonder what sort of rank/ID will be worn?

[Teamski]

And, importantly, BOTH the 4 pocket and the Ike Jacket will be reintroduced. I am looking forward to seeing paratroops in Ike Jackets with bloused jump boots! That should look pretty damn cool!

 

-Ski

[Bob Hudson]

My suggestion is that all services issue green body suits with integral computer and greenscreen CGI software (an iPhone app) - that way the Pentagon can push the master CGI button and all troops will immediately have a new virtual uniform: it works for all the Marvel movies.

[dave peifer]

 

 

Bob I agree 100%. When I was in you couldnt even stop at a store in your fatigues, yes FATIGUES. I didnt wear cammies till the National Guard, same rules. I like the old Green dress uniform. I think they missed the point on dress blues. I'm on the fence with these new ones. The do look sharp and its nice to see color unit patches again.

i agree when i was in 72-74 you couldn't leave base in fatigues,unless you were off base on duty.

[skautdog]

I still find this uniform carousel unnecessary and a waste of money and effort. The Army has changed uniforms so frequently in the last 20 years I suspect the wear out time and/or mandatory wear time for an existing uniform overlap dates by years.

 

Heck, it's just taxpayers' money and a cost burden on individual soldiers. Guess we don't need to replenish our equipment from 17 years of continuous war.in Afghanistan and other AORs?????

 

Uniform manufacturers and lobbyist getting wealthy.

[Brig]

Don't worry, the only uniform overhauls in the Corps in recent history seem to only apply to females...seems 90% of the uniform board for the last 5 years has been about them, and they're only 7% of the force...so minimal tax dollars

[skautdog]

Brig,

Thankd for pointing out that, fortunately, the USMC has not bought into this uniform change madness.