purposeful grimace
Posted 11 May 2013 - 1422 PM
So they went Nekked?
Heroic nude, as ancient greek warriors.
Almost nude; they have to wear a reflective belt when out-of-doors. 
Having lived a couple of decades within earshot of Langley AFB, its amazing how many Chair Force types need to wear a flight suit. Ironically, the wrench-benders that actually have need of a coverall apparently aren't allowed off-base with any kind of oil stain on their togs.
Finntroll
Posted 11 May 2013 - 1849 PM
"Even the Air Force has its own unique camouflage, used in a new Airman Battle Uniform. But it has flaws. So in Afghanistan, airmen are told not to wear it in battle."
This just made my day
So they went Nekked?
Heroic nude, as ancient greek warriors.
Right! Who doesn't want to see naked airmen?
I/Kitsap Militia
Posted 11 May 2013 - 1922 PM
"Even the Air Force has its own unique camouflage, used in a new Airman Battle Uniform. But it has flaws. So in Afghanistan, airmen are told not to wear it in battle."
This just made my day
So they went Nekked?
Heroic nude, as ancient greek warriors.
Right! Who doesn't want to see naked airmen?
Top Gun isn`t the Tanknet cult movie of choice for nothing. 
Member
Posted 11 May 2013 - 2125 PM
Navy "Aquaflage" get my vote. Stupid, ugly and dangerous to the wearer.
Which is the dumbest? I cant decide, take your pick.
Member
Posted 11 May 2013 - 2128 PM
Amen. The only good reason for different BDUs is for different climates/theaters of operation. I thought that the universal use of the Woodland BDU was a great idea, both from an OPSEC perspective and also from the point of reinforcing one team, one fight.
What is wrong with going back to BDU's for Army, USMC, and AF? Why should any adversary be able to identify branch of service by cammo pattern? Not to mention the fact that since BDU woodland is damn-near ubiquitous going back to it would favor those with advanced "IFF" while confusing those who don't.
BTW - What was that funky rough-weave, burlap type cammo uniform seen in GW I called?
Member
Posted 11 May 2013 - 2226 PM
Say, that kind of Commie talk is dangerous I tell you.
Member
Posted 11 May 2013 - 2353 PM
The bell bottoms had a functional purpose, so you could turn the trousers into an ersatz life preserver if push came to shove. Get the pants off while still wearing the shoes and easy movement.
The fact that someone went with a synthetic cloth uniform for navy shipboard wear means some committee needs to be FIRED and sent to work damage control on the worst ship in the navy. --rmgill
The original purpose of bell bottoms was so the sailor could roll up the legs to the knee while holystoning the old wooden decks; they usually worked barefoot. Getting them off over shoes for an impromptu life jacket can certainly be a useful feature, though.
As for polyester uniforms, it was also tried in the '70s. Sailors burned.
Member
Posted 12 May 2013 - 1124 AM
Sailors should be wearing Nomex onboard ship, just like aircrews do when in aircraft.
Proud Asshole
Posted 12 May 2013 - 1133 AM
Sailors should be wearing Nomex onboard ship, just like aircrews do when in aircraft.
+1
Any idea why the USN never adopted RN style anti-flash kit (wool based?) which has not only endured almost unchanged for more than a 100 years but is used by most Commonwealth navies, the Royal Dutch Navy, etc., etc.?
Proud Asshole
Posted 12 May 2013 - 1145 AM
Addendum - just Googled and the USN now dose indeed have RN style anti-flash gear (since when?) - seemingly worn in conjunction with the synthetic blend "Aquaflage". Talk about one step forward, two steps back...
Crew
Posted 13 May 2013 - 2017 PM
US is starting to look like those banana replublics where they have multiple camo uniforms.
Singapore is no different.
http://sg.news.yahoo...servicemen.html
For the longest time we had one type of camo for ground troops, and sailors and airmen wore dark blue overalls which made them look very smart and professional.
And then, the same stupidity began with the Navy and airforce all getting their own digital camo No. 4. Now they just look sloppy. My first question was also, "why do Navy men need blue camo?"
I quote:
“The colour (new camo) scheme is a better match against the commonly used colours of aircraft, ships and key installations,” it said in a statement. “This effectively blends the airmen and sailors in their respective operating platforms and enhances their survival by delaying enemy detection time.”
How asinine is that? Have militaries just gone stupid all over the world?
The Singapore police has also added a few more new uniform types, different coloured headgear, on patrol. On my annual short trips home I just wonder who these people are.
Edited by chino, 13 May 2013 - 2029 PM.
Crew
Posted 13 May 2013 - 2031 PM
Old
New
This is not an improvement. This is a joke.
Member
Posted 13 May 2013 - 2122 PM
No...it's just idiots aping one another.
REFORGER '79
Posted 14 May 2013 - 0713 AM
Strap-hanger
Posted 06 June 2013 - 0736 AM
wow...really? Some sanity?
A la lealtad y al valor
Posted 06 June 2013 - 0834 AM
wow...really? Some sanity?
"The measure passed by a 32-30 vote"
No, it was mere coincidence.
Scooter Trash Gunphobic, apparently
Posted 06 June 2013 - 0930 AM
No wonder the British Army did so well in WW2.
You kind of have to reflect, why the concern over multiple different kinds of camoflage uniforms, in an era when thermal imagers are increasingly making them irrelevant anyway? Its almost like the absurdity surround 'la Pantalon Rouge'. Maxim guns didnt give a toss what colour they were.
Traitor, BD, cowpat hats & those sleeveless leather jerkins were the business. Along with the Denison smock and those camo two-piece windproof suits. 
Ref the second bit, indeed, but worrying about Maxim guns wasn't going to keep the French madder dye industry afloat, was it. And horizon bleu wasn't compatible with all that stuff about elan vital and offensive à l’outrance...
BillB
Member
Posted 06 June 2013 - 1058 AM
Wouldn't bright orange or yellow coveralls make the most sense on an air field? On the the civilian side all people working outside wear some jacket or vest in bright colours with reflective tape.
That's why the reflective belts of infamy and ridicule.
Member
Posted 07 June 2013 - 0125 AM
Dunno know if it's true but I Marine Lt Col that I went to DLI with said that originally the Marines asked the Army to join in on their new camo and the Army told them that they weren't interested. Only after the Army said no, did they do the copyright thing. Judging by the Army buffonery I see on a daily basis in the joint SOF command I work at, I don't doubt this story for a minute...
The AF camo is the dumbest thing. Ever. What morons decided to to repeat the winter-weight BDU debacle?
How the services have the absolute unmitigated gall to whine about the budget with all the money they wasted on separate uniforms is simply beyond me....
