Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 10/8/2004 2:14:30 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/8/2004 2:20:13 PM EST by 2A373]
Uniform board incorporates feedback, alters design

by Tech. Sgt. David A. Jablonski
Air Force Print News

10/8/2004 - WASHINGTON -- Based on feedback from the six-month wear test, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. John P. Jumper decided to expand the current test program to include a pixelated tiger-striped pattern in a new color scheme on the proposed utility uniform.

The expansion does not involve a full test; instead, there will be a limited production to test pattern and color, said Senior Master Sgt. Jacqueline Dean, the uniform board superintendent.

”The color scheme is only one of many improvements we are testing,” Sergeant Dean said.

A small, select group of testers will wear the newest pattern. The solid tiger-striped pattern with its dominant blue overtones is gone. The latest pixelated test pattern has a more subdued color scheme and is not nearly as distinctive as the one unveiled at the start in August 2003; yet it provides the distinctiveness Airmen have requested, officials said.

“We have sufficient input from Airmen throughout the Air Force to ensure that our uniform decisions are on target with regard to wear, ease of maintenance and fit,” Sergeant Dean said. “We kept hearing throughout the test that Airmen loved the wash-and-wear feature and the fit. The design of the uniform will essentially stay the same, with minor modifications based [on] the wear-testers’ recommendations.”

General Jumper will announce the final decisions regarding the new utility uniform once the test data are analyzed and presented. Determination is expected within the next two months, officials said.

The new design represents a uniform that could be universally worn in all environments, Sergeant Dean said. The unique fit and design will remain the same, as Air Force officials said they want a distinctive uniform for Airmen that fits better and is easier and less expensive to maintain.

“There really wasn’t much that Airmen didn’t like about the design of the uniform,” she said, basing her comment on the large volume of feedback the board received via e-mail, surveys, focus groups and online questionnaires. “We really did capture what they needed and what they wanted.

“The chief of staff listened to the Airmen,” Sergeant Dean said. “We asked what they wanted in a uniform, what they needed in a uniform and, as a result, this is exactly what we’re getting.”

www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123008891



Link Posted: 10/8/2004 2:20:57 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/8/2004 2:28:33 PM EST by ajm1911]
pics?

ETA: I thought that we went to a standardized military uniform for a reason back in the '60s-'70s
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 2:27:45 PM EST
OH THANK GOD!

I thought I'd have to spend the last 4 years of my career wearing a subdued hawiian shirt
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 2:35:14 PM EST
Good for the Air Force lads. That uniform was a joke.
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 2:39:34 PM EST
Thank goodness for common sense - a blue utility uniform - like we don't take enough crap so we need blue BDUs...
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 2:41:47 PM EST

Originally Posted By ajm1911:
pics?

ETA: I thought that we went to a standardized military uniform for a reason back in the '60s-'70s



Here is what we are NOT going to. I cannot find any of the new version.
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 2:41:51 PM EST

Originally Posted By DOW:
Good for the Air Force lads. That uniform was a joke.



+1
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 2:44:08 PM EST
They ought to wear Royal Robbins cargo pants and polo shirts or something fairly civilian, but still snazzy and clean looking. After all, the AF competes with the civilian world for its people.
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 2:44:45 PM EST
I wouldn't do that either


Originally Posted By 2A373:

Originally Posted By ajm1911:
pics?

ETA: I thought that we went to a standardized military uniform for a reason back in the '60s-'70s



Here is what we are NOT going to. I cannot find any of the new version.
www.af.mil/media/photodb/photos/040930-F-0000S-001.jpg

Link Posted: 10/8/2004 2:50:32 PM EST
It seems the sanity check worked. Blue digital camo is fine, but not the bold tiger stripes.

<­BR>



I'm this excited:

Link Posted: 10/8/2004 2:55:24 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 2:57:16 PM EST
Here's another shot.

Link Posted: 10/8/2004 3:09:08 PM EST
+1
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 3:13:00 PM EST
Sooo... everyone said the colors suck.....
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 3:20:14 PM EST
The AF had a web hosted feedback and survey site that got pounded by the tactical folks. I guess we carried enough weight to make up for all the folks who thought it was "cute."
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 3:30:55 PM EST
Hopefully my -repeated- survey inputs had something to do with it......
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 4:01:36 PM EST

Originally Posted By GIJoe:
Hopefully my -repeated- survey inputs had something to do with it......



+1
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 4:01:43 PM EST


The replacement uniform.
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 4:16:50 PM EST
so they need blue camo so they cant be seen in the sky? what about while in the woods or desert woodland blue or desert blue ? standard uniform dotmatrix liek marpat is teh way everyone! or even multicam
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 4:20:19 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/8/2004 4:21:08 PM EST by limaxray]
And all these years I thought this was the Air Force tactical uniform:

Link Posted: 10/8/2004 5:22:54 PM EST
The NAVY's going through the same process now.
Well at least we can't get any worse than the current gas station attendant uniform.

The reason no one is familiar with it is because it is so shitty looking you're not even really authorized to wear it off base at most commands.
Link Posted: 10/8/2004 5:39:14 PM EST
I'll take that "gas station attendant" uniform over the fucking prison uniform top and the village people bell bottom "two-wash-and-their-faded" dungaree's of a few years ago.

The reason why you can't wear it off base is because most of the people that would wear it off base are covered in ship/aircraft grease and grime and look like shit anyways.




Originally Posted By SHIPSNIPE1:
The NAVY's going through the same process now.
Well at least we can't get any worse than the current gas station attendant uniform.

The reason no one is familiar with it is because it is so shitty looking you're not even really authorized to wear it off base at most commands.

Link Posted: 10/9/2004 12:58:42 PM EST

Originally Posted By ajm1911:
pics?

ETA: I thought that we went to a standardized military uniform for a reason back in the '60s-'70s





We did, but these days everyone needs to feel special with their black berets, copyrighted MARPAT, and blue tiger stripes.
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 2:29:42 PM EST
damn, I'm glad I didn't have to wear that gay uniform when I was in.
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 2:53:50 PM EST
Thank god! Leave that camo pattern for the urban youth.
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 6:55:42 PM EST
I Attended the NCO Academy at Lackland AFB this past May. One student out of three hundred plus was a member of one of the "test organizations" and wore the Blue BDUs. It was like a freak show. Everyone wanted to tug at or touch his uniform. Anyhow i'm glad they're reconsidering the design.
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 7:18:23 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/9/2004 7:19:17 PM EST by Dave_A]
They should issue OD green coveralls to all non-combat personell in all the services...

Yes, it will make them look like auto mechanics, but so what...

Let the combat-arms branches have their 'distinctive' uniforms....

But keep the wing wipers & paper punchers in something standardized & thus cheaper for the Govt to buy....
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 7:27:29 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
They should issue OD green coveralls to all non-combat personell in all the services...

Yes, it will make them look like auto mechanics, but so what...

Let the combat-arms branches have their 'distinctive' uniforms....

But keep the wing wipers & paper punchers in something standardized & thus cheaper for the Govt to buy....



Yes I agree, the combat soldiers should wear coveralls and red capes. Distinct indeed!
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 7:40:00 PM EST

Originally Posted By Pete841:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
They should issue OD green coveralls to all non-combat personell in all the services...

Yes, it will make them look like auto mechanics, but so what...

Let the combat-arms branches have their 'distinctive' uniforms....

But keep the wing wipers & paper punchers in something standardized & thus cheaper for the Govt to buy....



Yes I agree, the combat soldiers should wear coveralls and red capes. Distinct indeed!



I was referring to ACUs, Marpat, flightsuits for the Air Force, and the Navy's traditional what-have-you...
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 7:54:56 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By Pete841:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
They should issue OD green coveralls to all non-combat personell in all the services...

Yes, it will make them look like auto mechanics, but so what...

Let the combat-arms branches have their 'distinctive' uniforms....

But keep the wing wipers & paper punchers in something standardized & thus cheaper for the Govt to buy....



Yes I agree, the combat soldiers should wear coveralls and red capes. Distinct indeed!



I was referring to ACUs, Marpat, flightsuits for the Air Force, and the Navy's traditional what-have-you...



Even in temperate climates, flight suits are hotter than the devil's asscrack. Don't even think about wearing one in the desert or doing manual labor in it.

Let's just keep the BDU's and spend the extra money on things that will keep people alive.
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 7:57:12 PM EST
maybe they can get a real PT next, too
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 8:08:53 PM EST
I despise the utilities the Navy wears now. The old dungs were much cheaper, and lasted about as long. It used to be $13 for the shirt, and then you had to stencil the shirt. A pack of P.O. crows (6 per) was about $4. So, total cost for one shirt was about $15. Not, just the shirt costs that much. Add the name tapes ($4 to get made, and another $2 to get sewn on) and rank insigna ($3 to buy, and another $2 to sew on) and we're talking about $25-$30 per shirt.

Name tape on the pants, too, which is another $40 total cost.

So yea, if we went back to the old style dungs, I'd be happier (and richer).
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 8:10:25 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/9/2004 8:14:01 PM EST by StormSurge]
I think we should go to these uniforms:

Officers:





Security personnel:





Aircrew:

Link Posted: 10/9/2004 8:10:52 PM EST

Originally Posted By Unknown1Sailor:
I despise the utilities the Navy wears now. The old dungs were much cheaper, and lasted about as long. It used to be $13 for the shirt, and then you had to stencil the shirt. A pack of P.O. crows (6 per) was about $4. So, total cost for one shirt was about $15. Not, just the shirt costs that much. Add the name tapes ($4 to get made, and another $2 to get sewn on) and rank insigna ($3 to buy, and another $2 to sew on) and we're talking about $25-$30 per shirt.

Name tape on the pants, too, which is another $40 total cost.

So yea, if we went back to the old style dungs, I'd be happier (and richer).




and somehow...even gayer. I for one, hope we go to BDUs and coveralls.
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 8:14:48 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/9/2004 8:15:04 PM EST by eaglebite]
Sweet! Now I don't have to buy some dumbass blue tigerstripe uniform if I get called back up.
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 8:43:28 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/9/2004 8:45:48 PM EST by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By bmick325:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By Pete841:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
They should issue OD green coveralls to all non-combat personell in all the services...

Yes, it will make them look like auto mechanics, but so what...

Let the combat-arms branches have their 'distinctive' uniforms....

But keep the wing wipers & paper punchers in something standardized & thus cheaper for the Govt to buy....



Yes I agree, the combat soldiers should wear coveralls and red capes. Distinct indeed!



I was referring to ACUs, Marpat, flightsuits for the Air Force, and the Navy's traditional what-have-you...



Even in temperate climates, flight suits are hotter than the devil's asscrack. Don't even think about wearing one in the desert or doing manual labor in it. Since when do pilots (most of whom are O-3 and above) do manual labor in the desert or anywhere else? And pilots/aircrew are the vast majority of the AF's combat arms personell...

Let's just keep the BDU's and spend the extra money on things that will keep people alive.



You missed the point, too...

Let's see if I can get it into ARFCOM-understandable english

For all the NON-COMBAT guys in all 4 services, the ones who just stay on base & fix vehicles, type reports, etc...

Those guys should be issued OD BDUs/coveralls...

For all the COMBAT ARMS personell, they should be issued service-apporpriate uniforms.

For the AIR FORCE, 98% of Combat Arms folks fly in airplanes, and thus wear flight suits. The odd 2% or less of the AF that (a) fights, and (b) does not do so from an airplane can use the same ACUs as the Army

The Army has it's up-and-coming ACU

The Marines have MARPAT

And so on...

But there's no reason to issue BDUs to troops who will never be in battle...
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 9:02:59 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
You missed the point, too...

Let's see if I can get it into ARFCOM-understandable english

For all the NON-COMBAT guys in all 4 services, the ones who just stay on base & fix vehicles, type reports, etc...

Those guys should be issued OD BDUs/coveralls...

For all the COMBAT ARMS personell, they should be issued service-apporpriate uniforms.

For the AIR FORCE, 98% of Combat Arms folks fly in airplanes, and thus wear flight suits. The odd 2% or less of the AF that (a) fights, and (b) does not do so from an airplane can use the same ACUs as the Army

The Army has it's up-and-coming ACU

The Marines have MARPAT

And so on...

But there's no reason to issue BDUs to troops who will never be in battle...



Yeah all the guys who dont fight should wear shorts and birkenstocks. Hey john kerry, read your post, you said noncombat troops should wear OD BDUs, but should not be issued them because they arent going into combat.
Link Posted: 10/9/2004 9:21:43 PM EST
You're HIGH and you need a piss test ASAP!

The old dungaree uniform looked like SHIT.
Two washes and it was faded.

Plus wearing the white dog bowl on your head was a bonus.

The top looked like (because it was) a federal prisoners top, and the bell bottomed dungarees looked like Village People clothes.

Sewed on pockets that you couldn't put anything in them.

If you take care of the utility uniform (don't wash them with rocks) they last about a year.
The key is to get 4 sets and to NOT wear them to do any real work in.

That's what the coverall uniform is for.

You get almost $300 a year tax free as a uniform allotment.
If you can't manage your clothing budget then you need to speak to your Chief.


Originally Posted By Unknown1Sailor:
I despise the utilities the Navy wears now. The old dungs were much cheaper, and lasted about as long. It used to be $13 for the shirt, and then you had to stencil the shirt. A pack of P.O. crows (6 per) was about $4. So, total cost for one shirt was about $15. Not, just the shirt costs that much. Add the name tapes ($4 to get made, and another $2 to get sewn on) and rank insigna ($3 to buy, and another $2 to sew on) and we're talking about $25-$30 per shirt.

Name tape on the pants, too, which is another $40 total cost.

So yea, if we went back to the old style dungs, I'd be happier (and richer).

Link Posted: 10/9/2004 9:25:18 PM EST
Navy Enlisted HAS a coverall uniform.

BDU's would be excellent, just as long as you didn't have to blouse the pants.
They were great on the flight deck.


Originally Posted By MDC85:
and somehow...even gayer. I for one, hope we go to BDUs and coveralls.

Link Posted: 10/9/2004 9:25:51 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/9/2004 9:27:01 PM EST by MDC85]
i spent over 300 last year


i only got 100 or so


KA....i know we do, i meant i hope we go to coveralls and BDUs for work uniforms instead of utilities.

believe me, my coveralls will get plenty of use for field day
Link Posted: 10/10/2004 5:01:06 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/10/2004 6:47:29 AM EST by bmick325]

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By bmick325:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By Pete841:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
They should issue OD green coveralls to all non-combat personell in all the services...

Yes, it will make them look like auto mechanics, but so what...

Let the combat-arms branches have their 'distinctive' uniforms....

But keep the wing wipers & paper punchers in something standardized & thus cheaper for the Govt to buy....



Yes I agree, the combat soldiers should wear coveralls and red capes. Distinct indeed!



I was referring to ACUs, Marpat, flightsuits for the Air Force, and the Navy's traditional what-have-you...



Even in temperate climates, flight suits are hotter than the devil's asscrack. Don't even think about wearing one in the desert or doing manual labor in it. Since when do pilots (most of whom are O-3 and above) do manual labor in the desert or anywhere else? And pilots/aircrew are the vast majority of the AF's combat arms personell...

Let's just keep the BDU's and spend the extra money on things that will keep people alive.



You missed the point, too...

Let's see if I can get it into ARFCOM-understandable english

For all the NON-COMBAT guys in all 4 services, the ones who just stay on base & fix vehicles, type reports, etc...

Those guys should be issued OD BDUs/coveralls...

For all the COMBAT ARMS personell, they should be issued service-apporpriate uniforms.

For the AIR FORCE, 98% of Combat Arms folks fly in airplanes, and thus wear flight suits. The odd 2% or less of the AF that (a) fights, and (b) does not do so from an airplane can use the same ACUs as the Army

The Army has it's up-and-coming ACU

The Marines have MARPAT

And so on...

But there's no reason to issue BDUs to troops who will never be in battle...



Point taken on the OD utilities. Missed that the first time around. I also see your main points and for the most part I agree with you. I'm a little touchy on the flighsuit issue. Every so often some asshat will suggest that the entire AF wear them because they look cool and not because it's a good idea.

I wish the combat arms vs. non-combat thing still held true, but this is a new war and the lines are getting fuzzy. Lots of AF people are going outside the wire and(or) pulling a trigger (Security Forces, Truckers, Civil Engineers, Combat Comm, EOD) who may or may not fit the definiton of "Combat Arms". Two of my former troops were just awarded the Bronze Star (one with "V" device) for action in Iraq. Somebody forgot to tell the terrorists they were AF and in a non-combat career field. By the same token there are lots of aircrew who provide vital services but they don't drop bombs and aren't on the pointy end.

Issuing OD utilities and coveralls to some folks and ACU's and flightsuits to others gets too expensive and that why it won't happen. Better to continue the current system of a BDU-type uniform for ground personnel and Nomex for the flight crews. The only real question should be do we keep the current BDU/DCU patterns or go with the new ACU's. BTW, that tiger-striped abortion should not even be an option.
Top Top