# - or CTS according to me...



## KevinB (28 Apr 2005)

This started elsewhere and I figured I would take it to the mass media as it where.

As evident I am unimpressed with the direction of CTS - I know several of them (though not well) but I don;t blame them just the corporate entity that CTS has become and the lack of flexibility that they have.


perhaps we can start a Clothe the Combat Arms Soldier Project  :

Starting from the toe to the tip of the head;

Sock system - I dont mind it other than after a few uses they are garbage.

Underwear - go to the underarmour concept - the underwear (bottoms) and long under wear are not bad - but the T Shirts are still ASS.â â€œ UnderArmour type clothing: â â€œ close fitting, breathable fabric in a non flammable material if possible â â€œ failing that, then treated with a flame retardant that does not aggravate the skin

Combat Shirt: I think the Crye Field top has it hands down - the tight fitting top is nicely non snagging  and still breates very well - the pockets have been thoughfully rearrnaged so you can use them with armour on. - the neck zippers but it think a velro closure woudl be better they have that on their combat shirt) - velcro cuff and it is codura reinforced in wear areas - the biggest bonus is built in elbow pads - they are low profile yet work and dont move around or restrict motion /dexterity like the issued GUARGANTUAN cadpat elbow (and knee) pads.

Combat Pants - once again I have to give it to Crye (perhaps its best if I just give the website www.cryeprecision.com for featrue other than have me gush about them all over again.  Pant pocket more forward located so they don't interfere with holster, sub/drop load leg panels. * I really like the padded waist - finally you can wear a pistol belt all day and not really notice it...

Hat: I like ball caps - they protect you face somewhat but are stiff enough not to droop intoi your line of sight that that LARGE brimmed Combat hat.  But I understand some dont like gettign sun on their necks etc...

LBE:  As pretty much everyone know I think the CF issue gear is CRAP
 Three different systems are required 
One integrated system â â€œ like a Paraclete RAV for dismounted shooting soliders to use.  
A second Armour setup â â€œ like the current GenIII PBA and a Chest Rig set up so AFV crewman can easily use it upon dismount.
A 3rd setup for less mobility but maximum protection for truckers etc. who will be driving convoys etc.

  Holster -  two systems â â€œ one for vehicle crewman one for dismount use.  Based on the Safariland 6004 setup, which proved excellent security and retention â â€œ but allows for quick and safe access.

Weapons

 C8SFW in midlength gas system which will proved more real-estate on the hand guard and provide longer bolt/system life than the carbine gas system. optics non infantry EOTECH 552 - INF: BOTH EOTECH 552 (CCO) [Close Combat Optic] and TA31 ACOG [GPCO] (General Purpose Combat Optic)

C8ECBQ 12.5â ? Midlength gas system shorty â â€œ for Vehicle/weapon crews.  w/ EOTECH 552

 Both system fitted with enhanced M1913 Picatinny Freefloat  (EPFF) rail system  so accessories can be added/subtracted w/o need for live fire zero confirmation.

M203/EGLM â â€œ closer to bore than current M203A1, attaches to EPFF rail 

Breaching Shotgun â â€œ Remington MCS - as the damn DuckHunter 870 we have is way to big for what we do with it.

http://www.remingtonmilitary.com/images/smallarms/870mcs_lg.jpg

More to follow...

  If you wish to debate this please do it point by point or add items you want to see in different items / catagories 

thx.


----------



## Canadian Sig (28 Apr 2005)

Kevin, what difference would you like to see between dismounted and mounted troops holsters?


----------



## KevinB (28 Apr 2005)

Boots: I refer the Danner Desert Acadia - it is a good three season boot (and no polsih ;D)


INDIVIDUAL STANO
 Day time optics already covered

MNVG - PVS-14, although having seen the PVS-18 and the dual tube systems (which are IMHO a great deal better) the MNVG PVS-14 is a good piece of kit and alredy in the system.

Infrared Target Pointer/Illuminator/Aiming Laser (ITIPAL) Insight upgraded PEQ-2A/7500 (vis) 

Surefire M952MU series flashlight 

Surefire M1 IR flashlight (much better than normal light with IR lens - this things is the cats ass for driving a quad with NV on)


----------



## KevinB (28 Apr 2005)

Canadian Sig said:
			
		

> Kevin, what difference would you like to see between dismounted and mounted troops holsters?



When mounted the leg holsters (which are nice dismounted - unless walking REALLY far) are awkward and hard to use - especially if in a turret - as a result a lot of crewmen like to use a chest/shoulder harness/holster.

  The safariland holster is a modular body and could be configured to a shoulder rig - however due to its deisgn it is not ambi and needs to be specifically left or right handed...


----------



## Bomber (28 Apr 2005)

Boots:  Bates Enforcer ultra lites.  No water repellent liner.  I am a huge fan of molded soles.  Make a 3 pound boot less than 1 pound.  And I like the idea of goretex socks.  Change them, exchange them, clean them.  When they aren't in the boot, you just make it more versatile.  I would like to see this boot in a coyote brown.  Also, a boot needs to be shorter.  the calf's kind of hurt near the end of the day, and I prefer a 7 or 6 inch to the current 8+

Socks:  Merino wool socks are what your feet are secretly crying for.  Wigwam lite hiker are the way to go.

T-Shirt:  UA is a nice brand, but the technology is standard in the industry now.  I believe the kit shop in 1VP is getting a coyote shirt from a BC company.  Very nice, just stretch the neck out if you can.  Speaking of neck, I am sorry ladies, but bring back my V-Necks.  One of the problems the marines are finding with UA is odor.  The shirts are designed to compress, wick, and regulate moisture.  They also turn into a bit of a "self contained environment" and you stew in your juices until you wash it.  Most companies offer an anti-microbial solution, but they are almost always a chemical that is woven or dyed in during manufacture.  Unfortunately, we don;t use team laundry services, but giant industrial washing machines, which remove the anti microbial properties in about 15 washes.  Also, washing repeatedly can hamper the shirts ability to transfer moisture.  I have a "coolmax" shirt that now just holds the moisture and weighs a couple of pounds when you take it off.  I watched a load of presentations on this at a recent army textile conference.  FR is really warm to wear, a nice thing to have since almost everything we wear is an advanced plastic or something that turns to molten liquid when it is on fire, but how often has that happened to us in the past 20 years?  For this "duty" of undergarments, I was really impressed with the booth from Polartec, they just sold 750 000 complete sets of underwear to the US Army last year, it is undies, long johns, and a users choice between a lightweight or silk weight t shirt, and a light-weight or mid-weight thermal shirt.  And it is all in coyote.

Clothing:  Also at the Polartec booth was a water repellant, wind proof thermal shirt, like these crye ones, but in AR, with the pockets on the sleeves.  Folded up really small to.  

Gloves:  Like the new mortar gloves, I can one hand a 105 round with a straight arm by the shoulder, and it doesn't slip at all.  I think these gloves will make ammo handling a much safer job, as the rain and cold have little effect on these gloves.

Head wear:  I like the new balaclava and neck gaiter, made by polartec, and got one of their toques at the conference.  It is really nice sometimes to just wear a warm, itch free toque under a helmet.  

Eyewear:  I got some ESS goggles, and now my old issue goggles are in a rubermaid marked "legacy" alone with my waffle thermal stuff and everything else we used to have

more to follow...


----------



## Infanteer (28 Apr 2005)

I do like the US Army idea of going (back to) the Brown Service Boot.  If the CF where to go to a lightweight Service Boot that was Brown as opposed to CADPAT (the stupidest thing I've ever seen), we could do alot to eliminate the "Boot Glut" that all soldiers suffer from (ie: 18 pairs of issued boots).  A troop should basically have 5 pairs of boots:

2 x Lightweight Temperate boot (Something in brown akin to a Jungle Boot)
2 x Cold Weather Boot (Gortex Boot, similar to what we have now, but probably brown as well for high-altitude ops)
1 x Mukluk (for Arctic Ops)


----------



## Kal (28 Apr 2005)

Pistol? - Sig, USP, glock, 1911, etc, what?

I've never used the desert danners, how is the ankle support for them?   

The crye stuff, developed in CADPAT I'm assuming.   Or is multicam that much more effective?

Forgot, Stealth suit?  Issue one, or a personally bought piece?


----------



## Infanteer (28 Apr 2005)

Multicam is impressive - but still a little too yellow.  Perhaps a variation of it would be good enough to replace both AR and TW CADPAT.  Imagine the burden this would take off of a supply system if all camo equipment was only required in one pattern instead of two (rucks, packs, LBE, uniforms, etc, etc).


----------



## PPCLI MCpl (28 Apr 2005)

For underwear, I've found nothing beats my Polartec Power Dry.  It's light, breathable, soft and odor resistant.  In extreme cold, Underarmour Cold Gear is outstanding.

http://www.polartec.com/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/209


----------



## Kal (28 Apr 2005)

While checking out the crye stuff, I came the the conclusion that if a shirt like the combat shirt were adopted, it would probably be motivation enough for some members to get into better shape.


----------



## Matt_Fisher (29 Apr 2005)

Wow, already talking about scrapping Cadpat before 3/4 of the Cadpat kit comes out?    

In regard to the logistical ease of maintaining equipment and uniforms in only one pattern, maybe it's just me, but is anybody else having any Olive Drab deja-vu?   Not to say that OD was the panacea, but the subject of having to produce duplicate sets of everything, or even triplicate or even quadruplicate for overly specific environments (temperate, arid, urban, etc).

On the subject of brown boots, I love the brown/olive shade of the new Marine boots, but I'm not a big fan of the non-polish rough-out leather.   The boots will generally only last a year before they start to dry rot and crack because they haven't been polished.   A boot needs to come out that still has a 'flat' type texture/finish (no-shininess) but is still able to be treated with a oil or cream (danner type boot dressing, neatsfoot oil, etc.) that keeps the leather moisturized and nourished so it remains durable.   

I'm also not a fan of gore-tex boots.   The gore-tex "bootie" that these boots are manufactured with is great at keeping water out, but if you step in a puddle deeper than the boot, do a river crossing, etc. the boots will retain that water just as well.   Also, over time the gore-tex membrane abrades off from the bootie.   I"ve got an old pair of Matterhorn infantry combat boots that are gore-tex lined and my dog chewed them up.   As more of my curiosity getting the best of me, I cut them in half and examined the innards.   I was pretty disapointed to see that in alot of places the gore-tex bootie had been worn through (such as the toebox).   Also, where the bootie was sewn to the boot, the seams were not sealed.   Not so much due to manufacturer cutting corners, but it was not practical to do so.

Everybody's feet are different, but for mine, if I was doing alot of movement on my feet, either rucking or lengthy patrols, my feet would sweat to the point where the Gore-Tex bootie reached its saturation point and couldn't pass moisture through the membrane as fast as my feet were sweating it out.   At that point I might as well have had plastic bags over my socks, because it was essentially the same thing.   I much prefer a free-breathing boot such as the deserts or jungles.

When it does get wet, I prefer to wear a gore-tex oversock (such as the Rocky model).   Alot easier to adjust to conditions, my boots dry out faster without the gore-tex bootie and I can replace the oversocks when they become worn out.


----------



## Troopasaurus (29 Apr 2005)

> The US and Brits still have two types of camo, desert and temperate.



Actually the US Army is changing to a single uniform, the Army Combat Uniform (ACU). The "Universal Pattern" was discussed here a while ago and Multicam was in competition for that contract but did not win it. 

More info can be found http://www.militarymorons.com/misc/camo.html#mcacu


----------



## Infanteer (29 Apr 2005)

Why does a combat uniform have to be "mediocre" for other trades?  What a waste of resources.  garrison work can (and should) be done in a decent looking Service Dress (flame me if you want - but I don't think we should go to work looking like dumpy mechanics).

That being said, I don't want a uniform that is designed specifically to be worn under a vest as general issue - I prefer Crye's "Field Shirt" as opposed to the "Combat Shirt" as something to look at for innovation in design.  There are many times when someone in the field will be performing duties without a flak-vest.

http://www.cryeprecision.com/HTLM/products/field_shirt.htm#


----------



## KevinB (29 Apr 2005)

Well you all just wrong (see I can act like CTS too!  ;D)

 I think it is ridiculous to waste FIELD uniforms in Garrision - Work Dress came before Garrision dress...  I think it is because half the wogs want to feel like warriors.  While I like the Multicam - I like the desidn of the clothing and just CADPAT (TW and AR) in that sort of pattern (for Infanteer - you'd have both tops...)  The Strathcona's (not that I think they should be emulated but... ) due maintenance in coveralls - some guys in the Patricia's do to but very few.  I just fail to see why with the cost of CADPAT combats they have to be worn in Garrison?  I think only field pers should have combats - heck the old OD combat pants could be worn in garrison with regimental tops.

Multicam was not actually competing against the ACU BTW...

I FAIL to understand why the reserves parade in Combats - what a waste - bring back workdress...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (29 Apr 2005)

Can I get a new ruck and boots before the 2 of you rock the boat and there is a multimillion dollar boondockle over work dress.


----------



## GDawg (30 Apr 2005)

What would you folks have us WOGs, rentals, and desk pilots wear?
I like the idea of having support and HQ types like me wearing combats, it reminds us that we do in fact have to keep up soldier skills and put some bullets down range on occasion. Asides from the pointy end of the CF, the rest of us are increasingly branded as civil servants who dress funny. I wouldn't propose that I need uber fancy kit for climbing mountains or traversing the high arctic, but I do insist on having proper environmental clothing and boots that enable me to leave my office and apply my training as required. I am pretty happy with the kit I have right now and I feel that the cooks/clerks/medics/etc should continue to be issued the current CTS gear.

/end rant.


----------



## KevinB (30 Apr 2005)

GDawg said:
			
		

> What would you folks have us WOGs, rentals, and desk pilots wear?
> I like the idea of having support and HQ types like me wearing combats, it reminds us that we do in fact have to keep up soldier skills and put some bullets down range on occasion. Asides from the pointy end of the CF, the rest of us are increasingly branded as civil servants who dress funny. I wouldn't propose that I need uber fancy kit for climbing mountains or traversing the high arctic, but I do insist on having proper environmental clothing and boots that enable me to leave my office and apply my training as required. I am pretty happy with the kit I have right now and I feel that the cooks/clerks/medics/etc should continue to be issued the current CTS gear.
> 
> /end rant.




Dude you made my case for me. I mean hey the regular inf guys like to feel JTF assaulterish - lets buy them all Nomex CQB suits and MP-5 and C8CQB's so they can do section attacks felling like assaulters  :

 1) You dont need a CADPAT ensemble to sit behind a desk.
 2) If you are field force and go to the field - the when you go to the field you wear field kit.

I am just sick and tied of some asshat saying - well I dotn like pockets on the sleeves - or I need pockets on my chest for my smokes or notepad etc.  When they dont care how it feels in the field under armour or LBV etc.  Field kit is FIELD KIT - don't water it down for the sake of some donut munching clown that wears his kit out from repeated washes to get the coffe stains out.

CFL - the boondogle would likely get your shit to you quicker.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (30 Apr 2005)

All I'm saying is lets get some of the kit we don't have yet before we rework the stuff we do have.  PLEASE.


----------



## TCBF (30 Apr 2005)

"The Strathcona's (not that I think they should be emulated but... )"

AHEM......


----------



## KevinB (30 Apr 2005)

TCBF said:
			
		

> "The Strathcona's (not that I think they should be emulated but... )"
> 
> AHEM......



 Would you accept "not emulated entirely" or "not completly emulated to the fullest extent"  ?    ;D


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (30 Apr 2005)

Now that some Patricia's are joining the Strat's I'm sure we will corrupt them in no time.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (30 Apr 2005)

or vice versa


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (30 Apr 2005)

I think having the armoured wear coveralls (black or green) would be benificial to them working in the close confines of the MGS and Coyote as there is a lot of things to get caught up on not to mention the vehicle maintence side of things.


----------



## TCBF (30 Apr 2005)

Would you accept "not emulated entirely" or "not completly emulated to the fullest extent"

Yup.. We sure ain't perfect, either. ;D

"I think having the armoured wear coveralls (black or green) would be benificial to them working in the close confines of the MGS and Coyote as there is a lot of things to get caught up on not to mention the vehicle maintence side of things."

Everything gets caught.  I HATE coveralls, but they help keep the goo off you when swapping out the Leo engine compartment during a pack-pull.   To hell with wear and tear on the clothing.  When I am out of the call sign, I want to look just like everyone else.  So do my guys who are on sentry, by the way,  And a pair of coveralls make you stand out like a turd in a punch bowl.

Back to things getting caught in the vehicles, one Coyote in Kandahar ND'd TWO Halon bottles in TWO days because ONE member of the crew was not used to crawling around a Coyote full of ammo and kit while wearing a frag vest.  First rule of getting hung up inside a vehicle - DON'T STRUGGLE!  You are hung up for a reason, thrashing your legs to pull free will only result in a very expensive BANG when you kick a Halon Bottle.  Same thing goes for tommorrow, too. 

PD Trg a year ago, when we discussed - with WW2 vets who were there - the Strathcona Recce Troop bouncing the Melfa River in Italy, then hanging on to it and fighting like Hell along side a company of the Westies who joined them (and whose OC - Maj Mahoney - won the VC).  One of the vets was the OC of a tank sqn at the time, and he thought one of the tank sqns should have dismounted, grabbed the BMGs off the Shermans, and fought their way to the river and across it to join up with the Recce Troop.  

So, leave us the combat clothing/relish/whatever.

 Stripping coveralls off at forty below to take a dump is no joy, either.


----------



## KevinB (30 Apr 2005)

I was considering the coveralls for garrision maintnance only - not for field wear.

For this reaon pretty much specifically


> but they help keep the goo off you when swapping out the Leo engine compartment during a pack-pull



Not just for engine stuff but any dirty maint. task that could ruin a set of combats.


----------



## George Wallace (30 Apr 2005)

TCBF said:
			
		

> Stripping coveralls off at forty below to take a dump is no joy, either.



Stripping anything off at forty to sixty below to take a dump is no joy at any time.  I remember my experience up on patrol out of Pond Inlet using a Thunder Box.  CCCCccccooooolllllllddddd!


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (30 Apr 2005)

I would have thought that coveralls wouldn't get caught up like combts inside.

The only sentry I've seen you guys do is on back of the Leo in a crew tent.


----------



## TCBF (30 Apr 2005)

Thats cause when you lot are with us, we let the experts handle it. ;D


----------



## GDawg (30 Apr 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Dude you made my case for me. I mean hey the regular inf guys like to feel JTF assaulterish - lets buy them all Nomex CQB suits and MP-5 and C8CQB's so they can do section attacks felling like assaulters  :
> 
> 1) You dont need a CADPAT ensemble to sit behind a desk.
> 2) If you are field force and go to the field - the when you go to the field you wear field kit.
> ...



I didn't say anything about buying _new_ kit or redesigning kit for folks like me, I say we keep it as it is (non-leading edge types wearing cadpat). It seems like a waste to force most of us to give our cadpat back and spend millions buying us non-cadpat work clothes.

I don't need to feel like a JTF-2 door kicker, but If I have to deploy to the field straight from the office (and it happens) I like to be dressed appropriately. I work in an office most of the time, but on weekends and wednesday evenings I operate as a signaller and work in a training det, no commando here but I do need to dress for the job!

 If they happen redesign the combat shirt to accomodate the TV and body armour then I won't complain if I don't get it or at the very least I will wait till my shirt is see through before I get one from ASU. I'm not here to rock the boat, because that can prove to be expensive.


----------



## Britney Spears (30 Apr 2005)

> wears his kit out from repeated washes to get the coffe stains out



The real reason why we switched so fast.


----------



## Infanteer (30 Apr 2005)

Well, my take on the issue is that every soldier should consider themselves to be a Rifleman first, tradesman second; every soldier can be expected to deploy on ops and work in a hostile environment (or train to do so) so every soldier should be issued a combat uniform - 3 TW uniforms and 2 AR uniforms should be the universal issue - soldiers going on Ops can get more issued as a temp issue as required.

The uniforms should be general purpose; as I said before not all our training and ops will require vest and plates and some soldiers won't be able to wear them to do their job while deployed.  These two Crye items seem to have alot of the features we should look at:

http://www.cryeprecision.com/HTLM/products/field_shirt.htm#
http://www.cryeprecision.com/HTLM/products/combat_pants.htm

As well, it would be interesting to see a issue shirt for Ops that is compatible with the vest - Crye has designed one of these as well (it is the neat one Kevin is wearing):

http://www.cryeprecision.com/HTLM/products/combat_shirt.htm

This could be issued for Operations to soldiers who can be expected to leave the base and be wearing a flak-vest.  Since it is a "skin contact" item, it would be issued once to a soldier if they require it and they would hold onto it afterwards.

Just some ideas, but clearly, the comfort, versatility, and simplicity of uniform design is something that should be considered.  Gone are the days of the mass produced wool duds.

Infanteer


----------



## Britney Spears (1 May 2005)

I think Infanteer means something akin to "business casual" wear, which would be worn for desk jobs and sport ribbons. It would bridge the gap between field/combat uniform, which is purely utilitarian, and DEUs which are purely aesthetic.

Not saying that I'm for it of course, I mean, we might as well go all the way and bring back the tan shorts too. Way I see it I have too many sets of uniforms already. If you're worried about the public image of the CF, worry about hiding all the fat people first.


----------



## Infanteer (1 May 2005)

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> I think Infanteer means something akin to "business casual" wear, which would be worn for desk jobs and sport ribbons. It would bridge the gap between field/combat uniform, which is purely utilitarian, and DEUs which are purely aesthetic.



That is what I meant in my earlier post, yes - a decent looking service dress; for garrison work it would be "undress" - the USMC has a few nice versions which allow for sweater, jacket, short or long sleeved shirt.



> Not saying that I'm for it of course, I mean, we might as well go all the way and bring back the tan shorts too.



I would prefer tan or brown to that urinal puck green thing we wear now....



> Way I see it I have too many sets of uniforms already. If you're worried about the public image of the CF, worry about hiding all the fat people first.



I think both go hand in hand.  Make a decent looking service dress and don't make it in sizes that fall in the obese range.


----------



## Edward Campbell (1 May 2005)

First, thanks Kevin, for some comprehensible thoughts on kit,  Many things which are second nature to you serving folks are a little remote for some of us retired old sweats and, I'm supposing, quite incomprehensible to civilians who read/post here.

My take on expensive operational clothing and equipment is that it is _*for*_ operations and, of course, for training and preparing for operations.  Notwithstanding its undoubted utility as a psychological _bonding_ tool, it â â€œ expensive operational clothing â â€œ is neither necessary not even well suited for vehicle maintenance, auditing travel expense claims, painting curbs or debugging computer software.

Of course computer programmers and clerks go on operations and they go to the ranges, too.  Of course *all* soldiers should have, and keep in good order, their operational uniforms and equipment and they *all* should use them a couple of times each year, at least, when they do their battle efficiency tests and their annual classifications.

I agree that cheap, easy care coveralls are the best things to wear for cleaning mud caked, greasy vehicles or painting the curbs blue, gold and black â â€œ everyone ought to have a set, including officers.  I agree that we need a neat, comfortable, easy care garrison dress â â€œ not just for clerks and computer people â â€œ and I agree with Infanteer that the USMC provides a useful model.  In my (outdated) experience, the American Marines managed to look smart in garrison and perform well in the field â â€œ it is, clearly, not beyond the wit of man.

I grew up in a 'system' when we had little in the way of specialized operational kit.  We improvised â â€œ and we _*acquired*_ bits of kit â â€œ approved or not â â€œ and modified the bejayzuz out of it until we had something that kept us reasonably warm and dry and kept our magazines, grenades and respirators handy.  Maybe we â â€œ you, actually â â€œ have gone too far in enforcing standardization (which may limit the flow of good ideas 'up' the chain from users to designers) and allowing operational kit to be used for administrative duties.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (1 May 2005)

When I was in Wpg, 17 Wing had an ensemble of dress.  Basically it worked out to those that spent 99% of their time in doors (see Puzzle Palace) wore a work dress while those that could spend time out side such as Base TN wore combats.


----------



## Garry (1 May 2005)

First off, I was one of those guys who wore coveralls. I was forced into it by my Tp WO- hated the idea, then once I used them loved it. His concept was that he could always get clean coveralls for his troops: getting combats cleaned was an iffy proposition. He was correct.

Coveralls are also cheap, tough, and great for a tank crew deployed.

I'm no longer a pointy end guy, and did my best to avoid getting CadPat issued. I failed. Having said that, though, I agree with the concept of one uniform. We will save big bucks by dropping all of the garrison dress, work dress, and any other dress. One (count them, only one) issue of DEU and we're away. Now to convince the PTB to never, ever wear DEU as a daily dress. 

One interesting piont on the wearing of cam clothing: most of the time, cam really doesn't do much. The wermacht (sp?) grey was about the best colour at disappearing. However, the same studies found that soldiers felt more "warrior" like in cam- and that alone is a good enough reason for buying it.

In all honesty, i didn't often wear what was issued anyways: coveralls in the summer, sweat gear and windpants in the winter. It always worked out fine.

Cheers-Garry


----------



## COBRA-6 (1 May 2005)

Well regardless of what I wear at my desk, which doesn't matter to me that much, (be it deu, work dress, combats, spandex cadpat bodysuit, etc...) we do need to improve what soldiers get issued for field gear. Out on ex this weekend in pet it was cold and wet, one thing I noticed a great deal of was stealth suit hoods protruding from combat shirts, why is this not an issued item?? Where is our new, lightweight goretex rain jacket? Why are we issued a bulky, sweaty, heavy field jacket instead of a windproof smock? And my sleeka jacket is warmer, lighter and more compressable than the issue fleece one...


----------



## TCBF (1 May 2005)

"If you're worried about the public image of the CF, worry about hiding all the fat people first."

Isn't that why we lost the tan uniform (Summer DEU), the best one ever issued? It was not a "fat friendly" uniform.

Why do we still wear Winter DEU in the summer?   I still have my 1976 issued CF Service Dress Tunic and Trousers.  An all -year uniform.  A lot lighter than the Winter DEUs we wear.

Coveralls:  Heavy Veh Maint Only, and not tactically.


----------



## Britney Spears (1 May 2005)

> why is this not an issued item??



It is, you're just not high speed enough.


----------



## COBRA-6 (1 May 2005)

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> It is, you're just not high speed enough.



Who gets it?


----------



## BillP (1 May 2005)

For field wear, modify the current combats, by incorporating some features from the Crye uniform! For garrison wear, just keep the existing combats as is! Since the CF buys cadpat by the mile to say the least, I say just keep it cadpat, but incorporate" trade specific "mods onto the uniform! 
 For LBV's/load carriage a PALS modular system is the simplest, and most cost effective solution! A basic carrier, with trade specific pouches issued as needed! Also modify the current frag vest, by adding pals webbing onto it, thus increasing the choices of load carriage; not the best but at least it's another choice! 
 Footwear. One design, done in 2 colours; a leather/cordura construction(Danner Acadia), non-gore-TeX boot in OD, and Tan, for operations in either temperate, or arid areas! 
 Get rid of that pos goretex field jacket, and replace it with a smock, stealth suit, fleece, sleeka-esque system instead! A more lighter, less bulkierand flexible clothing system is what's needed.
 Anything else has already been covered, just my $0.02 ;D


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (1 May 2005)

Brit I don't think you are correct.

With regards to the CF's I was my understanding that they polled the CF community as to which they liked more and green was the favorite.  I personally liked the green over the brown myself and there was a rumour that they were going to start making lighter CF's in green.


----------



## Britney Spears (1 May 2005)

> Brit I don't think you are correct.



You're not high speed enough either.  ;D

In <a href=http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/23363/post-142336.html#msg142336>this thread,</a> I asked:



> Last time I checked, 3VP  recce plt troops are issued stealth suits(maybe devil39 can confirm?),



To which *devil39* replied:



> They were issued there 7 years ago when I was in Recce 3 VP, I'm certain they still are now.



Followed by the inevitable diatribe about the "old army" and marching uphill both ways through a snowstorm wearing the old raingear with his C1 between his teeth......





Welcome to the boards,*Mike_R23A*, *CFL*. Many of your questions have already been answered in previous threads. Have you tried doing a search? It's on the upper left corner......


----------



## COBRA-6 (1 May 2005)

Stealth suits being issued to recce platoons is a far cry from being a standard issue item... recce aren't the only ones who work in the rain  

It's not like they're a technically complex or expensive item, though I'm sure if CTS got involved they soon would be...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (1 May 2005)

Well they aren't issued out to our recce platoon and I'm not about to search something I know not to be true.   The temperate hat is issued, the stealth suits are/were something that may only be 3VP recce specific.   Please don't bother with semantics either.   If someone from 3VP recce were to be posted to 2VP recce he wouldn't be wearing them.


----------



## Andyboy (1 May 2005)

Not "there" yet but this stuff is Canadian designed: http://www.militarymorons.com/gear/clothes.3.html

Made with fabric that is windproof, breathable, waterproof, insulating, wicking...seems pretty much perfect to me.


----------



## Britney Spears (1 May 2005)

> If someone from 3VP recce were to be posted to 2VP recce he wouldn't be wearing them.



Why's that?   ???


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (1 May 2005)

Because its not a general issue only specific to 3VP recce (not any other recce element per se).


----------



## Britney Spears (1 May 2005)

> Because its not a general issue only specific to 3VP recce (not any other recce element per se).



But that doesn't prevent any individual soldier, recce or not, in the 2nd battalion from wearing it.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (2 May 2005)

True you could wear them as long as they weren't visible.   Had they been an issued item you could wear them visibly.   Now you suggest that 3VP had them issued and therefore would imply that they could wear them as an outer which is not the case in other units as they aren't officially issued like a temperate glove, hat etc.


----------



## Britney Spears (2 May 2005)

Fair enough, although I  counter that no one would wear the stealth suit outside anyway, issued or not.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (2 May 2005)

So given the option you would wear it under a cmbt shirt vs over top?


----------



## Britney Spears (2 May 2005)

> Insert Quote
> So given the option you would wear it under a cmbt shirt vs over top?



Well, yes, since it was designed to be worn that way. Is this a trick question?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (2 May 2005)

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> I   counter that no one would wear the stealth suit outside anyway, issued or not.



This statement by you would indicate to me that you would understand it to be worn under the combat shirt.


----------



## Infanteer (2 May 2005)

That's how I wear mine.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (2 May 2005)

under or over


----------



## PPCLI MCpl (2 May 2005)

I've "counselled" several members of my company on their insistence to wear the stealth suit as an outer garment.  I emphasize that I am not concerned with uniformity, but rather I would hate to see their $120 piece of kit rendered useless by a sharp twig.


----------



## Infanteer (2 May 2005)

CFL said:
			
		

> under or over



Under my combat shirt - hence the term stealth suit.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (2 May 2005)

oh I thought it made you invisible.

Jackass.


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 May 2005)

Slightly off topic,

I just used the stealth suit for the first time. Amazing little piece of kit. I'm told I can get them in the RCR kitshop? Is there somewhere online I could order one of these as well? I have a few things comming up in may I'd like to use it for.

Saw a few guys wearing them out the outside, 2 of them need new tops now.


----------



## chrisf (2 May 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> I FAIL to understand why the reserves parade in Combats - what a waste - bring back workdress...



Why do we parade in combats? Because it's a utilitarian uniform, and it's versatile, don't know about other units, but personally, the only two real options for a uniform would either be combats or coveralls...

Since getting cadpat, I've destroyed 7 pairs of cadpat pants (Most were just completely worn out, though a couple were snagged on a rad truck and torn wide open) and 4 cadpat shirts. While admitedly, I seem to be far harder on uniforms then anyone else, and I also work more often then many reservists, you think work dress is going to stack up substantially better?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (2 May 2005)

The cmbt shirt is $46.85
the pants are $52.90


----------



## COBRA-6 (2 May 2005)

I paid way more than that, $120 each...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (2 May 2005)

thats for the cmbts not the stealth suit

The stealth suit pants and jacket are in the system (just to correct myself) but aren't a bulk issue.  Pants are $75.00, jacket $90.00


----------



## Matt_Fisher (2 May 2005)

TCBF said:
			
		

> Isn't that why we lost the tan uniform (Summer DEU), the best one ever issued?
> 
> Why do we still wear Winter DEU in the summer?     I still have my 1976 issued CF Service Dress Tunic and Trousers.   An all -year uniform.   A lot lighter than the Winter DEUs we wear.



I remember back in 1998/99 when the tan DEUs were abolished that an all-season midweight fabric version of the green DEU was to be introduced.  Nice to see that in 2005 absolutely nothing has been done in this initiative.


----------

