# New brown boots on trial?



## Jorkapp (4 Jun 2008)

Hi everyone,

In my adventures on the west coast, I've come across a few people wearing what look like desert boots, but are more of a brown colour than a tan colour. Some shreds of information I've acquired around here says that they are new boots on selective trial, which can be worn at all times (in garrison, in the field).

Anyone have any details on these? They look really nice.


----------



## McG (4 Jun 2008)

Who did you see wearing it?  I think I've seen the brown boot idea somewhere before .... ?


			
				Infanteer said:
			
		

> 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)





			
				Matt_Fisher said:
			
		

> 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.


and after much time has passed ... 


			
				Infanteer said:
			
		

> As for boots (it is part of the uniform) a standard, dark brown boot would have been nice; better than issuing 4-6 pairs of boots to guys.


I don't think a no-gloss brown or olive boot would be that bad either.


----------



## eurowing (4 Jun 2008)

Brown Pigskin Boots.  Several of my troops are wearing them as of today. I raised an eyebrow, but all I know is they are issued as a trial.  The question why is yet to come, but they look even more comfy than my temperate-wear metric sized boots.  

Edit = Before anyone asks, these are not the tan desert boot!


----------



## McG (4 Jun 2008)

Maybe the Air Force has decided it does not like the Army's boots.  I still think it a brown or green boot would be a good way to replace all the black boots.  Unlike green, a darker brown could be suited to both arid & temperate regions.


			
				Blackhorse7 said:
			
		

> I checked out a US Army site about their new uniform.   One of the comments in the FAQ area was that a black, polishable boot will no longer be issued.   Instead, desert type tan boots with the rough out leather will be issued.   Another comment was on the fact that black was found to be easily picked up by the eye in most conditions, hence it not being a color in the new uniform.   Perhaps the same reason for the change in boots?


Black alone is not so much the problem.  Shinny is a problem & contrast is a problem.  If the colour of the boot is a sharp contrast to the colours of the uniform, it will be more visible (consider the well distributed picture of a US soldier hidden on a couch except for his boots).  This is what leads us to a CADPAT boot being looked at in certain places.  However, a solid colour boot that is not in hard contrast to the a uniform colour should achieve the goal of camouflage.


----------



## luck881 (18 Jun 2008)

I love that picture!


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (18 Jun 2008)

Who makes them?  Are they cut like the WWB?


----------



## geo (18 Jun 2008)

Pigskin ???

Mmmm... that's going to be a popular piece of kit in Muslim countries 
I remember a couple of years ago where airlines were testing leather seats on their aircraft flying from NewDelhi to LA.... cowhide.... great accessory in Budhist company.


----------



## Redeye (18 Jun 2008)

I wonder if pigskin leather would be considered "haram" in Muslim countries.  I can't see it being so as it doesn't involve pigs after all.

As for leather, I don't think it's a problem for Hindus, they do raise cattle after all for milk, and I don't know of any prohibition on it but I'm intrigued enough that I will have to ask one of my coworkers who is of that persuasion.  Buddhism would have no real qualms about leather that I would know of, save for the fact that many Buddhists are vegetarian/vegan, but they don't really have a religious obligation to be so.


----------



## geo (18 Jun 2008)

Budhists.... they DID have a problem with COWhide
The airline revised it's policy and cancelled the leather seats.


----------



## Armymedic (18 Jun 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> Pigskin ???
> 
> Mmmm... that's going to be a popular piece of kit in Muslim countries


I take it American-style Football isn't a popular sport in Islamic countries?


----------



## dimsum (18 Jun 2008)

So the GPB, in brown?


----------



## Good2Golf (20 Jun 2008)

Haven't seen them...are they like a coyote brown?


----------



## medaid (20 Jun 2008)

I would like to know what it looks like first i.e. Picture. I think a brown or coyote or tan boot would look fine with both uniforms. Would like to see more like I said.


----------



## Ecco (20 Jun 2008)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> So the GPB, in brown?



Not really.  Air Force (CEMS) boots are all CSA grade 1 safety boot.  The GPB is not.  The CSA rating involves many things the Land Forces are not interested in, like (heavy) steel toes, (heavy) sole puncture protection, etc...  They are good protective boots, but not good walking or fighting boots.  Some Land Forces users who require safety boots (log types, engineers, etc) might get the AF safety boot eventually.  Convergence is a good thing when it makes sense.

CADPAT brown is the only color that is common to both TW and AR uniform.


----------



## wannabe SF member (20 Jun 2008)

Redeye said:
			
		

> I wonder if pigskin leather would be considered "haram" in Muslim countries.  I can't see it being so as it doesn't involve pigs after all.



No it wouldn't. The sin is to eat the meat or drink the blood of the pork for it is ocnsidered to be impure.
Nobody cares if a pair of boots are made os pigskin except maybe hardliners but then who cares!? 
They're the ones we fight against. ;D


----------



## McG (21 Jun 2008)

Ecco said:
			
		

> CADPAT brown is the only color that is common to both TW and AR uniform.


This colour would make more sense for the Temperate Combat Boot then.  I don't like the idea of a CADPAT boot, and at least with a solid colour there is a better chance of finding alternate commercial market boots that will pass the RSM test.


----------



## armyvern (21 Jun 2008)

The incongruous said:
			
		

> No it wouldn't. The sin is to eat the meat or drink the blood of the pork for it is ocnsidered to be impure.
> Nobody cares if a pair of boots are made os pigskin except maybe hardliners but then who cares!?
> They're the ones we fight against. ;D



Tangent.

Uhhmmmm well, to clarify: We don't fight against Muslims per se. We fight against terrorists, extremists, and the Taliban. They happen to be Muslims, but not all Muslims happen to be them.


----------



## Matt_Fisher (21 Jun 2008)

The incongruous said:
			
		

> No it wouldn't. The sin is to eat the meat or drink the blood of the pork for it is ocnsidered to be impure.
> Nobody cares if a pair of boots are made os pigskin except maybe hardliners but then who cares!?
> They're the ones we fight against. ;D



Rather than us offer conjecture on the subject, I'd be a bit more comfortable with a council of Canadian muslim scholars to issue a fatwa on whether a boot made from pig flesh would be acceptable for muslim CF members to wear.


----------



## wannabe SF member (22 Jun 2008)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Tangent.
> 
> Uhhmmmm well, to clarify: We don't fight against Muslims per se. We fight against terrorists, extremists, and the Taliban. They happen to be Muslims, but not all Muslims happen to be them.



I meant hardliners, not Muslims, I have nothing against Muslims, I'm Muslim .



			
				Matt_Fisher said:
			
		

> Rather than us offer conjecture on the subject, I'd be a bit more comfortable with a council of Canadian Muslim scholars to issue a fatwa on whether a boot made from pig flesh would be acceptable for muslim CF members to wear.



It wouldn't work well, there is no centralized administration for the religion, the so no one really could agree. Also, with Sunnis, Fatwa is considered to be an opinion and no one is obligated to follow it therefore Muslims would probably refer to their imams rather than to council. The answer would change from person to person but as I said before hardliners would likely be against it while more liberal authorities might deem it acceptable.


----------



## geo (25 Jun 2008)

T'was my point Incongruous...
You could make the boot in Cowhide and avoid some of the problems...


----------



## Bzzliteyr (25 Jun 2008)

We could use squirrel skins... lots of those around.. appearently Toronto has enough to start posing them, from what I heard on the news...


----------



## tango22a (25 Jun 2008)

They pose Hizzoner Da Mayuh of Moronto ....why not squirrels!!

tango22a


----------



## geo (25 Jun 2008)

Got a friend from the UK.  Was telling me that some eating establishments in London actualy serve Squirrel ...
heh... if they serve Dog in China and Korea.... who am I to judge


----------



## Redeye (25 Jun 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> Budhists.... they DID have a problem with COWhide
> The airline revised it's policy and cancelled the leather seats.



So I asked one of my Hindu coworkers and they do indeed frown on leather - at least - they avoid it where alternatives are available, and never bring it into temples or shrines.  Interesting religion it is.


----------



## Redeye (25 Jun 2008)

Squirrel is pretty common in parts of the US too - I seem to recall my wife (who's from Georgia) telling me that the traditional recipe for a common dish where she's from would include squirrel meat.  Never had it myself though.


----------



## geo (26 Jun 2008)

heh... travel to Newfie & you,d be familiar with "seal flipper pie"


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Jun 2008)

Redeye said:
			
		

> Squirrel is pretty common in parts of the US too - I seem to recall my wife (who's from Georgia) telling me that the traditional recipe for a common dish where she's from would include squirrel meat.  Never had it myself though.



The only place I've seen an actual hunting season for squirrel in Canada is southern Ontario. That's only for grey and black though. The red squirrel is protected, IICR. None here anyway, they're all up north. They greys grow big here and I grew up hunting and eating them. It's not as common as it used to be, but there's still plenty of people here that take them.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Jun 2008)

tango22a said:
			
		

> They pose Hizzoner Da Mayuh of Moronto ....why not squirrels!!
> 
> tango22a



Your right. Miller is a poser.


----------



## dimsum (20 Aug 2008)

Today I could have sworn I saw someone wearing the boots on trial.  I thought it was a desert boot too, but it was darker and the person was wearing a flying suit (of course, he could be getting ready to deploy.)  Anyone in the know on how the trial is going...and if I should wait a little bit on exchanging my spare Mk IIIs/Aircrew boots?


----------



## McG (20 Aug 2008)

So .... do brown boots have the Look Cool Factor going for them?


----------



## dimsum (20 Aug 2008)

Didn't really stand around and stare, but they looked to me like brown GPBs/CWWBs.


----------



## Loachman (20 Aug 2008)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Today I could have sworn I saw someone wearing the boots on trial.  I thought it was a desert boot too, but it was darker and the person was wearing a flying suit (of course, he could be getting ready to deploy.)  Anyone in the know on how the trial is going...and if I should wait a little bit on exchanging my spare Mk IIIs/Aircrew boots?



Some of us have Magnum desert boots, and those occasionally come in a significantly darker shade for some reason. Both of my pairs are very light, but another fellow from my bunch just got the darker ones. Leather, nylon, and eyelet paint all match on each pair, ie the eyelet paint is either light or dark according to the colour of the boot.


----------



## armyvern (21 Aug 2008)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Today I could have sworn I saw someone wearing the boots on trial.  I thought it was a desert boot too, but it was darker and the person was wearing a flying suit (of course, he could be getting ready to deploy.)  Anyone in the know on how the trial is going...and if I should wait a little bit on exchanging my spare Mk IIIs/Aircrew boots?



There are various boots on trial right now. One of which is coloured "Cadpat Brown". It's a darker shade tan than the desert boots. It's ("Cadpat Brown") the only colour that is common to both the Cadpat TW uniform and our Cadpat AR uniform.

Hmmmm. One boot - in a colour common to both uniforms ... could that perhaps cut down on the number of pairs of boots we all have to cart around with us?

Just saying is all ...


----------



## dimsum (21 Aug 2008)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Hmmmm. One boot - in a colour common to both uniforms ... could that perhaps cut down on the number of pairs of boots we all have to cart around with us?
> 
> Just saying is all ...



Agreed...if I took out all the different CF footwear I had I'd look like Imelda Marcos, and I'm pretty sure most would say the same.  If I could only somehow turn in my Mk IIIs and most of my pesky CADPAT items of clothing that are just taking up space in my closet.   :


----------



## Matt_Fisher (21 Aug 2008)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> It's ("Cadpat Brown") the only colour that is common to both the Cadpat TW uniform and our Cadpat AR uniform.



If you look at the DSSPM specs, there is actually no brown colour that is common to both patterns:

According to _DSSPM 2-2-80-500 Specification for CADPAT (TW)  [Canadian Disruptive Pattern (Temperate Woodland)]_
CADPAT TW Brown CIE LAB 1976 co-ordinates for illuminant C, 2° observer are:
L*  36.5
a*  4.6
b*  14.5

According to _DSSPM 2-2-80-501 Specification for CADPAT (AR) [Canadian Disruptive Pattern (Arid)]_
CADPAT AR Brown CIE LAB 1976 co-ordinates for illuminant C, 2° observer are:
L*  34 
a*  7
b*  13

For more information, well beyond my limited scope of intelligence, on the CIE system, look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lab_color_space

As there are different CIE numbers assigned to 'Brown' for CADPAT TW and AR respectively, these are two different browns.  Unless DSSPM is going to change the specs for the CADPAT patterns, the 'Common Brown' boot will be uncommon to both, or either pattern;  Instead, it may be more of a 'Compromise Brown'  ;D


----------



## OldSolduer (21 Aug 2008)

But do they come in thigh high variations Vern???? :


----------



## geo (21 Aug 2008)

only by special order for special soldiers Oldsolduer


----------



## armyvern (23 Aug 2008)

Matt_Fisher said:
			
		

> Instead, it may be more of a 'Compromise Brown'  ;D



...

I just know they're being called "cadpat brown" ... and besides, the colour brown in my cadpat is different from the guy's right next to me at work - depending upon how many wash cycles they've been through.


----------



## geo (23 Aug 2008)

x80 said:
			
		

> I was at the Rideau Center around lunch time today and saw an AF Major wearing a pair of brown suede boots...



FWIW, wasn't there a regulation about not wearing the desert boots within Canada.... xcept, I guess, the troops who are currently preparing to deploy & who are wearing AR Cadpat?


----------



## McG (23 Aug 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> FWIW, wasn't there a regulation about not wearing the desert boots within Canada....


I suspect this brown Air Force boot may be a temperate weather thing.


----------



## aesop081 (23 Aug 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> FWIW, wasn't there a regulation about not wearing the desert boots within Canada....



The policy prohibits the wear of the wear of desert boots by anyone, anywhere that are not deployed or preparing to deploy to TFA or CM. I've been dealing with this issue for some time now since i was told that the Mojave Desert was not "desert" enough.



			
				MCG said:
			
		

> I suspect this brown Air Force boot may be a temperate weather thing.



It is indeed and a new hot weather boots in upcoming as well.


----------



## armyvern (23 Aug 2008)

One little clarification ...

"not to be worn by anyone who is not preparing to deploy on international operations" (not limited to operations in TFA or CM ... we have personnel on other international ops as well who wear the desert boots).


----------



## aesop081 (23 Aug 2008)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> we have personnel on other international ops as well who wear the desert boots).



I agree Vern, however, the document i was presented with only included TFA and CM specificaly.


----------



## armyvern (23 Aug 2008)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> I agree Vern, however, the document i was presented with only inluded TFA and CM specificaly.



And, I think that it was I who sent you that ref that they held against you.  8)  But, you know my thoughts on it already. Imagine -- not being able to wear desert boots ... in the desert; any desert.  :


----------



## aesop081 (23 Aug 2008)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Imagine -- not being able to wear desert boots ... in the desert; any desert.  :



Yeah...i love arbitrary policies  :


----------



## medaid (23 Aug 2008)

So...if I'm reading this correctly... Mojave is NOT considered desert boots?


----------



## armyvern (23 Aug 2008)

MedTech said:
			
		

> So...if I'm reading this correctly... Mojave is NOT considered desert boots?



"... deploy on international _*operations*_" ... so, no, I guess you're not.  :-\


----------



## Franko (24 Aug 2008)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Imagine -- not being able to wear desert boots ... in the desert; any desert.  :



Even Texas....      :

Regards


----------



## Soldier1stTradesman2nd (24 Aug 2008)

One of the first times posting on this forum, but I have been following the posts for some time now.

While not directly related to the discussion about boots, or boot colour specifically, here's a link to a recent CTV special on pre-depl training and the troops from Pet going over for the next ROTO.

http://watch.ctv.ca/news/top-picks/preparing-for-afghanistan/#clip83603

Note the varying standards in uniform AND short glimpses of guys wearing tan chest rigs (mixed in with others wearing TW tac vests over AR uniforms). Great to see that troops are allowed to train with the kit they are going to use overseas ... but then the issues with desert - no desert boots during pre-depl training in arid conditions such as Texas.  I don't get it.  Any comments from guys/gals actually going over for the next roto?  I'd hate to speculate based on news footage while being stuck in the NCR and not seeing it for myself.


----------



## Franko (27 Aug 2008)

Soldier1stTradesman2nd said:
			
		

> One of the first times posting on this forum, but I have been following the posts for some time now.
> 
> While not directly related to the discussion about boots, or boot colour specifically, here's a link to a recent CTV special on pre-depl training and the troops from Pet going over for the next ROTO.
> 
> ...



All that video featured in that clip was in theater and not of pre-deployment training.

Regards


----------



## Soldier1stTradesman2nd (27 Aug 2008)

Crap. You're right. The link only gives the first clip (with archival footage and current JTF-A comd) in a series of CTV specials from Pet on the day I found it. The clip I was referring to showed troops either in Pet or Texas, both in TW and AR combats firing weapons, walking on dirt paths in the training area and talking about their training (some wearing TW combats with tan chest rigs). I will try to find the proper link (CTV video on demand is tough to navigate when you're looking for something specific), unless someone knows where to find it.

Sorry about the confusion.


----------



## Matt_Fisher (23 Sep 2008)

I guess I get the scoop on who's put up the first pics of the new Boots, Combat, Hot Weather, Brown (Army) NSN: 8430-20-004-1013.












The colour is referred to in the tender as 'DND Brown', and is a full grain, chrome tanned, nubuck finish leather that is intended to be maintained by brushing only (no mention is made whether you can use any boot dressing compounds).

The sole is brown rubber to match the leather.  Good luck on getting these resoled commercially, with a brown replacement sole.   :











Boot is lined with Aerospacer 3D mesh, same as what the current Boot, Combat General Purpose, and the current issued Hot Weather Boot use, except that it will be chocolate brown.






As per the Boot, Combat General Purpose (commonly incorrectly referred to as the Mk IV Combat Boot), and the current issued Hot Weather Boot, this boot will have the 'dreaded' Heel Counter Pocket Lining, which has caused foot problems among a significant percentage of users.


----------



## armyvern (23 Sep 2008)

Surprise.  :

Footwear allowance. Dammit.

Why does the CF continue to waste the Taxpayers funds by buying boots which do not work for the troops ... which means they then sit on the shelf, not being issued (costing money in warehousing space, stkg, etc etc) because the troops will STILL buy thier own damn boots that actually work?

A single pattern of footwear which they intend to "force" tens of thousands of "structurally different" feet into *WILL NEVER WORK*. It didn't with bras ---- and it won't with boots, no matter how much they insist it will. What a damn waste of money.

They know there's a problem with feet, back, knees ... that's why we keep getting new friggin styles of boots every 18 damn months --- BUT they've yet to address the actual problem - solved with a simple footwear allowance so that the troops can buy (finally!!) what works for their own set of unique feet. 

And, the circle continues --- no lessons learned. And that, has got to be a hell of a lot cheaper in the grand scheme of things.

 :brickwall:


----------



## medaid (23 Sep 2008)

Matt_Fisher said:
			
		

> I guess I get the scoop on who's put up the first pics of the new Boots, Combat, Hot Weather, Brown (Army) NSN: 8430-20-004-1013.
> 
> The colour is referred to in the tender as 'DND Brown', and is a full grain, chrome tanned, nubuck finish leather that is intended to be maintained by brushing only (no mention is made whether you can use any boot dressing compounds).
> 
> ...




Let the blistering... begin!


----------



## geo (23 Sep 2008)

While, I'd go so far as having someone like Logistik or anyone else who deals with boots provide a Logistik kind of service, it won't work cause, you really & truly need to try those boots on before giving your okie dokie to the clerk.

A boot allowance - pay for it & claim with support of bill, for an amount not exceeding $xxx.00 every year OR every other year

Just like for that darned combat bra


----------



## medaid (23 Sep 2008)

OMG... those boots are HIDEOUS! Yes... I prefer a slight bit of fashion sense when wearing uniform items as well... so sue me 


But egads!


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (23 Sep 2008)

MedTech said:
			
		

> OMG... those boots are HIDEOUS! Yes...



My first thought also, ...or was it that they looked like the quality I might buy at a "EVERYTHING ONE DOLLAR" foot place?

Maybe easier to live with 'live' though......


----------



## TDeV (23 Sep 2008)

I think they look great; like more rugged GPBs. I just hope they have the same clunky weight distribution and that they fit nicely into my combat overboots.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (23 Sep 2008)

MedTech said:
			
		

> OMG... *those boots are HIDEOUS*! Yes... I prefer a slight bit of fashion sense when wearing uniform items as well... so sue me
> 
> But egads!



Maybe its the start of a trend, considering the look of the kit coming out of the NICE Project.

From the pictures, the soles are the same as the Hot Weather Boots the Navy is going to (maybe) get.

Why would they continue to use this heel if it is not working for the majority of people? (which I am betting is the same heel they are using in the Air Force TCBs as well that caused me trouble)


----------



## George Wallace (23 Sep 2008)

TDeV said:
			
		

> I think they look great; like more rugged GPBs. I just hope they have the same clunky weight distribution and that they fit nicely into my combat overboots.



It is one thing to have a really mean looking pair of boots sitting on the shelf, but a whole different story when it comes to a boot that will fit well and cause little damage to feet during extended periods in the Field and on the March.  

Are these going to be "Boots for Show, or Boots for Wear"?


----------



## medaid (23 Sep 2008)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Are these going to be "Boots for Show, or Boots for Wear"?



I'd like to see these as Boots for GONE. I hate them... the fact that it's ugly and bares resemblance to all of its predecessors of WWB, GPB has NOTHING to do with that fact...


----------



## geo (23 Sep 2008)

TDeV said:
			
		

> I just hope they have the same clunky weight distribution and that they fit nicely into my combat overboots.



You wear the galoshes ... guess you don't go in the field very often.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (23 Sep 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> You wear the galoshes ... guess you don't go in the field very often.



They were good in a Sqn harbour with sneakers in them  ;D


----------



## geo (23 Sep 2008)

I rest my case


----------



## TDeV (23 Sep 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> You wear the galoshes ... guess you don't go in the field very often.



Ha nobody detected my sarcasm?


----------



## geo (23 Sep 2008)

Sarcasm ???
Wazzat ?

with that blank profile, you could very well be a purple trade that uses the darned things


----------



## armyvern (24 Sep 2008)

MedTech said:
			
		

> I'd like to see these as Boots for GONE. I hate them... the fact that it's ugly and bares resemblance to all of its predecessors of WWB, GPB has NOTHING to do with that fact...



Personally, I didn't join the Ford or Elite modelling agency when I signed my contract - I don't give two shits about how our kit looks; we are NOT in a fashion show. And people who believe we are really irritate the hell out of me. First & foremost - out kit MUST be functional, looks are secondary.

I give a shit that, however they may look, that they WORK and that they do NOT hurt our soldiers feet. That'll never happen with the CF no matter how "cool", "hot", "awesome", "pretty" - thus covering the "LCF" - as long as it's all one style. 

We can buy the prettiest & most expensive set of boots out there for the CF contract, with the most-_awesomest_ LCF on the entire planet - that will not/can not/and never will FIX the problem.


----------



## medaid (24 Sep 2008)

My comment aboout looks was directed at the fact that they LOOK exactly like the WWB and GPB, which in honesty didn't work and part of it is attributed to the way they are designed, hence look. 

I could give less of a damn about looks if the kit we're issued would just WORK in the first place. 

Besides, the prettiest kit sometimes doesn't stand up to the test of use anyways.


----------



## McG (24 Sep 2008)

MedTech said:
			
		

> OMG... those boots are HIDEOUS! Yes... I prefer a slight bit of fashion sense when wearing uniform items as well... so sue me





			
				MedTech said:
			
		

> My comment aboout looks was directed at the fact that they LOOK exactly like the WWB and GPB, which in honesty didn't work and part of it is attributed to the way they are designed, hence look.
> 
> I could give less of a damn about looks if the kit we're issued would just WORK in the first place.
> 
> Besides, the prettiest kit sometimes doesn't stand up to the test of use anyways.


You claim that your concern is function, but you've based your argument on aesthetics.  Have you ever worn these boots?  Do you know anyone who has worn these boots?  The boots were trialed by soldiers participating in the 3 RCR BG exercise in Ft Bliss (though the trial boot was tan) and accepted based on the trial results.  I'm not going to try and suggest that any one make of boot will meet the requirement of most users, because I don't belive this is true.  However, if soldiers were able to wear these boots in the field for the length of the exercise and then come out saying they were happy with them, then maybe the boot is right for many users (which is about as good as any one make of boot is going to get).  Before we get too busy judging the boots' functionality (or LCF) based on a few pictures, maybe we could hear from somebody who has worn them?


----------



## armyvern (25 Sep 2008)

MedTech said:
			
		

> My comment aboout looks was directed at the fact that they LOOK exactly like the WWB and GPB, which in honesty didn't work and part of it is attributed to the way they are designed, hence look.
> 
> I could give less of a damn about looks if the kit we're issued would just WORK in the first place.
> 
> Besides, the prettiest kit sometimes doesn't stand up to the test of use anyways.



Understood, but your comment was the beginning of my rant - you honestly would not believe just how many troops we see in a day who are all about the LCF rather than functionality. It's pretty freakin' sad.


----------



## 1feral1 (25 Sep 2008)

Matt_Fisher said:
			
		

> I guess I get the scoop on who's put up the first pics of the new Boots, Combat, Hot Weather, Brown (Army) NSN: 8430-20-004-1013.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Matt, thanks for the pics.

These have a hint of Aussie dysfunctionlisms built in.  Cripplers, Mk IV, but I should shut my sausage roll-hole pending wearer critique. 

Why do we (the CF) not buy an already proven boot off the shelves, or make it under a copyright licence.

OWDU


----------



## armyvern (25 Sep 2008)

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> Why do we (the CF) not buy an already proven boot off the shelves, or make it under a copyright licence.
> 
> OWDU



Because some would say "Danners are proven and are the best" and some would say "Magnums are proven and are the best", and some would say "Swats are proven and are the best" ... etc etc etc ad nauseum.

The best for their own feet maybe, but as someone who works clothing stores --- not even with those "proven" boots is there a boot that works for the majority. Fact is that what works for one does not work for the next guy - no matter how well it works for the soldier before him.

A boot allowance, so that our soldiers can buy a "proven boot that works for them personally" (whatever manufacturer that "proven" boot happens to be for that individual) is the ONLY way to fix the footwear issue and avoid further injury to our troops' feet, knees, backs etc.


----------



## medaid (25 Sep 2008)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Understood, but your comment was the beginning of my rant - you honestly would not believe just how many troops we see in a day who are all about the LCF rather than functionality. It's pretty freakin' sad.



I understand  I get my fair share too  and I'm guilty of that as well


----------



## 1feral1 (25 Sep 2008)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> A boot allowance, so that our soldiers can buy a "proven boot that works for them personally" (whatever manufacturer that "proven" boot happens to be for that individual) is the ONLY way to fix the footwear issue and avoid further injury to our troops' feet, knees, backs etc.



That is an excellent idea. Here, we get over $500 per annum as a uniform allowance, and we are already allowed to wear 3 types of non-issue dessert boots.

On top of this we get an additional $10,000+ as a service allowance, then our salary, plus other allowances if applicable.

As long as the boots are of the same colour and approved why not do this.

OWDU


----------



## George Wallace (25 Sep 2008)

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> Matt, thanks for the pics.
> 
> These have a hint of Aussie dysfunctionlisms built in.  Cripplers, Mk IV, but I should shut my sausage roll-hole pending wearer critique.
> 
> ...



Wes

The bottom photo shows the part of the boot, that is also found in the GP Boot, that has a tendency to not just blister your heals, but literally tear the flesh to pieces.


----------



## Bzzliteyr (25 Sep 2008)

Wes, you must stop making sense... the scary men will show up at your home and make you disappear.


----------

