# CAF uniforms don't have sizes for fit guys



## Rocky Mountains (5 Jul 2014)

upandatom said:
			
		

> The shirts arent made decently, a Tailors wont "tailor" the shirt. Being tall, broad shoulders and neck, small waist, the shirts fit like a cheap quality poncho and bunch up at the waist. (Not everyone with a 46" chest in the CF is a rolly polly olly mofo)



I was like "broad at the shoulder and narrow at the hip."  I used to wonder whether the Forces actually employed anyone who fit the profile presented by the shirt.  I used to sew out a inch or two strip on each side.  I think someone told me it was a hanging offense but the muffin top looked silly.


----------



## wannabe SF member (6 Jul 2014)

Rocky Mountains said:
			
		

> I was like "broad at the shoulder and narrow at the hip."  I used to wonder whether the Forces actually employed anyone who fit the profile presented by the shirt.  I used to sew out a inch or two strip on each side.  I think someone told me it was a hanging offense but the muffin top looked silly.



Last year, I bought myself shirt stays and I never looked back. It does the job decently and eliminated the muffin top look.

Only problem is that It makes anyone look like they're wearing a Moulin Rouge get-up whenever the trousers come off.


----------



## upandatom (8 Jul 2014)

Rocky Mountains said:
			
		

> I was like "broad at the shoulder and narrow at the hip."  I used to wonder whether the Forces actually employed anyone who fit the profile presented by the shirt.  I used to sew out a inch or two strip on each side.  I think someone told me it was a hanging offense but the muffin top looked silly.



That V, I forget what one it is, Endo, Ecto, Enzomorph body type. But yes, its ridiculous. looks like a bag of left handed hammers, especially taking off your tunic at the mess after a function and this disaster of wrinkles and just awful size and fit.

I had mine tailored to fit, it was noted, and i was promptly marched in front of the RSM to explain why mine was different and actually fit. yeah....


----------



## George Wallace (8 Jul 2014)

Seriously?  If you take off your tunic in the Mess, who really cares?


----------



## Loachman (8 Jul 2014)

At least one person, apparently.

Considering that tunics and trousers often need tailoring to fit properly, and nobody (that I've encountered, at least) questions that, making a fuss about a decently-fitting shirt has to be an extremely high (or low) degree of a-holiness.


----------



## chrisf (8 Jul 2014)

My head transitions pretty much straight to shoulders with minimal neck... It's a problem  common to all shirts, not just cf shirts.

I had one long sleeve shirt and one short sleeve shirt tailored, I think it cost me $5 each at the local suit store (they had a staff tailor and he was quite used to doing tapered shirts)

I think it might have taken five minutes, he had it done before I was finished browsing the sale rack.


----------



## McG (8 Jul 2014)

In the civi world, you would never buy a suit based solely on the three measurements of waist, chest and height to shoulders (and even there the jacket does not make use of the waist measurement).  I wonder if we could reduce CAF tailoring costs by having LogisticUnicorps ship uniforms sized to include more measurements.


----------



## FSTO (8 Jul 2014)

I take my shirts and pants to a tailor as soon as they arrive from Logistik. I can well afford the cost since the clothing are provided for "free".

I know of a Commander who has all his shirts and pants tailor made. He refuses to wear Logistik crap as he calls it.


----------



## Journeyman (8 Jul 2014)

Loachman said:
			
		

> ....making a fuss about a decently-fitting shirt has to be an extremely high (or low) degree of a-holiness.





			
				a Sig Op said:
			
		

> I had one long sleeve shirt and one short sleeve shirt tailored, I think it cost me $5 each  .....I think it might have taken five minutes...





			
				FSTO said:
			
		

> I take my shirts and pants to a tailor as soon as they arrive from Logistik. I can well afford the cost  since the clothing are provided for "free".



I think you're missing the OP's point, which to paraphrase:


> :tempertantrum:


No, for the sake of $5 tailoring we should change the system.  





			
				MCG said:
			
		

> I wonder if we could reduce CAF tailoring costs by having LogisticUnicorps ship uniforms sized to include more measurements.


I'm _guessing_, but I suspect that for the overwhelming number of CAF pers, what comes out of the box is "good enough."  It's rarely a 'dress of the day' for most people, given that for even the majority of our higher HQs it's deemed more effective to wear the butts out of CADPAT, Flight suits, Navy blue//black uniform (?).  So for 'LogistUni' to stockpile additional uniforms to fit additional measurements, when it seems like it's become a Remembrance Day/New Years Levee order of dress, would add to our already wastefully spent clothing/badge budget.
    :2c:


----------



## Transporter (8 Jul 2014)

The long sleeve dress shirt is a disaster. If you don't want to be choked to death by the collar, you have to go with a size that makes it look like you're wearing a f****** moomoo. The shirt pockets are almost in your armpits and that's just for a 17" neck size, which for me allows for a bit of shrinkage to the 16.5" I normally wear. And don't get me started on the high-waisted, wide-legged DEU pants or the maternity wear looking gabardine.


----------



## FSTO (8 Jul 2014)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I'm _guessing_, but I suspect that for the overwhelming number of CAF pers, what comes out of the box is "good enough."  It's rarely a 'dress of the day' for most people, given that for even the majority of our higher HQs it's deemed more effective to wear the butts out of CADPAT, Flight suits, Navy blue//black uniform (?).  So for 'LogistUni' to stockpile additional uniforms to fit additional measurements, when it seems like it's become a Remembrance Day/New Years Levee order of dress, would add to our already wastefully spent clothing/badge budget.
> :2c:



There is no reason at all for higher HQ's to be wearing operational clothing in the office. That clothing is the most expensive in our inventory and should only be worn when flying, in the field or when at sea. And I don't believe for a second it makes you more operationally focused in the office. If our people can't do their jobs unless they wear a certain article of clothing then we have bigger problems.


----------



## dapaterson (8 Jul 2014)

FSTO said:
			
		

> There is no reason at all for higher HQ's to be wearing operational clothing in the office. That clothing is the most expensive in our inventory and should only be worn when flying, in the field or when at sea. And I don't believe for a second it makes you more operationally focused in the office. If our people can't do their jobs unless they wear a certain article of clothing then we have bigger problems.


This times one thousand.  

I wonder how many folks in operational dress in cubicle farms would DAG green tomorrow?


----------



## Dipstick (9 Jul 2014)

FSTO said:
			
		

> ...and should only be worn when flying, in the field or when at sea.



One of the featured RIMPAC images I saw today was of two officers (a Lt(N) and LCdr) touring the Battleship Missouri Memorial in NCD with ball cap. It's even getting to the Navy.

That said, Logistik clothes are pretty terrible. I'm not even all that fit, and the shirts still billow off of me. I'm starting to see USN and RN shirts, and handmade or heavily altered ones everywhere. It seems more and more people who have to wear this stuff every day are getting frustrated. In fact, I believe the official portrait of the Commander RCN depicts a fancy french-cuffed shirt under his jacket.


----------



## upandatom (9 Jul 2014)

As much as the DEUs are a disaster, the Combat sizing is as well. 

A 4" gap in sizes? sooo if your a 36" waist (comfortable fitting) your either going to get some MC Hammer parachute Pants, or some Tour De France Tights, 

Same goes for the length, way to long or way to short 

Shirts, even more WTF is going on. 

No matter what the sizes are different, it may say a 3644 on every pair of pants, But Every pair fits differently. 

I undestand we need to try to keep costs down, as stated with the More sizes from Logistik, but this is Day to Day wear for Many service members. Better Quality Control, and more sizing is needed for this.


----------



## PuckChaser (9 Jul 2014)

My DEU needs minimal tailoring, however I get a combat moomoo for my CADPAT shirts. Apparently if you have long arms, you're supposed to weigh 270 lbs too.


----------



## Pat in Halifax (9 Jul 2014)

I wouldn't call myself a rolly polly olly mofo but for some inexplicable reason, my girth, chest and neck have increased slightly in the last 5 years.(???) I think Logistik is restricted to using a fixed amount of material regardless of size requirement. I one case, the XLarge t shirt seems slightly smaller around as the medium only longer but for the dress shirts, I have noticed by hanging them side by side on a hanger that a 19" neck ss shirt is shorter than a 17" one. Now I am going to have to wear my belt up over my belly button like all good Navy Chiefs!!

Pat


----------



## McG (9 Jul 2014)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I'm _guessing_, but I suspect that for the overwhelming number of CAF pers, what comes out of the box is "good enough."  It's rarely a 'dress of the day' for most people, given that for even the majority of our higher HQs it's deemed more effective to wear the butts out of CADPAT, Flight suits, Navy blue//black uniform (?).  So for 'LogistUni' to stockpile additional uniforms to fit additional measurements, when it seems like it's become a Remembrance Day/New Years Levee order of dress, would add to our already wastefully spent clothing/badge budget.


I don't know if more sizes on shelfs would be the way to execute.  Maybe pants are not hemmed and sleeves not attached to jackets until an order is placed.  Tailoring still happens but it it happens in a big LUCorps sweatshop with economies of scale.

But maybe it is moot.  I suspect you are correct that the real savings already happen with the majority of pers accepting whatever size (regardless of best fit) comes out of the box. Then again, if we had uniforms that fit, maybe office dwelling staff would be more inclined to wear them.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (9 Jul 2014)

Dont necessarily go blaming this on Logistik. 

We had the same problems in my days and it was pre-Logistik's era.

We used to joke that there were three sizes in the CF: Too big, Too small and Mistake (it fits)


----------



## McG (9 Jul 2014)

They deliver what the government tells them to deliver.  It is DND where the sizes are determined.


----------



## Transporter (9 Jul 2014)

MCG said:
			
		

> Then again, if we had uniforms that fit, maybe office dwelling staff would be more inclined to wear them.



Agree 100%.


----------



## 211RadOp (9 Jul 2014)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> We used to joke that there were three sizes in the CF: Too big, Too small and Mistake (it fits)


I thought they were: Too big, too small and not in stock.  Now I'm confused  ???


----------



## Strike (9 Jul 2014)

You guys are complaining about the shirts?  What about the DEU pants that the women are stuck with?  It doesn't matter what size you get, the hip size is 10 inches bigger than the waist size, which needs to be worn up to the bottom of one's bra.  If not then you risk looking like you're wearing Jeanie/MC Hammer pants.  Many of us have to get our docs changed every year so we can order male pants.


----------



## Transporter (9 Jul 2014)

MC Hammer or Urkel... tough call  ;D


----------



## upandatom (10 Jul 2014)

Strike said:
			
		

> You guys are complaining about the shirts?  What about the DEU pants that the women are stuck with?  It doesn't matter what size you get, the hip size is 10 inches bigger than the waist size, which needs to be worn up to the bottom of one's bra.  If not then you risk looking like you're wearing Jeanie/MC Hammer pants.  Many of us have to get our docs changed every year so we can order male pants.



Those Pleats in them are dead sexy too. I heard they could be replacing the Skirt with some Acid Wash super high waisted Jorts to match the era the pants were designed in.


----------



## exgunnertdo (10 Jul 2014)

Strike said:
			
		

> You guys are complaining about the shirts?  What about the DEU pants that the women are stuck with?  It doesn't matter what size you get, the hip size is 10 inches bigger than the waist size, which needs to be worn up to the bottom of one's bra.  If not then you risk looking like you're wearing Jeanie/MC Hammer pants.  Many of us have to get our docs changed every year so we can order male pants.



Hey, Strike - have you been on Logistik lately?  There are women's flat front pants now.  They're not amazing, but they are a million times better than the pleated things.  They don't sit nearly as high on the waist as the pleated ones.  Pleated are also available for those that like them


----------



## Navy_Pete (10 Jul 2014)

Inky said:
			
		

> Last year, I bought myself shirt stays and I never looked back. It does the job decently and eliminated the muffin top look.
> 
> Only problem is that It makes anyone look like they're wearing a Moulin Rouge get-up whenever the trousers come off.



That's a good idea, I always look like my willpower loses fights with gallon buckets of ice cream.

Found an alternate; http://magnetuck.com/products/magnetuck

Might be kind of a high roller option, but not really confident the LU socks would hold up to shirt stays


----------



## trustnoone73 (13 Jul 2014)

MCG said:
			
		

> In the civi world, you would never buy a suit based solely on the three measurements of waist, chest and height to shoulders (and even there the jacket does not make use of the waist measurement).



I believe there are four measurements for all CF shirts/tunics.  Waist, chest, height to shoulders, and sum of all three added to the belly.  For pants there is only one measurement.  Inseam/waist.  They shall be the same.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (13 Jul 2014)

MCG said:
			
		

> In the civi world, you would never buy a suit based solely on the three measurements of waist, chest and height to shoulders (and even there the jacket does not make use of the waist measurement).  I wonder if we could reduce CAF tailoring costs by having LogisticUnicorps ship uniforms sized to include more measurements.



Actually, there are three measurements that are sufficient. However, I'll qualify that by saying I don't know which three they are.

Background:

I was purchasing Mess kit from Claymore (many years ago). They sent me a sheet that had about nineteen different measurement questions. I took it to my local men's store (Freeds) and asked the tailor to help fill it out. He took three measurements and wrote them on the sheet, then gave it back to me.

I asked about the empty questions and he stated: "Anyone that considers themselves a true tailor only needs those three measurements."

I sent it off to Claymore with some trepidation. A few weeks later I had my Mess kit and it fit absolutely perfect.


----------



## McG (13 Jul 2014)

CF pants are waiste and height to shoulders.  CAF jackets are chest and height to shoulders. Those are not adequate for a proper fit.  Height to shoulders is only relevant for gaberdines, ball gowns and prison jump suits.  Get measured for a suit and you are looking at waiste and at least one of inseam or height to waist, then for the jacket it is at least chest, waist to shoulders and sleeve length.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (13 Jul 2014)

MCG said:
			
		

> CF pants are waiste and height to shoulders.  CAF jackets are chest and height to shoulders. Those are not adequate for a proper fit.  Height to shoulders is only relevant for gaberdines, ball gowns and prison jump suits.  Get measured for a suit and you are looking at waiste and at least one of inseam or height to waist, then for the jacket it is at least chest, waist to shoulders and sleeve length.



So you're saying that my 80 year old Italian tailor is wrong?

Oh, well. I'm not going to argue it. Believe what you will.

I, also, still wear that three measurement Mess kit and it looks just as good as anything anyone else wears. Nineteen\ three measurements or not


----------



## McG (14 Jul 2014)

I've haven't seen resumes, passports or birth-certificates to compare anecdotes, but I've been to master tailors and I've been to Moore's - all take more than three measurements even to just pick from what is pre made. I have a friend who has researched this and concluded five measurements would be the minimum to ensure fit of both pants and jacket ... A quick google search seems to corroborate this with the hits demanding either 5 to 6 measurements or 15 to 20+ measurements.  From my own very limited exposure to anthropometric design (engineering things so they will fit and be usable by people), I know that waist is not an invariable predictor of chest, and that neither height, inseam, nor sleeve length invariably predicts one of the others.

I'm not suggesting your old Italian is the only guy who knows his trade.  Maybe you exist on the centre of every bell-curve of human proportions - you fit all the assumptions a tailor would make given less information.  If your guy is as good as you believe, he could probably see this (much as you can look at a crest line and see the number of fighting vehicles to fit into it).  He only took three measurements because that is enough for you.


----------



## Seanjj (14 Jul 2014)

Excuse my ignorance as I'm a civvie but do you have the option of having your uniforms tailored/tightened of they fit poorly?


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Jul 2014)

Seanjj said:
			
		

> Excuse my ignorance as I'm a civvie but do you have the option of having your uniforms tailored/tightened of they fit poorly?




Yes!!!


----------



## upandatom (14 Jul 2014)

trustnoone73 said:
			
		

> I believe there are four measurements for all CF shirts/tunics.  Waist, chest, height to shoulders, and sum of all three added to the belly.  For pants there is only one measurement.  Inseam/waist.  They shall be the same.



Those four measurements are ridiculous, I am forced to wear a size 38 jean/pant so my quads can fit into pants properly. Even then that is pushing it. My waist is a 34-36.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (14 Jul 2014)

MCG said:
			
		

> I've haven't seen resumes, passports or birth-certificates to compare anecdotes, but I've been to master tailors and I've been to Moore's - all take more than three measurements even to just pick from what is pre made. I have a friend who has researched this and concluded five measurements would be the minimum to ensure fit of both pants and jacket ... A quick google search seems to corroborate this with the hits demanding either 5 to 6 measurements or 15 to 20+ measurements.  From my own very limited exposure to anthropometric design (engineering things so they will fit and be usable by people), I know that waist is not an invariable predictor of chest, and that neither height, inseam, nor sleeve length invariably predicts one of the others.
> 
> I'm not suggesting your old Italian is the only guy who knows his trade.  Maybe you exist on the centre of every bell-curve of human proportions - you fit all the assumptions a tailor would make given less information.  If your guy is as good as you believe, he could probably see this (much as you can look at a crest line and see the number of fighting vehicles to fit into it).  He only took three measurements because that is enough for you.



Hardly : There are many here that can vouch I'm far from ordinary 

I guess I'll have to tell him, next time, that he's full of shit, doesn't know his trade and that your googlefu is stronger than his years of experience.  


All done here. Obviously, I'm out of my league.


----------



## upandatom (14 Jul 2014)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Yes!!!



Army Solutions
Pour milk into bowl, 
Add more milk so it spills
jam cookie in mouth and chug milk

Air Force
Break cookie in half

Navy-
Eat whole box of cookies trying to solve problem


----------



## medicineman (14 Jul 2014)

upandatom said:
			
		

> Those four measurements are ridiculous, I am forced to wear a size 38 jean/pant so my quads can fit into pants properly. Even then that is pushing it. My waist is a 34-36.



Not trying to sound like an ass here - I have to ask what cut of cut jeans are you wearing then? 

MM


----------



## OldSolduer (14 Jul 2014)

medicineman said:
			
		

> Not trying to sound like an *** here - I have to ask what cut of cut jeans are you wearing then?
> 
> MM



I take it that you are an iron pumper? Not to be a jerk, but if you are going to gain that kind of mass, be prepared to fork out some $$ to tailor your uniforms.


----------



## Messorius (14 Jul 2014)

exgunnertdo said:
			
		

> Hey, Strike - have you been on Logistik lately?  There are women's flat front pants now.  They're not amazing, but they are a million times better than the pleated things.  They don't sit nearly as high on the waist as the pleated ones.  Pleated are also available for those that like them



Are they as good as the men's? A guy at my unit gave me a spare pare of his that didn't fit anymore. Holy mother of God it was like Christmas come early. No more pleated front-butt.


----------



## Biggoals2bdone (15 Jul 2014)

Transporter said:
			
		

> The long sleeve dress shirt is a disaster. If you don't want to be choked to death by the collar, you have to go with a size that makes it look like you're wearing a f****** moomoo. The shirt pockets are almost in your armpits and that's just for a 17" neck size, which for me allows for a bit of shrinkage to the 16.5" I normally wear. And don't get me started on the high-waisted, wide-legged DEU pants or the maternity wear looking gabardine.



WIDE-LEGGED DEU PANTS?

Are we getting same DEU pants...mine are like friggin spandex, and I have to wear a 40" waist (2-3 sizes to big in the waist) to fit my legs.

Totally agree about the shirts though


----------



## George Wallace (15 Jul 2014)

MrBlue said:
			
		

> WIDE-LEGGED DEU PANTS?
> 
> Are we getting same DEU pants...mine are like friggin spandex, and I have to wear a 40" waist (2-3 sizes to big in the waist) to fit my legs.
> 
> Totally agree about the shirts though



Let's admit it now; Logistik Unicorp can't get their act together.  I don't think it is the uniforms that are the problem, as much as the Supplier out of Montreal.  My initial issues with them began in 2005 when I was measured by the Tailors at the Tailor Shop in CFSU Ottawa and the measurements sent to Logistik Unicorp, only to have the wrong size tunic sent to me requiring it to be sent back.  My last problem with them was the fur cap; where they had my measurements, and sent me a cap, size SMALL instead of size LARGE.


----------



## Transporter (15 Jul 2014)

MrBlue said:
			
		

> WIDE-LEGGED DEU PANTS?
> 
> Are we getting same DEU pants...mine are like friggin spandex, and I have to wear a 40" waist (2-3 sizes to big in the waist) to fit my legs.
> 
> Totally agree about the shirts though



Was meaning from the knee down. Not quite bell bottoms, but mine practically cover the entire shoe (unless, of course, you get floodies). 

Agree the thighs can be tight.


----------



## upandatom (15 Jul 2014)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> I take it that you are an iron pumper? Not to be a jerk, but if you are going to gain that kind of mass, be prepared to fork out some $$ to tailor your uniforms.



Shouldnt Have to- Gaining mass or not, becoming stronger, in better physical shape is exactly what the CAF wants us to do. By that logic we should be tailoring our own tunics to fit chest arms and shoulder, which is what the initial split was about. 

And those are regular run of the mill jeans.



			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> Let's admit it now; Logistik Unicorp can't get their act together.  I don't think it is the uniforms that are the problem, as much as the Supplier out of Montreal.  My initial issues with them began in 2005 when I was measured by the Tailors at the Tailor Shop in CFSU Ottawa and the measurements sent to Logistik Unicorp, only to have the wrong size tunic sent to me requiring it to be sent back.  My last problem with them was the fur cap; where they had my measurements, and sent me a cap, size SMALL instead of size LARGE.



Even in Basic on 06, YES GW, Just did my basic in 06- I have to be issued a set of DEUs for my grad parade from Basic.


----------



## exgunnertdo (15 Jul 2014)

Messorius said:
			
		

> Are they as good as the men's? A guy at my unit gave me a spare pare of his that didn't fit anymore. Holy mother of God it was like Christmas come early. No more pleated front-butt.



I haven't tried on a pair of men's pants, so I can't compare, but they're pretty decent.  

Both pictures are horrid...but you can see that the flat front is a bit better


----------



## MJP (15 Jul 2014)

There are mechanisms in place to conduct minor alterations to DEU uniforms.  Rather than useless speculation here is the source document and some of the relevant paragrahs for all to peruse.

Source Doc- Supply Administration Manual http://dgmssc.ottawa-hull.mil.ca/matknet/documents/SAM/SAM.pdf (DWAN)  

Supply Administration Manual 
Chapter – Clothing and Personnel Equipment

2.61. For all personnel, only minor alterations are authorized at public expense.
Authorized minor alterations to DEU are as follows:

a. DEU tunics
i. Taking in and letting out the side seams
ii. Removal of the excess material just below the back of the collar, often referred to as "raising the back."
iii. Deepening of the armhole
iv. Taking in and letting out the centre back
v. Raising or lowering the sleeve length

b. DEU trousers/slacks
i. Raising or lowering the pant length
ii. Increasing or decreasing the trouser waist
iii. Letting out the thigh

c. DEU skirts
i. Raising or lowering the skirt length
ii. Taking in and letting out side seams
iii. Increasing or decreasing the waist.

More info and restrictions on the source.


----------



## Pusser (24 Sep 2014)

This same document goes on to say:

*DEU Clothing*

2.118. Extended size clothing:

a. Except for those non-stocked items, which are normally issued as made-to-measure, every effort shall be made to equip personnel from standard or peripheral stock sizes. This includes carrying out minor alterations and adjustments to obtain a reasonable fit. Extended size ranges, available online, should be demanded prior to having a made to measure garment manufactured locally. The extended size range for DEU garments are manufactured by increasing or decreasing the dimensions of the DND paper patterns/specification to accommodate, for example an increase in chest size from a 52 inch to a 54 inch, and should not be confused with a requirement for a “made to measure” garment to accommodate body shapes outside the parameters of these DND specifications. Special size NSNs are available on the C3-01 website C3 contract page.

b. Personnel who cannot be fitted from the catalogued or extended size range are entitled to the issue of made to measure items, not exceeding the quantity authorized by the applicable EGC.

c. When individuals require made to measure garments, B/W/S SupO shall confirm all requests prior to initiating procurement action. B/S/W fund locally purchased made to measure requirements from command allotments. If an individual is undergoing training at a unit other than his home unit, funding for made to measure clothing, special size footwear and equipment should be requested from the individual’s home unit.

d. Extended size demands for initial issues made through Clothing Online are automatically recorded against the individual’s personal online record.

e. Initial issues of made to measure DEU kit purchased locally for all CF members must be reported to DGLEPM/DSSPM Clothing Online office to facilitate the recording of the issue against the member’s online account. Replacement issues of made to measure DEU kit purchased locally items for Regular and Reserve personnel must also be reported to DSSPM to facilitate the reduction of the members online point allocation.

f. When replacement of made to measure DEU kit items are purchased locally the applicable number of points must be removed from the individual’s account. Prior to ordering replacement made to measure clothing, or special size shoes or oxfords, the individual must advise clothing stores if he/she has sufficient points in their account to cover the purchase. If the individual does not have enough points payment must be received prior to ordering the made to measure or special size footwear. Clothing stores must forward details of made to measure or special size footwear purchases including members name, SN, item purchased to DSSPM email who will have the applicable number of points removed from the members account.

In other words, if you are unable to be fitted off the rack, you are entitled to custom-made items.  You have to go through clothing stores to get it, but you use your Clothing-on-Line points to "pay" for it.  And you pay the same price as if you were getting them off the rack.  If you decide to take up body-building and significantly alter your body shape, you are not entitled to a free issue of new service dress items, but you can get new  replacement items, using your points.  However, if your change in body shape is for medical reasons (e.g. weight loss or gain) then you may be entitled to a complete "initial" issue of service dress without resorting to using your points.  Operational dress is simply exchanged.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (24 Sep 2014)

FSTO said:
			
		

> There is no reason at all for higher HQ's to be wearing operational clothing in the office. That clothing is the most expensive in our inventory and should only be worn when flying, in the field or when at sea. And I don't believe for a second it makes you more operationally focused in the office. If our people can't do their jobs unless they wear a certain article of clothing then we have bigger problems.



We could have a uniform for the Garrison and Office and call it Work Dress


----------



## Edward Campbell (24 Sep 2014)

Colin P said:
			
		

> We could have a uniform for the Garrison and Office and call it Work Dress



_Riiiiiight_ ...  and you could blouse your work dress trousers over polished combat boots and maybe even have a neat jacket, festooned with _gee gaws_ and "high visibility" rank badges.


----------



## dimsum (24 Sep 2014)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> _Riiiiiight_ ...  and you could blouse your work dress trousers over polished combat boots and maybe even have a neat jacket, festooned with _gee gaws_ and "high visibility" rank badges.



Wow.  I've heard about this, but it's about 10000000x uglier than I would have thought.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (24 Sep 2014)

In fairness I think the idea had merit, all government uniforms were made to pretty much the same cut and the puke green shirts were difficult to distinguish as military. The idea to make the military instantly recognizable and distinct was good, just the execution was flawed. I left before the Tan uniforms came in, but would have happily taken that over the pukish green of the Work Dress, which was good at hiding stains if nothing else.


----------



## RedcapCrusader (20 Nov 2014)

Rather than create a whole new topic...

I _just_ received my initial issue of DEU, however my measurements were all out to lunch. Everything is much too large.

Do I return the shirts, pants, tunic to Logistik or should I just seek a tailor and submit a claim? I'll have to return the coat, rain jacket, and sweater anyway...


----------



## George Wallace (20 Nov 2014)

RedcapCrusader said:
			
		

> Rather than create a whole new topic...
> 
> I _just_ received my initial issue of DEU, however my measurements were all out to lunch. Everything is much too large.
> 
> Do I return the shirts, pants, tunic to Logistik or should I just seek a tailor and submit a claim? I'll have to return the coat, rain jacket, and sweater anyway...



Don't worry.  You will grow into them.

In all seriousness; go to the "Base Tailor" and have your tunic and pants adjusted (if they are not exorbitantly large -- see note at end) .  The shirts, you can  return to Logistik and have them exchanged for the correct size.   There should be a shipping label accompanying your package with the return address to Logistik for that purpose.  

NOTE:  After being sized by the "Base Tailor", my tunic arrive in a size too small.  The "Base Tailor" returned it for me and I was eventually properly fitted.  Later I ordered the Fur Cap through Logistik and although they have all my measurements on file, they mailed me a cap that was size SMALL.  I returned it with the shipping label provided in the package and was able to get the correct size.  It is my belief that Logistik has some serious problems in their warehousing and shipping departments, where they constantly make mistakes in what is shipped to their customers.   As demonstrated by the OP, this is not an isolated case, but a continuing problem with Logistik.

For your information:

LOGISTIK
Customer Service
info@logistikunicorp.com
Tel:   1-888-326-8688
Fax:  1-888-326-8690

820 chemin du Grand-Bernier Nord
Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu
Quebec         J2W 0A6


----------



## MJP (20 Nov 2014)

RedcapCrusader said:
			
		

> Rather than create a whole new topic...
> 
> I _just_ received my initial issue of DEU, however my measurements were all out to lunch. Everything is much too large.
> 
> Do I return the shirts, pants, tunic to Logistik or should I just seek a tailor and submit a claim? I'll have to return the coat, rain jacket, and sweater anyway...



Reserve initial order of DEU I am assuming?  Was it ordered through clothing stores?  Were you sized by hand or that retarded machine?  

If ordered by clothing stores, go back and have them sent it back for the correct sizes.  If you recieved it from stuff you ordered yourself, return the stuff and reorder by changing the sizes on the your logistics profile.  Once you recieve stuff that roughly fits ok then the tailor can work with it.   They can probably work with what you have but it sounds like it is really off and it is better to have your size profile at LogisticUnicorps changed.



			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> It is my belief that Logistik has some serious problems in their warehousing and shipping departments, where they constantly make mistakes in what is shipped to their customers.   As demonstrated by the OP, this is not an isolated case, but a continuing problem with Logistik.




I have heard a few rumblings over the past few years.  It would be interesting to see their return stats.  Other than slower shipping times than previous years, I have had nothing but success with my ordering including changing sizes for my ever expanding body....


----------



## RedcapCrusader (20 Nov 2014)

MJP said:
			
		

> Reserve initial order of DEU I am assuming?  Was it ordered through clothing stores?  Were you sized by hand or that retarded machine?
> 
> If ordered by clothing stores, go back and have them sent it back for the correct sizes.  If you recieved it from stuff you ordered yourself, return the stuff and reorder by changing the sizes on the your logistics profile.  Once you recieve stuff that roughly fits ok then the tailor can work with it.   They can probably work with what you have but it sounds like it is really off and it is better to have your size profile at LogisticUnicorps changed.
> 
> ...



I was measured by hand and the order sent by ASU Calgary clothing stores. There's no base tailor here anymore so either way, I'm either taking a day trip to Edmonton or just sending back (which is probably the beat choice).

I'm getting fitted for a suit today anyway and will have proper measurements to use.

Our "stores" don't qualify as stores anymore. All it is is a counter where they place orders ans receive shipments. I've never had anything accurate come out of this place since they shut it down from being a real Supply Stores for Southern Alberta.


----------

