# Need for a new Army dress uniform (Split from: Return To Old Army Officer Rank Insignia)



## Infanteer (29 Jun 2010)

Good heavens.

The only thing I'm going to state is that we do need to look at a new service uniform.

The current No. 1A/3 is ugly and uncomfortable.  The uniform is too heavy and uncomfortable and the dark, dark rifle green isn't really nice to look at nor distinguishable.  Wearing Service Dress shouldn't feel like Full Dress.  

Same with the No. 3A/3B/3C - The collar looks like something meant for Disco Inferno, that mint green colour looks like some '70s curtain reject and the sweater is just silly.

I'm not opposed to uniform changes - the US Army's program through to 2014 is a good example of streamlining things.  As well, I'm not opposed to something a little historic for service dress but if you want to give me a uniform with some new bits on it, at least give me a uniform I'd want to wear.


----------



## vonGarvin (29 Jun 2010)

Good God, no!  I mean, if DLR hears of this, they will bugger it up and give us this:


----------



## SeanNewman (29 Jun 2010)

Well if we're just talking about starting from scratch, I would suggest something like what the USMC does, but make the Service Uniform (the third one) a little easier to wear or lighter (still with a beret, for example).






Unless you include Scarlets, we don't really have an equivalent to their dress uniform.  Since Scarlets IMO don't really count since they're so rarely worn, our DEU is more like their Service, meaning we don't really have a dress uniform in comparison.

(Post just for conversation's sake; I'm not actually stating our current system is broken or needs fixing, I just like the USMC _real _dress uniform).


----------



## vonGarvin (29 Jun 2010)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> I just like the USMC _real _dress uniform).


I think you like marines:





While I like this type of marine:





;D


----------



## dapaterson (29 Jun 2010)

If we _really_ want to go back to our roots, the Air Force should cease to exist as a seperate service and instead become the Fleet Air Arm and the Army Flying Corps.


----------



## Michael OLeary (29 Jun 2010)

Now, if we really want to go back to the roots of the military in North America we'd be formed into a large number of small bands, each trying to be unique in their customs and appearance (while almost indistinguishable to an outsider), constantly fighting at perceived borders between groups to gain resources, manpower and power, unabashedly robbing one other of finite resources and still claiming to be a single powerful entity when confronted by external forces .... uh .... wait.  forget it, we're there still.


----------



## SeanNewman (29 Jun 2010)

Michael, stop talking about the Reserves, you're out of London now!


----------



## Nfld Sapper (29 Jun 2010)

Ah....shut up Petamocto.........

 ;D


----------



## Michael OLeary (29 Jun 2010)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> Michael, stop talking about the Reserves, you're out of London now!



Actually, I'm not out of London, and I wasn't even thinking about the Reserves.


----------



## SeanNewman (29 Jun 2010)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> Actually, I'm not out of London, and I wasn't even thinking about the Reserves.



[Sigh]  T'was a joke, good sir.

But you _were_ out of London, and my Reserves comment was meant to rebut your tribes story.


----------



## Michael OLeary (29 Jun 2010)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> [Sigh]  T'was a joke, good sir.
> 
> But you _were_ out of London, and my Reserves comment was meant to rebut your tribes story.



I am currently in London, and there are many "tribes" in the CF that comment applies to other than Reserve regiments.


----------



## SeanNewman (30 Jun 2010)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> I am currently in London, and there are many "tribes" in the CF that comment applies to other than Reserve regiments.



I stopped believing that when first Para Company had to change its name to Mike Company, and then even light battalions lost their identity.

Tribes are being squashed, and I'm convinced that it's only a matter of time before the Reg Force Infantry even loses the three Regiments.

When someone graduates from DP 1.2 (Phase 4), they will now be assigned to 3-1-2-2 platoon or 3-1-2-3 platoon.  

I can already hear it on PT:  "Who's the best platoon?" "3 Platoon of 2 Company of 1 Battalion of 3 Brigade!"


----------



## vonGarvin (30 Jun 2010)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> Tribes are being squashed, and I'm convinced that it's only a matter of time before the Reg Force Infantry even loses the three Regiments.


At unification, that almost became a reality.  If one checks out circa 1970-ish photos of Reg Force Infantrymen in S3s ("Service Dress"), the "buttons and bows" are very generic.  As I recall, it was the R22eR who were our saviour of the Regimental System.  "We'll lose our French culture-identifier" was the general argument, and thus PPCLI and The RCR retained their distinctive regiments.  

Or so I was told, many moons ago.

EDIT: Here is a photo from 12 October 1971 (8 days before I turned five years old!!!!)

Other than collar dogs and capbadge, there is nothing on the uniform that is unique to the regiment.  Even the buttons were the "CF Standard"


----------



## Loachman (30 Jun 2010)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> I am currently in London, and there are many "tribes" in the CF that comment applies to other than Reserve regiments.



Well, I thought that it was hilarious.



			
				Technoviking said:
			
		

> While I like this type of marine:



I wonder what she got her ribbons for?


----------



## dapaterson (30 Jun 2010)

And, today, the same Colonel would not wear regimental accoutrements or collar dogs at all, since we`ve declared Army colonels to be generalists (other than medical, chaplain and perhaps a few others).


----------



## GAP (30 Jun 2010)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> I think you like marines: Yeah, but they are looking for .......
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Michael OLeary (30 Jun 2010)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> I stopped believing that when first Para Company had to change its name to Mike Company ....



Can you provide a regimental document that states it was ever officially called "Para" Company?


----------



## MAJONES (30 Jun 2010)

> If we really want to go back to our roots, the Air Force should cease to exist as a seperate service and instead become the Fleet Air Arm and the Army Flying Corps.



My counter offer is for you to go and do something _intensely private _ with your hat badge.  >


----------



## Grunt_031 (30 Jun 2010)

> The only thing I'm going to state is that we do need to look at a new service uniform



We tried that in the 80/90 with the tans (I would have preferred more of a khaki color). 

I liked them, though they looked good and they where light weight for summer, imagine that.  Unfortunately they only looked good on people in good shape or a good shape.


----------



## TimBit (30 Jun 2010)

> I liked them, though they looked good and they where light weight for summer, imagine that.  Unfortunately they only looked good on people in good shape or a good shape.



Personnally, I couldn't care less about how the uniform looks on someone out of shape. Everyone should be in shape. It`s a requirement. You`re not? That sucks...

I also thought the tans looked great. I can`t really imagine parading in greens somewhere like Cyprus, for example...


----------



## SeanNewman (30 Jun 2010)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> Can you provide a regimental document that states it was ever officially called "Para" Company?



How about the Pro Patria itself?  Regimental enough?

http://www.theroyalcanadianregiment.ca/rcr_publications/propatria2004/1rcr_pp2004.htm

"On 27 January Cpl Jamie Murphy was killed and three soldiers of *Para* Company were wounded when a suicide bomber attacked their patrol..."


----------



## Michael OLeary (30 Jun 2010)

Actually no, the unit articles in Pro Patria are written by the units, and do not dictate regimental custom in themselves.  The entire issue came about because the unit was using the "Para" naming without formal regimental approval, to the point of loosing the context of the Regiment's tradition for naming (i.e., lettering) companies.

The place it _should_ appear to have regimental backing is in Regimental Standing orders.  The unit had an opportunity to seek approval for it, but never chose to use it.  The Annexes to Chapter 2 of Regimental Standing Orders are supposed to be prepared by the battalions.  Each annex is structured to present the individual unit's organization, symbols and any unique customs or traditions.

I can attest that at least the last three Regimental Adjutants have repeatedly asked the Battalions to update these Annexes for regimental approval and republication.  This annex is one opportunity where a CO and RSM could present their annex to the Regimental Executive Committee and could have requested Senate approval for an unofficial naming of "Para" to be recognized for the company so tasked (since there was no guarantee it would always be Mike Coy).  Unfortunately, that was never done, and attempts at common usage were mistakenly presumed to be a quasi-official change in naming - which the Regiment corrected.  (Seeking recognition through an RSO amendment may not have worked, at least the first time, but it would have put it on the table.)


----------



## SeanNewman (30 Jun 2010)

Mr O'Leary,

I appreciate the official nature of your reply, but in a way the staff-iness (tm) of it demonstrates just how far removed the answer is from the ground truth of what a soldier thinks or cares about.

Perhaps the Regimental Adjts and higher care about annexes of Regimental Standing Orders, but I don't think a 19-year-old Pte leaves work and loses a lot of sleep over what the Regimental Executive Committee or Senate talks about at meetings.

They heard their Section Commanders calling it Para Coy, their Pl Comds calling it Para Coy, their OC calling himself the OC of Para Coy, their MWO calling himself the CSM of Para Coy, and the CO and RSM referring to them as Para Coy on weekly battalion parades.  In fact, the "official" crest at the door of company lines was even the Pegasus and Bellerophon logo painted on the wall above the words "Para Company".

Not claiming to know what was inside the heads of all soldiers, I'll go out on a limb and say that to a Pte, whatever their Sgt and CSM said they belonged to was all the "truth" they needed.


----------



## Michael OLeary (30 Jun 2010)

Then it was up to *their immediate chain of command* to do the "staffy" crap to make their "truth" a reality - so you choose who in your mind failed them.

The "official nature" of my reply was to give you the reality-based background on how that could have been achieved.  But if you prefer the colloquial view, by all means stick to that.


----------



## Privateer (30 Jun 2010)

Would the desire for a true dress uniform (short of scarlets) be accomplished by permitting the Regular Force army to wear patrols, as the Militia does?


----------



## McG (30 Jun 2010)

Privateer said:
			
		

> Would the desire for a true dress uniform (short of scarlets) be accomplished by permitting the Regular Force army to wear patrols, as the some Militia regiments does?


Fixed your question.  To answer with more questions: what is the historical significance of patrol uniforms to the regiments that wear them, and does the whole (or even majority) of the Army share that linkage?


----------



## vonGarvin (30 Jun 2010)

Hey, I've got an idea:
How about we figure out how to fight wars and train people to fight wars instead of wondering which buttons or bows to wear?
EDIT TO CLARIFY:

I'm all about heritage and tradition, but not so much that I wish to remain embedded in the past.  As someone once said of The Royal Canadian Regiment, it is much like a tree, some branches are cut off, others grafted on, but in the end, *it keeps on growing*.  Or words to that effect.


----------



## McG (30 Jun 2010)

Whatever we do, let's not dress ourselves (as some other nation may have) like a city police force ...


----------



## SeanNewman (30 Jun 2010)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Hey, I've got an idea:  How about we figure out how to fight wars and train people to fight wars...



Slow down there, Mr Cumber-bun-on-his-mess-kit.


----------



## vonGarvin (30 Jun 2010)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> Slow down there, Mr Cumber-bun-on-his-mess-kit.


:rofl:
Good point.  In fact, you help my point.  I paid for my mess kit, not the crown.  So, there's the difference.  If we're worried about how Her Majesty is going to dress up Her Canadian Armed Forces, then we've jumped the shark.


----------



## SeanNewman (30 Jun 2010)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> ...I paid for my mess kit, not the crown...



Obviously we still have rules to follow in the manner we wear it though.

If there were no control over mess kit people would have everything from foreign badges to their Grade 8 2nd-place in the Discus ribbon.

I would certainly have my rank made out of gold rhinestones if given the chance.


----------



## dapaterson (30 Jun 2010)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> Obviously we still have rules to follow in the manner we wear it though.
> 
> If there were no control over mess kit people would have everything from foreign badges to their Grade 8 2nd-place in the Discus ribbon.
> 
> I would certainly have my rank made out of gold rhinestones _with the executive curl_ if given the chance.



Fixed that one for you.


----------



## SeanNewman (30 Jun 2010)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Fixed that one for you.



Never!  Curls are for those who wear fa....fabulously white uniforms.


----------



## Old Naval Guard (31 Jul 2010)

Hi How about this Since the Army is considering returning to a Pips and Crowns for 2nd LT to Lt Col ie its Tradition's, why not restore Khaki uniforms  in a CF Cut. Also bring back the Summer Tan DEU The Navy uniform reflects the history of the Navy.The Air Force DEU reflects the history of the Airforce  Its about time the army has something that reflects its traditions and heritage. I would hate to be a solider in those winter weight CF on a hot summer day. Tan is a colour of uniform that Canada Soldiers have worn in one form  or another since the Boer War. Canadian Khaki is of a greener shade than British Khaki which is Browner. It recalls Vi my ridge, Passen dale, Dieppe and Normandy as well as Korea.  Its up to the Army what it wants to do. My two  :2c:


----------



## PPCLI Guy (31 Jul 2010)

Old Naval Guard said:
			
		

> Its about time the army has something that reflects its traditions and heritage.



We have that.  Its called eight years of close combat with a determined foe.


----------



## dangerboy (31 Jul 2010)

I think it has been said on more than one thread, the average soldier does not really care to much about their CF uniform.  They care more about the combat uniform and would rather see that changed to incorporate features such as pockets on the sleeves, more modern design of the collar.  The CF uniform is not worn very often Nov 11th, men's Christmas diner and maybe once or twice more a year (unless you are doing troopings or change of command parades).


----------



## dimsum (31 Jul 2010)

(slight thread derail)  

Just interested to know what the "modern design on the collar" would be?

Now back to your original programming...


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (31 Jul 2010)

> I would hate to be a solider in those winter weight CF on a hot summer day.



You mean like a sailor today wearing his/her full riggers in the hot summer sun. Don't fix it because it ain't broken.


----------



## john. M (31 Jul 2010)

I like the combats just the way it is no changes, but instead of the lime green shirt i rather wear a tan shirt.
like this guy here


----------



## Neill McKay (31 Jul 2010)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> You mean like a sailor today wearing his/her full riggers in the hot summer sun. Don't fix it because it ain't broken.



I'd describe five pounds of black poly/wool in July as broken!  The navy, at least, has an optional summer rig as well.  (The optional nature of it, of course, limits its use by those who own it.)

I wasn't in when the army got rid of its summer tans, but I've always been curious as to why they did it.  It was a while before they cut back on wearing DEUs and stared wearing combats as often as they do now.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (31 Jul 2010)

N. McKay said:
			
		

> I wasn't in when the army got rid of its rsummer tans, but I've always been curious as to why they did it.



While not universally disliked, they did have a tendency to wilt and wrinkle in the heat especially on those carrying a bit of excess weight.  In the words of the then commander of the army (who was far from slim) to a parliamentary committee - it made him look like "a 10 pound bag of s*** tied in the middle".


----------



## aesop081 (31 Jul 2010)

N. McKay said:
			
		

> I wasn't in when the army got rid of its rummer tans,



I was. While i much prefered the tans, i was glad to have one less uniform to maintain.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (31 Jul 2010)

I graduated Cornwallis in Tans and I was glad to see that ugly uniform go.


----------



## pbi (2 Aug 2010)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> We have that.  Its called eight years of close combat with a determined foe.




Huzzah, huzzah. War is the ultimate source of all meaningful military tradition. 


But, still....a Sam Browne with brown gloves and Oxfords....Hmmmmm.

Cheers


----------



## Old Sweat (2 Aug 2010)

pbi said:
			
		

> But, still....a Sam Browne with brown gloves and Oxfords....Hmmmmm.



Tell me you are joking. The only purpose I could ever discern for my Sam Browne was as an aid to the dry cleaner, who made a fair amount of cash removing mahogany boot polish smudges from my service dress jacket. It was almost as useful as my RCHA riding crop and my RCA stick.


----------



## pbi (2 Aug 2010)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Tell me you are joking. The only purpose I could ever discern for my Sam Browne was as an aid to the dry cleaner, who made a fair amount of cash removing mahogany boot polish smudges from my service dress jacket. It was almost as useful as my RCHA riding crop and my RCA stick.



(Chokes on port....)

Oh, ye of little sartorial sense! What is the labour of a drycleaner, and a few pence, compared to that look of utter sharpness? The look that says "Gin and Tonic, please, my good man, and smartly, before I take this RCHA crop to your backside!"


But, seriously though, as much as I hated looking after tans (watch what happens when you wear a maroon sword sash on a rainy parade), I thought they looked sharp. Like blues (patrols): hideous to wear (starched collar always scraped flesh off my neck), but nothing looked sharper.

What price glory?

Cheers


----------



## REDinstaller (2 Aug 2010)

The Tans were a great cash cow for dry cleaners. Nothing gets the black from boots out of pant cuffs except dry cleaning. The tans looked all right, but were a total pain to keep absolutely clean.


----------



## Old Sweat (2 Aug 2010)

Patrols (aka blues) did look very sharp on parade. We also used to wear them after duty hours when doing orderly officer. I credit mine with perhaps saving my butt when I had to intervene in a domestic dispute involving a fire arm in the married patch, as I was recognizable as an authority figure who was able to negotiate terms of surrender. Having said all that, they were worn fairly rarely. Other than guest nights in the mess and a few parades, I only recall wearing mine at two or three weddings, a few guards of honour and as commander of the firing battery that fired the 100 gun salute on 1 July 1967 in Soest.

It's time to move on and develop our your uniforms in a manner that matters to our troops. I don't think that includes pips and crowns, embossed calling cards and various Victorian era British army uniforms and paraphenalia. If I had my druthers, I'd fix the tac vest before I devoted a smidgen of effort to scurrying about inventing dress uniforms.


----------



## George Wallace (2 Aug 2010)

Tans on a hot summer parade square = Woman in white bathing suit exiting the water.


----------



## REDinstaller (2 Aug 2010)

And as I remember none of those ladies in Tans were excruciatingly hot. :-X


----------



## George Wallace (2 Aug 2010)

The excruciating hot ones always seemed to be streamed into the Air Force Trades at the Recruiting Center, leaving the Army with the rest.


----------



## PMedMoe (2 Aug 2010)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Tans on a hot summer parade square = Woman in white bathing suit exiting the water.



Not if one wears the proper undergarments.



			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> The excruciating hot ones always seemed to be streamed into the Air Force Trades at the Recruiting Center, leaving the Army with the rest.



I beg to differ.


----------



## BernDawg (2 Aug 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> The Tans were a great cash cow for dry cleaners. Nothing gets the black from boots out of pant cuffs except dry cleaning. The tans looked all right, but were a total pain to keep absolutely clean.



Pre-treat w/rubbing alcohol or vodka and then steam iron with a pressing cloth.  Sucked the polish right out.

I remember the parades in the summer when the tunics got soaked through.... ugh!  Pretty nasty looking when there's an entire Bn wearing 2-tone tan 1A's.  That being said I think the tans were a better looking colour for the most part.


----------



## REDinstaller (2 Aug 2010)

BernDawg said:
			
		

> Pre-treat w/rubbing alcohol or vodka and then steam iron with a pressing cloth.  Sucked the polish right out.



Gahhhhh. Why waste vodka on my tans, instead of in my bloodstream where it belongs. mmmmm ^-^


----------



## BernDawg (2 Aug 2010)

Of course I'm talking about a VERY judicious application, just prior to mixing it w/OJ or Tonic if you prefer...


----------



## REDinstaller (2 Aug 2010)

Thats still spillage in my books, and a reason to take drinks away from friends and consume them yourself. >


----------



## vonGarvin (2 Aug 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> I beg to differ.


There are exceptions that prove the rule, of course!   >


----------



## REDinstaller (2 Aug 2010)

And there are others that prove the rule is correctly applied. I remember being at CFSCE in 93 and hearing the SSM jack quite a few ladies who had pants 2 sizes too small on. It made life interesting walking behind some of them, just plain painful with others.


----------



## PMedMoe (2 Aug 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> And there are others that prove the rule is correctly applied. I remember being at CFSCE in 93 and hearing the SSM jack quite a few ladies who had pants 2 sizes too small on. It made life interesting walking behind some of them, just plain painful with others.



Should have had the Sgt from my Med Tech QL3 course.  She checked everyone out when we were trying on uniforms.  Funny how a guy was able to get tight pants, but not the girls.......   ;D


----------



## REDinstaller (2 Aug 2010)

Thats just disturbing. :-X


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Aug 2010)

Although I would never admit this to them, I think that the Royal Marines' No.1 Blues (sans pith helmet please), are a good dress uniform. It gives the unit a bit of class. If we're on parade, we might as well dress up a bit so we don't look like the other 'fish and chip' mobs ambling about the military community these days. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZxRXItXAdw&feature=fvsr


Keep the CF Greens for 'less official' or nonpublic occasions, much like the Royal Marines use their 'No. 2 dress' or 'Lovats'.

Salute or handshake?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENUS9siw4yo&feature=related


----------



## REDinstaller (2 Aug 2010)

If we went for the RM blues we would need an alternate head dress. Remember Tom Cruise from Taps with his beret in dress uniform, just doesn't look right. The forge cap or pith helmet would be proper for blues. The No.2 dress would be very smart though, replace the Greens with those and I think more of us would be happy to wear them. What material are they made of?


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Aug 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> If we went for the RM blues we would need an alternate head dress. Remember Tom Cruise from Taps with his beret in dress uniform, just doesn't look right. The forge cap or pith helmet would be proper for blues. The No.2 dress would be very smart though, replace the Greens with those and I think more of us would be happy to wear them. What material are they made of?



It's a light wool material I believe, not as thick as CF green if I recall correctly. Quite sharp (but not as sharp as the Guards' berethea service dress that I wore, of course!)


----------



## REDinstaller (2 Aug 2010)

I ordered my mess kit in Doeskin, costs more but I like the look of it compared to the berethea.


----------



## Rheostatic (6 Aug 2010)

Bravo Juliet said:
			
		

> instead of the lime green shirt i rather wear a tan shirt.


I had been thinking the same thing. Swap that pastel green for tan, and maybe get some summer weight pants, but otherwise leave the DEU alone.


----------



## Schifty (6 Aug 2010)

Seriously, the current cadpad green comabt uniform is enough the wear in the garrison. Its not heavy, really more confortable versus the CF. I dont want to work with a shiny uniform and shiny boots.... We work outside and this kind of uniform is not appropriate to use. So thats why we wear and will keep it in garrison. This is not for nothing the work dress disaspear...... in the land army.

One thing i will be happy, create a new CF for the summer. Our current one is to warm to do a parade.


----------



## REDinstaller (6 Aug 2010)

And you youngster never had to wear the infamous garrison dress. Coveralls got much more use back then as combats were reserved for field activities only.


----------



## TimBit (6 Aug 2010)

Yes but why do you all think that MARINES wear blue? Because historically there is a naval connection... not so with Canadian Army/Land Command.

I don't think a blue dress uniform would make sense.


----------



## Schifty (6 Aug 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> And you youngster never had to wear the infamous garrison dress. Coveralls got much more use back then as combats were reserved for field activities only.



No but take a lot of time every night to spit shine my boots, and refresh pant and shirt... its a bit to much freak... We are soldiers, we work almost on vehicule inside or outside, dust on this kind of uniform.... oil... or anything else is not proper for that uniform  and its not a coverall keep it all clean.

Officers choose to be officer, they much live with their choice and wear the CF offen..... If they think its not confortable and too heavy, not really my problem.


----------



## Michael OLeary (6 Aug 2010)

TimBit said:
			
		

> Yes but why do you all think that MARINES wear blue? Because historically there is a naval connection... not so with Canadian Army/Land Command.
> 
> I don't think a blue dress uniform would make sense.



Really?

From the Regimental Standing Orders of the Canadian Guards, 1966 (because it's at hand to quote from):

Blue Patrol Dress (1A) (i/e., with whites, orders and medals) would be worn at _"All state functions or as a representative of the Canadian Army when Full Dress has not been ordered, Church parades, funerals, court martials, Guards of Honour, and as ordered."_


----------



## daftandbarmy (6 Aug 2010)

TimBit said:
			
		

> Yes but why do you all think that MARINES wear blue? Because historically there is a naval connection... not so with Canadian Army/Land Command.
> 
> I don't think a blue dress uniform would make sense.



Hardly, old chap. Many regiments already have a No.1 Dress Blue uniform or 'Patrols'. It's just not worn that often.


----------



## REDinstaller (6 Aug 2010)

Schifty said:
			
		

> No but take a lot of time every night to spit shine my boots, and refresh pant and shirt... its a bit to much freak... We are soldiers, we work almost on vehicule inside or outside, dust on this kind of uniform.... oil... or anything else is not proper for that uniform  and its not a coverall keep it all clean.



Are you spit shining your combat boots and pressing you Cadpat????? I think you have missed the point of wearing DEUs, and the usage of coveralls to keep your cadpat from being stained by oil and grease.


----------



## TimBit (6 Aug 2010)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Hardly, old chap. Many regiments already have a No.1 Dress Blue uniform or 'Patrols'. It's just not worn that often.



I stand corrected...twice.  :-X


----------



## pbi (9 Aug 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> And you youngster never had to wear the infamous garrison dress. Coveralls got much more use back then as combats were reserved for field activities only.



I guess that all depends on how you define "back then". Although I wore coveralls often when we worked on vehicles, I surely pressed many a set of combats (including with starch) and spitshone many a boot, in the '70s through the 80s and 90's. We avoided workdress as much as we possibly could (until it finally died a well-deserved death) and the hated garrison dress was really just a brief blip of silliness.

Cheers


----------



## CorporalMajor (9 Aug 2010)

Bring back the tan and forage caps!!!!!!!!!!  It looked mint!!!!

The USMC service dress looks suitable.  A darker shade of tan for the tunic, with the same light tan for the shirts.

I would love to have scarlet dress uniforms.


----------



## Edward Campbell (9 Aug 2010)

If, and it's a big IF, there is a 'need' for a ceremonial dress uniform then, surely, dark green, rifle green is an _appropriate_ colour for the Canadian Forces. After all some of our roots lie with e.g. Butler's Rangers and, even earlier, Rogers' Rangers.

If we need a ceremonial uniform it should be 'rooted' in authentic Canadian _traditions_, it need not and should not be a pale imitation of our American or British cousins. Rifle green is an appropriate colour; maybe a high collared tunic and a bandoleer (as _circa_ 1885 to 1915) would be appropriate, too; ditto, perhaps, a Wolsley helmet. 

But: keep it Canadian; keep it simple and dignified; make it 'smart' so that soldiers will be proud to wear it; make it reasonably easy to maintain in good, 'smart' condition; and, above all, make it a free initial issue to every trained soldier.


Edit:typo/Excuse: old age


----------



## dapaterson (9 Aug 2010)

Yes!  A proud, Canadian uniform!


----------



## BernDawg (9 Aug 2010)

Why, that's quite the Beaver you have there.......


----------



## vonGarvin (9 Aug 2010)

BernDawg said:
			
		

> Why, that's quite the Beaver you have there.......


Thanks, I just had it shaved:





But, in all seriousness, I see no need for a new service dress.  We had the "S3" CF uniform when I joined, then tan/green, and now green.  There was work dress, garrison dress and lord knows what else.  The only improvement I saw was when we went from FN C1 to C7.  But I must admit that the FN had "the look" of a rifle, but in the end, looks only gets you in the door: it's how you perform that seals the deal, if that means anything.


----------



## Old Naval Guard (10 Aug 2010)

Very funny, the last  two posts. I agree with Corperal Major. If the army wants to keep rifle green thats ok i guess :,However please lets at least change the mint green shirt. We should bring the tans back for summertime. They look sharp, look army  and have a place in Canadain military history :warstory: The only other alternative is  a Khaki CF DEU . A Patrol blues would be nice , but with the US Army changing from the OD unifrom to a Blue , we dont want to look like we are copyin the Americans. My two cents  :2c:With respect Old Naval Guard


----------



## Michael OLeary (10 Aug 2010)

Old Naval Guard said:
			
		

> Very funny, the last  two posts. I agree with Corperal Major. If the army wants to keep rifle green thats ok i guess :,However please lets at least change the mint green shirt.



As a self-appointed haberdasher to the Army, what colour options would you recommend for a new shirt to go with our green DEU?



			
				Old Naval Guard said:
			
		

> We should bring the tans back for summertime. They look sharp, look army  and have a place in Canadain military history :warstory: The only other alternative is  a Khaki CF DEU .



Why is that the only other alternative? 



			
				Old Naval Guard said:
			
		

> A Patrol blues would be nice , but with the US Army changing from the OD uniform to a Blue , we dont want to look like we are copyin the Americans. My two cents  :2c:With respect Old Naval Guard



It seems that no matter what we do, we get criticized for not being like someone else, or for being like someone else. For the critics-R-us crowd, it really doesn't mater, apparently there has never been, isn't now, and never will be a correct solution to anything in the CF.

Two cents worth?  Careful, you may be over-valuing your contribution.

And here's a smiley, just because it supposed to show I'm a nice guy .... :-\


----------



## Old Naval Guard (10 Aug 2010)

I would like to make a reply to the Good Captians Comments These are just my views, I have a right to my views as anyone else on this fourm. I have read other people complain about the current army DEU. As a former Militamen, for many years I was wearing both the Green and Tan DEU. I like the tans, they were a great uniform.  As far as the future army DEU may or may not be that up to other people. We are here to exchange views and ideas not to belittle on another  Have a nice day Sir


----------



## Michael OLeary (10 Aug 2010)

Old naval Guard, I'll offer the same response I sent to you PM:

_And I have as much right to challenge your opinions as you have to make them.  If you do not wish to have your opinions challenged, then don't post them.  In my opinion, those who throw out suggestions without being willing to back them up with reasoned debate are not making useful contributions._

I'm having a wonderful day, thank you.


----------



## aesop081 (10 Aug 2010)

Old Naval Guard said:
			
		

> I like the tans, they were a great uniform.



No they weren't !! I prefered the tans myself, but to say they were a great uniform .......yeah right. They had the look and feel of a cheap polyester suit.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (10 Aug 2010)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> No they weren't !! I prefered the tans myself, but to say they were a great uniform .......yeah right. They had the look and feel of a cheap polyester suit.









Here's a polyester suit for ya CA.....

 ;D


----------



## a_majoor (10 Aug 2010)

Since the military personifies _action_, we need _this_ polyester suit:

On the other hand, I'd much rather the time and money spent on uniforms and orders of dress (small as it is) be converted to small arms ammunition and field training.


----------



## vonGarvin (11 Aug 2010)

Of course, were it left to me, and with an unlimited budget and time, etc, I would offer up a dress uniform similar to this:




No swatsikas, of course.  But the tailoring, cut and "look" of the world war 2 German uniform was, as some would say, "smart".

But since it's not left to me, and budgets and time are both limited, I suggest we go with this uniform:


----------



## Arctic Acorn (11 Aug 2010)

I always thought the Danish had a pretty sharp workdress uniform. Basically for garrison they wear combat pants/boots, with a green short/long sleeve shirt. For field use, just replace the top with a t-shirt/combat shirt. 

Here's a good example of what a Danish soldier might look like: 

http://www.hellomagazine.com/photo-galleries.html?imagen=/royalty/2009/04/02/marie-denmark-bump/imgs/marie-2a.jpg

That said, there's obviously higher spending priorities about.


----------



## a_majoor (11 Aug 2010)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Of course, were it left to me, and with an unlimited budget and time, etc, I would offer up a dress uniform similar to this:



With unliited budgets and time, I'd rather train the people _inside_ the uniforms to the same calibre as the men in the pictures!


----------



## vonGarvin (11 Aug 2010)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> With unliited budgets and time, I'd rather train the people _inside_ the uniforms to the same calibre as the men in the pictures!


Ah, but there's the rub.  The budget is unlimited, as is time, so there's time (and money) for both!  


(For those other than Thucydides, please note that I'm being sarcastic, and I actually agree with his point.  But still, those uniforms are sweet) ;D


----------



## 30 for 30 (11 Aug 2010)

Keep it simple and cheap- just swap the awful mint green shirt for either a tan shirt or a white shirt (see latest US dress uniform as well as certain French soldier dress uniforms). White shirts already in the system. Anything more is a massive effort that isn't going to be approved anytime soon.


----------



## George Wallace (11 Aug 2010)

Senor Mono said:
			
		

> Keep it simple and cheap- just swap the awful mint green shirt for either a tan shirt or a white shirt (see latest US dress uniform as well as certain French soldier dress uniforms). White shirts already in the system. Anything more is a massive effort that isn't going to be approved anytime soon.



 ???

I have Linden Green long sleeve and short sleeve shirts.  No Mint Green shirts in my closet.

I have a white shirt to wear with bow tie and DEU tunic for Mess Dinners.  Of course I prefer to wear my Mess Kit with spurs instead.

I think a Tan shirt with Rifle green pants, tie and/or tunic would be a No No with the Fashion Police.

So I am having a hard time grasping your "fashion sense".


----------



## 30 for 30 (12 Aug 2010)

You think a green dress shirt colour that was last fashionable in 1974 is better than a tan alternative seen the world over today on dress uniforms? The green tunic/tan shirt combo was worn in the US in the mid-60s and looked sharp, before the worst period in human fashion history began soon after. Green/tan looked good in Garrison Dress when I wore it in the early 90s.

You bring up an interesting note regarding mess DEU- the white shirt is already worn. Make it the new norm, I say. Forget about pips, forget about sam brownes- Just rid us of the light green, please.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (12 Aug 2010)

I don't need fashion - I just need pride.  

Anyone who suggests that the current uniform, of any of the services, is somehow not worthy of those who have died (figuratively at  least) wearing it, just doesn't get it.

I am proud to wear my uniform, and often do in public, even when travelling - and I have been throughout my career, including, I might add, work dress.  It is not the skin that makes the sausage, its the meat.

We have uniforms.  Wear them with pride, and thereby honour both our accomplishments and our fallen.

My 2 cents


----------



## Pusser (12 Aug 2010)

Senor Mono said:
			
		

> Keep it simple and cheap



Ah yes, these are the principles that build pride!  Perhaps elegant and cost effective would be a better way to describe it?


----------



## wannabe SF member (12 Aug 2010)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> But the tailoring, cut and "look" of the world war 2 German uniform was, as some would say, "smart".



Maybe the issue with the uniform isn't so much the color as it is the cut as you so well said.

let.s nto forget that the Wehrmacht had their uniforms designed by Hugo Boss.

I'm guessing that if the forces ever fancied asking a "Maison Haute-couture" to redesign the uniforms, we.d end up with some pretty sharp stuff regardless of colour.


----------



## mover1 (12 Aug 2010)

Ok enought silly talk. Its talk like this that is going to be getting you people into wearing tans, work dress, and garrison dress again. 
If you value your fee time then stop it immediately.  ;D

Those who like the tans abviously didn't wear them or didn't look at themselves int he mirror too closely. 
Problem with the tans.
They fit like bags. 
every stain from grease and blueing from the rifles showed on them whenever there was rifle drill involved.
Boot polish ...yes boot polish would show on the bottom of your pant legs sometimes up to the knee.
Light Tan and a rifle green tie with dark ranks, Canada flashes etc...the whole thing looked horrible. 
Pretty soon we are going to be leaving Afghanistan. That will effectivley turn us into a peace time army. Which means that there will be a lot of staff officers looking for little pet projects to improve morale etc then we will start getting stupid things like new dress uniforms with more boots etc that no one needs, all the while stuff we do need is being mothballed. 
I suggest we start thinking about new arctic tents and sleeping bags seeing as thats where the Canadian Army is going to be spending most of its time (the arctic) if its not on the parade square. And if we are on the parade square do you really want two or three uniforms to prep? 
The current CF uniform is sufficent enough.  It looks good. 
Wear it with pride.

And if you don't like the cut you can always get it altered and taken in. Or out.....


----------



## PegcityNavy (12 Aug 2010)

Inky said:
			
		

> Maybe the issue with the uniform isn't so much the color as it is the cut as you so well said.
> 
> let.s nto forget that the Wehrmacht had their uniforms designed by Hugo Boss.
> 
> I'm guessing that if the forces ever fancied asking a "Maison Haute-couture" to redesign the uniforms, we.d end up with some pretty sharp stuff regardless of colour.



I thought it was just the SS that had the Hugo Boss designed uniforms?


----------



## Blackadder1916 (12 Aug 2010)

Pegcity said:
			
		

> I thought it was just the SS that had the Hugo Boss designed uniforms?



I don't think it was so much that Hugo Boss (the individual) designed the uniforms for the SS (someone else personally did that) but that Hugo Boss AG (his company) had contracts to manufacture them (like other clothing manufacturers).  Boss was a party member and that may have something to do with him being awarded such contracts (and receiving "help" with labour difficulties).  Of course, if one provided shoddy goods to the SS, their customer complaints would probably not be handled by a phone call to a 1-800 line.  In looking at tags in some old uniforms of mine I don't think that "Vetements Burtmar" (in an old tan DEU) or "P and J Clayman" or "Peerless Garments" had any hand in designing CF uniforms, though there may be significant differences in the quality of the garments produced by different manufacturers.  Now if "Logistik Unicorps" had provided items to the SS, there would have been a lot less complaints about quality or service.


----------



## BernDawg (12 Aug 2010)

I believe that the design and the manufacture of uniforms are different contracts.  Once the design has been tendered and approved the uniform contract is then awarded for the manufacture of uniforms from the "sealed pattern" provided by the CF.
That being said I would imagine that the same company could, possibly, win both contracts.


----------



## Biggoals2bdone (13 Aug 2010)

I don't wear the army DEU (air here), but I agree the light/mint green is horrid.

My beef is fitting!

They make DEU pants for skinny stick people...i've got big legs and rump from squats, strength training and bodybuilding and even going up 1-3 sizes up in waist, they are almost like spandex on my thighs and arse. The shirts need more size options as well, considering i'm 5'9 but a large chested guy, i've gotta get shirts that are like damn dresses.


----------



## a_majoor (13 Aug 2010)

Yes, and not just with DEU either. Larger sizes of combats seem to have the default notion that bigger means bigger in the waistline....


----------



## REDinstaller (13 Aug 2010)

So true, with out a belt my cadpat pants would always fall down due to poor sizes.


----------



## ArmyRick (13 Aug 2010)

Enough of the horse garble. Seriously. I have no problems (and I like) the current army uniform. To the air force guy who said it looks horrid, well good for you, you don't wear it. Same with our current rank structure and insignia, it works, so leave it.

IMO, if we are griping about new dress uniforms, then lets forget new armoured vehicles, weapons and artillery. Or we could focus on the important issues facing our army.

Selection and maintenance of the aim!


----------



## aesop081 (13 Aug 2010)

Nevermind.


----------



## McG (13 Aug 2010)

Biggoals2bdone said:
			
		

> They make DEU pants for skinny stick people...i've got big legs and rump from squats, strength training and bodybuilding and even going up 1-3 sizes up in waist, they are almost like spandex on my thighs and arse. The shirts need more size options as well, considering i'm 5'9 but a large chested guy, i've gotta get shirts that are like damn dresses.


It seems most "major" clothing items (shirts, jackets, coats, pants, coveralls, etc), of both operational clothing and dress uniforms, are based on two measurements (height and chest or waist).
We could probably go a long way to improving the current Army dress uniform by simply expanding the spectrum of measurements taken and having Logistic Unicorp do final tailoring once the order comes in.  We would not even to go to the full range of measurements used by civilian tailors ... imagine, with the simple consideration of chest & waist in the jacket, it could be delivered to properly taper to your waist (instead of being all loose and baggy below the chest).

Current Measurements: Height and one of Neck, Chest, Waist
Better Measurements: Height, Height-to-belt, Neck, Chest, Waist, Hips, Sleeve, Inseam


----------



## Neill McKay (13 Aug 2010)

MCG said:
			
		

> We could probably go a long way to improving the current Army dress uniform by simply expanding the spectrum of measurements taken and having Logistic Unicorp do final tailoring once the order comes in.  We would not even to go to the full range of measurements used by civilian tailors ... imagine, with the simple consideration of chest & waist in the jacket, it could be delivered to properly taper to your waist (instead of being all loose and baggy below the chest).



Was there not a plan to use body scanning for just that purpose a few years ago?  I'm not sure what, if anything, came of it.


----------



## PMedMoe (13 Aug 2010)

N. McKay said:
			
		

> Was there not a plan to use body scanning for just that purpose a few years ago?  I'm not sure what, if anything, came of it.



Years ago (1997?) they did the Anthropometric study of different personnel in Petawawa.  Our unit ensured they sent the smallest and largest people for a wide variety of measurements.  Stuff still doesn't fit me......and I've gained weight since then.   :   What I love (besides the 4-inch increment in waist sizes) is how with the CADPAT jacket, even though the chest size gets smaller, the length of the sleeve doesn't.   :-\


----------

