# Navy guys want the converged CADPAT raingear (From: Naval Officers to Wear the Executive Curl)



## jollyjacktar (4 Aug 2010)

It's raining today here in Halifax.  As I was coming into the Dkyd this morning I observed the Cpl at the gate was wearing the new CADPAT Gortex Raingear.  It made me think about all the fuss with uniforms here, insignia and badges there.  Here as a Sailor I am stuck with lousy raingear (canary suit) and even lousier long johns (white, waffle pattern crap) when compaired against the CADPAT kids clothes.  I, would love to see suitable Gortex rain gear above all and decent long johns for starters.  That's something that is broken and should be fixed.  Let the Officers have the Curl, but save the rest of the money being spend on crap like SSI and the like and use it towards some usefull gear.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Aug 2010)

JJT, the irony was that the Air Force (dare I say it) was actually leading the pack on Gore-tex raingear.  I feared for my safety in AFG not because of the Taliban, but from my Army brethren jealously eying my 2-in-1 Gore-tex rain jacket and sizing me up...wasn't sure I wouldn't wake up one day bound and gore-tex-less...

Point is a good one that often things such as perspective get lost in place of a bit of flash here and there.  Yellow rubber sou'westers and curls is but one example.  

then again, CADPAT wouldn't look very pusser on a sailor!


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (4 Aug 2010)

Well, here's a possibility: Let's just agree to start using the army Cadpat rain gear. There is a long tradition of the Navy wearing Army gear when suitable under the circumstances. I am sure nobody in supply would reject a move that actually reduces the number of different clothing items they have to store and manage. And if anybody says that  "real seaman don't wear camouflage" I suggest that they look up the Royal Australian Navy sea going uniform: Its a black-grey-tan camo.

And don't give me "we wont see them if they fall overboard" unless someone can recall  a single person falling overboard wearing the canary suit but not a positive buoyancy lifejacket or inflatable life vest at the same time (both of which are highly visible). In fact, as everybody knows, we hide the reflective portions of our black floater jackets and any one falling overboard with them would have to strip the covers to be seen. And if you fall overboard on a sunny day (or night) in warm weather, your NCD is all black.  So ...


----------



## jollyjacktar (4 Aug 2010)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I, would love to see suitable Gortex rain gear above all



And thus why I said the above.  I have seen other Navies wearing a black/dark blue HH or like gear.  It's out there.  The new CADPAT gear jacket I saw this morning is geared towards wearing underneath a tac vest or frag vest as it had pockets on the arms.   Logical progression in suitability.  So with all the earlier pattern gear out there being turned into the system perhaps some could come our way.  I don't mind the thougt of looking like a pickle and being comfortable vs a canary and bloody uncomfortable.   But given my druthers I would rather it in a Sailor colour.


----------



## ModlrMike (4 Aug 2010)

I agree with you all on the raincoat issue. However, this is a topic that we need to press our Chiefs on so that they can convey our wishes in turn to the Formations Chiefs. Eventually, the dress committee will have to address the subject. Personally, I think that if we can have green and tan CADPAT Gortex raincoats, the black/blue shouldn't be a stretch.


----------



## McG (4 Aug 2010)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Well, here's a possibility: Let's just agree to start using the army Cadpat rain gear.


There is no "Army" raingear.  The Army and Air Force both agreed to converge their requirements and the CF is now buying a "Converged" raingear for both environments and operational units of Land Force and Air Commands.

If the Navy wants the same jacket, they would just have to put some capital funds into the pot to procure jackets for the initial issue.


----------



## REDinstaller (4 Aug 2010)

It took long enough for the Army to get on board with the AF regarding the Converged Raingear. The Navy would have to open a new contract for additional sets. Hello PWGSC :crybaby:


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Aug 2010)

As I recall from my (very) brief time in contact with the Navy they were - with very good reason - paranoid about fire and flash burns. Would that be an issue that keeps us from issuing the Navy with synthetic rain gear and long johns?


----------



## armyvern (4 Aug 2010)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Well, here's a possibility: Let's just agree to start using the army Cadpat rain gear.



Sounds good, but there`s STILL people in Army Units (and others wearing Army uniforms elsewhere) who are anxiously awaiting their issue of the raingear.

 :-\


----------



## armyvern (4 Aug 2010)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> As I recall from my (very) brief time in contact with the Navy they were - with very good reason - paranoid about fire and flash burns. Would that be an issue that keeps us from issuing the Navy with synthetic rain gear and long johns?



The Air Force had the same concerns and they were first to the doorstep.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Aug 2010)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> The Air Force had the same concerns and they were first to the doorstep.



 :nod:

I'm sure it was retained in the converged ICE design (AF-Army) but the original AF 2-in-1 gore-tex rain jacket had static-dissipative fiber woven into the material and met anti-static requirements sufficient to allow personnel to wear this gear while refueling CF aircraft.

As for fire retardant qualities, I only know of the CF aircrew lightweight/winter jackets and winter flying pants that have an outer layer of Nomex material with an inner gore-tex lining to address both water-resistence and fire-retardant qualities.

Regards
G2G


----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Aug 2010)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Sounds good, but there`s STILL people in Army Units (and others wearing Army uniforms elsewhere) who are anxiously awaiting their issue of the raingear.
> 
> :-\



Thank you for thinking of me ;D


----------



## Stoker (4 Aug 2010)

I have seen some people going around with a black gortex type of rain gear. I believe some ships were issued it as a trial, what came of that I wonder. I still like to sea us go to a one piece coverall, however the committees that have looked at that is comprised of C1's that think coveralls are "lazy".


----------



## Franko (4 Aug 2010)

While the new rain gear is ALOT better than the old stuff. For those of us who actually remember wearing the Nylon "rain jacket" after soaking it in Silicon know it's a huge improvement.

One thing though...it does not do very well in a driving, persistent over hours rain. It does leak and does allow water in. After all, Gortex can only do so much. I've worn the entire suit with a stealth suit and Neos and still got drenched all over after a few hours.

I wouldn't be too quick to turn in the slicker yet. I'm sure you sailors have been through some wicked rain storms on a rolling sea that would make torrents on land look like a lawn sprinkler.

My $0.02 worth.

Regards


----------



## NavyShooter (4 Aug 2010)

I'm an abnormal sailor in that I've been issued a lot of the kit talked about above....

From the "rubber" rain gear I was issued in Cornwallis where we painted the seams with silicon to seal it.

To the Yellow Canary suits on a half dozen ships, and a couple of hemispheres.

To the US Army rubber rain jacket from the mid '90s that was the "cat's meow" at the time (you didn't need to seal the seams!!! that was pre-done!) 

I have the current nylon-ish green rain-gear with my green kit, and was delighted at the temporary issue of a set of the new Gore-tex gear when I went to Bisley in '08 (borrowed from the Airforce and had to return it....)

I now have a grey stealth-suit that goes nicely under green gear.

I've tried a lot of different options out, and of the various issued pieces of gear, in various bits of weather from North Atlantic, to Mediterranian to Baltic, to Persian Gulf, to Gagetown, Pet, the UK, and various spots in between, the universality that I've noted between EVERY one of these pieces of gear, was that at some point, I got wet.

No matter how "good" the rain gear was, I got wet.

In '09 in Bisley, my preffered "rain" gear was my Stealth suit upper, over a wicking fiber shirt, under my combats, with the body armour on top to act as a nice warm vest, my tac-vest riding on top of that, and when I had the opportunity to stand up off the firing point, I'd put a rain jacket over top just to help keep some of the heat in.

I got soaked.  To the bone.  To the point that I have a photo of me pouring the water out of my shooting log book.  Except for my upper body.  My core stayed dry, so I stayed warm.  The wicking fiber drew a bit of the wet up from my pants, but not much.

I accept the fact that when the rain comes, the only parts of me that I want to keep dry are the lenses of my glasses, and keep the heat into my upper body a bit.

Having been issued all that kit, none of it has kept me "dry".  Over the years, it's progressively gotten better at keeping me "less wet", but never dry.

Should the Navy invest in some new rain gear?  Sure.  When we have some money it'd be a fine idea. 

In the meantime, I've got my stealth suit handy.  Thank-you RCR Kit-shop!

NS


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae (5 Aug 2010)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> And if anybody says that “real seaman don't wear camouflage" I suggest that they look up the Royal Australian Navy sea going uniform: It’s a black-grey-tan camo.


Likewise the USN with their  Navy Working Uniform.  These uniforms are not intended to be camouflage uniforms but rather the USN realized that a solid pattern uniform shows heavy wear areas much more predominantly than a multicoloured pattern and often a small stain or spot of paint renders a single coloured uniform not wearable.


----------



## REDinstaller (5 Aug 2010)

Camouflage is intended to mask the wearers presence, not to hide his sloppiness. We all know tomato sauce is hard to get out of anything, but the issue of Cadpat Raingear doesn't solve this dilemma. The AF has a monopoly on Cadpat Parkas...why, because the paid for them. Even though they don't ever use the garment to its full potential.


----------



## mover1 (5 Aug 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> Camouflage is intended to mask the wearers presence, not to hide his sloppiness. We all know tomato sauce is hard to get out of anything, but the issue of Cadpat Raingear doesn't solve this dilemma.


Like gravy off a Strathconas tunic?   ;D



			
				Tango18A said:
			
		

> The AF has a monopoly on Cadpat Parkas...why, because the paid for them. Even though they don't ever use the garment to its full potential.


How does the Airforce not use this garment to its full potential? I see lots of Techs in my squadron and other squadrons outside in the rain fixing airplanes with their rain gear on. 
I also see them wearing it on cool days.
The refletor tabs are great on active taxiways? 
And the pockets are fleece lined to keep your hands warm. 

The tab on the inside pocket holds your ear defenders on when your not using them.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (5 Aug 2010)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Sounds good, but there`s STILL people in Army Units (and others wearing Army uniforms elsewhere) who are anxiously awaiting their issue of the raingear.
> 
> :-\



Yup - still don't have mine - and nor did I when I last served in a field unit from 06-08...


----------



## REDinstaller (5 Aug 2010)

mover1 said:
			
		

> Like gravy off a Strathconas tunic?   ;D
> How does the Airforce not use this garment to its full potential? I see lots of Techs in my squadron and other squadrons outside in the rain fixing airplanes with their rain gear on.
> I also see them wearing it on cool days.
> The refletor tabs are great on active taxiways?
> ...



The ICE Parka. I don't think they are wearing that at all on cool days. In Edmonton I can't get a CADAPT ICE Parka issued to me as they are only for 408 Tac Hel Sqn. So I have a OG Parka instead, with Cadpat pants it looks Cadetish. And I tend to stay away from the Gravy, it makes my butt too big. ;D


----------



## George Wallace (5 Aug 2010)

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> I'm an abnormal sailor in that I've been issued a lot of the kit talked about above....
> 
> From the "rubber" rain gear I was issued in Cornwallis where we painted the seams with silicon to seal it.
> 
> ...




.....and under it all, your skin is still "water tight".    ;D


----------



## REDinstaller (5 Aug 2010)

Only if you're a marine mammal. >


----------



## Pusser (5 Aug 2010)

The chief reason we have had sub-standard gear in all elements for so many years is that although everybody knows the failings and everybody has been complaining for years, few people have actually bothered to submit a UCR on the stuff.  The wheels of bureaucracy turn slowly, but they're even slower when there's no grease!

Fire retardancy is not an issue in replacing the navy's canary suits.  Just about anything would be more fire retardant than the rubberized nylon we use now.  In fact, the ant-static properties of the AF kit would be very useful in the Navy, as fueling parties normally wear rain gear as protection from their periodic marine distillate baths.

The reason the Navy doesn't get any of the CADPAT stuff is because they chose not to participate (i.e. help fund) the various projects that produced it.

However, to the best of my knowledge, new rain gear is part of the overall review of naval clothing that is now ongoing.


----------



## REDinstaller (5 Aug 2010)

I'm surprised that new raingear wasn't in the NCD project. How much does it rain inside the ship? >

Shouldn't anyone that is outside of the ship in foul weather be wearing a floater suit any way?


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (5 Aug 2010)

Not really, Tango,

First of all, you do get rainy days without rough seas, so "flotation" would not be a concern.

Second of all, it does rain in summer too you know! I would not wear the floater jacket to work on deck above 15 degrees celsius, as you would sweat like a pig.


----------



## REDinstaller (5 Aug 2010)

We hopefully the Navy can get you guys something better than what you have now.  Maybe the SSI is eating up funds that could have been used better?


----------



## jollyjacktar (5 Aug 2010)

Pusser said:
			
		

> However, to the best of my knowledge, new rain gear is part of the overall review of naval clothing that is now ongoing.



Somewhere in the cobwebs of my mind I believe  I have heard this has/is being looked at as well.  However, with the length of process one might chalk it up to some of the other great misconceptions of western society.  "The check is in the mail.  I'll respect you in the morning.  There is a Santa Claus.  And lastly, Christmas is coming."

Yes, we all have bitched about the canary suit for years.  But, it does do what it is supposed to after a fashion.  Keep the water out.  Perhaps that is enough to slow change down if UCRs have been submitted.   I could have done with my old NCD jacket without the nifty new pockets on the sleeve for a while if the money could have gone towards decent rain gear if money is an issue.


----------



## Halifax Tar (5 Aug 2010)

JJT I can confirm that as of last summer the new rain gear was in the trial phase and distributed to a few personnel in the fleet for trials. I have seen the new rain gear and tried it on. Its just the same as the Army/Air stuff only plain black... Be patient it is coming my old friend!


----------



## Blackadder1916 (5 Aug 2010)

NICE rainsuit.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/aete/2in1rainsuitwindbreaker-impermeablecoupevent2en1-eng.asp


> 2-in-1 Naval Wind Raingear (NWR)
> 
> Waterproof, static dissipative suit (2 pc) navy blue / black in color for wear as a walking out dress in hot weather and during cool, low relative humidity conditions. It will have thermal dissipative characteristics to be wearable from +10 to +25C.



No photos of said item at site and there doesn't seem to have been any updates in over a year.  If memory serves there was a thread on here last year about NICE.


----------



## kratz (5 Aug 2010)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> If memory serves there was a thread on here last year about NICE.



Here is the link.


----------



## Lex Parsimoniae (5 Aug 2010)

Pusser said:
			
		

> However, to the best of my knowledge, new rain gear is part of the overall review of naval clothing that is now ongoing.


I was issued a navy blue rain suit in early '07 as part of the trial.  The suits we were issued were 'Canadianized' versions of the RAN rain gear.  We submitted our impressions/comments in the summer of '07.  Many switched back to the canary suits ASAP as they're more waterproof and durable.  Waterproof cold weather gloves...now that would be something!


----------



## Pusser (6 Aug 2010)

I thought gloves were in the works as well.  It matters not a lot to me.  My seagoing days are done.   However, even without the NICE project, we're still miles ahead of where we were when I joined.  Does anyone remember the old kapok weather jackets that would make you sink like a stone?  There were warm though.


----------



## cobbler (6 Aug 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> Camouflage is intended to mask the wearers presence, not to hide his sloppiness. We all know tomato sauce is hard to get out of anything, but the issue of Cadpat Raingear doesn't solve this dilemma.



Really closing your eyes as to the nature of shipboard work there.


----------



## Zoomie (6 Aug 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> In Edmonton I can't get a CADAPT ICE Parka issued to me



You can have mine.  Most aircrew that I know take all their relish and throw it all in a bag in the closet.


----------



## REDinstaller (7 Aug 2010)

cobbler said:
			
		

> Really closing your eyes as to the nature of shipboard work there.



So how is the Cadpat Raingear going to help you on ship then??



			
				Zoomie said:
			
		

> You can have mine.  Most aircrew that I know take all their relish and throw it all in a bag in the closet.



Hence why I said that Cadpat is under utilized by Aircrews.


----------



## KrazyHamburglar (7 Aug 2010)

I think the title of the thread is misleading... 
I doubt that any sailor really want to walk around the Dockyard wearing Cadpat raingear over the NCD but the design of the jacket itself would be better than the canari.


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Aug 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> ...Hence why I said that Cadpat is under utilized by non-tac hel Aircrews.



There, T18A, fixed it for you!  

Huah!
G2G


----------



## REDinstaller (7 Aug 2010)

Thanks man.No slag intended for the Tac hel guys.


----------



## aesop081 (7 Aug 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> Hence why I said that Cadpat is under utilized by Aircrews.



It is certainly not under utilized by ground crews and support personel.......even non-tac hel ones.


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Aug 2010)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> It is certainly not under utilized by operational ground crews and support personel.......even non-tac hel ones.



There, fixed it for you too, CA!  Man, what is it with you guys tonight?  LOL


----------



## REDinstaller (7 Aug 2010)

I was particularly refering to the issue of the ICE parka to the AF. No requirement for it compared to the Army.


----------



## aesop081 (7 Aug 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> No requirement for it compared to the Army.



Realy ?

Have you tired servicing aircraft in the middle of winter in places like Cold Lake, Iqualuit, Inuvik, Yellowknife.......


----------



## REDinstaller (7 Aug 2010)

Does the camo properties of the parka add to its warmth. The AF can have all the OG IECS parkas on a one for one from the Army.


----------



## aesop081 (7 Aug 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> Does the camo properties of the parka add to its warmth. The AF can have all the OG IECS parkas on a one for one from the Army.



The AF paid for theirs out of AF money....sorry you got ****ed by your own army.........take it up with the CLS.


----------



## REDinstaller (7 Aug 2010)

Yes I know we bought a small pack system instead.


----------



## armyvern (7 Aug 2010)

Tango18A said:
			
		

> I was particularly refering to the issue of the ICE parka to the AF. *No requirement for it compared to the Army*.



Interestingly, I posted a comment on the site wrt the Army's actual use of it's Parka and overalls ECW way back when, years ago, it was decided that they would not be issued to all Army personnel. I posted the reasons why that was decided and I included a pic of the piles of stuff we received back from a certain Infantry regiment.

Because, when we began doing the one for one exchanges ... a full 80% of the olive drab ECW parkas and overalls that were returned from Army personnel (Infantry guys) came back still in their original packaging which they had laid in for years in those pers' basements. Even those that were unpackaged when swapped out for the ICE, were in "excellent" or "brand new" condition. Why then, spend millions to get ICE for Army pers who didn't even wear their old OG stuff? Some did. But, the huge majority did not ever touch it.

On the other hand, the same could not be said for Air pers when we did their swap-outs. Even those in Trenton for example had used their old ECW ... it gets pretty damn cold working on a flight line with no windbreak for hours on end fixing an aircraft. 

Your observation as to who "used" parkas was simply not borne out by facts brought to light when the exchanges occured. With 80% of army guys returning their old parkas and overalls still in their original packaging, it quickly became very obvious that there existed no requirement to purchase and issue new ICE to them all, but rather only into those positions who actually made use of that expensive kit.


----------

