# Navy doing trials on new clothing???



## Navy_Blue (12 Feb 2007)

Recently I have noticed that several units in the fleet and on base have personnel doing trials on new clothing.  I only know of two.  Black T-shirts for under our NCD's and while doing a tour on the St John's I notice on the bulletin board in the ET shop referenced two people doing a sock trial??  I searched a little but most sites reference our clothing on line stuff and nothing more.  Anyone know anything about this??  These seem like small things but I was hoping it might be an indication they have bigger plans afoot for other trials ie. coveralls    I hate trying to find crap on the DIN.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (12 Feb 2007)

No coveralls in the Navy's future at all, at least that what the FCPO told us awhile ago. The new NCDs we will eventually get will be the two piece similiar to the ones you are currently issued.


----------



## Neill McKay (12 Feb 2007)

Navy_Blue said:
			
		

> Recently I have noticed that several units in the fleet and on base have personnel doing trials on new clothing.  I only know of two.  Black T-shirts for under our NCD's



Are you sure that was a trial, as opposed to a couple of people doing it on their own?  I've seen a few people with various t-shirts under NCDs (and at least one non-issue belt) before.


----------



## Sub_Guy (12 Feb 2007)

I did read somewhere that the navy was going to issue black t-shirts for wear with Cadpat for those personnel posted to specific units. (along with the fancy cadpat name tag/rank slip on) When I am at work next I will see if I can track it down...  (But why trial a T-shirt.... IT's a T-shirt!)

What ever happened to the rain coat they were trialling?  I did see some CPO2 wearing it around dockyard a few years ago... He mentioned it was part of a trial.

Not going to coveralls   -----> lame (my opinion)


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (12 Feb 2007)

Navy_Blue said:
			
		

> Recently I have noticed that several units in the fleet and on base have personnel doing trials on new clothing.  I only know of two.  Black T-shirts for under our NCD's and while doing a tour on the St John's I notice on the bulletin board in the ET shop referenced two people doing a sock trial??  I searched a little but most sites reference our clothing on line stuff and nothing more.  Anyone know anything about this??  These seem like small things but I was hoping it might be an indication they have bigger plans afoot for other trials ie. coveralls    I hate trying to find crap on the DIN.



The black t shirt trial is definately happening cause I saw one inthe mess the other day and the person said his unit was designated to do the trial....can't remember which one of the top of my head. I have to wear DEU every day so it didn't impact me too much.


----------



## Halifax Tar (12 Feb 2007)

As a Naval Storesy perhaps I can shed some light.

There is a program out there called NICE (Naval Improved Clothing and Equipment). I saw this memo come across my desk about a year ago. In it we such items as fleece for our "gortex" parkas, sun/ballistic glasses, in and out dress rain gear, black tshirts, new socks, new long underwear this is just a sample there must have been 25-30 items all together. 

I have herd through the supply rumor mill that NICE is now on the back burner, BUT i do know for a fact we are trialing black Tshirts (i know its a Tshirt WTF!) and socks. The socks we are trialing are the new army 2 sock system. The army has had it for a few years now and now were seeing if there socks will work for the navy.

On a side note most of the stuff I listed and more is just simply the newer generation or army clothing (minus cad-pat) dyed to a more naval color.


----------



## SoF (13 Feb 2007)

I hope that black t-shirt trial doesn't cost any money because that would be a stupid waste of well needed cash.


----------



## Navy_Blue (13 Feb 2007)

You know it cost lots of money if they have to call it a trial.  I hope we get the army issue winter gloves in black that would be sweet.


----------



## TAS278 (13 Feb 2007)

I do find it quite absurd that they would even waste time asking people what they think. When they are just going to do what is cheapest anyway.

You know it and so do i.

Trials are someones desk job in Ottawa, we should all be so lucky


----------



## TAS278 (13 Feb 2007)

That was funny. .. Dress Police, I thought that was the RPO's job


----------



## Neill McKay (13 Feb 2007)

gravyboat said:
			
		

> The navy needs a better belt for work dress.  The current DEU belt is insufficient for wear at sea.



The dress regs provide for a leather belt as an alternative to the usual one, but I've never seen such a thing available for issue.


----------



## Stokers_Rule (13 Feb 2007)

The belt I wear with my NCDs came through the stores system and I believe is called a Firefighter's safety belt or something.  Good solid buckle, nice sturdy leather, much like the one I was issued in Cornwallis, minus the weak brass buckle.  Haven't been picked up yet, but I'll be going back to see soon so we'll see.  8)


----------



## SupersonicMax (13 Feb 2007)

A Cotton T-Shirt and a Synthetic Fiber T-Shirt is very different... Both in comfort and fire protection.  Me thinks there is a reason for trials...

Max


----------



## Navy_Blue (13 Feb 2007)

You can get fire fighters belts through the system.  We got the whole MSE dept on the ship kitted with them and it was great.  Still have mine just can't ware it at CFNES.


----------



## PO2FinClk (13 Feb 2007)

gravyboat said:
			
		

> As for the t-shirts a MARGEN exists indicating that a white cotton t-shirt is approved for wear with NCD.


033/04


----------



## Sub_Guy (13 Feb 2007)

The white t-shirt is what we should be issued anyways. I have to wear one under my NCD's its a comfort issue, and it doesn't look that bad either.


----------



## NavyShooter (13 Feb 2007)

Stanfields makes some nice comfy nomex t-shirts and long sleeve shirts too, great for "under" dress when you're looking for a little extra....protection?  In Hot parts of the world.

I've got a couple that I usually bring on ship with me....not WUPS approved, but in my mind, better than just the issued shirts....

NS


----------



## Stoker (14 Feb 2007)

Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> The white t-shirt is what we should be issued anyways. I have to wear one under my NCD's its a comfort issue, and it doesn't look that bad either.



Its funny that the clothing online lists a grey t shirt for the navy, but doesn't list a white one for use on ship.


----------



## Stoker (14 Feb 2007)

Navy_Blue said:
			
		

> You can get fire fighters belts through the system.  We got the whole MSE dept on the ship kitted with them and it was great.  Still have mine just can't ware it at CFNES.



Thats something i'd like to order for my department, do you have a stock #.


----------



## armyvern (14 Feb 2007)

Stoker said:
			
		

> Its funny that the clothing online lists a grey t shirt for the navy, but doesn't list a white one for use on ship.



That's explained by the fact that the grey items listed on Logistik are PT kit items (they should show on all enviornments -they do on my Army one) and are a one time initial issue.

The white t-shirts are a naval only item, not DEU, and Logistik is not the supplier.


----------



## Stoker (15 Feb 2007)

The Librarian said:
			
		

> That's explained by the fact that the grey items listed on Logistik are PT kit items (they should show on all enviornments -they do on my Army one) and are a one time initial issue.
> 
> The white t-shirts are a naval only item, not DEU, and Logistik is not the supplier.



Perhaps its time that white T shirts are added to the site, as well as green and for a cheap price and while we are at it get a new supplier. I find the quality of clothing available from clothing online to be of inferior quality.


----------



## armyvern (15 Feb 2007)

Well, no use putting the clothing on the web-site then...it's Logistik's site not the DND/CFs.

That is, BTW, the first time I've heard that complaint regarding inferior quality clothing from Logistik. It does meet the Mil-specs.


----------



## Stoker (15 Feb 2007)

The Librarian said:
			
		

> Well, no use putting the clothing on the web-site then...it's Logistik's site not the DND/CFs.
> 
> That is, BTW, the first time I've heard that complaint regarding inferior quality clothing from Logistik. It does meet the Mil-specs.



Well thats only my opinion. I find the clothing doesn't last as long as what we had before. To tell you the truth I don't really like the web site either.


----------



## armyvern (15 Feb 2007)

You're not alone. I'm quite sure we could all find something to complain about re the site.


----------



## Stoker (15 Feb 2007)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> No coveralls in the Navy's future at all, at least that what the FCPO told us awhile ago. The new NCDs we will eventually get will be the two piece similiar to the ones you are currently issued.



Use of coveralls on ships been bantered around for ever since I can remember. There are advantages of wearing coveralls and there have been plans over the last number of years to trial them. What I have seen there are some people in the chain of command that do not like coveralls and have blocked their adoption. I think they are a good idea.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (15 Feb 2007)

Stoker said:
			
		

> Use of coveralls on ships been bantered around for ever since I can remember. There are advantages of wearing coveralls and there have been plans over the last number of years to trial them. What I have seen there are some people in the chain of command that do not like coveralls and have blocked their adoption. I think they are a good idea.



We had an Aussie visitor this week at our office and he was showing us pictures from shipboard life in the RAN. they are all in coveralls and look very comfy and professional. I think this is something that has been blocked by those who don't like them....a select few in the upper echelon.


----------



## Sub_Guy (15 Feb 2007)

Concur, the Aussie/Kiwi's coveralls are a great idea, they are more comfortable....  Not to mention they have reflective stripes which would be handy in the event of a power failure/fire.

Some day those dinosaurs will be retired and the new ideas will be entertained..... Just like the CRTC!


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (16 Feb 2007)

Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> Concur, the Aussie/Kiwi's coveralls are a great idea, they are more comfortable....  Not to mention they have reflective stripes which would be handy in the event of a power failure/fire.
> 
> Some day those dinosaurs will be retired and the new ideas will be entertained..... Just like the CRTC!



I so hear you. I was having a conversation about this with a salty old Chief of my vintage today (30 years before the mast...arrrrrrr) and we were both bemoaning the 50's attitudes of some of our brain trust with respect to a lot of things including "buttons and bows."
The women are not as comfy with coveralls but having said that we had a woman RAN exchange officer when I sailed with Huron and she loved them...so go figure.


----------



## jollyjacktar (17 Feb 2007)

Coveralls are the way to go.  It will really have a positive impact on close up times as you won't be fighting with buttons and the like.  I did hear that it was the "Dress Committee" who put the brakes on the idea in the past.  Some of the Mahogony Admirals did not like the idea of zippers, they wanted to see shirts and buttons.  It would not come of a surprise if some of these people are charter members of the Flat Earth Society as well.

White is a stupid colour to have on a ship, especially on the Tankers.  Black or Navy Blue would be a better choice.  At the very least they would look cleaner longer than several hours.

Right now I am in KAF.  I am using the Army's two sock system daily.   It is great and very comfortable, I do hope they adopt this for us as well.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (17 Feb 2007)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Coveralls are the way to go.  It will really have a positive impact on close up times as you won't be fighting with buttons and the like.  I did hear that it was the "Dress Committee" who put the brakes on the idea in the past.  Some of the Mahogony Admirals did not like the idea of zippers, they wanted to see shirts and buttons.  It would not come of a surprise if some of these people are charter members of the Flat Earth Society as well.
> 
> White is a stupid colour to have on a ship, especially on the Tankers.  Black or Navy Blue would be a better choice.  At the very least they would look cleaner longer than several hours.
> 
> Right now I am in KAF.  I am using the Army's two sock system daily.   It is great and very comfortable, I do hope they adopt this for us as well.



Yes I too used the two sock system when I was in Gagetown and the fleece is great too. I've seen some of the other Navies using fleece....I think when the Danes were here last year they had fleece. It was dark blue and you can put Velcro on it to attach name tags etc...very warm and comfy.
I'm not sure who is the culprit on dress committee but it seems like good practical ideas don't get very far sometimes. 
When I joined officers had to wear shoes, DEU shirt and peaked caps on the bridge or when closed up for entering/leaving harbour. Because the old man didn't like me he assigned me as permanent Focsle officer (so he could keep an eye on me). I'll tell you it was a little chilly up there on the focsle even in Esquimalt! He would often order "negative weather jackets" because he didn't like the fact that there was no rank on the jackets (those were the old green ones not the current mustang type). I remember how grateful we were when they finally issued the "new" green sweater and let us wear sea boots....some folks haven't progressed much further than these old days when style outweighed practicality.
there are a lot of retirements coming in the next 5 years...let's cross our fingers that some of the dinosaurs swallow the anchor!!  ;D


----------



## childs56 (27 Feb 2007)

My only concern with Fleece, t shirt and the Army two sock system would be if they are fire and heat retardent. In previous conversations in other forums it was mentioned that this was the one of the most important things in consideration of new clothing for the NAVY


----------



## armyvern (27 Feb 2007)

CTD said:
			
		

> My only concern with Fleece, t shirt and the Army two sock system would be if they are fire and heat retardent. In previous conversations in other forums it was mentioned that this was the one of the most important things in consideration of new clothing for the NAVY



I'm not sure if they are or not, but the Air Force is wearing the 2 sock system now and they are big on the same factors. Hmmm, I'll have to check the specs out when I get back to work on Wednesday.


----------



## Sub_Guy (27 Feb 2007)

I doubt the fleece would be for shipboard wear.   Our NCDs are fine.

Back to the coveralls, can someone tell me why the Firefighters and Hull techs are permitted to wear coveralls, while the rest of the crew gets NCD's.  Not that its important because I only have 1 more month in the Navy.  

Zippers in boots?   No I will take my laces please!!


----------



## jollyjacktar (27 Feb 2007)

Firefighters wear coveralls as part of their normal dress when employed in firehall/crash rescue duties.  HT's are cross trained in crash rescue and on 280's and CPF take up several positions as HT/FF in the hangar/flightdeck as part of the FF crew.   Therefore they are filling the position and dress accordingly.


----------



## Sub_Guy (27 Feb 2007)

I agree, but we are all trained to be Ship Firefighters. I know am grasping at straws here but most Army clerks wear Cadpat as their dress of the day but they have to wear NCD's while on ship, so why not get all sailors in coveralls!! 

 I am just a bitter sailor who likes coveralls!  

NCD's are ok, but I know that I can throw on coveralls and get zipped up twice as fast as I would in NCD's!  In my simple mind I think Maritime Command would attempt to make the jump to coveralls if the RN did it first!


----------



## Stoker (27 Feb 2007)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Firefighters wear coveralls as part of their normal dress when employed in firehall/crash rescue duties.  HT's are cross trained in crash rescue and on 280's and CPF take up several positions as HT/FF in the hangar/flightdeck as part of the FF crew.   Therefore they are filling the position and dress accordingly.



On ship I am rapid response and have to respond to any emergency. The wearing of coveralls will improve close up times and thus improve combat efficiency. I would say a pair of coveralls probally doesn't cost anymore than what we wear now. The problem is that some people at the top of the chain of command think coveralls are lazy because they are easy to get in or out of. So far they have been sucessful,but the time will come that these dinosaurs will be gone.


----------



## childs56 (27 Feb 2007)

I was to understand that the Airforce issued the new blue T shirt that is 100% cotton to flight line personalle for the fact that is as flame retardent as you can get with out getting into Nomex. 
The Rain jackets and IECS issued to them is all anti static and or static dissapaiting. 
Hence the reason for not suppose to wear the fleece and or older wool shirts. They also issued the white 100% cotton long under wear and/or the unlabeled Helly Hanson flame retardent blue long under wear for the the flight line personalle. 

IF they could issue a good decent winter glove and winter boot then all would be great for them on the flight line. The coices now are winter mitts, flight gloves, anti contact gloves, muklucks or your good old issued steel toed line boots/new style ones. 

Which at -30 as good as the muklucks are, walking on the lex of a F18 is not in your best interest due to the clumseyness of the boots. Nor is wearing the work boots, due to the fact they do not insulate very well. 

As for a good pair of gloves, that one is hard to deciede. The mittins are impossible to work in. The flight line gloves are good but provide no cold protection, Getting a screw or a bolt stuck to your finger sucks at that temperature. 

The NAvy and the Airforce are in the same boat right now. What is the best over all clothing that we can provide that will suit the actual needs, but more so our image that we want to portray. And at the least costly figure.


----------



## Springroll (27 Feb 2007)

I think the coveralls would be awesome!!


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (27 Feb 2007)

Springroll said:
			
		

> I think the coveralls would be awesome!!



+1 I agree Springroll. Much easier and safer.


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Mar 2007)

Dolphin Hunter, yes we are all Shipboard FF trained I agree.  But the Helo/Crash Rescue is a different kettle of fish.  Related in that there is fire involved but completely diffferent ROE etc.   But again, the HT wearing the gear is because they are involved in that line of work.

 I agree with you on the bitterness of not being able to wear coveralls, it is a sore point in many fronts.  As Stoker mentioned, he too is rapid response and this form of dress does indeed cut down the close up times greatly.  And yes, the cost of  these coveralls is similar or cheaper than the full NCD suite.  Some higher ups don't like the look of coveralls and feel that they are a sloppy form of dress.  Hopefully these old timers will at last retire and some more foreward thinking individuals come into the decision making process.


----------



## FSTO (3 Mar 2007)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Dolphin Hunter, yes we are all Shipboard FF trained I agree.  But the Helo/Crash Rescue is a different kettle of fish.  Related in that there is fire involved but completely diffferent ROE etc.   But again, the HT wearing the gear is because they are involved in that line of work.
> 
> I agree with you on the bitterness of not being able to wear coveralls, it is a sore point in many fronts.  As Stoker mentioned, he too is rapid response and this form of dress does indeed cut down the close up times greatly.  And yes, the cost of  these coveralls is similar or cheaper than the full NCD suite.  Some higher ups don't like the look of coveralls and feel that they are a sloppy form of dress.  Hopefully these old timers will at last retire and some more foreward thinking individuals come into the decision making process.



Coveralls sloppy?? Have they not seen what the NCD's look like? Multi shades of green/blue/black pants, faded shirt (which you constantly have to tuck in!) frayed collars, supply system that won't exchange....The list is endless.


----------



## Sub_Guy (3 Mar 2007)

I have yet to see coveralls looking sloppy, although the only two navies that I have seen look good in coveralls are the Aussie's and Kiwi's. 

The NCD dress IMHO looks awful, throw on a  beret (god ugly thing) and it looks worse!


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Mar 2007)

FSTO said:
			
		

> Coveralls sloppy?? Have they not seen what the NCD's look like? Multi shades of green/blue/black pants, faded shirt (which you constantly have to tuck in!) frayed collars, supply system that won't exchange....The list is endless.



This was the reasoning given I am told by the dress committee as part of their decision.  They felt that buttons on shirts and the like looked more professional, and that really sailors wanted to have buttons etc instead of coveralls.  This is perhaps what happens when you are too far away from the coal face and out of touch with the wishes of the great unwashed.

I agree the NCDs can look like a bag of shit especially when they are subjected to the hard reality of shipboard life, especially in the engineering world.  But to be fair, I am sure that there would be those indivuduals who would make coveralls look just as bad in about the same time frame.


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (12 Mar 2007)

Hers my 2 cents,  as a sailer 1. the NCD's are garbage, they look like garbage, maintain like garbage, and wear through in less than a hockey season, add on top of that a ball cap and we look like we should be pumping gas at payless after dropping out of Jr high. 
2. Ball Caps, I hope that some C1 out there decides he/she's going to play the book right by the letter, "may wear ball cap at sea" period just like the floppy hat the army and airforce have.
3. Garison Dress, those posted ashore/garrison should wear a standard of dress higher than that of seagoing/field units period, typically they sit at desks or instruct in schools, typically the first people that are seen by the public. I wear Service Dress (all order no 3) at work including whites during summer periods.
4. Sea Boots, on of 2 things enforce that they must be blackened or discontinue thier use a walking out rig, they are usually green(mildew) grey or have steel poking through, why you might ask, because these are P1/P2's and Chief's walking out like this, a horrible display of leadership in my opinion
5. We need NOMEX clothing in the navy (nope) cotton clothing yes, cotton is naturaly fire "resistant", we no longer fight fires with rain gear we use proper turn out gear, the kind that guys wear jeans and bathing suits under. there must be something more utilitarian, that looks better and more proffesional than NCD's

And again scrap the ball caps, we're not playing ball or selling gas and smokes, keep some pride about us.

I was once told by a WO if we can't get you to fold your damn socks a certain way how can we get you to engage the enemy in conversation let alone with a rifle.


----------



## Stoker (12 Mar 2007)

Disenchantedsailor said:
			
		

> 5. We need NOMEX clothing in the navy (nope) cotton clothing yes, cotton is naturaly fire "resistant", we no longer fight fires with rain gear we use proper turn out gear, the kind that guys wear jeans and bathing suits under. there must be something more utilitarian, that looks better and more proffesional than NCD's



I agree with most of your points, however the use of cotton instead of NOMEX is something I don't agree with. Cotton is not naturally fire resistant, unless its treated with a fire retardant, most often the fire retardant will become less effective with washing. Wool is actually more fire retardant than cotton. While its fine under bunker gear, what about people conducting rapid response? or in the case of a flash fire? If I have to go into a fire as rapid response or to fight a fire i'm going to want the max protection NOMEX or something similar will provide. I think a good set of NOMEX coveralls is the best bet.


----------



## aesop081 (12 Mar 2007)

*sigh*

Take it from the aircrew world...NOMEX coverall alone will do nothing for you........it is only effective if you have a layer underneath it, like cotton.......

2 words.....DUAL LAYERS


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (12 Mar 2007)

you make a good point, especially for the rapid repsonse types, but heres this in tropical weather the troops enjoy the benefits of shorts, and T-shirts for night clothing are coming back how well will they fare in a flash fire (likely caused by battle damage). I will give merit to your point about rapid response requiring special gear sure for for the average dresses like a bag of hammers sailer (and remember these are a sailors observations) long pants sure, jacket at hand sure, but why kit thats falls apart after the third or fourth washing (NCD's not coveralls) or coveralls for everyone that make us all look like prisoners (lets not forget that every guest of our special place in Edmonton wear coveralls)


----------



## Stoker (12 Mar 2007)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> *sigh*
> 
> Take it from the aircrew world...NOMEX coverall alone will do nothing for you........it is only effective if you have a layer underneath it, like cotton.......
> 
> 2 words.....DUAL LAYERS



Yes underware made of 50/50 cotton/wool mix or 100% cotton should also be worn.


----------



## aesop081 (12 Mar 2007)

Stoker said:
			
		

> Yes underware made of 50/50 cotton/wool mix or 100% cotton should also be worn.



On my AMT course they showed us what happens to skin when only the NOMEX layer is worn.......it aint pretty !!


----------



## Stoker (12 Mar 2007)

Disenchantedsailor said:
			
		

> you make a good point, especially for the rapid repsonse types, but heres this in tropical weather the troops enjoy the benefits of shorts, and T-shirts for night clothing are coming back how well will they fare in a flash fire (likely caused by battle damage). I will give merit to your point about rapid response requiring special gear sure for for the average dresses like a bag of hammers sailer (and remember these are a sailors observations) long pants sure, jacket at hand sure, but why kit thats falls apart after the third or fourth washing (NCD's not coveralls) or coveralls for everyone that make us all look like prisoners (lets not forget that every guest of our special place in Edmonton wear coveralls)



Anyone can be rapid response. Are shorts still worn as tropical gear? As for night dress I don't agree with it and I refuse to let my stokers wear it. I agree that the current NCD's do not stand up to normal wear very much, that should be looked at. I would also like to see a fleece alongside or some sort of intermediate garment to wear when the NCD jacket is not warm enough and the gortex jacket is too warm.


----------



## aesop081 (12 Mar 2007)

Synthetic fibers bad..........


----------



## navymich (12 Mar 2007)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> This was the reasoning given I am told by the dress committee as part of their decision.  They felt that *buttons on shirts* and the like looked more professional, and that really sailors wanted to have buttons etc instead of coveralls.  This is perhaps what happens when you are too far away from the coal face and out of touch with the wishes of the great unwashed.



"Buttons"?  They had buttons on the shirts?   Most people just pulled them off over their head anyway, to save time if/when having to put them back on quickly anyway.  That and skipped wearing a belt too (or tried to, dependent on observant coxns of course) to try and save even more precious seconds.  Yet more reasons to have coveralls.


----------



## Sub_Guy (12 Mar 2007)

Disenchantedsailor said:
			
		

> 2. Ball Caps, I hope that some C1 out there decides he/she's going to play the book right by the letter, "may wear ball cap at sea" period just like the floppy hat the army and airforce have.



Ball caps look much better than the beret, and they are more comfortable (for me anyway).....   There is nothing wrong with guys wearing ball caps around dockyard.  Some look sloppy, but the entire uniform looks like shit, its not the ball cap.  It works with the Yank uniform, for some reason their Naval dress doesn't look as sloppy as ours, even when compared to the kippers our NCD's still look like shit.

But what do I care.... I only have a few more days as a fish-head, then I am off to better and bigger things.....


----------



## Sub_Guy (19 Mar 2007)

Disenchantedsailor said:
			
		

> Hers
> 3. Garison Dress, those posted ashore/garrison should wear a standard of dress higher than that of seagoing/field units period, typically they sit at desks or instruct in schools, typically the first people that are seen by the public. I wear Service Dress (all order no 3) at work including whites during summer periods.
> And again scrap the ball caps, we're not playing ball or selling gas and smokes, keep some pride about us.
> 
> I was once told by a WO if we can't get you to fold your damn socks a certain way how can we get you to engage the enemy in conversation let alone with a rifle.



1. Spell check its there bro, use it.

2. Unless you are allocated the extra points why would you wear your No 3's in BIS as a LS, I work in the same building as yourself, and I have yet to see you in "whites", but keep up the good work and keep your lips clean!

3. Scrap ball caps?  Is it just because you don't like them? If you want us to look like sailors and not gas station attendants then we better bring back the square rig.


----------



## TAS278 (19 Mar 2007)

I will definitely agree that our current NCD's or completely made of sub standard material. Buttons are always coming off, strings are always hanging... The shirts are too short.  There are a number of reasons not to wear what we are currently using. I would like to see a change but in light of where the rest of our funding is going I really don't see a change coming down the pipe anytime soon. 

We all know what would make more sense. I guess that is what I find baffling. everyone complains but whenever change is introduced it never makes it through the "rigorous" process. The reason are never clearly spelled out either. The whole things just seems so vague.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (19 Mar 2007)

Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> 1. Spell check its there bro, use it.
> 
> 2. Unless you are allocated the extra points why would you wear your No 3's in BIS as a LS, I work in the same building as yourself, and I have yet to see you in "whites", but keep up the good work and keep your lips clean!
> 
> 3. Scrap ball caps?  Is it just because you don't like them? If you want us to look like sailors and not gas station attendants then we better bring back the square rig.



Arrrr bring back the Square Rig Arrrrrrr  ;D


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (19 Mar 2007)

I think I've worn my NCD's about 3 times since I got there, you're a watch keeper so we see each other what 1 day in 10 or fifteen maybe less due to weekends. And its got SFA to do with a@@ kissing, ask anyone whose sailed with me, when my lips move its usually to point out exactly how retarted I believe some ORO's are. The last time I checked the standing orders said "may wear work dress" check QR&O's Chap 102 for defs, May indicates a choice, Shall indicates a Direction, I choose to wear salt and peppers because it looks less gas pumpish than NCD's, and April's coming, I'll be the guy with white pants, why because I can.


----------



## Prairie Sailor (21 Mar 2007)

Disenchantedsailor said:
			
		

> I think I've worn my NCD's about 3 times since I got there, you're a watch keeper so we see each other what 1 day in 10 or fifteen maybe less due to weekends. And its got SFA to do with a@@ kissing, ask anyone whose sailed with me, when my lips move its usually to point out exactly how retarted I believe some ORO's are. The last time I checked the standing orders said "may wear work dress" check QR&O's Chap 102 for defs, May indicates a choice, Shall indicates a Direction, I choose to wear salt and peppers because it looks less gas pumpish than NCD's, and April's coming, I'll be the guy with white pants, why because I can.



QR&O 19.14 – IMPROPER COMMENTS
(1) No officer or non-commissioned member shall make remarks or pass criticism tending to bring a superior into contempt, except as may be necessary for the proper presentation of a grievance under Chapter 7 (Grievances). (15 June 2000)

You state in several of your posts that dress and deportment are at an all time low. Deportment also includes what we say and this is not a very positive statement to make about a superior.


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (21 Mar 2007)

agreed my slip, except that is was not directed at a particular individual, therefore not insubodrinate, improper sure.


----------



## aesop081 (21 Mar 2007)

Great...now you guys can get back to the subject.......right ?

army.ca staff


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (21 Mar 2007)

Right,

      So baring getting rid of the NCD's altogether anybody have any ideas on how to improve  the care that goes into them, i.e. get the troops to press them, maybe attack the boots with a brush every now and then??


----------



## Sub_Guy (22 Mar 2007)

Getting sailors to press NCD's is a leadership issue. 

Now do I think we should be creased up and starched at sea?  No.

But alongside there is no reason why most people don't press their NCD's.

So (IMHO) the only way to get that done is through excellent leadership.


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (22 Mar 2007)

I'm thinking we're on the same wavelength on this one


----------



## GreasyStoker (22 Mar 2007)

Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> Getting sailors to press NCD's is a leadership issue.
> 
> Now do I think we should be creased up and starched at sea?  No.
> 
> ...


Some trade's jobs don't stop just because the boat comes alongside.
Ask most MSE folks to press their pants and prepare to be told what to do with your hat.

Unless you are talking about being up at the school/shore billet and more *visible*, in that case I agree with you.


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (22 Mar 2007)

I'm leaning more toward walking in and out rig, really anytime you're in a position to contact the public, the ones that pay our saleries, so places like schools, offices, where you are likely to have contact with the public on a daily/near daily basis. The chances of a civillian "suit and tie" type coming into an office at Headquarters/Support buildings is fairly high, not so much in the bilge of a 280.


----------



## TAS278 (22 Mar 2007)

Disenchantedsailor said:
			
		

> I'm leaning more toward walking in and out rig, really anytime you're in a position to contact the public, the ones that pay our saleries, so places like schools, offices, where you are likely to have contact with the public on a daily/near daily basis. The chances of a civillian "suit and tie" type coming into an office at Headquarters/Support buildings is fairly high, not so much in the bilge of a 280.



I am sorry, I thought that way, maybe my first 3 years in but there is no reason why we can't wear our work dress/civilians in and out of the base. #1's #2'S will just give another watch for some poor RPO to stand and inspect people. Unless you are talking about not having enough things to screw up at work. We could add this...


----------



## navymich (22 Mar 2007)

Personally, I used to iron my NCDs all of the time.  But due to my position, I also had more time available to me to do so while at sea, as well.  I understood when my department wasn't able to.  They knew that I expected them to have them ironed for while we were alongside and any inspections etc.  But at sea, I relaxed on them.  However, it didn't mean that they looked like a bag of crap either.  If you take your NCDs out of the dryer as soon as they are done and hang them up, they look fine.  All it is, is putting a bit more effort into it.  And it doesn't take long to take a brush to the boots either to blacken them.


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (22 Mar 2007)

Airmich,

I've found doing it that way the shirts usually need some touch up, no big deal but the creases in the pants can last 3 weeks or so without taking an iron to them, and of course at sea is a much different story and some relaxation is warranted. As for TAS278 I wasn't thinking Ceremonial Dress (#1's) or Mess Dress (#2's) for walking out but a reasonably well turned out set of NCD's when leaving dockyard. It wasn't long ago we had to wear salt & peppers as walking out rig, no civis. I think the reason theres more civis than uniforms leaving at the end of the day is people have become ashamed of the uniform, I have wingers who won't even admit they're in the military. Taking pride in our kit is just the first step in preserving the military sub-society in Canada.


----------



## Sub_Guy (23 Mar 2007)

GreasyStoker said:
			
		

> Some trade's jobs don't stop just because the boat comes alongside.
> Ask most MSE folks to press their pants and prepare to be told what to do with your hat.
> 
> Unless you are talking about being up at the school/shore billet and more *visible*, in that case I agree with you.



Submariner here.  I get your point.  On ship is one thing, Tim Hortons is another. 

You should not be seen struting around outside the confines of Dockyard/Naden looking like a bag of siht.


----------



## TAS278 (23 Mar 2007)

Disenchantedsailor said:
			
		

> Airmich,
> 
> I've found doing it that way the shirts usually need some touch up, no big deal but the creases in the pants can last 3 weeks or so without taking an iron to them, and of course at sea is a much different story and some relaxation is warranted. As for TAS278 I wasn't thinking Ceremonial Dress (#1's) or Mess Dress (#2's) for walking out but a reasonably well turned out set of NCD's when leaving dockyard. It wasn't long ago we had to wear salt & peppers as walking out rig, no civvies. I think the reason theres more civvies than uniforms leaving at the end of the day is people have become ashamed of the uniform, I have wingers who won't even admit they're in the military. Taking pride in our kit is just the first step in preserving the military sub-society in Canada.



Well the ashamed to be military thing sounds very far fetched to me. I recall the "Salt & Pepper" days. What happened with Civvies was 911. They didn't want military personnel being targeted. I had also heard something about some insurance issues while in uniform. While traveling to and from work you are considered to be at work and if injured, you will be compensated as such. But as that obviously sounds quite absurd while traveling home as you can easily stop for groceries and such they went to civvies optional.

But I still find it funny for someone to say they are ashamed.. they need to consider releasing from the forces.  

Anyhoo, someone who gets paid more than I do will figure out what is appropriate and what isn't. 

What were we talking about again


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (23 Mar 2007)

In 1997 there was a white paper written based o the results of a forces wide survay that found the underlying factor in CF personel not wearing thier uniforms to and from work was related to a lack of pride, and shame. Likely due to the way the forces had been treated over the previous 10 years, CAR, Base Closures, Pay freezes, Defence cuts and the like. As for coverage to and from work, our contract of unlimited liability ensures we are on the clock all the time, including if we are gardening in our backyards, and yes I have heard people tell Ladies in a club they "work for the government" rather than in the military.  That said it is a leadership issue. at all levels, the only way to change it is probably from the bottom up and shame the supervisors into the whole uniforms to and from, lets face it, if we can't/wont take pride in ourselves how can we expect the rest of Canada to


----------



## TAS278 (23 Mar 2007)

So wearinf our uniforms more often will allow us to build up morale?


----------



## Prairie Sailor (23 Mar 2007)

I find that personnel on ship tend to walk in/out in civilian clothes more than those posted ashore. Guys on the boat are more apt to get dirty doing ship's husbandry than those of us posted to a desk. As a result, instead of having another uniform to change into, it's easier to put on some civvies (then you don't have to change yet again when you get home). Lets not forget that there is still a standard for civvies as well. And as for the public eye, have you seen what some of these dockyard matees are wearing to and from work, and I don't mean the FMF guys, the desk jockeys are not the most respectably dressed people on the base. 

As an aside I have yet to see the news paper article or the 5 o'clock news report on the dress habits of the CF, but...It could be

"The Canadian Navy, if they fight as bad as they look, we're in trouble...tonight at 10"

How about everybody gets coveralls like I don't know, every other Navy in the world...after a hard day working and getting dirty turn 'em insideout and off ya go...


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (23 Mar 2007)

When I was in Esquimalt.....posted out in 01 practically everyone was going ashore in civies from the ship. At Naden we were in DEU so went home that way, of course. I've never been ashamed of walking out in my uniform or anyone knowing that I'm a member of the CF. In fact I take a lot of pride in wearing it. Here is Halifax it looks like most people walk out in DEU at Stad or NCD from the Dockyard....no ball caps allowed when walking out of course.

Having said that there was an initiative a few years ago to try and encourage people to travel, ie fly in uniform and that was not roundly endorsed. I personally want to be comfortable when I travel....nothing to do with shame or pride. I want to sleep on a plane and sitting in one position for a long period of time tends to wrinkle the old uni-bag.


----------



## cobbler (30 Mar 2007)

Dolphin_Hunter said:
			
		

> Not going to coveralls   -----> lame (my opinion)



The RAN changing from coveralls back to two piece in the next few years = tragedy.

I love the ralls, to Canada I say get them and cherish them. They are gods gift to the Puss.


----------



## M Feetham (8 Apr 2007)

Here's my bit. As far as wearing NCD's to and from the ship, personally I would rather wear my salt and peppers, it just looks more professional. Like someone else said earlier,during the day people tend to get dirty while they are working around the ship. Along with boots that are paint splashed and worn thru at the toe. It just doesn't make for a proper military appearance. Yes I know that if the MSOD and the POOD are doing their job then most of these guys won't get off the brow, but when they don't have a change of clothes on board, what are you going to do, get some guy/girl to phone their better half and get them to bring in a fresh change of clothes from Sooke or Sackville. Not gonna happen. I know that most of the CPO's and above usually wear Salt and Pepper's to and from, I really don't see why the rest can't do the same and leave the NCD's for wear on the ship. I also don't have a problem with civvies if they are in good shape. I would rather that than NCD's. 
Thanks. 
Marc


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (8 Apr 2007)

For what its worth a few times when standing MSOD I turned guys back at the brow for looking like garbage, the Duty COXN, OOD, and the COXN all backed me on it too.


----------



## M Feetham (9 Apr 2007)

I have too, disenchanted, but the problem is that first not all MSOD's will turn people back, not all the POOD's will back you up unless the Cox'n is standing right behind him (which does happen now and then) and it always seems to be the same guys over and over again. It surprinsingly is not always the Bosn's or the Stokers however that look like a BoS. A lot of the time I have found it to be the OD/AB operators who just don't care. I blame that on poor leadership at the LS/MS level, myself included. Again though, I say the Salt and Peppes is much more profesionnal looking.
Marc


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (9 Apr 2007)

Can't argue with that logic


----------



## Springroll (9 Apr 2007)

The S&P's are definitely more professional looking while us sailors are out in the public. 
They are very comfortable, but a pain to have to dry clean every time you spill something on them. 
The NCD's give us ladies major wedgies, well maybe not every one, but every one I have spoken to about them.

Bring on the coveralls!!


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (9 Apr 2007)

maybe they're designed to give you wedgies for a reason lol, but all kidding aside S&P's don't NEED to be drycleaned when you spill stuff on them the white shirts can be bleached (mine twice a week need it or not) and the pants washed in cold water and hang dried no problem, I haven't sent my kit to a dry cleaner in years (except the stuff I have reserved for #1 and #3 with tunic). 

and a little of topic, Friday's my last night at the fleet I rank out on Sunday


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (9 Apr 2007)

Disenchantedsailor said:
			
		

> maybe they're designed to give you wedgies for a reason lol, but all kidding aside S&P's don't NEED to be drycleaned when you spill stuff on them the white shirts can be bleached (mine twice a week need it or not) and the pants washed in cold water and hang dried no problem, I haven't sent my kit to a dry cleaner in years (except the stuff I have reserved for #1 and #3 with tunic).
> 
> and a little of topic, Friday's my last night at the fleet I rank out on Sunday



Thanks for warning us! BEWARE OF BARRINGTON ST ON FRIDAY NIGHT AROUND 0130!!!! Ha ha.
So you are coming up the hill to the Chuffs and Puffs eh?? You know you're getting old when!!


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (9 Apr 2007)

nope all the way up to the wardroom


----------



## M Feetham (9 Apr 2007)

Unclean, Unclean, and you shall be rejected as is the leper. 
Just kidding man, good luck in the shark infested waters of the wardroom.
Feet.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (10 Apr 2007)

Disenchantedsailor said:
			
		

> nope all the way up to the wardroom



ah well now you're really getting old!! ha ha


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (10 Apr 2007)

I wonder how they'll take to an Artilleryman in the wardroom lol


----------



## aesop081 (10 Apr 2007)

Disenchantedsailor said:
			
		

> I wonder how they'll take to an Artilleryman in the wardroom lol



Start a thread about it so that this one can go back to dealing with clothing... ;D

army.ca staff


----------



## navymich (10 Apr 2007)

Springroll said:
			
		

> The S&P's are definitely more professional looking while us sailors are out in the public.
> They are very comfortable, but a pain to have to dry clean every time you spill something on them.
> The NCD's give us ladies major wedgies, well maybe not every one, but every one I have spoken to about them.



Suggestion for the S&P's: use your points to buy a couple extra shirts and an extra pair of pants.  Keep one of each set aside for good, and use the rest as everyday wear.  The shirts wash up with no problem and use that Dryel stuff for your pants once in awhile.

As for the NCDs, I never had a problem and neither did anyone I've sailed with.  You might need to play around with sizes a bit, try getting the next length up.  One thing with the pants especially, is they only keep their shape and size for so long through washing.  Personally, I (and many chicks I sailed with) wore the men's style.  Much more comfortable.


----------



## childs56 (10 Apr 2007)

I see nothing wrong with Sailors wearing NCD's to and from their work.  Problem lies with using NCDs as a pair of coveralls and wearing unsafe boots. 

Hear me out before you start to jump all over me. 

NCD's contaminated with oil, paint, grease even body sweat renders them ineffective in their reasons to be worn, Protection from fire. As for the ironing issue well the COC needs to sort that out. 

On to bad looking boots. A pair of steel toes that you can see the steel from are no longer effective protection from falling objects. Read it up in the WCB safety digests. 

Unpolished boots, simple fix, hold onto some shoe polish and a brush on the Brow. Dont let anyone leave who has brown boots. 
Eventually they will get the hint. The same thing for them comming in except send them home to fix there uniform. Then when they are late discipline them. 
Eventually they will get the point. 

The problem lies with the COC, they don not care. It is easier to turn a blind eye then it is to enforce the Regs. 
Unfortunatly enforcing the regs is a matter of safety. 
A pair of coveralls can solve most issues of dirty NCDs at the end of the work day. 

Some one will say I am out to lunch and straying outside of my field. Go ahead. 

Discipline is well with in my field as is the disgusting look of the Fat lazy people I see in uniforms all the time. 
Start to apply pressure to them they will sort them selves out. 
Enforce rules of having to wear your S&Ps to work, they still look like slobs but just in a different uniform.


----------



## armyvern (10 Apr 2007)

Springroll said:
			
		

> The NCD's give us ladies major wedgies, well maybe not every one, but every one I have spoken to about them.



Lisa,

Move yourself up to the next 'taller' size as there is a greater crotch to waist ratio. Ie move from a 67 to a 70.

Man, I can't believe we are talking about ladies friggin wedgies on Army.ca  ;D


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (10 Apr 2007)

CTD said:
			
		

> I see nothing wrong with Sailors wearing NCD's to and from their work.  Problem lies with using NCDs as a pair of coveralls and wearing unsafe boots.
> 
> Hear me out before you start to jump all over me.
> 
> ...



This is not only sailors. When I was in Petawawa there were a lot of vehicle techs doing work on vehicles in thier combats and not putting coveralls over them to protect them from grease and dirt. Again just too lazy to clothe themselves properly to do the job. One Maint O that I served with got a grip on it and it soon became a problem of the past. These were in the days when they were loathe to exchange combats till you could see your knees and elbows through them cause there just wasn't any money.....early 90s.


----------



## Springroll (5 Jul 2007)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Lisa,
> 
> Move yourself up to the next 'taller' size as there is a greater crotch to waist ratio. Ie move from a 67 to a 70.
> 
> Man, I can't believe we are talking about ladies friggin wedgies on Army.ca  ;D


I haven't been on in a long time but i want to say thanks to ArmyVern and Airmich for the suggestion of exchanging the pants for a longer leg...OMG do they feel better!!
I am tempted to snag myself a pair of men's to see the difference there too.


----------



## navymich (6 Jul 2007)

Springroll said:
			
		

> I haven't been on in a long time but i want to say thanks to ArmyVern and Airmich for the suggestion of exchanging the pants for a longer leg...OMG do they feel better!!
> I am tempted to snag myself a pair of men's to see the difference there too.



Springroll, except for when I was on my JLC, I always wore the mens.  Without the pleats in the front, and the supposedly shape for our hips, they fit amazingly well.  They aren't for everyone, but give them a try.  I seem to recall that they changed the regs too, to say that women can wear the men's now.  I never had any trouble though at stores out west.


----------

