# CADPAT as Navy Work Dress?



## Navalsnpr (31 Mar 2005)

The past number of years has seen both the Army and Air Force elements change to CADPAT for the daily work dress for its personnel. Rumours have gone around over the past year that the Navy may adopt the same for personnel who are not posted to a sea going position.

Comments?


----------



## Sundborg (31 Mar 2005)

The army has its own dress and the navy has its own dress. The navy should stick with the NCD's.  All elements shouldn't look the same, then what's be the differernce in having seperate elements?


----------



## McG (31 Mar 2005)

Navalsnipr said:
			
		

> Rumours have gone around over the past year that the Navy may adopt the same for personnel who are not posted to a sea going position.


Navy pers posted into LFC units do wear the CADPAT combats.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (31 Mar 2005)

If you are posted to a ground pounder unit then sure, but as an everyday dress no. I am not a big fan of the NCDs but it does help with morale to wear something different then everyone else.


----------



## Zoomie (31 Mar 2005)

MCG said:
			
		

> Navy pers posted into LFC units do wear the CADPAT combats.



Ditto for Navy types at Airforce units...


----------



## bob the piper (31 Mar 2005)

What would you guys think about having something like the new camo the US navy is testing?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (31 Mar 2005)

I believe the army and airforce are going in on a few different items that meets specs for both for cost reasons and to speed up procurment.


----------



## LS Blogins (31 Mar 2005)

That USN camo is fugly.  I'd go for CADPAT workdress if they were Nomex coveralls.


----------



## Cloud Cover (31 Mar 2005)

Unless one is posted to a joint force unit ashore, what would be served by such an issue? From what I can tell, the CADPATs are made to be worn with combat boots, not the shorter sea boots. [unless those are no longer permitted]  For stokers, trodes and hull techs and maybe even bosun's, I could see dark colored Carharts [green or blue] with the side pockets for regular duties at sea - wash and wear, gauranteed for life - but only as a work dress.


----------



## Kat Stevens (31 Mar 2005)

Eeeerrrrm, perhaps a stupid question from a guy who gets seasick in the tub.  Why in the HELL would you need to look like a tree in the middle of the ocean?

CHIMO,  Kat


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (31 Mar 2005)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> Eeeerrrrm, perhaps a stupid question from a guy who gets seasick in the tub.   Why in the heck would you need to look like a tree in the middle of the ocean?
> 
> CHIMO,   Kat



Navalsniper mentions it would be for personnel in _non_ sea going positions.


----------



## Kat Stevens (31 Mar 2005)

well then the answer is obvious.  Wear the environmental gear of the land based unit you're attd to. If your a Jetty Jocky, you still don't need to look like a tree...

CHIMO,  Kat


----------



## Sh0rtbUs (31 Mar 2005)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> well then the answer is obvious.  Wear the environmental gear of the land based unit you're attd to. If your a Jetty Jocky, you still don't need to look like a tree...
> 
> CHIMO,  Kat



I agree Kat, its a fairly simple answer. You're bathtub analogy made me chuckle, thanks


----------



## ctjj.stevenson (1 Apr 2005)

Naval-types should be permitted to have a CADPAT uniform if they need it for their functions only. As a CIC officer, we do have to bring our cadets on Outdoor Adventure Training weekends, however seeing that the Naval Combat Dress is inappropriate for the woods, we should be permitted to have a comba uniform for this type of training (even if it has to be temporary for each weekend). 

When I did my Military Occupational Course, I was permitted to get a CADPAT uniform for my Survival training weekend. I kept it at home of about a month an a half and only wore it for three days. 

Also, NCDs helps us know who is a member of the navy. I remember being at the Longue-Pointe Supply Store and I called a Killick in CADPAT ... CORPORAL. He told me that he was a Leading Seaman, but he understood that I did not really see the little anchor on his name tag. The air force have their blue stiching everywhere now on their CADPATs, will the navy have black?

Good day!


----------



## Sam69 (1 Apr 2005)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> Eeeerrrrm, perhaps a stupid question from a guy who gets seasick in the tub.   Why in the heck would you need to look like a tree in the middle of the ocean?



If this is the issue, then the answer seems intuitively obvious to me: plant trees in the flats and on the uppers.  ;D

But, then again, working in NDHQ has probably given me an over developed sense for practical solutions.  :

Sam


----------



## FSTO (5 Apr 2005)

I have it on good authority that the CMS has signed off on a "Clothe the Sailor" project, while we won't be wearing blue digital camo, this ensamble will cover everything from socks and underwear to outer clothing that provides comfort and dryness to the wearer. There will aslo be ballistic protection and new equipemt for NBP and Force Protection personnel.


----------



## Cloud Cover (5 Apr 2005)

Do you know if the new lapels are going to be shawl or peaked?


----------



## Navalsnpr (5 Apr 2005)

FSTO said:
			
		

> I have it on good authority that the CMS has signed off on a "Clothe the Sailor" project,



Long time overdue I say.

I remember around 10 years ago being up in the Fjord's of Norway, standing Life Buoy Sentry in the middle of winter at -20 degrees Celsius, and there we were, with our steel toe boots on standing on a metal deck. You want to talk about cold!! I made sure I took my seal-skin boots with me made by Inuits in Northern Labrador. The POOW came up to me and asked what I had on my feet. I told him they were Warm... The POOW smiled and walked away...

It is time for a "Clothe the Sailor" project!


----------



## Cloud Cover (5 Apr 2005)

SeaPat? 
New head bandana's, left and right eye patches, water proof hand hooks and low vis pattern large buckle shoes with knee high socks?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (5 Apr 2005)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> SeaPat?
> New head bandana's, left and right eye patches, water proof hand hooks and low vis pattern large buckle shoes with knee high socks?



Which parrot variant and how many pistols?


----------



## tabernac (5 Apr 2005)

Dirty Stoker said:
			
		

> That USN camo is fugly.   I'd go for CADPAT workdress if they were Nomex coveralls.


I agree completely. I was down in Naval Station San Diego for the past 10 days on a an exchange trip with my SCC. The majority of the Navy personnel had "work dress" (don't really know what else to call it) but there were some who did have the didgital camo. If Canada was to adopt such a patern, it could cause some large problems. If someone was to go overboard in stormy seas(think North Atlantic) the camo would probabily blend in with the white caps and such. If Naval CADPAT was issued, there would need to be some sort of bright warm colour on the shoulders (red, orange, yellow).

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## starlight (9 Jun 2005)

NCDS are ok being made of nomex but  I think it looks kind of impractical the US is going to  navy BDU's I don't think Cam is a good idea but only the navy would give you something you have to iron and call it "combat dress"


----------



## Steel Badger (10 Jun 2005)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Which parrot variant and how many pistols?




Don't you mean the Norweigian Blue naval UAV?


yaaarrrggghh!


----------



## andpro (14 Jun 2005)

Does anyone have a pic of USN camo?


----------



## FSTO (14 Jun 2005)

Here is what they are looking at

and here is a link 

http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=16236&page=1


----------



## andpro (14 Jun 2005)

Wow that really is ugly. I actually thought it would look good, but I guess that I was horribly wrong.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (14 Jun 2005)

andpro said:
			
		

> Wow that really is ugly. I actually thought it would look good, but I guess that I was horribly wrong.



Have you seen our NCDs? Its not exactly an attractive uniform...


----------



## NCRCrow (14 Jun 2005)

Navy CADPAT....gimme a break.........lets just get a nice one piece NOMEX coverall (for the ship)

If we had SeaBees in Canada, it might work for them.

Hard Naval positions ashore, should wear salt-peppers. It looks professional and very Navy.


----------



## andpro (14 Jun 2005)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Have you seen our NCDs? Its not exactly an attractive uniform...



I have actually worn our NCD's, they are functional for working in and don't look bad (just my opinion). The USN camo just looks like sailors trying to be soldiers.



			
				NCRCrow said:
			
		

> Hard Naval positions ashore, should wear salt-peppers. It looks professional and very Navy.



That is a good point, I would wear the salt and peppers before combats, it gives our sailors a more professional look.


----------



## NCRCrow (14 Jun 2005)

NCD's are sloppy and damn ugly looking and require massive sorting at sea between all three pieces.

and u are more apt to lose a piece when it gets mixed up between the messes.

Lets go..one piece..quick and easy


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (14 Jun 2005)

Agreed...quicker to get into action dress as well.....zzzzzzzzzip!


----------



## NCRCrow (14 Jun 2005)

we did a coverall trial on Iroquois in 95...i guess nothing ever came out of it

the army gets like a new piece of kit everday...we still use leather ninja turtle mitts and have no extreme cold water-proof boot (plse correct me if I am wrong)

we should have "clothe the sailor"


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (14 Jun 2005)

The new sea boots are much better then those low pieces of crap they use to issue. We have nothing near to the army's mukluks or any of their cold weather gear which is a downright shame.


----------



## mikeninercharlie (14 Jun 2005)

It's about time the naval clothing authorities make a recommendation to the CMS to adopt coveralls as the standard shipboard dress for all ranks. It seems to work for the Aussies, our heldets, the firefighters and the occasional seagoing Physician Assistant who has some difficulty following dress instructions, so why not the rest of the Fleet... 

The old arguments in regards to dirty, basement dwellers needing to "clean into night clothing" while dragging around a jacket which constitutes a second layer of clothing just don't cut it in today's reality of real world deployments with real world emergencies, read fires. 

Don't get me started with requirement to carry "war bags", that is quite possibly the stupidest thing that I've even seen! For those of you not in the know, the Navy uses an old mess tin pouch to carry anti flash gear / shell dressing / triangular bandage strung on a belt along with an inflatable life vest and a C3 mask for PPE during action stations.

Why not store the anti flash gear / FA supplies in the large pockets on the legs of a the new coveralls?  Makes sense to me but, when I was in position to say my piece, while wearing coveralls, the adults of the time thought I was a heretic. Then again, one of those adults thought that steel toed sandals for shipboard wear in the tropics would be popular with the troops while meeting all OSHA regulations

I'm also sure that something could be done about carrying the C3 mask, is there a need while inside a pressurized citadel on a highly mobile platform? What's gonna slime you? 

Same can be said for the life vest, I'd probably have to get to the uppers in order to use it, so why not keep them there?

Ain't in fun to work in a risk averse organization.


----------



## NCRCrow (14 Jun 2005)

OP Apollo Roto 0--we (I) carried those retarded war bags for like 70 days straight. 

What a waste, we would go alongside the French & Kipper Navy (RAS) and they would be in shorts. 

Laughing at us.

We had warbags on while Jessica Simpson waved to us from the USS Bataan on XMAS day.

what a laugh!!!


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (15 Jun 2005)

> OP Apollo Roto 0--we (I) carried those retarded war bags for like 70 days straight



Iroquois?


----------



## FSTO (15 Jun 2005)

Listen up folks, the way you change things in regards to any type of kit is to put in UCR's (unsatisfactory condition report). DMRS (Directorate Maritime Requirements) will not look at anything unless there is a UCR. If each ship in the Navy puts in a UCR regarding clothing then CMS is forced to look at it. Just bitching about it will NOT get you new kit.

When the army started the clothe the soldier project, the Navy did not sign on, therefore when we ask about getting the gloves or underwear we are told to go stuff it. Since we are not part of the project we do not get to use any of it. Now the Navy is looking into a clothe the sailor, but this will take time because we are re-inventing the wheel, AGAIN ???

Finally, the folks who make the decisions about dress are mainly senior chiefs up in Ottawa who have not been to sea in years. Once again if they do not have formalized correspondence from the ships to help them make decisions then you will end up with kit like the NCD. (which in my mind looks like crap, feels like crap and is NOT professional looking.


----------



## Cloud Cover (15 Jun 2005)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Agreed...quicker to get into action dress as well.....zzzzzzzzzip!



And just to clarify, that's a front zipper.


----------



## Imprezzed (23 Jun 2005)

Big fan of the idea of Coveralls....only at sea though. I like the look of the NCD's....


----------

