Author Topic: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots  (Read 216168 times)

Ludoc, Quirky and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 900,310
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,718
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #400 on: July 13, 2017, 21:27:37 »
I don't think Binrat said they were black, just pimped out MkIVs. Can be made out of a brown leather.

Offline Pickle Rick

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 10,540
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 262
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #401 on: July 13, 2017, 21:43:27 »
I don't think Binrat said they were black, just pimped out MkIVs. Can be made out of a brown leather.

Ack, I think I got the black colour in my head from reading the Toronto Star article and the photo they used and the below quote from the last page

I've heard from a reliable source that the CAF will be returning to Black Mk 4 leather combat boots except they'll come with vVbram soles and speed laces. And of course will be the only authorized boots to wear   ;D

Offline BinRat55

    ???

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 19,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,127
  • Lead by example.
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #402 on: July 14, 2017, 06:45:21 »
I don't think Binrat said they were black, just pimped out MkIVs. Can be made out of a brown leather.

Or even a nice purple-ish blue for the flyboys! (and girls... flygirls too!)
Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake - Napoleon Bonaparte

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 199,110
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,102
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #403 on: July 16, 2017, 20:28:49 »
that's not the colour I want...can I order different ones?  Purple-blue won't go with my crew patch or my eyes dammit.
Pilot, RADAR...turn right, heading...3-6-5...

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 255,371
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,039
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #404 on: July 24, 2017, 06:39:32 »
Random weird question but speaking of non-issued boots does anyone own and find Lowa mountian boots or Lowa desert elites pull their socks down?

I know, first world problems.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 204,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,898
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #405 on: July 25, 2017, 00:48:31 »
Random weird question but speaking of non-issued boots does anyone own and find Lowa mountian boots or Lowa desert elites pull their socks down?

I know, first world problems.

I've got a pair of Lowa 'Combat' boots. They are awesome.. full stop.
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Online RocketRichard

  • Donor
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 6,805
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 346
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #406 on: July 25, 2017, 13:18:55 »
I have the Lowa Uplander. Great for the field and load bearing, in addition RSM and adj friendly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline BinRat55

    ???

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 19,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,127
  • Lead by example.
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #407 on: July 25, 2017, 17:08:37 »
I have the Lowa Uplander. Great for the field and load bearing, in addition RSM and adj friendly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, that would depend on the RSM - not all are created equal. Adj has literally nothing to do with boots. Unless you are talking about a Warrant Officer (WO/Adj)...
Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake - Napoleon Bonaparte

Online RocketRichard

  • Donor
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 6,805
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 346
BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #408 on: July 25, 2017, 17:12:37 »
Well, that would depend on the RSM - not all are created equal. Adj has literally nothing to do with boots. Unless you are talking about a Warrant Officer (WO/Adj)...



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
« Last Edit: July 25, 2017, 17:16:36 by RocketRichard »

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 199,110
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,102
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #409 on: July 26, 2017, 00:45:16 »
Adjts generally have something to do with lots of stuff and act on lots of stuff their commanders deem important.  Boots/dress stuff could be one of those things, after all the Authorizing sig on things like Wing DIs is the Wing Comd officially as an example.   :2c:
Pilot, RADAR...turn right, heading...3-6-5...

Offline Tcm621

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 6,825
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 635
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #410 on: July 26, 2017, 15:26:21 »
Well, that would depend on the RSM - not all are created equal. Adj has literally nothing to do with boots. Unless you are talking about a Warrant Officer (WO/Adj)...
The Adj often fills a lot of  the RSM role for officers. While most RSMs will dress down jnr officers when required, it isn't technically allowed. So the CO will often charge the Adj to ride herd on on the subalterns. The assumption being anyone over the rank of major wouldn't require any such herding.

Offline trooper142

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 3,800
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 64
BOOTFORGEN dropping 16 July 18?
« Reply #411 on: July 11, 2018, 14:37:00 »
Rumour mill is running at full speed these days. The new rumour is a canforgen authorizing civilian pattern boots to be worn and reimbursed up to $340 a year per member.

Can someone confirm or deny this rumour? I want to believe, the military has been making real efforts lately to address the common sense gap (most notably the quick turn around ref the relocard nonsense) so I am optimistic this has some truth to it.

Any comments would be appreciated

Online PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 900,310
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,718
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #412 on: July 11, 2018, 14:58:37 »
I'll confirm or deny it for you by end of day on 16 July 18.

I also heard we were losing LDA, but that was 6 years ago and I still have it.

Online kratz

    Summer. Finally!

  • Float, Move, Fight
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 240,353
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,014
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #413 on: July 11, 2018, 15:23:36 »
Nothing is official until the message is signed and released.

Anything else is RUMINT.
Quote from: Pipe *General Call*
"Tanning Stations on the flight deck"


Remember, this site is unofficial and privately owned. The site benefits from the presence of current members willing to answer questions.

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 205,552
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,192
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #414 on: July 11, 2018, 17:18:35 »
Even then...
+100

Offline Once_a_TQ

  • New Member
  • **
  • 950
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #415 on: Yesterday at 01:31:22 »
Nothing is official until the message is signed and released.

Anything else is RUMINT.

Except the Combat Boot Working Group page on ACIMS, the 3 phased approach approved by ADM(MAT), the draft CANGORGEN that was reviewed and submitted for final signature this week, the claim process proposed that mirrors the BTU system, the presentation to Army council (which is available on the DIN) out lining all the above, ect ect.

There was some really good work done on this. I am pleasantly surprised.

This one has some serious steam and it will only be a matter of time till is comes out. Will it meet the July 16th date, I dont know. But if it doesn't I dont think it will be far off.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 199,110
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,102
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #416 on: Yesterday at 08:21:30 »
Is this pan-CAF, Army only?
Pilot, RADAR...turn right, heading...3-6-5...

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 35,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,550
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #417 on: Yesterday at 10:31:33 »
So I was at a promotion ceremony at 101 yesterday and the CDS had quite a joke about the boot issue. Being a Navy guy who never wears combats ashore I guess this has been quite the issue eh? I get the feeling that if the boot issue gets solved then the current CDS will consider his career a success!

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 204,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,898
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #418 on: Yesterday at 11:04:46 »
So I was at a promotion ceremony at 101 yesterday and the CDS had quite a joke about the boot issue. Being a Navy guy who never wears combats ashore I guess this has been quite the issue eh? I get the feeling that if the boot issue gets solved then the current CDS will consider his career a success!

Then there's the tac vest.... ;)
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Eagle Eye View

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 15,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 328
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #419 on: Yesterday at 11:13:36 »
If this rumour turns out to be true, it would be interesting to see what colour they go for. Is the RCAF converting to brown boots?  :stirpot:
Leadership and learning are indispensable to each other.

John F. Kennedy

Online PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 900,310
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,718
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #420 on: Yesterday at 11:45:30 »
I get the feeling that if the boot issue gets solved then the current CDS will consider his career a success!

Considering the absolute failure boots have been throughout the Afghan conflict, he'd probably be right.

As a Navy guy, imagine Clothing Stores never having stock of boots for your NCDs, the style of boot changed 5 times in 15 years, and whatever boots you do get are woefully inadequate for shipboard life (they slip on metal when wet, melt when in fire situations or that they disintegrate in 3 weeks due to sea water). Then you buy your own boots to be able to do your job and are told you'll be charged if you wear them again. Add in a splash of issued boots destroying feet/knees/ankles, and you'll know what the Army has gone through.
+600

Online RocketRichard

  • Donor
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 6,805
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 346
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #421 on: Yesterday at 11:53:02 »
All good points. Had a soldier wear his shitty issue zipper boots, big toe came through the boot and zipper broke so he bought his own boots as there were no issue boots available.  Hurt his foot training and was told he may not be covered as the boots weren't issue.  Sigh...

Considering the absolute failure boots have been throughout the Afghan conflict, he'd probably be right.

As a Navy guy, imagine Clothing Stores never having stock of boots for your NCDs, the style of boot changed 5 times in 15 years, and whatever boots you do get are woefully inadequate for shipboard life (they slip on metal when wet, melt when in fire situations or that they disintegrate in 3 weeks due to sea water). Then you buy your own boots to be able to do your job and are told you'll be charged if you wear them again. Add in a splash of issued boots destroying feet/knees/ankles, and you'll know what the Army has gone through.

Offline Eagle Eye View

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 15,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 328
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #422 on: Yesterday at 12:10:33 »
I’ve purchase my own boots since 2008, like most of us at the Sqn. Never was I told I couldn’t wear them. My wife is a physiotherapist and the first thing she said when she saw the Air Force issued boots was not to wear those, they’ll destroy your feet, knees and back. Everyone’s feet are different and I’m a strong believer that you should be comfortable wearing the footwear that is right for you.

As for not being covered, I can personally testify that having been through a VAC claim, including the redress process, never was I asked if I was wearing issued kit, but again every cases are different and maybe someone may share a different story.
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 12:13:08 by Eagle Eye View »
Leadership and learning are indispensable to each other.

John F. Kennedy

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 35,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,550
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #423 on: Yesterday at 12:13:00 »
Considering the absolute failure boots have been throughout the Afghan conflict, he'd probably be right.

As a Navy guy, imagine Clothing Stores never having stock of boots for your NCDs, the style of boot changed 5 times in 15 years, and whatever boots you do get are woefully inadequate for shipboard life (they slip on metal when wet, melt when in fire situations or that they disintegrate in 3 weeks due to sea water). Then you buy your own boots to be able to do your job and are told you'll be charged if you wear them again. Add in a splash of issued boots destroying feet/knees/ankles, and you'll know what the Army has gone through.
We had an issue after they got rid of the ankle boots. The first replacement sucked massively but lately (at least when I last sailed) they weren't that bad. I'm sure a current sailor will come here and tell me I'm out to lunch with that comment! ;D

Offline Once_a_TQ

  • New Member
  • **
  • 950
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: BOOT REGULATIONS: issued vs. non-issued vs. non-standard boots
« Reply #424 on: Yesterday at 12:31:45 »
Straight from the PPT given to the Army Council and avalible on the DIN.

"Ref: CDS meeting with CCA and ADM(Mat) on 13 June.
Outcome:
Approval of 3 phased approach.
Rapid implementation of an interim policy to allow soldiers to buy boots of their choice.
“implement by next Friday”

CA / ADM(Mat)  Approved phased approach

Short Term (asap to summer 2019)
Allow CAF members to obtain boots of their choice using simple criteria to be defined.
Similar to brassiere and undergarment policy.
LOTBs remain available.

Medium Term (summer 2019 to fall 2021)
Allow CAF members to obtain boots of their choice based on a prequalified list with industry engagement.
Supply chain provides General Purpose Boot (GPB) as initial issue and for operational contingency.

Long Term (beyond fall 2021)
Remove operational footwear from the DND supply chain by leveraging OCFC2."


"Timeline
20 - 21 June: Presentation to Army Council.
25 - 26 June: Boots WG  (CA G4 / ADM(Mat) co-chaired)
4 July: Back brief to CCA on WG outcome / COA development.
9 -13 July: Vector check with CDS (CCA and ADM(MAT), including draft CANFORGEN.
9 - 13 July: CANFORGEN circulated for comment.
16 July:  CANFORGEN published."