Service Dress - Right On!
- Thread starter IntlBr
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
Teddy Ruxpin said:
I believe as well that this would have the best chance, if any, of going forward. Let start the push.
- Reaction score
- 3,105
- Points
- 1,160
Back to Branch/Corps trousers and berets, too? Be nice to see my lads in a dark blue beanie.
- Reaction score
- 10,124
- Points
- 1,260
Teddy Ruxpin said:
Agreed.
Using the current model, the new Service Dress would be as follows:
No 3. Ceremonial: Khaki service dress (tunic) with medals, badges regimental accrouments, belts, sashes, Sam Browne belts (for officers?), drill canes/pace sticks, etc.
No 3a. Duty: Khaki service dress (tunic) with ribbons.
No 3b. Sweater: Optional Khaki sweater for garrison wear.
No 3c. Long Sleeve Shirt
No 3d. Short Sleeve Shirt
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
geo said:
Having spent 12 years in The Canadian Guards, and at times working with both The GGFG and CGG, I never once saw anyone Capoing(is that a word?) their rank badges Also spent some time with The Coldstream Guards and The Grenadier Guards in GB, and never saw it there.
Drummy
As I recall, the only regiment/corps anal enough to whiten rank badges, trades badges etc was mine - the artillery. We used to use White It and a toothpick as the drill was to whiten each individual herring bone on rank bades as opposed to the barn painting approach. Mind you, we used to whiten our issue running shoes as well.
- Reaction score
- 79
- Points
- 680
Sounds like The RCR and rock painting ;D or RETS picking out coloured rocks from the walkways at Tent City (when some one finally decides to paint the wooden curbs by the tents)
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
Whitened badges were also an affectation of the Canadian Provost Corps.
Back to the thread subject...
I think that although a return to a form of khaki DEU is a good idea rather than spending a considerable amount of money on DEU development, trials and purchases, perhaps those resources would be better spent on producing a Tac Vest or MOLLE clone that is suitable for operational needs. Money is availible right now, more than ever before, but it won't last forever. Although I am now outside the military, from what I have read on this site, plus reading user reports and trials evaluations, quantity availible as well as quality of some of the operational gear leaves much to be desired.
But I guess things haven't changed much in 2000 years since a Roman Legionare submitted a UCR on his paenula (cloak) for having a hood that was too small. ;D
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
XMP said:
Without getting into it, operational equipment money comes from a different pile... DEU "development" (which should be practically zero in this case) shouldn't impact on operational equipment purchases.
Matt_Fisher
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
Infanteer said:
Wouldn't it be more appropriate to name this as No. 2 for Service Dress? No. 1 should be Blue/Patrol dress (authorized, but not maintained at public expense).
Regarding No 3b. In addition to the sweater, a modernized battledress jacket might be sharp, and easier to take on/off depending on the differences in outside/inside temperatures. The Australians have a version as shown below.
- Reaction score
- 10,124
- Points
- 1,260
Matt, I was just using the existing system - No 2 is Mess Dress.
As for the battledress jacket, is it any different than a tunic? It just looks like a pretty slick CANEX jacket. A little heavier and maybe it could get rid of the CADPAT Jackets with DEU's we see in Ottawa.
As for the battledress jacket, is it any different than a tunic? It just looks like a pretty slick CANEX jacket. A little heavier and maybe it could get rid of the CADPAT Jackets with DEU's we see in Ottawa.
- Reaction score
- 5,513
- Points
- 1,260
Back around 1984/85 I was on the edge of the ”Coates* of many colours” project. If my memory is correct the Army asked to stay green – in part citing our long history of light infantry regiments, which we had in huge number until after the First World War. I think some generals wanted to look more like their US counterparts while others simply didn’t want change for the sake of change.
It seems to me that if we are going to have any ceremonial uniforms – and I think we should – then they should be provided to all ranks at public expense. I do not want to return to the days of mixed officer/senior NCO vs. junior ranks orders of dress. If any one person needs a ceremonial uniform thenwe you should all have them – issued and properly tailored/fitted after a members has completed initial trade/speciality/classification training.
Maybe we could consider:
• No 1/Full dress – scarlet (for a very few regiments) or dark green patrol dress uniforms with sundry, but not too many, gee-gaws;
• No 2/Undress – scarlet or dark green patrol dress – without gee-gaws;
• No 3/Service Dress – dark green jacket and tie, with a few accoutrements;
• No 4/Garrison dress – a series of uniforms including dark green trousers with open neck shirts or sweaters, cargo pants with golf-shirts/t-shirts or sweaters, etc, etc, etc; and
• No 5/Work dress – coveralls, etc.
Mess dress would be required for officers and senior NCOs and optional for junior ranks, at their own expense, and combat uniforms would be restricted to training/operational situations.
Now, while I agree with those who like the USMC model, my personal preference would be to merge No 2 and No 3: we would have a patrol dress jacket and plain trousers as our “business suit” uniform. Notwithstanding the views of a few people whose military experience is confined, largely, to the grounds of the Royal Military College, a properly fitted patrol dress jacket is neither uncomfortable (no more so, at least than a collared shirt and tie) nor out of the ordinary.
----------
* Named after then MND Bob Coates who spearheaded the DEU project, over the CDS’ objections. Coates later came a cropper over a late-night visit to a cheap strip-bar in Lahr.
It seems to me that if we are going to have any ceremonial uniforms – and I think we should – then they should be provided to all ranks at public expense. I do not want to return to the days of mixed officer/senior NCO vs. junior ranks orders of dress. If any one person needs a ceremonial uniform then
Maybe we could consider:
• No 1/Full dress – scarlet (for a very few regiments) or dark green patrol dress uniforms with sundry, but not too many, gee-gaws;
• No 2/Undress – scarlet or dark green patrol dress – without gee-gaws;
• No 3/Service Dress – dark green jacket and tie, with a few accoutrements;
• No 4/Garrison dress – a series of uniforms including dark green trousers with open neck shirts or sweaters, cargo pants with golf-shirts/t-shirts or sweaters, etc, etc, etc; and
• No 5/Work dress – coveralls, etc.
Mess dress would be required for officers and senior NCOs and optional for junior ranks, at their own expense, and combat uniforms would be restricted to training/operational situations.
Now, while I agree with those who like the USMC model, my personal preference would be to merge No 2 and No 3: we would have a patrol dress jacket and plain trousers as our “business suit” uniform. Notwithstanding the views of a few people whose military experience is confined, largely, to the grounds of the Royal Military College, a properly fitted patrol dress jacket is neither uncomfortable (no more so, at least than a collared shirt and tie) nor out of the ordinary.
----------
* Named after then MND Bob Coates who spearheaded the DEU project, over the CDS’ objections. Coates later came a cropper over a late-night visit to a cheap strip-bar in Lahr.
Matt_Fisher
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
I have never seen the Australian jacket in person. Perhaps Wes could comment. If we made it out of a waterproof/breathable wash & wear fabric, it could have great utility and look good as well. You'd have to design some way of being able to place ribbons and nametags without puncturing the fabric and creating leakholes though.
