Should there be one standard combat uniform across all branches of service?

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 10:28:21 -0400

http://www.havokjournal.com/national-security/vote-military-uniform/

Response by SFC Stephen King made Jul 2 at 2015 10:32 AM

SFC Stephen King — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 10:32:26 -0400

yes

My opinion is if this was accomplished the availability of uniforms would grow and it would be easier to recognize all who serve. If this happens will it lead to rank streamlining as well?

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 2 at 2015 10:33 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 10:33:03 -0400

Yes. If the brass really want to save money, then pick one damn uniform for all.

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made Jul 2 at 2015 10:35 AM

SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 10:35:26 -0400

Question: How can "one standard combat uniform" perform in Bosnia as well as Afghanistan?

Response by SGT Kristin Wiley made Jul 2 at 2015 10:36 AM

SGT Kristin Wiley — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 10:36:01 -0400

I honestly don't care either way, but I know it would be more difficult to enforce service standards if we were in all in the same uniform. Is that sailor/soldier/marine/airmen wearing his uniform incorrectly or are the uniform standards different for his branch? I can't imagine the services getting on board to a cross-service uniform regulation when we all have unique functions and requirements.

Response by SFC Chad Sowash made Jul 2 at 2015 10:40 AM

SFC Chad Sowash — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 10:40:50 -0400

Yes the same uniform for all. Who is being held accountable for the sheer waste of taxpayer dollars?

Response by MSgt Jim Wolverton made Jul 2 at 2015 10:40 AM

MSgt Jim Wolverton — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 10:40:59 -0400

Yes

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made Jul 2 at 2015 10:50 AM

SCPO David Lockwood — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 10:50:48 -0400

It would make sense.

Response by CPT Zarin N. made Jul 2 at 2015 10:57 AM

CPT Zarin N. — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 10:57:15 -0400

It'll save money, and (hopefully) simplify logistics. Honestly, it seems like everyone just started pushing for new combat uniforms because everyone else was getting them. Army didn't really have a reason to go to ACUS-UCP, other than the Marines going to MARPAT. Air Force only changed because the Army did, and the Navy Changed because everyone else did.

At the end of the Day, I think our dress uniforms are where every branch ca take liberty and be different, but I think to truly bring home the "One Team, One Fight Mentality", having the same combat uniform is a good place to start.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 2 at 2015 10:57 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 10:57:19 -0400

I'm torn on this one.

A) for money's sake, if we would develop the best theater-specific uniforms and share for all military in that theater (desert, urban, jungle, garrison, snow, water, etc) it would make the most sense - after the pattern in that environment proves to be the best, every branch should wear the best then.

...however...

B) there is a strong sense of pride and identity in each branch. Different branches also take pride in their uniforms differently. Requiring the same uniform for each branch would certainly detract from that branch's pride in their uniforms and possibly even decrease morale.

Response by A1C Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 2 at 2015 11:03 AM

A1C Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 11:03:24 -0400

I think there should be. There are separate branches, each with their own specialties and differences, but we are all one military, one fighting force and I believe we could show some cohesiveness and all wear the same uniform as equals. Also, it would save a lot of money.

Response by TSgt Gwen Walcott made Jul 2 at 2015 11:09 AM

TSgt Gwen Walcott — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 11:09:04 -0400

Different Services == Different Missions === Different and distinct Uniforms

Always | Everywhere | Forever

Response by SMSgt Dave Swearingin made Jul 2 at 2015 11:12 AM

SMSgt Dave Swearingin — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 11:12:47 -0400

I like the idea of individual branches having their own identifiable uniform, but if they really want to save money, yes one uniform. Think of the millions or even billions it would save.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 2 at 2015 11:20 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 11:20:14 -0400

Yes....without a doubt.

Got really sick of sticking out like a sore thumb when I was on GACs.....hell.....shhhhh.....don't tell anyone......but we actually wore Army uniforms when we could just to blend in .....you know it's never good to stick out when there are snipers around.

Oh and budget blah blah.....save money blah blah....promote inter-service blah blah...

And for those that want a sense of pride or want to be seen as a Marine, Navy, Army, Air Force when walking around the mall, out to dinner, etc...wear your Class-As or Mess Dress and you will be recognized.

Battle uniforms should be universal based on the optimal uniform for the location.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Jul 2 at 2015 11:33 AM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 11:33:32 -0400

Absolutely NOT! We need to keep spending millions of dollars on uniforms. Every time one is developed and put into production another contractor needs to be hired to create another - spending millions on R&D. We need to keep all services developing their own style because it creates jobs, lets the big boys have something to play with. Lets our SNCOs/Officers get out and makes their mark on these important decisions. Just look at the legacy you'd create if you get your design approved!

No, it makes too much common sense to do something like this and we all know common sense is always put in the back of the line when we can let stupid take over; let stupid go forth in spending time and money on something else when a common uniform would save so much over all. After all, if we got so many billions to send over seas, owe China, Japan and who ever else now own the U.S.A., print money at the whim of the private bankers running the country (Fed Reserve) that soon it will take a wheelbarrow full to buy a loaf of bread, then we've surely got enough to waste on so many different uniforms.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jul 2 at 2015 12:21 PM

PO1 John Miller — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 12:21:22 -0400

NO. I was in the Navy and I wanted to be recognized as a Sailor, not just "some guy in the military."

What I Do think should be done is pick a unique working uniform for each branch and stick with it, not change it every few years. I went through 3 working uniform changes in the Navy: Dungarees, Utilities, and Navy Working Uniform (the blue digital camouflage). 4 uniforms if you count coveralls.

Response by LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow made Jul 2 at 2015 12:58 PM

LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 12:58:06 -0400

It would certainly make it more of a uniform. The Navy has 3 different ones (although there is talk of eliminating the blueberry). It would also greatly reduce costs.

At the same time, service identity and pride (Esprit de-Corps) is an important, intangible consideration. I think that would be bolstered if our so called leaders in the Puzzle Palace could actually develop good quality, reliable, durable, comfortable, well fitting uniforms that the troops actually want and like.

I've seen far too many uniform changes over the last 35 years, that were complete flops, yet they all claimed to have had backing from the troops. It is crazy...

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 2 at 2015 1:21 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 13:21:26 -0400

I am also torn between this one as well. Because of our distinctive uniforms on the battlefield, it allowed out reputation to precede us. In Iraq we got Intel that stated they didn't want to mess with us because they knew we were Marines based on the turret gunners Cammies. On the other side the DoD spend a little now to save a whole lot more in the long run by adopting the same uniforms. Ever since we left the BDU's the Marine Corps has had two a woodland and desert variant and it has worked very well for us and there is no sign of it changing anytime soon.

Response by SFC Jeff L. made Jul 2 at 2015 1:30 PM

SFC Jeff L. — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 13:30:59 -0400

As long as it's not the AF "tiger stripes" or that ridiculous blue camo the Navy wears. I'm partial to the Army's new pattern and the Marines and Navy SeaBees.

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made Jul 2 at 2015 1:46 PM

PO1 Glenn Boucher — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 13:46:45 -0400

I don't think it would work, different work environments dictate different uniforms.
I will agree that it would potentially save money, in the end there would still be modifications to each services uniform with the need for patches and badges by unit / command.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 2 at 2015 2:28 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 14:28:55 -0400

I agree with SSG in regards to cost efficiency, yet at the same time I appreciate the separate uniforms as a type of distinction. I personally take pride in the Navy uniform I myself wear.

Response by CPO David Sullivan made Jul 2 at 2015 2:53 PM

CPO David Sullivan — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 14:53:17 -0400

The Navy should go back to Dungarees and Crackerjacks... Look like a Sailor... Act like a sailor... BMC Retired

Response by SrA Daniel Hunter made Jul 2 at 2015 3:21 PM

SrA Daniel Hunter — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 15:21:43 -0400

Uniform, uniforms? What a novel idea! Keep the distinction of branch in the dress uniform. Have all combat (ACU/BDU) uniforms the same. Sounds like a good idea to me.

Response by TSgt David L. made Jul 2 at 2015 4:51 PM

TSgt David L. — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 16:51:40 -0400

Back in the day we had a common uniform, we'll call it Woodland BDU. It had service specific designators, lets call them Nametapes. In a joint or multi service environment (like we had when I taught at the EOD school, NAVSCOLEOD) we would actually look at the nametapes and then if we needed to address the individual we looked at the service specific rank designators, we'll call them rank insignia, then we could say "SGT Snuffy!", and relay a message.
In an outdoor environment we wore things we'll call "Headgear". Sometime they were a common shape but one service used headgear rank while the other service did not.

Now I know this is all crazy and makes no sense, but if you remember this tell us your opinion or view of the old style system...

Response by MSgt Keith Hebert made Jul 2 at 2015 6:01 PM

MSgt Keith Hebert — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 18:01:37 -0400

one utility uniform and black boots

Response by SGT Lawrence Corser made Jul 2 at 2015 6:06 PM

SGT Lawrence Corser — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 18:06:13 -0400

probably, it would save a ton of money for the government, and who cares really it is just a name tape difference or patches.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 2 at 2015 7:35 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 19:35:21 -0400

yes

Response by PO3 Jody Wangen made Jul 2 at 2015 7:41 PM

PO3 Jody Wangen — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 19:41:57 -0400

I got out in 1989 so don't really know what my opinion is worth. but I do think it would not hurt to have the working uniform the same. with different covers. keep the dress uniform distinct to the branch. but I do think the active duty people should be polled on this. they are the ones who have live with it.

Response by PO2 Kayla Modschiedler made Jul 2 at 2015 7:56 PM

PO2 Kayla Modschiedler — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 19:56:50 -0400

Yes and no, when the Navy Corpsman go support the Marines they were the Marines Uniform. The Navy switched to the NWU which is not a good uniform for sea. It's great if you get a little paint splatter on it but if you fall in the water, well GOOD LUCK! In the past we wore Dungarees, which were bell bottoms (so sexy! Just Google it, you know you want a pair lol). The reason for this was, if a person fell overboard or had to survive in the water without a life preserver they could get their dungerees wet and force air into them and use them as a makeshift life preserver. Then we switched to the utilities which were basically a Dickies shirt and pants. It was a great shipboard uniform and a little more modern than the dungarees. Plus they held those military creases a lot longer I feel than the dungarees. In addition to the utilities we also had the coveralls (mostly an underway uniform for dirty work and such) I don't know if they still use them aboard ship I got out right after the implementation of the NWU and was at shore duty so I didn't have to worry about that. I still have my coveralls though I use them for when I do yard work or have to do some major cleaning.

Response by 1st Lt Blair Ross made Jul 2 at 2015 8:44 PM

1st Lt Blair Ross — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 20:44:28 -0400

Yes. In some places the Air Force was augmenting we were given Army uniforms to prevent us from being sniper bait. My hats off to the army for that. A few of our guys got snipped simply because they had on a different uniform from those around him. Logistics and cost savings would be another great thing. Just design them with the guy in the field in mind, NOT the office junkie!

Response by SCPO Lee Pradia made Jul 2 at 2015 9:07 PM

SCPO Lee Pradia — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 21:07:23 -0400

I would have to say no. Here lies the problem, one combat uniform for all sister services, plus service specific uniforms, that would be a financial nightmare, another set of uniforms to buy for augmenting with sister services. How often does a Marine augment with the Army and vice versa? Navy with Army or Air Force or Coast Guard and so forth?
If this were to happen, who would pick the style? Because as you know, someone has to leave a legacy behind.
I can't imagine having to purchase a combat uniform for whatever environment we're prepping for, artic, desert, jungle, urban, NATO, and what have you. I'm happy to be retired.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 3 at 2015 5:19 AM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 05:19:11 -0400

Where I am currently stationed the Army and the Air Force both wear OCPs and there doesn't seem to be any issues with that. All that would need to be done is to make a pattern that would work in any environment and start phasing out the old uniforms.

Response by SPC JoAnn Session made Jul 3 at 2015 7:28 AM

SPC JoAnn Session — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 07:28:47 -0400

I am torn down the middle with this one. My first instinctual answer is yes, one standard combat uniform for all, representing one force to be reckoned with. One USA armed forces with the distinctive branch insignias and ranks left as is. Pride in the uniform should be something viewed across the board anyway. Taken pride in the job or mission on hand and completed should be of greater value in my eyes.

However, on the other hand, having a separate uniforms for each does help to know who and what the other individual standards and responsibilities are, and who they report to accordingly. For that I would say keep the different looks. Although I find that each branch want a uniform from the other branches.

Either way you look at it, we need to have uniforms for US soldiers made in the USA helping to save US jobs, cut debts to other countries, keeping our businesses home and having the US pride in what we wear and do.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 3 at 2015 9:16 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 09:16:26 -0400

Of course! All services should go with the USAF ABUs! Looks at how well it blends in with the trees-, the sand-, well you get the idea.

I'm joking of course...

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 3 at 2015 9:51 AM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 09:51:31 -0400

Yes. There should be one standard combat uniform across all branches of Service. A few years ago, (2012-2013) I read an article about how much it had cost the Navy to get the current NWUs (The blue Digitals) It was over $10Million. Just for the one navy uniform.

Response by SFC Joseph Weber made Jul 3 at 2015 2:53 PM

SFC Joseph Weber — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 14:53:00 -0400

No.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 4 at 2015 12:57 AM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 04 Jul 2015 00:57:53 -0400

That is not the combat uniform of the USCG; that is the duty working uniform worn on all cutters and USCG stations. However, law enforcement units within the USCG wear both the Navy blue combat fatigues, and Port Security Units wear the desert camos.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Jul 4 at 2015 1:10 AM

COL Charles Williams — Sat, 04 Jul 2015 01:10:36 -0400

YESSSSS... we should all share the same standard fatigues. CW4 Private RallyPoint Member

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 4 at 2015 8:18 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 04 Jul 2015 08:18:49 -0400

Sure, why not? I grew up seeing everybody in BDUs, so I don't really buy the "esprit de corps" argument. If services insist they can have their own garrison/working uniforms, but I don't see the point in unique combat uniforms. It certainly hasn't worked out well so far, except for maybe the Marines.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 4 at 2015 9:13 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 04 Jul 2015 09:13:27 -0400

I started reading this thinking, "No, of course not. Why should the Navy and AF dress like the Army and Marine Corps? Economies of scale be damned, we have different jobs." However, as I read through, I've come around due to the issues of 1) service members looking different in theater making some stand out as targets, 2) the fact that two out of three services picked horrible uniforms that provide no tactical advantage to those wearing them (looking at you, Army and Navy), and 3) the cost to taxpayers (and service members) of having half a dozen different patterns out there.

So, for a duty uniform, one standard design across the services, with a desert variant and a woodland variant. Dress uniforms can and should remain different. That's where you show your service heritage.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 4 at 2015 4:54 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 04 Jul 2015 16:54:52 -0400

Doesn't the DOD share a vision of seamless joint service interoperability? If so, it stands to reason that the future of the military will be done on a joint basis. If we adopt a single duty uniform we will proactively reach towards this goal. In a fiscal view, by adopting a single duty uniform, costs can be reduced through a phased rollout.

Response by PO1 Rick Serviss made Jul 4 at 2015 7:49 PM

PO1 Rick Serviss — Sat, 04 Jul 2015 19:49:47 -0400

They would have to find one that can be worn in the jungle and on a ship. It would need to be flame resistant for fires at sea. The dress uniforms should remain unique to all branches.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 5 at 2015 12:13 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 05 Jul 2015 12:13:17 -0400

It should be standardized, with variations only for type of terrain ie operations in snow or desert.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 5 at 2015 12:29 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 05 Jul 2015 12:29:07 -0400

Yes they should all be the same. It would save money. One team one fight we are all in this together.

Response by Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. made Jul 5 at 2015 4:40 PM

Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. — Sun, 05 Jul 2015 16:40:03 -0400

NO. Let the members of the services have their distinctiveness. Although my military career service was in the Air Force, I spent three of those years with the Army. Also, taught advanced DOD courses to members of all the services. And was very thankful for the Marines who provided provided security for my family and I during an assignment in Europe. After retiring, I spent two years on an Army post and three on a Navy base. Our services all have unique roles, missions and traditions and each service deserve their own distinct uniforms.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jul 5 at 2015 4:47 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sun, 05 Jul 2015 16:47:05 -0400

The next war will drive thencolor

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 6 at 2015 1:22 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 06 Jul 2015 13:22:22 -0400

As most would say, the short answer would be yes. It would save money in the long run. I for one do not want to wear the same service uniform as the other branches. It's what sets us apart from one another. The biggest issue I have is that they want to keep changing the uniforms every few years. Pick something already!!!

Response by CMSgt Tom Qualls made Jul 8 at 2015 3:46 PM

CMSgt Tom Qualls — Wed, 08 Jul 2015 15:46:32 -0400

Yes

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 9 at 2015 11:45 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 09 Jul 2015 23:45:24 -0400

With many bases being joint it would make more sense. If we all deploy to the same area we should all use the same uniforms. I can see having different dress uniforms for formal occasions but in the field you do not need to have four different uniforms.

Response by PFC Cliff Green made Jul 10 at 2015 11:45 AM

PFC Cliff Green — Fri, 10 Jul 2015 11:45:55 -0400

Each one distinguishes a certain branch does it not?

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 10 at 2015 1:34 PM

CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 10 Jul 2015 13:34:46 -0400

I think we should have one uniform type, same physical layout of pockets, same manufacturer but have the dye in the uniform different for services. As the picture associated with this discussion. Keep navy blueberries and the marines with their desert color and army green and Air Force blue green color. This would save money and keep the services distinguished. As for dress uniforms go, I would die before I wear another services dress uniform.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 10 at 2015 1:43 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 10 Jul 2015 13:43:51 -0400

The military isn't a fashion show.
Quit changing the fricken things!

Response by COL Charles Williams made Jul 10 at 2015 9:22 PM

COL Charles Williams — Fri, 10 Jul 2015 21:22:13 -0400

I think yes!!!! SSgt Private RallyPoint Member. This has been asked before... check out the other responses too.

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Jul 17 at 2015 7:39 AM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Fri, 17 Jul 2015 07:39:44 -0400

Yes. It would be more cost effective. More and more we deploy in joint units and it would just make sense to me.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 17 at 2015 7:54 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Jul 2015 07:54:11 -0400

Absolutely not. Each branch has a different mission set and different types of situations for which they could be involved in. Additionally, I first served in the 80's when all branches used the BDUs. This was done under the auspice that if we went to war with the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact, every NATO country had a variation of the BDU that was very similar to ours - so if you got separated from your unit, you could still get an appropriate uniform that identified you as a NATO ally. That is no longer the case, and most NATO countries have completely different uniforms now, the Warsaw pact is defunct, and as I understand it, some former Warsaw pact countries are now NATO or non-aligned. As I served over 26 years, I have seen both sides of the coin, and I can say this too: Each service, being able to create and design it's own uniform, allows that service to uniquely identify itself from other services, and it instills pride in your branch when you have a bad-ass uniform. Lastly: Why should any one branch, be able to influence the type of uniform requirements that any other branch has? What may work for a Navy Seebee, or SEAL, will not necessarily work for an Army grunt, or and Airforce mechanic.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made Jul 23 at 2015 11:14 AM

SrA Edward Vong — Thu, 23 Jul 2015 11:14:02 -0400

I'll take the same combat/utility uniform. I do think the branches should have a different service uniform.

Response by SGT John Rauch made Jul 23 at 2015 12:38 PM

SGT John Rauch — Thu, 23 Jul 2015 12:38:07 -0400

personally,I dont think so and I also dont believe the marines could allow themselves to "blend" with the common soldier

Response by PVT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2015 1:05 PM

PVT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Jul 2015 13:05:15 -0400

I think everyone saying no should bury their pride. The uniform doesnt make the branch, the person does. there's a lot of things on the uniform that identify the branch so, why not a same combat/working uniform. Economically it is better. Money saved on uniforms can be used for R&D on technology to save lives on the battlefield. Dress uniforms are what will matter, not the combat uniform.

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Aug 15 at 2015 9:32 PM

CW3 Kevin Storm — Sat, 15 Aug 2015 21:32:23 -0400

Well I can see a blue uniform for the navy and Coast Guard, but for land forces, lets get real. Some General thinks it is important to have his own unique service uniform. I mean if if generals had to pay for every dumb idea that cost the taxpayer billions I think some of these idiotic ideas would never come to reality.

Response by SPC David Hass made Sep 22 at 2015 12:53 AM

SPC David Hass — Tue, 22 Sep 2015 00:53:33 -0400

My dad retired from the Navy in 1989. He worked at a joint school his last assignment,everyone had woodlands. I could always tell the branches apart when I was a kid. USMC by their headgear and rolled sleeves,USMC on the pocket. USAF with the blue rank patches. Army with unit patches and USN were identifiable to me. I went Army and wore 3 different uniforms before I got out.I remember being in Iraq in dcu's and seeing incoming units with the new acu,and thought wow I have to wear that awful thing when I get home. The multicam makes sense to me. All of this started in what,the 2000s? I have been out since 08 and my opinion may not mean much but the "distinctive" combat uniform per branch makes no sense to me,maybe cause I grew up seeing the same uniform.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Nov 23 at 2017 4:14 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 16:14:38 -0500

I like the faded Tiger Stripes the Air Force wears. Far Left

Response by CPL Michael Paul made Nov 30 at 2017 7:42 PM

CPL Michael Paul — Thu, 30 Nov 2017 19:42:29 -0500

Yes that makes the most sense to have one standard uniform. But it won’t happen cause it makes to much sense and someone can not line there pockets with uniform change money

Response by SGT Richard Moschetti made Jan 13 at 2018 6:13 PM

SGT Richard Moschetti — Sat, 13 Jan 2018 18:13:19 -0500

We waste too much money on so many different uniforms. .. I STILL HAVE MY BDU'S IN WOODLAND CAMO

Response by SSG Harry Herres made May 13 at 2018 3:42 PM

SSG Harry Herres — Sun, 13 May 2018 15:42:54 -0400

What ever happened to the green machine? The fruit salad is worse that field and general scrambled eggs on the hats

Response by MSgt Pat Cronan made Aug 9 at 2018 6:09 PM

MSgt Pat Cronan — Thu, 09 Aug 2018 18:09:14 -0400

No. I agree with some of the other readers. The larger services would dictate the uniform and it may not be the best for everyone.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 9 at 2018 7:16 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 09 Aug 2018 19:16:47 -0400

I had an NCOIC back in 2011 while I was in Ft. Campbell who use to tell me all the time that the military was going towards this. Well, we are 7 plus years from him telling me that and we haven't go there, but I do recognize that we might end up there some day. I'll probably be retired when we get to this point, but it would be something to see.

Response by Mark Dellacamera made May 29 at 2019 1:41 PM

Mark Dellacamera — Wed, 29 May 2019 13:41:21 -0400

Def should be job specific , the DOD spends a lot to develop combat uniforms but if a certain job or service might not require it such as clerks, mechanics or if your on a ship which camo is useless why devote more money for somthing that might be unnecessary .

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made May 31 at 2019 2:35 AM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 31 May 2019 02:35:51 -0400

I am old enough to remember when Robert F. McNamara was the SECDEF under President Kennedy. He wanted to standardize all kinds of things across the services. From a dollars and cents perspective standardization makes sense. Everyone gets the same boots, socks, underwear, rifle, knife, etc., etc., etc., ad nauseas. There would be fewer contracts, fewer variants, more savings. McNamara served in the Army but he was much more of an academic than a military thinker. The uniforms and equipment of the various services need to be mission specific. Some standardization might be a good thing, but the individual services are the most qualified to determine their uniform and equipment needs. Short answer: NO.

Response by CPO Arthur Weinberger made Jun 1 at 2019 5:51 PM

CPO Arthur Weinberger — Sat, 01 Jun 2019 17:51:45 -0400

This is already in effect

Response by Sgt Anthony Leverington made Jun 20 at 2019 11:40 AM

Sgt Anthony Leverington — Thu, 20 Jun 2019 11:40:59 -0400

Personally, I think having one standard uniform could get rather confusing in joint operations.

Response by MAJ Jim Cook made Jun 20 at 2019 2:07 PM

MAJ Jim Cook — Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:07:34 -0400

Different mission, different uniform.