Would you support a standard uniform for all branches of service? Why or Why not?

SFC Michael Jackson, MBA — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 23:25:49 -0500

the closest I seen to a standard uniform for the Armed Forces was the multicam uniform when I was in Kandahar, and Air Force all wearing the uniform at one point with few deviations. Would do feel about this?

Response by SSG Scott Grandy made Dec 24 at 2014 11:37 AM

SSG Scott Grandy — Wed, 24 Dec 2014 11:37:09 -0500

I support it. I think a common field uniform, as when we had the BDUs, would be the best thing. One Country, one uniform. I have no problem with keeping service specific dress uniforms, but think when deployed, one should see a specific uniform and know that person represents the US.

Just my 2 cents.

Response by CMSgt James Nolan made Dec 24 at 2014 4:57 PM

CMSgt James Nolan — Wed, 24 Dec 2014 16:57:38 -0500

For Utility Uniform, Combat Uniform, Battle Uniform, Diggies, Multi-Cams, whatever you want to call it, my answer is yes 100%.

I feel that each service could maintain their own Branch Tapes and Rank insignia. But I would place rank insignia in same location on each uniform.

This would facilitate a few things:
1. Highest quality uniform could finally be obtained
2. Each service would not be spending ridiculous amounts of their budget to research the better option.
3. SMs would be able to obtain uniforms no matter where they were in the world, because uniform shops would only need to carry the one uniform.

Response by Maj Chris Nelson made Dec 24 at 2014 5:05 PM

Maj Chris Nelson — Wed, 24 Dec 2014 17:05:54 -0500

There used to BE a single uniform...That is what the BDU Uniform was.....worn by everyone. I would support it.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 1:11 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 01:11:14 -0500

In terms of saving cost I would support one vendor and one DOD cost.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 1:49 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 01:49:31 -0500

I think it would be kinda hard to tell who was who and the ranks between services are different you would definitely have to know all ranks of the other services,to make sure you render the proper respect for the rank.

Response by PO2 Stephen Brinkley (Scott) made Feb 15 at 2015 1:54 AM

PO2 Stephen Brinkley (Scott) — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 01:54:23 -0500

When it comes to the BDU, yes! As for dress uniforms and working uniforms keep them separate in honor of traditions. When the Navy brought out the blue BDU, I thought it was the stupist thing. I was embarrassed to wear them. I went through 3 duty uniforms in 12 years!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 2:19 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 02:19:32 -0500

I'd just be scared of what group of morons would decide the pattern. We might end up all wearing that pink and purple camo.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 3:28 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 03:28:11 -0500

No, not unless in a common operational area.

All things aside, I think we tend to take pride in being clearly distinguished from other services. Granted, we all fight the same fight, but the uniform uniqueness adds a bit of pride to branch service. In my opinion.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 3:45 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 03:45:58 -0500

Yes, amidst budget cuts it is smarter for our services to be like they were 15 years ago when we all were wearing BDUs is we were wearing camouflage. I know we all may have called it something different, but they were the same things.
Keep the dress uniforms different and tied to service history, but lets all work together in the sense that the Goldwater-Nichols Act wanted us to and come to an agreement on a uniform.
Though with all the money spent on new uniforms it will never come to fruition.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 5:40 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 05:40:24 -0500

It would be pretty funny seeing a bunch of bushes and vegetation running around on the deck of a ship.

Response by PO1 John Meyer, CPC made Feb 15 at 2015 6:12 AM

PO1 John Meyer, CPC — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 06:12:42 -0500

I think of pride in the branch of service an individual enters in when I think of something like this. I agree with those who say they wouldn't support something like this.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 8:33 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 08:33:03 -0500

I'm all for a unified camo uniform. But for dress uniforms, tradition and culture matters. As much as I never liked my cracker jacks, I'd be sad to see them go.

Response by SGM Darren Bean made Feb 15 at 2015 8:36 AM

SGM Darren Bean — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 08:36:43 -0500

Yes. The cost to maintain 4 different "combat uniforms" is becoming prohibitive. Keep the dress uniforms separate. The concept of a camouflaged uniform is to prevent the enemy, when in or near contact, from seeing you. On a ship, it doesn't matter if the enemy sees you, they are in a plane or another ship and YOU are not the target. Same thing with a flight line or hangar. The new OCP uniform and/or MARPAT are both equal in camo, so either is fine. Having one uniform, would increase the quantity of the contract, decreasing the cost of the uniform and provide a stable base of matching OCIE as well. So, the costs of all accessories like t-shirts, belts, socks, boots etc would all go down as well. Simple equation. Take the emotion out of the decision and make a smart business decision. All these items costing less equals less tax dollars needed, cheaper replacement costs in AAFES for the warrior as well. And while we are at it, name-rank-unit-branch-combat patch ONLY. I don't need to know you, like everyone else who attended, graduated Air Assault. That information is not necessary to fight and win. It's not like I move around the battlefield, wanting to set up a DZ, looking for dope on a rope. I know who my Pathfinder and AA guys are. More reduction in cost to the Soldier, less stuff for the 1SG to waste his time inspecting. We have to start reducing costs in a dwindling budget economy or more important stuff like weapons, armor, ISR gear will be sacrificed.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 12:00 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 12:00:55 -0500

Wow our memories are short, or we've really just turned over that many personnel! The BDU and DCU were common uniforms, and I don't think the basic flight suit varies between services either except for rank insignia and patches. This isn't a far out concept here. For in garrison work I get it - personally I think it's silly to wear anything camo'd up in an office, always have, but unless we're willing to go even further back and put everyone in olive drab fatigues (the old pickle suit), let's just pick something and stay with it for utilities. Dress uniforms, let's just stop obsessing over this already.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 1:55 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 13:55:48 -0500

Since the Navy has abandoned their traditional uniform, yes--otherwise I'd have recommended the dungarees and dixie cups as being an exception.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 1:56 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 13:56:05 -0500

At this point, the changes just need to stop for a while. We are cutting jobs.....cutting Brothers and Sisters....cutting experience. Is your uniform going to tell you what you need to know to advance in the branch of service that you are in? No. Is your uniform going to guard your back in a firefight? No.

These uniforms are already being issued, so to go through the massive "research committee" that would be necessary to decide on the "best camo" would be many more jobs. Simply put, the cost savings I don't think warrant the necessary headaches that would come along with trying to "unify".

It also makes it easier. When trying to identify rank, it is helpful to know a good distance out what branch you are looking for. Sailors in Army uniform are sometimes confusing to Soldiers that aren't as familiar with the Navy ranking system. I once saw a SSG salute a PO3. Watching that PO3s face was the funniest thing I'd seen.

At this stage....let's just focus on settling into the new battle rhythm rather than trying to force 5 "Brothers" to dress in the same suit....
v/r,
CPT Butler

Response by Sheryl Verhulst made Feb 15 at 2015 6:28 PM

Sheryl Verhulst — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 18:28:16 -0500

Never! I refuse to have Marines wearing the same uniforms as the Army! I jest

Response by LTC Stephen C. made Feb 15 at 2015 7:55 PM

LTC Stephen C. — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 19:55:19 -0500

SFC Michael Jackson, MBA, I think that each service should determine its own uniform, as only they can assess their unique and specific needs.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 8:33 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 20:33:40 -0500

I do not. I just paid $106 for seeing my new ranks on all my jackets and what not. I will not pay more money for another uniform and ranks

Response by SGT Shannon Bowdoin made Feb 15 at 2015 9:42 PM

SGT Shannon Bowdoin — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 21:42:17 -0500

Why not. We all serve the same purpose.

Response by SGT Jim Z. made Feb 15 at 2015 11:10 PM

SGT Jim Z. — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 23:10:47 -0500

From a budget standpoint standardizing the utility or battle dress uniform makes sense. The services need to retain their dress uniforms to remember their heritage and history. However, heaven forbid the Marines wear the same cammo pattern as the Army and the sailors aboard ships would look kind of strange as well.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 16 at 2015 11:42 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 11:42:14 -0500

To my line of thinking I agree with having a common field uniform. Regardless of esprit-de-corps, think about it logistically. We are spending so much money making uniforms in lessee here 7 different patterns. I pretty sure I'd rather have few extra rounds to train with that have a uniform the announces to everybody that I am in the Army... then again I am infantry gimme 30 secs of conversation and I'll tell'em.

Response by CSM Louis Rothenstein made Feb 16 at 2015 5:58 PM

CSM Louis Rothenstein — Mon, 16 Feb 2015 17:58:12 -0500

I support it even though retired. Seems like a waste ro have more than one pattern per area of the world. I could see a couple but they should be the same across all services. The field is the field. Might save a few dollars.
I think the Army went astray by prescribing the field uniform for almost all wear. I think if ID becomes important, one can read the branch on a nametape.

Response by CPL Gregory Cembrola made Feb 17 at 2015 8:57 PM

CPL Gregory Cembrola — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 20:57:04 -0500

I'm on the fence... I feel that the uniforms carry so much history and I, personally can more readily identify the branch of service.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 18 at 2015 10:31 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 10:31:42 -0500

Operating Location specific, yes. All for branch identity, but not all the patterns are best suited for all operating locations. right now it is quite humorous seeing personnel in other branches in cam that does not match the terrain. yes, some fwd deploy. this debate will continue as long as there are cam manufacturers developing new cam with the gov. from a budget standpoint it seems like the right choice for a single uniform, but that is not always the case in the short or long run depending on many factors.

Response by MSgt Michelle Mondia made Feb 18 at 2015 10:49 AM

MSgt Michelle Mondia — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 10:49:47 -0500

I say, Team America!

Response by Cpl Charles Vadnais made Feb 18 at 2015 1:41 PM

Cpl Charles Vadnais — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 13:41:42 -0500

Definitely yes when it comes to the cammies. I knew several Corpsman when I was enlisted and didn't realize they have to maintain both Navy AND Marine Corps uniforms, which not only required a lot of time (and closet space), but also could get expensive quickly in some cases. I think we're long overdue for finding a common type of non-dress uniform. I also think it would help foster more brotherhood between branches, as silly as that might sound. When I was enlisted I always had some instinct reaction to other uniforms that made me want to stay away from them (can't explain why, just something i realized post-service)

Response by CPL Daniel Perez made Feb 18 at 2015 2:03 PM

CPL Daniel Perez — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:03:19 -0500

Not the Dress Uniform. I think that those should be as distinct as ever.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 18 at 2015 2:09 PM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:09:34 -0500

This is a hilarious question. Everybody would want standardization . . . . . with their uniform being the standard. Jarheads don't like all the patches the other services wear.

Honestly, what's wrong with different uniforms. People joined the different services for their respective reasons. Going "purple" doesn't appeal to everyone. So some of us enjoy the distinct differences of our respective uniforms.

Also, there's history behind the uniforms for each service.

If only referring to the "BDU" (That when I was in the Marines we called cammies), there are still service-specific differences.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 18 at 2015 2:16 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:16:45 -0500

I fully supports DoD policy of introducing one military uniform for all branches. Just like my favorite uniform "old school BDU's. It will save the country a lot of hard earned Tax Dollars. But be on guard for the trouble step child, the USMC always want to look different, and this situation need to be addressed prior to making this policy a reality. Guys you know what! let bring back the old BDU's lol.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Feb 18 at 2015 2:45 PM

LTC Paul Labrador — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:45:30 -0500

From a economic, logistic and functional standpoint, yes having a common field uniform is the way to go. Service individuality/pride is adequately expressed by service and dress uniforms.

Response by A1C Lawrence Greenwood made Feb 18 at 2015 4:33 PM

A1C Lawrence Greenwood — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:33:51 -0500

Yes, why waste the taxpayers dollars on multiple uniforms? Find one that works and go for it. In many ways the old BDU's were perfect. We all wore them, and they were effective. The only reason they were replaced was people saw them as old.

Response by PO2 Christopher Morehouse made Feb 18 at 2015 4:59 PM

PO2 Christopher Morehouse — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:59:46 -0500

As long as the Marines and the Navy get to keep an eight-pointed utility cover, I'd be fine if the rest was the same for field uniforms. I was never a fan of the Army/Air force version.

Response by SSG Brian MacBain made Feb 18 at 2015 5:40 PM

SSG Brian MacBain — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:40:55 -0500

I do not think that is a good idea. There are history in all the uniforms, whether it is Dress uniforms to BDU's.

Response by Col Kyle Taylor made Feb 18 at 2015 5:56 PM

Col Kyle Taylor — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:56:00 -0500

Yes. Keep separate formal uniforms but combat uniforms should all be he same. It helps with identity and uniformity on the battlefield and all you need to do is keep service name strips. A common uniform would significantly reduce the need for logistical trails for various uniforms, boots, etc. some would argue that it would take away the separate service identities but that is a weak argument in a combat situation. Actions speak louder than words.

Response by 1st Lt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 18 at 2015 5:58 PM

1st Lt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:58:16 -0500

I support this 100%! It has gone too far with each service having a different uniform. If we are worried about saving money it seems like this could be one way to do it.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 18 at 2015 6:08 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 18:08:01 -0500

This is the problem I see...
Person 1 yells, "Soldier..., Hey Soldier..., Soldier!!!!,"
Person 2 replies, "I am a God damn Sailor!!!!!!!"

Response by SSgt Robert Clark made Feb 18 at 2015 7:36 PM

SSgt Robert Clark — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 19:36:33 -0500

I like the idea of a common combat/field uniform with branch specific rank etc. Each branch, by all means, should keep their unique dress uniforms.
Seems like a common combat/field uniform would simplify the procurement process and possibly reduce DoD budget since they would not have to rely on multiple vendors for several different uniforms. I like either the ACU or MARPAT, from what I have read the AF goes to ACU's when deployed anyway.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 18 at 2015 9:18 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:18:46 -0500

For the utility uniforms I would say yes, keeping branch specific rank insignia. But as others have said the Service Dress should all be branch specific. It makes sense fiscally and when it comes to force protection measures. If there was one uniform and one standard it would make spotting threats in disguise that much easier. From experience being AF I couldn't tell you if someone in the Army is wearing their uniform 100% correct or not, let alone any of the other services.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 3:42 AM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 03:42:49 -0500

Whatever keeps us from wasting money. Five uniforms in 10 years, in just the Army alone, is ridiculous.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 4:04 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:04:10 -0500

The OCP's are great. Loved them during my time in Bagram and Bastian. I do, however, miss BDU's and DCU's.

Response by SGT Brian Gibbs made Feb 19 at 2015 4:53 PM

SGT Brian Gibbs — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:53:47 -0500

I think the Utility uniform for Training and Combat use would be a great idea. Maybe some deviation dependent on job specifics, but the same camo outline. When I was in the Army I always thought it was interesting that we wore our combat fatigues all the time. I always felt this was unprofessional. My father was in the marine corps when I was growing up and I remember him in the all brown dress uniform (cant remember what they are called). I always felt that something of that manner was more professional when not in training or on the battlefield. Unless your job was in the MotorPool climbing around on Tanks and trucks. But to answer the original question. Yes. For combat only....we should all be united in the same look and feel of the US.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 5:05 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 17:05:21 -0500

I support this 1000% for a standard duty uniform. No more 50 shades of multi-cam. 1 garrison/battle/utility/duty uniform for all, the same way it used to be with BDUs. No more copyrighting camouflage patterns for a specific branch. Keep all the dress uniforms and PT gear service specific, but give everyone one uniform for the fight. One exception is that the Navy gets a pass with wearing camouflage on the ship for obvious reasons. But if you are on land, we should all be wearing the same camouflage pattern in my opinion.

Response by SGT James Murphy made Feb 19 at 2015 5:23 PM

SGT James Murphy — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 17:23:33 -0500

I hope your kidding... this isn't some 3rd world Military. Uh..Well it wasn't before Obama got elected.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 5:32 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 17:32:59 -0500

I don't think it woild work. Not only because every service CHOOSES to have its own distinctive uniform, but because each service also has its own globe of dominance, woth very few exceptions. Army on the ground, Navy/Marines/Coast Guard (who may be my only exception) on the sea, Air Force to the sky. Therefore, each needs a duty uniform duly displaying their separate realms of authority. Combat uniforms should be unanimous only if the services are all deploying to the same environment, much like the multicams are used for. But duty and dress uniforms should NOT be the same military-wide.

Response by MSgt Keith Hebert made Feb 19 at 2015 5:42 PM

MSgt Keith Hebert — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 17:42:30 -0500

Saves money and can get replacements at any base

Response by SPC John Decker made Feb 19 at 2015 6:14 PM

SPC John Decker — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 18:14:05 -0500

I think a standard uniform could eliminate some of the inter-service rivalries. Actually, I think there should not be different services. We already have different sections within the various branches that overlap: Infantry/Marines, Navy/Air Force aviators, JSOC. A person would join "The Military" to specialize in a particular field. They would be assigned to a base, most of which are joint bases now anyway, that requires that specialty.

Response by SGT Brian Lee made Feb 19 at 2015 6:21 PM

SGT Brian Lee — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 18:21:11 -0500

I would only support one standard field uniform. The dress uniforms should be specific to the branch of the military one is in.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 6:22 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 18:22:19 -0500

Absolutely not. Here is why:

Different situations call for different camouflage patterns and utility types to be used depending on geographical location, combat/non-combat situation, weather, etc.

A great example would be the U.S. Army's UCP on the ACU, which I do not wear, but I know many who think the UCP is a too much of a "limbo" pattern; efficient somewhere in situations between mountainous/tundra and urban areas. Multi-cam when used in the same situation may not be as effective and can even pose a threat to the soldiers considering visibility. But it's pattern, which is effective in grassland, forest, mountain, and even urban situations, cannot completely overrule the relevance of the UCP ACU. The Air Force basically is in the same boat since the ABU's pattern is similar to the UCP, and groundside/deployed units utilize the multi-cam utility.

The Navy's "N-dubs" work rather well on a ship, though there are many that agree that, in the case of a sailor going overboard, it might be hard to spot him/her when wearing a navy-blue uniform. I would even suggest the NWUs have a higher ratio of the silver/grey "pixels" to the dark-blue colors. Groundside sailors use multi-cam in many situations, whereas "greenside" sailors (Navy personnel attached to a Marine unit), use either woodland or desert MARPAT. Having different patterns proves to be effective, especially for the Navy, where having ship and shore rates requires the availability. If anything, the Navy should not even use the multi-cam and be given the Marine MARPAT, just without the Marine Corps emblem on the pocket and cover. It would not be hard for the Navy to do this since woodland/desert MARPAT "US NAVY" chest tapes and rank insignia already exist. The NWU should not be obsolete though, just altered. US Navy Seabees could keep their uniform (US Navy Type III) since it is similar to the woodland MARPAT, or trash. Whichever works...

The Marine's woodland MARPAT pattern has proven extremely effective in both jungle, mountainous/tundra, and night operations. Whereas the desert MARPAT has the same efficiency in the desert, snow, and some mountainous situations where wearing woodland exposes the Marines. Wearing multi-cam, although somewhat effective, simply does not work as well as woodland MARPAT when the situation calls for it. In situations like jungle warfare, the woodland pattern is excellent and blends superbly with the environment. The desert pattern as works in any clime and place a Marine may be sent.

Aside from all of this, a less significant point would be a mix of culture and tradition. And of course, as a Marine, that's what I'm all about. I simply cannot see Marines wearing multi-cam and having "pinning" ceremonies where a Marine Sergeant gets his first rocker with a hook-and-loop (Velcro) patch smacked onto his sternum. Also, the MARPAT uniforms are unique in the sense that they were the first digital camouflage within the US Military and distinctly display our emblem on the left breast pocket. There are a few other things that I feel would be odd for any service member of any branch to change over to a common uniform but are less relevant.

The multi-cam utility serves its purpose well for the Army and Air Force in the event that the UCP/ACU and ABU does not suffice. And the US Navy has NWU Type II and Type III for groundside situations. The Marines have done well with their woodland and desert MARPAT. These uniforms are designed by their respective branches FOR that branch, WITH the branch in mind every step of the way.

The Army and Air Force need multi-cam utilities. The Army still has a use for the ACU as well. The Navy should alter their NWUs, but I feel they are still relevant. Groundside units could easily utilize Type II and Type III uniforms or altered MARPAT since "greenside" Navy already does this. The Marines do not need another uniform, nor do they need to change theirs.

If there were to be an all-branch uniform, it would probably come in multiple color/pattern variants and the individual branches would stick to the color/pattern variant they use more or need; this simply defeats the purpose of developing a new uniform or using an existing one - which, when considering efficacy, does not exist.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Feb 19 at 2015 6:58 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 18:58:32 -0500

A uniform uniform. How quaint. I don't suppose it would be any worse than a Joint Forces Fighter Aircraft. That worked out well, didn't it?

Can you imagine the "committee" that would design the uniform uniform? Every branch represented. Every uniform uniform requirement thrown into one pot. Wouldn't you love to be a fly on the wall listening to that debate?

How about the compromises? Every design is a compromise. Imagine compromises between mountain infantrymen, tropical sailors, and SAC ground crewmen.

Nope. I have no objections. I look forward to seeing the results. Just keep in mind that I like bell bottom trousers and camo-suspenders...

Response by MSG Paul DePrimo made Feb 19 at 2015 7:03 PM

MSG Paul DePrimo — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 19:03:00 -0500

Absolutely Not! Politics already has taken the Black beret from the Army Rangers without input from any one except staff personnel and Gen Shenseki of course. We have another General stating that the ACU's were a bad design but yet where was he when the approval process went through? I know he was in service. Let the troops decide on a uniform change and NOT the politician's! If I wanted to look like a Navy or Airforce troop I would have joined that branch!
MSG (RET) D

Response by SSgt Dan Montague made Feb 19 at 2015 7:58 PM

SSgt Dan Montague — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 19:58:47 -0500

To be honest I am confused with the amount of cammie uniforms the Army has and that AF and Navy cammie pattern ???????? Not to long ago we all wore the same pattern. The Marines branched out with a new pattern and everyone else followed with something completely different. I think it would make sense to come up with 2 patterns that all use. Tan and green. No Army or Marine emblems buried in the design. Just allow the individual service to wear patches,chevrons and the covers they want.
The Marines used snipers to develop the colors and pattern for the MARPAT uniform. I'm sure if the military involved special forces from all branches, they could come up with a color and pattern that works.

Response by TSgt Dennis McNally made Feb 19 at 2015 9:36 PM

TSgt Dennis McNally — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 21:36:17 -0500

I believe there are significant advantages to a single form of utility uniform with specialty-authorized deviations for safety, performance, and recognition (like law enforcement, first responders, and such). Dress and formal uniforms should stay as they are; there is a lot of branch-specific heritage and culture in those.

Response by SGT Kenneth Hall made Feb 19 at 2015 9:57 PM

SGT Kenneth Hall — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 21:57:36 -0500

I support it, not only is it cheaper in the long run it also unifys all service branches

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 19 at 2015 10:56 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 22:56:57 -0500

Answer: Yes, provided the camouflage actually blends in all environments were the forces are operating.

Reason: Cost savings to the tax payers. Yeah, it's that simple.

Response by SPC Mamoun Assad made Feb 19 at 2015 11:16 PM

SPC Mamoun Assad — Thu, 19 Feb 2015 23:16:04 -0500

No, if you can't tell you run a safety risk for one. It would also cause lots of confusion on installations with multiple branches of service members.

Response by MSgt Rick Runion made Feb 20 at 2015 1:52 AM

MSgt Rick Runion — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 01:52:16 -0500

No, Here is why;
When I first joined in the 80's the Army, Marines, and Air Force. were starting to come together with the same utility or BDU Uniform mostly to add uniformity is what I was told. the navy had specific requirements that the uniforms of the time did no live up to. By the 90's the three services were wearing the camouflage uniform the Army called BDU's and the Marines simply referred to as Cammies.
The problem the Marines ran into was that the standard of the uniform did not fit well with the needs of the Marine Corps operational tempo, rarely lasted through a deployment, and there was always the costly need to issue a separate dessert uniform for deployment.
In the late 1990's The Marine Corps Uniform Board put out a survey to all Marines asking what they wanted to see or required in a combat Uniform. The survey went on for a few months and the board took all the results and came up with the uniform the Marines currently wear.
There are specific features designed into the uniform that are Marine specific. Wash and wear no iron, pockets inside the knees and elbows for pads, the pocket are designed to be conducive to wearing body armor, the material is very durable in a combat environment, and they are issued in green and tan to save money on TAP issue for Deployment.
It wasn't long after the Marines started issuing the new uniforms that the other services began working with their own designs that were specific to their needs. The navy needs uniforms that are conducive to ship life. the Air Force need uniforms that are tailored to the needs of an Airman. The Army while having most of the requirements of the Marines also need the ability to add unit patches which the Marines do not wear.
So in my opinion trying to make everybody wear the same uniform is simply short sighted to each services needs.
Money is not the issue since each service uses their individual funding in order to purchase the uniforms and once issued the service member is responsible for the upkeep of their uniforms except in specific cases of combat deployment when it is not possible to go to a uniform store and purchase replacements.
So my suggestion is that each service tailor their uniforms to their own needs and leave it at that.

Response by CDR Michael Goldschmidt made Feb 20 at 2015 9:01 AM

CDR Michael Goldschmidt — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 09:01:03 -0500

I love the Navy and our traditions, but it probably no longer makes sense even to have separate services. Our military budget is larger than all other countries' on the planet, COMBINED. Does it really make sense to have 5 separate air arms and at least 4 sets of Special Forces? I'd say it doesn't. Not only is it more expensive the way we do things now, but our equipment doesn't always interoperate. An F-15 or 16 or whatever the USAF is using now can't land on an aircraft carrier. Even if it could, the pilots don't have those skills. It makes most sense to move toward a common force, which many would say we're doing already. Marines have been used to operate at least hundreds of miles from water, as have SEALs. Navy and Marine Aircraft assault as far inland as USAF and Army aircraft. I've even known Surface Warfare Officers (ship guys) like me to command FOBs in Afghanistan. CENTCOM sent me there instead of Army officers on staff. Maybe we should just stop pretending and go all out integrated.

Response by Cpl Aaron Goodson made Feb 20 at 2015 9:07 AM

Cpl Aaron Goodson — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 09:07:28 -0500

Absolutely not. The whole point of having different uniforms is displaying distinction between the services. Embrace these differences. You joined each specific branch for a reason, I didn't join the United States Marine Corps to look like an airman or a soldier. I joined to be a MARINE and to look and conduct myself as such. You all want a common utility uniform, leave the Marine Corps out of it. Take some pride in the service you joined, they're not the same; quit trying to get them to be.

Response by CSM Richard Montcalm made Feb 20 at 2015 11:08 AM

CSM Richard Montcalm — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 11:08:15 -0500

This is an outstanding idea for tactical uniforms only. Keep the Services Dress Uniforms as they are to allow them to retain their identity and traditions.

Logistically, it is cheaper for the taxpayers to support a single tactical uniform rather then several different types, it makes stocking replacement items much easier, it simplifies the problem of what 'right' looks like, even though each service will have certain differences such as unit patches and what jewelry can be worn with the uniform. Buying a common uniform will also ensure a better quality and price control for DLA

Tactically, it makes every bit of sense that if everyone looks the same then personnel from different services, i.e. USAF JTACS don't stand out under observation, because of a different camouflage pattern. I've noticed that our Allies here at Kandahar wear the OCP Multi-cam camouflage pattern with their own countries' 'style' of Battle Dress- pocket locations, sleeve pockets, etc... they even wear their rank centered in the chest like we do- although I personally think rank should be worn above the right pocket.

Response by CMSgt William Staggs made Feb 20 at 2015 11:14 AM

CMSgt William Staggs — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 11:14:58 -0500

Absolutely. all factors involved (design, testing, purchase and distribution would be simplified and more cost-effective. Tradition notwithstanding(a factor embedded with many, if not most, of those opposed, would not be a primary factor over time. I'd personally like to see something of which all can be proud - regardless of branch. I do recall earlier attempts at standardization in which it was extremely difficult for those involved to even decide upon a standard belt buckle. Good luck! Great subject; good question.

Response by SFC William Swartz Jr made Feb 20 at 2015 11:48 AM

SFC William Swartz Jr — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 11:48:23 -0500

Yes, would save the tax payers in the long run....

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 20 at 2015 3:56 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 15:56:04 -0500

I think no matter what anyone thinks some company or companies is going to strike some stupid contract with the government and get rich and cause more spending to cause greater cuts to our budgets in the form of pay and benefits and no matter what they decide, in a couple of years someone is going to change their minds, re-invent the wheel and we will again get new uniforms... Politics at its best... I personally don't care one way or another, we use to all wear the same BDU/Cammies/utility uniform and it was all good, not to mention those things lasted for ever...

Response by MAJ Ronnie Reams made Feb 20 at 2015 5:37 PM

MAJ Ronnie Reams — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 17:37:06 -0500

We had it in the OG fatigues, for a couple of decades, followed by the
woodland camo fatigues for a decade or so. The everyone went off on their own
service camo fatigues. The OG was the best for blending in almost everywhere.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Feb 20 at 2015 9:28 PM

COL Charles Williams — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 21:28:08 -0500

Another good one. The Marines went to digital, then Army did... The Navy and USAF were still sporting DBDUs... then they decided they needed a new uniform too... Riddle me the this batman.... why does the Air Force need Sage Green Tiger Stripes? and Green Boots? Why do Sailors need blue digital camouflage? You would think the Navy would have orange, so if they fell off a ship, someone could see you.... The ACU concept was a worthy idea (one camo pattern for every where) except it worked no where...

That aside, I think we all should have standard utility uniforms, with minimal markings (you know the Army gets carried away as does the Air Force with utility patches and badges...) and then a few variants for the most likely environments we will face.

I like the idea of a single combat uniform. So long as there are variants for different climates and terrain...

Response by Lt Col Michael Hills made Feb 20 at 2015 10:09 PM

Lt Col Michael Hills — Fri, 20 Feb 2015 22:09:48 -0500

Hell yeah! This uniform situation is asinine. There is no justification for different uniforms that have nothing to do with environment. I understand arctic camo, jungle camo, dessert camo etc. if you are in a specific environment but garrison uniform or uniform in theater's without a specific requirement should be standard. Admittedly, it's budget dust in the greater scheme of things but it's still a stupid fight in the end.

Response by CCMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 21 at 2015 1:15 PM

CCMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 13:15:06 -0500

(In my humble opinion) I'm a big supporter of one utility uniform for all branches! Personally I'm a huge fan of the multi-cam/OCP... it was nice to wear a uniform that was usable/practical in every sense (slanted Velcro pockets, etc), plus it was just downright comfortable! And I think there's plenty of velcro on those sleeves to formulate and distinguish our own unique branch identities. But with that said, still always maintain the exception and option of different camouflage patterns for adaptiveness to different & unique field environments!

Though I'll also admit my personal bias is speaking as I'd love nothing more than to wear my multi-cams everyday! And yes, for all my Air Force brothers & sisters... we could even come up with nice big velcro stripes so we can continue our tradition of those big stripes on our sleeves! Oh plus, just think how cool that would be on promotion day?... peel that old rank right off and then stick and "tack" those new stripes right on... voila, you're done, no more trips to the alterations shop for a sew-on!

And yes, with respect to my Marine brothers & sisters... you do have one BA uniform and you did it better than the rest of us with your first and only go round when initially fielding your new uniforms to your Marines! So a big shout-out and "Semper-Fi" to all you devil dawgs!

Lastly, thanks to the entire gang... ALL Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Airmen, and Guardians! NO ONE can do what we do when we're all out there kicking @__ together on the same team! Even the famed warrior Spartans would be impressed and give us props!

Response by Sgt Lew Dunham made Feb 21 at 2015 8:22 PM

Sgt Lew Dunham — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 20:22:51 -0500

keep as is ...

Response by SSG Jeffery Christensen made Feb 21 at 2015 8:23 PM

SSG Jeffery Christensen — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 20:23:25 -0500

This is a hard one for me. I know that it would obviously be more cost effective for all branches to share one standard uniform. That being said, it would be more cost effective for the USPS, FedEx, and UPS to share uniforms. I'm probably a little bit old school, but I think it IS important for each service to "represent". If (in my humble opinion), we all look exactly the same, the lines of responsibility start to fade, in the eyes of the public. I also think loyalty plays a big part; each service member takes pride in the fact that they chose the particular service they are in.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 21 at 2015 9:03 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 21:03:21 -0500

I'm all for it. With the exception of the Marine Corps, we all wear the same uniform in a combat environment anyway. One team, one fight.

Response by SSG Keven Lahde made Feb 22 at 2015 5:46 AM

SSG Keven Lahde — Sun, 22 Feb 2015 05:46:30 -0500

SFC Michael Jackson, MBA SFC I would agree with you on this one. I think it would save a ton of money in the long run. Just have a few alterations is all for each branch. That is my opinion on this topic.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2015 7:24 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 22 Feb 2015 07:24:19 -0500

Uniforms for the your suroundings! I think that the working uniforms (I.E. camo) should reflect the members surroundings regardless of what branch they may be from in a combat zone, outside of that I feel that each branch has a sense of pride in their uniforms that we should not take away. The fact that we all have U.S. (branch, I.E. Navy, Marine, Army, Air Force, Coast Gaurd) unites us all you in the same but as we all know the different branches has their different ways about the, is it a head or a latrine or a bathroom, is it a wall or bulkhead, a hatch or door. Our traditions are very different as well. I say own the branch you are in and show off when you can but when it comes to combat we share the same blood so why not the same uniform.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 22 at 2015 11:34 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 22 Feb 2015 23:34:36 -0500

I support it for the work uniform, but dress uniforms should be branch specific.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 12:11 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 12:11:06 -0500

I would support a common uniform. For one thing, it's cheaper than letting all the services try to research and develop a brand new pattern every few years. Less money spent there means more money for other stuff like required hardware/tools for those careers that need them. It also builds more national unity. Though we all joke about our sister services, we are all fighting for the same friends and families at home. It only makes sense 1 team, 1 fight!

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 12:30 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 12:30:06 -0500

We are all different, do different jobs and it's ok to have Branch Pride. Espirit De Corp amongst the different branches!

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 12:30 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 12:30:15 -0500

One team one fight! We all have pride in what we do and sometimes feel we do a better job than other branches. Bottom line were paid the same rate plus special duty based on different criteria. That's what sets us apart. Navy has the highest annual budget for uniforms (what are you up to? 6?) And your blue, you fall in the water who's gonna fuck in see you, jk. One uniform, save cost, maybe a sand/jungle/gassison diviation. Keep our own dress uniform for special occasions (mines never been worn in 4 years).

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 1:07 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:07:59 -0500

Yes, Combat uniformity with service dress being branch specific (Pre-9/11 Rules).

Just make sure that those involved with the "development/decision making" of the UCP/ABU patterns are allowed nowhere near the process. Multicam and MARPAT were ready/available before ACU/ABU were made, this insanity driven by folks who have no idea what their doing while bold-face lying about "effectiveness" in order to generate "individuality via jealousy", needs to stop (I'm looking at you Air Force for wishing you were cool enough to wear original Tiger Stripes, and you Army for wanting digi's so bad it didn't matter what color it was in). For example, it took me about 15min [with some mad photoshop skills I might add] a few years ago to perfectly digitize/pixelate the amazingly effective Multicam colorway at a full resolution (example attached) if simply being digital was so important.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 1:17 PM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:17:20 -0500

I support it %100. I liked the multi cam. and think it looks sharp. I think we could all just wear our own rank etc

Response by Cpl Matthew Wall made Feb 25 at 2015 1:37 PM

Cpl Matthew Wall — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:37:54 -0500

I would agree to let the Army wear the Digital Camis of the Marine Corps. On one condition though. You can stick patches all over it. You know why? Because it doesn't have VELCRO.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 1:49 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:49:09 -0500

My Solution:

Marine (MARPAT) Patrol Cap
Army Scorpion Multicam Jacket
AF ABU Trousers
Navy Flip Flops

In all seriousness, let the service branches maintain their own dress uniforms. This allows for service pride and the continuity of historical traditions. Combat (field) uniforms should be designed for the field of battle to where they are deployed regardless of branch. Special purpose uniforms i.e. aviators, submariners, sailors (At Sea) etc. should maintain the design as prescribed by their service branch.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 2:05 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 14:05:23 -0500

No I would not support a standard uniform for all branches of service. You are correct in asking how I "feel" about this...as it may be practical and economical to mass produce one uniform for all the Armed Forces there is the issue of pride in ones own branch of service. If we are to standardize uniforms why not just lump all of the services into one branch and let the SNAFU begin. We are all committed to one goal however there needs to be a pride factor somewhere.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 2:08 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 14:08:57 -0500

Yes, I think a universal combat/ utility uniform would save the DOD a ton of money. No matter what base a service member is at, they could buy utility uniform items. It worked 15 years ago when we all had the old tricolor uniforms. Why wouldn't it work now?

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 3:09 PM

SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 15:09:17 -0500

I would totally support it. I think the grey Air Force uniforms get dirt to easly.

Response by SMSgt Thor Merich made Feb 25 at 2015 7:06 PM

SMSgt Thor Merich — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 19:06:19 -0500

Back in the day (late 70's, early 80's) both the Army and Air Force wore the same green uniforms for daily wear. Then the Army went to BDU's and for the most part, so did everyone else. Now, we all have to be different. It makes economic sense to have one type of uniform for all. But I would let each service add it own touch (such as sleeve rank insignia or other markings).

Each combat environment is different and the quest to find a "one camo pattern to fit all" will always fail. When down range, we should all wear the uniform that makes the most sense for the location.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 8:23 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:23:26 -0500

Absolutely not. Uniforms are to distinguish us from the other branches and as Marines, we take pride in being different than everyone else. The Air Force and army can do what they want, but the Navy and Marine Corps will maintain our distinguishing uniforms.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 25 at 2015 10:33 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 22:33:28 -0500

Yes. This ain't no fashion show... to speak in old "hardass" NCO terms. We're here to fight and win wars. We (all) need the most effective camouflage pattern for the terrain we are in. If you want to wear different uniforms when not in combat, go back to the class-A/class-B garrison uniform. Camouflage is designed to blend in to the surrounding area, if you're just trying to look different than your ally counterparts, it might be time to rethink your priorities. I think it's well beyond fraud, waste and abuse the way we've spent millions of tax dollars (between all the branches) just to pick the prettiest (often least effective) pattern.

One team, one fight.

Response by Cpl Todd Miller made Feb 26 at 2015 1:29 AM

Cpl Todd Miller — Thu, 26 Feb 2015 01:29:51 -0500

Moving to one uniform would be stealing from our culture, and identity. No thanks!

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 26 at 2015 6:58 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 Feb 2015 06:58:42 -0500

I think the forces distinction is what i appreciate about uniforms. I just wish the Army chooses a uniform, where we dont have to replace it after 4 washes. I like darker uniforms and they need to bring back leather boots and kiwi..

Response by MSG Danny Stanley made Feb 26 at 2015 1:20 PM

MSG Danny Stanley — Thu, 26 Feb 2015 13:20:45 -0500

I understand the inter-service rivalry, but we went for many years with one camouflage uniform. Sure, each service called it something different, but the pattern was the same and it saved the taxpayers a lot of money. I read somewhere that the USMC created the woodland camo pattern and the other services liked it so much they adopted it. Then the USMC did it again, but they knew the Army would get camo-envy and try to steal it again, so they put the EGA in it. I guess that made the Army mad so they had to do the impossible and create a universal camo pattern that is universally useless. Then the rest of the services had to do their own thing.

Anyway, being the cheapskate that I am, and trying to be a responsible steward of the taxpayers' dollars, I think one camo pattern for all services is a good idea. From a logistics perspective it makes sense. We have one common firearm (with few exceptions) for all services. If someone breaks their M16 they can go to any armorer and have it fixed. We have a lot of commonality amongst services so we can get back in the fight. The ability to be issued a uniform or any other gear from any unit in the field is a big plus when we consider how many units operate with multi-service assets these days.

Edit- I just reread the original question. I do not support one uniform for all services. Each service has their distinct heritage and that should be reflected in their dress uniform. However, for a field uniform I support one pattern.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 26 at 2015 8:56 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 Feb 2015 20:56:59 -0500

Let's definitely move to one uniform. The Army ACU is well designed for actual utility, and this move would consolidate supply and distribution functions, thus saving a metric butt-ton of money.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 26 at 2015 9:16 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 Feb 2015 21:16:14 -0500

Yes, and let the Marines let themselves roll their sleeves up inside out, so they can feel few and proud.

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 27 at 2015 1:19 AM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 01:19:34 -0500

No. Marines would not know what to do with all the Velcro and they don't need to carry office supplies on their sleeves... but if DOD decides to go in that direction they should let the Marine Corps design it. We would do it better and cheaper than anyone else. We designed our MARPAT for only $319K over 12 years ago (thanks Canada). Our pattern seems to be working pretty well.

Interesting side note: According to a report from the Government Accounting Office (GAO 12-707) the Army may spend $4 Billion fixing their ACUs. The monetary equivalent of procuring about (930) M1A1 Tanks.

http://www.gao.gov/assets/650/648951.pdf

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 27 at 2015 1:27 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 13:27:48 -0500

I would like to see a common dress uniform that would have branch insignia displayed. Duty uniforms should vary not necessarily by branch but actual duty performed while deployed and while in garrison. Whether it's the same in each branch is moot to me.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 27 at 2015 9:53 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 27 Feb 2015 21:53:44 -0500

To the original question I'd limit it to two - one for the ground services and one for the sea services. Whatever the Army chooses is what the Air Force gets, whatever the Marines choose is what the Navy gets. Save the money.

Response by SGT(P) Bruce Van Havermaet made Mar 1 at 2015 10:52 AM

SGT(P) Bruce Van Havermaet — Sun, 01 Mar 2015 10:52:55 -0500

hi i think we should have stayed with the all green uniforms we had back in the 70's, off all the uniforms i wore they were the best.

Response by LCpl Ernest Aviles made Mar 4 at 2015 3:31 PM

LCpl Ernest Aviles — Wed, 04 Mar 2015 15:31:36 -0500

Yes as long as each one is some how distinguishable from the next. Marines are not the same k8nd of soldier and need a distonction for themselves even if it is just a logo or name tag that differentiates them

Response by LCpl William Fogle made Mar 11 at 2015 12:30 PM

LCpl William Fogle — Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:30:09 -0400

No our uniform is our calling card. Hello, USMC here! Whats the problem? Yes we can!
Change what you want, leave ours alone.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2015 7:20 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 01 Apr 2015 19:20:46 -0400

Yes for the pattern... A "H" no for the design.

Response by SFC Victor Serrano made Jul 20 at 2015 4:19 PM

SFC Victor Serrano — Mon, 20 Jul 2015 16:19:32 -0400

For financial reasons. I do not see a reason for every service having their own uniform. I support one standard uniform for all services

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 10 at 2016 11:28 AM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:28:58 -0500

100%

Response by COL Jeff Williams made Jan 10 at 2016 11:41 AM

COL Jeff Williams — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 11:41:49 -0500

Applying this thought to sports, would it be ok if every team wore the same uniform?

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 10 at 2016 12:13 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 12:13:51 -0500

I like that each branch has its own identity, however I'm not opposed to wearing the same uniform during deployment, as we should all be wearing the most functional concealment in a combat zone. I also think it is odd now that the Army is getting a new pattern and it is the only non-digital of all the branches. OCP is hands down better than UCP though.

Response by PO1 Joe StMartin made Jan 10 at 2016 12:58 PM

PO1 Joe StMartin — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 12:58:30 -0500

The concept is great, however the problem that occurs is that our working uniforms need to be closely matched to our working environments. I can not imagine any one style, or fabric that would be appropriate to working in a ships engineering pit, on a flight line, a base, a battlefield, And whichever other locations our forces find themselves working in on a day to day basis. The only time that one standard uniform would work would be if we were all working in the same environment.

The issue that arises then becomes the problem of each individual having to keep several different types of uniforms that wouldn't use for years at a time.

Response by MSgt Billy McDonough made Jan 10 at 2016 1:01 PM

MSgt Billy McDonough — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 13:01:01 -0500

Only if it saves money, in textiles these days I am not sure it would.

Response by MSgt John Taylor made Jan 10 at 2016 1:49 PM

MSgt John Taylor — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 13:49:49 -0500

We all wore chocolate chips in DESERT STORM. I hate to sound like a conspiroist, but how long after we all look the same before someone asks the question "why different services?"

I have a great deal of respect for our sister services, but I have more pride in my own, therefore I prefer the separate look.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 10 at 2016 3:48 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 15:48:16 -0500

I don't know about this. Considering our different rank structures, I think having different uniforms is a good way to tell what branch you're looking at from a distance, so when you see a bit bird on someone's hat you know what to say to them.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 10 at 2016 3:54 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 15:54:25 -0500

I support a standard combat uniform for all the branches. The biggest argument about having distinct uniforms is that it is "tradition". These people forget that before the whole digital camouflage fad, all the branches wore BDUs. Since then the branches have spent tons of money on their service distinct uniforms that don't provide a distinct tactical advantage. With a standard uniform, that money can be spent on more important things. A standard uniform also makes the logistics a lot easier, saving even more money. We work for the people and shouldn't be frivolously spending their money on combat uniforms that don't effectively do their job. If I am in a foxhole getting shot at, I don't care if the uniform I'm wearing shows my service's distinct look. All I care about is if it conceals me so that I'm not a bigger target for the enemy.

With that being said about the combat uniform, I think there should still be service distinct dress uniforms. This is where the argument for tradition is actually valid. If I am in my dress uniform it is a formal occasion and I actually care about pride in my service, as opposed to when I'm getting shot at. Logistically it would still cost more to have service distinct dress uniform but the services are changing their dress uniform as often. This means they aren't spending as much money on development of new uniforms. I think if they tried to get rid of service distinct uniforms for both combat and dress uniforms there would be too much backlash. I think that having a unified combat uniform will solve many of the problems they are trying to fix.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 10 at 2016 4:39 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 16:39:23 -0500

No way. Love my NWUs.

Response by SFC Victor Pontbriand made Jan 10 at 2016 5:02 PM

SFC Victor Pontbriand — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 17:02:41 -0500

Stupid idea

Response by COL John Hudson made Jan 10 at 2016 5:08 PM

COL John Hudson — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 17:08:39 -0500

Chief, and ALLCON: I was at the last combined LOGEX held at Fort Picket back in the day. A Joint Field Ex - we had Canadian military types with us as well. They shared with us the Canadian military tried that very idea, and it was the biggest "Recruiting" disaster ever in the history of the Canadian armed forces. Young people wanting to become engaged in a specific aspect of any of the armed forces sought to be recognized by the roll-specific uniforms for that area. Turning off that inducement, exchanging it for a 'one-size-fits-all' vanilla outfit, choked off their enlistment numbers in a heartbeat. Senior military leaders couldn't get that turned off quick enough. U.S. common uniform? Didn't work for the Canadians and I REALLY don't believe it would work for us!

Response by SGT John Fritz made Jan 10 at 2016 7:34 PM

SGT John Fritz — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 19:34:36 -0500

Doesn't the uniform requirement have to fit the needs on the specific mission? More so the environment that they will be going to to defend us.

Response by SSgt Jim Gilmore made Jan 10 at 2016 8:38 PM

SSgt Jim Gilmore — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 20:38:33 -0500

Standard battle/utility uniform, yes! Dress uniforms, keep separate.

Response by SSgt Jamie Ritter LeBlanc made Jan 10 at 2016 8:40 PM

SSgt Jamie Ritter LeBlanc — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 20:40:34 -0500

Uh no there have been enough uniform changes. I honestly didn't see the need for the change before in roughly 2007. Me personally it is a waste of time and money for the changes. Only time it should change is for the mission. JMHO

Response by PO3 Chris Scheide made Jan 10 at 2016 8:46 PM

PO3 Chris Scheide — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 20:46:13 -0500

Seagoing services, Navy and Coast Guard, shouldn't have to wear camo. As a Machinery Technician I like our working blues or dungarees w/ a chambray shirt. I like what others have said about keeping the service specific dress uniforms. Lets each service keeps its identity.

Response by CSM Chris McKeown made Jan 10 at 2016 9:16 PM

CSM Chris McKeown — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 21:16:51 -0500

I have to say hell NO! Different uniforms between the different branches is good for morale on so many levels. Also different uniforms helps during large campaigns like Desert Storm so you know which branch of service you are seeing and dealing with. Many a time during Desert Shield/Storm I would come across troops in remote areas and would call in to report what I was seeing to make sure they were what ever branch of the US Forces and that they were authorized to be in that area.

Also if every branch has the same uniform it is easier for enemy forces to impersonate and gain a major advantage on us both abroad and here in the US.

Response by SSgt Christopher Gilbert made Jan 10 at 2016 11:05 PM

SSgt Christopher Gilbert — Sun, 10 Jan 2016 23:05:09 -0500

I like the idea

Response by Charlie Matthias made Jan 11 at 2016 12:08 AM

Charlie Matthias — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:08:58 -0500

This is probably the most asinine thing I have ever read or heard of coming from someone in the military!!!! All countries issue their military branches different uniforms for many reasons; the least of which is to distinguish them from each other!!!! Most military uniforms have historical context that represent the continuity of the uniform and the branch itself!!!

As for the camouflage; maybe it could be justified if it meets the individual mission requirements of each branch of service, but remember that they were changed in the first place because each branch needed and wanted different patterns and styles for their personnel!!!!

The old adage "if it is not broken do not fix it" comes to mind!!!!

Stop trying to change the military!!!!

It is fine the way it is!!!!

Response by Capt James Warren made Jan 11 at 2016 12:27 AM

Capt James Warren — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:27:44 -0500

It's down to parts commonality; small group of vendors producing a quality battle uniform that not only readily identifies US forces but has all respective services using the same resources (i.e. Joint base carries one uniform with service-unique rank, badges, etc). We should have immediately recognized the waste from having every service strike out on their own to research and produce a distinctive uniform, the duplication of effort is mind-boggling in this era of financial constraints vying against new weapon systems with runaway budgets. If more than one uniform, then at least operational environment-specific uniforms, in lieu of service-specific.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 11 at 2016 7:19 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 07:19:20 -0500

Love it. All your military uniform contractors will fight you to the death however to do it. Sometimes I wonder who's controlling who's contracts. But that's a different, ans much longer, Rally Point complaint post.

Response by LTC Timothy O'Neill made Jan 11 at 2016 9:21 AM

LTC Timothy O'Neill — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 09:21:41 -0500

The only real advantage of a single utility uniform (cost effects are negligible) is that we remove a free intelligence signature for an enemy. But more important: service missions differ, operating envelopes differ, and the purpose of camouflage is to reduce tactical signature, not to look cool. Similarly, one uniform cannot adequately cover all priority environments, so services would be sharing a common family of designs. We need to agree for at least fifteen minutes on what the purpose of a combat uniform is, and work from there. (I've been in the field for nearly fifty years; I ain't holding my breath.)

Think like warriors, not like CPA's or fashion designers.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 11 at 2016 11:34 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 11:34:44 -0500

I feel it IS about time for a standard one for all 5 branches, but since there are so many 1-4 star Generals across ALL branches and they are all buckin for the 'next' star, this will never happen.

Response by PO1 Mark Perreault made Jan 11 at 2016 12:53 PM

PO1 Mark Perreault — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 12:53:03 -0500

Keep the sailors in blue aboard ship but if in a ground combat role, such as SEALS or Seabees, switch to other colors, depending on theater of operation.

Response by PO2 Ray Michalak made Jan 12 at 2016 7:44 AM

PO2 Ray Michalak — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:44:39 -0500

After wearing the Navy's blue cammies I would say yes.....no reason we shouldn't all be in the same utility uniform all the time. Service and dress uniforms should always be service specific, however.

Response by LT Charles Baird made Jan 19 at 2016 9:27 PM

LT Charles Baird — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:27:40 -0500

As long as it's not the Army one we wore in Afghanistan - that was extremely uncomfortable and did not feel like a uniform; it felt more like pajamas

Response by SGT Ronald Bacon made Jan 28 at 2016 11:56 AM

SGT Ronald Bacon — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 11:56:00 -0500

One Uniform for each theater makes sense in that all supply could work in one direction, equipment could be easier to transfer from unit to unit regardless of branch. Also if there was some kind of uniform standard for across the board so on every person walking by I can see clearly where rank should be so I am not looking all over for it. (maybe that is dated I have been out for a while) While service back in CONUS wear whatever the Branch wants their Service Members to look like. When in the face of the world look as if we stand united...

Response by SSG Stephanie Mitchell made May 30 at 2016 8:44 PM

SSG Stephanie Mitchell — Mon, 30 May 2016 20:44:00 -0400

Imagine how much money the military would save. I remember when we all wore BDU's.

Response by SrA Paul Pfeil made Jun 24 at 2017 1:24 PM

SrA Paul Pfeil — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 13:24:01 -0400

I am torn here. Battle dress makes sense based on theater and mission not branch. Dress uniform definitely should remain separated. Good luck getting marines to give up their blood strip or letting others wear it.

Response by CPO Greg Frazho made Jun 24 at 2017 1:27 PM

CPO Greg Frazho — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 13:27:32 -0400

I favor whichever uniform reduces the overall drag (read: volume of the shit) we all have to take with us when we deploy, regardless of the environment. I frankly don't see what was wrong with ripstop BDUs; then the gamechanger of digital camo superseded that uniform, although desert tri-color worked just fine in that setting. (Winter weight camo is good for winter climates, as if anybody here needs to be told that. And if not, you can always layer underneath the ripstops.) The only problem with classic woodland and desert tri-color was the need to iron them after laundering. In a combat zone, though, that should be the least of our worries.

I'm not very fond of the reindeer games that resulted from the various digital patterns within the services throughout these last several years, but I should think multi-cam, probably the direct descendant of woodland, would be the most utilitarian. No, they wouldn't work well at sea, but they could work with a few modifications. (Colored ballcaps and/or t-shirts for specific watchstanders, etc.) Most of those guys wear one-piece coveralls at sea as organizational gear, similar to how mechanics and other wrneches have for working in the motor pool, the pit, etc. But this has cost the taxpayers, which is to say all of us, mightily for these experiments.

In the year 2017 with the above graphics showing essentially a new woodland, it begs the question: why did we ever really mess with this in the first place? The only people it's benefited are the garment and textile manufacturers and retailers. Big Navy is finally coming to its senses and dispensing with NWU Type I (aqua-flage), which is probably about six or seven years overdue. Big Army's largely rid themeselves of ACU, which didn't bother me as much, but nevertheless it didn't last very long or live up to its reputation. Now that multi-cam is the way to go, ACUs are largely superfluous. Big Air Force meant well by trying to implement a variation of the tiger stripes of Vietnam days, but I think they would've been better off going with actual tiger stripes or a close variation instead of what they ended up with.

But I also favor the working uniform that contains the least amount of whizbangs. Name, rank and service branch are, to me, the only things necessary without going to town with however many additional unit patches, combat patches and occupational speciality tabs to sweeten the deal. In that sense, you're a member of the U.S. military first, and everything else should be secondary or simply left at home. If a uniform is truly that, we should probably keep these things in mind and reduce the fighting load that our personnel already have to contend with.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 24 at 2017 3:11 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 15:11:32 -0400

Awesome idea just no Velcro

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 24 at 2017 3:19 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 15:19:04 -0400

This would reduce cost! One uniform for all

Response by CW3 Greg Donovan made Jun 24 at 2017 3:28 PM

CW3 Greg Donovan — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 15:28:18 -0400

We're not talking about making fashion statements. One good, versatile uniform that would serve our fighters under any circumstances would simply logistics and reduce costs. They can use hats and patches to enhance identification. Save the fashion statements for dress uniforms.

Response by CW3 Greg Donovan made Jun 24 at 2017 3:34 PM

CW3 Greg Donovan — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 15:34:54 -0400

Good idea. I'm partial to multicam, myself. And a hat with a brim. Give SOF types their berets back, if they want them.

Response by SMSgt Lawrence McCarter made Jun 24 at 2017 4:08 PM

SMSgt Lawrence McCarter — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 16:08:31 -0400

With so many more joint operations with different branches of the service it seems at least the pattern of any camouflage uniform should be the same. Keep the service specific insignia. With people from different service all in the field together and not matching doesn't seem to make much sense. Patterns that blend with the location Would help, some of these uniforms stand out say against woodland as an example only a little better than white would. At least the Marines have figured out what colors and in nature and set out to blend with that. Seems the other services could learn from that. Instead of wasting money on all sorts of patterns that don't work, adopt one that does for all services. Only difference should be where the task is, dessert, woodland etc. Only class A and Class B uniforms should be specific to any one branch of the service. Shown here is one sampling of a number of different camouflage patterns and even more types have been added since this chart.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 24 at 2017 5:17 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 17:17:00 -0400

We never should have gotten away from it. The Marines started it then all of the other services had to jump in. Such a waste of resources...and we cry poverty when it comes to training dollars and O/M money.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 24 at 2017 6:27 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 18:27:05 -0400

I think we need to go back to a single utility uniform, like we had until the USMC developed MARPAT (then the Army tried to say "hold my beer" and failed with the ACUs). Furthermore, we need to let the combat arms professionals (infantry, special ops, etc) design the uniform... not the desk jockeys who place form over function.

Response by Liz Hodges Flores made Jun 24 at 2017 7:10 PM

Liz Hodges Flores — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 19:10:05 -0400

IT DENTIFIES ALL U.S. ARMFORCES UNIFORM CODE !!!!-!!!!-!!!!-!!!!

Response by LtCol George Carlson made Jun 25 at 2017 1:24 AM

LtCol George Carlson — Sun, 25 Jun 2017 01:24:40 -0400

While I personally think the various camouflage patterns have been more a product of, "Sustained employment for DoD civilians at research labs" than anything else, I do have a couple of thoughts on previous comments. #1 The "cost-saving" argument is likely moot. At any given time, there will be some contract cost differences, but the "volume discount" on 1 million vs. 200 thousand is either zero or negligible. #2 Service differentiation can be limited to rank/service/branch and not affect much of anything. Maybe it was a different time and a different war, but I will guarantee the VC knew when they were taking on Marines vs. Army. The enemy had intel too! #3 This is the first time (to my knowledge, I may be wrong) we have had so many differences -- see my lead-I for part of the explanation. The rest is like emergency responders -- everyone wants to by both "current" and "different."

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 25 at 2017 4:02 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 25 Jun 2017 04:02:01 -0400

It makes sense and maybe a standard rank change too and get rid of Spc ranks and just have corporals

Response by Col Dan Kienker made Jun 25 at 2017 9:10 AM

Col Dan Kienker — Sun, 25 Jun 2017 09:10:39 -0400

Absolutely not. Loss of service idenity

Response by Col Dan Kienker made Jun 25 at 2017 9:13 AM

Col Dan Kienker — Sun, 25 Jun 2017 09:13:02 -0400

Absolutely not. Loss of service idenity

Response by Sgt Charles Loader made Jun 25 at 2017 1:37 PM

Sgt Charles Loader — Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:37:40 -0400

I never understood each brach having its own BDU anyways. Having one for all branches with each branch having their own branch tape & rank would be in everybody's best interest. The sooner the better!

Response by MAJ Raúl Rovira made Jun 25 at 2017 11:34 PM

MAJ Raúl Rovira — Sun, 25 Jun 2017 23:34:38 -0400

Coming full circle. Back then when the Secretary of Defence was William Cohen, he required all service branches to use the same uniform pattern. Air Force had to give up the leather name patches and the Marines had to sew on their last names.

Amazing how we back to where it all started.

Response by Sgt Joseph Baker made Jun 26 at 2017 1:05 PM

Sgt Joseph Baker — Mon, 26 Jun 2017 13:05:27 -0400

RallyPoint is starting to stagnate. Same recycled topics. Always Army personnel who can't agree how to regulate themselves or get with their program, or constantly fussing over whether they can put this badge or ribbon on or what

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 26 at 2017 1:34 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 26 Jun 2017 13:34:17 -0400

I'm not sure whatever happened to this: http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/12/04/congress-pushes-ahead-with-plan-for-joint-camouflage-uniform.html

Congress Pushes Ahead with Plan for Joint Camouflage Uniform

Lawmakers still plan to eliminate service specific-camouflage patterns for branches of the U.S. Military, according to the 2015 defense spending act.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 26 at 2017 1:50 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 26 Jun 2017 13:50:45 -0400

Well at one time the old BDU was worn just about by everybody is some form or another, then the Marines got their new pattern and after that everybody had their own pattern and color.

Response by Sgt Charles Loader made Jul 6 at 2017 2:45 PM

Sgt Charles Loader — Thu, 06 Jul 2017 14:45:45 -0400

I fully support a single uniform for field use, with appropriate tape for branch, rank, etc... as needed.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Jul 14 at 2017 11:06 AM

MCPO Roger Collins — Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:06:30 -0400

Kind of a difficult question to answer, but basically our uniforms represent our branch of service and that could be critical in some instances. If we were to look at things like underwear, fitness wear and many off duty aspects, perhaps. The Navy used to have specific purposes for our clothing, which increases survivability if your ship was sunk, not so much any more. Let your synthetic material seal to your skin with firs and try to make a flotation device with the new stuff.

Response by CW3 Kim B. made Oct 6 at 2017 8:45 PM

CW3 Kim B. — Fri, 06 Oct 2017 20:45:25 -0400

No. However the Army, in particular, needs to stop changing the field uniform every 5 yrs. IMHO they need to complete the issue (I know RA has to buy them) the new OCP and PT uniforms to all Army personnel. If they need a particular uniform for a different theater of operation then do so for ONLY those actually needing them. When the individual goes back to a garrison environment, then back to the OCP. Of course I Think the Army should get a true class B uniform. That white shirt has to go for casual wear.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 21 at 2017 3:59 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 21 Nov 2017 15:59:10 -0500

Fiscally and logistically, it makes a lot of sense.

Response by SSG Thomas Gallegos made Nov 21 at 2017 8:54 PM

SSG Thomas Gallegos — Tue, 21 Nov 2017 20:54:48 -0500

Great points, especially the last one.

Response by CPT Chris Loomis made Nov 21 at 2017 11:33 PM

CPT Chris Loomis — Tue, 21 Nov 2017 23:33:10 -0500

Yes please.

And I’m NOT in favor of changing the Army dress uniform!!!

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 22 at 2017 4:55 AM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 04:55:05 -0500

Absolutely not for Marines.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Nov 22 at 2017 5:11 AM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 05:11:01 -0500

SFC Michael Jackson, MBA If this happened, then what would the military industrial complex (uniform makers) do? they'd go broke, the U.S. Military could save tons of money or put it to better use. How dare you bring up something so sensible!! I almost down voted you for making such a statement!!

Response by CW5 Jack Cardwell made Nov 22 at 2017 8:50 AM

CW5 Jack Cardwell — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 08:50:40 -0500

Yes. KISS keep it simple stupid.

Response by Cpl Daniel Bowles made Nov 22 at 2017 9:48 AM

Cpl Daniel Bowles — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 09:48:10 -0500

Marines,army,air force and some of the Navy had all the same field uniforms in the 80 and 90s when I was in So why not agin

Response by SPC Josh Little made Nov 22 at 2017 10:15 AM

SPC Josh Little — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 10:15:10 -0500

Carriers have aways had Marines aboard who wore BDUs and Navy Sailors who served in Iraq, Afghanistan and other ground combat enviornments wore those same uniforms. Ive served in both Army and Navy and I dont remember blending into the ship being a big concern. A bigger question is why we in the army switched camo patters like 4 times duringva war where we were doing very little hiding. I remember practicing individual camoflauge during Expert Infantry Badge qualification while wearing the Armys new(at the time) ACUs and even the instructor couldnt keep a straight face. We decided to call them the I see yous.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 22 at 2017 12:22 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 12:22:08 -0500

As long as everyone keeps there own dress uniforms. You can this Marines Dress Blues the same day as my cold dead body.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 22 at 2017 12:28 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 12:28:10 -0500

No because every branch of the military should have separate uniforms because each branch has different standards to uphold

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 22 at 2017 1:02 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 13:02:37 -0500

Precedent was set once the services started moving away from the BDU. Once precedent is set it's hard to go back.

Personally, I'd like a cleaner (Army) uniform. For the Army at least, I'd prefer a move back to collar rank for all and branch insignia for officers.

I believe Congress already forced the policy on new camo; all branches must agree on new additions for standardization which nobody seems to want.

Response by Sgt Mike Jacobi made Nov 22 at 2017 2:21 PM

Sgt Mike Jacobi — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 14:21:25 -0500

unified in combat areas with unique to branch insignia. unique to branch class A uniform. Unique to branch rank.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 22 at 2017 2:37 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 14:37:39 -0500

I completely agree. one utility uniform, with area specific uniforms on deployment that all services wear.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 22 at 2017 4:01 PM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 16:01:17 -0500

Congress arms committee out out in 2015 that all branches had to go to a universal set of uniform by fiscal year 2019. Idk what happened after that was put out but cause nobody seems to be talking about it.

Response by A1C Alan Wilbar made Nov 22 at 2017 4:41 PM

A1C Alan Wilbar — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 16:41:43 -0500

I joined in OG107 days, seemed to make perfect sense. The first concern when they went to individual service uniforms was profit, not actual use.

Response by Sgt Daniel J. Daly made Nov 22 at 2017 5:26 PM

Sgt Daniel J. Daly — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:26:05 -0500

No each service needs to be it's own self. What needs to stop is the need to change the utility uniform almost every other year.

Response by Cadet 3rd Class Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 22 at 2017 6:03 PM

Cadet 3rd Class Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 18:03:45 -0500

I’m pretty sure the Air Force is getting new uniforms in 2 years. Not 100% but rumor is they are going back to multi cam.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 22 at 2017 6:50 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 18:50:20 -0500

You mean, like we used to have with the BDU uniform? Call it what you want, USMC was cammies or utilities, it was all the same uniform.

Response by SFC Eric Rampley made Nov 22 at 2017 7:16 PM

SFC Eric Rampley — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 19:16:54 -0500

It would be nice to see it, remembering when most of us where in BDU’s and we just about looked the same across the board.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 22 at 2017 10:01 PM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 22:01:54 -0500

As a marine I disagree 100% with this. As marines we hold ourselves to the highest of military standards. We wear our uniform with pride. No other branch tries to set themselves apart like we do. Marines aren't just any branch of service. We are MARINES and our uniforms show it.

Response by CSM David Draughn made Nov 22 at 2017 11:05 PM

CSM David Draughn — Wed, 22 Nov 2017 23:05:40 -0500

Folks, I for one think the Department of Defense should cease wasting money on uniforms and use that money for better training. Congress, lobbied by various manufacturers as well as the senior leadership feel compelled to change the uniform. This nonsense needs to stop. I agree that one utility uniform is all we need in two weights, summer and winter.

Response by SPC Michael Ricklin made Nov 23 at 2017 12:17 AM

SPC Michael Ricklin — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 00:17:48 -0500

Use the pattern, or go back to the BDU type of pattern. Get rid of Velcro and bring buttons back

Response by Cpl Brian Boeckenhauer made Nov 23 at 2017 2:58 AM

Cpl Brian Boeckenhauer — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 02:58:52 -0500

.... As long as it's in agreement that the Army and Air Force can keep their ugly soft covers and Marines and Navy can keep our awesome covers. I'm completely fine with unification of battle dress. Everyone just needs to go to marpat

Response by SFC Dave Beran made Nov 23 at 2017 4:23 AM

SFC Dave Beran — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 04:23:34 -0500

No. No. No. No. If you are going to do that then just have one service.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 6:03 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 06:03:50 -0500

I would support it and probably a universal rank system too so it’s easier to address other branches service members

Response by CPT Tom Monahan made Nov 23 at 2017 6:20 AM

CPT Tom Monahan — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 06:20:22 -0500

Go back to a common fatigue. One uniform saves the tax payer and simplifies the Supply Chain.

Response by Capt Daniel Goodman made Nov 23 at 2017 7:00 AM

Capt Daniel Goodman — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 07:00:54 -0500

Probably wouldn't be as much fun, though....

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 9:35 AM

SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 09:35:02 -0500

For our general uniform I agree. Maybe not aboard ships though, I am surprised sailors don't wear mechanic style overalls.

Response by PO2 Michael O'Malley made Nov 23 at 2017 9:37 AM

PO2 Michael O'Malley — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 09:37:01 -0500

Personally, i've always been in favor of the un-uniform. It promotes diversity, increases unit cohesiveness by making servicemen become aquainted with each others dressing habits to avoid friendly fire, increases enemy confusion as they cant tell our boys from civilians, and increases discipline, as ncos arent having hissy fits about a patch being a quarter of an inch off.

Response by PV2 Dv Michael Persson made Nov 23 at 2017 10:41 AM

PV2 Dv Michael Persson — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 10:41:45 -0500

Ok so what yuall want is the enemy's to know what they r shooting at different uniforms they don't know who is who just my thaughts

Response by TSgt Thomas Reed made Nov 23 at 2017 10:56 AM

TSgt Thomas Reed — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 10:56:32 -0500

BDU yes, separate dress uniform

Response by PVT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 11:08 AM

PVT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 11:08:01 -0500

No. I think the different uniforms is what gives each branch their identity. Also every branch has a history for why its uniform is what it is. i.e thr Army Airborne dress blues.

Response by GySgt Dan Tetrault made Nov 23 at 2017 11:26 AM

GySgt Dan Tetrault — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 11:26:19 -0500

For field yes, dress no!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 11:47 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 11:47:03 -0500

One uniform with each branch small differences it would be cheaper due to one supply resource to draw from.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 11:48 AM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 11:48:40 -0500

As a marine I'm extremely biased, so I don't support same uniforms for all branches, I like the fact my cammies are different and our chest embodies our Eagle Globe and Anchor.

Response by PO1 Barbara Matthews made Nov 23 at 2017 11:58 AM

PO1 Barbara Matthews — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 11:58:22 -0500

We had one once when we all work the woodland camouflage. I support that.

As far as service dress blues (or green) I'm for service specific. The Cracker Jack is totally Navy. The Marines have a nice dress blue uniform that is distinctive too. Even Army and Air Force have theirs.

The service dress uniforms should be left to each service. They instill pride of service and are a tradition.

As far as a working out utility uniform I think that it could save costs if they were across the board. They same basic uniform with minor variations would work.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 12:27 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 12:27:16 -0500

Sure but please limit the hook and loop on it. Buttons and sew down patches.

Response by CW4 Jason Wheeler made Nov 23 at 2017 12:32 PM

CW4 Jason Wheeler — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 12:32:08 -0500

It has definately turned into a comedy show with each service trying to out due the other. It ends the need to memorize 5-6 different patterns for quick friend or foe. It definately saves money which could be used better places to help service members and thats always Awesome

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 1:43 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 13:43:16 -0500

Good luck getting marines to come off the Marpat

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 1:51 PM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 13:51:18 -0500

The uniform shouldn't have never went obsolete with the ACU digital pattern and should've just changed over to a mulicam digital pattern cause the ACU pattern sort of tricks the eyes.So with the multicam digital pattern,it would of course look better and also would look like such a down grade from the ACU uniform

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Nov 23 at 2017 4:13 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 16:13:22 -0500

I like the faded Tiger Stripes the Air Force Wears

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 6:38 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 18:38:24 -0500

No! Why is for a few different reasons. One is the cost, all of the other branches spent how much on their uniforms to realize that your decision was a bad one. Another is how two forces that are hardly rotating through but yet spent the money on doggies to fallow suit with the Army and Marines. Another is I couldn’t see any Marine wanting to wear your digge base ball caps or berets, it doesn’t look professional or have any traditional heritage to the Marines or Navy. The other is why do we want to look like each other, spare me the we are all on the same side. We’re on the same side of the fight, other than that we are in competition with each other and it makes us better!

Response by SFC Jose Cintron made Nov 23 at 2017 7:11 PM

SFC Jose Cintron — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 19:11:48 -0500

I support one uniform for the entire armed forces

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 7:54 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 19:54:54 -0500

There are so many other vital things money could be spent on for our military. Stop applying money and resources to yet, another uniform change. Lets focus on equipment, upgrades, maintenance, healthcare and salaries. Is this really a priority for the military?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 8:11 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 20:11:02 -0500

Would it save the military money?

Response by SGM Jim Lowry made Nov 23 at 2017 8:44 PM

SGM Jim Lowry — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 20:44:44 -0500

Certainly. DoD waste millions on service specific uniforms. We should have one work or combat uniform that is the best in the world. As for dress uniforms, have distinct styles for the service but not for different regiment or specialty.

Response by HA Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 8:57 PM

HA Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 20:57:10 -0500

As cost effective as this could be I would feel as they would be taking away the pride of the individual wearing the uniform of his or her branch. You joined one branch and most (I hope) feel a strong sense of pride in that branch including the specific uniforms we wear. Granted they’re pleanty of uniform changes through out every branch we still have the chance to strut our colors anywhere we go in our world. Further I don’t believe one uniform throughout the branches would be a good idea because of the implications and uses of various uniforms. The navy has their blueberries. The gray and blue digital color masks the gray paint sailors come into contact with on ship. The the Marines have uniforms best conducive to what they do in their environment. Army and the Air Force follows the same logic. The separate uniforms devolved due to separate needs of the individual branches. Plus I am not ready to pay for more sets of uniforms again. I just had to get new ones for a uniform change

Response by SFC Greg Bruorton made Nov 23 at 2017 9:42 PM

SFC Greg Bruorton — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 21:42:57 -0500

Each branch of our Armed Forces has uniqueness to themselves. So long as our combat uniforms do not betray the rules of camouflage I see no need to support such a change. Should our uniforms be too uniform with other branches what next? Forego our wearing special badges and insignia that sets us apart from others? I feel strongly that Ranger and Airborne Army units would not support such a change and neither would I.

Response by LT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 9:58 PM

LT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 21:58:18 -0500

I agree with one standard combat uniform. Savings alone would be worth it. It’d just be a little harder to make fun of the Air Force

Response by Cpl Al Deveru made Nov 23 at 2017 10:20 PM

Cpl Al Deveru — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 22:20:10 -0500

Absolutely not , it was tried for awhile and didn't work out well. Leave it alone.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2017 10:22 PM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 22:22:24 -0500

No, because I don’t want my Marine Corps to be confused with the Army. Mainly because the enemy fears us and not them. In Afghanistan they would avoid us and go after a easier softer target the Army.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2017 1:42 AM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 01:42:20 -0500

Indifferent, but can we standardize patches and rank placement

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2017 7:18 AM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 07:18:14 -0500

I don't support anymore changes, keep what you have and stop waisting taxpayer money on stupid shit!

Response by LCpl Donald Faucett made Nov 24 at 2017 8:00 AM

LCpl Donald Faucett — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 08:00:40 -0500

Need unisex style for the millenniums

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2017 11:30 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 11:30:24 -0500

No because the uniforms separate the branches. Each Branch wants to look different than the other for the pride. When I was a Marine I wanted to look like a Marine not another branch cause I was proud of it. Now I’m in the Army I don’t want to look like a Marine cause I’m not anymore I want to live ok like a Soldier and don’t wanna look like a Airman or someone fr M the Navy it’s good too lol different

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2017 11:49 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 11:49:40 -0500

I would not agree with the same combat uniform for all services due to the fact all the branches don’t operate in the same location. (Sea, land and air) now if we are talking about dress uniform. Now that can be debated.

Response by LCpl Jeff Moore made Nov 24 at 2017 1:28 PM

LCpl Jeff Moore — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 13:28:58 -0500

When i was in, army, air force, navy and the Marines all wore the same Cammies, and the navy had dungeries for ship duty.

Cost wise, the army, airforce and navy should of gollowed and used the Marpat cammies.

Response by SSG Rob Gaiser made Nov 24 at 2017 1:51 PM

SSG Rob Gaiser — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 13:51:34 -0500

Uniforms should be adapted to the area the member is serving in.

Response by LTJG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2017 2:15 PM

LTJG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 14:15:06 -0500

The navy needs to adopt the USCG uniform that can be worn both on and off the ship.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2017 2:47 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 14:47:20 -0500

No problem with it

Response by LCDR Jay Martin made Nov 24 at 2017 2:53 PM

LCDR Jay Martin — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 14:53:35 -0500

Sorry, no. Some think tank rep would try to standardize everything and traditions plus service character would suffer. That said, we Navy aviators wore the same flight suits as AF, Army, Marines and Coast Guard. If we’re talking flight suits, fatigues or bdu’s Maybe but sailors should be wearing bell bottoms

Response by SPC Kyle Williams made Nov 24 at 2017 3:58 PM

SPC Kyle Williams — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 15:58:44 -0500

One thing they need to get rid of is Velcro. It wears out way to fast.

Response by Sgt Paul Gamble made Nov 24 at 2017 4:01 PM

Sgt Paul Gamble — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 16:01:25 -0500

Yes, when I was in the Marine Corps every branch of service had the same camouflage utilities. I don’t know why they changed. Even being deployed to the desert we all had the same brown uniform.
Sgt Gamble

Response by FN Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2017 4:09 PM

FN Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 16:09:52 -0500

One standard uniform doesn't make sense though we are just switching to the water army uniform and it's seen as a joke we wear coveralls when underway. Unless youre a deck combat job like GM VBSS or ground combat AKA seal Seabees etc. I don't know about you but a green and tan uniform puttering across the sea is much easier to spot that the blue NWU.

Response by MSgt Joey Tubb made Nov 24 at 2017 6:12 PM

MSgt Joey Tubb — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 18:12:30 -0500

Absolutely not! I think you need to have distinction between the branches whether it be combat uniform or dress uniform.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2017 7:39 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 19:39:28 -0500

it sure would save the military a lot of money with a single battle uniform.

Response by CPL David Blagrove made Nov 24 at 2017 8:15 PM

CPL David Blagrove — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 20:15:19 -0500

I think the Navy shouldn’t wear camouflage at sea! That’s just dumb! However, on post, at least the Army, and Marine Corp should be the same. The Airforce May have different demands, but in the field, the battle dress should be the same for all!

Response by SPC Jeff Bailey made Nov 24 at 2017 8:22 PM

SPC Jeff Bailey — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 20:22:45 -0500

I would be ok with bdu’s being the same just for the fact you would have less confusion in battle of someone not recognizing another branchs uniform and possibly firing on them . but keep the class a dress uniform seperate

Response by CW4 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2017 9:14 PM

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 21:14:03 -0500

Gimme back my damn Pickle suit!

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2017 9:27 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 21:27:11 -0500

I like the distinction between each branch.

Response by MCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 24 at 2017 9:31 PM

MCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 21:31:44 -0500

Fiscally it makes sense and facilitates uniform and uniform component availability to all service members.

Response by Jason Krisko made Nov 24 at 2017 11:01 PM

Jason Krisko — Fri, 24 Nov 2017 23:01:29 -0500

Honestly if I have the United States Flag on my shoulder and so do you is it really that hard to tell if I stand by you?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 25 at 2017 7:46 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 07:46:04 -0500

standard uniforms I support that I would put the rank on the sleeves for enlisted personnel though. I believe we need to KISS instead of changing the uniform every two years to put money in some generals buddy s pocket under the premise that he or she is a vendor.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 25 at 2017 8:51 AM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 08:51:30 -0500

I support that change but believe it should happen in 2026/2027 in order to mitigate effects felt with U.S. Army recent change in FY-17/18. I thought it was amusing in 2003 when it starting hitting operating forces. We are one Nation, wear one uniform. Long term you save the taxpayer dollar. We know it will be wasted elsewhere.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 25 at 2017 9:15 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 09:15:16 -0500

I don't care for the 1 fits all uniform idea it's been a long standing thing to have different uniforms leave things alone Marines have theirs Navy has theirs army has ours and air Force kinda just does whatever

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 25 at 2017 9:47 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 09:47:14 -0500

In my opinion, I'd say every branch can keep their uniform design cut but everyone must have the same uniform pattern. The Marines/Navy can still maintain their sewn on tapes, pin on ranks and current design uniform cuts as well as the Army/Air Force with the current ACU cut with velcro but everyone (branch) would have the same camouflage pattern instead. Look at the pictures attached to my comment. Same pattern, different uniform cuts/layout.

Response by SSgt William Ritter made Nov 25 at 2017 10:42 AM

SSgt William Ritter — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 10:42:49 -0500

I feel that if the different branches want unique uniforms they can have their own dress uniforms but a standard field uniform is the right way to go.

Response by Capt Daniel Goodman made Nov 25 at 2017 12:03 PM

Capt Daniel Goodman — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 12:03:37 -0500

I may have said this on here before, and realize I !at be repeating myself, yeah, it could obv be done, the thing is, just think how much fun we'd all lose trying to keep all the different ones straight all the time, you know? Lol....

Response by PO2 Jim Clark made Nov 25 at 2017 12:07 PM

PO2 Jim Clark — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 12:07:05 -0500

Bad idea, sorry. Different requirements for the different services. Navy should go back to the bell bottoms and chambray shirts.

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 25 at 2017 1:29 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 13:29:24 -0500

No! Maybe a common combat uniform for everyone that actually fights but the rest should wear a service identifying uniform

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 25 at 2017 4:02 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 16:02:16 -0500

Well it worked fine when we all had the woodland camo BDU!! Why wouldn't it work again. Plus it would probably save tax payer money in the long run. Yes at first the price tag would be high, but after the first year it would fall.

Response by SSG Curtis Mcneill made Nov 25 at 2017 4:49 PM

SSG Curtis Mcneill — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 16:49:32 -0500

They need go back to the BDU we had in the seventies use the cammies in the field and combat. Spit shined boots also

Response by SSG Curtis Mcneill made Nov 25 at 2017 5:00 PM

SSG Curtis Mcneill — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 17:00:24 -0500

I liked the olive green uniforms with ranks on the collar black belt shined black leather boots and the uniform starched this look good in garrison. Field duty wear cammies. But dress uniforms stay the same.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 25 at 2017 6:41 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 18:41:29 -0500

Never

Response by LCpl Brandon Pinkletown made Nov 25 at 2017 7:08 PM

LCpl Brandon Pinkletown — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 19:08:08 -0500

Why would one uniform be good? Four different purposes you can’t make one that fits them all.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 25 at 2017 8:55 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 20:55:27 -0500

I miss the BDU’s. Usually when the military uniform is changed we all change to the same uniform.

Response by CPT Phil Herman made Nov 25 at 2017 10:04 PM

CPT Phil Herman — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 22:04:12 -0500

Fist question is WHY? What is the purpose in changing to a single uniform for all branches? Cost effectiveness - No, that doesn't come into play since each branch will maintain so many uniforms that there will be no cost savings. Simplify Identification in the field – possible but how often has this been an issue, if ever? Esprit De Corps – You would preserve more by maintaining unit / branch specific uniforms. Combat troops and clerical troops have very little in common. Why would you have cooks wearing combat fatigues if they are not attached to a combat element? In some cases, combat uniforms can be dangerous – ships mechanics working around equipment in close quarters for example.
For some services, and elements within that service, it is less problematic. Army soldiers in combat elements could share a common uniform with Marines assigned to similar units. Navy SEALS, Air Force Rescue, Rangers, Special Forces, Special Operations Command elements all could share the same combat uniform.
Which brings us to a different way of looking at this. Why not have identical uniforms, across branches, based on the primary job assignment instead of the branch element? Cooks would wear cook uniforms. Medical staff would wear medical uniforms, maintenance mechanics would wear the uniform specific to their tasks. Clerical and most general support services members would wear a similar non-combat specific uniform – something like the old olive drabs we had during Vietnam. Simple, easy to maintain and was actually used by most services.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 25 at 2017 11:35 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 23:35:09 -0500

No, because I am a Marine.

Response by PO3 Scot Fahey made Nov 26 at 2017 12:22 AM

PO3 Scot Fahey — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 00:22:31 -0500

Uniforms change so often anyway, certainly the uniforms will keep changing

Response by CPL Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2017 1:22 AM

CPL Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 01:22:14 -0500

Definitely. Rank should be uniform as well. That way if you switch from one branch to another it is uniform transition, not a guessing game, if you got the experience and training then it should go across all branches. Many schools are already taught together, it would definitely cut down on contracts for several uniform companies.

Response by SSG Irvin Perkins made Nov 26 at 2017 4:25 AM

SSG Irvin Perkins — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 04:25:13 -0500

It is best to leave well enough alone
Calling it Join Force Operations Bases are good enough.
Their is a big difference between a Soldier and a Marine but they are train to do the heavy fighting in difficult situations on the battlefield where as the Air Force, Navy and Coast Guard are not train to do what the Army and Marine are train to do.
Before I retired from the Army a Air Force Sergeant cross over to the Army Hospital unit. She was put in the NCOIC position. She has no idea what we do on the Army side. She didn't know D&C, how to form a formation. She was totally lost. She got into our Nurses and Doctor on a regular basis saying the Air don't do this or don't do that.
I will never go into a combat Zone with a Air Force or Navy officer in charge unless that person is train in Special Ops

Response by SSG Jeff Gerfen made Nov 26 at 2017 9:19 AM

SSG Jeff Gerfen — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 09:19:05 -0500

For field uniforms, yes, for dress uniforms no

Response by CPL Terry Fisher-Foley made Nov 26 at 2017 11:20 AM

CPL Terry Fisher-Foley — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 11:20:53 -0500

It would be a great ideal.

Response by LCpl Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2017 11:37 AM

LCpl Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 11:37:52 -0500

I do not support this. All branches fight in different parts of the world. So this would only work if all branches were in the same area

Response by PO2 Nick Burke made Nov 26 at 2017 11:49 AM

PO2 Nick Burke — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 11:49:22 -0500

Sure as long as they can be safely worn aboard ship. Unlike the uniform in use now. They melt in a fire.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2017 12:52 PM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 12:52:40 -0500

It would make a big family in the army branches and it make all one instead of having army say their better than the marines, navy better than air force and so on.

Response by SSgt Dwayne Williams made Nov 26 at 2017 1:24 PM

SSgt Dwayne Williams — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 13:24:50 -0500

a standard field uniform makes a lot of scence with the exception of the navy when they are afloat cammys on ship dosent really profit any thing for duty ashore yes. for service and dress each service shoud retain thier own distinctive uniforms and distinctive insigina of rank your always gonna have a need for specilized uniforms as for service in the desert of artic enviroment woodland green dosent really work well in either setting and vice versa.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2017 2:18 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 14:18:12 -0500

This is a terrible, being a Marine, we like the fact that we are different. You can tell a Marine by the care of his/her uniform and telling us to wear the same uniform as another branch doesn't do us any justice. Enemies see marpat green/desert and know that hell is coming. We don't want to be associated with another branch

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2017 2:44 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 14:44:11 -0500

I don't support it. We have spent more money on uniform changes in the last 10 to 15 years between duty, dress, and PFT uniforms. Now at least for the Army the SMA is talking about another dress uniform to bring back the pinks amd greens. Yet training, supply, and recruiting budgets (including those to keep quality members or the military) are tight or lacking. Enough with all these changes.

Response by TSgt Steve Troudt made Nov 26 at 2017 4:02 PM

TSgt Steve Troudt — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 16:02:56 -0500

Makes a lot of sense! But that would also be the reason I could see it NOT happening!

Response by PO3 Jerry C. Hayes made Nov 26 at 2017 4:26 PM

PO3 Jerry C. Hayes — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 16:26:30 -0500

No.

Response by SGT John Dooley made Nov 26 at 2017 4:28 PM

SGT John Dooley — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 16:28:59 -0500

Marist!

Response by PVT Mark Brown made Nov 26 at 2017 4:49 PM

PVT Mark Brown — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 16:49:40 -0500

I like the blue for the Navy utilities but consistent color for all else.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2017 5:51 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 17:51:49 -0500

We could do like China did. Same uniform, variation of colors.
I'm ex-Navy and I always thought the jumpsuit is what they should run with though. Because they are technicians and operators first.
The Air Force could do the same thing with different badging.
No reason the Army and Marine Corps could not double up. The Marines could keep their cap. Just diffeeent badging....
So in my mind, two "standardized" uniforms. For work. Everyone can have their own dress uniform.
Heaven forbid if the Navy got rid of its dress whites......

Response by CAPT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2017 6:01 PM

CAPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 18:01:58 -0500

Wasting your time. The Marines will never convert to a common uniform. What the Army should focus on is getting their own “uniform house” in order. Ever since Desert Storm the Army has worn their battle dress (way too many names to recall) as the uniform of day for everything, liberty, travel, meetings with civilians in coat and ties, joint meetings where other services are in kakis or blues. It is an embarrassment to the Army. Only thing worse is the Air Force wearing flight suits to the same meetings.

Response by LCpl Dana Keene made Nov 26 at 2017 6:20 PM

LCpl Dana Keene — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 18:20:26 -0500

BS, no Marine wants to look like a Doggie or Squid! Get your headgear checked!

Response by CPL Vinnie Vinanti made Nov 26 at 2017 6:37 PM

CPL Vinnie Vinanti — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 18:37:25 -0500

Yes! For easier identification of friendly forces. We are inching closer and closer to a peer on peer or state enemy in a conventional setting. Plus you can buy replacement clothing on any base.

Response by LCpl Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2017 6:57 PM

LCpl Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 18:57:20 -0500

I agree and disagree. I think we should all have a few different sets, of the same colored cammies, you wear whichever color is closest to the surroundings you're in. Referring back to vegetation running around on a ship deck. The Navy has already started this process. They have blue cammies for ship rates, and they have a multi cam uniform for other environments. Also sticking with few variations. I'll wear the same cammies as someone in the Army or Navy, but as a Marine, I'd like to take pride in my branch of service and stick out a tiny bit amongst my brothers and sisters of other branches.

Response by CDR Michael Doidge made Nov 26 at 2017 7:51 PM

CDR Michael Doidge — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 19:51:28 -0500

Response by Oscar Thomasson made Nov 26 at 2017 7:54 PM

Oscar Thomasson — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 19:54:11 -0500

Nomex is a requirement for below deck wear in the Navy

Response by SP5 Gary Smith made Nov 26 at 2017 8:14 PM

SP5 Gary Smith — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 20:14:55 -0500

We should combine the branches.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2017 8:20 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 20:20:33 -0500

No. There is no reason to constantly change uniforms and it would also make it for service members from different branches to properly identify each other.

Response by MCPO William Richards made Nov 26 at 2017 8:27 PM

MCPO William Richards — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 20:27:49 -0500

Dress uniforms should be different. It was Navy Pride to wear a Dixie cup and stand out from the other uniforms. The Marines are the same. The uniform shows your pride and heritage of your branch of the service. You could tell what branch you were in just by looking at the uniform.
The most awful uniform was the navy blue camouflage . Who were they hiding from. The ball bottom jeans and blue shirt were comfortable and functional. Don’t change is my vote

Response by PO3 Mike Bek made Nov 26 at 2017 9:18 PM

PO3 Mike Bek — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 21:18:44 -0500

A uniform should be distinctive to the branch. I joined the Navy and was proud of it. I didn't want to loik like I was in the other branch. It's not a realistic idea. The Navy Officer's are not equal across all branches so that would cause problems also.

Response by COL King Davis made Nov 26 at 2017 9:41 PM

COL King Davis — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 21:41:00 -0500

Hell no. Each branch has its own history, traditions and culture. Don’t mess up their identities.

Response by CW4 James Strange made Nov 26 at 2017 11:24 PM

CW4 James Strange — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 23:24:04 -0500

No not in favor

Response by SSgt Kenneth Staten made Nov 26 at 2017 11:24 PM

SSgt Kenneth Staten — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 23:24:12 -0500

Great idea !! We all wore the same b.d.u s in special operations back in my day -- so way not !!

Response by SFC Tom Jones made Nov 26 at 2017 11:44 PM

SFC Tom Jones — Sun, 26 Nov 2017 23:44:10 -0500

No I can't agree , each person in the military earns they're own distinctions and a lot of it comes from they're uniforms, badges, wings, Tabs . Etc.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 27 at 2017 12:30 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 00:30:56 -0500

Vareity is the spice of life.
SGT Robert George LTC Stephen C. SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth Cpl Private RallyPoint Member SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4" @lt col ford @SGT Private RallyPoint Member SMSgt Minister Gerald A. "Doc" Thomas LTC Stephen F. Capt Seid Waddell COL Mikel J. Burroughs SPC George Rudenko TSgt Joe C. SP5 Mark Kuzinski MSgt Danny Hope MSgt Robert C Aldi Capt Gregory Prickett Sgt Wayne Wood PFC Private RallyPoint Member SPC Margaret Higgins

Response by SSG Dave Johnston made Nov 27 at 2017 1:06 AM

SSG Dave Johnston — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 01:06:55 -0500

$$$, Have you seen the digital 'blue' uniform the Navy and Air Force are/were sporting; Who needs that? Standardize the Uniform between the Marines, Army, and Navy Seabee's, Air Force, Navy, and Coast Guard personnel assigned to theater can wear that uniform. Didn't DOD just admonish all services for excessive uniform expenditures? It never ceases to amaze me when each Branch of Service expends $$$ for a Uniform, Vehicle, Weapon(system) that another Branch has already tested and fielded.

Response by Capt Mario Alfonsi made Nov 27 at 2017 1:29 AM

Capt Mario Alfonsi — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 01:29:08 -0500

Yes

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Nov 27 at 2017 1:41 AM

LTC Stephen F. — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 01:41:22 -0500

In the mid to late 1990s every military service wore the BDUs although the color of name tapes and service tapes varied SFC Michael Jackson, MBA.
Since DLA executed the contracts for fatigue uniforms it makes great sense to leverage the quantity of all service uniforms to reduce the price per issue, simplify the orders for these gross size uniforms, and make it more difficult for our potential enemies to determine who they are facing in battle, recon, etc.
This question was posed before I joined RallyPoint
FYI COL Mikel J. Burroughs COL Charles Williams LTC Wayne Brandon LTC Wayne Brandon LTC Bill Koski LTC Ivan Raiklin, Esq. LTC Private RallyPoint Member SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4" CW5 Private RallyPoint Member CW5 Jack Cardwell SP5 Robert Ruck SGT Charles H. Hawes SGT John " Mac " McConnell

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 27 at 2017 4:29 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 04:29:58 -0500

Everyone in the same uniform you say? Oh boy! I can’t wait to hear stories of someone winding up in another branches Formation.

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Nov 27 at 2017 5:28 AM

SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 05:28:49 -0500

I think all the armed forces branches should have their own variations of the camo- type uniforms. Adds to the distinction of each branch.

Response by PO2 Rick Gerson made Nov 27 at 2017 5:59 AM

PO2 Rick Gerson — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 05:59:28 -0500

In my opinion when the Navy went to the new working uniform was a big mistake
The dungaree uniform was better. Why do you need to wear camaflouge on a ship out in the middle of the ocean? You fall over board you are screwed....

Response by AN Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 27 at 2017 6:49 AM

AN Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 06:49:02 -0500

For camos/field uniforms, absolutely. For a multitude of reasons, however I think the 2 paramount reasons are cost and unity. If the entirety of the US military is utilizing the same uniform, we will be saving a lot of money. And wearing the same camos just makes sense, in any situation where this uniform is utilized, no one is going to be concerned about uniforms. And there is still the name tape for th3 branch of service over the breast pocket. And we still have service, and dress uniforms specific to each branch. I am 100% in favor.

Response by SSG(P) Matthew Bisbee made Nov 27 at 2017 11:53 AM

SSG(P) Matthew Bisbee — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 11:53:15 -0500

I like the idea, but The USMC would never stand for it.

Response by SSgt Dennis Hurston made Nov 27 at 2017 12:07 PM

SSgt Dennis Hurston — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 12:07:57 -0500

Don’t change the Marines uniform or their covers! We are different! Pride in our uniform!

Response by CWO4 William Johnson made Nov 27 at 2017 1:28 PM

CWO4 William Johnson — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 13:28:34 -0500

I'd support a common working uniform (cammo). I like the diversity of the dress uniforms of each service.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 27 at 2017 3:51 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 15:51:25 -0500

Support this idea. It’s ridiculous to have different uniform patterns for the branches it should be the same across the armed forces

Response by LTC Marc King made Nov 27 at 2017 4:20 PM

LTC Marc King — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:20:22 -0500

It did not work for Canada! they hate it! Prior to unification in 1968, the uniforms of the Canadian Army, Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) and Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) were similar to their counterparts in the forces of the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth countries, save for national identifiers and some regimental accoutrements. With unification in 1968 all branches started wearing the new Canadian Forces CF rifle green uniform. The present distinctive environmental uniforms in different colours for the army, navy and air force were introduced in the late 1980s and are generally similar to their pre-1968 counterparts.

Response by LtCol Robert Quinter made Nov 27 at 2017 4:58 PM

LtCol Robert Quinter — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:58:10 -0500

Mr McNamara had the standardization idea in the 60s and we all ended up wearing sateens, probably the most uncomfortable and least colorfast uniform I wore. We went to Vietnam, found out they were neither durable or climate appropriate and went to various tropical weight uniforms with the Army having one style (slanted breast pockets) and the USMC another. Both evolved according to the needs of the specific service. The problem with the DOD wide uniform is it's developed by a committee trying to solve very different service requirements, preferences and desires and you end up getting a compromise that serves no one well with very minimal savings. Let it be.

Response by LCpl Jamie Vaughan made Nov 27 at 2017 5:56 PM

LCpl Jamie Vaughan — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 17:56:07 -0500

Nope!! Keep them all the way they are. Each uniform for each branch is outfitted for what they do to give them maximum cover.

Response by 1LT Dale Burch made Nov 27 at 2017 7:40 PM

1LT Dale Burch — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 19:40:38 -0500

Uniforms are what makes a team cohesive and avoids confusion.....
I dont want baseball players suddenly wearing football or soccer uniforms...
Maybe that's just me....
A lot of young men have joined a particular branch over another just because of the uniform!!!!

Response by SFC Sarah Garcia made Nov 27 at 2017 7:48 PM

SFC Sarah Garcia — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 19:48:14 -0500

Should be equal. That way there would be no animosity and cut down on costs.

Response by SGT Dale Harwood made Nov 27 at 2017 9:30 PM

SGT Dale Harwood — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:30:12 -0500

I don't know. I can see the army, marines and air force having similar uniforms; but not the navy. You camoflauge sailors at sea they won't be seen by rescue vessels minus a life raft. Then there is the matter of showing rank. Navy shows all ranks from E4 and up on their sleeves for working uniforms. It would take away the tradition of "tacking on the crow". Plus they have to be fireproof in case of shipboard fires. These are just a few itemsbi thought of. Add more if you feel inclined to agree that the fleet needs to stay TRUE BLUE.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 27 at 2017 9:49 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:49:03 -0500

Like I need a BDU on a ship. The aquaflage proved to be an amazing idea and next year I'll be wearing green and tan. Just call us the U.S. Water Army.

Response by Nicole Thomas made Nov 27 at 2017 10:10 PM

Nicole Thomas — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 22:10:38 -0500

you better believe it. here in Roswell NM we have 203 satellites over our heads 24/7 and drones. A standard uniform non color coded, would help to preserve non disclosure of rank etc....

Response by SGT James Clark made Nov 27 at 2017 10:14 PM

SGT James Clark — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 22:14:34 -0500

I think all the armed forces branches should have their own variations of the camouflage type uniforms.

Response by SSG Christopher Perkins made Nov 27 at 2017 11:35 PM

SSG Christopher Perkins — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 23:35:12 -0500

I personally think we should go back to BDUs

Response by FN Michael Tesauro made Nov 28 at 2017 8:00 AM

FN Michael Tesauro — Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:00:31 -0500

I support it only for, training and combat zones, I like the distinct dress and casual uniforms

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 28 at 2017 12:20 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:20:27 -0500

I think the original question was do you support a standard uniform for all branches of service, yes or no?
No, not only do the dress uniforms need to be different, but there should be a different fatigue set and cammo set based on temperatures and regions of the world. How can we all have a standard uniform with different missions, climates and geographies. Multi-cams on subs, missile silos, bomber bases, space, flying and cyber commands? I think, cammo and flight suits should be the same for each theater for all services when deployed in a war zone. But I don't think all sailors and airmen need to be running around in cammo or army and marine personnel wearing OD fatigues. I know when I loaded special bombs, the OD fatigues were cheap and easy to replace. it was hard for our young airmen to pay for a set of BDUs every time they got grease or oil on them.

Response by SPC David Willis made Nov 28 at 2017 12:42 PM

SPC David Willis — Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:42:26 -0500

No reason not to, if you want to make theatre specific uniforms I could see that, but the multicams work in pretty much any environment not called the arctic.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 28 at 2017 4:08 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 28 Nov 2017 16:08:02 -0500

Combat uniform...definitely. The services can show service pride with their dress uniforms. A standard uniform for combat is cheaper for the taxpayers and troops. Also, by definition if troops deployed to the same place are wearing different combat patterns, somebody is wearing a less effective pattern.

Response by Sgt Robert Mitzenheim made Nov 28 at 2017 4:30 PM

Sgt Robert Mitzenheim — Tue, 28 Nov 2017 16:30:22 -0500

My vote is to allow each branch to define and procure their own uniforms. What would be good for a marine isn't necessarily what would be good for an airman.

Response by SPC Lee Sweningson made Nov 29 at 2017 9:11 AM

SPC Lee Sweningson — Wed, 29 Nov 2017 09:11:14 -0500

Because wearing green, brown and black multicam makes so much sense on a ship, naval base, in an aircraft, etc.

Response by MSgt Mark Bucher made Nov 29 at 2017 1:39 PM

MSgt Mark Bucher — Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:39:31 -0500

I think having a standard field uniform makes too much sense, that's why it'll never come to pass. Each branch needs to have their' own separate dress uniforms, but duty/work/field uniforms should all be that same. As I said, it only makes too much sense so it won't happen

Response by PV2 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 29 at 2017 7:32 PM

PV2 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 29 Nov 2017 19:32:44 -0500

One country one uniform.

Response by SPC Robert Coventry made Nov 29 at 2017 7:48 PM

SPC Robert Coventry — Wed, 29 Nov 2017 19:48:01 -0500

I agree with same uniform in the same jobs, infantry either Army or Marines should be the same other than that i don't agree.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 30 at 2017 6:19 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 30 Nov 2017 18:19:18 -0500

Why not we all serve the country.

Response by PO1 Sean Reynolds made Dec 1 at 2017 11:45 AM

PO1 Sean Reynolds — Fri, 01 Dec 2017 11:45:00 -0500

If you are only talking cammies/BDUs, I say sure why not, but let each branch keep their rank devices and such. But not dress uniforms

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 1 at 2017 11:49 AM

CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Dec 2017 11:49:24 -0500

It is not the uniform that dilineats the service, rather, it is the ethos.

Response by SPC Jd Shadwick made Dec 1 at 2017 12:21 PM

SPC Jd Shadwick — Fri, 01 Dec 2017 12:21:53 -0500

One team one fight

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 1 at 2017 12:39 PM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Dec 2017 12:39:08 -0500

No the uniform defines the branch we all work together but we’re all different

Response by SPC Blair Patterson made Dec 1 at 2017 2:08 PM

SPC Blair Patterson — Fri, 01 Dec 2017 14:08:49 -0500

Yes, im for it......only people that seem to be against it are marines

Response by PFC Kevin Crocker made Dec 1 at 2017 3:12 PM

PFC Kevin Crocker — Fri, 01 Dec 2017 15:12:01 -0500

It would save a lot of money and possibly bring down the barriers of us and them mentalities.

Response by PO2 Richard Lodwick made Dec 1 at 2017 3:30 PM

PO2 Richard Lodwick — Fri, 01 Dec 2017 15:30:18 -0500

Sounds like too much Army. Keep them separate

Response by CPL Ralph Moschler made Dec 1 at 2017 5:14 PM

CPL Ralph Moschler — Fri, 01 Dec 2017 17:14:27 -0500

Yes , cost 2 they could work together without being singled out to , that make all branchs work harder to look shape

Response by LTC David Turek made Dec 1 at 2017 8:39 PM

LTC David Turek — Fri, 01 Dec 2017 20:39:33 -0500

BDU was worn by all services.

Response by MSgt Edward Whitmore made Dec 1 at 2017 10:01 PM

MSgt Edward Whitmore — Fri, 01 Dec 2017 22:01:55 -0500

Yes, as long it is just the utility uniform, and rank and military service were easily identifiable. The military wastes a lot of money on constant changes to the uniforms.

Response by LCpl Jeff Moore made Dec 2 at 2017 1:38 PM

LCpl Jeff Moore — Sat, 02 Dec 2017 13:38:31 -0500

Should be noted this all started when yhe army didn't want to use the marpat pattern the usmc had developed. Cause some army General wanted his stamp on the new uniform.

Really the army and airforce, and navy should have followed the marine marpat pattern.

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 2 at 2017 6:02 PM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 02 Dec 2017 18:02:36 -0500

I'd wear those uniforms any day o the week

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 2 at 2017 6:52 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 02 Dec 2017 18:52:33 -0500

I think all branches with perhaps the exception of the Coast Guard should just be rebranded as "The Federation" and we can all wear the same uniforms and share equipment and training resources. Too much is lost by everyone trying to do their own thing. We could all learn things from each other and save this country money. Not to mention if we combined we wouldn't need as many Generals and their salaries cost us a lot for the amount of work they actually do.

Response by Cpl Bill Johnson made Dec 2 at 2017 7:13 PM

Cpl Bill Johnson — Sat, 02 Dec 2017 19:13:15 -0500

No. The services have different rank structures. The services have different missions (even though they occasionally blur). The services have different histories and traditions. What good would come of erasing those lines?

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 2 at 2017 9:06 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 02 Dec 2017 21:06:10 -0500

I think if we all can agree on a pattern, and have different colors to represent each branch, that would be fine.

Response by PO1 Mike Highley made Dec 2 at 2017 10:25 PM

PO1 Mike Highley — Sat, 02 Dec 2017 22:25:00 -0500

For all land forces yes, airfarce included, thier bases are on land. Navy and Coast Guard not so much. Don't really want to blend in with the ocean if you manage to fall overboard! Just saying.

Response by Jenn Hall made Dec 3 at 2017 7:37 AM

Jenn Hall — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 07:37:11 -0500

Even know how to write a complete sentence? That's what I care about

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 3 at 2017 10:48 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 10:48:44 -0500

Uniformity is preached across all branches so why not. This would also benefit when SM of a different branch should recognize and render salutes if the uniform is the same across the board.

Response by SPC Todd Burton made Dec 3 at 2017 11:35 AM

SPC Todd Burton — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 11:35:17 -0500

I would support it, but I think that all branches should go back to the days of high and tight while they are in a garrison setting. Pressed uniforms and shined boots ( for at least me ) gave a sense of pride in the wearing of the uniform!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 3 at 2017 1:53 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 13:53:08 -0500

If you do some research you will find that Robert McNamara implemented a standard uniform and weapon for all branches in the 60s. More economical and efficient for the armed forces and the taxpayer. It's worth a Google!

Response by SPC Burke Easter made Dec 3 at 2017 3:40 PM

SPC Burke Easter — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 15:40:13 -0500

We all wore the same uniform throughout the 80s, BDUs. Sometimes, depending on mission or place of deployment a unit might get issued something else, such as old OD Jungle Fatigue's from the Vietnam period, or over whites etc.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 3 at 2017 4:35 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 16:35:09 -0500

Good idea, stop wasting money govt

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 3 at 2017 9:30 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 21:30:19 -0500

Here's an idea. Stop changing the uniform unless the first four sets of the new pattern are free to all service members. Let's face it. Clothing allowance doesn't cover much.

Response by Cadet SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 3 at 2017 10:54 PM

Cadet SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 22:54:42 -0500

I liked when everyone (besides the coast guard cause their extra) was in BDUs

Response by LCpl Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 3 at 2017 10:58 PM

LCpl Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 22:58:04 -0500

I don’t support it. Your uniform distinguishes your branch from the others. Shows pride in the organization you’re a part of.

Response by LTJG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 4 at 2017 8:20 AM

LTJG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Dec 2017 08:20:59 -0500

I could argue for both. I think it would benefit the services financially because instead of having to create many different uniforms, you only need to create one; however, each uniform is supposedly designed to benefit particular missions. In all honesty, I think we could all have one uniform and it would be just fine.

Response by SSgt W. Aaron Gregory made Dec 4 at 2017 9:39 AM

SSgt W. Aaron Gregory — Mon, 04 Dec 2017 09:39:20 -0500

Is this the best idea that people can come up with to make the US military stronger or better? For God’s sake, FOCUS.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Dec 4 at 2017 10:25 AM

SSG Edward Tilton — Mon, 04 Dec 2017 10:25:00 -0500

And for dress

Response by Maj Martin Smith made Dec 4 at 2017 11:17 AM

Maj Martin Smith — Mon, 04 Dec 2017 11:17:25 -0500

So we don't shoot each other mistakenly!

Response by Cpl Rob Villegas made Dec 4 at 2017 12:27 PM

Cpl Rob Villegas — Mon, 04 Dec 2017 12:27:35 -0500

Are you kidding me sure in the hell would not trade in my alphas or Charlies for for no other unless joining other branch and only becuz was to old for the Corp. So i was planning on going to the national gaurd during the iraq war but my lil girl was born and that changed my mind .

Response by CPO Nate S. made Dec 4 at 2017 12:33 PM

CPO Nate S. — Mon, 04 Dec 2017 12:33:34 -0500

NO! While green/tan based camo works fine for USMC/USA (aka land forces) it would not be good for a naval ship. Likewise, the Navy, Coast Guard and Air Force could share a blue/gray camo pattern while the USA/USMC could share a green/tan camo pattern(s).

All uniforms could be cut in the same pattern to have same pocket capacity, etc. That makes total sense. This would at least get fabrics down to two/three pattern types. It would also put contracting for making uniforms under a singular process.

In situations like Kandahar where DESERT CAMO makes sense in combined land operations this would makes sense, but in operations aboard ship, or stateside aboard respective bases this might not be as appealing. Unless we are going to make all bases JOINT bases and the common uniform is a working uniform (aka camies) by fabric and style, except for service specific identifies then keeping service identity via dress uniforms would be the separator.

Just some comments!

Response by SFC Quinn Chastant made Dec 4 at 2017 4:05 PM

SFC Quinn Chastant — Mon, 04 Dec 2017 16:05:26 -0500

As standardized utility/field uniform there would be a cost savings for all the branches. Additionally you would not have to worry about "Branding" a Branch Specific Camo pattern as the USMC had done a few years back. Break it down to some specific points and it almost becomes a necessity depending upon duties on ground , shipboard or aviation when fire resistance is a needed aspect as well. Kevlar and nomex blends having been the standard for fire protective apparel and very pricey to boot. You wouldn't have to have multiple lines of manufacture in various camo patterns, streamlining the acquisition process as well. But hey I was just a CA tree hugger hiding out in uniform, what would I know?

Response by MGySgt Paul Roarke Jr. made Dec 4 at 2017 8:39 PM

MGySgt Paul Roarke Jr. — Mon, 04 Dec 2017 20:39:59 -0500

No, as a Marine I don’t want to be mistaken for any other branch.

Response by SGT Chad Cherry made Dec 4 at 2017 10:09 PM

SGT Chad Cherry — Mon, 04 Dec 2017 22:09:17 -0500

No. I like the division. If we all wear the same uniform then we might as well be in the same branch. Also other branches haven't earned the right to wear the same uniform like the air force, navy, and coast gaurd.

Response by SGT Leon Riege made Dec 5 at 2017 12:12 PM

SGT Leon Riege — Tue, 05 Dec 2017 12:12:25 -0500

Every branch needs its own task specific uniform, anyone as doesn't realize this ought to just retire and make way ,a sailors uniform includes bell bottom pants for a reason and why should they wear woodland or desert colors ? And shouldn't airman wear clothing as makes them less a target in case they have to bail ? Marines are specop navy and spend time on the beach the army ? Put them back in of and teach them about vegging out with yeti and making mud pies oh and since we are on track tell them there boots will be black in color and highly shined because an individual as spends an hour a day on their boots is gonna pay attention where they put there feet

Response by CPO Terry Sandefer made Dec 5 at 2017 5:00 PM

CPO Terry Sandefer — Tue, 05 Dec 2017 17:00:26 -0500

Not only no but he'll no, mainly for traditions sake if your in bush or desert that's different situation and should be handled as such

Response by SPC John Neargardet made Dec 5 at 2017 6:42 PM

SPC John Neargardet — Tue, 05 Dec 2017 18:42:37 -0500

I think that each branch should have a uniform that applies to their theater of operations... as for every branch looking the same that would be a bad idea ! We're all on the same team of course but if you can't tell the diffrent between a coast guard member and a marine or army from navy not only will this create confusion amongst squad leaders, platoon sgts, but a far greater confusion between branches ...Not to mention the pride that comes to being part of a certain branch...

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 5 at 2017 7:29 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 05 Dec 2017 19:29:49 -0500

The Marines and Navy Seals still use their own uniforms, vice the OCPs in Afghanistan. We Navy folks have Type III's (green digis) which is our deployed uniform to HOA and other places, but use the OCPs in Afghanistan.
For us, if we could use Type III's instead of OCP, it would mean we would actually have useful gear when we return home, instead of Army gear that will probably sit around the man cave as war mementos. Not sure if this is a justifying enough reason, but it hits a little bit on the personal side, especially as we officers buy our own gear usually.

Response by CPT Mike Silverman made Dec 5 at 2017 8:25 PM

CPT Mike Silverman — Tue, 05 Dec 2017 20:25:43 -0500

Yes. I came up under woodland, standard bdu. Worked fine. Just no velcro for the love of all that is holy.

Response by TSgt Floyd Leach made Dec 5 at 2017 10:42 PM

TSgt Floyd Leach — Tue, 05 Dec 2017 22:42:02 -0500

Yes

Response by SSgt Daniel d'Errico made Dec 6 at 2017 3:32 AM

SSgt Daniel d'Errico — Wed, 06 Dec 2017 03:32:30 -0500

Well it brings back the old saying," we are all equal in the military, because we all dress the same, to look the same and act the same". I agree that all services of the military must wear the multicam uniform. It would bring down the uniform cost, show that individualism is no longer needed by each branch and make it harder for our enemies to tell who they're fighting. We once wore olive green fatigues, except for ship borne sailors. Why not Multicam now?

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 6 at 2017 4:13 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 06 Dec 2017 04:13:09 -0500

Yes, this is the only time since the creation of utilities that we don’t have a common working uniform to deploy with. Different ones don’t fiscally make sense...

Response by SGT Kieran Pavlick made Dec 6 at 2017 9:01 AM

SGT Kieran Pavlick — Wed, 06 Dec 2017 09:01:48 -0500

Branches have through the Decades felt Uniforms defined them. I remember when the Navy changed from chambray Shirts and Dungarees, to Polyester. Keep the traditional system.

Response by MSgt Michael Dorn made Dec 6 at 2017 3:22 PM

MSgt Michael Dorn — Wed, 06 Dec 2017 15:22:50 -0500

No. It's a matter of tradition and Branch identity

Response by SSG James Mielke made Dec 6 at 2017 4:27 PM

SSG James Mielke — Wed, 06 Dec 2017 16:27:02 -0500

From a logistics and purely 'uniformity' standpoint I could see the logic behind this but I think an SMs standard operations area must be considered. You do not want a standard woodland type camo being worn on in contrast to the superstructures on a cruiser of carrier, nor would you want the blue/grey naval camo being worn while trying to hide or low crawl or in an open field.

Response by SPC Paul Hayward made Dec 6 at 2017 9:36 PM

SPC Paul Hayward — Wed, 06 Dec 2017 21:36:44 -0500

i think a standardized uniform is a great idea, the rank and service insignia ought to be exclusive to each branch, but the uniform it goes on should be the same across all services, with exception to maybe sailors aboard ship, with them i believe they should have something that would be suitable for seaborne service

Response by MSgt James Vercher made Dec 6 at 2017 10:56 PM

MSgt James Vercher — Wed, 06 Dec 2017 22:56:57 -0500

One battle/utility uniform would make sense in both a cost and production point of view. Back in the day I had and used “tiger stripes”. This pattern was the best that I used and offered very good concealment and well as long wear. The puzzle palace had to decide on changes for each branch. Keep the dress uniform but get the one battle/utility and go to aircrew style name tags for name and rank.

Response by SGT Frank Pritchett made Dec 6 at 2017 11:22 PM

SGT Frank Pritchett — Wed, 06 Dec 2017 23:22:09 -0500

I think it is a matter of Branch Pride, I served in Army and I wouldn't want to look like a Marine and I feel they would agree. If you want to instill Chaos and Confusion then try one uniform to fit all. I am all for keeping pride in the uniform. the Navy had the dungaree, the Army had the Greens and the Marine Corp never changed now were are all digitized with separate colors. Let's keep the pride.

Response by PO3 Sandra Cooper made Dec 7 at 2017 6:42 AM

PO3 Sandra Cooper — Thu, 07 Dec 2017 06:42:36 -0500

I can see that!! Navy veteran and when I was in you had Navy blues for winter and Whites for summer, unless you was a Seabee you wore camafloge. After I got out they changed the dungarees to Dickies which was cool and over due!!

Response by CPO Hal Morgan made Dec 7 at 2017 10:34 AM

CPO Hal Morgan — Thu, 07 Dec 2017 10:34:41 -0500

Uniform changes in the Navy are a regular occurrence, mostly from bad to worse. I remember this staring with Adm. Zumwalt, who tried to make all the ranks look the same....whatever.

Response by MAJ Montgomery Granger made Dec 7 at 2017 11:34 AM

MAJ Montgomery Granger — Thu, 07 Dec 2017 11:34:32 -0500

Identification. Different force, different mission and capabilities. I used to find it confusing and frustrating, all the uniform and gear changes over my 22 years in the Army, But in the interest of giving the soldier the latest and greatest supplies and equipment, the only constant in the universe is CHANGE. Another concern is the enemy. They seem to always be able to get their hands on or create copy-cat uniforms for their clandestine operations. Supply control is essential, but keeping up with what's going to protect soldiers BEST should be our goal. Back to identification. Besides being able to tell friend from foe and friendlies from non-friendlies, being able to tell at a distance who is on your left and right is key to battlefield survival and effectiveness. Distinctive uniforms for Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force and Coast Guard assist with safety, security and organization. An office setting is one thing, but on the battlefield, when you may not be close enough to read name, rank and service, at least with different uniforms you can extrapolate mission from a distance. Hooah!

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 7 at 2017 2:20 PM

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 07 Dec 2017 14:20:30 -0500

We should have one point of entry for all services; one basic training that we all share together before going on to our various branches and specialties.

Response by SSgt Eric Swanson made Dec 7 at 2017 9:26 PM

SSgt Eric Swanson — Thu, 07 Dec 2017 21:26:34 -0500

We all (Army, Marines, Air Force) wore the same utilities/fatigues, just different hats and patches, until the introduction of the ACU's. Then it got stupid.

Response by LCpl Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 7 at 2017 11:18 PM

LCpl Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 07 Dec 2017 23:18:17 -0500

Absolutely not. It’s easy to identify our different branches and tell who’s American and who isn’t.

Response by LCpl Herndon Pyatt made Dec 8 at 2017 12:16 AM

LCpl Herndon Pyatt — Fri, 08 Dec 2017 00:16:04 -0500

No! Each branch has its own unique history and individual uniforms reveal their own distinctiveness.

Response by CPT Arthur Jacobs made Dec 8 at 2017 11:23 AM

CPT Arthur Jacobs — Fri, 08 Dec 2017 11:23:38 -0500

The uniforms can be different - there is pride in your unique service dress. However, when each branch is spending millions of tax dollars seemingly every three or fours years to research what kind of special field camo pattern they want, it gets ridiculous. The perfect example of that is the Navy's blue and black camo. Are your kidding me? What background will that have you blend in with so you will not be seen by the enemy? Oh, I know, if your ship sinks or you fall overboard the rescuers will find it hard to locate you. Good plan.

Response by PFC James Middlebrooks made Dec 8 at 2017 12:19 PM

PFC James Middlebrooks — Fri, 08 Dec 2017 12:19:42 -0500

No. Services don't have the discipline to be squares away like the Marine Corp

Response by PO1 Sean Hurley made Dec 8 at 2017 6:00 PM

PO1 Sean Hurley — Fri, 08 Dec 2017 18:00:53 -0500

Well, having worked o n the deck of the Abe Lincoln, honestly, who the Hell cares what you are wearing as long as it can take a serious ass beating. You are on one of the largest floating objects on the surface of the sea, with about fifty jets on deck. Who the hell are you trying to hide from? We wore bdu's on the deck. Green bdu's for enlisted and Sand Camo for Chiefs and officers. Again, who cares what you wear as long as it is durable and can hold up to non-skid.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 8 at 2017 7:27 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Dec 2017 19:27:12 -0500

Navy folks were wearing multicam too

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 8 at 2017 7:27 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Dec 2017 19:27:29 -0500

And I think it’s a great idea

Response by SSgt Tim Hall made Dec 8 at 2017 9:53 PM

SSgt Tim Hall — Fri, 08 Dec 2017 21:53:09 -0500

It worked until about 2000.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 9 at 2017 5:24 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 09 Dec 2017 05:24:38 -0500

I seen? Really?

Response by SSG Craig Newton made Dec 9 at 2017 12:48 PM

SSG Craig Newton — Sat, 09 Dec 2017 12:48:56 -0500

Not for it. There needs to be a distinction between the branches.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 9 at 2017 12:59 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 09 Dec 2017 12:59:52 -0500

All for it.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 9 at 2017 10:06 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 09 Dec 2017 22:06:13 -0500

No. I've earned the right to be amongst the few, the proud, the Marines. I want my uniform. The one I wake up and fight for everyday. The one that I left my family for. The one that brave men and women have died for. If I wanted another branchs uniform I would be in that branch.

Response by Cpl Rc Layne made Dec 10 at 2017 9:43 AM

Cpl Rc Layne — Sun, 10 Dec 2017 09:43:56 -0500

At one time, in the not too distant past, everyone did.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 10 at 2017 11:02 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 10 Dec 2017 11:02:49 -0500

When is America going to wear their true uniform of the future?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 10 at 2017 11:39 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 10 Dec 2017 11:39:00 -0500

CMSAF said he wants to push for OCP by the end of next year

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 10 at 2017 12:54 PM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 10 Dec 2017 12:54:02 -0500

I would not support that because marines deserve there own uniform to represent their badassery

Response by Col Robert Wallace made Dec 10 at 2017 4:20 PM

Col Robert Wallace — Sun, 10 Dec 2017 16:20:42 -0500

Definitely Not. The "Dress Uniform", Class A, is what distinguishes the different branches of service. As stated by SSgt Michael Jackson, the closest to a "standard uniform" is the BDU's or camos. But even they have differences, except for name breast patches. During WW II, the USAF was part of the Army and shoulder patches designated members as AAF, distinguishing them as Army Air Force, separated from the ground Army. Marines have no other insiignia; Navy has bluish color plus insignia; Air Force has only button tags & breast patch denoting "outfit/command"; Coast Guard is same as the Navy; only the Army has shoulder patches as well as button tags & American shoulder flags.

Response by Capt Nate Le made Dec 10 at 2017 11:45 PM

Capt Nate Le — Sun, 10 Dec 2017 23:45:44 -0500

Each branch is different. Separate uniforms not only distinguish the service members it is also part of our identity. Would the Army forego wearing the patches they take pride in? Would the Marines want blank velcro areas because they don’t wear patches, or have their rank insignias sewn onto their sleeves as enlisted Airmen do? I took great pride every time I put on my MarPats and my brother also took pride in putting on his ACUs (we both thought the other looked ridiculous). If cost/savings are an issue, then increase the amount of suppliers/manufacturers. Competition in the market drives prices down and increases quality, simple economics.

Response by SPC Angela Nelson made Dec 11 at 2017 4:48 AM

SPC Angela Nelson — Mon, 11 Dec 2017 04:48:45 -0500

In '91 I Know that we All wore bdu's..the variation was Marines wore OD t shirts, and tan belts. Army wore Brown t-shirts and black belts.. I agree with a standard field uniform. It uncomplicates deployments and Probably more cost effective over all

Response by PO1 Jim Dawson made Dec 11 at 2017 6:42 PM

PO1 Jim Dawson — Mon, 11 Dec 2017 18:42:22 -0500

I would. Keep your different dress uni's, but "work" uniform all the same. Exceptions of special situations, such as camo's for battlefield, but otherwise, same.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 11 at 2017 9:07 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Dec 2017 21:07:13 -0500

Yes. But the navy no. Unless attached to the ground units in Afghanistan.

Response by Lt Col Bg Smith made Dec 11 at 2017 9:12 PM

Lt Col Bg Smith — Mon, 11 Dec 2017 21:12:43 -0500

I do not support this. I think the distinction between services needs to be show. As a Marine Combat NCO and an AF Officer I think both services deserve dinstinction.

Response by Cpl Lury Watson made Dec 11 at 2017 10:38 PM

Cpl Lury Watson — Mon, 11 Dec 2017 22:38:52 -0500

Woodland bdu's worked across the board in the 80's.

Response by SPC Nanette Porter made Dec 11 at 2017 11:24 PM

SPC Nanette Porter — Mon, 11 Dec 2017 23:24:29 -0500

Well as much as I would like to say yes I am going to have to say that every branch of the military has it's own purpose and they don't work in the same places. Yes we work together but as a team but we all have are own training for what we do best. And even if we went to a single uniform it would still be just as expensive. People are always monie hungry so the price of uniforms would be about the same. And green on the deck of a ship would stick out and blue on a dessert not so good ether.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 13 at 2017 9:31 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:31:47 -0500

For a combat uniform I think it would be great. Why spend $ billions for every branch to have their own. As for Class A & B uniforms, you MUST be kidding!!!!!!!!!

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Dec 13 at 2017 2:16 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Wed, 13 Dec 2017 14:16:07 -0500

Complete with distinctive headgear

Response by MAJ Eric G Troup made Dec 13 at 2017 2:26 PM

MAJ Eric G Troup — Wed, 13 Dec 2017 14:26:23 -0500

No. Fundamentally disagree with attempts to homogenize the force. Let each force move forward at its own pace optimizing against their own mission objectives. This should not be forced into a one size fits all approach.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 15 at 2017 6:47 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 06:47:36 -0500

I think that a common uniform with unique accoutrements would be more fiscally responsible as well as make it easier to distribute. That being said, we can celebrate our uniqueness in a service-specific dress uniform.

Response by SSgt James Tadlock made Dec 15 at 2017 1:56 PM

SSgt James Tadlock — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 13:56:14 -0500

Slowly coming to this I think. I agree with the idea.

Response by SPC Curt Dennis made Dec 17 at 2017 8:30 AM

SPC Curt Dennis — Sun, 17 Dec 2017 08:30:20 -0500

Utilities: Sure. I mean what idiot thought it would be a good idea for sailors to be camouflaged in water??

Dress Uniform: NO WAY!
Each service has a long and storied history and deserves a unique identity in their dress uniform.

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Dec 18 at 2017 7:08 PM

CW3 Kevin Storm — Mon, 18 Dec 2017 19:08:17 -0500

As for a field or duty uniform yes, class A's are distinctive to their respective branch of service, and or division(in the case of the Army). It was IMHO foolish for the one branch to go one way, then splinter the entire thing in an endless game of "me too."

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 19 at 2017 1:39 PM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 19 Dec 2017 13:39:28 -0500

Maybe - but not for Sailors and Marines - they should be required to wear distinctive uniforms. Warmest Regards, Sandy :)

Response by Sgt Harlin Seritt made Dec 19 at 2017 3:46 PM

Sgt Harlin Seritt — Tue, 19 Dec 2017 15:46:46 -0500

No. If so, then why not have the same boot camp? Same Physicial Fitness standards? Same marksmanship standards, etc.?

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 20 at 2017 2:47 AM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Dec 2017 02:47:12 -0500

Depends, I don't think its necessary on a ship, but in the field I think its a good idea. I'm a Coastie but looked just like any Army, Navy, or Airman when I was in the Stan.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 20 at 2017 9:43 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Dec 2017 21:43:24 -0500

I agree with many others, that dress uniforms could stay service unique, but a utility uniform could be universal.

Response by Cpl Bill Johnson made Dec 22 at 2017 7:13 AM

Cpl Bill Johnson — Fri, 22 Dec 2017 07:13:35 -0500

Before We get down this road, we need to ask ourselves who needs what kind of uniform. Seriously? Sailors and Airmen in camouflage? Why? Sure, SEALs... AF Security Forces, EOD etc... I get it, but cooks? Aircraft mechanics? Fighter pilots? I'm not disparaging any of the people who do so much important support work, I just question the need.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 22 at 2017 3:15 PM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 22 Dec 2017 15:15:42 -0500

Seems to me the field uniform is moving in that direction. The only part I know my service would not want to lose is the six-point cover. As far as my feelings is the dress uniforms should not change in the foreseeable future. They promote the services and team spirit.

Response by LTC John Bush made Dec 25 at 2017 8:50 AM

LTC John Bush — Mon, 25 Dec 2017 08:50:15 -0500

A standard work uniform like the BDU or the ridiculous annual modifications we now have makes sense but the dress uniforms should be service specific. As a combat infantryman i really do not be confused with a clerk. I can not believe they want to revive the WWII dress uniform! The green uniform was just fine. The blues with the shirt and Beret makes soldiers look like airline attendants!

I get the impression we have a bunch of Washington bureaucrats that are just trying to stay busy to justify their existence.

Response by PO3 John Wagner made Dec 25 at 2017 10:07 AM

PO3 John Wagner — Mon, 25 Dec 2017 10:07:27 -0500

We would all end up looking like storm troopers in a Star Wars movie.

Response by MSG John Wirts made Dec 25 at 2017 11:17 AM

MSG John Wirts — Mon, 25 Dec 2017 11:17:38 -0500

I for one have worn the pickle suit, the woodland camo, at that time the utility uniform was universal across the services. Then the 5 services went insane and each service developed their service specific utility uniforms. What a WASTE!!!!! We are short of money for almost everything, weapons, vehicles, maintenance, pay, bonuses, to name a few! But we allocate money for a committee to develop a service specific utility uniform and field gear. I was in the Air Guard for a time, I picked up a surplus Air Force Arctic Parka, My brother joined the Navy and became a submariner. He was in New London pulling deck watch,and freezing. We were talking on the phone and he asked about my parka. I told him I still had it, he asked me to send it to him. I did and the deck watch used it to keep warm. He was talking with me later and said I wish I had the stock number for that parka, I told him it was on the label inside the collar. He attempted to order some parkas for the sub deck watch, the requisition got to base supply, and was turned back, Air Force item not authorized for the Navy. The Navy has a similar item for Navy use. It was not the same nor as warm. I would recommend a joint service committee to develop utility and field equipment. I would make sure all specifications were necessary. Case in point I was aware of a butcher's apron, duck cloth with RED STITCHING. These were used to cut meat for cooking, they are used to protect the cooks uniform from getting bloodied up. The stitching is only a means to assure that a certain provider gets the contract! The Army 2 piece rain suit specified a SILK label to assure the correct contractor was awarded the contract! All specifications should be checked for necessity, and make sure that it does not circumvent the Competitive Bid process!

Response by PO3 David Greeley made Dec 25 at 2017 1:35 PM

PO3 David Greeley — Mon, 25 Dec 2017 13:35:38 -0500

I believe each branch of service should have its own version of BDU's.

Response by PO3 Edward Crutcher made Dec 25 at 2017 2:40 PM

PO3 Edward Crutcher — Mon, 25 Dec 2017 14:40:57 -0500

SAVE MONEY

Response by Sgt Al Thompson made Jan 6 at 2018 3:04 PM

Sgt Al Thompson — Sat, 06 Jan 2018 15:04:29 -0500

No, Definitely not.
The Marine Corps dress blues are representative of a history ans tradition that goes back to 1775. It is integral to the pride instilled in every Marine from the time they step on teh yellow footprints until the have taps played over there burial service. In addition, the combat uniform informs the enemy that hey are about to be destroyed by the finest military outfit in the world.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Jan 6 at 2018 3:25 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Sat, 06 Jan 2018 15:25:23 -0500

I like the cut of the Air Force Tiggers and their boots appear to be an inch or two higher.

Response by CPL Bobby Bowman made Jan 9 at 2018 11:09 PM

CPL Bobby Bowman — Tue, 09 Jan 2018 23:09:17 -0500

yes to show what side you stand for 4 ceas is a good digital uniform

Response by CPL Bobby Bowman made Jan 9 at 2018 11:18 PM

CPL Bobby Bowman — Tue, 09 Jan 2018 23:18:14 -0500

yes also no more arm sales so we can identify what is on our side

Response by CPL Bobby Bowman made Jan 9 at 2018 11:27 PM

CPL Bobby Bowman — Tue, 09 Jan 2018 23:27:25 -0500

4ces would be good for all branches desert artic woodland

Response by William Smith made Jan 13 at 2018 2:28 AM

William Smith — Sat, 13 Jan 2018 02:28:02 -0500

no I support the most effective uniform for the task at hand
also helps unit members find each other amongst crowds

Response by SrA Richard Bishop made Jan 14 at 2018 2:26 AM

SrA Richard Bishop — Sun, 14 Jan 2018 02:26:44 -0500

All the combat services should wear the same uniform. Navy has always had their duty uniform on ship. Air Force aircraft maintenance needs a different type of duty uniform. Army, Marines, and field service Air Force personnel should have the same camouflage uniform so they are recognized by each other and by allies.

Response by SFC Dennis Yancy made Jan 14 at 2018 10:22 AM

SFC Dennis Yancy — Sun, 14 Jan 2018 10:22:27 -0500

One fatigue uniform for all makes sense. Unifies us all together. On battlefield you do not need to be thinking shoot or not. Allies are tough enough to id.

Response by 1stSgt Daryl Allen made Jan 14 at 2018 6:40 PM

1stSgt Daryl Allen — Sun, 14 Jan 2018 18:40:43 -0500

I concur that we should have a deployment uniform such as the multicam for all our services. The current uniforms for the Army and Air Force are the worst I have seen in many years. The Navy is now getting smart and doing away with the Blue Berry uniform. The BDU was a great uniform for most deployment locations but our current deployment locations are not compatible with it. The multicam is the best so far.

Response by MSG Gene Nichols made Jan 15 at 2018 11:59 AM

MSG Gene Nichols — Mon, 15 Jan 2018 11:59:15 -0500

Nope, troops take pride in their unit and their service branch. Who want's to be "just like everybody else" Also different missions dictate different uniforms.

Response by SPC Brian Stephens made Jan 17 at 2018 12:57 PM

SPC Brian Stephens — Wed, 17 Jan 2018 12:57:12 -0500

No. Different branches have different jobs that require different uniforms, training and skills on completely different teams. The uniform for each service is an identifier and a source of pride for each branch of service.

Response by SSgt Frank Martin made Jan 19 at 2018 1:11 AM

SSgt Frank Martin — Fri, 19 Jan 2018 01:11:45 -0500

I think this is a great idea....I was in during Vietnam and said the same thing = save money, etc. with one BDU type uniform. (Be interesting other comments!)...

Response by 1SG Klayton W. Hayes made Jan 20 at 2018 1:16 PM

1SG Klayton W. Hayes — Sat, 20 Jan 2018 13:16:21 -0500

BLUF: No. We fought a war to be independent of The Crown. The UK and other NATO Forces have integrated their forces into one size fits all. Since YORKTOWN 1775 we are the UNITED STATES MILITARY!

Response by SGT John Pearson made Jan 21 at 2018 12:12 AM

SGT John Pearson — Sun, 21 Jan 2018 00:12:55 -0500

I support the idea, but it won't fly with my Jarhead buddies! They just gotta be different. (See other comments) Back when we had BDU's Marines would roll their sleeves so the pale inside if the fabric would be exposed, the one thing they did that made sense to me!

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 21 at 2018 3:50 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 21 Jan 2018 03:50:29 -0500

I think it's a great idea. I agree that individuality is great but let's be realistic. For at least the past 15 years, combat has taken place in the Middle East, and the way things are going it seems we'll be here for a while. The some Air Force units have already started phasing out ABU's for the new OCP's, or ACU's as the Air Force calls it (super original right?). At the end of the day we're not soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. We're Americans. In my opinion we all have one job, and that is to support and defend the constitution of the United States of America, not to to be a soldier sailor airman or marine. I personally think the Air Force is doing the transition well. We use the exact same uniform, mine actually has the army logo on the tag. The only thing that's different is ranks obviously, and thread color for name tapes. That's just my opinion on the issue.

Response by PO3 Phyllis Maynard made Jan 21 at 2018 7:15 AM

PO3 Phyllis Maynard — Sun, 21 Jan 2018 07:15:13 -0500

The men and women who still wear the uniform will have the better insight. Go troops!

Response by 1SG Leon Espe made Jan 21 at 2018 8:22 PM

1SG Leon Espe — Sun, 21 Jan 2018 20:22:01 -0500

Yes. A common uniform would be cheaper, "BDU"s and Class "A"s. Each Service could wear different types of stripes and insignia like they do now. It might even foster a bit more cooperation between services and cut down on some divisive competitiveness. I'm not sure but I think the Canadian Forces have had the same uniforms for many years. Please don't make a dress uniform look like a rainbow!! Not too flashy and not too drab but respectable with a look of authority as well as practical. I always did like the 1940s Ike Jacket except for the color. The old OD uniforms I took home with me when they were not so presentable for duty lasted me many years used for hunting, fishing or outside work. After 10 years of wear I gave the OD trousers to my mechanic brother who wore them 3 or 4 more years in the grease and grime of auto mechanic work. They were permanently stained with ragged cuffs and pockets but were still actually wearable when he discarded them. The Army got their money's worth with the OD uniform but they got screwed on the color. The combat boots of the 1960s and 1970s were much more comfortable than the 1930-40s buckle top boots and I believe took more punishment. I never cared for the leggings and service shoes of the 30s and 40s either. Just an old soldier's opinion.

Response by A1C Stanley Kolakowski made Jan 23 at 2018 10:25 AM

A1C Stanley Kolakowski — Tue, 23 Jan 2018 10:25:23 -0500

I'd go all the way back to "3 uinforms per service":

Dress
"Garrison Work"
Combat.

Combat would be a singular uniform w/service specific "looks" (Velcro flightline-style names for USAF, etc.) and "theater specific", aka Desert Camo for desert ops, etc. Worn while "in the field" only.

"Garrison" uniforms would bring back Dungarees & Ball Caps to Navy, Khaki's to USAF, and the "Analog Woodland/hunter Camo" to USMC/USA. Worn most times.

And Dress Uniforms stay the way they are.

Response by PO1 William Van Syckle made Jan 23 at 2018 11:58 AM

PO1 William Van Syckle — Tue, 23 Jan 2018 11:58:56 -0500

I can see ground forces wearing O.D. green fatigues or BDU’s and the Navy back to dungarees. But all these different cammies is getting ridicules. I live in San Antonio and saw a bunch of service members in a new cammie and thought they where Marines and said so to my wife. I was shocked when I got close enough to see the service tape and it said U.S. Navy. It shocked my wife also. And, we could not figure out anybody’s rank. I walked up to one and when I was within six feet of him, I saw his rank was CDR. The new “Marine” pattern hides the rank real well. With this new cammie and the tan and blacks that the navy wears, I think they are trying to look like Marines. The Navy needs to go back to dungarees for work uniforms and stop copying the Marines and the other services need to go back to the fatigues or woodland BDU’s. It would save a lot of money. Just my two cents.....

Response by PO2 Frank Read made Jan 23 at 2018 6:49 PM

PO2 Frank Read — Tue, 23 Jan 2018 18:49:32 -0500

NO.Each service 'should'' have their own uniform.

Response by MAJ James Rip made Jan 24 at 2018 4:11 PM

MAJ James Rip — Wed, 24 Jan 2018 16:11:30 -0500

Yes. We had that years ago. The old BDUs. I know the Air Force, Army, and Marines had them. I think some Navy personnel had them but also had a different uniforms. I think it would drive down cost.

Response by SFC Ernest Thurston made Jan 24 at 2018 11:18 PM

SFC Ernest Thurston — Wed, 24 Jan 2018 23:18:39 -0500

I agree we should have a standard combat uniform. Nowadays with all the velcro on the uniforms, it's a lot easier to change branch, unit and specialty badges. I always have thought was a waste of money to have each branch do R&D for the combat uniform and then have a contractor produce a branch specialized uniform pattern. It was bad enough when Desert Storm kicked off that the Army had soldiers wearing about four different camo patterns, including woodland camo in the desert! I have never understood why the Navy and Air Force need blue camo. Ships are not blue they are grey. I don't think the Air Force is hiding people behind clouds.
I think that the dress uniforms for each branch should be distinctive so that our civilian population can see the difference. Of course in some cases, civilians don't know the difference like which branch guards the Tomb of the Unknowns, or the White House. Or flies/guards the Presidental helicopter or
Presidential airplane.

Response by CMDCM Maurice Conner made Jan 27 at 2018 2:46 PM

CMDCM Maurice Conner — Sat, 27 Jan 2018 14:46:42 -0500

LNCM (E9) USN Retired. One combat/field uniform would work with individual service identifying insignia. Non-combat uniform, especially the Navy's khaki for Chief Petty Officers and O's, and dress uniforms should remain the same as they are. Tradition builds esprit de corps. IMHO

Response by SSG John Eroh made Jan 27 at 2018 8:09 PM

SSG John Eroh — Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:09:17 -0500

I would support a common work/field uniform for the Army, Air Force and Marines with the Navy & Coast Guard having one that would blend into their ships more. Which the Navy Seals would wear would depend on where their mission was. Each service should maintain their own dress uniforms.

Response by SSgt Ron Regan made Jan 28 at 2018 10:18 AM

SSgt Ron Regan — Sun, 28 Jan 2018 10:18:22 -0500

I would support this idea as long as our troops who are presently serving felt comfortable with it.
SSGT Ron Regan, USAF 1966-72

Response by SSgt Ron Regan made Jan 28 at 2018 10:19 AM

SSgt Ron Regan — Sun, 28 Jan 2018 10:19:50 -0500

I support this idea as long as our troops who are presently serving the country think it's appropriate.

Response by PO1 Kevin Dougherty made Jan 28 at 2018 11:43 PM

PO1 Kevin Dougherty — Sun, 28 Jan 2018 23:43:12 -0500

Each service has a distinct and unique mission. It's uniform needs are as well, and the uniforms should reflect that. For instance my branch the USCG interfaces with the public on an almost daily basis. We do not generally spend a lot of time trying to blend into the back ground, but we do spend a lot of time being very visible. Cammo and subdued insignia is neither needed or desired. When our units that do deploy, and need such uniforms it is easy enough to obtain what is needed from whoever they are deploying with. such as our units in the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan do.

On a side note, I find the navy "blueberries" just plain silly. Blue cammo pattern on a big grey ship? Why?

Response by SFC Mamerto Perez made Jan 29 at 2018 7:37 AM

SFC Mamerto Perez — Mon, 29 Jan 2018 07:37:06 -0500

We are all military servants of our Country, our jobs are to keep our Country free and save from aggression. We all have pride in the service that we serve so why not wear the same uniform and also save money

Response by SP5 Norman McGill made Jan 30 at 2018 5:41 PM

SP5 Norman McGill — Tue, 30 Jan 2018 17:41:48 -0500

I'm thinking that different fatigues ( daily work uniform for you kiddies) are part of the uniform of each section of the military and part of the espree de corps that each has for itself. Each branch of our service is bigger than the total size of the military in most countries. We need different uniforms for each branch so you can tell the troops apart when they are deployed together. The uniform needs to blend with the color of the area in which it's worn so as to cover and conceal the men in that place. OD wouldn't blend too well on a gray ship or next to a shinny silver fighter jet. Personally I would not feel right wearing the same uniform as a swabbie or junior birdman. I liked the spirit of belonging to a special group and I want everybody to know that I belong to the United States Army and don't confuse that with anything else. However I do wish the powers that be would unify the rank insignia. Now there's a lot of confusion if ya ask me.

Response by Sgt Tee Organ made Feb 2 at 2018 9:19 AM

Sgt Tee Organ — Fri, 02 Feb 2018 09:19:10 -0500

No, mission requirements dictate what uniforms to wear, that's the way it always should be. Dress uniforms should reflect branch and accomplishments.

Response by SSG Lee Kujawa made Feb 4 at 2018 12:51 PM

SSG Lee Kujawa — Sun, 04 Feb 2018 12:51:44 -0500

Like the idea:

Response by PO1 Michael Turnbeaugh made Feb 4 at 2018 9:12 PM

PO1 Michael Turnbeaugh — Sun, 04 Feb 2018 21:12:26 -0500

No, the Army and Marines should have similar, maybe even identical, work uniforms because they do very similar jobs. The Navy has no use for a BDU type uniform. In fact, as the blueberries have shown, they basically are useless in a shipboard situation. In a man overboard situation, they become a hindrance to survivability.

Response by Maj Mike Sciales made Feb 7 at 2018 3:46 PM

Maj Mike Sciales — Wed, 07 Feb 2018 15:46:31 -0500

More cost efficient.

Response by Sgt Allen Haney made Feb 8 at 2018 8:26 AM

Sgt Allen Haney — Thu, 08 Feb 2018 08:26:24 -0500

No.

Response by SGT Douglas Figgins made Feb 8 at 2018 9:43 AM

SGT Douglas Figgins — Thu, 08 Feb 2018 09:43:01 -0500

I support a standard operational uniform, let our Dress Uniforms be distinct between services but when it comes to fighting we are Americans and should be the same.

Response by PO1 Mike Dean made Feb 8 at 2018 4:00 PM

PO1 Mike Dean — Thu, 08 Feb 2018 16:00:11 -0500

Absolutely not! Each service should have their own uniform. Don't try to make grunts out of sailors. In my opinion each service member is proud of the service which they serve. That distinct uniform gives them the pride in their unit. I was shocked the first time I saw sailors wearing what I call Gucci-flage. Camo at sea? REALLY?? I was involved with the uniform change in the Navy back in the 70's when they went to the same uniform Seaman to Admiral. Bad move! That traditional service dress blue so familiar to many made it easy to identify our sailors all around the world. Thank goodness they came back to their senses with a return to the traditional bluejacket. More recently, they tried to take away the rating badge that identified the specialty of the sailors. That rating badge immediately identified that sailor's skills. They take great pride in that and there was a big push-back from the fleet. Upper management came to their senses on that issue as well. I took pride in being an Electrician's Mate and then as a Gas Turbine tech. Soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are not just a bunch of empty-headed machines programmed to move in order.

Response by MSgt Bill Johns made Feb 8 at 2018 6:29 PM

MSgt Bill Johns — Thu, 08 Feb 2018 18:29:05 -0500

NO ..... who came up with this idea .... I am a 20 year USMC veteran ..... I am proud of and respect all my brothers and sisters in the armed forces ..... but I don't want to see the eagle/globe/and anchor go anywhere .....

Response by SSG Keith Amacher made Feb 11 at 2018 8:19 PM

SSG Keith Amacher — Sun, 11 Feb 2018 20:19:57 -0500

Special Ops need special uniforms then everyone wants them Vietnam era was the Tiger Stripes based off of the Bengal Tiger and everyone loved when we all had Olive Green. Change is good but as far as tactical uniforms they should be by capability. If you want one join that disiplane or ask for improvements for your current. Everyone wanted a beret because they felt left out. Well guess what you got the Black Ranger Beret that had to be earned before. Special Forces and Airborne stayed with Green and Maroon Beret. POINT we earned those berets and I Do not believe in a Statndard. Earn it.

Response by MSG Louis Alexander made Feb 16 at 2018 12:03 PM

MSG Louis Alexander — Fri, 16 Feb 2018 12:03:01 -0500

Home rice and yaki Mondo! To sit here at my desk and review all the whining going on about interservice pride and how they wish to remain separate from other services, reminds me of the whiney millennial or so called LBGT groups who with their colorful dress arrangements, screams for equality. If this issue is so important than perhaps a light violet green with a tint of pink rose uniform would suffice. Than when in a combat situation the enemy can laugh themselves to death or allow our forces to obliterate them while they’re in this hysterical mode. Refer to the uniform as “The violet rose destruction camo’, yeah! That’s it the violet rose. Wink, Wink

Response by CPO Donald Drake made Feb 18 at 2018 9:39 AM

CPO Donald Drake — Sun, 18 Feb 2018 09:39:03 -0500

No I don’t support it

Response by MSG Charles Turner made Feb 18 at 2018 10:20 AM

MSG Charles Turner — Sun, 18 Feb 2018 10:20:15 -0500

More of a Common Uniform for "Utility" Dress Uniforms have a Lot of History and Branch Pride... why take that away?

Response by PVT Gary Rieck made Feb 19 at 2018 3:30 PM

PVT Gary Rieck — Mon, 19 Feb 2018 15:30:54 -0500

I have mixed ideas on standard uniform. Part of the reason for the camo bdu was to aid in concealment to some degree. Land based naval such as sea bees, as well as air Force ground crews yes. Air Force pilots yes if shot down may aid in thier concealment on land but ship based naval I'm not so certain of.

Response by PVT Gary Rieck made Feb 19 at 2018 3:31 PM

PVT Gary Rieck — Mon, 19 Feb 2018 15:31:54 -0500

Also I'm in favor of branch specific class A uniform.

Response by Eric Lund made Feb 19 at 2018 4:05 PM

Eric Lund — Mon, 19 Feb 2018 16:05:21 -0500

combat uniform? No. The camouflage pattern material and cut should correspond to the region you are deployed in jungle tigerstripe works great in the Amazon or in Vietnam Cambodia etc but sucks in the Europian or North American forests. Material: for wet swamp or jungle climates you want poly's. Shirts made of that under armor material; pants and jackets made of single layer ripstop nylon like a rugged windbreaker that doesn't hold water; cotton holds water molds/mildews and rots if wet too long but in Southern Europe, North America and central Africa cotton is your best friend. we cant standardize we proved that with the woodland BDU. should any service have a monopoly on a pattern or cut if it fits the needs of another branch? NO!! BAD MARINES!! BAD!! would say bad navy as well but who else would want blue camo

Response by SSG Walter Corretjer made Feb 20 at 2018 5:31 PM

SSG Walter Corretjer — Tue, 20 Feb 2018 17:31:59 -0500

Don't agree.All branches should continue using their distintive branch of the Armed Forces uniform.This installes the real purpose and mission of that branch,plus a deep mark on the Spirit De Corp's, for the people assigned their respected branch.
As an addition to this trade mark,I would support,the more often use of the Class A and Class B dress uniforms,for light duty work and travel on orders movements,on airports and other circumstances,
between all branches.

Response by Sgt Brent Wanstreet made Feb 23 at 2018 2:31 PM

Sgt Brent Wanstreet — Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:31:49 -0500

Totally think it would be a great idea, huge show of strength, unite all branches of the armed forces!

Response by PO1 Sam Elbe made Feb 27 at 2018 11:06 AM

PO1 Sam Elbe — Tue, 27 Feb 2018 11:06:41 -0500

I am a Vietnam Vet and in Vietnam we all wore GREENS, the same greens. Over the left pocket was a Tag Label stating what branch of service, the Marines also had USMC on the left pocket and us SEABEES had a SEEBEA on the left pocket. The seagoing Navy wore dungrees, without doubt the most confortable working uniforn the Navy ever had. I say go back to those days and save the monnnney for other item the Military needs.

Response by TSgt Michael Williamson made Feb 28 at 2018 12:29 PM

TSgt Michael Williamson — Wed, 28 Feb 2018 12:29:05 -0500

For the field, everyone should be in the same uniform with as little crap as possible. If you're wearing a different uniform or a lot of Boy Scout patches, any enemy may assume (frequently correctly) that you're an attached specialist (intel, recon, medic) and decide you're a choice target.

For dress, it would be more cost effective to have a standard cut in different colors, but is less critical. But we don't need new Class As every 5-10 years.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 2 at 2018 12:45 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 02 Mar 2018 12:45:38 -0500

I can support this for sure a huge problem we had when i was in the army was we deployed with some marsoc teams. They had expressed concerns over the fact we looked so different uniform wise, and it took so long to get matching stuff, it made missions much more hazardous when the enemy can easily pinpoint a target the wanted based off uniforms

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 20 at 2018 1:23 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 20 Mar 2018 13:23:01 -0400

Absolutley Yes.

Response by PFC Keli Opaleski made Mar 23 at 2018 7:19 AM

PFC Keli Opaleski — Fri, 23 Mar 2018 07:19:57 -0400

I fully support having the uniforms the same. I agree that it supports unity within the Nation.

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 25 at 2018 7:52 PM

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 25 Mar 2018 19:52:37 -0400

That makes way too much sense. It will never happen.

Response by SSG William Jackson made Mar 28 at 2018 12:40 PM

SSG William Jackson — Wed, 28 Mar 2018 12:40:33 -0400

very bad idea but probably ok with much of our snowflake generation. it would lower morale even lower

Response by 1SG Cj Grisham made Apr 1 at 2018 12:12 PM

1SG Cj Grisham — Sun, 01 Apr 2018 12:12:46 -0400

I think the different services have unique needs and the uniforms should reflect those needs. Creating a single uniform across the entire DOD wouldn't be a good idea in my opinion.

Response by SSG Erik McKinster made Apr 1 at 2018 1:51 PM

SSG Erik McKinster — Sun, 01 Apr 2018 13:51:36 -0400

Here's my 2¢... Every service needs to maintain their own their own service & dress uniforms. These uniforms are stepped in history & tradition. Their roles... But DOD meds to pull it together on Battle Dress Uniform/Utilities. Completely ridiculous!

Whoever decided that blues and greys in camouflage pattern deserves the same fate as dose the creator of the ACU... a sound beating. If a situation warrents a pattern, then the color scheme should resemble the terrain. And they should all be the same. Exceptions to this could include service specific details, such as Army name tappes, the Marine Corp EGA, etc.

I would also be a fan of the camo uniform only be used during training or deployment, and bringing back the utility/work uniform...

Response by CSM Jim Corrin made Apr 8 at 2018 8:25 AM

CSM Jim Corrin — Sun, 08 Apr 2018 08:25:01 -0400

Someone, somewhere is making a lot of money with all the uniform changes. As NCO's, We are supposed to be taking care of soldiers. Making soldiers constantly purchase new styles / patterns of uniforms is not taking care of them. One example is when the Army went from the cotton PT uniform that cost about $20 and was virtually indestructible to a PT ensemble that cost $125...Wonder whose brother-in-law owns the sweat shop? My favorite, the rip stop slant pocket uniform. I'm not a Velcro fan either.

Response by COL Thom Brooks made Apr 9 at 2018 6:50 AM

COL Thom Brooks — Mon, 09 Apr 2018 06:50:27 -0400

Yes, I would definitely support it. Would increase availability on all bases and increase Camaraderie.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 9 at 2018 1:41 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 09 Apr 2018 13:41:25 -0400

Yes.
1- It is fiscally responsible.
2-It makes PID of friendly adjacent units on the battlefield easier
3- It promotes a unified fighting force on air land and sea.
4- It makes logitics easier.

Response by PO2 Dale Brown made Apr 11 at 2018 7:41 PM

PO2 Dale Brown — Wed, 11 Apr 2018 19:41:04 -0400

I have always felt that sailors at sea should wear bright orange work uniforms. While serving on a can out of Pearl, a sailor fell overboard from a supply ship. The lookouts never saw him and he was declared lost at sea. How might that result been altered if he was wearing orange instead of dungarees?
Assuming of course, that he wasn’t helped over the side!

Response by CPT Tc Simmons made Apr 11 at 2018 10:49 PM

CPT Tc Simmons — Wed, 11 Apr 2018 22:49:43 -0400

We need a purple Army. The support branches should be able to support any branch of the military and there should be one logistics computer system as well as one budget system. The taxpayers are getting ripped off by the military industrial complex.

Response by SFC Jim Ruether made Apr 11 at 2018 11:06 PM

SFC Jim Ruether — Wed, 11 Apr 2018 23:06:09 -0400

If it saves the defense department money I am all for it. I suggested the same thing back in the 90's and it fell on death ears.

Response by Sgt William Collins made Apr 12 at 2018 1:03 PM

Sgt William Collins — Thu, 12 Apr 2018 13:03:26 -0400

No. You choose a particular military branch because of it's individual identity. Like it or not, the uniform you wear is a part of that and directly reflects the individual form of service it provides.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2018 10:31 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 12 Apr 2018 22:31:22 -0400

I think it would be good for two very simple reasons: 1) It would save taxpayer money on utility uniforms, and 2) would be symbolic of the fact that even though we are in different branches, we are all part of the same team. The Class A's and B's would be sufficient to show branch pride and a reason to wear them more often.

Response by MAJ Raúl Rovira made Apr 12 at 2018 11:57 PM

MAJ Raúl Rovira — Thu, 12 Apr 2018 23:57:32 -0400

It comes and goes.

I was a cadet when Secretary of Defence Hon. William Sebastian Cohen stated that all uniforms would be the same for all branches.

My opinion, make the uniform about the environment versus the branch.

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2018 2:46 AM

CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Apr 2018 02:46:52 -0400

Let’s make everyone in the Military look like each other without name tags and branch of service. Also Hi and Tight for everyone with no exceptions to gender. How’s that?

Response by Cpl Geoff Smith made Apr 16 at 2018 1:47 PM

Cpl Geoff Smith — Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:47:53 -0400

NO! Coast Guard, most of Navy and most of Air Force do NOT need cammies, but they are trendy.
The Army and Marine Corps have different ideas as to what their specific needs are.

Response by CWO2 James Mathews made Apr 18 at 2018 5:10 PM

CWO2 James Mathews — Wed, 18 Apr 2018 17:10:31 -0400

I cannot argue money since I do not have "all" the data/information relating to hand. However, I will speak to tradition. I believe that since each service has a different role to play in the defense of the US, and considering the price that can be paid by those who wear those uniforms, it is not too much to allow each force to have their own dress uniform, as a matter of personal pride, and the pride that the country has in those who wear it. In my view, if you ask someone to risk both life and/or limb for their nation, the nation can afford to honor that trust with the services own dress uniform. Secondly, I think it is VERY, VERY, unfortunate that servicemen appear in public, for whatever reason, in their work uniform. To me such is not the military I knew, or really want to know currently. I see no good reason why the old denim work uniform was not suitable for the Navy. It worked well for me for 20 years, and I knew some old WWII Chiefs who still wore it after making Chief! Special suits for special activities, submarines uniforms, for example, coveralls for dirty work, etc. may well be necessary and I do not argue with that which I am not more deeply involved in. I know that my views are old-fashioned, however, my view is to honor the services for what they do, and how they do it. Navy fights on the sea, Marines fight on the land and sea, Army invades and occupies, and the Air Force controls the skies. Let their Dress Uniforms reflect those tasks and risks! For that, privilege, I say spend a little more for the military honor and tradition, and a little less for our enemies overseas!

Response by SA Carrington Bibuld made Apr 21 at 2018 7:29 AM

SA Carrington Bibuld — Sat, 21 Apr 2018 07:29:14 -0400

For me it's a question of service pride. Having been a sailor, I find them unidentifiable. 'Cracker Jacks are a novelty now. Cammies make no sense on a ship unless a boat can get passed both radar and lookouts. (Of course, takers have crashed into our ships. I don't understand how that happened.)

Response by GySgt Andrew Gatzke made Apr 23 at 2018 7:54 PM

GySgt Andrew Gatzke — Mon, 23 Apr 2018 19:54:59 -0400

Hell no, that's what separates The MARINES from the other services is our uniforms. We love our uniforms, and would never give them up, Not for one uniform for all.

Response by SFC Randall Atchison made Apr 25 at 2018 8:54 PM

SFC Randall Atchison — Wed, 25 Apr 2018 20:54:41 -0400

30 years ago I suggested that the US make a drastic change in our military. Rename all the services so they fall under one name; The US Armed Forces, and wear one dress uniform with a shoulder board depicting rank. A cook serves one enlistment in the Army and could reenlist as a cook in another branch, say, the Navy. Never went anywhere.

Response by Cpl Rob Shaver made Apr 26 at 2018 3:26 PM

Cpl Rob Shaver — Thu, 26 Apr 2018 15:26:07 -0400

Saves the tax payer and back into the economy and GDP where needed? then by all means "uni" meaning ONE. Branch/unit and rank is all you need pinned/sewed on and coming from a Marine who loves our uniforms but to cut our DOD spending its time to cut...

Response by FN Robert Barrett made Apr 29 at 2018 9:42 PM

FN Robert Barrett — Sun, 29 Apr 2018 21:42:12 -0400

No I don’t support it. Each branch of service should have its own distinct uniform to promote pride in their branch.

Response by MSG John Duchesneau made Apr 29 at 2018 10:18 PM

MSG John Duchesneau — Sun, 29 Apr 2018 22:18:28 -0400

While over the years they have been many efforts at cross service standardization most of those efforts fail. Why? Because each branch of the service has its own unique culture and prioritization of values. The bottom line each branch is going to wear what it wants to wear. The Marines are never going to adopt a uniform from the Army because they want to look like Marines and not Soldiers. (Whom they consider an lower order of being.) The Air Force wants their own look so that's why they wear green boots when Army boots (for now) are tan or "coyote brown" (whatever that is).

Is the Navy going to abandon its white uniforms because none of the other services have them? No. Robert Redford made sure that the service dress "choker" whites for Navy officers would be around for another 100 years in the movie "The Way We Were" in 1973. (How many fashions which were cool in 1973 are still cool today? Plaid men's shirts? PLEAASSSEE!) The Marine Corps dress blues are probably the closest thing to fashion perfection ever invented and will NEVER change.

Sure, there's some room for standardization in the area of utility/combat uniforms. But, again, the problem is that one service doesn't want to be like the other.

Sooo.... After they spend 6 trillion dollars on the F-35 and have built only 100 of them before the cancel the program. They will realize that trying to build a "one size fits all" jet fighter doesn't work.

Let each service handle its own procurement and it will cost less in the long run.

Response by SMSgt Jeff Kyle made May 5 at 2018 10:41 PM

SMSgt Jeff Kyle — Sat, 05 May 2018 22:41:00 -0400

Combat uniforms could definitely be standardized across the services. For the Navy personnel onboard ships, something like the dungarees would seem to be functional.

Response by Conner Fleury made May 6 at 2018 8:25 PM

Conner Fleury — Sun, 06 May 2018 20:25:13 -0400

Yea im for it. I think it should be based off of where one is stationed. Ex someone stationed in green land or somewhere where theirs snow shouldnt have to wear the same uniform as someone in afganistan or some of the hotter places. Not sure if this is a thing already. On the other hand it would be hard to depict when branches are together whos who.

Response by PO2 Marcel Verrando made May 8 at 2018 11:49 AM

PO2 Marcel Verrando — Tue, 08 May 2018 11:49:25 -0400

Working uniforms should meet the needs and objectives of the mission, the Navy has a different mission on ship than the Army or Air Force has, there fore the same uniform may not be adequate. Dress uniforms must always be specific to the service or risk loss of identity and unit esprit de corps.

Response by CPO Mark B. made May 10 at 2018 3:27 PM

CPO Mark B. — Thu, 10 May 2018 15:27:21 -0400

The cost savings for a common working uniform would be huge

Response by MSgt Don Dobbs made May 12 at 2018 10:29 AM

MSgt Don Dobbs — Sat, 12 May 2018 10:29:43 -0400

Honestly years back the Army and the Air Force wore the same utility uniform, the only difference was the insignia and tags. The old OG fatigues. Dress uniforms should remain branch specific but utility camo or whatever should be standardized. In the long run it will save money, one uniform one source. Basic issue the same across the board.

Response by Cpl D L Parker made May 13 at 2018 6:48 PM

Cpl D L Parker — Sun, 13 May 2018 18:48:16 -0400

Just camouflage utilities, nothing else

Response by SSG Cam Prince made May 13 at 2018 7:33 PM

SSG Cam Prince — Sun, 13 May 2018 19:33:23 -0400

Agree. Former SSG, US Army.

Response by Lt Col John Culley made May 14 at 2018 1:29 AM

Lt Col John Culley — Mon, 14 May 2018 01:29:07 -0400

I oppose a common field uniform because the service have different roles a mission performed in different environment.

Response by SPC Steve Willis, PhD made May 15 at 2018 5:03 PM

SPC Steve Willis, PhD — Tue, 15 May 2018 17:03:19 -0400

Having a unified (pardon the pun!) digi-camo BDU for all branches would greatly simplify the acquisition and evaluation process and ultimately lower costs to the taxpayer and/or allow the funds otherwise wasted on each branch having a unique BDU be made available to other far-more-mission-critical items that may be lacking sufficient funding. That being said, the Marines and the Army get to pick, because these are the folks whose lives depend upon their uniforms having effective camouflage, wearability under extreme environmental conditions, and IR-supression. The problem is getting the Marines and the Army to set aside inter-service rivalries and agree on something which should be, in the final analysis, quite trivial.

Response by CPL Private RallyPoint Member made May 19 at 2018 3:27 PM

CPL Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 19 May 2018 15:27:56 -0400

I would be ok with it but ranks for the various branches should also be uniform. Otherwise there could very quickly be issues with people not showing proper respect /etiquette.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 27 at 2018 1:12 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 27 May 2018 01:12:23 -0400

Personally I would say No. Each Branch has jobs and training that they do/have and how you approach talking to them would be potentially different because of that. And within a branch of service having some differences helps us know who we are talking with

Response by SGT Harvey Putterbaugh made May 27 at 2018 9:29 AM

SGT Harvey Putterbaugh — Sun, 27 May 2018 09:29:37 -0400

No. Different materials, design, and color for different takes/assignments. Finally, tradition.

Response by SSG(P) Brian Kliesen made May 28 at 2018 9:50 AM

SSG(P) Brian Kliesen — Mon, 28 May 2018 09:50:36 -0400

The issue is not only the BDU, but the individual services have a number of Class A, B, and C uniforms, Mess Uniforms, Dress Uniforms, etc., that are a waste of resources. How many different versions of dress mess uniforms to the military have? Individual identity is important in the office, commonality on the battlefield, but why all the other extras? Simplify, simplify, simplify. The Marines got the MARPAT correct. The Army wasted billions on theirs. Imagine if those resources had been put into the VA? or housing? or family programs? or actual training?

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 31 at 2018 1:57 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 May 2018 01:57:23 -0400

I support a single uniform for all branches. We should have transitioned to a single uniform many years ago. There should also be a simple standard requirement for all branches. Hopefully, the next uniform board meeting will keep that in mind before submitting new policy changes.

Response by 1SG Patrick Sims made Jun 5 at 2018 7:37 AM

1SG Patrick Sims — Tue, 05 Jun 2018 07:37:04 -0400

The samne field uniform would be a common sense approach to this question. but as we all know, there are people in there military who aren't long on common sense. This having been said, the Marines may want to keep their locomotive engineer's has. Now that were on the subject of uniforms. It would be great if the Navy and Coast Guard got rid of their funny hats, and adopted the dark blue or white garrison cap other navies wear.

Response by Maj Marty Hogan made Jun 10 at 2018 6:01 PM

Maj Marty Hogan — Sun, 10 Jun 2018 18:01:42 -0400

Supposed to be one team one fight right?

Response by Cpl Mark Gray made Jun 10 at 2018 7:47 PM

Cpl Mark Gray — Sun, 10 Jun 2018 19:47:21 -0400

Nope I will Not support that. In 1964 Macnamara tried that
when he tried to save money on the Armed Forces. We were issued good boots that almost lasted 4 years and gave us the crappy ones that rotted out in 6 months, He took away our brown shoes and changed them to black He took away out Utilities and made us wear those god awful army one's made from much cheaper material. he took away our all Wool Green Winter service class A's, and replaced them with the cheap imitation green Officers were given in all it was a complete Failure.

No keep it the way it is, I joined the Marines not the army, air force of the friggin Navy.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 11 at 2018 9:01 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Jun 2018 09:01:04 -0400

I don't know about the rest of you but identifying rank in these things is hard. I do like that we are saving the taxpayers money. They've wasted thousands on cammo patterns over the last decade. It's become a fashion show. Also, I never understood the blue cammo. What background does that blend into? Iraq and Afghanistan are pretty much tan/sand colored. The multicam makes sense there.

Response by Cpl Scott McCarroll made Jun 11 at 2018 7:15 PM

Cpl Scott McCarroll — Mon, 11 Jun 2018 19:15:04 -0400

SFC Michael Jackson, MBA I am really ambivalent, however that being said,as a Marine, I am not for all the flash badges that are on the Army and Air Force BDU's. To my thinking it gives to much information should they be killed or captured. I'M HOME.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 11 at 2018 8:48 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Jun 2018 20:48:30 -0400

I liked the USMC way of "decorating" the field uniform (BDUs/Cammies/etc). When I first started it was just your rank. Then Desert Storm introduced Name Tapes. I am OK with that. All the Unit Patches, Flashes, etc I don't think we need. Make it simple, streamlined and uniform and I am all for it. Add to many patches and I start to gag. Name Tapes, Rank, US Flag, done. Better quality uniforms, less money spent on each branch proving theirs is best. Yep, yep, yep.

Response by 1SG Robert Rush made Jun 17 at 2018 8:55 AM

1SG Robert Rush — Sun, 17 Jun 2018 08:55:53 -0400

I am mixed on this, having said that, I could see it in a combat situation.

Response by CPO Leonard Orth made Jun 18 at 2018 1:49 AM

CPO Leonard Orth — Mon, 18 Jun 2018 01:49:34 -0400

No, I liked being easily able to tell the difference between the services. It was important to me.

Response by SFC Melvin Brandenburg made Jun 20 at 2018 2:12 PM

SFC Melvin Brandenburg — Wed, 20 Jun 2018 14:12:04 -0400

I think it would simplify things. I am in the Army, and I appreciate the similarities in rank insignia with the Marine Corps, not because I want to be one of them but because as a soldier it is just more stuff I have to keep track of to understand the rank insignia of other branches. I think a simplified supply chain would be a great cost savings to the services. I also think it makes sense from a "one team one fight" perspective.

Response by 1stLt Matthew Hicks made Jun 20 at 2018 4:22 PM

1stLt Matthew Hicks — Wed, 20 Jun 2018 16:22:02 -0400

It was when I was in. Standard woodland cammies and standard desert cammies. No issues

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 22 at 2018 2:29 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 22 Jun 2018 02:29:34 -0400

Maybe... However I will say as a Marine Veteran now Army Soldier I prefer the Marines Uniform.

Response by PO2 Richard Blakey made Jun 22 at 2018 11:55 PM

PO2 Richard Blakey — Fri, 22 Jun 2018 23:55:22 -0400

like canda

Response by CPT Jeff Porterfield made Jun 24 at 2018 1:50 PM

CPT Jeff Porterfield — Sun, 24 Jun 2018 13:50:38 -0400

The current BDU is OK for ground forces, but doesn't it seem odd to be wearing camouflage on the deck of a ship. And then again, pilots of all services have a distinct need for a different flame resistant uniform. And one thing I definitely do not like about the current army BDU is the placement of the rank insignia on the chest. I prefer its previous location ( still used by the other services ) on the collar, near the face of the person I am addressing, especially female personnel. And then there the uniforms with different color schemes.

On second thought, does a single BDU make sense?

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 24 at 2018 5:34 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 24 Jun 2018 17:34:41 -0400

The only way that would be okay is it wasn't broken into branches anymore. Let me elaborate say only one service and call it....... Bc for that to work without any bs anywhere is for all apft standards to be the same across the "uniform" and so on. Not knocking the army other branch but if everyone is wearing the same uniform the same things should be expected of them ALL. From D&C to APFT everything otherwise no.

Response by SSG Sandra Sutherland made Jun 29 at 2018 5:12 AM

SSG Sandra Sutherland — Fri, 29 Jun 2018 05:12:35 -0400

We all serve the same country, therefore; we should wear the same uniform. One country, one uniform!

Response by Alfred Perdue made Jun 29 at 2018 7:41 PM

Alfred Perdue — Fri, 29 Jun 2018 19:41:13 -0400

Common uniform is fine. Might need different boots shipboard.

Response by SSG Chris Tierney made Jul 3 at 2018 1:34 PM

SSG Chris Tierney — Tue, 03 Jul 2018 13:34:48 -0400

I started my Army career when all branches of service wore BDUs. We were one team, one fight. We need to stop the individualism and get back that “one team, one fight” mentality.

Response by SSgt Holden M. made Jul 3 at 2018 1:57 PM

SSgt Holden M. — Tue, 03 Jul 2018 13:57:29 -0400

I personally think that it's the smartest way to go. One uniform for all branches, besides the rank and the branch strip being different. You don't have each branch spending a bunch of money on different uniforms. Kind of like back when the BDU's were still around besides the Navy not doing much with them as far as I heard. I think all the years of all the branches playing around with their different color/pattern uniforms was pretty dumb to begin with.

Response by CPT Tim Homolak made Jul 7 at 2018 1:26 PM

CPT Tim Homolak — Sat, 07 Jul 2018 13:26:02 -0400

single uniform hurts esprit de corps. Been in multiple branches and very much identified with the uniform of the branch I was with at that given time.

Response by PO2 Rick Henderson made Jul 15 at 2018 10:42 AM

PO2 Rick Henderson — Sun, 15 Jul 2018 10:42:51 -0400

More of a question really. I have been out for quite some time now and I was just wondering. Is the uniform allowance still as woefully inadequate as it was in the 90's?

Response by CAPT Steve E. made Jul 16 at 2018 3:10 AM

CAPT Steve E. — Mon, 16 Jul 2018 03:10:07 -0400

I disagree with a 'one uniform' armed service. We have different services with different missions requiring different uniforms for one. A bit of a split between the services is not necessarily a bad thing when it comes to preserving the Republic as well.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 22 at 2018 10:07 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 22 Jul 2018 22:07:58 -0400

Maybe a more senior/seasoned vet can enlighten me. I don't understand why we don't use plain OD for working, field, etc, and draw theater specific camo for deployments.

Response by LCpl Roy McMillan made Jul 23 at 2018 1:33 AM

LCpl Roy McMillan — Mon, 23 Jul 2018 01:33:21 -0400

I whole heartedly disagree. A Marine or Army infantryman could too easily mistake some Airforce or Navy non-combat service member as an ally covering their six and end up overrun because of ill equipped and untrained personnel being in the wrong uniform.

For centuries the different uniform has identified who's who on a battlefield and give a quick visual.queue of who is where, and how they are doing.

Response by SSG Deron Santiny made Jul 24 at 2018 5:41 PM

SSG Deron Santiny — Tue, 24 Jul 2018 17:41:36 -0400

Yes, it would save lots of money on various uniforms as well as show uniformity. Although we all serve in separate branches and we all have our distinct jobs, the Uniformity in the same uniform would show others that we are all one Military. Many may disagree but, that is my opinion. If older Warriors remember, before the ACU came into effect for the Army, the Marine Corps had it's MARPAT and the Navy went with its Blue Camo and the Air Foce went with it's latest pattern, we all wore the BDU's.

Response by LCpl Michael Cappello made Jul 27 at 2018 1:00 PM

LCpl Michael Cappello — Fri, 27 Jul 2018 13:00:03 -0400

Absolutely NOT !!! Our Dress Blues represent much that has to do with our heritage. ie. the Leather Neck, the Blood Stripes, the Eagle Globe and Anchor, the wide belt to hold a saber (or cutlass back in the early days), etc... Why must it ALWAYS be some "grand unification" which is nothing more than a "blandification" and total disregard for heritage and tradition? Why does it seem to me that every one of these types of questions concerning history and tradition are usually asked by Army personnel. As far as I know, you people have a long and glorious history. Why would you want to make everything the same? Is it something that has been indoctrinated in to you which makes you just want to be one homogeneous mass? What about all the BS about the frigging berets? You couldn't be happy with the Green Berets. You then had to have the Rangers Red Beret. Now (like a bunch of whine ass school children who have to get a trophy just for participating) the Army had to authorize the damn Black Beret so no ones feelings would be hurt. Sorry if I offended anyone. I am just calling it like I see it.

Response by 1SG Dale Cantrell made Jul 27 at 2018 9:04 PM

1SG Dale Cantrell — Fri, 27 Jul 2018 21:04:55 -0400

Yes on the standard uniform in combat area to all US troops, no ally troops, no contractors, no translators , nothing but US troops

Response by MAJ John Douglas made Aug 5 at 2018 3:32 PM

MAJ John Douglas — Sun, 05 Aug 2018 15:32:43 -0400

No, we tried that before and it was unpopular and took away from service identity. Keep the different uniforms.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 7 at 2018 9:13 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 07 Aug 2018 21:13:12 -0400

Hell No/ Each branch should have it's own uniform and the navy does not need camo. Nothing was wrong with the old dungaree work uniform and the traditional navy uniform of white for summer and blues for winter is the best. The marines should not have the same as army and same for air force. We each did different jobs and were proud to wear the uniforms of our particular branch. Don't go stupid.

Response by CWO2 M J made Aug 11 at 2018 6:50 PM

CWO2 M J — Sat, 11 Aug 2018 18:50:01 -0400

It all needs to be the same. The dumbest decision the dod ever made was to allow the services to go buck wild with uniforms. Tri color cammies were cheap. When the corps went to digis the cost almost doubled. The services list the leverage they had with bulk ordering millions of uniforms. Also the navy and air force uniforms looked ridiculous and the army bdu was some of the worst quality military clothing ever made (the original one). As for the Marines, where do I begin. They made the collar ridiculous and curved so you couldn't even align you ensignia properly. The pockets all feel apart in what felt like weeks. If you took them to the field they were pretty much worthless in garrison because they would have so many holes in them. I could go on and on but the point is that if the services have joint leverage on a uniform that is common across al, it will be higher quality, cheaper, and really easy to find since the same uniform would be in every px, mcx, and aafes.

Response by SPC Jacob Hostetler made Aug 12 at 2018 10:33 AM

SPC Jacob Hostetler — Sun, 12 Aug 2018 10:33:08 -0400

One Uniform would be budget friendly, across the board, but keep are head gear and ranks system branch specific.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 15 at 2018 8:31 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 15 Aug 2018 08:31:06 -0400

At a minimum, all U.S. forces should wear the same type combat field uniform when deployed or mobilized, to make us look more United.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 16 at 2018 6:28 AM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Aug 2018 06:28:29 -0400

I seem to recall this conversation occurring at Congress back in 2014 where they said all services would be in the same uniform by 2018. The Marines aren't really fans and the Navy just created their Type 3's, so it appears the Army and Air Force are the only ones on board. I would absolutely support it. This identity crisis that we have gone through over the past decade has been pointless and costly. Remember when you could get a full uniform for under $60 ready to wear, minus the boots? That was the benefit of one uniform. It was cheap. It would be great to see all services adopt the OCP (or any pattern for that matter) but only time will tell if it will ever happen. One camouflage uniform for all and retain our independence with our dress uniforms.

Response by CPO Deborah Simmons made Aug 17 at 2018 12:50 PM

CPO Deborah Simmons — Fri, 17 Aug 2018 12:50:23 -0400

I would not suppose the idea. I like the uniqueness of each of the branches uniform. We don't have to look alike to support our country. I am a proud Retired Navy Chief Petty Officer. I love the Navy uniforms, especially the Khakis and Chiefs Dress Whites. Marines uniforms are awesome and sharp, love them. AF and Army, your uniforms are nice also. To go to one uniform is like having only one branch of the service. My opinion.

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 18 at 2018 4:58 AM

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 18 Aug 2018 04:58:33 -0400

No. Each branch has a specific mission and the uniform is tailored for their respective operational environment.

Response by CSM William Payne made Aug 19 at 2018 2:56 PM

CSM William Payne — Sun, 19 Aug 2018 14:56:39 -0400

For the Combat Uniform, this is doable. This is exactly what we did with the BDU / DCU uniforms. All the services wore the same combat uniform for years and modified them for their particular services. That made too much sense. Then somewhere down the line with the development of the ACU, all the other services didn't like it and therefore went off to develop their own combat uniform(s). It just adds to confusion on the battlefield. This color uniform, that color uniform, these color boots, those color boots, it’s redundant, rediculious and a waste of taxpayer money.

As for each services dress uniform, I do not agree that one uniform is best. The Marines by far have had that corner of the market covered for years. They don’t look like anybody else and nobody else looks like them and by tradition that should stay that way. The Navy is second with their own unique uniforms, though without all the pomp of the the Marine Uniform. The current Army and Air Force uniforms, specially before the issuing of the Army Service Uniform, looked almost identical, except made with different color cloth. I guess that is a carry over from when the Air Force was still the Army Air Corps.

So when I see you on the battlefield, all I really need to know is that you are an American combatant and I’m really not concerned with service you represent, unless there is a specific need, and we can easily figure that later if necessary. But if I’m watching a parade, I want to see each service stand out destictively, wearing uniforms representative of each service.

Response by MSgt Rick Chatwell made Aug 20 at 2018 9:35 AM

MSgt Rick Chatwell — Mon, 20 Aug 2018 09:35:21 -0400

yes for the love of god yes, and quit changing the goddamn thing every ten seconds. One working uniform with branch patches, and one individual dress uniforms per branch, cracker jacks for Navy, awesome marine Dress, awesome army dress, and air force bus driver suit. The money save would be insane! not to mention some staffer in DC would have to find a better use of their time!

Response by Sgt William Turner made Aug 23 at 2018 2:09 PM

Sgt William Turner — Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:09:30 -0400

combat uniforms are one thing. all being the same makes id easier. however formal uniforms should be traditional and different. Pomp and circumstance should show in the variations of traditional uniforms.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 26 at 2018 8:29 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 26 Aug 2018 20:29:25 -0400

Well, I think it is a good idea, except for fellows on ships... That should be different based on their main operational area.

Response by MAJ Raúl Rovira made Sep 16 at 2018 10:46 PM

MAJ Raúl Rovira — Sun, 16 Sep 2018 22:46:58 -0400

In the mid 90s BDUs were standardized across the services under Defense Secretary William Cohen. Then it changed. And here we are today. Is this FRAGO #8, #9... I can't keep up.

Regardless, we should wear the uniform based on the environment we are going to be in.

Response by PO1 Joseph Glennon made Sep 19 at 2018 2:11 AM

PO1 Joseph Glennon — Wed, 19 Sep 2018 02:11:06 -0400

With a few caveats and rules, *perhaps*.
Dress uniform? No.
Working uniform? Yes - with the following caveats:
It must be able to fulfill the requirements of the working uniforms of all branches that it's replacing.
It must be fireproof.
It must have enough pockets for the various jobs performed by the men and women wearing it.
It must be able to be fashioned into a flotation device.
It must present a "smart" appearance.
It must be the *final* change of uniform, so that our military personnel can stop wasting money on new uniforms every time some former "brass" gets a job with a clothing manufacturer.

Response by CPL Barrie Osborne made Sep 20 at 2018 10:20 PM

CPL Barrie Osborne — Thu, 20 Sep 2018 22:20:09 -0400

I fully agree with SSG Scott Brady. He has really nailed it! Your two cents is worth a million. Good to see some common sense prevailing.

Response by PO1 Kevin Dougherty made Sep 20 at 2018 11:47 PM

PO1 Kevin Dougherty — Thu, 20 Sep 2018 23:47:46 -0400

No, the needs of the different services are all unique to some degree or another. For the Navy and USCG for example, fire is a much greater hazard than catching a bullet because you were spotted. Uniforms need to be fire retardant, but for most units, cammo is just plain silly. The USCG also has many small boat units, where the ability to move quickly and freely in tight spaces without snagging is important. They also have to interface with the public in a First Responder/LEO capacity on a daily basis. Having said that, when deployed CG units forward deployed such as the personnel in Afghanistan, should and do wear the BDUs of the units they are deployed with.

Response by Sgt Mark Tarte made Sep 27 at 2018 12:54 PM

Sgt Mark Tarte — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 12:54:55 -0400

It was already done, in the 1960s to late 1970s, fatigues were universal as was the footgear. Head gear was different for Marines and those sailors who wore the OD fatigues. But you could still tell Soldiers from Airmen and Marines from Sailors. I've been watching my tax dollars for the past 20 years being wasted, especially by the AF, Army and Navy on uniform changes that mean absolutely nothing but wasted tax dollars.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 2 at 2018 2:42 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 02 Oct 2018 02:42:06 -0400

Only a standard utility uniform, dress should stay the same.

Response by GySgt Keith Rininger made Oct 7 at 2018 11:40 PM

GySgt Keith Rininger — Sun, 07 Oct 2018 23:40:26 -0400

Not NO, but HELL NO. I became a Marine because I wanted to be one of the elite, not one of the many. I respect the other services, but they are not Marines. Keep the uniforms seperate.

Response by SFC Bob Johnson made Oct 8 at 2018 10:44 AM

SFC Bob Johnson — Mon, 08 Oct 2018 10:44:45 -0400

Absolutely, the different branches have shared a common uniform throughout the past (e.g. OD green and the BDU are two that come to mind) and though I don’t know why the services choose to kill their budgets by choosing a different uniform pattern, I feel that it’s a great idea. First, from an economic standpoint, the overall DOD budget would be reduced (albeit marginally) as only one uniform pattern is used. Secondly, from a logistical view, it would make it easier for the troops who are co-stationed or stationed remotely to be able to purchase new uniform items and AAFES clothing and sales stores don’t have to stock as much merchandise. However, with the ability to order anything through online stores, troops have an advantage.

Response by Capt Robert Lee made Oct 12 at 2018 12:06 PM

Capt Robert Lee — Fri, 12 Oct 2018 12:06:05 -0400

Absolutely not. Each branch has a unique and specific role and should be recognized for that.

Response by Maj Ted Mc Neel Sr. made Oct 14 at 2018 10:47 PM

Maj Ted Mc Neel Sr. — Sun, 14 Oct 2018 22:47:09 -0400

Maybe so for utilities and Infantry Combat Gear, but Marines will never give up Dress Blues for Officers, Staff NCOs, and Enlisted Personnel, and Evening Dress and Mess Dress uniforms for Officers.

Response by SSG Jess Peters made Oct 15 at 2018 2:15 PM

SSG Jess Peters — Mon, 15 Oct 2018 14:15:55 -0400

Every service has a different and unique function. As such each service has a different uniform that people can identify with.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 18 at 2018 1:01 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:01:41 -0400

I support it for the simple fact that a common field uniform is cheaper for taxpayers.

Response by Cpl Ryan McGrath made Oct 19 at 2018 12:46 AM

Cpl Ryan McGrath — Fri, 19 Oct 2018 00:46:42 -0400

Distinguishing between work, utility, and combat uniforms that's on each branch. What one person see's on deployment or in combat should look the same or close to it. Set a handful of color arrangements for environment with the same pattern for broad use. Like the analog that was previously used nearly universally. Name and service tapes obviously will be different. The breast pocket should also show service branch so people can see what's what when not wearing a flak jacket or other armor. Rank on collar and center for armor with a background that shows rank clearly. No guessing how many rockers at distance. Each service chooses stitched, Velcro, pinned, or other for application of rank. What you wear on your head and what is on your breast pocket is a distinguishing factor.

Response by SSG Wayne Work made Oct 30 at 2018 1:40 AM

SSG Wayne Work — Tue, 30 Oct 2018 01:40:59 -0400

Yes, I think all services should have the same field uniform. But in gearson, especially people who see a lot of persnnel should wear some kind of Class B uniform. Something easy to work in. Maybe just a white or tan top with OD green pants which include females. Since so many women want to integrate in a multi cultural military, there should be no dresses and the cap/hats they wear are the same. I also do not like the new female hair dress code. Again, they want to play the game to the letter that play it all the way. I AM not trying to a smart butt but its all about cleanliness and the ability to wear their hellment correctly. I was a 1SGT in Europe and was one of my biggest issues was the women could not get their helmet on corectlt or their head gear. It all comes down to safety. Also when we replied to Gulf War I we got emerdion heaters for a bit of a hot shower. The troops spent hours putting them together and getting them to lite. The next day, all of a sudden all the females (we only had about 6-8) cam Dow with either body lice or crabs. I can't remember but they got to was their clothes all nice and neat while our shut was funkey since we had limited water, no buckets to was in and because it was so cold the soap did not come out of the cloths and made several males whith charging, jock itch and rashes on their shin. Since I came from a combat Div (3rd ID) we lived gone one the boarder. I knew that a little bottle of dawn would was you cloths and come out without using a lot of waster. RANT ENDED. hope some learns from it,
Cheers fellow troopers and God bless all active duty soldier, especially the ones still deployed.

Response by SFC James Beason made Nov 1 at 2018 1:40 AM

SFC James Beason — Thu, 01 Nov 2018 01:40:01 -0400

I agree with SFC Jackson

Response by LTC Zachary Hubbard made Nov 2 at 2018 3:50 PM

LTC Zachary Hubbard — Fri, 02 Nov 2018 15:50:26 -0400

I would support having common utility and physical fitness uniforms only. Don't touch the other uniforms. They represent our heritage and history, which are important for building esprit de corps.

Response by SSG Howard Fair made Nov 5 at 2018 4:46 PM

SSG Howard Fair — Mon, 05 Nov 2018 16:46:23 -0500

It seems that they change for the hell of it also, I can see different dress uniforms but somebody is making money off of this

Response by Sgt Joseph Cavalari made Nov 14 at 2018 6:35 PM

Sgt Joseph Cavalari — Wed, 14 Nov 2018 18:35:05 -0500

No !! The enemy has to be able to identify Marine Corps grunts in the field and be prepared to get their asses kicked whether they run or not..

Response by SCPO Carlie Brand Sr made Nov 24 at 2018 10:50 AM

SCPO Carlie Brand Sr — Sat, 24 Nov 2018 10:50:57 -0500

I am 30 year retired Navy. Over the years the uniform has changed many times. I have one thought on this. If we change the uniform then the Service should pay for the ORIGINAl outfit, keeping up with the uniform board changes cost a fortune. Contrary to popular belief, the uniform is to keep one from shooting their buddy, not to hide oneself from the enemy. If we could put our enemy in a look alike uniform we could beat them in a day. Knowing who to shoot is the problem. Friend or foe, if the enemy looks like civilians who do we shoot? Special OPS in special conditions need special uniforms. Durable, comfortable uniforms is what gets us through a hard day.

Response by SSgt Freddie Jackson made Nov 30 at 2018 9:29 AM

SSgt Freddie Jackson — Fri, 30 Nov 2018 09:29:31 -0500

I don't like it, there is a reason why we wear different uniforms because, we are different branches of services. The Marine Corps used to set that standard, but after Desert Storm, we started wearing name tapes, like the Army. We as Marines all new who we were.

Response by MSgt Dickerson MacLeod made Jan 20 at 2019 12:33 PM

MSgt Dickerson MacLeod — Sun, 20 Jan 2019 12:33:09 -0500

To be blunt, no. If I wanted to look like a grunt I would have joined the Army!

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 22 at 2019 3:50 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Jan 2019 15:50:46 -0500

Another dumbass post
Leave everything alone .
Bunch of good idea fairies

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 22 at 2019 4:12 PM

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Jan 2019 16:12:37 -0500

We all had BDUs when I joined.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 22 at 2019 7:15 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Jan 2019 19:15:35 -0500

The reason alot of service men and woman choose a branch is the different uniforms.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 22 at 2019 10:17 PM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Jan 2019 22:17:44 -0500

No, its stupid. Each branch has their own traditions and history. And their uniforms let them show those off. Personally i would not want to look like any other branch, because my branch is the best. I do not want to look like a shit bag

Response by Lt Col George Roll made Jan 22 at 2019 10:19 PM

Lt Col George Roll — Tue, 22 Jan 2019 22:19:48 -0500

Cammies yes, we did that back in the 70s. Mac Namara tried to standardise all utility uniforms, boots etc. It didn't last. Dress uniforms should not be standardized they represent traditions and that is important to maintain.

Response by LCpl Darrell J. Farley Jr. made Jan 23 at 2019 2:51 PM

LCpl Darrell J. Farley Jr. — Wed, 23 Jan 2019 14:51:33 -0500

My posts here are in no way trying to disrespect the Army or Navy (the Air Force a little). But we know the Army will be buying the lions share and won’t/don’t care what the other Branches think. I remember when some quizz kid at the puzzle palace thought Marines would look good in some gay French hat! But that got a big NO from the Enlisted and Officers. Don’t limit your whole force to one size fits all in utility uniforms. The Woodlands worked great in Germany or France, not so well on Okinawa is Guam (Sweat factor 100+). And they really sucked in 29 Palms!!! Just think before you want make a bunch of Stepford Service Members!

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 23 at 2019 3:06 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Jan 2019 15:06:14 -0500

Why would we? The Marine Corps adopted the MCCUU in 2002 and it’s still the same uniform I’m wearing today. With our force modernization efforts it would be fiscally irresponsible to adopt a new uniform we don’t need.

Response by SFC Paul Tramp made Jan 23 at 2019 3:19 PM

SFC Paul Tramp — Wed, 23 Jan 2019 15:19:56 -0500

I think alas branches should be in the same uniform which would vary based on theater of operation ex desert oractic uniform make no sense in Europe. Keep distinctive markings per branch. Some branches are more high priority targets. No need to give the enemy too much information.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 23 at 2019 3:21 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Jan 2019 15:21:16 -0500

They woodlands were pretty standard across the board.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 23 at 2019 5:29 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Jan 2019 17:29:48 -0500

Negative.
The traditions and core values of each branch share the same heritage but not the same role in our history. Each branch has forged this country in their own way but still together as one. This allows SM’s to carry that pride in whichever branch they volunteered in. Separate uniforms doesn’t mean we’re not on the same team but represents the history of sailors and soldiers very unique roles in our country. The separation provides pride in our branch, pride in branch traditions, respect to the ones who served in our branch before us, and adds a little healthy competition with other branches. Seperate uniforms also provides awareness to the public especially during joint operations. To visually see branches working together is priceless. One team one fight is a mentality that does not stop at the uniform you are wearing.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 23 at 2019 6:41 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Jan 2019 18:41:04 -0500

It used to be before these new patterns came out and we all wore BDUs, so why not... the only thing that was different was head gear... the DoD wastes more tax payer money on stupid uniform ideas when thay R&D money can go to better equipment, but of course, so POG that sits in an office comes up with stupid ideas to waste money...

Response by Sgt Tom Agostini made Jan 24 at 2019 12:04 PM

Sgt Tom Agostini — Thu, 24 Jan 2019 12:04:58 -0500

Absolutely not. People join the various branches of service for a multitude of reasons. Those reasons are as expressive as the individuals. By differentiating the uniforms, we allow all of those entering each branch to be immediately identifiable by, and take pride in the uniform of their CHOSEN branch.
Thomas Agostini,
SGT., USMC

Response by SFC Mamerto Perez made Jan 25 at 2019 7:30 AM

SFC Mamerto Perez — Fri, 25 Jan 2019 07:30:17 -0500

Yes it is cheaper

Response by A1C M Gordon made Jan 25 at 2019 10:05 AM

A1C M Gordon — Fri, 25 Jan 2019 10:05:07 -0500

Not only HELL NO... to the HELL NO

Response by LCpl Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 29 at 2019 7:11 PM

LCpl Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Jan 2019 19:11:48 -0500

No because there is certain traditions and battles behind why uniforms (dress blues) are worn it might just be the marine in me but I think this is the dumbest idea.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 30 at 2019 7:41 AM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Jan 2019 07:41:19 -0500

I think this is a dumb idea. I’d rather get admin separated from the marines than wear any other uniform. We have a uniform that has worked for well over 10 years and I do not plan on looking like anyone else.

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 31 at 2019 10:33 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Jan 2019 22:33:33 -0500

We all had the same uniform until 2001 when the Marines went digital.

Response by SPC Robert Coventry made Feb 25 at 2019 2:06 AM

SPC Robert Coventry — Mon, 25 Feb 2019 02:06:49 -0500

No I think all need their own identity SGT Joseph Cardenas CSM Michael Boom SPC Margaret Higgins COL Mikel J. Burroughs CPL Dave Hoover SMSgt Minister Gerald A. "Doc" Thomas LTC Stephen F. LTC Stephen C. SPC Douglas Bolton CPT Chris Loomis SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth CW5 Jack Cardwell

Response by Sgt Michael Clifford made Mar 5 at 2019 6:27 PM

Sgt Michael Clifford — Tue, 05 Mar 2019 18:27:56 -0500

What are we talking about here? Field uniforms i.e. utilities/Cammie's or dress uniforms? A uniform Cammie's design might work as long as the Marines could retain their distinctive cover design and wouldn't be required to fill their sleeve with patches. I never understood what the Navy was trying to blend into with the blue Cammie's.
Dress uniforms? A resounding NO WAY. The Marines dress and class A's have remained more or less the same since the early 20th century and that is just fine. All those pins and patches on Army uniforms never impressed me much. I miss the summer service tropical and khaki's and the officers whites. Tough to keep clean and squared away, especially aboard ship but sharp as hell.
The Army seems never to be happy with their appearance. How many uniform changes have they had since 1945 and now they are going back to that design. Lots of money wasted.

Response by MSG John Wirts made Mar 11 at 2019 5:54 PM

MSG John Wirts — Mon, 11 Mar 2019 17:54:27 -0400

I was in more or less universal field or utility uniforms for a good part of my career. The fatigue uniforms had generally the same patters with the Marines having a map pocket in their version. When we went to the newer fatigues with the thicker buttons, the marines lost their map pocket the Air Force lost their black steel buttons. Then the services went to woodland camo and we were all still the same, to differentiate themselves from the other services they rolled their sleeves differently. I was in the Air National Guard for 6 years I went into the salvage store at McClellan AFB and bought a surplus Air Force Arctic Parka. My brother was serving as a submariner and on deck watch was freezing. He called me and asked me to send my surplus Air Force Arctic Parka. I did so and the entire crew used it on deck watch. He told me he wished he had the stock number for that parka. I told him in was on the label on the back of the collar, he ordered it and the requisition got up to base supply and it was rejected as not authorized for navy. Too bad the best item can not be used for all services!!!

Response by CPO John Krawczyk made Mar 15 at 2019 2:27 PM

CPO John Krawczyk — Fri, 15 Mar 2019 14:27:40 -0400

No each branch of service should have it's own identity. I don't like the new Navy BDU's. Sailors should be wearing dungarees. Unless they are E-7 and above. The only people in the Navy that should be wearing camouflage uniforms and those that are in a special unit such as EOD, Dive and SEALs also HM's stationed with the Marines.

Response by SGT Juan Robledo made Mar 15 at 2019 11:05 PM

SGT Juan Robledo — Fri, 15 Mar 2019 23:05:29 -0400

I believe that's a bad idea, each branch has its own identity, why screw around and try to come up with one set of uniform for the entire military, leave each branch to wear what that branch wants or allow them to design their uniform period

Response by PO1 Tom Follis made Mar 19 at 2019 6:53 PM

PO1 Tom Follis — Tue, 19 Mar 2019 18:53:18 -0400

No. Do we only have one military? NO I don’t wanna wear yours and you’d look pretty funny in mine. Only real sailors were made to wear the cracker jack

Response by SP5 Terry Adams made Mar 20 at 2019 8:28 AM

SP5 Terry Adams — Wed, 20 Mar 2019 08:28:42 -0400

no don't think this should even be a question. each service should have it own. unless you want to group all into one service. then you can have one uniform.

Response by SP5 Terry Adams made Mar 20 at 2019 8:30 AM

SP5 Terry Adams — Wed, 20 Mar 2019 08:30:16 -0400

no all should remain as is. if you want the same uniforms then just bunch all into one service. why try to have unit moral then make them all look the same?

Response by LT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2019 1:53 PM

LT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Apr 2019 13:53:43 -0400

I have been in two branches now(Army then Navy). Frankly, I think it would work and save money. I know that the Navy would still have to switch to coveralls while deployed at sea. but for garrison, I would prefer a tactical uniform. The Navy has switched to NWU type III which is the woodland uniform. It's actually pretty good uniform in the field. I know some people think it's odd for the navy to have a woodland uniform BUT the reality is that we are more and more likely to deal with an active shooter and a attacks on a Naval base a lot more theses days. When/If that happens I want to a green uniform to hide in, not a blue one. Besides, once you step off the ship and take off those coveralls you are in a green environment just like the army and marine corps.

Response by Sgt Mark Tarte made May 29 at 2019 10:42 PM

Sgt Mark Tarte — Wed, 29 May 2019 22:42:48 -0400

Back in the 1960s, McNamara instituted a standardization of utility uniforms and foot gear. This lasted through the 70s when I served. The Marines still had their. EGA on the fatigue pocket and their utility cover. The only was you knew someone was what branch was by their hat and their rank. It worked then, it will work now. Except for the Marines, the services seem to want to change their uniforms yearly. Just a waste of money.

Response by LTC Andy Liebeknecht made May 30 at 2019 8:15 AM

LTC Andy Liebeknecht — Thu, 30 May 2019 08:15:04 -0400

No. The lack of branch identification has become an issue when conducting operations. That branch within the branch of service signafies a SME in that field, removing that branch has led some to believe that they are a knowledgable as the next. This causes improper training and planning. Secondly, the rank having been moved and adjusted so many times has led to a decrease in respect for the higher ranks. Combining all military under one specific uniform would degrade and harm the professionalism of the branches as the Army has already seen by taking the Army branches off of uniforms.

Response by PO2 Stan Doze made Jun 2 at 2019 7:40 PM

PO2 Stan Doze — Sun, 02 Jun 2019 19:40:50 -0400

Consolidate all services into one military branch. Same uniforms, ranks. Save tons of money and communication would improve

Response by Ethan Kessler made Jun 3 at 2019 1:32 AM

Ethan Kessler — Mon, 03 Jun 2019 01:32:37 -0400

Personally i think there should still be some separation in uniform. Because we aren’t all soldiers its bad enough to be called your brothers name you dont need to look like him too.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2019 2:34 AM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 03 Jun 2019 02:34:16 -0400

No, no one in the Marine Corps wants to share the same uniform as a solider. We earn our EGA and are known for being the best fighting force. We want to be distinct, and not be confused as just a military member. It’s in our DNA to be different, better, then the rest of the branches.

Response by LCpl Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2019 7:59 AM

LCpl Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 03 Jun 2019 07:59:13 -0400

I beleive that we could switch to a uniform that everyone could wear, however, I believe that it needs to be a good solid camouflage design, such as Multi-cam, Kryptek, or a Marpat like design. We need something for arid grasslands, desert, and the woods. (Artic is more of a speciality) Multi-Cam rates very well compared to even the Armys Scorpian pattern and would be a great fit for the military, add the desert Multi-Cam and you'll be good to go for a good set of Camis that in all honesty, I could get behind. But it needs to be done tastefully and with a lot of help from the combat oreinted MOS's. You cant have a guy on a computer type something up and think itll work, it takes experiance and a level of feild knowledge only gathered by being down range that you can get understanding of what works and what doesnt. That's my two cents, hope everyone understands my point of view on the matter.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2019 9:25 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 03 Jun 2019 09:25:47 -0400

The Marines MARPAT camouflage had been proven as the most effective design. The army's new multicam is a nice uniform, the issue lies with the idea that one uniform can meet the needs of all environments. Using different patterns for different reasons is the most logical. That said the cut of the army uniform is more superior to the other contenders, especially the larger pockets. The reason why they started having Navy & AF wear the army uniforms while deployed was they were augmented to support army units. So it made sense to wear one uniform for many reasons. Not to mention seeing the AF running around Afghanistan wearing grey tiger striped uniform was nothing short of ridiculous.

Response by Cpl Kurt Huber made Jun 3 at 2019 4:31 PM

Cpl Kurt Huber — Mon, 03 Jun 2019 16:31:11 -0400

No, not at all.
Quit trying to be Marines.
Earn the title if you want our uniform, discipline, esprit de corps and lineage.
A "common uniform" designates everyone as the same and as one military and well, frankly, it just ISN'T SO!

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2019 8:51 PM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 03 Jun 2019 20:51:49 -0400

Why have everyone wear the same uniform? Beat the purpose of the different branches

Response by Devon Bingham made Jun 4 at 2019 12:51 AM

Devon Bingham — Tue, 04 Jun 2019 00:51:27 -0400

Hell no, as a marine I take pride in the uniform I wear it sets ya apart from other branches of service and honestly other uniforms look like shit

Response by PO3 Zachary Olack made Jun 4 at 2019 2:22 AM

PO3 Zachary Olack — Tue, 04 Jun 2019 02:22:05 -0400

No. There should be a base working uniform for the Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps with individual service tags/rank (like BDUs used to be in the 80's and 90's, and a base working uniform for the Navy and Coast Guard, and a base uniform for the Space Corps.

Each service should have it's own unique dress uniform, with variants for Flight and Space service within the branch. Army and Air Force should be identical dress with a variance of color, green for Army, blue for Air Force.

Response by SP6 Peter Kreutzfeldt made Jun 4 at 2019 10:32 AM

SP6 Peter Kreutzfeldt — Tue, 04 Jun 2019 10:32:41 -0400

We spend way too much money on changing BDUs. It would appear they change color, pattern and cut every couple of months. That will not make them better soldiers

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2019 9:31 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 04 Jun 2019 21:31:06 -0400

Absolutely not. We do way too many different operations in different environments. That's why for the most part Marine Corps has jungle and desert uniforms. Velcro sucks and after time it wears and is no longer serviceable. I have uniforms I have had for 8 years and are still serviceable due to very minimal velcro. And my last take is like others have mentioned. Our uniforms give us pride. When people see me in my cammies they can say hey he's a Marine. Not hey there is a guy in the military. I am proud to be a Marine. I didnt join to look and be like everyone else. And for the most part most other branches have horrible military appearance and I know myself and many others would not want to be a part of the other services standards.

Response by SSgt Todd Garwood made Jun 4 at 2019 11:11 PM

SSgt Todd Garwood — Tue, 04 Jun 2019 23:11:14 -0400

No.Because how can we tell which branch is which.It is like an Army Colonel giving orders to a Marine,Vise Versa.As Marines a Universal Uniform would mean saying bye bye to our iconic and famous Dress Blues.How and who would we know take our orders from.The only exception is Joint Strategic Operations Command where we take orders from multiple branchs.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2019 11:47 AM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 05 Jun 2019 11:47:01 -0400

I semi support it the OCP uniform started in the army and since the air force has adopted the uniform.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 6 at 2019 4:06 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 06 Jun 2019 16:06:45 -0400

Not at all. I prefer to stay having the best looking uniform in the whole military, not downgrading to some army type uniform.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 9 at 2019 6:31 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Jun 2019 18:31:48 -0400

Each service should have a different uniform. It promotes pride in service. and those in that uniform are part of that team. However, since you ask, I do not approve of the periodic dress uniform change that goes on in each military branch every so often. I think the return to the Pinks & Greens by the Army is just a waste of money that can be used elsewhere. Work/Camo uniform changes I can understand because of the constant change of technology on the battlefield. However, the dress uniform is nothing more than a make money scheme for certain suppliers. I think if we follow the money we could find out who is friends with who in our procurement system. If someone tells me this constant change promotes pride in service, I say BS. Just saying.

Response by SGT Nickolas Ortiz made Jun 13 at 2019 9:41 PM

SGT Nickolas Ortiz — Thu, 13 Jun 2019 21:41:56 -0400

No I wouldn't. Having a ACU multicam uni in the Navy just doesn't make sense on a ship. So you have one exemption. Having the Air Force flight suits as ACUs, that doesn't make sense either... so a second exemption. The Marines have a tradition of different head gear, which I support. Not a Marine, but they look sharp. Each different branch has tradition and should keep that tradition alive. If not, then just have one military branch...

Response by SP5 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 15 at 2019 2:08 PM

SP5 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 15 Jun 2019 14:08:36 -0400

Well, you know what they say about opinions!

Response by PO1 William Van Syckle made Jun 15 at 2019 10:23 PM

PO1 William Van Syckle — Sat, 15 Jun 2019 22:23:53 -0400

I support a common field uniform like the old OD green fatigues or the BDU’s. They should be worn on base only and not in Walmart or a restaurant or on a commercial aircraft. Field uniform are not for the general public. With everyone wearing the same field uniform, we would have uniformity and think of the cost savings. In the field, you see that uniform and you know that person is US Forces. No mistakes.....

Response by SrA Brett Stratton made Jun 16 at 2019 4:27 PM

SrA Brett Stratton — Sun, 16 Jun 2019 16:27:11 -0400

I'm all for it. Other branches may give each other shit time and again, but there's no arguing that the military as a whole is one cohesive unit. Our rank systems are diverse enough where we can tell when we're dealing with a Soldier or Airman or whatever else. Cost-wise, it'd probably be cheaper to keep everything to one standard BDU and/or dress blues anyway.

Response by SP5 Gary Smith made Jun 19 at 2019 10:11 AM

SP5 Gary Smith — Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:11:24 -0400

No. I would want to be able to distinguish between Air Force and military.

Response by SSgt James Peacock made Jun 19 at 2019 5:00 PM

SSgt James Peacock — Wed, 19 Jun 2019 17:00:01 -0400

For those on land maybe but the Navy??? Except for those who serve on land in combat.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 19 at 2019 10:02 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 19 Jun 2019 22:02:28 -0400

BDUs just sayin

Response by SFC Quinn Chastant made Jun 20 at 2019 2:58 PM

SFC Quinn Chastant — Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:58:55 -0400

Currently the Airforce has adopted the Army's current style camo pattern uniform. Would it make more sense for the Navy to adopt as well? Probably as the Seabees have a different one again from the Marines. and the Marines currently have 2 camo patterns they utilize. Perhaps the better question would be should the Navy and Marine Corps have a specific standard land duty uniform, and the Army and Airforce their specific land duty uniform. Thus reducing the number of options from about the current 5 uniforms to three total.

Response by LCpl Andrew Mondejar made Jun 20 at 2019 3:30 PM

LCpl Andrew Mondejar — Thu, 20 Jun 2019 15:30:23 -0400

No, Marine Corps has 3 things on their uniform; rank on collar, U.S.Marines and last name on chest. The army gets colorful as hell with their patches and covers. If everyone wants to copy the Marine Corps fine, but I think keeping it barebones is the best. Also ranking would be different. The Marines have too much pride to compare themselves with any other E3 lol

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 20 at 2019 6:28 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:28:18 -0400

The Marines will never give up their digitals.

Response by Lt Col Bill Fletcher made Jun 20 at 2019 6:56 PM

Lt Col Bill Fletcher — Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:56:48 -0400

Standard BDUs or utility ground uniform makes sense. Flying utility uniforms are already similar. Shipboard uniforms certainly could be different as they may have fire retardant requirements, too.

Response by Cpl Brandon Edwards made Jun 21 at 2019 11:20 AM

Cpl Brandon Edwards — Fri, 21 Jun 2019 11:20:37 -0400

For all except the Corps...needs to be a noticeable difference for a variety of reasons.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 21 at 2019 12:49 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Jun 2019 12:49:04 -0400

Back in the olden days, we had these things called “BDU’s.” You could get them almost anywhere, and all you had to do was put on a name tape and service tape, or an appliqué EGA on the pocket for Marines.

We were happy. We focused on training to kill Reds, then.

Response by Sgt Phil Quintana made Jun 21 at 2019 8:22 PM

Sgt Phil Quintana — Fri, 21 Jun 2019 20:22:10 -0400

It looks good on paper and the financial and logistics benefits would be impossible to argue with...here it comes...BUT, I can't see a "one size fits all" uniform. For Army and Marine units, yes, our missions are similar. What benefit would a sailor derive from a woodland cammo uniform aboard an aircraft carrier? How would an air force jet mechanic benefit from a desert cammo uniform while working on a silver or gray fighter? Y es, some MOSs might benefit like the para rescue guys or FACs but the force as a whole? Not so much.
As for making rank insignia style and placement uniform?!? I can see the headlines now, "The American military has just declared war...on EACH OTHER"!!! Just look how different everyone does it. The Marines; enlisted, black metal chevrons on the collar, officers, colored metal hardware on the collar. Army; all ranks, black embroidered devices on a little square placed like a target at center mass. Air Farce; enlisted, full sized chevrons on the sleeve, officers, embroidered colored devices on the collar. Navy...well they do their ow

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 21 at 2019 10:25 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Jun 2019 22:25:06 -0400

I’ve been saying this for awhile.... a common uniform, I say the marines dessert and woodland uniforms (they need to bring back the option to wear both)

https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/should-the-military-go-back-to-the-old-camouflage-uniforms?urlhash=4670343

Should the military go back to the old camouflage uniforms? | RallyPoint

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 22 at 2019 4:25 AM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Jun 2019 04:25:45 -0400

As long as its multi-cam I’m down.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 22 at 2019 9:25 AM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Jun 2019 09:25:39 -0400

Absolutley not

Response by SN Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 22 at 2019 9:35 PM

SN Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Jun 2019 21:35:30 -0400

I would support this. However I think Navy personnel should still be able to wear command ball caps like their ship, squadron, activity, etc, as well as an 8 point. 8 points for Marines with EGA as well.

Response by SPC Ryan Galasso made Jun 23 at 2019 10:48 AM

SPC Ryan Galasso — Sun, 23 Jun 2019 10:48:54 -0400

I 100 percent agree but we all know those marines are gonna cry about it

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 23 at 2019 3:29 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 Jun 2019 15:29:30 -0400

It would make sense and I hate to say, it would also save taxpayers.

Response by PO1 Scott Brewer made Jun 23 at 2019 9:31 PM

PO1 Scott Brewer — Sun, 23 Jun 2019 21:31:58 -0400

Whoever had the brain fart to put us squids in cammies can fuck off

Response by SMSgt Joseph Fitzhenry made Jun 24 at 2019 9:45 AM

SMSgt Joseph Fitzhenry — Mon, 24 Jun 2019 09:45:27 -0400

I think it should be based on what pattern affords the best protective cover, not service specific. I would rather be generally invisible to the enemy when in the field than die because I was in my branches version of cami’s. I also think cami’s should be field only, and the DoD re-institute a daily wear uniform, like the old style khakis or something similar where you have to look sharp, polish shoes, press creases etc. It shows pride, commitment, attention to detail and professionalism. This wash and wear, baggy cami nonsense is sloppy and, having worn them before I retired, instills no point of pride. I always wore my blues without jacket every chance I had. Polished, pressed, professional and pride inducing! Just my thoughts.

Response by PO3 Rick Bachman made Jun 24 at 2019 10:08 PM

PO3 Rick Bachman — Mon, 24 Jun 2019 22:08:38 -0400

No I don't like that the Navy got rid of the dungarees. It made you look like a sailor.

Response by SGT Chris Nichols made Jun 25 at 2019 2:31 PM

SGT Chris Nichols — Tue, 25 Jun 2019 14:31:38 -0400

There’s been so many uniform changes in the last twenty years it’s actually hard keeping up with who’s who.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 26 at 2019 2:13 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Jun 2019 14:13:30 -0400

Just as long as they get rid of that stupid-a$$ velcro. That is the worst thing some jack wagon put on them.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 26 at 2019 8:44 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Jun 2019 20:44:41 -0400

Definitely! Saves money. One standard pattern but each branch would have their own patches, badges, rank etc... Of course the Marines would never go for it as they have to be different.

Response by SFC Melvin Brandenburg made Jul 12 at 2019 7:44 PM

SFC Melvin Brandenburg — Fri, 12 Jul 2019 19:44:28 -0400

Yes.

Response by CW4 Craig Urban made Jul 13 at 2019 1:03 AM

CW4 Craig Urban — Sat, 13 Jul 2019 01:03:41 -0400

No. Tradition.

Response by 1st Lt Padre Dave Poedel made Jul 13 at 2019 2:07 AM

1st Lt Padre Dave Poedel — Sat, 13 Jul 2019 02:07:10 -0400

Back after I was commissioned, I heard stories of the proposal to merge the medical service of each branch into a generic military medical service. The proposal was for a maroon uniform for all medical officers in the new branch. It didn’t go anywhere because each service chief convinced the establishment that this was a really stupid idea.....just saying.....not gonna happen

Response by SFC Robert Walton made Jul 13 at 2019 9:39 AM

SFC Robert Walton — Sat, 13 Jul 2019 09:39:19 -0400

Dress uniform no. Combat uniform Maybe, with service specific rank and branch tapes as in US ARMY, US NAVY,. Dual Service assignment yes. Now i have to ask are we going to paint all the planes, and ships, anfibs to match or what?

Response by Capt Daniel Goodman made Jul 13 at 2019 12:42 PM

Capt Daniel Goodman — Sat, 13 Jul 2019 12:42:45 -0400

I'd seen another thread on this here, though that one dealt with rank insignia...please understand, this is obv purely my own thought process, however, aside from multicams, as you'd mentioned, there are pretty well always gonna be uniform differences, it's never gonna be wholly standardized, though, as your photos showed, what you tried to depict is most likely as close as that sort of standardization would prob ever got, I should think...as I'd said, those are obv just purely my own thoughts, of course....

Response by CW4 Jj Lacasse made Jul 13 at 2019 6:39 PM

CW4 Jj Lacasse — Sat, 13 Jul 2019 18:39:19 -0400

Doesn't the Canadian Armed Forces have that?

Response by CPL Trey Sivaad made Jul 15 at 2019 11:57 PM

CPL Trey Sivaad — Mon, 15 Jul 2019 23:57:15 -0400

No. WTH....

Response by MSgt Brenda Policy made Aug 7 at 2019 4:21 PM

MSgt Brenda Policy — Wed, 07 Aug 2019 16:21:46 -0400

I thoroughly agree. Maybe this way they don't have to change to a new look at what seems to be every couple of years. I went through 4 uniform changed when I was in.

Response by PV2 Wayne Grinnell made Aug 8 at 2019 4:59 PM

PV2 Wayne Grinnell — Thu, 08 Aug 2019 16:59:55 -0400

I think since all the branches are different you need to be able to distinguish between each branch.... besides it promotes esprit de corp.

Response by SGT James Murphy made Aug 10 at 2019 1:37 PM

SGT James Murphy — Sat, 10 Aug 2019 13:37:55 -0400

No because then it's too confusing in the bar fights....

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 10 at 2019 1:54 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 10 Aug 2019 13:54:06 -0400

We all wore the same uniform for my first 13 years and then things just got stupid and wasteful. Tiger stripes for AF?? Yes, the Marines are to blame as they rolled out the digital camo in 2001 for testing. Sadly, you have a whole generation who can’t remember when we all wore the same tactical uniform.

Response by MAJ James Rip made Oct 1 at 2019 2:07 PM

MAJ James Rip — Tue, 01 Oct 2019 14:07:30 -0400

Yes, we had that at one time. It was cheaper and easier.

Response by PO3 Al Fan made Jan 25 at 2020 11:42 AM

PO3 Al Fan — Sat, 25 Jan 2020 11:42:01 -0500

We all wore same uniforms in NAM. I think it would be a great idea at all times. Service branch over pocket and rank unit on sleeve. Like SSG Grandy says, "One country, One uniform".

Response by COL Frank Siltman made Mar 15 at 2020 7:15 PM

COL Frank Siltman — Sun, 15 Mar 2020 19:15:47 -0400

Ha, you mean like in 1982 when we adopted BDUs for all the services as a land component field uniform?

Response by MSgt Dan Calhoun made Mar 16 at 2020 7:29 AM

MSgt Dan Calhoun — Mon, 16 Mar 2020 07:29:12 -0400

When talking about formal uniforms (mess dress, service dress ect.) I say no way. Each service needs to be able to stand out in their own way.
When talking about a combat uniform i would agree with 1 uniform. The fact is each branch has spent a ridiculous amount of money on uniforms between development and testing. The army adopted the ACU only to move away from it due to its failure in the battlefield. The Air Force went with the ABU which was an even bigger failure (we were not even allowed to where them outside the wire in 2012) and the Navy went with those blueberry looking things that are completely useless for those guys on shore duty downrange. The Marines seem to be the only ones who got it right the first go of it. The other three are already changing (or have already changed) again. When you have personnel from different branches working together in a deployed environment they already have to be in the same uniform. This is just needless added cost and logistics. We don't want that JTAC or Medic to standout for a reason. When you're talking about a combat uniform keep it standard.

Response by SFC William Ewing made Mar 16 at 2020 12:41 PM

SFC William Ewing — Mon, 16 Mar 2020 12:41:35 -0400

Combat uniform the same in all branches, reduce blue on blue.
Class A and B unique to branch.

Response by SGT David Petree made Mar 16 at 2020 7:05 PM

SGT David Petree — Mon, 16 Mar 2020 19:05:33 -0400

I do not think they will ever go back. but the word was O D GREEN .

Response by COL Brenson Bishop made Mar 16 at 2020 8:40 PM

COL Brenson Bishop — Mon, 16 Mar 2020 20:40:36 -0400

For actual field service I agree But service on ship or areas not requiring cammo the service should be able to decide

Response by PO1 David Albert made Mar 16 at 2020 11:08 PM

PO1 David Albert — Mon, 16 Mar 2020 23:08:27 -0400

I can see this for a land based unit, but putting sailors in BDUs (especially underway) is rather narrow sighted. Dungarees and coveralls were serviceable and relatively inexpensive uniforms at sea, and it didn't break the bank when we had to throw out a half dozen pairs when you returned from deployment because you couldn't get the grease, fuel, paint, and sweat out of them.

Response by SSG Karl Fowler made Mar 16 at 2020 11:35 PM

SSG Karl Fowler — Mon, 16 Mar 2020 23:35:16 -0400

I think we came very close to that in the 1950 and 60s recently I happen to be waiting for my spouse at the navel hospital and I counted 6 different variations of the Navy uniform in one hour, it would make since for all branches to have one for all ,just think of the money each branch would save

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 17 at 2020 7:46 AM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 17 Mar 2020 07:46:51 -0400

When I first came in, Army/Marines/Air Force all wore woodland pattern BDU’s. It was easy to find uniforms since we all wore the same thing. Better for the taxpayer too instead of the cost of 5 different uniforms for 5 different branches.

Response by SGT Michael Herdt made Mar 17 at 2020 6:10 PM

SGT Michael Herdt — Tue, 17 Mar 2020 18:10:26 -0400

Absolutely for the duty uniform, but I believe we should keep the dress uniforms their own.

Response by CPO Paul Smith made Mar 18 at 2020 4:07 AM

CPO Paul Smith — Wed, 18 Mar 2020 04:07:28 -0400

Not only no, but #%?!$ no! I can definitely see the benefit of one battle uniform for those who are in country, but to dissolve the distinctions between the services is Ludacris! I never did agree with having sailors look like combat smurfs. If you were not in a combat situation in country, then keep your own distinctive service uniform. And for gods sake, let the Navy go back to dungarees.

Response by 2ndLt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 18 at 2020 10:36 AM

2ndLt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Mar 2020 10:36:34 -0400

A major challenge with this would be Marines and Sailors don’t wear all the badges that the Army wears on their utilities. So there would be a bunch of unused Velcro

Response by COL Dana Hampton made Mar 18 at 2020 4:52 PM

COL Dana Hampton — Wed, 18 Mar 2020 16:52:40 -0400

It’s a decision whose time has come...for a field uniform that is. Dress uniforms should retain service’s distinctiveness.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 18 at 2020 6:59 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Mar 2020 18:59:56 -0400

Now come on, we can't be introducing a common sense approach to uniforms. Too many fashion industry lobbyists have families to feed. The switch to a common field uniform for all the services would put them out of a job.

Response by Cpl Kenneth Ledbetter made Mar 18 at 2020 10:13 PM

Cpl Kenneth Ledbetter — Wed, 18 Mar 2020 22:13:50 -0400

We could all wear the Navy uniforms, bellbottoms in combat would be far out. The same dress uniforms would make sense too for the same reasons, to save money, officers and enlisted alike could wear the same Class A, ranks would be all you need. You can save there too. All in all , I think the idea sucks, Marine can stay the same and the rest of you can be soldiers.

Response by SCPO Paul Barker made Mar 18 at 2020 10:58 PM

SCPO Paul Barker — Wed, 18 Mar 2020 22:58:37 -0400

No. History and traditions are represented by specific service uniforms. For daily work wear, I could see a common fatigue uniform, such as the Marines' digital camo

Response by Cpl Charles Trump made Mar 19 at 2020 11:43 AM

Cpl Charles Trump — Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:43:10 -0400

No, when the Marines came out with the cammo they got it was to set them apart. Your not going to get them to agree to wear that silly looking rounded off cammo cover either. They shouldn't be forced into it either!

Response by SSgt Bill Spurrier made Mar 19 at 2020 11:50 AM

SSgt Bill Spurrier — Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:50:46 -0400

I would say yes, but starting with new addition uniforms and not requiring elimination of the current uniforms. It's crazy to require the individual or the government to essentially trash can serviceable uniforms. Set a start date and perhaps a two year transition time. After the transition time is passed the old uniforms would have to go. This could be amended for men and women who are in combat zones, but would require completion within 45 days of leaving the zone.

Response by 1SG John Highfill made Mar 19 at 2020 5:49 PM

1SG John Highfill — Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:49:48 -0400

Since the BDU the DOD has wasted more money on uniforms I think there should be a standard Battle uniform across all branches

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 19 at 2020 7:23 PM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Mar 2020 19:23:37 -0400

No. The Marine Corps should never go back to being confused with the sloppiness of the Army. The Marine Corps broke away and everyone else followed. We have the best and that is why everyone else tried to mimic it with failure. So no the Army can not ever have our look again. Semper Fidelis!!!!

Response by Cpl Tim Frey made Mar 19 at 2020 8:44 PM

Cpl Tim Frey — Thu, 19 Mar 2020 20:44:58 -0400

If you read all the comments, you will discover that most of the people who are for this idea are soldiers, airmen, and sailors, and most of the people who are against it are Marines. As a Marine, i can tell you that we take pride in not being anything like the army. We take pride in our own identity. We take prideb im not using velcro, using actual boot bands, pinning on rank, and our EGA over our heart. Every single Marine and veteran Marine will oppose this. Let the Army and Air Force share their service uniform patern if they want, but let the Navy and Marine Corps keep theirs.

Response by SGT David Nicholas made Mar 19 at 2020 11:51 PM

SGT David Nicholas — Thu, 19 Mar 2020 23:51:50 -0400

Doesn't the military have better things to spend money on besides a fashion statement?

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 20 at 2020 7:46 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:46:21 -0400

Marines won’t give up their 8point for our(army) ragged ass cover

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 20 at 2020 11:09 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Mar 2020 11:09:46 -0400

The Multicam is gone now ODP's that use the so called Scorpion will be the common of the Army and the Airforce. But yes we should have a common uniform for the military that way Snipers would not pick the one who looks different believing that person is more important. I liked my Mulicams best Uniform I had worn since Cammies when I was in 82nd back in late 70's early 80's.

Response by PFC Kenneth Anderson made Mar 20 at 2020 11:16 AM

PFC Kenneth Anderson — Fri, 20 Mar 2020 11:16:44 -0400

Only The Field Uniform! I Have Mixed Emotions About The Army Going Retro, With The Dress Uniforms!

Response by MAJ Robert DeCoulaz made Mar 20 at 2020 3:49 PM

MAJ Robert DeCoulaz — Fri, 20 Mar 2020 15:49:46 -0400

One uniform for all the services. Like the green fatigues during the Vietnam war.

Response by LCpl Jack Walker made Mar 20 at 2020 4:11 PM

LCpl Jack Walker — Fri, 20 Mar 2020 16:11:06 -0400

We had BTUs back in my time, everybody wore them. Just don't copy our dress blues!

Response by PO2 Roger Sr. made Mar 20 at 2020 5:53 PM

PO2 Roger Sr. — Fri, 20 Mar 2020 17:53:34 -0400

Leave the Navy dress uniform alone, it’s a 200 year tradition!

Response by CPO Pat Barnes made Mar 20 at 2020 6:55 PM

CPO Pat Barnes — Fri, 20 Mar 2020 18:55:46 -0400

Cammies on a ship? Who do you think you're hiding from?

Response by GySgt Brian Johnson made Mar 20 at 2020 7:03 PM

GySgt Brian Johnson — Fri, 20 Mar 2020 19:03:53 -0400

I'm retired so I'm not sure my opinion matters. I support one combat uniform across the DOD. It doesn't make sense having branch specific camouflage. It's cheaper & logistically easier to maintain on camouflage pattern. Dress uniforms should always be unique.

Response by SGT Perry Shields made Mar 20 at 2020 7:07 PM

SGT Perry Shields — Fri, 20 Mar 2020 19:07:25 -0400

As a veteran i support this to save money overall so uniform supplies are bought in even larger bulk which should be able to reduce overall cost. Just have different velco tags identifying each branch of service.

Response by PO2 Jim Bollinger made Mar 20 at 2020 8:24 PM

PO2 Jim Bollinger — Fri, 20 Mar 2020 20:24:23 -0400

No problem with the same.

Response by SSgt Daniel d'Errico made Mar 21 at 2020 3:39 AM

SSgt Daniel d'Errico — Sat, 21 Mar 2020 03:39:11 -0400

Better that all branches of the US Military wear multicam than the shit looking digital crap uniforms.

Response by Cpl Kimberly Susanne made Mar 23 at 2020 4:29 PM

Cpl Kimberly Susanne — Mon, 23 Mar 2020 16:29:25 -0400

Never going to happen! If we need the same uniform, let’s just get rid of all the different services and call it one military. No need for A distinction between USCG, USMC, USAF, Navy and ARMY.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 24 at 2020 10:13 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Mar 2020 10:13:28 -0400

Absolutely. The pattern should be the same, but each branch should keep the things that make the uniform unique. Sailors and Marines should keep the eight point cover, and soldiers and airmen keep the Velcro on their sleeves. We should all wear our rank on our collars, though. Just sayin'...

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 24 at 2020 7:33 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 24 Mar 2020 19:33:56 -0400

For a combat uniform, absolutely. Anyone who’s been in combat in the last 20 years is all too familiar with the “who are THOSE guys?” question while on patrol. As a Cold War vet I remember vividly how we all wore the same uniform but with different rank and service insignia, but you could at least tell they were on same side before you were in rifle range. Now that we’re changing uniforms every 5-10 years and using different patterns for each service all while farming out our old patterns to allies and enemies alike we have pushed possibility of fratricide to a virtual certainty. I wish senior leaders would focus as much energy on combat readiness.

Response by SPC Burke Easter made Mar 24 at 2020 8:50 PM

SPC Burke Easter — Tue, 24 Mar 2020 20:50:53 -0400

When I was in all branches wore the same uniform, BDUs. Navy also had some kind of untility uniform fpr ships that looked like blue jeans.

Response by Capt Fred Bauer made Mar 25 at 2020 6:26 PM

Capt Fred Bauer — Wed, 25 Mar 2020 18:26:47 -0400

In general, a common uniform for field utilities would be fine. Different uniforms and/or modifications are required for different purposes, ie. aircrew, ship/sub, tanks/Amtrak's, APC's, etc.
I absolutely support that each branch should maintain their own dress uniform. The individual traditions of each branch are important and powerful. History and tradition needs to be carried forward.

Response by LTC Russ Smith made Mar 26 at 2020 4:26 PM

LTC Russ Smith — Thu, 26 Mar 2020 16:26:46 -0400

Just fatigued. Branch nametapes. Marines wear 7 corner cover. The other services berets, patrol caps, & ball caps...

Response by CWO4 Frank Kirtley made Mar 26 at 2020 7:11 PM

CWO4 Frank Kirtley — Thu, 26 Mar 2020 19:11:57 -0400

Absolutely not! A standard uniform would be destructive to morale.

Response by CPT Stephen Watson made Mar 27 at 2020 12:45 AM

CPT Stephen Watson — Fri, 27 Mar 2020 00:45:57 -0400

One uniform. Affirmative

Response by AN Michael Agosta made Mar 27 at 2020 2:37 PM

AN Michael Agosta — Fri, 27 Mar 2020 14:37:53 -0400

How do we tell the difference from Navy or Coast Guard Lt.....vs Army , Air Force or Marine Captain?

Response by SSG Lynn Skocdopole made Apr 10 at 2020 3:43 PM

SSG Lynn Skocdopole — Fri, 10 Apr 2020 15:43:54 -0400

I have said since 1972 that camoflage has to be relative to the relative situational environment. Start with a basic uniform cut with promotional limits(i.e., rank on chest ) but when one goes into the jungle needs more green color while desert will need more tan and beige. So it goes with onboard a ship needing more blue while planes and ground crews may need more gray color. Same simple consideration should be given to helmets or caps; High seas on outer deck might need a more precautionary color such as orange and red and yellow mix while armored track vehicle crews could use a subdued O.D. Green and beige and black mix. Infantry and Artillery teams may swap up a solid crush cap with a helmet showing a multi-cam mix.

Response by GySgt Keith Rininger made Apr 26 at 2020 1:35 PM

GySgt Keith Rininger — Sun, 26 Apr 2020 13:35:47 -0400

Oh hell no. Prefer each branch have their own. Now I am a retired Marine and my opinion dos not matter now, However, each branch is distinct in their history, regulations and uniforms. If I would have wanted to look like an Army trooper, I would have joined the Army. I was a Marine, each uniform was different from every other branch and it needs to stay that way. No disrespect intended, but Marines want to look like Marines.

Response by CPO John Moore made Apr 29 at 2020 12:19 PM

CPO John Moore — Wed, 29 Apr 2020 12:19:02 -0400

Yes one combat uniform, work uniform for all of the services (you could have a shoulder patch showing the service you are in). Go to two dress uniforms one for winter and one for summer. Think of the money the average service person could save plus the storage space would be a lot less.
I know it will never work because of how our stupid people in charge think..

Response by Maj Pete Siegel made May 9 at 2020 11:43 AM

Maj Pete Siegel — Sat, 09 May 2020 11:43:59 -0400

The Canadians tried a single service dress uniform. Wasn't highly received.

Response by CPL Joseph Elinger made Jun 8 at 2020 2:40 PM

CPL Joseph Elinger — Mon, 08 Jun 2020 14:40:04 -0400

During "The Cold War," all Polish Armed Forces wore a common utility uniform (OD).
I personally think a common Armed Forces Uniform for The US would be very doable. The Germans in WW2 used to distinguish unit types by color of piping on their epaulets. We could do this with out Branches of Service, as well as, say head gear ex Israel's MOS specific or unit specific beret colors. We could augment this with flash n crest.

Response by SSgt Daniel d'Errico made Jun 13 at 2020 3:25 AM

SSgt Daniel d'Errico — Sat, 13 Jun 2020 03:25:38 -0400

The multicam uniform for all the services. Well that would be good, but the sailors at sea won't need multicam. Why you might ask, well your sailors would be out of place, because the water is blue and only SEALs work on land, at sea and in the air. There would have to be different variations of either head gear or pants. How else are we to tell each other apart, when we all wear multicam?

Response by SFC Robert Walton made Jun 13 at 2020 9:51 AM

SFC Robert Walton — Sat, 13 Jun 2020 09:51:25 -0400

I thing we spend way to much of the taxpayers Dollars on Uniforms and changes. Leave it at the Velcro Warrior level with the BU all being the same. It is called a Uniform for a reason. Dress let each service pick the one they want then freeze it for at least 20 years. JMT

Response by PO3 Angel DeJesus made Jun 13 at 2020 11:15 AM

PO3 Angel DeJesus — Sat, 13 Jun 2020 11:15:56 -0400

I believe each branch should have their on uniform. It will be much easier to know who is who and give each branch a more of set of pride.

Response by SSgt David Allen made Jun 17 at 2020 10:52 AM

SSgt David Allen — Wed, 17 Jun 2020 10:52:02 -0400

No. Distinctive looks enhance pride in service.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 17 at 2020 11:11 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 17 Jun 2020 11:11:24 -0400

the only thing i did not like on the BDU's were the lower pockets on the shirt. useless with gear.

Response by SPC Raymond Kerr made Jun 18 at 2020 6:45 AM

SPC Raymond Kerr — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 06:45:02 -0400

No, I don't support a standard uniform. Each branch has their own history and their own traditions. I feel that if we go to one standard uniform, soon there will be one standard military.

Response by PFC Kenneth Anderson made Jun 18 at 2020 12:12 PM

PFC Kenneth Anderson — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 12:12:44 -0400

I thought the BDU was standard In All of the military? When I was in Army, 1972-1978, the basic pickle green fatigues was the work dress!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 18 at 2020 4:19 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 16:19:17 -0400

Can we just all agree to let Crye or Patagonia produce them?

Response by MSgt John Cusolito made Jun 18 at 2020 6:59 PM

MSgt John Cusolito — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 18:59:03 -0400

It would be great for BDUs or whatever but dress should be service specific. In my 22 years I can't remember how many kinds of fatigues I bought or were issued. Out in 76

Response by LCpl Wayne Freund made Jun 18 at 2020 11:38 PM

LCpl Wayne Freund — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 23:38:27 -0400

No I like the different uniforms

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 19 at 2020 12:20 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Jun 2020 12:20:50 -0400

Absolutely! I like the different service dress uniforms, but a standard uniform for the military in a combat environment unified all the branches.

Response by SPC Ron Simpson made Jun 19 at 2020 5:49 PM

SPC Ron Simpson — Fri, 19 Jun 2020 17:49:31 -0400

I think we need a standardized pattern, i.e. cut and style, but different camouflage designs depending on mission. Desert sand camo, desert rock, desert scrubland jungle, arctic, woodland summer, woodland winter, woodland fall, etc. It may cost more, but the camo needs to be effective for the environment. Not universal. But in garrison, not out in the field (combat or training) maybe a plain olive or gray utility like the old OD greens.

Response by CH (COL) Thomas Brouillard made Jun 19 at 2020 7:39 PM

CH (COL) Thomas Brouillard — Fri, 19 Jun 2020 19:39:12 -0400

Army and Air Force already share the UCP, with the AF employing brown lettering on tapes and patches and the Army utilizing black. Best combat uniform I’ve seen in the last 35 years.

Response by COL Frank Siltman made Jun 19 at 2020 10:31 PM

COL Frank Siltman — Fri, 19 Jun 2020 22:31:53 -0400

Umm we did that in 1982 or so. It was called the BDU. It was the same uniform for all services. What a unique idea

Response by ENS Louis Liotti made Jun 19 at 2020 11:13 PM

ENS Louis Liotti — Fri, 19 Jun 2020 23:13:55 -0400

Perhaps history might provide some guidance. In WWII each service had a service dress uniform and a field/working uniform which practice continued right up through Vietnam. Why not continue in that same vein? The Navy and the Coast Guard waged the most successful global naval campaign in history with a service dress uniform and in a working/combat environment khakis for officers/CPOs and dungarees for enlisted sailors. Worked fairly well. The Army (with its USAAF component) and the Marines had their variations. In addition to practicality, distinctive uniforms are mist effective in helping to instill unit and service pride. One thing that does seem a little pretentious though is wearing ACUs, BDUs, ODUs, etc. in a
an office setting. George Marshall did not wear fatigues while walking around the Pentagon when he was Chief of Staff and neither did his subordinates.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 20 at 2020 3:39 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 20 Jun 2020 15:39:24 -0400

Yes. It was functional, comfortable and easy to maintain. Best working uniform I've worn in over 40 years of service.

Response by PO2 Keith Libby made Jun 20 at 2020 3:53 PM

PO2 Keith Libby — Sat, 20 Jun 2020 15:53:36 -0400

Yes. Less change for troops.

Response by CW5 Robert Arms made Jun 20 at 2020 6:22 PM

CW5 Robert Arms — Sat, 20 Jun 2020 18:22:27 -0400

That was the original plan when the BDUs came out. Then the Marines wanted their insignia permanently embossed on the uniform. Then the Air Force insisted on blue lettering, followed by a blue BDU pattern, affectionately known as WalMart Camo, then modified to a tiger-stripe pattern. The Navy followed suit. A common uniform pattern makes sense, but each service keeps making changes to make the uniform unique to them, thus defeating the intent.

Response by CPT Brad Wilson made Jun 20 at 2020 6:34 PM

CPT Brad Wilson — Sat, 20 Jun 2020 18:34:56 -0400

We did it for 20+ years with the BDU and since the Korean War with the “pickle suit”

Response by CPL Johnnie Johnson made Jun 20 at 2020 7:36 PM

CPL Johnnie Johnson — Sat, 20 Jun 2020 19:36:32 -0400

I think all service branches should wear the same uniform. But each branch retains its own rank and its own dress uniform.

Response by Pamela Black made Jun 20 at 2020 9:41 PM

Pamela Black — Sat, 20 Jun 2020 21:41:25 -0400

great so long as the dress uniform stays the same-each unique to it's branch of service-

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 21 at 2020 1:55 PM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 21 Jun 2020 13:55:02 -0400

We all should be wearing the same camouflage combat uniforms. The navy & coast guard be different. But on ship. On land they wear the same colors as everyone else.

We never should have gone to branch specific combat uniforms. Here's a single plan. Use the uniform from the Marines, built strong, durable, functional. Use army multicam color pattern. No velcro patches. Every thing sewn on. Navy & Marines keep pointed soft cap. Army & AF use standard soft cap. It's that's simple. Cheaper all around. No more extra fu ding. No more research (which congress supposedly canceled).

Response by SFC Quinn Chastant made Jun 21 at 2020 7:20 PM

SFC Quinn Chastant — Sun, 21 Jun 2020 19:20:51 -0400

As a cost saving measure for the nation's taxpayers, and Military Services Members, Absolutely. Economy of scale, and ease of replenishment makes the idea most practical. The Services should retain their distinctive rank insignia of course. As for the visual of shubbery on haze grey Public Service Vessels of Specific Function. Why not?

Response by PO1 Robert Hayton made Jun 21 at 2020 10:08 PM

PO1 Robert Hayton — Sun, 21 Jun 2020 22:08:39 -0400

I'm an old sailor. I remember when they came up with that totally asinine idea to have a "single" uniform for seaman recruit thru admiral. The "suit" uniform cost like 4x or more than the traditional Navy "crackerjack" uniform, was much harder to maintain, and took up a lot more shipboard storage space. Then the Coast Guard got into the act--apparently tired of looking like Navy, their new uniform was easily mistaken for Air Force. Leave the damn uniforms alone!

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 22 at 2020 6:20 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 22 Jun 2020 06:20:56 -0400

That uniform I have never worn but I have felt the fabric and it feels very comfortable to wear quiet to move in. Easy to care for like a cross between sweats and cargo pants.

Response by LT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 3 at 2020 8:42 AM

LT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 03 Jul 2020 08:42:42 -0400

When I worked at CENTCOM, everyone was issued DCUs, including military, DoD civilians and contractors. I think it helped create a sense of unity. It also made it easier to distinguish US personnel from all the representatives of 47 coalition partners who were also stationed there.

Response by SSG Andrew Giordano made Jul 24 at 2020 7:16 PM

SSG Andrew Giordano — Fri, 24 Jul 2020 19:16:01 -0400

In the olden days ( Vietnam era) Army and Marines wore same OD fatigues.

Response by MSgt Judy Craven made Aug 19 at 2020 4:17 PM

MSgt Judy Craven — Wed, 19 Aug 2020 16:17:10 -0400

I would support a single field uniform. Back when I was in my twenties (a long time ago in a land far, far away), I started writing a novel and in Chapter 1 I discussed how the military would combine forces, with a single dress and field uniform. The dress uniform would include I of all 5 services uniforms representing each branch. The boots would be Army,, the pants Coast Guard, the blouse would be Marine, The hat blue, Air Force, Coast Guard, and their would be blue tie Navy. The field uniform would be something akin to BDUs which was the field uniform i wore in the second half of my 20 years. But that was how the novel started I never finished it. Got to 12 chapters and my Air Force service took over my free time as I progressed in rank.

Response by SSG James Mielke made Sep 6 at 2020 2:40 AM

SSG James Mielke — Sun, 06 Sep 2020 02:40:36 -0400

hmmmmmm...
Logistically this would seem to make sense but uniforms are not just Branch identifiers, they are based on the types of missions and what kind of environments each Branch performs their missions in.
Army and Marines should have the same uniforms since we have very similar mission profiles.
The average Airman, Sailor, or Coastie really has no reason to wear jungle, woodland, or desert camouflage.
SEALs, and AFSOC, on the other hand, are a different matter.

Response by SP5 Charles Willoughby made Sep 13 at 2020 9:42 PM

SP5 Charles Willoughby — Sun, 13 Sep 2020 21:42:23 -0400

Coast Guard would never allow it.

Response by PO1 Frank Reiffenstein made Sep 18 at 2020 8:50 AM

PO1 Frank Reiffenstein — Fri, 18 Sep 2020 08:50:35 -0400

No absolutely not. Think every civilian service uniform is differant. Police,Sheriff's office.