Posted on Dec 17, 2014
Would you support a standard uniform for all branches of service? Why or Why not?
539K
3.26K
1.01K
808
807
1
Responses: 694
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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!
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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
(0)
(0)
The reason alot of service men and woman choose a branch is the different uniforms.
(0)
(0)
To be blunt, no. If I wanted to look like a grunt I would have joined the Army!
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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..
(0)
(0)
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
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
Cheers fellow troopers and God bless all active duty soldier, especially the ones still deployed.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
I support it for the simple fact that a common field uniform is cheaper for taxpayers.
(0)
(0)
Every service has a different and unique function. As such each service has a different uniform that people can identify with.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
Absolutely not. Each branch has a unique and specific role and should be recognized for that.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
Regardless, we should wear the uniform based on the environment we are going to be in.
(0)
(0)
Well, I think it is a good idea, except for fellows on ships... That should be different based on their main operational area.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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!
(0)
(0)
No. Each branch has a specific mission and the uniform is tailored for their respective operational environment.
(0)
(0)
Sgt William Turner
i disagree. Combat bdu's have not changed that much since i was in viet nam. a basic BDU funtional to all services would not be hard, and it would save much money . no jobs would be lost because the inventory wouldnt change mkerely the funtionality .
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
One Uniform would be budget friendly, across the board, but keep are head gear and ranks system branch specific.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
No, we tried that before and it was unpopular and took away from service identity. Keep the different uniforms.
(0)
(0)
Yes on the standard uniform in combat area to all US troops, no ally troops, no contractors, no translators , nothing but US troops
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
SSG Deron Santiny
The cost of such thing would make it almost impossible to keep up with. It already cost a fortune for uniforms (all items) and you know as well as I know that the small amount you get for the "Uniform Allowance" doesn't cover everything you need. We already had the DCU's for deploying units (before the Multi-Cam uniform).
(0)
(0)
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?
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
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.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next