Posted on Dec 17, 2014
Would you support a standard uniform for all branches of service? Why or Why not?
541K
3.26K
1.01K
808
807
1
Uniforms
Officers
NCOs
DoD
Responses: 694
0
0
0
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Just as long as they get rid of that stupid-a$$ velcro. That is the worst thing some jack wagon put on them.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
There’s been so many uniform changes in the last twenty years it’s actually hard keeping up with who’s who.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
No I don't like that the Navy got rid of the dungarees. It made you look like a sailor.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
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
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/should-the-military-go-back-to-the-old-camouflage-uniforms?urlhash=4670343
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
We were happy. We focused on training to kill Reds, then.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
For all except the Corps...needs to be a noticeable difference for a variety of reasons.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
For those on land maybe but the Navy??? Except for those who serve on land in combat.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.....
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
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...
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Not at all. I prefer to stay having the best looking uniform in the whole military, not downgrading to some army type uniform.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I semi support it the OCP uniform started in the army and since the air force has adopted the uniform.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Why have everyone wear the same uniform? Beat the purpose of the different branches
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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!
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!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
Suspended Profile
We all had the same uniform until 2001 when the Marines went digital.
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
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...
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
0
0
The reason alot of service men and woman choose a branch is the different uniforms.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
To be blunt, no. If I wanted to look like a grunt I would have joined the Army!
(0)
(0)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
0
0
0
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)
0
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)
0
0
0
I support it for the simple fact that a common field uniform is cheaper for taxpayers.
(0)
(0)
0
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)
0
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)
0
0
0
Absolutely not. Each branch has a unique and specific role and should be recognized for that.
(0)
(0)
0
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)
0
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)
0
0
0
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
0
0
One Uniform would be budget friendly, across the board, but keep are head gear and ranks system branch specific.
(0)
(0)
0
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)
0
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)
0
0
0
No, we tried that before and it was unpopular and took away from service identity. Keep the different uniforms.
(0)
(0)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
0
0
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
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)
0
0
0
0
0
0
We all serve the same country, therefore; we should wear the same uniform. One country, one uniform!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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?
On second thought, does a single BDU make sense?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
Maybe... However I will say as a Marine Veteran now Army Soldier I prefer the Marines Uniform.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
It was when I was in. Standard woodland cammies and standard desert cammies. No issues
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
No, I liked being easily able to tell the difference between the services. It was important to me.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
CPT Jeff Porterfield
In Garrison, decorative badges, such as the Ranger tab and the CIB are useful to signify special achievements and build esprit de corps, but in the field, they need not be worn.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
No. Different materials, design, and color for different takes/assignments. Finally, tradition.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I oppose a common field uniform because the service have different roles a mission performed in different environment.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
No I don’t support it. Each branch of service should have its own distinct uniform to promote pride in their branch.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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...
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.)
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
The Army and Marine Corps have different ideas as to what their specific needs are.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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!
Assuming of course, that he wasn’t helped over the side!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Yes, I would definitely support it. Would increase availability on all bases and increase Camaraderie.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
very bad idea but probably ok with much of our snowflake generation. it would lower morale even lower
(0)
(0)
Suspended Profile
That makes way too much sense. It will never happen.
0
0
0
I fully support having the uniforms the same. I agree that it supports unity within the Nation.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Totally think it would be a great idea, huge show of strength, unite all branches of the armed forces!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
More of a Common Uniform for "Utility" Dress Uniforms have a Lot of History and Branch Pride... why take that away?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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 .....
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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?
On a side note, I find the navy "blueberries" just plain silly. Blue cammo pattern on a big grey ship? Why?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.....
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
The men and women who still wear the uniform will have the better insight. Go troops!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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!
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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!)...
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
no I support the most effective uniform for the task at hand
also helps unit members find each other amongst crowds
also helps unit members find each other amongst crowds
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I like the cut of the Air Force Tiggers and their boots appear to be an inch or two higher.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
I get the impression we have a bunch of Washington bureaucrats that are just trying to stay busy to justify their existence.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I agree with many others, that dress uniforms could stay service unique, but a utility uniform could be universal.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
No. If so, then why not have the same boot camp? Same Physicial Fitness standards? Same marksmanship standards, etc.?
(0)
(0)
Suspended Profile
Maybe - but not for Sailors and Marines - they should be required to wear distinctive uniforms. Warmest Regards, Sandy :)
0
0
0
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."
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
Dress Uniform: NO WAY!
Each service has a long and storied history and deserves a unique identity in their dress uniform.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
-
Ask questionGet expert advice and
tips for your questions. -
Post updatePost pictures, personal updates, plans, or anything you like!
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google 
