Guest CharlieDontSurf Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Disagree with you here. My best friend is Ranger qual in the 101st so I get this info first hand. The ACU is crap. Sure its light weight, but its concealment is majorly lacking. Also, the velcro ends up trapping sand and becomes useless, the zippers are crap, and once you stain it you might as well throw them away. While some if this is might just be bitching I think the concealment portion is kind of a big deal. They are doing dismounted patrols in Afghanistan and blending in certainly helps. Yes the black beret for everyone was stupid (I agree). But generally the Army likes to incorporate things SOF is doing because they are doing it for a reason: It works! Not because it looks cool, but because its functional. I participated in an Army FTX (as OPFOR) in a woodland environment and it was painfully easy to spot them trying to be sneaky doing a recon while in ACUs. I agree with your concealablity points. I was ranting because I've seen the wannabe SOF types and it boils my blood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
summe32c Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 HA! I dont care who you are. That's funny right there.... Mabye if I start wearing my ABU's here at work, no one will notice me for the last 5 weeks until AMS... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sweatie311 Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 (edited) I think that would be a nice little advantage of a camo two-piece flight suit. Wearing a two-piece in say multicam would A) not be as hot and B) help you hide if you got shot down.* Not that I plan on getting shot down but I don't think anyone plans on that... * Don't get me wrong, I love my pajamas and the 1-piece is comfortable as hell and obviously necessary for ejector types I understand the need for a 1-piece for ejector types, but us sweaties in the back would love the 2-piece. I would love to be able to take the top off and set it down instead of having to peel back my flight suit and tie it around my waist. Do the missle guys get to wear bomber jackets? I don't get too much exposure to those guys. You don't see me runnin around wearing a green beret for a reason. I didn't EARN one. From my time in Minot...yeah they do. It's funny with the Buff guys there and the Missle guys trying to act like them. Are they wearing green flight suits now or are they still wearing those awesome blue ones? And yeah, I remember THREATCON->FPCON change...almost the most retarded thing ever. Edited August 27, 2009 by Sweatie311 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stract Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 does anyone know where someone can get their hands on a bunch of tan two-piece flight suits? They aren't manufactured anymore, as far as I know, and we're looking to get some, as they are now authorized for wear (HH-60 and HC-130 crews, thanks to then MGen Gorenc). Unfortunately we are not authorized to wear the new Army A2CU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Flight nurse camouflage should probably have digital images of box lunches all over it. Maybe the rest of the crew should be camouflaged with digital images of the back of a flight nurse's head on the crotch. Seriously, if you're in the Air Force and you really need camouflage, you're probably already fvcked. It would be like putting camouflage on carrier deck crews...what's the point. JTACs and PJs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wannabeflyer Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 I'm sure the ACU sucks in the woods, it wasn't designed for the woods. I don't have personal experience with them but they were created for an urban/desert setting. In the same way the ABU was created for an office environment, of course it doesn't actually camouflage in a combat setting, would you expect anything less from the Air Force? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stitch Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 JTACs and PJs? You gotta point there, so just authorize those guys either army and/or marine stuff as the situartion dictates. As far as AF camo goes why do services, MPF, finance etc... need it? Sky cops I can see it if they get in one of those "defend the base" situations, but really. As far as flightline maintainers go, authorize as a "regular" uniform a zoom bag like coverall. The shoes would hate it as it would have no ironing requirement and let be get a little bit soiled (STS). Heck, it a working uniform. In maintenance, when a guy looks like a recruiting poster other maintenance people don't say "Wow, he's professional" they say "What the hell do you all day?" or at least "Its about time your finally gonna get served that Article 15" Just bring back the old VietNam style solid green jungle uniforms with the squadron baseball caps and call it good. Although services camo with chow hall supplies, bowling alley equipment & gym stuff on it would be good for a laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoleIt Posted August 28, 2009 Author Share Posted August 28, 2009 Or we could just solve the problem and have a FUNCTIONAL uniform... And I am a firm believer that there is no ONE universal uniform. The Marines were right. There is no magical uniform that will have good concelability properties in both the desert and the jungle/woods. As much as we love saving $ look at what this uniform fiasco is doing? Costing more money! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Last Posted August 29, 2009 Share Posted August 29, 2009 I disagree. I thought the same thing until I in-processed at maxwell a couple months ago. Then I noticed something, the ABU blended in perfectly with the pattern of the mesh of the cubicles. ugghhh Choke yourself... With my hands Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
contraildash Posted August 29, 2009 Share Posted August 29, 2009 BTW- anyone seen the Navy's new blue digicams? I'd hate to be the poor sap who gets blown over the side of ship wearing that thing. You'd be extremely lucky to ever be seen in the water. Actually about the only thing you can see when someone is in the water is their noggin. (unless they are floating in a gumby suit) Hell, the USCG used to wear blue flightsuits until they standardized with everyone else. Make sure ya ditch your hat in this case! :) I saw a picture recently of one of the Army's modifications to the ACU. It was a half breed between the top and a underarmor shirt. Basically the 'underarmor' part was covered up by the body armor they wear, but the sleeves still looked like a regular ACU top. Kinda slick and makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JarheadBoom Posted August 29, 2009 Share Posted August 29, 2009 I saw a picture recently of one of the Army's modifications to the ACU. It was a half breed between the top and a underarmor shirt. Basically the 'underarmor' part was covered up by the body armor they wear, but the sleeves still looked like a regular ACU top. Kinda slick and makes sense. Not sure what the Army calls it, but the Marines have the same thing (in desert MARPAT, obviously) and call it a "combat shirt". Re: what the AF will do if the Army ditches the ACU? Probably nothing... until we get a new CSAF. Then the vicious cycle will begin anew. This shit is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stunna Posted August 29, 2009 Share Posted August 29, 2009 Not sure what the Army calls it, but the Marines have the same thing (in desert MARPAT, obviously) and call it a "combat shirt". Re: what the AF will do if the Army ditches the ACU? Probably nothing... until we get a new CSAF. Then the vicious cycle will begin anew. This shit is ridiculous. We supposedly are fielding an ABU combat shirt that is identical to the Army one, except it's got those blue tiger stripe sleeves. Supposedly only authorized in the AOR, while on convoy ops, while wearing armor... If i recall right, it looks like they took the sleeves ABUs should have had, and attached them to each other with some mesh... We really need to stop all of this "we're a different service and need to look different from you" crap. All it got us was a bunch of money spent on on BDU's with a few extra pockets added, in a ridiculous looking pattern that seriously only blends into cubicles... And now we'll drop more money and waste more time researching a new and improved utility uniform that might be available before 2020. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted August 29, 2009 Share Posted August 29, 2009 I'm sure the ACU sucks in the woods, it wasn't designed for the woods. I don't have personal experience with them but they were created for an urban/desert setting. In the same way the ABU was created for an office environment, of course it doesn't actually camouflage in a combat setting, would you expect anything less from the Air Force? I, for one, can't believe...well, I can believe it, but I'm baffled by the process that decided we would design a utility uniform WITH NO UTILITY! Really, we're going to design a camo pattern that isn't ACTUALLY designed to camoflague anything? Only in the USAF. No wonder we're the laughingstock of the other services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stract Posted August 29, 2009 Share Posted August 29, 2009 luckily the Navy just rolled out theirs, and now we aren't the laughingstock anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy.The.Engineer Posted August 29, 2009 Share Posted August 29, 2009 luckily the Navy just rolled out theirs, and now we aren't the laughingstock anymore. No surprise. It isn't like the Navy has the best track record with regard to uniforms. I take comfort in the fact that we'll never be that bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flyin' AF Hawaiian Posted August 29, 2009 Share Posted August 29, 2009 No surprise. It isn't like the Navy has the best track record with regard to uniforms. I take comfort in the fact that we'll never be that bad. The Navy, at least, had the common sense to call theirs a "working uniform." It's really not meant to be camouflage. The Air Force, on the other hand, calls our uniform the Airman Battle Uniform, while doing everything possible to make sure that it serves absolutely no battlefield purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LockheedFix Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 JTACs and PJs? Ever seen a JTAC or a PJ wear an actual AF uniform? Every time I've worked with them, they have been wearing not necessarily uniforms but tactical clothing that is suited to the job they are doing. They could care less what the rest of the AF is wearing because they wear what they need. All this bickering over the functionality of the ABU is pointless because no one who actually wears the ABU will ever wear it in combat (with the possible exception of folks pulling convoy duty and the aforementioned sky cops defending the base during an attack.) If the ABU is suitable only to the office environment, then that's probably a good thing, because that's where it will be worn 99% of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 Ever seen a JTAC or a PJ wear an actual AF uniform? Every time I've worked with them, they have been wearing not necessarily uniforms but tactical clothing that is suited to the job they are doing. They could care less what the rest of the AF is wearing because they wear what they need. All this bickering over the functionality of the ABU is pointless because no one who actually wears the ABU will ever wear it in combat (with the possible exception of folks pulling convoy duty and the aforementioned sky cops defending the base during an attack.) If the ABU is suitable only to the office environment, then that's probably a good thing, because that's where it will be worn 99% of the time. There's a reason JTACs and PJs don't wear USAF uniforms...because the USAF refuses to make a combat uniform with any utility. We already have a uniform well suited for the office environment...Blues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest merlock Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 We already have a uniform well suited for the office environment...Blues. But are blues suitable for the office 'warriors' to defend their cubicles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LockheedFix Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 There's a reason JTACs and PJs don't wear USAF uniforms...because the USAF refuses to make a combat uniform with any utility. We already have a uniform well suited for the office environment...Blues. I agree completely. I just can't see the Air Force ever getting a combat uniform right, so those guys that need one will never wear whatever the AF has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 But are blues suitable for the office 'warriors' to defend their cubicles? We'd better hope so...otherwise the NK army will plan their assault on the finance office for a Monday...like anyone would be there to defend it anyway, whatever uniform they're wearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MC Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 I think we all should go to combat in these uniforms... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TacAirCoug Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 I take comfort in the fact that we'll never be that bad. How confident in that statement are you really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craino21 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 There's a reason PJs don't wear USAF uniforms... Because they like to think they're "Special" and don't have to play by the same rules as everyone else? Even if ABUs were the most tactically perfect uniform ever devised they'd wear something else to draw attention to themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herk Driver Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 I agree that it has ZERO functionality. I only got one set for some recent PME and have never worn it since. It is garbage. I feel bad for the dudes who actually have to wear it on a daily basis. How many times have we seen change for the sake of change? Does anyone out there remember when it was THREATCON? One day, we come to work and it now FPCON. The only thing that changed was the name. They then spent how many millions to change all of the signs and what not. Someone got promoted/bronzed starred for that. Fraud waste and what? 2 THREATCON - FPCON CBPO - MPF MPC - AFPC NBC - CBRNE etc, etc, etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now