Are we going back to denims and woolie pullies or what?

#1
Can anyone shed any light on the duty rumour that the Army is going back into lightweights and woolie pullies for in camp use again, if so do they have an ETA? Can't say it will be a bad thing, at least it'll stop the crabs and matelots looking like squaddies and young scrotes will have to iron their kit properly again (or maybe for the first time!). CS95, can't iron it, can't get the right size trousers!
 
#5
Jumpers over 95 kit looks good if you have a few badges scattered around it! Hopefully it will happen soon as its cold outside!
My fanny is hurting!
Laters
 
#6
newlynpirate said:
good stuff cant wait..
WHY? Stupid jumpers with cardboard patches, crap shoulder titles that snap everytime to remove them to wash the jumper. Crap light weights that are lovingly fadded to 'show starched'. What a load of bollocks!

Not required, not wanted. Waste of fucking money. Oh hang on, waste of money. Sounds like a plan, let's do that.
 
#8
Ahh, two-tone Lightweights, Barrack-Dress Trousers, rigidly starched shoulder and elbow-pads on pullover and bulled shoes DMS - happy days!
 
#9
Always struck me as comfortable working wear. A plain olive green blouson jacket/tunic would be a good addition though. Fleeces are too shabby and DPM should be kept for the field or for Guard duty as it's supposed to be fire retardent. (Except the current chinese cr4p apparently isn't...)
 
#10
Bravo2nothing said:
newlynpirate said:
good stuff cant wait..
WHY? Stupid jumpers with cardboard patches, crap shoulder titles that snap everytime to remove them to wash the jumper. Crap light weights that are lovingly fadded to 'show starched'. What a load of bollocks!

Not required, not wanted. Waste of fucking money. Oh hang on, waste of money. Sounds like a plan, let's do that.
Actualluy i agree with that comment. And i was in the Army when the starch on the shoulders/elbows ruled! Admittedly, CBT 95 comes in good material/crap material but its better for the way we do business now.
 
#13
CH512O said:
Actualluy i agree with that comment. And i was in the Army when the starch on the shoulders/elbows ruled! Admittedly, CBT 95 comes in good material/crap material but its better for the way we do business now.
Agreed - why on earth would anyone actually want to go back to wearing that shite again? Looks nice on parade, is absolutely useless for anyone who doesn't spend their entire day sat behind a desk.
 
#14
jimmys_best_mate said:
CH512O said:
Actualluy i agree with that comment. And i was in the Army when the starch on the shoulders/elbows ruled! Admittedly, CBT 95 comes in good material/crap material but its better for the way we do business now.
Agreed - why on earth would anyone actually want to go back to wearing that shite again? Looks nice on parade, is absolutely useless for anyone who doesn't spend their entire day sat behind a desk.
...which is why it will get approval. I used to work in a tri-service group and it did look funny with the RN and RAF sitting in their version of barracks dress while the army walked in in combats and combat boots. We would then sit down and discuss something totally unwary (if that is a word).

Apparently the reason why it might be considered is that barracks dress is apparently cheaper than combats...
 
#15
Do the Army allow you to wear woolie poolies with combats when in barracks? That would be a nice cheap compromise.
 
#16
See below....
 
#17
lanky said:
Apparently the reason why it might be considered is that barracks dress is apparently cheaper than combats...
Except we'll now be buying both and so will save no money at all. It'd be cheaper to make the combats out of material more than 3 microns thick so they don't wear out in three days, but that would be common sense so there's no chance of the MoD doing that...
 
#18
lanky said:
We would then sit down and discuss something totally unwary (if that is a word).
It is. But not the one you were thinking of....

Adj. 1. unwary - not alert to danger or deception; "the shrieks of unwary animals taken by surprise"; "some thieves prey especially on unwary travelers"; "seduce the unwary reader into easy acquiescence"- O.J.Campbell
wary - marked by keen caution and watchful prudence; "they were wary in their movements"; "a wary glance at the black clouds"; "taught to be wary of strangers"
...but on the other hand....
 
#19
The rumour in my unit is that only office type jobs will wear it
the tankpark lads would still wear 95 or coveralls,you know,the
s hite RAF ones with velcro instead of buttons and one pocket :pissedoff:
 
#20
1st thing: I not in the army.

Ive been round a fair few navy bases and army bases (relatives in both), and the matelots in their No 3 dress and royal in his lovatts always looks loads smarter than army blokes schlepping round in combats.

Lets be honest, if i couldnt make my mind up which service to go for, and i walked into the recruiting office and saw jack in his 3s, royal in his lovatts and whatever the crabs wear, and the army in C95, youd go for the smarter option?
 

Similar threads

Top