Assault Boot - Date of Introduction?

ACAB

LE

TamH70

MIA
This

Because in the Falklands the DMS boot was found to be inferior.
And they replaced them with the first generation of Boots Combat High, which were worse. Still, they kept Med Centres in business, which is nice I suppose...

In answer to the OP's question, I think guzzijon got it right - they were issued in a big way contemporaneously with Soldier '95 kit - though some got them earlier than others.
 
And they replaced them with the first generation of Boots Combat High, which were worse. Still, they kept Med Centres in business, which is nice I suppose...
If i recall, the BCH came in a Mk. 1, with a distinct heel counter*, and a Mk. 2 without.

I found the Mk. 1 pretty comfortable, with trainer insoles in, maybe i was just lucky with the couple of pairs l had.

Mk. 2 was dreadful, couldn't get a pair that felt comfortable, awful boots.






* yes. 'Counter'. I looked up 'naming of parts boots'.

:
 

TamH70

MIA
If i recall, the BCH came in a Mk. 1, with a distinct heel counter*, and a Mk. 2 without.

I found the Mk. 1 pretty comfortable, with trainer insoles in, maybe i was just lucky with the couple of pairs l had.

Mk. 2 was dreadful, couldn't get a pair that felt comfortable, awful boots.

* yes. 'Counter'. I looked up 'naming of parts boots'.

:
Yep. The BCH Mk.1 did have a heel counter, as you said. The one on my left boot chewed into my Achilles region to such an extent that I nearly got binned from my Regular recruit course as my ankle swelled to about three times its normal size. Much use of big buckets of ice ensued. Plus the soles seemed to change composition from bouncy to concrete-like after a few miles or so of use. The Mk.2's were almost as bad as far as their soles went.
 
Mild understatement.
No kidding. I binned using boots DMS completely, acquired a couple of pairs of these, and never bothered with boots CH. I consider myself fortunate, in that my Achilles area never suffered, also, my knees are still in somewhat decent shape.

german-army-para-boots-used-small-sizes-special-offer-pack-of-10-2480-p.jpg


During late Autumn, through to Spring I pretty much wore these. Once they had been broken in, I found them incredibly comfortable.

image73.jpeg
 
That would possibly be the earliest year of issue. They certainly weren't available to me (in BFG) in that year, but I got Danner boots (which looked good, but fitted badly) for deployment to B-H in time for Xmas 1995, then moved to a TA unit in 1996, where the only bloke who'd been issued Cbt 95 gear was the recently-arrived-from-BFG regular army RSM. Slightly strangely I can recall coveting every item of his DPM kit, but not his footwear, which mebbe suggests that the assault boot was a late arrival to complete the ensemble, or that you'd only get the things in exchange for a shagged-out pair of BCH.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
Trialled 1989 (1 Para) with goretex socks and lightweight high leg "barracks" boots. Distinctly better than the issue version, the first of which I saw about 92/93 IIRC.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Trialled 1989 (1 Para) with goretex socks and lightweight high leg "barracks" boots. Distinctly better than the issue version, the first of which I saw about 92/93 IIRC.
By all accounts the original BCH were good boots - the trial ones. Then the MOD put a cost ceiling of £12 per pair on the production version.

Given the injuries they caused and the careers they ended, I wonder how much they eventually actually ‘saved’ with such parsimony.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
By all accounts the original BCH were good boots - the trial ones. Then the MOD put a cost ceiling of £12 per pair on the production version.

Given the injuries they caused and the careers they ended, I wonder how much they eventually actually ‘saved’ with such parsimony.
As a 30 year served codger who's had both Achilles tendons repaired, not to mention shagged knees along with three discs removed from my back, I'd like to meet the swine who made the decision in a dark alley whilst I was tooled up. Best not give him a head start mind.
 
No kidding. I binned using boots DMS completely, acquired a couple of pairs of these, and never bothered with boots CH. I consider myself fortunate, in that my Achilles area never suffered, also, my knees are still in somewhat decent shape.

View attachment 443175

During late Autumn, through to Spring I pretty much wore these. Once they had been broken in, I found them incredibly comfortable.

View attachment 443176
The soles tell me it's Deutschland issue
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
As a 30 year served codger who's had both Achilles tendons repaired, not to mention shagged knees along with three discs removed from my back, I'd like to meet the swine who made the decision in a dark alley whilst I was tooled up. Best not give him a head start mind.
And as someone with a knackered hip because of said boots, I’ll come with you.
 
I distinctly remember being issued a pair of assault boots in Germany in about 93/94 when I swapped a worn out pair of BCH for them. IIRC they came out about the same time as the last issue type of combat jacket (with the two vertical zipped pockets) before CS95.
I was very pleased as I’d bought a civvy manufactured pair to take on Granby from the HQ (1)BR Corps PRI and they proved to be excellent boots. These were identical to assault boots apart from having the old DMS type grip pattern.
Weirdly, when I got my first issue of Combat 95 (in 97) we were issued with hot weather boots, essentially black jungle boots (was deploying on a summer Bosnia tour), and the next boots issued to me after that were pro-boots.
I think I had around 5 pairs of boots to hand in when I de-kitted!
 
Last edited:
I distinctly remember being issued a pair of assault boots in Germany in about 93/94 when I swapped a worn out pair of BCH for them. IIRC they came out about the same time as the last issue type of combat jacket (with the two vertical zipped pockets) before CS95.
I was very pleased as I’d bought a civvy manufactured pair to take on Granby from the HQ (1)BR Corps PRI and they proved to be excellent boots. These were identical to assault boots apart from having the old DMS Type grip pattern.
Weirdly, when I got my first issue of Combat 95 (in 97) we were issued with hot wether boots, essentially black jungle boots (was deploying on a summer Bosnia tour), and the next boots issued to me after that were pro-boots.
I think I had around 5 pairs of boots to hand in when I de-kitted!
Same for me 95 Bosnia we got black jungle boots and also a pair of Matterhorns and winter kit as we had to go to a rebro up Mt Trebević in the winter. It was fuccing cold mind the winter kit was 100 times better than the stuff we got in the Falklands, only good thing then were the white socks , the rest, long johns and canvas mittens with seal skin on were shite.
 
when I got my first issue of Combat 95 (in 97) we were issued with hot wether boots, essentially black jungle boots (was deploying on a summer Bosnia tour), and the next boots issued to me after that were pro-boots.
I think I had around 5 pairs of boots to hand in when I de-kitted!
As ever, covering all the bases by using UORs (and along the way semi-officially confirming the widespread unofficial view that the standard issue gear simply wasn't good enough!).
 
Yep. The BCH Mk.1 did have a heel counter, as you said. The one on my left boot chewed into my Achilles region to such an extent that I nearly got binned from my Regular recruit course as my ankle swelled to about three times its normal size. Much use of big buckets of ice ensued. Plus the soles seemed to change composition from bouncy to concrete-like after a few miles or so of use. The Mk.2's were almost as bad as far as their soles went.
We were advised to miss the 5th lace hole to avoid Achilles problems, it seemed to work.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top