Belts worn over smocks

#1
Now that common sense seems to be filtering down the CoC over the jacket tucked in issue will a similar forward thinking decision come down from on high over stopping the most abhorrent and gayist of unit dress policy? The wearing of belts over combat jackets. The mood seems right to stamp out this disgusting and filthy habit once and for all...........
 
#3
belts for holding your pants up, not for holding your guts in,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
 
#4
Now that common sense seems to be filtering down the CoC over the jacket tucked in issue will a similar forward thinking decision come down from on high over stopping the most abhorrent and gayist of unit dress policy? The wearing of belts over combat jackets. The mood seems right to stamp out this disgusting and filthy habit once and for all...........
It's only gopping because it's a combat jacket and the wearers of such garments are critters. A 58 pattern belt over a slightly faded 190/112 para smock worn by someone entitled to wear the aforementioned garment is ******* lush.
 
#6
It's only gopping because it's a combat jacket and the wearers of such garments are critters. A 58 pattern belt over a slightly faded 190/112 para smock worn by someone entitled to wear the aforementioned garment is ******* lush.
do one civvy,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
 
#8
thats right,,,,,, x. has been, never been, do you sign on, in the morning ?.... as i said, do one civvy, thats a good chap......
 
#9
Red Square, you simply aren't equipped to gain a bite from five alpha, all you'll do is look a further cnut than you do already, which to be fair is no mean feat.

 
#10
p g is 5a, i doth claim my 5 English groats,,,,,,,,,,,
 
#12
It's only gopping because it's a combat jacket and the wearers of such garments are critters. A 58 pattern belt over a slightly faded 190/112 para smock worn by someone entitled to wear the aforementioned garment is ******* lush.
What he said
 
#13
It's only gopping because it's a combat jacket and the wearers of such garments are critters. A 58 pattern belt over a slightly faded 190/112 para smock worn by someone entitled to wear the aforementioned garment is ******* lush.
What he said
 
#15
Now that common sense seems to be filtering down the CoC over the jacket tucked in issue will a similar forward thinking decision come down from on high over stopping the most abhorrent and gayist of unit dress policy? The wearing of belts over combat jackets. The mood seems right to stamp out this disgusting and filthy habit once and for all...........
It would be nice if he did say we did not have to wear a belt on top off our smocks however with the directive you will wear your jacket untucked and sleeves down, it also said a green issue belt will be worn on top of the smock. This to me is a step backwards as with C95 I was allowed to use my belt to hold my trousers up.

However as I have been told I will do as I am told and get on with it.
 
#16
Now that common sense seems to be filtering down the CoC over the jacket tucked in issue will a similar forward thinking decision come down from on high over stopping the most abhorrent and gayist of unit dress policy? The wearing of belts over combat jackets. The mood seems right to stamp out this disgusting and filthy habit once and for all...........
Are we going to be able to ditch the pregnant look and be able to tuck our shirts in again then? If so am glad that common sense has prevailed over that arrogant reply to the Soldier mag request a couple of months ago
 
#17
It's only gopping because it's a combat jacket and the wearers of such garments are critters. A 58 pattern belt over a slightly faded 190/112 para smock worn by someone entitled to wear the aforementioned garment is ******* lush.
do one civvy,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
You are cringingly embarrassing, which is to be expected of a man with the equivalent military experience of Bravo_Bravo.
 
#20
Are we going to be able to ditch the pregnant look and be able to tuck our shirts in again then? If so am glad that common sense has prevailed over that arrogant reply to the Soldier mag request a couple of months ago

IT IS NOT A SHIRT.

Do you remember the Green Shirt we used to wear with Lightweights Trousers, if so compare that with the Lightweight Jacket we had with C95 very similar hence how we ended up tucking them in. Now compare your C95 Jacket and your PCS Jacket there are totally different and one is definitely a Jacket.

The other Item of uniform you have been issued is a Smock.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top