Buttons on belt loops. Why?

#1
Random question time, per the thread title. Anyone know the reason why uniforms from the 90s and earlier had buttons on the belt loops, rather than just sewn down? The Army's never been big on fashion (stand fast Household Div and Cav), so I don't think it's for appearance's sake. What function did it serve? Whatever it was, CS95 did away with them, so I'm all the more curious.

Obvious question - why do I want to know? I missed a belt loop earlier with my belt, and it prompted me to think of Army trousers where you could just undo a button and fix it, but I'm sure there must have been a more useful reason, I just don't know what that is.
 
#3
Random question time, per the thread title. Anyone know the reason why uniforms from the 90s and earlier had buttons on the belt loops, rather than just sewn down? The Army's never been big on fashion (stand fast Household Div and Cav), so I don't think it's for appearance's sake. What function did it serve? Whatever it was, CS95 did away with them, so I'm all the more curious.

Obvious question - why do I want to know? I missed a belt loop earlier with my belt, and it prompted me to think of Army trousers where you could just undo a button and fix it, but I'm sure there must have been a more useful reason, I just don't know what that is.
Maybe something to do with stable belts? Or wearing a full set of webbing in shirt-sleeve order? Or just lunacy?
 

AlienFTM

MIA
Book Reviewer
#5
If your belt is attached to your and pouches, you can apply the loops without dismantling the webbing.

No, me neither. Webbing stayed firmly tucked in a bin. "Not to mention stocking and suspenders", he added quickly to preempt the cunny funts.
 
#7
On the contrary, the word 'built' is spelled perfectly correctly. It's just that the word does not belong in the sentence.
Although a webbing belt with pouches, etc, added could be considered a 'built set of webbing', so perhaps both spelling and context are fine, but the grammar lets you down?
 
#9
Grammar aside, why then was it done away with in CS95?
 

AlienFTM

MIA
Book Reviewer
#10
As an aside, hands up who lost the central back loop button (before a design change made the central loop two loops, offset from centre) with a slightly large spare combat jacket button, then banged out loads of sit-ups, only to finish with a pair of nasty weals either side of the butt crack.

Only me, huh? To be fair, after the first time, I made sure I never wore centre-loop lightweights when sit -ups were possible.
 
#11
Grammar aside, why then was it done away with in CS95?
Penny-pinching? Or possibly (as part of the reasoning behind the penny-pinching), that as CS95 on ops was generally worn shirt-out (howls of outrage from some quarters) or that chest-webbing or assault vests were more often used, the 'opening' belt loops were redundant.
 

MrBane

LE
Moderator
Kit Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#15
Grammar aside, why then was it done away with in CS95?
Because there was one belt for webbing and one for your trousers and never the two would meet.

Webing stayed permanently assembled and would just sit over your normal belt.

Is my guess.
 
#16
Grammar aside, why then was it done away with in CS95?
Because to put a button on would cost £0.002 therefore by doing away with the button being sewn you save a shed load of money...or some such
 
#18
From Wikipedia so must be true: Combat pants have buttons on every belt loop, this was if the pants were to large you could button over to the next button to make them smaller. Combat pants also had "blousers" which were tucked into the boots and the draw string on the bottom of the pant leg will be tightened around the top of the boot to keep out foreign objects and pests. Often the "blousers" were ripped out of the pant leg and used as toilet paper.
 
#19
Although a webbing belt with pouches, etc, added could be considered a 'built set of webbing', so perhaps both spelling and context are fine, but the grammar lets you down?

Isn't a "built" set of webbing CEFO or CEMO?
 
#20
Random question time, per the thread title. Anyone know the reason why uniforms from the 90s and earlier had buttons on the belt loops, rather than just sewn down? The Army's never been big on fashion (stand fast Household Div and Cav), so I don't think it's for appearance's sake. What function did it serve? Whatever it was, CS95 did away with them, so I'm all the more curious.

Obvious question - why do I want to know? I missed a belt loop earlier with my belt, and it prompted me to think of Army trousers where you could just undo a button and fix it, but I'm sure there must have been a more useful reason, I just don't know what that is.
It's bleedin' obvious, innit.

when fightin' in shirtsleeves (it happened, there are pictures) you'd have the loops over the main webbing belt (find some pictures, take a look) , 'cos Her Maj didn't issue trouser belts, and you were'nt allowed to use a civvie one, nor could you have your issue grey braces/suspenders/galluses* on display, for fear of amusing the natives.

And then you'd need to take a tactical dump, without removing your webbing.

So - it's a design feature, not a bug.

Sorted.
=========
*Stonkernote: Those are all words for the same thing in English/American/Geordie
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
O Weapons, Equipment & Rations 7
R Classified Ads 0
Myss Classified Ads 0

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top