Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by Cymru_am_Byth, Nov 23, 2005.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
under or over combat jacket?
why is this question specific to the TA?
Surely it belongs in the QMs/MT forum?
no-need to be pedantic, you could have just answered the question
It depends on the tactical situation on the ground.
New ones have no pockets and were designed to go under. They last longer in this manner and you can still get at the stuff in your pockets which was all in waterproof bags anyway.
Someone would have been eventually, so thought it could be me!
As to your question, I agree with what was said above: It depends on the tactical situation.
What tactical situation is that? They aren't crisp packets anymore!
And if you are close enough to the enemy for them to hear your jacket rustling above the sound rain, they're going to see your movement.
All that wearing them under will achieve will be a wet smock. Which may lead to the obvious.
I also agree with the tactical situation answer. I had a row with our former RSM over this (as much of a row as you can have with an RSM), because I always wore mine under for anti rustling reasons (and because it's described as a "liner").
it's just a shame there isn't pockets in the jackets and trousers
The honest answer is: however you are told to. If you are making the decision, you don't need to ask
You reckon they are designed to go under your smock?, how come they have the left chest map pocket opening then?. Over the top, no point in getting f_cking soaked because the enemy are more likeley to hear your moaning than the rustle of the fabric.
This is a fad that came about because of the old Crisp packets.
Let us look at the practicality of wearing it over, as it is easier to dry out a Gary Gore Tex than it is to dry a smock.
What do you need to get from your smock is such a hurry, your ammo or grenades? No.
I would rather have thirty blokes sounding like a fat bird fast walking than tuning into the Mong Multiple!
I agree with MM ( shock, horror probe ).
If it was designed to go UNDER a smock, it would probably not be printed in DPM.
I did see a bunch of very fresh faced squaddies in the pissing down rain with waterproofs under their smocks. Looked like a bunch of drowned rats.
Had one troop commander who insisted that we deploy in the field in NBC state low(?) so wearing noddy suits with hoods down - so no water proofs allowed We always looked like drowned rats.
Wear them on the outside and be bloody grateful you can. Goretex jackets were first issued to my Battalion in 1988 in South Armagh, with a warning from our slug of a QM, that if we ripped them we would pay for them (Blackthorne hedges anyone?)My multiple spent four & half months soaking wet but the fat REMF got his jackets back unscathed (and unworn). Ah, the good old days!
Separate names with a comma.