gore-tex

#4
It depends on the tactical situation on the ground.

msr
 
#5
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.
 
#6
qui_audet_vincit said:
no-need to be pedantic, you could have just answered the question
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.
 
#7
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.
 
#8
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").
 
#10
The honest answer is: however you are told to. If you are making the decision, you don't need to ask ;)

msr
 
#11
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.
 
#12
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!
 
#13
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.
 
#14
Bravo_Bravo said:
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 :evil: We always looked like drowned rats.
 

ACAB

On ROPS
On ROPs
#15
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!
 
#16
I would say (in my lovely gortex experiences) it depends. I agree with MM, what's the hurry in getting stuff out of your top pockets, but if your smock's already wet - ie put gortex on a bit late, I would wear it outside.

I would prefer gortex outside and save the smock getting wet because it adds unnecessary weight, like a wet bergan (good reason for bergan liners).
 
#19
I don't even take a smock on ex/ops at all in temperate or arctic climates - I just use the gortex as a combat jacket.

Quick rant: sorry, but in this day and age, cotton combat clothing is a ridiculous anachronism - what the heck is the point in using something that becomes instantly sodden - with rain or sweat - and then doesn't dry out? I know that the real reason is that cotton clothing is dirt cheap, but there have been far better solutions around for decades. Just one example: I remember being on a jump with some South African paras: our smocks were those soft cotton mid-90s jobbies which wore out in about a week; the SA smocks were made of cordura or similar, with padding & reinforcment along the forarms and across the shoulders - ie a thoroughly tough, quick-dry bit of kit. End of rant.
 
#20
Didn't some para start a busniess selling cordura smocks dont know anything else about them.Guess they didn't work out.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top