Here we go again! Another new uniform

drewfester

Lantern Swinger
#4
What also got me about the article was the CO of Lancaster saying it was great because it had "Branding" on it.
Who comes up with this crap?? The Royal Navy is not a flipping brand its and armed force not Nike or Gucci. FFS stop trying to make the armed forces a company it's not and the sooner those bellends at the top realise that and force it downwards the better!
 

Tomahawk

Lantern Swinger
#6
What also got me about the article was the CO of Lancaster saying it was great because it had "Branding" on it.
Who comes up with this crap?? The Royal Navy is not a flipping brand its and armed force not Nike or Gucci. FFS stop trying to make the armed forces a company it's not and the sooner those bellends at the top realise that and force it downwards the better!
I understand where you're coming from with the branding but I think it's along the right lines. With this, we have the White Ensign and Royal Navy to inform people, especially when service personnel in combats are automatically tagged as in the Army
 
#7
I agree completely with Drewfester's comments - the use of a word like "branding" is just the sort of no-brainer blue-sky thinking out of the box which has typified the management-bollocks mentality which has taken over.

There's a sort of analogy to the tale of the emperor's new clothes - if you don't go along with it, you are a dinosaur. ( or at least the equivalent of a climate-change denier in BBC terms).

Having said that, Tomahawk raises a valid point about recognition of the RN when wearing combats. But will the new rig actually replace the wearing of combats when required?
 
#8
Reading the RNTM, everywhere the RN is operating where MTP isn't required but is worn is to stop with the roll out of the new uniform (CHF when not in the field, Fleet diving groups, people out in the middle east that isn't a war zone e.g. bahrain at CTF150).

On the other hand I assume the RFA, Sea Cadets and CCF will have their own corrosponding badges on the shirts so as to avoid confusions between the arms?

As for branding, I think we missed a trick with the arm badges- looking at the trial issue rigs, I thought the ships crest looked much smarter and would have worked well wth the service badge on the chest. A shame some CO's didn't want their sailors to be linked to a specific unit as I think things like this instills a pride and beter cohesion, like the army have with their regiments and corps'.
 

CmdKeen

Lantern Swinger
#9
Having said that, Tomahawk raises a valid point about recognition of the RN when wearing combats. But will the new rig actually replace the wearing of combats when required?
Well the associated guidance from 2SL was quite to the point about how infrequently sailors should be wearing MTP, even the divers need to move over.
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#10
In this particular case, I think we need to nail this puppy to the floor:

Branding is important.

Whenever I go to a school wearing working rig (3B's) I get mistaken for a Copper or an Arriva bus driver. (I don't mind because I just take bus fares from kids, tell them RN business cards are valid on the bus & spend the cash in the pub). The words "Royal Navy" on the uniform stops the kids having to walk home skint and also shows the Navy in a more coherent, socially responsible light. Burp.

Whenever I go to a school with a Booty in tow, they get confused with the pongos, so they wear a polo shirt with Royal Marines Commando on their backs in big letters for the hard of hearing. It works.

With regard Divers, don't start me. Nowhere does it say they need to wear MTP & hair gel in UK. Do they listen? Do they b*llocks.
 
#11
What I want to know is why Perc (and more commonly the Crabs) always appear to weat MTP for getting Medals, homecoming tours and other ceremonial events. Do they not have No 1's anymore? Is MTP not the same as working rig?

I like the new rig, looks smarter than No 8's (refuse to call them the new name) :)
 
G

guestm

Guest
#12
What also got me about the article was the CO of Lancaster saying it was great because it had "Branding" on it.
Who comes up with this crap?? The Royal Navy is not a flipping brand its and armed force not Nike or Gucci. FFS stop trying to make the armed forces a company it's not and the sooner those bellends at the top realise that and force it downwards the better!
I disagree entirely. The RN is a brand and identity and public visibility is linked to the branding.

NS hits the nail on the head with his post.

What annoys me more is the gimp they chose to model the rig in the picture. That guy would look a bag of shit in a bespoke Oswald Boateng suit.
 
#13
I disagree entirely. The RN is a brand and identity and public visibility is linked to the branding.

NS hits the nail on the head with his post.

What annoys me more is the gimp they chose to model the rig in the picture. That guy would look a bag of shit in a bespoke Oswald Boateng suit.
Is that anything like an Oswald Mosley outfit?
 

drewfester

Lantern Swinger
#14
In a manner I agree with NS that the RN should be identifiable and the Royal Navy eppelettes and badges on foulies etc does that but the Royal Navy is NOT a brand! It is the name of an Armed Force within the UK.
Nike and Gucci are Brandss, the RN is not.
The CO of Lancaster could have said it has our ensign or for want of a better term logo on it but no way is the White Ensign or words Royal Navy a Brand
 

Capn_Pugwash

Lantern Swinger
#15
new rn uniform.jpg

That man there! Why are you wearing your branch badge on your shoulder.

Cos the poster says so, Chief.

No it £$%"£^&* well doesn't.

Yes it does Chief, LOOK!

I don't hold out much hope for it fitting well if the team who are running this don't know the difference between a shoulder and upper arm.
 
#16
MLP wrote:

"I disagree entirely. The RN is a brand and identity and public visibility is linked to the branding.

"NS hits the nail on the head with his post."


Whilst it is important that the RN should be recognisable as an organisation the use of an expression such as "branding" equates it to the marketing of cornflakes. The sentiment is sound, but the terminology is flawed.
 
#19
Does one think that skipper was looking for brownie points?
Cdr Peter Laughton, commanding officer of HMS Lancaster, said: "We are extremely proud and genuinely delighted to be the first ship to wear the Royal Navy's new uniform.
"It is a really practical, smart and modern uniform, and the extra branding allows us to much better represent our service.
Vice Admiral Sir David Steel, who oversaw the changes while in his previous post of Second Sea Lord, said the old look was "a bit out of date".
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
finknottle Current Affairs 50
MG Maniac Current Affairs 12
R12_CV Current Affairs 10

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top