New USN Uniforms

PartTimer

War Hero
Many will be familiar with the RNs long and involved process of replacing 4s (8s for the older amongst us), the debacle that was the blue Norgy top (thankfully withdrawn) and the current dark blue CS95 that are being trialed. Don't even get me on trying to get a coat!

THE USN seems to have jumped in the a new working uniform, details here.

thumb_051101-N-2410F-001.jpg


I think it looks pants - then again I've never seen the point of wearing camoflage when sitting at a desk.
 

Gook

Midshipman
Agreed. I don't see how a camouflage uniform is going to protect you from a Styx or a Sunburn. And its not as if the USN is even facing off against these nowadays, is it.

Forgive me for asking, what is wrong with the existing uniforms (both USN and RN)? Didn't they address the fire-retardence problem post-Falklands?
 

PartTimer

War Hero
Vasco said:
PartTimer said:
the debacle that was the blue Norgy top (thankfully withdrawn)

Forgive an old man who is out of touch - why was the norgy disliked?

to replace the No 4 blue working shirt shirt and trousers the RN introduced a dark blue norgy top (with epaulets for rank slides) and a dark blue version of the old green lightweights (pocket on side). There was a lightweight and heavyweight version for hot and cold climates. It lasted all of 6 months - looked a crock of shite when worn. Epaulets hanging half way down the back if the (plastic) zip waa down, big holes in the cuffs, sleaves couldn't be roled up like the shirts, and no pockets either. One wash and they just looked cheap and shoddy. COs were banning them on their ships. In the end the trousers were kept, but the norgy tops binned.
 

purpleronnie

Midshipman
Let's face it, even if we don't like dressing up like trees in Combat 95, there is no way anyone can describe No 8s (or whatever they are called now) as smart. They are also extremely uncomfortable in anything but moderate climates and a cow to iron when washed.

While I agree the camouflage blue look a bit strange, if I know the yanks, it will be comfortable, non-iron, drip dry and last forever.
 

PartTimer

War Hero
purpleronnie said:
Let's face it, even if we don't like dressing up like trees in Combat 95, there is no way anyone can describe No 8s (or whatever they are called now) as smart. They are also extremely uncomfortable in anything but moderate climates and a cow to iron when washed.

While I agree the camouflage blue look a bit strange, if I know the yanks, it will be comfortable, non-iron, drip dry and last forever.

It's an all over dark blue CS95 that the RN are trialling - lightweight and heavyweght versions.

Peronally I don't mind the 4s - at least you can role up the shirt sleeves when its hot, have pockets, can button up the top button in the cold.

That said I was quite surprised that the blue CS95 actually loooked OK. What I'm concerned about is why do we need it? I think something designed for the shipboard environment rather than just a blue version of a uniform degined for the Army (however good it is). Maybe something which has attachment points for carrying life Jacket, AGR, immersion suit, rather than hanging them uncomortable of your waste. Reflective stripes for when you're on the upper deck (and if you go over the side). There's a case for colours for different specs/levels of command (like with Action overalls). Any other suggestions?
 

janner

MIA
Book Reviewer
Vesper said:
I'm not really sure I see the point of wearing camouflarge at sea.

Assuming that this would be sea colours type camo, you'd need to give up hope pretty quickly if you fell overboard. :eek:
 

hammockhead

Lantern Swinger
Not sure about the different colours - don't think white CS95s would be very practical. How about a white shirt and tie underneath for officers like the old battledress?
 

sidon55

Lantern Swinger
RAN has Action Working Dress (AWD) which are worn by the RAAF as well. Both short and long sleeve versions and there is also shorts. Quite smart. Shirrts have eppualates for rank slides. and yes, they do tend to not sit on the shoulder if the shirt is not a proper fit.
 

Vasco

Newbie
PartTimer said:
Vasco said:
PartTimer said:
the debacle that was the blue Norgy top (thankfully withdrawn)

Forgive an old man who is out of touch - why was the norgy disliked?

to replace the No 4 blue working shirt shirt and trousers the RN introduced a dark blue norgy top (with epaulets for rank slides) and a dark blue version of the old green lightweights (pocket on side). There was a lightweight and heavyweight version for hot and cold climates. It lasted all of 6 months - looked a crock of shite when worn. Epaulets hanging half way down the back if the (plastic) zip waa down, big holes in the cuffs, sleaves couldn't be roled up like the shirts, and no pockets either. One wash and they just looked cheap and shoddy. COs were banning them on their ships. In the end the trousers were kept, but the norgy tops binned.

Thanks, PartTimer. Norgies were the bee's knees when I was soldiering, because of the general all-round element of comfort and cosiness, but I follow your reasoning.
 
Top