What's happened to the uniform

Should the square rig uniform be retro-modernized to recapture traditional jolly jack appearance?


  • Total voters
    271
Montigny_La_Palisse said:
Montigny_La_Palisse said:
MOD EDIT: Irrelevant comment to the topic
Yes it fcuking was. It was designed to create a reaction, much like all this bollocks about the RN of today being chod.
You amaze me MlaP you keep beating on about others bleating on yet you are always the first to throw a snide comment or three with these comments laced with the odd mouthful of expletives.
If these issues do not really bother you why bother responding? :roll:
 
Polycell said:
Montigny_La_Palisse said:
Montigny_La_Palisse said:
MOD EDIT: Irrelevant comment to the topic
Yes it fcuking was. It was designed to create a reaction, much like all this bollocks about the RN of today being chod.
You amaze me MlaP you keep beating on about others bleating on yet you are always the first to throw a snide comment or three with these comments laced with the odd mouthful of expletives.
If these issues do not really bother you why bother responding? :roll:
I wouldn't have to if imbeciles like you wouldn't keep banging the "in my day" drum.

And what's your point? Am I to sit idly by while you spew your ill-informed wank onto these pages? No.

Wind your neck in and fcuk off to the RBL or RNA forums if you want to drip about us.
 
I

In_my_day

Guest
Just for all those that reckon that all matelots are scran bags; I was in Guzz today and there were dozens of "baby" matelots from Raliegh in town, I have to say they looked quite smart in rig. I can't recall when I last saw new entrants in town in rig, any ideas?

IMD
 
Fully agree I_m_d, they are invariably immaculate on their day out. I've also found their behaviour on public transport exemplary, so we're (or I should say 'they're') getting something right.

What did you mean by 'any ideas'? How long they've been venturing into Plymouth in rig? If so it's been going on for several years to my memory.
 
I

In_my_day

Guest
Guzzler said:
What did you mean by 'any ideas'? How long they've been venturing into Plymouth in rig? If so it's been going on for several years to my memory.
Yes, it's just that I don't recall having seen it for years. Perhaps it's just something you become accustomed to.

IMD
 
Just discovered why todays sailors hats look so naff. My son came with an old hat that he was going to throw out. I said "give that thing here", and attempted to bend a bow wave in it. It would not bend. There is a rigid hardened plastic surround inside the hat making it impossible to bend into proper shape.
Perhaps the powers that be should fit a pudding basin to the inside of the Royal Marine beret as well, to improve the appearance of that.
 
Just discovered why todays sailors hats look so naff. My son came with an old hat that he was going to throw out. I said "give that thing here", and attempted to bend a bow wave in it. It would not bend. There is a rigid hardened plastic surround inside the hat making it impossible to bend into proper shape.
Perhaps the powers that be should fit a pudding basin to the inside of the Royal Marine beret as well, to improve the appearance of that.
I tried bending one had the same prob.
Got round it with a pair of wire cutters and amputated a ferkin great lump from the rim.
 


The above picture from WWI. There seems historically to be much difference in how much shirt was shown and how tight the uniforms were, though the jumpers in most of the photos are noticeably shorter than today.

I have a question about the silk. Covey Crump, which was written in the 1950s says:



The most noticeable thing to me about the new uniforms - apart from the trousers and how long the jumper is now - is how thin the silk is - it looks like a cheap piece of folded over nylon ribbon. The current silk currently ready-fashioned and the two sides cross over with velcro under the collar. Yet when I look at pictures from the 50s and 60s it is also flat, definitely not what a 12" wide piece of silk would look like. Can anyone shed light on this?

MODs, can we consider a Uniform forum for the many threads on this same subject?
I have a question which will undoutably show my useless modern naval uniform knowledge...

Ref the chap sitting next to the two ringer, he has the crossed hooks of a PO but is in (what I would consider) JR's rig. However directly next to him is what I take to be a senior rate negative cpo's buttons, which I would have thought to be a PO. can anyone help my historical curiosity?
 
S&S branch (writers etc) used to wear the fore and aft rig, it was only changed to square rig in the 1950's I think. Seamen branch petty officers wore square rig and only went into fore and aft rig when they became CPO's.
 
The silk was folded and ironed to a 2inch strip. The P.O. has been rated up and is carrying out his 12 month provisional before moving to
'Fore' and Aft rig.The chap on the left is probably an SBA or 'Dusty' who all wear Fore and Aft not Square rig.
 
The silk was folded and ironed to a 2inch strip. The P.O. has been rated up and is carrying out his 12 month provisional before moving to
'Fore' and Aft rig.The chap on the left is probably an SBA or 'Dusty' who all wear Fore and Aft not Square rig.
Thanks for the reply, and Wrecker.

Did all dustys (logs pers.....!) wear the fore and aft? Inclusive ab's etc? I'm interested by the history of it, as of course nowadays the peak cap would be a status symbol of SR's. Does it imply that the writers of the day went in with seniority or was it simply to discern between the Seaman and the "back office" guys? (intend no offence to writers, and an RO who spends most days in a commcen I'm very much office myself)
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
The_Caretaker Land Ops 0
B Site Issues 30
M The Corps 16

Similar threads

Latest Threads

New Posts

Top