Is there a tight-collar uniform in your future?

[CommunityEditor]

The latest version of the service dress, which will begin appearing in a limited wear-test this summer, is essentially a modern take on the classic World War II-era uniform worn by Henry “Hap” Arnold, the aviation pioneer who became the first leader of the Air Force when it separated from the Army.

"No uniform will make everyone happy," Lt. Gen. Roger A. Brady, deputy chief of staff for manpower and personnel said, and he expects that some airmen will have complaints.

Read the details about the new uniform. (http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/03/AFuniform031807/)

View 360-degree illustrations of the new service dress coat and the early gear that inspired it. (http://www.airforcetimes.com/projects/flash/2007_03_16_afuniforms/)

Do you like the heritage-inspired look? Will it really 'Hap-pen'? What are your thoughts on what should stay or go?

(Also: Take our survey on the new uniform. (http://www.keysurvey.com/survey/144640/e81e/))

[VinCar]

It looks silly to me...I don't like it, leave well enough alone, it'd be nice to have a uniform with some heritage and history too it that was longer than about 10 years. I never got the need to change the uniform repeatedly. Plus, and no offense here, 90% of Air Force members can't wear that jacket with any kind of belt around the midline/waist...let's face it and get real on that one. Air Force standards and that belt thing on the jacket don't go hand-in hand to looking professional unless you want to have a beacon that screams "Im over my bodyfat %!!"

*no offense intended, I'm an ex member 13 years, just being "real" in my assessment of the jacket and that belt thing

[Skweegee_guest]

I took a look at the 360 view and think that the female in the early uniforms looks damn good. But the new uniform makes the female SMSgt's a$$ look pretty big. I am curious as to what other females will think about that.

[GENERALBULLDOG54]

I think they are on the right track. My only gripes are the belt and the lapels. There's something in the current uniform that doesn't lead to the serious covering up of ribbons and name tags. The belt isn't necessary for common wear, maybe for something special. In that regard, the "Mitchell" would be more than sufficient. I was also wondering, would a black "Mitchell" coat, with belt with department of air force seal in silver, af blue pants with silver lining, and black military hat with af blue lining be decent for a parade uniform?

[RKAZALSKI]

The new uniform does not look comfortable to wear. That belt will cause all kinds of problems, the one of the male in the photo in the Air Force Times, it covers a button, on the woman, the belt is between two buttons. I can see all kinds of rules, clarifications and discussions about which belt wear is "out of uniform", etc. Will anyone be able to sit down comfortably with that belt around their waist. It looks bulky and too tight fitting, not the kind of uniform you want to wear all day. Go back to the drawing boards, this is not the solution. And, why do we need another uniform, anyways? We're just getting used to our latest version.

[DSEVANS]

Everytime I pick up an issue of Air Force Times or read the news articles in the local base paper when visiting active duty bases, I read about the whole down sizing of the force, due to lack of fundage. The Air National Guard is facing serious funding issues right now as well. The guard Wing that I work for has had a 50% budget cut in the past 2 years. Yet, the Air Staff continues funneling money into projects that have absolutley NO bearing on the missions that we're facing around the world right now. Elminiate the manning and all of the funding for the 50+ LTCOL's and senior NCO's (exageration) at this "back to heritage board" and use that money more efficently. If people are so intent upon looking fashionable, then when it comes time to reenlist, join the Navy instead.

[AIRGUARD231]

Here is another example of our leaders not listening to the replies in the field. A survey was conducted where a whopping 54 percent clearly stated to leave the current design alone. Only 5 percent liked the Hap-Arnold design. So I ask, are the leaders listening to those in the field, those fighting the combat operations? Evidently, this seems to be something personal than useful. We, airmen, clearly understand our past and we clearly understand our present--funds are short. Please take the blinders off and LISTEN to your troops in the field. Spend the money on combat operations or support those spouses left behind while loved ones are defending our freedom. This isn't the time to address a uniform change that will not be worn in ANY battle.

[EDWARDW4]

I don't think the new design is too bad; but I think there needs to be more consistency with the metal components: you have bright silver (badges, collar brass), satin silver (nametag) and dull silver (buttons). It needs to be IMO all one or the other, not this mish-mash of metal types.

I also agree with the previous postings about how it is funny that we don't have enough money to run the AF, but they find the money to do this. My ANG wing literally didn't have enough $ to pay us to come to drill at the end of FY06!!!

[BKNJOHNSON]

With all due respect to the work that went into the design of yet another uniform change, I look around my office and realize I'm losing as many as 60% of my team to force shaping, RIFs, VSP and deployments and around my base at cuts in services, all to buy more airplanes. So naturally, we should be spending precious tax dollars on a new uniform. Today's AF Times quotes Lt Gen Brady "It's about increasing the focus on combat operations." With all due respect sir, how is spending money on a new service dress (which most of us never wear more than once a year, if that) focusing us on combat operations? The uniform board and office should be scraping by on nickels and dimes like the rest of us. Go ahead and come up with some great ideas, but can't we wait until the bleeding stops a little before sticking our junior enlisted and junior officers with yet another uniform, and in this case, one we rarely wear anyway?

[FINKD]

I retired 4 years ago and after looking at the new uniform, I'm glad I won't be wearing it. I know it's our for wear-testing which is a euphemism for it's a done deal.

The uniform looks like the one issued to me in 1975 except without the belt. As another poster mentioned, the belt will make AF members look fat. I'm glad the original "Billy Mitchell" look did away with the high collar but what's left over really doesn't, IMO, present a positive, professional image of today's Air Force. It looks more like a costume for a 1950s B-movie.

[FAMILIEWILSON]

Let's see ...



1. We're at war and seemingly can't afford it
2. We're losing people in our Air Force because we can't afford them
3. We're cutting out PCS moves because we can't afford them
4. We're flying tankers that are older than dirt because we can't afford new ones
5. My enlisted personnel are having their 7-level school waived because we can't afford it


Oh ... but we have plenty of money to waste on new uniforms that never really brought America's most talented and patriotic citizens into our Air Force in the first place, right?

Nice ... REALLY nice ... thanks for wasting my tax dollars!

[BFADELY]

The new coat as shown is nothing more than the one that I wore from 1954 to 1975 except for the material and color. Please, can the Air Force stop with the uniform changes ever other fiscal year. Since I retired in 1975 there has been, at least, 5 to 6 new uniforms and changes. It has become like the weather in Texas. If you don't like it, just wait it will change.

[AirForceMike]

Another service dress uniform. Amazing! I guess I went through a few changes in my 25 years of service, and offer that maybe money can be better spent supporting the war effort or boosting the housing allowance for junior enlisted personnel, but I'd like to make a few suggestions if I may. The pockets, I like. That takes us back to our heritage and gets rid of the business suit mentality that seems to drive these changes. I'd like to see senior leadership get rid of that bright, shiny, light reflecting name tag on the service dress jacket that should only be used as an emergency signaling device in case you're stranded in the wilderness. I'd like to see officer rank lose the pin-on/frog system of wear on the jacket and be replaced with maybe a sewn-directly on method to the epaulet. A flat epaulet is a professional epaulet. But a belt? Optimal fit? Custom tailored? How long until the next directive comes out to remove the belt from the jacket? The belt is not going to work, period. The current fabric is a winner, adding pockets back is a winner, but the belt has to go!

[xdinks]

Good Lord, they can't be serious. Didn't we just get a new Service Dress a few years ago? What is the point? Why are we going to waste money on something like this (that's a step backwards anyway) when we are cutting manpower and PCS moves to pay for new airplanes.

What I hate is the idiot leaders who make these decisions will be retiring in a year anyway, so they won't have to deal with the "more with less" environment that we will surely endure when resources continue to be wasted like this. But, Oh golly, they gotta leave their mark on the Air Force.

By the way, this new uniform is butt-ugly! If they are going to change uniforms, why not to something we would feel good wearing. Why does the Air Force continue to always have the ugliest uniforms. Please, next time, lets have a women design the new uniform -- not some 56 year old general who's been wearing the same clothes every day for the last 30 years!!!!

[PEARCED24]

Please no tight collar uniform - Have you ever sat in a banquet, been outside in formation for a retreat in full service dress, well think about doing that with a tight collar uniform, people would be passing out left, right and center, it's crazy.

[PEARCED24]

The new uniform looks ok, but I would get rid of the belt, and why do you want the women looking like the men? Lets not go back to the bad ol days, when women and minorities were treated as second class citizens in the military.

[PEARCED24]

The proposed new uniform does not look good on women, it makes even a slim person like the SMSgt in the Air Force times look out of shape (putting it nicely), please come up with some alternatives for the women in service.

[spyder48]

I wonder what pig sty architectural school the personnel on the uniform board attended. Actually that insults architects.

They went contrary to the recommendations of test wearers, completely ignored the recommendations of the company that held the rights to the tiger stripe design as to pixel pattern and color combinations, did not take in to consideration the design efforts of the Army and the feedback given after usage and as a result we now have an ABU that meets none of the needs of a field camoflage uniform. Anybody that thinks the Air Force is not in the direct line of fire and does not need an effective battle uniform deserves to be compared to the Army's General in charge of the Bureau of Ornance during the Civil War in failing to adopt the repeating rifle.

Now, even in tha halls of business, the Air Force Uniform Board has designed a camel by committee. Continuing to use the powder blue bus drivers shirt is laughable, the cut and drape of the uniform would have been used by Weary Willie the clown made famous by Emmett Kelley in his act.

The continued insistence of a single color for jacket and pants keeps the Air Force well in league with many bus drivers across the country. If you want to see a sharp uniform look at the Marines.

I am tired of not being able to present a professional image at home and a safe and unseen image in the field, free us of these dinosaurs on the Air Force Uniform Board.

[130fan]

Why, why, why, why, why? I was ever so glad to see that style of uniform go in the early 90's, and will be disappointed to see that style return. I love the current uniform as it is. But now, the only exception is the circle US insignia. Again I ask why? Why must there be a seperate US insignia segregating enlisted and officer. I believe the distinction between a chevron, and brass, is plain to see. Do we have an image problem? The problems I see from my end, has nothing to do with the dress uniform. Take the money from this project, and pay the salaries of my middle management, that is being cut, for the second time in two years due to a lack of CJR's for first term Airmen in my AFSC.

[RetiredAirGuard]

We are in the middle of a War...a long War. Gen. Moseley apparently has nothing better to do then suggest that we waste millions on a "retro-new uniform." There is not enough money for new aircraft or housing for the troops but unlimited money to waste on a back-to-the-future Hap Arnold uniform. Does anybody on the Air Staff have any common sense?

[jacksonl]

Come on, why can't we make our own history rather than going back to look more like the Army!? That is the most ridiculous uniform look I've seen. Didn't anyone learn anything from McPeak's design to make the uniform more civilian looking? Now the pendulum has gone in the complete opposite direction. We are always following rather than leading.

Don't we have more pressing issues to resolve?!

[VinCar]

Hopefully all of us engaging in this discussion are forwarding our (respectful) comments to our leaders, and not just your 1Sgt's and Commanders...get them to your Command Chief at a minimum. And don't forget the CMSAF, AF Chief of Staff and the Secretary have global email addresses.
We can all bellyache about it all we want here and get no result. Send your comments up the Chain and don't count on your first level leadership to do it for you, because they won't.

[76thMacDonald]

You guys amaze me. I showed pictures of the new uniform to every
military friend of mine that I know. All the non-Air Force guys thought
it looked good. One Marine friend was like "HOOAH!" Only the Air Force
people carped about it. The belt's too restrictive, it looks too retro, why
do we have to look like the Army? Blah, blah, blah. Frankly, the uniform
looks fine. It's more military, it has heritage, it's going to be tailored, and
all the other services think it looks sharp. What could be better than that?
If I send anything to the CSAF it'll be to tell him that it looks good, and maybe
offer some suggestions as to what to add (service stripes for enlisted, etc).

John

[hiflyin]

I agree with AIRGUARD 231 - Why is this a needed expense when the Air Force is taking every possible measure to cut spending and funding across every spectrum? I fly C-17's and AMC has implemented a fuel savings initiative that is so restrictive that I have to account for every pound of fuel that gets put on my airplane and if I need more fuel than the flight manager has authorized I have to ask permission if some cases all the way up to the 2-star level. So I'm at 35,000 ft over the Atlantic with 50 kts more headwind than was anticipated worrying about whether I have to divert for fuel and our leaders are spending money on a new non-combat uniform. I just don't get it?

Now - to comment on the actual uniform itself, I'm a female officer and I think it looks awful on the SMSgt modeling in the article. She's actually a fairly small woman and the uniform does nothing for her figure at all. Also I agree the lapels need to be changed and/or the pockets need to be lowered or eliminated on the female jacket. If you look at the close up of the medals, you can't even tell what badge she's wearing as it's half way covered up by the lapel and her most important ribbons are covered as well - the one's highest and closest to the heart. Now if you have wings or two badges like I do, there's not even enough room to get everything on your chest. And about women wearing the tie with the jacket but having to switch to the tie tab if you take off the jacket? Just stick with the tie tab, but not both.

[JDOAN13]

ANOTHER PLAIN BLUE SUIT?

The new Hap Arnold uniform looks a little outdated wih a blue belt that basically blends into the uniform. And the uniform is still basically the same uniform concept as our current one ... a plain blue suit. If we're going to spend money on a new uniform, then it really needs to be radically different and reflect the cutting edge technological leadership that the Air Force is know for. Otherwise, we should save our money and just keep the current uniform.

But if the Air Force really needs a new uniform, then let's do it right and invest the type of resources needed to make it worth our attention and effort. For one, why not contract with the Brooks Brothers like the U.S. Navy does and get their help in developing a service dress uniform. From my experience, military and non-military people alike have generally positive comments about Navy service dress uniforms. And let's change the "plain blue suit" concept. Nobody wears blue suits anymore. Plus, our blue suit is drab blue and has a very tired look to it. It needs more color to bring more balance to it. Why not darken the color of the service coat to a more deep midnight blue (representing the space domain?) to contrast with the Air Force blue pants (representing air domain?). And to continue adding contrast to the uniform, why not add a silver braid down the side of the pants like the USAF Honor Guard wears. And maybe add an officer and enlisted braid on the service coat similar to how the Army dress uniform. However, keep the braid a silver color since silver can aptly represent the Air Force's technological leadership. And it seems like the Air Staff is intersted in a Hap Arnold and Billy Mitchell look. Why not keep both and add more modernized looks to both (get rid of the belt, better fit, better material etc). The enlisted could wear the WWII Hap Arnold uniform to represent the organizational leadership of the Air Force while the officers could wear the WWI Billy Mitchell uniform to represent the pioneering spirit of air power. Anyways, these are just ideas. The point is, if the Air Force is going to spend money doing this, then they need to do this right and put some real thought into it to produce a significantly better uniform (like get the aid of reputable designers like Brooks Brothers). Otherwise, don't do it at all and just keep the current one.

[airmanandy]

I agree with 76thMacDonald. I think the new uniform is a step in the right direction. It does look more military. It's certainly better than the cheap blue suit we have now by a long shot! But it ain't perfect.

USABILITY:
I'd like to see some prototypes with a shorter coat -- sort of the like the Ike jacket form WWII. It would be easier to wear when driving and would be distinctive from the other services' uniforms.

For women, go with either a tie or the tie tab...not both.

DISTINCTIVENESS:
I think we should move to greyer blue (look at the RAF's uniform colors). When people see my blue uniform, they assume I'm in the Navy (it's happened several times). I'd also like to see a revival of the prop-and-wing insignia on the collar and/or the "Hap Arnold" logo on the shoulder. Both of these would help make the uniform more distinctively Air Force.

AESTHETIC:
I agree the belt needs work.

Make the difference between officer and enlisted uniforms more evident. Maybe add black stripes to officer's trousers like the Army has.

And for goodness sake, improve the fabric.

General:
And I, for one, like the idea of the stand-up collar as a "parade" uniform. I like the suggestion for the black coat and trousers with piping.

[76thMacDonald]

Agreed on the fabric! It's probably one of my main issues with
both the current coat and the new one. Surely it can't be that
hard to find better material to make the jacket and pants from?
Even if it means copying what the Marines use and having it
made in blue.

I think the Air Force may be saving it's powder with regards to
sprucing up the jacket and adding stuff for the Billy Mitchell
jacket. If they introduce that as a semi-formal uniform to go
between the service coat and mess dress, I hope they go
crazy and really make it look good. It would be nice to have
something that could be worn with full sized medals. Silver
stripes for NCO's/officers, piping, and a nice white high-
collar shirt like the Marine officers wear with their own high
collar jacket would look good. The honor guard's belt would
look great with it, as well as their wheel cover with Hap Arnold
insignia.

John


I agree with 76thMacDonald. I think the new uniform
is a step in the right direction. It does look more military. It's certainly better than
the cheap blue suit we have now by a long shot! But it ain't perfect.

USABILITY:
I'd like to see some prototypes with a shorter coat -- sort of the like the Ike jacket form
WWII. It would be easier to wear when driving and would be distinctive from the other
services' uniforms.

For women, go with either a tie or the tie tab...not both.

DISTINCTIVENESS:
I think we should move to greyer blue (look at the RAF's uniform colors). When people
see my blue uniform, they assume I'm in the Navy (it's happened several times). I'd also
like to see a revival of the prop-and-wing insignia on the collar and/or the "Hap Arnold"
logo on the shoulder. Both of these would help make the uniform more distinctively Air
Force.

AESTHETIC:
I agree the belt needs work.

Make the difference between officer and enlisted uniforms more evident. Maybe add
black stripes to officer's trousers like the Army has.

And for goodness sake, improve the fabric.

General:
And I, for one, like the idea of the stand-up collar as a "parade" uniform. I like the
suggestion for the black coat and trousers with piping.

[swtmkae]

:mad: Reading this article and thinking about this issue just plain makes me mad! The previous posters have summed up the issue well... 1. The USAF is "force-shaping" 40,000 individuals, and overall troop deployments are increasing, while 37% of our deployments are "in leu of" taskings to support the Army. We can't afford to buy toilet paper or cut the grass in PACAF, but we can afford to spend time and money on a new uniform?? 2. I KNOW my heritage and changing the uniform I wear a few times a year won't help educate me. 3. Senior leadership obviously does not listen to, or seem to care, what we think when over half of respondents indicated we like what we have. I am a female and was thrilled when our pockets went away- I think our current service coat is attractive and relatively comfortable. Many more people liked the Mandarin collar, but it doesn't seem that is the favored option at this point. 4. Lastly- this iteration is just plain hideous. I was appalled when first saw it. Those pockets for the females are bulky and the lapels cover the ribbons, the four buttons just add bulk, and the tie is too manly (our regs specifically state we must present a feminine appearance) and don't even get me started on that horrendous belt! Only underfed models look good in a belted jacket. If leadership wants to harken to historical example, the 50s-60s uniform looks quite nice. And PS- with all due respect- if you want to give us some history- stop changing the uniform every few years.

[pjc767]

Since the argument has previously fallen on deaf ears, I'll not say much about the absurdity of designing a dress uniform during a war.

However, if we have to have a new uniform, can we all please just say no to this re-tread of the "Tony Nelson uniform?"

1. How stupid is it to have functional chest pockets on a jacket? Who would use them & for what? Won't the flaps get bent out after sitting in the jacket for a short while? If they aren't stitched down, will they ever follow the contour of the body or will they just stick out? And why have flaps at all? What's their real purpose?

2. A belt on a jacket? Wow. Wow.

3. Have you seen the rear-view of the fancy pleat on the jacket? It makes the wearer look like the Iron Giant.

4. If there is a real call for a new uniform jacket that looks more military--and I doubt that there is--why not lean to something inspired by an Eisenhower jacket? Yeah, it has the silly looking chest pockets too, but they could easily be eliminated. Same is true with the E-jacket's belt (or, at least it's not very prominent). The E-jacket offers one real advantage over every other coat considered--you can wear it sitting down and it easily becomes a uniform item that you wear all the time, not just for a few minutes at a ceremony or a court-martial. True, its fit will encourage wearers to maintain body fat standards. And that raises the question, why is it that military members were so much fitter during WW II?

5. Air Force Clothing Office seems to be missing a real opportunity here--why are they wedded to using that awful blue polyester fabric they've been punishing us with for years? Is it true that all that fabric was found in a dumpster behind Studio 54? Why not a natural low-maintenance fabric like the Marines' gabardine? Better yet, modern fabrics/fabric treatments would allow the Clothing Office to chose a fabric that is or looks natural; keeps a crease without shining, scratching, or magnetically drawing lint from 10' away; and offers superior wicking and stain protection? Why aren't they thinking about this?

6. Hooray JDOAN13! That's the best idea I've heard regarding our uniforms in my 13 years' service. Why not take advantage of competitive forces and hold a contract competition for the design of a new uniform? Certainly, vendors like Brooks Bros. & their competitors will produce a superior, innovative design that may actually produce a more functional product! Clever thinking re color choices too!

[Ol Dawg]

I agree with what appears to be the majority. I've been in for just over 20 years and this will be just another change for the sake of change. While I don't necesarilly like the current uniform, it works. Also, last i checked we were ordered to cut unit budgets, reduce TDY training, make do with less money, reduce contract support, deploy more troops ag and again.
It really seems like the AF senior staff does not understand the concept of fighting a war if they can't find better ways to spend millions on "testing" a new uniform, not to mention the costs to the service members. Also, as we transition, we will once again be wearing two seperate uniforms and remain the joke of our sister services while we once again try to decide who we are as a force.
The ABU was a good idea we screwed up, why make it two in a row. Leave well enough alone and spend the money saving lives, like with better body armor, better vehicle armor, or cold weather deployment gear from at least the 20th century.

[airmanandy]

That's probably the best idea I've heard yet:

For both the ABU and the new service uniform, a full and open contract competition and award would have been the right way to go. There are lots of combat uniforms out there that are much better than the ABU. And there are also lots of companies that can make suits better than the AF can.

[jennpetz]

I think the heritage uniform is very unattractive. The belt serves absolutly no purpose and it looks bad on the uniform. It is a very unprofessional looking uniform. As much as some people may want to "remember" the past, there is a reason things were updated with the times. Move forward not back. I would be embarrassed if my husband had to wear this thing.

[jennpetz]

I'm curious why the AF keeps coming up with these GOOFY styles!

[76thMacDonald]

With regards to the previous posters:

1. A belt makes a uniform look more military. That WAS one of the points of a new
uniform, right?

2. Does anyone have any idea how much a new jacket's going to cost? No? Neither
do I. Until someone has actual figures, please stop repeating over and over how it's
going to bankrupt the Air Force.

3. The new jacket doesn't look goofy. It looks like what it's supposed to look like-- a
modified older style, like, say ALL the other services wear.

4. These uniforms are being wear tested, which means that hopefully stylistic
problems will make themselves apparent, and will be corrected.

5. The Air Force isn't changing the jacket just to change it, they're changing it
because PEOPLE COMPLAINED ABOUT THE CURRENT ONE! It's a logical conclusion
to a stated problem!


Finally, about the only thing I'll agree with on these jackets is that the current poly-wool
material we use is AWEFUL. I 100% agree with the poster that asked why we can't
use a gabardine like the Marines. It really wouldn't be that hard to take what the Marines
use and buy it in blue.

John

[SecurityForces695]

I personally think that the air force needs to reprioritize what they think our needs as a force are. I wont beat a dead horse and talk about how much the air force changes based on what the wants of the few senior leaders that are running the show, however for us to even have this initiative brought up shows how out of touch they are. We should be more concerned about military priorities instead of what we feel like wearing to work today. The new service coat is taking away from newer body armor that could bring troops home alive, or actual cold weather gear because the booty on duty shorts that the air force calls standardized PT gear doesnt cut it when you are deployed somewhere that gets about -10 C in the winter. In addition, the new ABU is not combat ready. It has nothing that combat AFSC's asked for. But i guess it doesnt matter when you deploy overseas and work in an office and get off at 2pm to go PT. I guess more airmen need to be killed in the line of duty before the air force wakes up and realizes that we are at war, not a back office fashion show.

[AirForceRetired]

I agree with DSEVANS. I think the military has many more important things to focus on than a new uniform that ,quite frankly, is the worse design to date. I also agree with some others that this new design probably is not going to be--how do I say this delicately?--flattering to some body types. Anyway, is a new uniform design necessary? Are the people that authorized this expenditure that out of touch that they don't realize there's a war going on? I think the people, money, and time spent on this project could be used in a more constructive way. Like, oh, I don't know... equipment and protection for our airmen in Afganistan and Iraq. I can't tell you how bizarre I think this is. How is this even justified? Better yet, who cares about a new uniform? I retired several years ago, but I can't ever remember thinking, "Gee, you know it's been 5 or 6 years since we had a new uniform design, somebody better get on this!" I bet there are lots of airman who just can wait to spend money on a new uniform. And they will have to wear it. Many military functions that they will have to participate in will require them to wear it--promotions, dining outs, academies (jr. and sr.), parades...you get the idea. Do the other branches of the serivce change their uniforms as much as the AF?

[AirForceRetired]

"2. Does anyone have any idea how much a new jacket's going to cost? No? Neither
do I. Until someone has actual figures, please stop repeating over and over how it's
going to bankrupt the Air Force."
--76thMacDonald



Yeah, I have the answer--too much. It's too much because it's not necessary. Just like any other company, organization, or household for that matter; take care of your needs before your wants.

[airmanandy]

None of us has seen the budget info for this uniform. The odds that this is actually pulling funding away from body armor are slim (at this point, it's probably not even the same flavor of funding).

The ABU is fine replacement for the BDU if you work in an office in Ohio. I don't see a single improvement for battlefield airmen. However, while disparaging the ABU may be fun and worthwhile, it is a separate topic that should go in its own thread.

[pjc767]

With regards to the previous posters:

2. Does anyone have any idea how much a new jacket's going to cost? No? Neither
do I. Until someone has actual figures, please stop repeating over and over how it's
going to bankrupt the Air Force.

John

John--your points are well taken, but I don't think the "cost" argument is about the effect it will have on the USAF's bottom line--or the wallets of officers and other members that will have to buy it. Rather, I think the argument is that spending money on the effort to develop the dress uniform during a war is wasteful. Even if the cost of the project is comparatively small, the money could be better spent on a project that directly supports the war. However, a more cynical view is that wartime is the ideal time to develop a new dress uniform, because the war bloats the service budgets and makes the money easier to find than it would be during a peace budget.

[EDWARDW4]

I think the AF should have done what both the Army and Navy did; they farmed out their new uniform search to the private sector where fashion designers and people who knew what they were doing came up with some really good designs.
In the case of the Army, they decided to just adapt their existing "Dress Blues" into the new Army Service uniform. The Navy came up with a new uniform that seems, according to the Navy Times, be be received pretty well.

Of course the AF Uniform Board wouldn't do that, because it would mean giving up their power and cushy jobs.

The result: A uniform that looks like a throwback to the 70's, with an uncomfortable looking belt, mismatched metal colors and one that makes the SMSgt. in the pictures look really "dumpy". :(

[Irish4]

Put the money in the right places. I know they all fall into different budgets, but who said you can't take money from on area and move it to another. The Uniform we have now looks good if it just had a few simple touches. Look at the Honor Guard uniform! Get rid of the flight cap and go back to the bus driver cap. Or get whoever designed the marines uniform to design an Air Force uniform. Really the money should be spent on the ageing aircraft we have in our inventory. And for once put the F-22 and F-35 on the back burner and concentrate on the most important aspect of the Military, The People!

[flyjinx]

Are you kidding?! :thumbdown
I echo the sentiment of the people who do not understand the priorities of the Air Force right now. After serving 6 years active duty, requesting separation, being booted 2 months early due to force shaping, picked up for the guard, and then unable to go TDY for an exercise due to lack of funding for man-days, I find it rather frustrating that the AF willingly continues down a path that the Airmen disagree with. It is very evident our leadership is not listening once again.
I have one word for the new service uniform-- horrendous. It looks like a Salvation Army reject from the 70's. It clashes in every way possible. The AF seems so desperate to make a service-unique uniform, it will lower it's standards to this? The same goes for the new ABU and PT Gear.
What also concerns me is the AF is not talking about the changes being made that actually make sense. Such as the fit patterns for all uniforms. I started an inquiry to this last year, and it took going through 5 different people and over a year to finally get an answer.
What the AF also does not talk about is the negative feedback on these changes. According to AF Times for the most part, everyone loves the new ABU. After hours of searching for a way to make my voice heard, I finally found this.
What's next? I am afraid of the answer...

[Logie1371]

I think my friend put it best when she asked me right before I deployed...."What happenned to the Air Force you joined?" Have we lost most common sense? We have a uniform that currently works. Do we really need to try to play catch up with the Army? They get new ACU's so we need new ABU's. They introduce a new Service Uniform so we need too? Many will point out that the Army is doing it so why cant we? Well hey the Army took an EXISTING uniform and mandated it. And once again I'll echo previous replys when poeple have asked where is the LEGITIMATE feedback airmen from around the service are giving to such things as the ABU. And I have to ask where are our Sr. NCO's and our Chiefs at? When I was a new Airmen I was taught that our Command Chiefs where put in their positions to be enlisted advisors to let our senior leadership know what the voice of the enlisted force is saying. Obviously they have lost there voice. I hear from so many individuals the so called Battlefield airmen that I work with and interact with complain and make great suggestions about what we are wearing and these all have seemed to have fallen on deaf ears. While the USMC and Army are introducing new high tech flame proof uniforms we are stuck with BDUs in a different fabric and different pattern. I'm sure individuals like the TACP TSgt. who receive major burns and is still recovering would have apprechiated a simple innovation like this instead of a cell phone pocket in his combat uniform. Lets wake up and relize taht we are at war and we need to set our priorities because this Global war on terrorism or whatever we are calling it now isnt going away anytime soon.

[Semper-Fi_Aim-High_guest]

Having been a former active duty Marine of 8 years and having served during the previous Gulf War, I must admit that I am a bit partial to the proposed Hap Arnold uniform. However, it has a few serious draw-backs. The first being that a majority of Airmen are not shaped like a majority of Marines. Our weight standards are nowhere near as strictly enforced, and our physical fitness test is not as demanding, so what this means, sadly, is that we are a force of big bodies by and large (pun intended). Now, considering the merits of the proposed design itself, if the powers that be must go through with replacing the current uniform, then consider adding some modern flare to an old design: (1) develop a set of the "New Hap Arnold Wings" or some other insignia (perhaps miniatures of the Air Force seal) to be worn on the collars instead of the U.S. emblems, (2) get rid of the silver button below the belt; have all the silver buttons above the belt and one inconspicuous blue button covered by the belt to maintain the functional integrity of the uniform, (3) add some silver piping and accents that are similar to the current Honor Guard ceremonial uniform, (4) authorize full-size medals to be worn over the left breast pocket and ribbons for which there are no medals over the right breast pocket in formal settings, and ribbons only or miniature medals only (no ribbons) over the left breast pocket in semi-formal settings, and finally ribbons only when wearing the uniform in leave status or daily wear such as at technical schools, (5) leave the name tag off of the uniform no matter what, (6) add some modern pockets to it; perhaps set the top edges of the breast pockets at 30-45 degree angles and do something different with the bottoms of the pockets, kind of like how the other services have styled the breast pockets on their utility uniforms--sure, it would be a bit different and it would make lining up the ribbons and medals in straight rows a little tough, but it wouldn't take much more effort than it currently does, (8) return "hash marks," i.e. service stripes to the sleeves and get rid of the Air Force Longevity Service Ribbon, and (9) come up with something imaginative for the cuffs of the sleeves. What I have described sounds a lot like Marine Corps Dress Blues or Navy Dress Whites, but let's face it: the Hap Arnold uniform is not far from them. Why not put forth some effort to actually make the thing look stylish and modern, or even progressive, while maintaining a historic look? As far as that goes, the Mandarin Collar can be of the open variety with no button or hook in the center (there are plenty of "turkey-necks" that would appreciate it), or even taking it a step further, it could have small "dog-ear" folds on either side. But why stop there? We could just go with a blue coat tailored after the red ones worn in Star Trek II - VI. ;) The Hap Arnold idea could certainly work, but it needs more time on the drawing board and we need more time in the gym.

Now...all that aside, I think we would be better off to adopt the Honor Guard uniform across the board. It is a sharp uniform, distinctively Air Force, and much more cost effective since we already have suppliers. The bottom line is that when it comes to a professional military image, regardless of the styling, clothes do not "make the man" but "the man makes the clothes." I once heard someone say that 250 pounds of s**t in a silk suit is still 250 pounds of s**t. The best way to improve the Air Force image is to stop putting pigs in tuxedos and to get serious about putting lean war fighters of any age into smart uniforms.

[Slater]

I like the new look. It looks a lot better then the current "insurance salesman" uniform, which is a McPeak creation.

[JDOAN13]

Well, if we're going to change our uniforms, we should do it right and hire someone with experience in designing military uniforms like Brooks Brothers (U.S. Navy and Teddy Roosevelt's Rough Riders). The current proposed one just looks the typical drab and dowdy "plain blue suit." If you're going to do it, then do it right, get the right people (not the Air Staff), and deliver a truly unique Air Force uniform that will immediately impress upon people who look at it that it is truly the uniform of the U.S. Air Force. The problem with our current uniform is that there's just too much blue. We need more colors in the uniforms to offset the drab blue appearance ... the current USAF Honor Guard uniform is the step in the right direction with the white undershirt and silver braids on the coat sleeves and pants. But the low cut blazer look still has to go.

[SALANE281]

Having spent a little over 28 years in the Air Force and retiring as a CMSgt I can tell you that no uniform will please all the people. I still find it odd that at this point in time the Air Force would attempt to change the design. In reference to the prototypes that were recently in the Times I can truthfully say I am glad I won't have to wear it. I am sure the men and women in the Air Force today would much rather receive the money spent in redesigning efforts in their monthly paychecks. The Air Force should keep the current service dress uniform until such a time, if ever, there is a cry for change emanating from the corps. Until then...
leave well enough alone.

[FINKD]

Having spent a little over 28 years in the Air Force and retiring as a CMSgt I can tell you that no uniform will please all the people. I still find it odd that at this point in time the Air Force would attempt to change the design. In reference to the prototypes that were recently in the Times I can truthfully say I am glad I won't have to wear it. I am sure the men and women in the Air Force today would much rather receive the money spent in redesigning efforts in their monthly paychecks. The Air Force should keep the current service dress uniform until such a time, if ever, there is a cry for change emanating from the corps. Until then...
leave well enough alone.
I'm with you on this one. The new uniform looks like it came out of a Hollywood movie set. The old, plain blue uniform may not be exciting as the Marine uniform but it doesn't have to be exciting. I hope if they come up with another design it doesn't look like a South American uniform with braids, colorful stripes, swords, etc... Personally, I little wrong with the current uniform.

[BROGERSII]

The tight-collar design is definitely an uncomfortable design which should not even be considered. The belt design reminds me of the old trench coat belt which eventually frayed on the edges. Men's ties for women -- come on, let's not impose that on them (if truth be known, most men would just as soon do away with ties). Let's really be creative and bring back the silver-tan uniforms!

[FINKD]

The tight-collar design is definitely an uncomfortable design which should not even be considered. The belt design reminds me of the old trench coat belt which eventually frayed on the edges. Men's ties for women -- come on, let's not impose that on them (if truth be known, most men would just as soon do away with ties). Let's really be creative and bring back the silver-tan uniforms!
Most men don't want to wear a tie everyday but with a service dress uniform, it adds to its appearance. Most people don't wear their service dress uniform more than a handful of times a year.

[SVARGAS]

I'm a female and I agree! If you're going to give us a different uniform, then let us look good! Not dummpy! Let's go back to the 50s-60s version again.

I took a look at the 360 view and think that the female in the early uniforms looks damn good. But the new uniform makes the female SMSgt's a$$ look pretty big. I am curious as to what other females will think about that.

[Drake_vampiel_d]

I concure that we should have dress uniforms that allow us to look good everyone is always commenting how great the Marine's dress uniform is and how much better the Dress Blue uniform is so if we go to the Dress Blues I think it would be nice.

[Rotorhead]

They got it all wrong "again" because they didn't listen. The reason they didn't listen was because it wasn't through the proper channels. Did any of us follow the rules? They listened to the ones that did. It states in AFI 36-2903, Chapter 7 para 7.1 how to make changes. We didn't follow it, so we were not "heard". It's my next step, I know it takes forever and sucks, but it's the only way they will "listen".

My suggestions will be along the same lines as some of the others. For the ABU, I like the colors, but hate the "Tiger stripes". General pixelation computed by a computer looks alot better. Sorry HQ AF, Vietnam is over, it's not as cool as it was in the 60's. For those that work on the flightline, which is a large portion of us, the new ABU colors blend well with concrete. It doesn't stick out as much as BDUs, makes us much less of a target. If you think we're not a target on the line, ask the guys at Howard AFB in Panama about snipers dury Urgent Fury. Take the lower pockets off and put them on the shoulders where we need them. It's alot easier to lift the shoulder armor than it is to open my flak jacket fully to get something and be hit in my chest. If you are wearing the proper size flak jacket, the front pockets will always be covered. Move the rank to the collar like every other service in DOD. It gives all services one place to look. As for the Chiefs complaining they don't get respect for their rank, a "good" Chief already has the respect of his/her troops and doesn't need his/her Chevron to prove it. It also makes a huge target on the battlefield, keep wearing it, I'm sure the bad guys won't mind. One last thing, put our rank on our helmet like everyone else, again, one place for all to look for rank.

As for the blues, I like the two tone idea with darker blue (almost black) for the top and the lighter dark blue for the trouser that was suggested. The reasons for representation were outstanding. I'm still in a toss up on the new design, I like some of the features but not all of them. I also think we should get rid of the longevity ribbon for the hash marks. Make them the same color as the chevron. Get rid of the marksman ribbon and use the badges the other services use. They already exist and would not be a problem to procure. By elimanating some of the ribbons, we would clear up some of the congestion on the ribbon rack. I already look like a "BX hero" and some of my friends have so many ribbons they don't fit on the 26 count ribbon rack that is the largest I've seen available at clothing and sales. If you have more, you have to special order them. (Another reason I thought the Combat Action "Medal" was a stupid idea, but that's another subject) The Honor Guard belt is a good idea, but as it was stated, we aren't the skinniest bunch in DOD. Maybe make that an option? Speaking of Honor Guard, obviously our uniform isn't jazzy enough for the President so we have to pretty it up. The only thing the other services do is give their teams ceremonial trousers. What's good for us, should be good for all, to include Honor Guard. I understand the need to keep a little heritage, but we barely have a heritage, the other services have had over 200 years to perfect their uniforms, we are just now getting 60. Give us a little time.

One more thing before I get off my soap box. Once we do get the service dress we want, give our office jocks a daily uniform to use such as the old khakis. I wish we could attach pics, AF.mil has a great demo pic in the heritage section of photos. Give the blues the prestige it deserves by using it on special occasions only. Oh and by the way, does anyone have any idea what type of shoes are on SMSgt Athnos feet?(Female uniform model) What happened to old fashioned oxfords? You guys are right, that uniform makes her look dumpy. I too like the 50's-60's look.



Rotorhead

[AJFISHER]

The two tone idea sounds sharp and has historic precedent. I like the idea of a Sam Brown belt (belts should be leather not cloth) but you realyy need to be in shape for it to look good. Unfortunately too many airmen (officer & enlisted) aren't. I also agree about trimming dwon the number of ribbons we have. Why do we need a training ribbon anyway? If your in the uniform you made it through training! Put hash marks back on the sleeves for time in; this also has historic precedent and uniformity with our sister services.
While we're at, hot about a distinct simple motto like the marines have, and an update to the lyrics of the air force song. It has always reminded me of a college fight song and lacks the dignity the Air Force deserves

AJ

[Rotorhead]

I totally forgot the useless training ribbon, you're right about that one. I didn't mind the addition of the MTI and Recruiter ribbons because they denote someone going out of their career field and doing something different. But what about Tech school instructors and MTL's? Don't they have special duty jobs? Not everyone would get the ribbon, so it would only clog up some ribbon racks. The Sam Brown is a good looking belt, I would make that an NCO or SNCO wear only or maybe just give it to the Officers. It would be a nice distinction between the ranks for the uniform. As for us being a little big around the middle, give it some time, the new Airmen are coming into squadrons with organized PT, it's already second nature to most of them and soon it will be on the EPR. The slightly chubbier guys, including me, are slowly going to pasture and eventually the force will be slimmer. I give it another 10 years because most of the Staffs and Captains that have been in for 10 years are still pretty fit. It will take time, but it will happen.

I forgot to discuss the color of the NCO stripe on the trousers, it should be the same color as the jacket for the two tone idea, or a darker shade of blue than the trousers. The silver on the Honor Guard uniform looks band campish. Matter of fact, alot of the silver does that. I would keep the silver chin strap for the officers and the Hap Arnold emblem. The old Army looking emblem has to go.

As for the AF song, it's an old pilot drinking song. When is the last time most of us went off into the "wild blue yonder and gave 'er the gun??" Hmmm, never. Nothing againts our human stick actuators, we do have the best, but the song does not reflect the whole service. It sounds bad, but I know people who are sick of it. The have even denied it at their retirement. The reason? It's been over played. It's like the chicken dance played at every wedding. The tune itself played slowly is great, but the words have to change.

Rotorhead

[MovingtargeT]

This talk of scrapping the Air Force song sounds very McPeak-ish, which is how we got to this uniform predicament in the first place. The Air Force was founded by mostly pilots and former pilots who were fed up with the Army's lack of vision regarding the capability of airpower. We're not all pilots today, but nevertheless, that is our roots. I guess I side with Moseley in the sense that I think the AF should recognize it's heritage and past, and stick to it. There is no need for us to reinvent ourselves every decade or so to make us seem more relevant.

As for the uniforms, when the first pictures were leaked last year, I thought the "Billy Mitchell" uniform was a travesty. Anyone who knows Air Force history would tell you that it was the airmen of that era who pioneered the open collar w/tie look for the US military. The stiff collars would chafe pilots necks while flying in those open cockpit biplanes, and constantly turning one's head from side to side. Giving us a stiff collared uniform and calling it "our heritage" would have been a terrible misnomer.

The "Hap Arnold" uniform, or basically the 4-button jacket w/belt, also doesn't look quite right, probably because this style was never worn with blues. When the Air Force switched to blues, the belt was left off because the brass thought it looked too RAF, and we wanted to stand out as Americans. In choosing to have the jacket and trousers the same shade, our image of looking like cops or bus drivers was forever set in stone. Now, six decades later, looking like bus drivers is as much our heritage as anything else we have that's Air Force. The ideas mentioned here about having a two-toned look is interesting, but what some have described fits the bill almost exactly as what the Army is wearing now. For those that didn't know, the Army ditched their class A's (what we would think of as "greens") and is only using their dress blues, which used to be reserved for formal occasions. It consists of a dark blue, basically black, 4-button jacket with trousers of a more medium blue shade. The jacket has yellow trim and there is a yellow stripe that runs down the length of the pant leg. If we go two-toned, we'd basically be copying that and modifying it a little, which is what we've always done (borrow an Army uniform and tweak it).

So, it looks like the Air Force is stuck on the idea of going retro. Since all branches now have a uniform which they call "blues" for us to stay unique, we may have to reach way back and readopt the khaki service dress and 1505 uniform. Since that is well beyond the memory of almost all Airmen serving today, I don't think that would go over well. My two cents: take the female example from the 40's-50's era on the 3-D uniform chart, make it blue, make the shirt the same powder blue color we wear today, and make the tie black. They can keep the male tie, and wear it with all uniform combinations (no switching to the tie tab if the jacket is off). As you can see in the example, the tie doesn't make the model look unfeminine, it's just different that what current AF women are used to. The slanted pockets on the lower part of the jacket give the allusion of height on the wearer, and the scalloped upper pockets are positioned just a little bit higher than on the male coat so that...*ahem*...female anatomy doesn't interfere with the pocket's position or draw attention to that area. For the males, black tie, 4-button coat, and make the lower pockets actual pockets, not just flaps. They should also be elongated, and not the same size as the upper pockets for the same reason to add height to the wearer. The belt should be optional (it does look sharp on people with the right physique for it) but make it a higher quality material, and have chrome or silver buckle. The buckle should be just the rectangular frame, where the belt fabric passes over and under it. The belt we have now, with the solid chrome cover, would look very cheap if it were enlarged and placed outside the jacket. Another addition to complete the ensemble would be to add a black stripe that runs down the length of the pants, for officers only. Yes, it's another Army touch, but it would compliment the black stripe on the sleeve cuffs and the black tie. A third color would break up the monotony of the two-toned blue scheme of the uniform.

While we're at it, let's bring back the flared blues pants for women. About five years ago, I had a tech school instructor who always wore those. They looked very sharp, very feminine, and still professional. We asked about them once, since they looked so different than the normal, tapered blues pants AF women wear. She said they had been phased out recently but she kept wearing them cause she hated the look of the tapered leg. A final throwback touch, one which the officers will probably love, bring back crusher caps. They always looked more military than the bus driver hats we've worn for so long, plus it's another old-school Air Force touch. Once an Airman flew 50 missions, he was then allowed to "crush" his cap. This look was naturally achieved over time, when Airmen wore those caps during flights and wore the large headphones over them. After several missions, the frame of the cap would bend. Instead of reforming frame for the normal look, Airmen loved the way the bent frame gave their caps a more casual appearance.

[Rotorhead]

I don't want to scrap the song, just add a verse that has to do with the rest of the AF.

As for the two tone idea, all the services do it. The Marine Blues are two tones of blue, Army Blues are two tones of color, even the Navy cracker Jacks are black and white. If we were to do it, it wouldn't be copying the Army, it would be falling in line with the rest of DOD.

I agree they should have never phased out the flared trousers for females. The tapered doesn't look right on some females.

The black stripe on the officer trousers doesn't sound right, I'm pretty sure the stripe on the sleeve is a darker blue, not black. I'll have to look.

The "crush" looks great in the movies, but I don't think it would create a neat look.

Bring back the Khakis, they already exist (no reinvention of the wheel) Just add rank to them and ready to wear as an office option.


Rotorhead

[MovingtargeT]

I'm with you on the khakis., although they could update the material. The ones the Navy chiefs wear look a little on the heavy side. I'm not sure what the old 1505's consisted of, but something that breathes a little easier than blues would be appreciated. As an office warrior, BDUs, although comfortable, were never practical...especially when we're forced to starch and polish what is meant to be a combat uniform.

As for the black stripes...the idea was a dark color. Dark navy would be fine, it doesn't have to be a pure black. If we go the two-toned route, why not just look at the Army's blue jacket. We can make it an AF shade of blue, change the yellow trim to a silvery-gray (not the gaudy Honor Guard silver, but a light gray would work), and run the same color down the stripe on the pant leg, and again make belts an option. Af officers can keep the metal insignia for rank (the Army officers use a civil-war style shoulderboard on their blues), and add hash marks on the sleeves.

For the crusher cap, it did look great in the 40's, it's hard to tell if an updated version would look as sharp. It we copy the Army blues style, we'd have to wear the bus-driver cap at all times anyway.

[airmanandy]

The two-tone is a great idea and would really break up the monotony of the all-the-same-blue look we have now.

I still think the Ike jacket would be a good idea (heritage; it's distinctive from other services; and more convenient for riding in a car), but if we're sticking with the longer coat, the Sam Brown belt would look snappy.

Use black or dark blue -- maybe a Prussian blue -- for trim and move away from the bright silver.

I think a round AF logo (Hap Arnold or new style) patch on the shoulder would help distinguish us from the other services also. If not that, then bring back the prop & wings pin.

For the ABU -- ditch the current "camo" pattern. It's not camo anyway; it's a fashion statement. Move all the rank to the collar. About half the people I've heard from want pockets on the sleeves and about half say you can't reach them in your battle rattle anyway so don't bother.

We do need a middle-ground uniform between blues and ABUs for office wear.

[MovingtargeT]

The Ike Jacket faces the same problem as the belt: you need the right physique to make it look good. The Sam Brown belt was an officer tradition that the USMC and Army borrowed from the British. If the AF took it, and gave it to all ranks, we'd probably get berated for ruining the heritage of the belt. The prop and wings pin is a good throwback idea, but not the patch. When the AF split from the Army, brass was adamant about having an uncluttered uniform, which led to patches being removed. Adding a patch could be done, but it would be stepping away from heritage instead of towards it.

[WRENAE]

Remember the days when at the whim of a 4-star general chief of staff we changed the BDUs... take off the stripes, put on a name patch - aircrews did not care for that - OK, take off the name patch and put the stripes back on.... while you are at it, lets change the service dress for officers... can you tell by the round sleeve stripes what rank an officer is... not well received - we're the Air Force, not the Navy. I would love to have the money we spent at alteration shops removing things from and sewing things on uniforms...

I love this one, "According to Moseley's office, designs and prototypes have cost only about $150,000 - a near-invisible sliver of the service's more than $110 billion bidget." $150,000 would go a long way in a wing who's budget was reduced by 40 percent. In the "old" days we did more with less. Now we are doing more with nothing. When my commander asks me to accomplish a task for which I do not have proper resources at my disposal, I tell him we will get it done. The next thing I do is reach into my pocket and buy it myself. There is little to no money for office supplies. Monetary performance awards for civilians disappeared for fiscal year 2007 at our wing.

$150,000 a near-invisible sliver? I think not. Air Force leadership in your Pentagon Castle... airman and civilians are doing without due to statements like - "a near-invisible sliver." Remember those at the bottom who must endure the whims of 4-star generals... it is costly in more ways than senior Air Force leadership can imagine. Think about how your decisions effect everyone, especially our young airmen. Are you being a good "wingman" ?

[wingtip78]

It seems like a complete waste of time and money to redesign the Air Force service dress uniform when for all practical purposes the BDU and flight suit have become the standard AF duty uniform. In eighteen years of service, the only times I have ever worn my service dress is when I was commissioned, I graduated from a PME program, or pinned-on a new rank.....that's it. Over the last 10 years it's become exceptionally rare to see any Airman in blues, let alone in service dress, at a CONUS base. Many change of command ceremonies are now conducted in BDUs/flight suits. BDUs and flight suits are even the uniform of the day for Air Staff personnel at the Pentagon. Frankly, just keep the service dress the way it is....it's not worth the effort to change it when only a few people wear it on a routine basis.

[Rotorhead]

Remember the days when at the whim of a 4-star general chief of staff we changed the BDUs... take off the stripes, put on a name patch - aircrews did not care for that - OK, take off the name patch and put the stripes back on.... while you are at it, lets change the service dress for officers... can you tell by the round sleeve stripes what rank an officer is... not well received - we're the Air Force, not the Navy. I would love to have the money we spent at alteration shops removing things from and sewing things on uniforms...

I love this one, "According to Moseley's office, designs and prototypes have cost only about $150,000 - a near-invisible sliver of the service's more than $110 billion bidget." $150,000 would go a long way in a wing who's budget was reduced by 40 percent. In the "old" days we did more with less. Now we are doing more with nothing. When my commander asks me to accomplish a task for which I do not have proper resources at my disposal, I tell him we will get it done. The next thing I do is reach into my pocket and buy it myself. There is little to no money for office supplies. Monetary performance awards for civilians disappeared for fiscal year 2007 at our wing.

$150,000 a near-invisible sliver? I think not. Air Force leadership in your Pentagon Castle... airman and civilians are doing without due to statements like - "a near-invisible sliver." Remember those at the bottom who must endure the whims of 4-star generals... it is costly in more ways than senior Air Force leadership can imagine. Think about how your decisions effect everyone, especially our young airmen. Are you being a good "wingman" ?

I see where you are coming from, but $150,000 is chump change in the scheme of things to a wing with aircraft. On the helicopter I work on, one rotor blade is $112,000, I have 4 of them on each aircraft. That's about half a million right there and I haven't added the rest of the aircraft. To those of us on the flightline, spending large amounts of money is an everyday occurance. I guess you kind of get used to spending half a million without thinking about it. I suspect that would be the same with the CSAF. Dealing in the billions would make $150,000 seem like pennys. I look around my base and see all kinds of wasteful spending, I am sure there is some where you are too. I can bet just by trimming some of the stupid stuff done on bases, we could save $150,000 in no time. Here's one, my squadron uses Airmen for "Hangar Detail". They clean the toilets and mop the halls. A large percentage of units on my base use contracted janitors. Do they really need to contract it? Is it a problem for them to clean-up after themselves? Take a look around, I am sure you can find some other stuff. We can all help save a little.

I think your Commander needs to know the true capabilities of his/her unit. If you can't complete a task because he/she has not given you the tools, then you need to speak up. By covering things with a band-aid and making it less than it is, you make everything look pretty till it gets worse and blows up on you making it a catastrophe. I have never understood the mentality of making things look good for inspections. If somethings broke, the chain of command needs to know it. Show it to them, tell them what needs to be done. They can't fix or fight for money you need if you don't tell them. Your commander also needs to push it up the chain. Keep pushing, eventually they will tire of you and give you what you need just to get rid of you.


Rotorhead

[skyward]

Not in my future, thank goodness I retire at 30 in just one more year.

The McPeak era is now being repeated in the Moseley era. Not one single O6 or GO with the _alls to say this is a huge mistake. When is the next CSAF due, so all this HS can be cancelled. I work in a joint command and we are the laughing stock. First the Tommy Bahama ABUs, now the heritage costume. We have more ribbons and specialty devices than the Girl Scouts, and while the folks in HQAF-A1 are busy dumbing us down... no-one is speaking up. Transformational Air and Space Power.... yeah right.

[Measure Man]

Not in my future, thank goodness I retire at 30 in just one more year.

The McPeak era is now being repeated in the Moseley era. Not one single O6 or GO with the _alls to say this is a huge mistake. When is the next CSAF due, so all this HS can be cancelled. I work in a joint command and we are the laughing stock. First the Tommy Bahama ABUs, now the heritage costume. We have more ribbons and specialty devices than the Girl Scouts, and while the folks in HQAF-A1 are busy dumbing us down... no-one is speaking up. Transformational Air and Space Power.... yeah right.

Ah yes...I remember the McPeak era as well. Although I must admit I've grown to like our current service dress uniform in it's current form. I think all the changing of this in the name of heritage detracts from our heritage. I think some of those above are correct...our leadership is trying to make our heritage more like our sister services (jealousy?), rather than appreciate and honor our real heritage, which, in my mind is:

- Emphasizing technical ability and skill in specialty over traditional "military discipline" (drill etc.) --this used to be in the PFE!!

- A record second-to-none for taking care of our people, home and deployed, in terms of excellent work conditions, housing, family life

- High retention of those highly skilled people

- Complete domination of the enemy in the AIR. Our AF is the most dominant force of any kind ever known. No US forces have been killed by an enemy air attack in over 30 years!

Seems like all the push lately is to recognize what Airmen are doing on the ground. I mean God Bless those guys that are fighting the ground war from all services....but that isn't our core competency. You didn't see Marines, Army and Navy touting their air forces so hard to prove something during Northern and Southern Watch, although they were there. Let's face it, right now, ground forces have the lead...let us do our part to support that without trying to become the Army...we fly, that's what we do. I'm all for our forces filling in where we are capable and the Army has shortfalls, but let's not change our identity into that.

I see us deemphasizing technical skills these days...combining specialties (diluting expertise), emphasizing "warrior" skills over technical skills, etc.

Some of that is necessary, but I think we are beginning to see a decrease in expertise. Heck, it's getting harder and harder to find a thoroughly knowledgeable personnelist, let alone the more technical aircraft maintenance functions, comm, and ops. In my AFSC, we get a guy in from a 8-month tech school and the first thing we do with them is send them to FTAC and SF augmentee training.

I suppose the promise is the next generation of aircraft are more "plug and play" as far as flight line mx...but the structural work is getting harder and more complicated, the support equipment is getting more technical (and more expensive to simply replace)...the personnel system is more complicated than ever...let's not forget that Air Power is a highly technical business and we need highly technical people...that take more than a few weeks or months of experience to get really efficient at their jobs.

[skyward]

Easy there friend, This was a uniform post not a pulpit for Air Force Magazine "arent we great editorials."

Regarding your bullet about our domination of the air.... which air force were we fighting against most recently??? You know... a real air adversary??? Noriega? Sadamm 1, Sadamm 2, 9-11 Air Defense.
Stop patting our collective AF backs, and consider how we will do against a REAL Air adversary... Straits of Tawain???

By the way the only air threat I was ever afraid of was a nearby AWACs controlling the fight. and that is not sarcasim.. it is hardcore truth.
And speaking of Northern watch and our 30 year record, how exactly do you catagorize the AWACs/F15 shootdown of a HH60?

Aim High:

[Measure Man]

And speaking of Northern watch and our 30 year record, how exactly do you catagorize the AWACs/F15 shootdown of a HH60?

Aim High:

I guess I would call that "friendly fire"...would you call it an enemy attack?

You almost prove my point...technical errors led to that incident...improper IFF transmission...if memory serves me correctly. I seem to remember that being the incident that set off a mandatory Mode IV check prior to every flight...again, I'm old and my memory aint what it used to be.

Sorry for going beyond the topic.

[JDOAN13]

The new uniforms at first glance just look like a plain, drab blue suit. Nobody wears plain blue suits anymore ... they're out of style. So what we have is a military uniform that still looks like a plain blue suit ... shouldn't we embrace what military uniforms are all about and have our new Air Force uniforms to be sharp looking. Let's add some white or silver braids or lining around the uniform like how the Army or Marine dress blues. And we should authorize the use of white pants to go with a blue service coat during special ceremonial events. Blue looks good when it's offset by other colors like white. It shouldn't be that hard to come up with a decent service dress ... our hertiage begins with the Army Air Corps ... why not take some elements of the Army's history and incorporate it into our new service dress. Better yet, ask Brooks Brothers to help design an Air Force uniform ... they've had a long history of designing uniforms for the Navy and Army.

[skyward]

Please report immediatly to the CSAF as the new Deputy Assistant of REALLY BAD TASTE AND IDEAS.

But please let me retire before I dress up as Liberace.
LeMay, Arnold, Twinning.... they fought like hell to get the new AF out of the Army, and they ditched the Cavalry inspired belts, epaulets, etc. The true stewards of the 1947 AF are rolling in their graves.

Aim High

[Measure Man]

The new uniforms at first glance just look like a plain, drab blue suit. Nobody wears plain blue suits anymore ... they're out of style. So what we have is a military uniform that still looks like a plain blue suit ... shouldn't we embrace what military uniforms are all about and have our new Air Force uniforms to be sharp looking. Let's add some white or silver braids or lining around the uniform like how the Army or Marine dress blues. And we should authorize the use of white pants to go with a blue service coat during special ceremonial events. Blue looks good when it's offset by other colors like white. It shouldn't be that hard to come up with a decent service dress ... our hertiage begins with the Army Air Corps ... why not take some elements of the Army's history and incorporate it into our new service dress. Better yet, ask Brooks Brothers to help design an Air Force uniform ... they've had a long history of designing uniforms for the Navy and Army.

White pants?? EEEE-GAD!

[zellawig]

my 2 cents...the reason for the uniform change is to keep everyon'e focus off the reachback HHQ and drawdown transformation... As a female officer it makes me sick to think about having to wear a man's tie in uniform...I guess this is just another way of cutting the force....I can only hope it's at least 4-yrs to the mandatory wear date!

[AF_gal]

Alright, here we go.....
1. I agree with all the talk about no money, blah, blah. We are in a crunch and need to cut back. Why kick out Airmen (with no incentive-to-get-out pay like them O's by the way) when you're making us employed Airmen pay for useless uniform changes??!!
2. I'm tired of hearing about new uniforms. Why can't we discuss real issues...like the war and how our boys/girls are doing over there? Let's all take the money we have to spend on nifty green boots and socks and mail some kick butt body armor to them boys out there...anyone in? That's where I'd like to send my hard earned money....seriously, no joke or sarcasm here! If we can't get the body armor, lets send em tickets home.
3. Word to the "BRASS": YOU CAN'T HAVE HERITAGE, HONOR OR PRIDE IN OUR UNIFORMS IF YOU KEEP CHANGING THE DARN THING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Am I the only one? First it's the PT gear, ok, I get it. We need it. But did anyone REALLY wear the thing before it hit the shelves? I think not. Does anyone else feel like the slow kid in kindergarten that had the short shorts and see through shirt? I know I do. Plus put us up next to the Army/USMC....we look like dorks....all reflective.
Second...the ABU....anyone else think that it's the BDU recolored? Yep, thought so. And those boots?? Don't get me started. How about letting us wear the desert color (I'm going to say it!! Prepare!! LIKE THE ARMY!) ? Most Airmen have about 3 pairs in the garage or closet that will get good use if we go that way. The clothing sales store on Base X has pulled all the ABUs from the shelves because THE COLORS DON'T MATCH!!! They are different shades and are selling them to anyone who wanted to fight another person like at David's Bridal on their $100 wedding dress day! Oh and the ones they pulled? How about one size of mens pants, numerous shirts and many female sizes.....ALL THE WAY TO 50!!! Tell me what female has a 50 inch waste and I'll show her the D-O-O-R!!!
Lastly, the Service Dress changes....not too bad in my opinion. My only gripe is the female tie to tie-tab issue. I remember reading somewhere that the Airmen wanted a more comfortable jacket for daily wear. WHAT??!! Can someone find me anyone who wears the jacket DAILY? Like most Airmen, I have it ready just in case I am blessed to get nominated for an Airman of the ________ but other than that, forget about it. As soon as the award ceremony/retirement/whatever is over, it goes back in the closet for another 1.5 years.