Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 32
  1. Default

    As a response, I was and am exstatic that the Army has moved away from the pretty and moved to the prudent reality, however, something will be lost. What are the thoughts on this
    Thank you

  2. Default

    The whole Army ran in boots until the late 70s or early 80s. Some of us are still paying for that today

    To be clear, I didn't particularly care for people who looked like bags of $hit. Take a little pride in yourself fer crissakes

    But when they spend more time shining their boots or brass instead of learning or doing their jobs or get gigged for not having shiney stuff no matter how well they do their jobs, that's taking things a bit too far.

    Give me a guy who can work a wing weather recovery or the 5PM air carrier rush by himself and I don't really care what his boots look like.

    Maury

  3. #23

    Default

    I got out in '81 and we ran our PT and PT test in boots. Did the airborne shuffle and got timed in the mile in boots. Got timed as a group at 5 miles. Best time I ran was 6 flat in the mile, but we had a couple of guys that ran in the 5:20's and 40's. That's flying when you're wearing boots! Mike

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Between the two Vancouvers
    Posts
    436

    Default

    Yes, the whole Army did run in boots however running in jump boots was a whole different experience.
    Maury, I'm not sure if you were taking a pot shot at me with your comment about spending more time shining boots than doing your job so I'll just accept it as an overall generalization. As you probably know that there are several jobs in the Army that require a higher degree of spit and polish than others. Of these are : The Old Guard, Drill sergeants, Airborne instructers, Color Guards and Ceremonial units. Their purpose is to present to the public and those troops being instructed a visible example of the highest professional standards a soldier can attain.
    BEAR

  5. Default

    Bear,

    No, nothing personal at all, just a generalization on how the Army was when I was in it.

    When S&P is part of the job description that's one thing. As is taking at least some pride in your own individual appearance. As I said earlier, I spent a fair amount of time with Kiwi and a t-shirt and sent my fatigues to the QM Laundry for heavy starch.

    But looking at it logically, uniforms etc that require Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, or Marines to spend/waste time or money doing non-mission related "busy work" just to look halfway decent or having work or field uniforms that aren't suitable for work or the field was, is, and always will be dumb.

    When the USAF was considering what colors to use in its new camoflague pattern, the common comment from the wrench-turners was to use grease, oil, hydraulic fluid, and JP4. That made sense to me.

    Maury

  6. #26

    Default

    Spending time on uniform and polishing details was a way of inculcating individual pride. Never saw "athletic shoes" - maybe once or twice toward the end of '75-'76. I miss those days of "strac" heavy starched, tapered uniforms; by comparison, today's fatigues (BDUs) look sloppy. But they are infinitely more practical for the field. They are a fighting uniform, in every way.
    Last edited by Griff Murphey; 11-28-2010 at 09:17.

  7. #27
    Shooter5 Guest

    Default

    Gentlemen:
    I think we're all in accord when it comes to looking good and practical use. In this day and age, which commander would rather have his troops spend 2 hours a night on boots and starch...or hit the gym, learn a foreign language/culture on eArmyU, and study an FM or use the Army or Marine Corps reading list?
    I miss breaking starch, getting a high-&-tight every week at Ranger Joes and looking STRAC. But its usefulness is from another era. I do agree the younger trooops may miss out on elements of pride and discipline it instills but our military is a different force from decades past.
    As an example, I remember a CSM at Sgts Time coming out to inspect and he could not get past one of my Joe's missing a helmet band...which had already been addressed at the appropiate squad level! Anything else SgtMajor?, like can these guys throw a grenade properly or shoot their weapon accurately? He (and too many others like him) were all about fancy and little to none about being a Warrior.

  8. Default

    Amen shooter! I also wished our uniforms that looked like mud/oil/disrepair, because after a short time in the field or combat thats what they look like any way, to no avail. I appreciate all of the responses and look forward to further reading.
    Armorkav!

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Lower Alabama
    Posts
    1,503

    Default

    I had a helicopter crew chief at Ft. Carson,CO that spray painted his "work boots" every morning with gloss black paint. Once you have gotten fuel or oil on them you can't polish them so every day he would wipe off yesterdays paint and re-spray.He was a great crew chief too. Nick

  10. #30

    Default

    The worse thing that I ever had to clean off my boots was somebody's puke and blood...both from bar room brawls. Mike

Similar Threads

  1. Some more little known pre-WWI U.S. Army weapons
    By Rick the Librarian in forum M1903/1903A3/A4 Springfield
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-01-2014, 05:06
  2. Colt New Army
    By hvymech in forum Revolvers
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-16-2014, 08:30
  3. Army chow...SOS in particular.
    By Michael Tompkins in forum Service Life
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 07-01-2014, 10:49
  4. Colt 1901 Army
    By randy langford in forum Revolvers
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-03-2014, 03:30

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •