New USAF Uniforms look to be WWII in most origin!!!

[MIKE]

RAF ORDERS OF DRESS - FEMALE PERSONNNEL

[DNall]

give it a few days & go look at the feedback on a few of the AF sites (including linked to that article). I think you'll find your answer there. Fact is if the force hates it then it won't happen, cause if it's a uniform that effects retention positively versus one that effects it negatively then airmen get what airmen want.

[arajca]

Anyone else notice the epaulets are "X" stitched where the grade insignia goes and the major is wearing what appears to be general's sleeve braid?

[lordmonar]

Hate it!!! Looks stupid. I'm, all for heritage & military tradition, but it looks like the 40s, not the cutting edge warrior AF. I know a lot of people didn't like the current business suit approach - personally, I like it - and if they wanted to militarize that a bit, I think that would be well recieved, but this thing is just silly looking in so many ways. I think they missed the mark entirely & I think that's what the wear test will reveal. At very least the belt ain't happenin.

hahahahaha......I love it when you want to be more like the USAF you don't like the same thing the USAF likes!

It's good that CAP does not get any input into what the USAF gets to wear!

[lordmonar]

Frankly, when you start talking about how "military" any formal uniforms are I just start to chuckle...  If its not getting mud, blood, or engine oil on it, its just a costume in my book. 

Do you really want to go there River?

[wingnut]

well looks just like what we wore in 1971, except the belt. I would like to see the dark blue wool shirt with the dark blue tie back looks sharp.

[DNall]

hahahahaha......I love it when you want to be more like the USAF you don't like the same thing the USAF likes!

It's good that CAP does not get any input into what the USAF gets to wear!

I want us to be more organizationally aligned with the AF, sure, and that includes respectable looking uniforms, not for the sake of looking like them cause it's cool, but cause it really means acceptance from both sides as par tof the team.

If the AF goes to this, them of course we should seek to wear it as much like theirs as we can. That doesn't mean I like the way it looks, or that I'm in love with what they wear now either. I think though you'll find from teh wreactions within the AF that this isn't all that popular. I think what you'll get is pretty much the service coat we had before the current one but in the new fabric, a little more tappered, and with the throwback collar, and that's fine.

[ColonelJack]

What I found interesting about the AF Times article was the fact that the Mitchell-style blouse (high collar) was vastly more popular with the airmen and officers, but wasn't selected.  Apparently the issue with the Mitchell-style blouse is that you can't wear a shirt and tie under it without massive discomfort (the alternative is keeping the blouse on all the time).  They're looking at the Mitchell blouse as a semi-dress uniform, between regular service dress and mess dress.  (A place for the AF to wear their full-size medals, which they don't currently have.)

Side note -- if the Arnold-style blouse is adopted (with belt or sans belt) and the AF takes on the Mitchell blouse as well ... and they eventually trickle down to CAP -- which they will -- does that mean Vanguard will start producing full-size medals for CAP awards to wear on the Mitchell blouse?  (Heh heh heh heh)

I never really understood what was wrong with the blouse we used to have, the one that looked like a blue, thin-lapeled Army style.  [darn] that McPeak, anyway -- he started all this!

Jack

[davedove]

I don't mind the uniform, but I think the men's uniform would have looked much better if it was better tailored to the model.  For one thing, the position of the belt looks wrong on him.  I think if it set a little higher, it would look much sharper.

[RiverAux]

Frankly, when you start talking about how "military" any formal uniforms are I just start to chuckle...  If its not getting mud, blood, or engine oil on it, its just a costume in my book. 

Do you really want to go there River?

Don't worry, I say the same thing about the "uniform" I wear for my regular job.

[LtCol White]

I think the new coat looks sharp. At least they decided that the color shade would remain the same and that allows for use of the same trousers people already have. So the only cost is really the coat itself.

[JohnKachenmeister]

I like it.  This LOOKS like a military uniform. 

Interestingly, it was the Air Corps that pioneered the shift from the high collar of the "Mitchell" design to the shirt-tie-and-lapel uniform.  Pilots said that they couldn't wear the high collar because of the requirement to keep looking around while flying.  The rest of the Army followed the Air Corps lead later.

[lordmonar]

I never really understood what was wrong with the blouse we used to have, the one that looked like a blue, thin-lapeled Army style.  [darn] that McPeak, anyway -- he started all this!

The only complaint I ever had with the old style service coat was the cut in the arms was kind of tight.  Just driving with the jacket on could be a pain.  Mc Peak used that complaint to justify his desire to make us look more Navy.

[LtCol White]

I'm glad USAF is going back to a more military look. I hated when McPeak ditched the old uniform because it was a "blue army uniform". USAF was carved from the army so I thought the styling of the uniform was appropriate.

I do like the belt on the new service coat. Having been a Marine Officer, I always felt something was missing from the USAF service coat. The green USMC service coat has always had the belt and finished off the coat.  I hope the wear tests will keep them.

[A.Member]

I have to give another day or so. 

My initial reaction is that I don't like the belt.  The idea of using earlier uniforms for inspiration is a good one and I like the idea of a belt....but I just don't think I like the belt selected.  Based on the close-up, it looks kind of cheap.  Perhaps it's something else that I can't put my finger on  (maybe needs more contrast - real dark blue?  I don't know).  As mentioned by someone earlier, it could also just possibly be a matter of fit on the "model".  I'd expect it to be more fitted more in the waist.  They also could've given the pockets more of a modern look - sleek. 

Overall, not bad but not great either.  Is it an improvement over current?  Hmmm.... Like I said, I'll have to give it a few days to sink in.

[ddelaney103]

I like the uniform.  When in doubt, steal from the experts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:PlateI_Officer_Service_Uniform.jpg

Service A, baby!

The current uniform, especially for the junior enlisteds (who don't even get the epaulets), is pretty lame from a military standpoint.

[MIKE]

Service A, baby!

More like: No 1 SD

[ddelaney103]

Service A, baby!

More like: No 1 SD

Nah - no epaulets. 

That "braid on the sleeve" grade insignia was what McPeak was aiming for with the current Service Dress.  I remember they started selling epaulet kits for the officers so the early adopters wouldn't be out a couple of hundred bucks.

[ZigZag911]

I like the idea of a belt....but I just don't think I like the belt selected.  Based on the close-up, it looks kind of cheap.  Perhaps it's something else that I can't put my finger on 

Yeah, I couldn't come up with what was bothering me about it, 'cause I basically like it....but the belt doesn't look, I don't know, "crisp" enough.

[lordmonar]

Service A, baby!

More like: No 1 SD

Nah - no epaulets. 

That "braid on the sleeve" grade insignia was what McPeak was aiming for with the current Service Dress.  I remember they started selling epaulet kits for the officers so the early adopters wouldn't be out a couple of hundred bucks.

It did not work, because a lot of the Navy Styple silver rank stripes ruined the lower sleeves and they had to buy a new coat anyway.