I would argue they are neither black or brown, nor combat style.
1 Like
Correct but if it is the only pair of boots a cadet has, would you allow them to wear them on an activity such as fieldcraft or shooting as they don’t get issued them. I’m not going to turn someone away because of the footwear. It’s no worse than nco course cadets turning up to the CTC dining hall in blue uniform and trainers so they don’t scuff their parade shoes before inspection. (To be fair this gmg but if the WWO allows it…)
I’ve binned off the idea of separate cadet/AT boots too
I had 2 pairs of pricey walking boots go in a year, but my second hand combats are still kicking
1 Like
No. It would result them being sent home, based on what we are required to have in our RAs for Fieldcraft.
That’s not to say there aren’t good civvie boots - there are — or gash ‘combat style’ boots of course.
1 Like
I am. Not because I care what they look like, but because a low cut boot like this doesn’t provide sufficient ankle support.
If they were bright pink but high with sufficient support, they’d be getting some strong advice, but crack on.
1 Like
My dad bought a near identical pair of boots around November(ish)
I’ve made sure he’s taking care of them, but went to tie them a few weeks ago and 4 rivets came right out.
Mountain Warehouse boots really aren’t great for ought intensive
to counter this, i am on my second pair of Magnum side zips and love them - and yes, before any asks i can tie shoe laces.
I have yet to have an issue with the side zip, i replaced my first pair as the sole was wearing flat/thin - i don’t do fieldcraft preferring my Greens wear for shooting should that influence anyone’s view on how i wear my boots.
but would that RA control measure not read “suitable footwear with ankle support” which the photo of the boots shown above do provide…?
they would be suitable for AT Trekking so unsure how they would be unsuitable for Fieldcraft on the basis of “PPE”??
Since any FC we do is really to the level of aggressive camping (excepting the <1% who get to do a Ninja Course) and is basically a walk in the woods and not a 2 week yomp across East Falklands in winter, unless the boots really are from Toytown, there are likely to be very few who have ‘unsafe’ footwear
TBH, other than a cursorily glance to ensure they are not in carpet slippers or clogs, who really checks in depth?
And yes I am checking with the activities I am doing in mind, before I get flamed!!
I’m not going to start unpicking wing/region risk assessments. The requirement is for combat boots. So that’s what we brief participants to wear.
…but it is private purchase so as long as they are safe for the activity - rock on!!!
It is no different than for CFAV buying their own equipment - so long as it is fit for purpose
Just because a shiny book says so - if it is that important then issue it to us other wise get what you see as long as it is fit for purpose
2 Likes
As one of the people that writes the policy and the staff courses etc for field craft in the RAFAC, I’d agree. We can’t expect 100% kit compliance so need to make sure the boots are suitable for the activity and terrain.
They should offer ankle support and a sturdy sole unit.
2 Likes
which is my words but slightly different - Combat boot is prescriptive, while “suitable” is the same without being so prescriptive
Should you not be doing your own risk assessments?
Don’t be fooled by the fact that TAs have come from wing or region - my wing has a risk assessment in place for teaching MOI, that states pupils must wear eye protection…
Yes but they have to be approved by Wing or Region staff. They also provide a template.
the future’s so bright, they’ve got to wear shades