No one is trying to say your opinion is wrong. All we are saying is that that is all it is. An opinion.
What’s more irritating about your stance is your refusal to accept that there may be other opinions, which don’t match your own lofty one. And you’re simultaneously insulting and denigrating the experiences of everyone else here, simply because we’re not one of ‘the lads’, and simply cut around RAF camps. (Which is in itself a particularly ignorant assumption on your part.)
We get it. You’re a regular, a regular who apparently gets his kicks out of coming to a forum for CFAVs and insulting them for being CFAVs. That may be fair game on ARRSE, but we don’t appreciate it here.
I’m not insulting anyone, or big timing. Maybe that’s just a banter thing/mannerisms. Although it was aimed mostly at the RRBB244, as I have gobbed off about PCS before.
I’m merely stating (and it’s not just me) that all this stuff that everyone goes on about and thinks is so wonderful and great, isn’t. Just because it’s gucci and looks great or American or is whatever or looks whatever.
The drip was mainly about this constant need to “look gucci” and to have all the bells and whistles and Velcro when it can’t even perform at a basic level.
It’s like teaching cadets to use GPS. Then wondering why they get lost when the batteries run out and they can’t use a map and compass its about basics and function over aesthetics.
are you saying because Cadets don’t understand how to best utilize PCS that they can’t work out how to put on trousers or how to wear the shirt so the zip and buttons are at the front?
What I think you are trying to say, and what I actually believe, is that the PCS system is over-engineered for our needs. The features of the uniform that may be useful on operations actually become an irritation in more relaxed circumstances, such as wearing round the squadron, or even on basic ranges or fieldcraft exercises. It is a compromise so that one set of kit can be used in a wide range of circumstances.
I find the standard PCS to be basically a nuisance and the CS95 stuff performed better for my needs. Being an ATC CFAV and therefore not issued with the stuff I cannot say what is ver1 and what is the latest stuff, but the “lightweight tropical” PCS shirt I have works far better for me than the original PCS shirt which was inflexible, scratchy and awkward to roll the sleeves up on.
I like the smock.
What doesn’t matter to me is its efficacy as a camouflage base layer or whether it looks particularly “gucci”. Just like blue uniform, this is simply stuff I am supposed to wear in some situations and will fit in with what the rest of us may be wearing.
Teaching cadets to use a GPS is sensible, as long as you teach them to use a map and compass first. There is nothing wrong with using technology if it is available. Using a map and compass all the time doesn’t make you a martyr.
You missed my point. It’s this constant over engineering and marketing ploy, same with MOLLE and chest rigs and plate carriers and all that gucci stuff. All the zips and Velcro and pockets galore. It’s all going full circle and we are going back to good old fashioned belt kit, and people prefer the old cut.
This point has been done to death, you like PCS? Great wear it all day long, sleep in it for all I care. But I’m telling you, it’s not what it’s cracked up to be. That’s not just an opinion formed on a whim. That’s from using, living and sleeping in it, in various environments. It’s not just PCS, but take it to the extreme, Crye gear is horrendously over priced, over engineered and not all it’s cracked up to be. Give me good old DPM cut MTP over Crye anyday.
We have strayed massively off topic, we can just agree to disagree.
Outside of the world of Andy McNab fans, “the Regiment” generally refers to whatever organisation called a regiment that the speaker talks about the most. Ergo in the RAF, “the Regiment” means the RAF Regiment.
Given that this is Air Cadet Central, “the Regiment” is understood to mean the RAF Regiment whether you like it or not.
