Mtp

tango_lima · 5 August 2013 14:45

[quote=“steve679” post=9821]interesting. i saw two RAF personnel. two females, one a SAC the other a Cpl both in PCS and only one had their shirt tucked in.

personally i prefer the tucked in look, however appreciate as a working dress if actively working either would be acceptable, much like a berets on/off, a beret can be in the way, or impractical to wear (keeps falling/knocked) off due to the task but when the task is over a return to the tucked in format[/quote]

How long ago?

RAF started out untucked, went tucked in at Halton in March last year and everywhere else over the summer.

The original brief was that the jacket could be worn untucked* when ‘actively working’ but should be tucked in for cutting about the place, although I think most CoCs have gone for the ‘Tuck it in or kittens will die!’ approach.

For what it’s worth, I was chatting with oppos and we agreed that it would have made sense to copy the Aussies and say ‘untucked as the norm, but you can tuck it in for special occasions, ie: all the Olympic stuff’. Not that our opinion counts for anything.

*properly

talon · 5 August 2013 14:50

A question and a statement:

Why is this thing about making cadets stand out more from regulars so important? My lot are in CS95s all the time and didn’t have any mistaken identity issues when regs wore CS95.
Joe public can’t tell the difference between MTP and DPM. All they see is camouflage.

steve679 · 5 August 2013 15:01

sorry i should have said "i saw two RAF personnel. while at RIAT (last month) two females, one a SAC the other a Cpl both in PCS and only one had their shirt tucked in as they walked about the airshow (off duty)

DJRice · 5 August 2013 15:05

It’s not supposed to be tucked in - as it is in fact a jacket.
Local variations are around due to local orders though!

397k · 5 August 2013 15:06

I have never been issued with any DPM CS95 or any of its previous styles. Everything I have for myself, staff and cadets has always been begged, borrowed or “acquired”.

I would personally prefer to stay in CS95 as I have a lot of additional items other than shirt, trousers and Jacket as does everyone on my Squadron.

If we are to swap to MTP so that we are “uniform” with everyone else then so be it but the cost will be enormous.

I would not be happy with being told we are changing but then have to supply our own, even though certain parts of our chain of command insist on saying ‘to be worn as issued’.

Then again it will probably be found for the SATT and JL elites.

steve679 · 5 August 2013 15:07

we are not regulars so why pretend to be so? i am not saying there should be a difference, but i am not bothered if there is given the advantage it offers

[quote=“talon” post=9824]

Joe public can’t tell the difference between MTP and DPM. All they see is camouflage.[/quote]

so if there is no perceived difference why is there such a rush to get MTP/PCS??

tango_lima · 5 August 2013 16:23

[quote=“djrice” post=9831]It’s not supposed to be tucked in - as it is in fact a jacket.
Local variations are around due to local orders though![/quote]

[quote]Royal Air Force Combat Uniform Dress Policy

After consideration of the Defence policy on the wearing of the new Personal Clothing System Combat Uniform (PCS CU), the RAF has decided to make a number of adjustments which are consistent with the DIB issued in Feb 2011 on the introduction of the Personal Clothing System and the intent in Joint DIN 2008DIN01-200 ‘The Wearing of Uniform in Public - Standards of Dress and Behaviour’.

This policy change is intended to help maintain the RAF’s profile in the public eye when wearing combat uniform by allowing the use of standard RAF blue rank slides and braid, stable belts and the introduction of an RAF specific badge. These changes will also come into effect for the deployed phase of Op OLYMPIC for RAF personnel in the Venue Security Force who may be wearing PCS CU to undertake such tasks as vehicle searches.

The most significant change is that when Royal Air Force personnel are required to wear the new uniform at their normal place of work ‘on base’, the PCS CU lightweight jacket is to be worn ‘tucked in’ to trousers. In addition, standard blue RAF rank slides/braids are to be worn and personnel are permitted to wear approved pattern RAF stable belts. In due course an RAF badge will be introduced, to be worn in place of the Tactical Recognition Flash.

When personnel are engaged on tasks that entail high levels of physical activity, particularly at higher temperatures, local commanders will retain the authority to allow the jacket to be temporarily un-tucked; it is also permissible, as in the extant regulations for CS95, to remove the jacket completely and complete the tasks in just the t-shirt. Once the task is completed, or an individual leaves the task to undertake less strenuous duties about his Unit, then the Jacket should be replaced and tucked in to the trousers.

Due to the limitations of the current sleeve design, the sleeves of the jacket are normally to be worn down. However, where the activity or temperature dictate, sleeves can be rolled up at the discretion of the individual.

The new combat uniform was designed specifically to support the combat task. Thus, when personnel are engaged in combat operations, operational training or on exercises where combat uniform is being worn as part of a specific requirement of the task, and where high activity levels can be expected to be encountered at short notice, the jacket is to be worn outside of the trousers. In these situations, low contrast rank slides, combat webbing belts and tactical recognition flashes may also be worn at the discretion of the local Commander.

The full details of these changes can be found at AP1358 Dress Regulations for the Royal Air Force, Chapter 2.

This revised policy should be read in the context of the IBN issued in Sep 08, which directed a significant reversion to the wearing of No 2 blue uniform and a greater wearing of uniform in public in support of a stronger public profile for the RAF. While RAF Commanders retain the authority to allow or direct the wearing of combat uniform for its designated purpose of combat operations, operational training and exercises, routine work activities ‘on base’ will rarely qualify against these criteria. Furthermore, combat uniform is not the alternative dress for heavy or dirty work, for which personnel should use standard-issue coveralls. Any standing routine wearing of combat uniform will require the authorization of the respective RAF 2-star/AOC.
For all RAF personnel serving with or in Joint, RN and Army organizations, single-Service dress regulations take precedence unless there are other operational imperatives. In these situations RAF personnel are expected to wear No 2 HD unless a new standing authority to routinely wear combat uniform routinely is given by the most appropriate RAF 2-star officer - this decision cannot be made by officers from other Services. Furthermore, RAF personnel should not wear accoutrements affiliating them to non-RAF organizations, such as stable belts, regimental berets and badges; only RAF variants are permitted.

[/quote]

^^^So there you have it. Note the fact that the policy recognises the fact that it’s a combat jacket, not a shirt, but still requires troops to tuck it in.

Baldrick · 5 August 2013 17:17

[quote=“djrice” post=9831]It’s not supposed to be tucked in - as it is in fact a jacket.
Local variations are around due to local orders though![/quote]

But there is no CS95 shirt. Have a look at the tag. It’s a lightweight field jacket. So nothing has changed.

tmmorris · 5 August 2013 17:46

Thanks, Tango_Lima, that’s the one I was thinking of but couldn’t find.

DJRice · 5 August 2013 18:30

so as it states it is hardly worn that way. As the only time a member of the RAF would wear such an ensemble is on operations, exercises and operational training where the jacket is not to be tucked in.

There are very few occasions where RAF personnel are wearing PCS/MTP on a daily basis as a standard uniform.

I for one wear mine once or twice a year for operational training or when on actual operations, otherwise it’s 2 HD or growbag! (on flying duties only)

To that end cadets (were they to wear MTP) would be the same, on training exercises only; therefore untucked - they should not be wearing it as a matter of course.

cheers

DJ

Baldrick · 5 August 2013 20:24

[quote=“djrice” post=9845]so as it states it is hardly worn that way. As the only time a member of the RAF would wear such an ensemble is on operations, exercises and operational training where the jacket is not to be tucked in.

There are very few occasions where RAF personnel are wearing PCS/MTP on a daily basis as a standard uniform.

I for one wear mine once or twice a year for operational training or when on actual operations, otherwise it’s 2 HD or growbag! (on flying duties only)

To that end cadets (were they to wear MTP) would be the same, on training exercises only; therefore untucked - they should not be wearing it as a matter of course.

cheers

DJ[/quote]

This does highlight one of the things I like about the ATC, the variety. I wear greens for about 50% of the things I do in the Corps. And this extends beyond simply training exercises. Leadership courses and Road Marching are two activities where I routinely wear CS95 in a non-operational setting, and for the most part untucked jackets in those situations would not be appropriate.

However, it is worth mentioning that at Nijmegen this year we were given permission to remove our lightweight jackets and strip down to undershirts. However, as the majority of my team weren’t wearing undershirts anyway we were allowed to wear our jackets untucked.

tango_lima · 5 August 2013 21:27

[quote=“djrice” post=9845]so as it states it is hardly worn that way. As the only time a member of the RAF would wear such an ensemble is on operations, exercises and operational training where the jacket is not to be tucked in.

There are very few occasions where RAF personnel are wearing PCS/MTP on a daily basis as a standard uniform.

I for one wear mine once or twice a year for operational training or when on actual operations, otherwise it’s 2 HD or growbag! (on flying duties only)

To that end cadets (were they to wear MTP) would be the same, on training exercises only; therefore untucked - they should not be wearing it as a matter of course.

cheers

DJ[/quote]

I don’t mean to be rude, so please don’t take this the wrong way, but that comes across as really quite out of touch.

What about CCS, Guard, all the blokes in the RAFP and Regt? I’ve certainly been told that being on the ranges doesn’t constitute ‘operational training’ so I should get tucked in…

flago · 5 August 2013 21:48

[quote=“tango_lima” post=9850][quote=“djrice” post=9845]so as it states it is hardly worn that way. As the only time a member of the RAF would wear such an ensemble is on operations, exercises and operational training where the jacket is not to be tucked in.

There are very few occasions where RAF personnel are wearing PCS/MTP on a daily basis as a standard uniform.

I for one wear mine once or twice a year for operational training or when on actual operations, otherwise it’s 2 HD or growbag! (on flying duties only)

To that end cadets (were they to wear MTP) would be the same, on training exercises only; therefore untucked - they should not be wearing it as a matter of course.

cheers

DJ[/quote]

I don’t mean to be rude, so please don’t take this the wrong way, but that comes across as really quite out of touch.

What about CCS, Guard, all the blokes in the RAFP and Regt? I’ve certainly been told that being on the ranges doesn’t constitute ‘operational training’ so I should get tucked in…[/quote]

Tango Lima, fully agree. I know of many people in the RAF who where MTP on a daily basis as working uniform and all of them wear it tucked in. I have even been in a meeting with around 30 RAF bods on a visit to an RN base and all were in MTP and all had it tucked in, personally think they like showing off their stable belt.

To add to the areas you identified, I think you will find all RAF personnel in MTP at PJHQ.

DJRice · 5 August 2013 22:03

Indeed to all the above, but I can’t be out of touch as I do it everyday

To address your points though, yes there are people who wear MTP on a daily basis and therefore the earlier order applies.

But, in the big scheme of things the vast majority don’t wear MTP everyday. All Regt type training is now classed as operational training - especially CCS and IPDT (and other) Guard is mostly done by the MPGS augmented by regulars where required.

Ultimately the RAF is a Blue organisation and the majority of it’s personnel wear Blue everyday. If we need to wear the disruptive type then it means we’re working on (or training for) Operations.

flago · 6 August 2013 07:43

[quote=“djrice” post=9852]Indeed to all the above, but I can’t be out of touch as I do it everyday

To address your points though, yes there are people who wear MTP on a daily basis and therefore the earlier order applies.

But, in the big scheme of things the vast majority don’t wear MTP everyday. All Regt type training is now classed as operational training - especially CCS and IPDT (and other) Guard is mostly done by the MPGS augmented by regulars where required.

Ultimately the RAF is a Blue organisation and the majority of it’s personnel wear Blue everyday. If we need to wear the disruptive type then it means we’re working on (or training for) Operations.

:D[/quote]

I work with people who have done it everyday for longer than I was born and they are out of touch! :lol:

Its a shock to hear someone refer to the RAF as a blue organisation after watching it slide more and more green. Hell, I have been in an office where the Pilots wore flying suits for no reason at all (took flying a desk to a new level).

As for cadets and MTP, it will happen eventually. Quite likely it will officially happen well after the CS95 stocks have run dry and it will be an absolute pain and people will start wearing it before its official (my bets on JLs being the 1st) at least it will give fuel to a resurrection of this thread!

tmmorris · 6 August 2013 07:49

If RAF staff at PJHQ are in MPT, then CAS needs to get a grip. Or, stop telling the rest of us to wear blues at all times.

steve679 · 6 August 2013 08:23

a direct question to all those who think we should have MTP/PCS over DPM for whatever reason (ie if the supply chain for CS95 DPM woodland permitted infinite wear you’d still vote for PCS)

is this simply to look “more RAF”??

i ask as it occurred to me, go back 5 years in blues and greens we (ATC) looked like the RAF (from a distance) and could easily be mistaken as such.

return to modern day and in blues we can still be mistaken for regulars, but in greens less likely given the “out of sync” uniform pattern.

but wait, go back 5 years again…that comment about blues isn’t right…Cadets wear working blue, and would be unlikely to be mistaken for RAF regulars (by regulars or otherwise)
return to modern day and it is still isn’t right, Cadets in blues still have the distinction

there is a difference in uniform, whether in blues or greens between Cadets and the RAF Regulars and I suspect it is the “walts” in the organisation wanting to be more (mistaken for) “RAF” than are so keen for PCS

it is interesting to me that most comments for MTP/PCS have been from Staff than the Cadets (in my opinion and experience).

an interesting post on the “you know when you have been a Cadet too long when…” Facebook page i noticed by Cadets on the topic of MTP quickly raised the subject of its cost, and how the ATC comes at the very bottom of any budgets with regard to uniform, a very sensible conclusion and argument which soon fizzled out.

While on ACC (which has been mainly staff discussion) it is its merits over CS95, how much "better“ it is and the advantages in the field (and recently how, a uniform we’re not permitted to wear, should be worn!)…all which are null and void when the operational “combat” role of the ATC does not need the advantages that MTP/PCS brings over CS95
CS95 was not replaced because it doesn’t work, because it is too expensive (it would seem cheaper than MTP), because it isn’t comfortable, or because the supply chain didn’t work, it was and is a viable “greens” uniform for the best part of 15+ years replaced due to an improvement rather than out of necessity. It was and is a credible uniform so why are people so against using it?

is this a case of Staff wanting to look like regulars, which 5 years ago they could, and modern day they now don’t?
and because of this the wearing of greens now puts them in a position where they are clearly ATC instructors/CFAVs rather than regular Air Force?

Personally and to mixed topics here, if we could (long term, through sustainable supply) stay in CS95 would the restriction on CIs wearing CS95 be lifted? With the distinction between RAF and ATC clear the bug bare of RAF SWOs seeing civilians waltz around in “uniform” on their Station with no beret mistaken for a regular would disappear…

Baldrick · 6 August 2013 09:35

[quote=“steve679” post=9866]a direct question to all those who think we should have MTP/PCS over DPM for whatever reason (ie if the supply chain for CS95 DPM woodland permitted infinite wear you’d still vote for PCS)