Mtp

Everyone Uniform and Drill
21

[quote=“wilf_san” post=4170] There is absolutely no reason whatsoever for any Cadet organisation to wear a specific tactical pattern of camouflage, other than for reasons of uniformity. That could be within the Cadet organisation itself, or also out of respect/tradition follow-on from a parent service.

It’s completely impractical for the ACO not to wear some form of approved ground training undress field uniform. The logical approach would be (in the absence of MTP scaling from the RAF) to simply continue wearing CS95 surplus for decades to come. The ACO should commandeer every single serviceable item of unissued/PWS CS95, and keep it in a national stockade. … If costs were cheap enough, and purchase channels were created, why couldn’t we just stick with CS95 for at least the next 5-10 years?? Practically-speaking, and with an eye to costs/disruption (badges, anyone?), there is no better/simpler smarter solution. If there was, we’d already know about it.[/quote]
The only reason IMO people are that bothered about new kit is looking the part sauntering about on military establishments.
The idea of acquiring as much of it as possible for cadet use has some validity, although distribution would be interesting. Given the number of times and the main environment a cadet or member of staff wears it, it should last for years.
I can remember far enough back when we didn’t have any form of combat kit, we did everything in coveralls, and maybe this is a way to go. I bought DPM in the 80s and it is still wearable today. But then it is made of a decent heavy material.

This is something that has been mentioned by some sqn cdrs and returned on return of uniform. But a bit of a pig to administer unless sqn cdrs were able to write cheques or have the cash in sufficient amounts sitting around.

22

Don’t new coveralls come in Blue?

23

There’s some trial stuff going on somewhere in the regulars.

Wasn’t the MTP designed with the current conflicts in mind?

I mean, ACP16 doesn’t cover Afghan?

24

You never know what Vol2 might cover… :wink:

25

Hi Wilf_San,

On the Canadian front, as I understand it, all their cadets (army, air and sea) are only issued ‘barrack dress’, but are allowed to purchase OD combats for field stuff. Their army cadets get gifted ODs for specific camps and courses, in a similar way to JLs and combats, but are allowed to purchase their own or, in most areas, CADETPAT (which is Canadian combats in USMC MARPAT comouflage).

Devils advocate: why not bin blues,CS95 and overalls and issue olive green or khaki combats to cadets as routine working dress? Maybe save enough money for a No 1 style uniform for special occasions - loan pool of perhaps?

As to having to account for every item of PCS/ PCS not being disposed of etc… :? not seen :?

26

[quote=“tango_lima” post=4176]Hi Wilf_San,

On the Canadian front, as I understand it, all their cadets (army, air and sea) are only issued ‘barrack dress’, but are allowed to purchase OD combats for field stuff. Their army cadets get gifted ODs for specific camps and courses, in a similar way to JLs and combats, but are allowed to purchase their own or, in most areas, CADETPAT (which is Canadian combats in USMC MARPAT comouflage).

Devils advocate: why not bin blues,CS95 and overalls and issue olive green or khaki combats to cadets as routine working dress? Maybe save enough money for a No 1 style uniform for special occasions - loan pool of perhaps?

As to having to account for every item of PCS/ PCS not being disposed of etc… :? not seen :?[/quote]

I think the Air Force was trialling a blue PCS, there was a lengthy thread about it on the archive.

MTP is not hitting disposal, the entire camouflage pattern is very highly protected, copyright wise etc.

27

Especially with the latest defence cuts…

28

Not allowed under the new regs (might get away with it on the smock!)

29

[quote=“wdimagineer2b” post=4164]The wording of the ban did indeed refer to ancilliaries…but (intentional or not) that has specific meaning within the context of the PCS uniform. Equipment is not actually covered by the ban.
If they meant to ban MTP/multicam ‘equipment’ then they should have used that word.

As you say, multicam (or various other MTP-like pattern) equipment is readily available at fair prices, and in some cases DPM version are no longer being made. Personally if I were to spend out on something like a new camelbak, webbing, daysack, &c I’d prefer to invest in the future and not buy in a pattern that will soon enough be obsolete.[/quote]

Why not i still use dpm bergan, webbing, camelbak, daysacks etc etc. Dpm is cheaper and still available!

30

[quote=“5432golf” post=4174]There’s some trial stuff going on somewhere in the regulars.

Wasn’t the MTP designed with the current conflicts in mind?

I mean, ACP16 doesn’t cover Afghan?[/quote]

Intially yes when MTP CS95 was UOR. MTP/PCS is what has evolved from PECCOC and the new pattern for everywhere (minus snow)

31

[quote=“tango_lima” post=4176]Hi Wilf_San,

CADETPAT (which is Canadian combats in USMC MARPAT comouflage).
[/quote]

dont tell a canadian that! they get upset when people think they stole it when infact the yanks did!

32

[quote=“Baldrick” post=4177][quote=“tango_lima” post=4176]Hi Wilf_San,

On the Canadian front, as I understand it, all their cadets (army, air and sea) are only issued ‘barrack dress’, but are allowed to purchase OD combats for field stuff. Their army cadets get gifted ODs for specific camps and courses, in a similar way to JLs and combats, but are allowed to purchase their own or, in most areas, CADETPAT (which is Canadian combats in USMC MARPAT comouflage).

Devils advocate: why not bin blues,CS95 and overalls and issue olive green or khaki combats to cadets as routine working dress? Maybe save enough money for a No 1 style uniform for special occasions - loan pool of perhaps?

As to having to account for every item of PCS/ PCS not being disposed of etc… :? not seen :?[/quote]

I think the Air Force was trialling a blue PCS, there was a lengthy thread about it on the archive.

MTP is not hitting disposal, the entire camouflage pattern is very highly protected, copyright wise etc.[/quote]

strangely gone quiet on that front, including the Navy trial which from what i remember the RAF were waiting to see the results

33

That wouldn’t be a certain 4 letter word alert would it?

34

[quote=“duty_pongo” post=4183][quote=“Baldrick” post=4177][quote=“tango_lima” post=4176]Hi Wilf_San,

On the Canadian front, as I understand it, all their cadets (army, air and sea) are only issued ‘barrack dress’, but are allowed to purchase OD combats for field stuff. Their army cadets get gifted ODs for specific camps and courses, in a similar way to JLs and combats, but are allowed to purchase their own or, in most areas, CADETPAT (which is Canadian combats in USMC MARPAT comouflage).

Devils advocate: why not bin blues,CS95 and overalls and issue olive green or khaki combats to cadets as routine working dress? Maybe save enough money for a No 1 style uniform for special occasions - loan pool of perhaps?

As to having to account for every item of PCS/ PCS not being disposed of etc… :? not seen :?[/quote]

I think the Air Force was trialling a blue PCS, there was a lengthy thread about it on the archive.

MTP is not hitting disposal, the entire camouflage pattern is very highly protected, copyright wise etc.[/quote]

strangely gone quiet on that front, including the Navy trial which from what i remember the RAF were waiting to see the results[/quote]

Blue PCS is on trial. Seen it. Looks better than you’d expect.

RAF wear Para wings on PCS, thought Army were too? Has it changed?

CADETPAT is MARPAT, as in that’s the camouflage pattern used, but the uniform is the same cut as the Canadian ones. The USMC did copy the idea of ‘digital camouflage’ from the Canadians after they introduced CADPAT (which in turn is a digital copy of Danish M88 camouflage), which Canadian cadets are forbidden from using (along with everyone else not Canadian Forces).

MTP actually works pretty well in snow too.

35

[quote=“tango_lima” post=4186][quote=“duty_pongo” post=4183][quote=“Baldrick” post=4177][quote=“tango_lima” post=4176]Hi Wilf_San,

On the Canadian front, as I understand it, all their cadets (army, air and sea) are only issued ‘barrack dress’, but are allowed to purchase OD combats for field stuff. Their army cadets get gifted ODs for specific camps and courses, in a similar way to JLs and combats, but are allowed to purchase their own or, in most areas, CADETPAT (which is Canadian combats in USMC MARPAT comouflage).

Devils advocate: why not bin blues,CS95 and overalls and issue olive green or khaki combats to cadets as routine working dress? Maybe save enough money for a No 1 style uniform for special occasions - loan pool of perhaps?

As to having to account for every item of PCS/ PCS not being disposed of etc… :? not seen :?[/quote]

I think the Air Force was trialling a blue PCS, there was a lengthy thread about it on the archive.

MTP is not hitting disposal, the entire camouflage pattern is very highly protected, copyright wise etc.[/quote]

strangely gone quiet on that front, including the Navy trial which from what i remember the RAF were waiting to see the results[/quote]

Blue PCS is on trial. Seen it. Looks better than you’d expect.

RAF wear Para wings on PCS, thought Army were too? Has it changed?

CADETPAT is MARPAT, as in that’s the camouflage pattern used, but the uniform is the same cut as the Canadian ones. The USMC did copy the idea of ‘digital camouflage’ from the Canadians after they introduced CADPAT (which in turn is a digital copy of Danish M88 camouflage), which Canadian cadets are forbidden from using (along with everyone else not Canadian Forces).

MTP actually works pretty well in snow too.[/quote]

only seen the Navy stuff on trial but as said that was months ago and not heard much since.

UK para wings yes on the right pannel problem is that gunners are the dutch ones that go above the right breasticle.

my mistake about the CADETPAT as i didnt know it exisited (assumed it was cadpat)

Not seen mtp in the snow but do know it seems very effective everywhere else!

36

Camouflage geeks!

37

when it can save your life and is what you wear to work every day what do you expect?!?!

38

[quote=“wilf_san” post=4170]
It’s completely impractical for the ACO not to wear some form of approved ground training undress field uniform. The logical approach would be (in the absence of MTP scaling from the RAF) to simply continue wearing CS95 surplus for decades to come. The ACO should commandeer every single serviceable item of unissued/PWS CS95, and keep it in a national stockade.

[SNIP]

If costs were cheap enough, and purchase channels were created, why couldn’t we just stick with CS95 for at least the next 5-10 years?? Practically-speaking, and with an eye to costs/disruption (badges, anyone?), there is no better/simpler smarter solution. If there was, we’d already know about it.

wilf_san[/quote]

A nice thought, however under the Army MTP PCS fielding plan, stocks are supposed to have been managed to avoid wastage and leave little excess available once the roll out has completed. I imagine RAF stocks will have been managed in the same way. There will be some left of course but it won’t last that long. If I was feeling cynical, I would say that since you chaps are not scaled for combat uniform, the MOD will just release it to disposals…or burn it.

39

After all the moaning we did about mixed patterns of CS kit, why aren’t we concentrating on getting all the uniforms the services don’t need anymore instead of trying to get the new kit we don’t need? There must now be THOUSANDS of 95 uniforms going to waste. Why not scale and issue them?

40

It isn’t there. When MTP was brought in all production of CS95 stopped. The army were apparently expected to have stockpiled it, but seemingly didn’t. Meanwhile during the changeover all CS95 which is handed in is being laundered and re-issued to those who still need it. The stuff has a very high turnover and is being used to destruction. All combined this means it’s becoming a finite resource.

Also, MTP isn’t going through to the usual disposal channels. It gets destroyed. (recently by the front line troops who cut it up for helmet scrim strips.)