Proposed Replacement for GP Jacket- Softshell trials

Everyone Uniform and Drill
41

How many high ranking jobs and subsequent promotions, gongs, honours etc relied on those happening in terms of the political fall out if they didn’t? As you say self-preservation and self glorification at all costs and nuts to everyone else.

Moving parts around is normal practice across all engineering disciplines. Every ‘engineer’ I know has said ‘robbing’ parts from one thing to keep another going is what they just do and have done. I’ve known and know people from all 3 services and they all say the same about using parts from one thing to keep the other going and make do/mends, from subs to staff cars.

As for the cost of things generally, I was told as part of a visit that the nuts and bolts used on aircraft are exactly the same as you can get from DIY shops, but are charged at a small fortune ie one nut/bolt costing the same as a bag of the same from popular DIY/trade outlets.

42

[quote=“Teflon, post:41, topic:3013, full:true”]
Moving parts around is normal practice across all engineering disciplines. Every ‘engineer’ I know has said ‘robbing’ parts from one thing to keep another going is what they just do and have done.[/quote]

Yes, I’ve been doing it for 27 years and why? Because of contractual restraints, usually based on financial considerations. Given that there is an ever decreasing amount to spend on defence, don’t you think it should be spent more wisely then? I’m trying to work out if you think it’s a good idea to spend money on introducing these jackets or not?

To a certain degree, yes but the parts used on aircraft are “certified” so that in the event that an aircraft incident or crash can be traced to the failure of a particular item, the manufacturer can be held to account. This inevitably pushes up costs.

43

personally I wear one of these rather than my GPJ

https://www.flying-jacket.com/jackets/mod-approved-jackets/mod-approved-pattern-jacket/

3 Likes
44

Personally, they have a perfectly functional every day jacket (GPJ) so why a new one is something of a mystery. But then I’ve thought that every time there has been a new ‘DPM’ uniform come out and they try to do a ‘one style fits’ all exercise, why they needed to change jumpers and trousers as well evaded me completely. It just seems a complete waste of time and effort, just reinventing the wheel. In some ways I am surprised that the RAF and RN retain their own working dress, when logically and financially using DPM as working dress makes sense and just keeping the ‘blue suits’ for best.

However I’ve seen changes / money spent on things in my own working life that leaves you thinking WTF, but I’ve come to understand it comes down to whose pet project / area it is and how much clout they have or think they should have, or, if they think they need to show they are still breathing. Although working in a private company, changes etc are never done lightly as it affects the shareholders and profits, both of which fuel development, unlike the abject waste of money you see it in local govt and other public bodies where it’s our money (from taxation) getting wasted on peripheral nonsense.

1 Like
45

i offer you

it is standard in the MOD/Govn this cost more for little justfification

1 Like
46

Naive view of certification of aircraft parts. They aren’t the same - the DIY stuff isn’t tested to particular torque etc.

47

It all depends on which officer has just bought shares in which ever company.

It’s all a game to them brother. They don’t see the pointy end. We are all just pawns on the board.

48

I see it’s no longer listed as a flying jacket!:slight_smile:

Sad times…:grinning:

49

If the proposed soft-shell jacket was correctly-sized and fitted, it wouldn’t look too bad.

To be fair, I think the current GP Jacket is actually still a completely-useable piece of kit as it stands. The USAF still thinks so (it remains, to the best of my knowledge, the only uniform item common to each Force both sides of the Atlantic. Active Duty and NG personnel can opt to have the left breast-pocket side embroidered with the large modern USAF crest. Our cousins in the Civil Air Patrol wear it unembroidered, like us).

The original published minutes of the RAF DPSG where the soft-shell is first mentioned are quite intriguing.

Other matters being considered were the withdrawal of the WO male-issue shiny-peaked SD, with a view to saving money by replacing it with the fabric-peaked Officers’ version (thus following the Army style). They’ve currently binned the idea, but in so doing they now can’t redress the anomoly that female RAF WO peaks are actually commissioned officer cloth-peaked. I’d never noticed that in all my many years of service (oops).

I’m (personally) glad to see that the option of all Officers being permitted to wear berets in No2 dress is still being talked about. There are times and places that I reckon it can make sense (it did before, and I believe it would do no harm to have as an approved alternative).

The goretex blue jacket may be getting an RN makeover (so: the soft-shell does not fully replace it).

Round-necked jumpers may have a withdrawal date within dress regs.

Note that all of the above is just a number of (dated) published proposals, some of which are already-obsolete eg the RAuxAF “A” badge total removal overtakes the stated interim position within the paper.

Noticed that they’re considering withdrawing the mess waistcoat from No5s for Officers, since it would cost too much to issue/insist upon them for WOs/SNCOs. No, I don’t understand the problem, either.

And it looks like regular/active reserve WOs are to be permitted to wear the qualification badges they’d normally-remove from No1s when they leave behind the rank of FS (I think?)

Anyway- we are the RAF Air Cadets, so it’s reasonable that we should keep tuned-in to any relevant public channels of information (nb ATF are part of the formal notifications/awareness chain, at the bottom of the document, which is excellent)

1 Like
50

PLEAAAASE!!!:bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

1 Like
51

I won’t believe for one minute they get these items made especially, they will be bought in bulk from the same factories as all the others and test each batch of several tonnes on a small random sample based on weight and then issue a certificate.

Certification or not, someone, somewhere is coining it in, as they know only too well :
a) it’s a defence contract and they can just make up numbers and get paid as there is little scrutiny
b) no one in the MoD pays any heed to costs well unless it’s too late, they get found out (people in charge are promoted and given honours) and then there has to be cuts.

If it is made from something more specialised then fair enough you have to suck up and pay.

Unless you have tested a DIY nut and bolt, how do you know what it’s characteristics are.

52

Berets? No2s? Do you all want to in the Army or Regiment Officers? The RAF styles itself on being able to equip its Officers with suitable headwear.

Nooooooo.

1 Like
53

Sorry
Wearing berets with No2 just looks naff and it’s the start of the down hill slope to a change in uniform
So our No1s would be as a cadets I feel

54

All for this. There are some days in blues where I would just love the convenience of a hat I can roll up and stuff in a pocket or pouch. The next best thing is the chip hat, but it is fack all use when it’s windy.

1 Like
55

Looks fine for ATC/RAF ORs…

2 Likes
56

The chip bag is the sole reason why I would ever consider going into uniform. I would cut about with that thing on my bonce humming the thunderbirds tune and ending every conversation with FAB.

57

I don’t think that they’re suggesting that officers wouldn’t be able to wear the chip bag, just that the beret would be an option

1 Like
58

Love my chip bag. Tbh I very rarely wear my peaked cap.

1 Like
59

Exactly.

60

Chip hat? Yeuch - if I don’t get issued it, it doesn’t get worn - I’m certainly not paying for uniform.