Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

British Army Uniforms

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • British Army Uniforms

    I knew they were bad but this is stupid.... imagine how much equipment they could get with the amount of money spend on these (and thats only 1 regiment!)

    http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/gen...t_Oct_2009.pdf

  • #2
    I know these things are expensive and arguably there mainly for aesthetics more than anything else, but I quite liked that about the British Army. The difference in uniforms and the history behind everything. I think these diffences instil pride, ambition, promote competitiveness between units, and observe the units' hundreds of years of history and accomplishments. All of which go toward moulding good soliders who strive to represent more than themselves.
    And if soldiers on ops filled with the aforesaid pride and competitiveness are prepared to go the extra mile, solely so as not to tarnish the good reputation of the unit they're apart of; then I'd consider all the money spent on engraved swords, ball buttons, stable belts etc worth every penny. Recession, or not.

    Comment


    • #3
      Dev, where in that document does it say that everyone is issued with all the items listed? No1 dress is issued to bands, and units on public duties - anyone else who wants it has to pay for it themselves. That, incidentally, is why that document exists, so anyone who wants to buy it themselves knows what to buy and where to buy it (thus the list of approved suppliers at the end).

      Comment


      • #4
        Some things that are in yes are private purchase but most of it has a NSN (a NATO stock code) that means it is available from stores for issue to someone, it isn't made to order!

        All units rotate through public duties

        Comment


        • #5
          I don't know about the British, but in the CF there are 2 systems of finance:

          - Public funds: these are the govt allocated funds, AKA the "defence budget", and are used to pay for service dress, combat dress and all operational items of clothing and accessories.

          - Non-public funds (NPF): these are funds raised by the unit canteens, messes, CFPSA, donations etc... and are used to pay for unit-specific ceremonial dress, accessories, mascots etc...

          One cannot use one fund to pay for items covered by the other fund, so in our case, we could not buy body armour in place of bear-skin hats with NPF (for example).
          "On the plains of hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions, who on the very dawn of victory, laid down to rest, and in resting died.

          Never give up!!"

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by SwiftandSure View Post
            I know these things are expensive and arguably there mainly for aesthetics more than anything else, but I quite liked that about the British Army. The difference in uniforms and the history behind everything. I think these diffences instil pride, ambition, promote competitiveness between units, and observe the units' hundreds of years of history and accomplishments. All of which go toward moulding good soliders who strive to represent more than themselves.
            And if soldiers on ops filled with the aforesaid pride and competitiveness are prepared to go the extra mile, solely so as not to tarnish the good reputation of the unit they're apart of; then I'd consider all the money spent on engraved swords, ball buttons, stable belts etc worth every penny. Recession, or not.
            I agree 100%

            Comment


            • #7
              What HA said! I think it's something which brings great esprit de corps. It's a pity, for instance, that unit citations aren't handed out- or are they?- for meritorious service. Eg instead of a composite Bn heading overseas, 27 Bn go overseas and maybe do something which earns a citation and is then added to the battalion history books.
              "Gentlemen, you can’t fight in here...this is the War Room!"

              Comment


              • #8
                Whats the story behind the back badge ??
                Anyone need a spleen ?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by ollie View Post
                  Whats the story behind the back badge ??
                  I think its to do with the "Glorious Glosters" in Korea fighting a rearguard action .
                  Last edited by rod and serpent; 23 November 2009, 00:22.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by rod and serpent View Post
                    I think its to do with the "Glourious Gloucesters" in Korea fighting a rearguard action .

                    And another of the Rifles ancester units fought a rearguard action in Egypt too.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It was a bit before that - in 1801 the 28th of Foot were engaged simultaneously from front and rear, so the rear rank recieved the command to about turn, and engaged the enemy to their rear

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_...ria_%281801%29

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Of course, RGJ wouldn't really want to admit the fact that the honour was bestowed upon a Regiment that wasn't a Rifle Regiment or even a Light Infantry Regiment at the time, and which didn't become Light Infantry until 2005!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Why doesnt the PDF get issued 'Gimp shoulder boards'?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I know the brits are all into preserving the history and traditions of the various regiments. But what exactly is the point in having 1st Bn the 1st Amalgamese retaining the traditions of their parent regiment and the 2nd Bn doing the same for theirs. I think we were correct here in just giving units a Number instead of a name
                            Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Steamy Window View Post
                              What HA said! I think it's something which brings great esprit de corps. It's a pity, for instance, that unit citations aren't handed out- or are they?- for meritorious service. Eg instead of a composite Bn heading overseas, 27 Bn go overseas and maybe do something which earns a citation and is then added to the battalion history books.
                              The only problem with that is that with KFOR going out the window, we only have one real Bn sized Op running Overseas.

                              So while letting individual Units go Overseas is a good idea, it wouldn't work over here.

                              Looking at 3 trips to Chad a year, that would cover the 3 Bn's in each Brigade and then the 3rd Bn in DFTC. So you're looking at a Bn getting 1 trip on average every 3 years?

                              In a job where your 5 year contract involves the need to serve Overseas, 1 trip for a Bn every 3 years just won't cut it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X