Irish Military Online is in no way affiliated with the Irish Defence Forces. It is in no way sponsored or endorsed by the Irish Defence Forces or the Irish Government. Opinions expressed by the authors and contributors of this site are not necessarily those of the Defence Forces. If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
AFAIK Tailored Images have the current contract for operational unforms for the DF as a whole.
Therefore they were the supplier from what i am aware of.
Nope. Seyntex have the Operational uniforms contract. T.I has the ceremonial uniforms contract.
"Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.
They must also have had the GDR contract as TI tags on all of that.
I wonder so if Syntex have the NS DPM contract too as it has beed defined as an Operation Uniform with its brother in green.
As you probably know the uniform contracts run in three year cycles from time of award of tender. NSV DPM wan't tendered for as part of the operational uniform competition. OGP might have asked TI to "tag it on" to a contract extension as up to three one year extensions are allowed under the current tender. Also as the new uniform is made with a specialised material perhaps there were proprietary issues and the NS/TI/OGP didn't want it being shared with Seyntex??
A separate competition hasn't been run for NSV DPM so it must be an "add on" on an existing contract.
"Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.
As you probably know the uniform contracts run in three year cycles from time of award of tender. NSV DPM wan't tendered for as part of the operational uniform competition. OGP might have asked TI to "tag it on" to a contract extension as up to three one year extensions are allowed under the current tender. Also as the new uniform is made with a specialised material perhaps there were proprietary issues and the NS/TI/OGP didn't want it being shared with Seyntex??
A separate competition hasn't been run for NSV DPM so it must be an "add on" on an existing contract.
Looks like all naval uniforms was part of Lot 1 in the tender (LOT 1: Provision of Service Dress and Operational (SD1) Uniforms) which went to Tailored Image and in the tender document it does say this:
12.2 During the Term of the Goods Contract operational imperatives may necessitate
alteration/amendment to the Design and Fabric Specifications in Appendix 1B of this RFT for any
of the Goods. The alteration/amendment of the Goods listed in the Design and Fabric
Specification shall not incur any additional or further costs to the Contracting Authority.
It was the year of fire...the year of destruction...the year we took back what was ours.
It was the year of rebirth...the year of great sadness...the year of pain...and the year of joy.
It was a new age...It was the end of history.
It was the year everything changed.
Just had a look at the documents. No mention of the specs for the NSV DPM in the the Navy Uniform lot. I reckon the above clause was invoked to change from the original shirt/trouser specs to the new ones.
"Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.
How long before the smock ends up as building site wear?
Very strange decision to retain the jumper, when so many other more militarily practical options are there, such as fleece layers. Are there dark base layers or are the originals being retained?
For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
The Barrack jacket is being withdrawn because it is not flame resistant and cannot be worn below decks. The jumper is being retained because it is made from wool which is and can.
All this info was up on IKON for months while the new uniform was being developed.
"Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.
The Barrack jacket is being withdrawn because it is not flame resistant and cannot be worn below decks. The jumper is being retained because it is made from wool which is and can.
All this info was up on IKON for months while the new uniform was being developed.
But inside the new smock during the trial in big letters was "not fire retardant"
Yes. Trials variant was made from normal material to test the cut etc .The issue version is FR throughout. Apparently. (It better be as that was another of the reasons used to justify the move to the new uniform)
"Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Comment