Task Force Uniform (The Fraud, Waste and Abuse Kings)

I have already addressed some of these issues but we were discussing them once again and I thought I would reorganize the thoughts, specifically about the new blue battle dress uniform (BDU) and some other Navy recent uniform changes. I have some questions for Task Force Uniform about the new blue BDU uniform.

First: This uniform can only be worn on naval installations and aboard ship. Sailors cannot stop for gas, groceries or any other routine stop between work and home. If the uniform has to be worn only among other naval personnel, who are the people in a camouflage uniform hiding from? Aboard a ship or on a naval installation should be the safest environment in which naval personnel will ever be located. Why is it necessary to wear camouflage?

Second: Assuming everyone is wearing this camouflage uniform on board a ship, does it make any sense at all to be wearing a blue camouflage uniform when a sailor falls overboard? It is hard enough to find someone in the ocean without the added disadvantage of having the person in the water in a purposely difficult to see uniform. Maybe a shipboard uniform, which is worn virtually nowhere else, should be reflective yellow or fuchsia to be seen.

Third: In rapid evolutions (man overboard or general quarters), why come up with a uniform that takes longer to don than the current uniforms? Having worn BDUs in many deployments, they are a hassle to wear correctly with trousers bloused. People will argue that blousing isn’t necessary in a hurry. The counter argument is then why put in place a uniform which ever requires blousing on a ship?

Fourth: Another justification for the BDUs which has been offered is that it will make sailors feel more like “warriors”. This has to be the most condescending, insulting comment ever. Is anyone actually implying that Sailors in blue jeans and white T-shirts who fought throughout World War II were wimps? Are submarine Sailors in coveralls that perform so admirably upon submarines not warriors? I suppose it is a good thing that Task Force Uniform finally came up with a uniform which will make SeALs feel like warriors. This is the worst made up excuse for a uniform ever.

Fifth: If a Sailor deploys in a joint arena with the Army or the Marine Corps, will a Sailor be able to wear this new BDU uniform? Of course not, it is BLUE. If it makes you feel like a warrior, why is it inappropriate? The Sailor will wear either the Army colors or Marine Corps colors to blend in. So now we have a battle dress uniform which can only be worn in battles at sea. It isn’t used in land battles. That is ridiculous. Why come up with a uniform for combat that can't be worn most of the places where combat happens?

Sixth: The cost of the new uniform is $410.05 before the name and rank devices are attached. This uniform costs two to four times the uniforms it replaces. That is a lot of money for a relatively useless uniform. Whose idea was it to come up with an almost prohibitively expensive uniform?

Seventh: The Army and the Air Force allow their members to stop for routine necessities in their BDU uniforms. Assuming that there is a legitimate reason for the uniform (which I haven’t found), why would Task Force Uniform agree to one that is so hideous that no one can be seen in public wearing it? If the Army and Air Force uniforms are acceptable, why not change to Navy versions of similar ones? Someone commented that the leadership wanted time to have people get used to wearing it. Once again, it is incredibly insulting to imply that experienced Sailors cannot figure out how to wear a new or changed uniform and follow instructions.

Now, let's talk about the new physical training uniform. Only Task Force Uniform could come up with a physical training uniform for Sailors which cannot be laundered on a ship. It melts. Additionally, when Sailors bought it, it was like a tourniquet on the upper thigh. It is obviously poorly thought out and a total waste of money.

Let's talk about the new boots for the useless BDU uniform. There are two varieties. All of the other services now have suede finish boots which do not require polish. They are easier to care for and, not coincidentally, harder to be spotted by enemy snipers. Task Force Uniform, in their infinite wisdom, came up with two different black boots. One suede finish boot can only be worn on shore installations. A smooth polished boot must be worn aboard ship because of the sole and steel toes. You can wear the smooth boot on ship or on shore. Let's see... at about $120 a pair, do you think anyone would buy the boot you can only wear on shore if the other can be worn anywhere? Of course, this means that if a Sailor goes anywhere on land in a combat zone, he/she will have to buy the khaki suede boots to go with the Army or Marine Corps uniform. So, my questions would be: Why not find a suede boot with the correct soles and steel toes? Manufacturers will climb over each other to produce them. Why not use the khaki boots everyone else uses? Marines wear the khaki boots when they are on amphibious assault ships. Should they be less safe than Sailors?

Task Force Uniform has really screwed the pooch on this one. Someone in authority needed to squash these things. This is analogous to the ill-fated enlisted uniform of the mid 1970s which temporarily replaced the classic blue jumper uniform. This is the "New Coke" of the Navy's recent past. I suppose the Task Force Uniform members feel obligated to do something to justify the billets and the budget but doing dumb stuff just to do something is not adequate justification for these fiascoes. One of two things will happen with this new blue uniform, either it will go away after a long enough trial period to allow the people who came up with it to save face (and the manufacturer to make a lot of money), or the policies will change and the uniform will have similar limitations to the Army and Air Force. In the mean time, Sailors will have to take the costs on the chin so some manufacturer can get rich.