Making the uniform choice

[madkins007]

The 'baby sitters of America' thread mentioned that the issue of parental involvement is an ancient one, and that reminded me of this uniform thread. Scouts and leaders have complained about the uniform since 1910!

 

One thing I find interesting in the BSA's uniform issue is that over the years, the most consistant aspects of the debate has been that National has always felt that the uniform should be 'top to bottom', that you always (well, not in the very beginning) had to buy it from them, and that it was always pretty 'non-participatory' (not designed by surveys, etc., but by rather remote committes, unlike the newest UK uniform.)

 

Bu thte good news is that it DOES change sometimes, and most often for the better (especially if we ignore the rather unfortunate mid-70's uniform!) and the changes are usually based on feedback.

[Hunt]

"If we had more unit leaders who put as much thought and effort into what is inside the uniform as they do in what the uniform is we would have a much better local program for our scouts."

 

I agree with this wholeheartedly, Bob. I think both gripes about the uniform and defenses of the minutia of uniforming are much less important than the program. However, you and I and others seem interested in discussing the uniform anyway, and I don't see much harm in that.

 

"Hunt, have you any experience or even a concept of what it takes to uniform MILLIONS of people. The cost? The Logistics?"

 

Not really. Do you? If so, please use your experience to get us some better pants the next time the uniform is changed. That's all I'm saying.

 

[packsaddle]

I'm curious too. What does it take to make uniforms for millions of people? I'm only familiar with the automated systems in the textiles research center for the university. They helped develop the manufacturing process for the U.S. Army.

[John-in-KC]

Welllll, if you're Mother Army ....

 

It takes a lot of design attempts, with a host of testing at the lab (Natick Labs in MA), before an article of the uniform even goes out to field units for testing.

 

Field units around the world (weather appropriate) test the uniform, at not cost to the troops. Wear tests can run for up to a year.

 

There is a board of officers and senior NCOs (Generals and Sergeants Major) who vote a recommendation to the Chief of Staff of the Army.

 

When the Chief signs off, then the time clock starts for wearing out the existing article and replacing it with the new item.

 

By the way, the process is fairly transparent. The Army Times, the (now) Gannett paper that specializes in the US Army, maintains visibility over all manner of uniform and equipment article changes.

 

Bottom line: Users have direct input, and the process of changing Army uniforms is done "in the full light of day."

 

 

[packsaddle]

John-in-KC, That was illuminating. There are a few other interesting things about the design and production. I only recently became aware that Army uniforms are 'scaled' in many ways. For example, the shirt pockets, in order to maintain a proportional appearance, are scaled in size depending on the size of the uniform. But this is limited by standards of utility (can't make them too doggone small). Or so I'm told by the apparel researchers. That and some similar properties make this a really challenging design and manufacturing problem, solved, I think, by computer automation. I had no idea there was so much detail.

I wonder if scout uniforms even come close to this standard.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)