Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

New Air Force Uniforms to be made by Brooks Brothers

Mojave Jack

One Too Many
Messages
1,785
Location
Yucca Valley, California
Latest dope on the new uniform from Citizen Airman:

http://www.citamn.afrc.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123068537

070917-F-0000Z-007.jpg


They've done away with the peaked lapel on this version, unfortunately, but have made at least one good choice:

"...a coat made of higher-quality fabric will be available as an option for Airmen who want to wear a more professionally tailored uniform. This commercial, custom-tailored coat is being put together through a contract with Brooks Brothers."

Bravo, Air Force! Bravo!
 

MrBern

I'll Lock Up
Messages
4,469
Location
DeleteStreet, REDACTCity, LockedState
Several years ago, there was a HistoryChnl show on the units that put together WWII instructional films. Basically Hollywood pros found their niche in the war effort.
One of the vets interviewed was DeForestKelly (trek's DocMcCoy) who laughed about the young Hollywood types with beautifully tailored uniforms. It stunned some of the old army officers who couldnt get over how beautiful the expensively tailored uniforms were.
 

plain old dave

A-List Customer
Messages
474
Location
East TN
Now a SDB for us "workin' stiff" E-6 and below from Brooks Bros or some other outfit would be SLICK. Heck' I'd treat myself to a custom set of blues when I go gold stripe in 2 years....
 

The Wingnut

One Too Many
Messages
1,711
Location
.
*breathes a sigh of relief* Oh, MAN, was I dreading the Billy Mitchell comeback. Not ecstatic about the notch lapel, but it's a massive improvement over the airline pilot jackets we've currently got. Hooray for the four-pocket!

...those cuffs look horrible. Eh, get 'em tailored, I guess. I wonder if with a little blue dye and a button swap I could get away with a '50s tunic and pants.:D
 

uniballer63

New in Town
Messages
13
Location
oregon
If I remember correctly from my Marine Corps days, the sleeve length regulation was 1/8" above the second knuckle on your thumb.(kinda long for you lounge posters) but we didnt have any fancy cuff links to show off :) I don't know about air force but she looks about in regulation.
 

Hondo

One Too Many
Messages
1,655
Location
Northern California
I like it better when women who work in clerical duties wore skirts, blouse & tunic with cap, wearing what men wear is ugly in appearance, simply walking around every day in camouflage outfit is worse, it’s a matter of proper office style, taste. Women can wear camos if there are in the motor pool, but lets show some class for the department you work for, This is the new Air Force brooks brothers?, Compare styles, the Navy is well ahead, anchors away my friends....

https://www.navy-nex.com/command/about_us/premier-uniforms.html
 

Mojave Jack

One Too Many
Messages
1,785
Location
Yucca Valley, California
Hondo said:
This is the new Air Force brooks brothers?
This one is the issue version that is currently being tested. The Brooks Brothers version will be available for purchase, but not issued.

I can't seem to find a photo of the male version. I hope it does not have the hidden pockets that this version has, but instead goes back to the four pocket tunic, like Wingnut mentioned. I think the ladies version has always had those hidden pockets, though.

I'm not sure you could get away with that mod, Wingnut! I still have my four pocket tunic in my dad's attic, I think. In fact, I think he still has his four pocket tunic in the attic (circa 1960)!

I finally had to have my current JC Penney uniform tailored. Just couldn't stand it any more, and regs be darned. Honestly, the only way they could tell would be that my jacket actually fits!
 

Mojave Jack

One Too Many
Messages
1,785
Location
Yucca Valley, California
fishmeok said:
Here you go:
http://www.af.mil/news/story_media.asp?id=123020472

A choke collar? Maybe it's time to bring back the pinks and greens...
DSCN2387.jpg


Cheers
Mark
Mark, those were the original test versions, but the stand up collar has been eliminated as an option. Unfortunately they also did away with the peaked lapel on the "Hap Arnold" version. The Hap version was supposed to be a very close copy of the pinks and greens, but someone got their fingers into the pie and had it changed to the notch collar.

Hopefully, though, they've at least retained the pocket configuration. If you look at her uniform in the link Mark posted, the female uniform pockets are similar to the notched collar version, except that the newer version has less scalloped top pocket flaps and more scalloped lower pocket flaps. The men's version (of the Hap Arnold variation) has patch pockets on the upper breast, and hidden lower pockets. That, at least, is the same configuration as the chocolate jackets.
 

Cobden

Practically Family
Messages
788
Location
Oxford, UK
I hope you won't mind, but a bit of foreign perspective on the uniform; I have to make some assumptions about the male uniforms from the photo's of the open necked officers uniform, but I hope you'll forgive me!

-Notch collar; probably, despite other's thinking, a good idea, as it's a design feature that sets it apart from the Army - I've always thought, personally, that Air Force uniforms often are too similar to army uniforms, or go over the top not to be (such as the former USAF uniforms, which, in my eyes, didn't look like military uniforms at all). Small details like that are good

-Officers vs. Airmen; the uniforms don't look distinctive enough between the ranks; it's hard to tell without having a direct male officer - male airmen (or female of - female OA) comparison. Again, something I've always personally thought: there should be some distinction between the OA's and officers uniforms excluding insignia, such as bellows pockets vs. normal pockets and/or different pocket flap shapes.

-Belt; a good idea, again, another distinction between the Army and Air Force, but not too much of one. However, I think it could be something that could be used to distinguish officers from OA's. Officers with, OA's without. Or OA's cloth, officers black leather Sam Browne (but I feel this would go against recent US tradition). It also doesn't look too good on females, IMHO. Needs to have a slightly wider, silver buckle

-Male/female; agree with Hondo - skirt, not trousers - however, that can run into runs into the "not looking the same on parade problems". I'd also be tempted to say crossover tie as opposed to neck tie, but again, that has the same problem as skirts. If they wear different headgear anyway, or something else different, then you might as well go the whole hog. I'd be tempted to say, if a skirt is worn, a slighly more rounded edge to bottom edges where it slits (where it buttons up), however, again, this may be seen to go against US uniform traditions.


The stand collared uniform might make a good dress uniform, however, it would need some more distinctions, such as black/white trousers (depending on season), silver braid instead of the black for officers, perhaps fancier eppaullette, that sort of thing, with perhaps an open collarred version for women. Also, it looks rubbish without a white imperial collar underneath

These are just my foreign thoughts on it... just need to bribe my way onto the USAF uniform committee (if they accept sterling!) lol
 

Miss Neecerie

I'll Lock Up
Messages
6,616
Location
The land of Sinatra, Hoboken
disclaimer: I am not in the military, will never be. etc....


But i find it slightly odd that at least a few of you would wish to make women wear skirts.

This would require them to wear nylons and a slip....and so forth. i.e. it doesnt make it -easier- for them to dress ....it makes it more complicated.

That would be fine if they could -opt- between trousers and a skirt and as a whole -they- decided to do that...but otherwise..coming from a bunch of dudes on the internet.....laughable.
 

Cobden

Practically Family
Messages
788
Location
Oxford, UK
I'm not suggesting it permanently - obviously, when in the field etc. trousers are far more suitable, however, the problem comes in with it being, for all intents and purposes, a dress uniform; thus, in my mind, you need to take into account tradition, formality, smartness and uniformity. Tradition dictates that it should be skirts for obvious reasons, and I'm sure you'd agree that a skirt is more formal than a pair of trousers (this is going to be the most formal day uniform for the USAF, I believe). Smartness is slightly trickier - the problem is not that skirts are neccessarily smarter than trousers, rather that military uniforms (for want of a better way of putting it) aren't supposed to be fashionable, and the styles of trousers that are smart on woman are, to some extent, smart due to fashion inherent in the cut: simply put, uniformed women's trousers are rather hideous looking masculine cut trousers, which simply don't look smart, whereas by having more feminine cut trousers would, to some extent, negate the point of the uniform itself. The final problem, uniformity, conversely, is in favour of trousers, as it would make the men and the women look the same on parade, however, if there are other obvious differences in the uniform, such as a different cap, this in some ways negates the argument in favour of trousers.

I can think of one example of a military uniform in which the women wear trousers only: Royal Navy ratings. Although this was only introduced in 1994 (IIRC), there are good traditional reasons as to why they wear trousers (which I won't go into here, as it's ridiculously complicated!), the trousers look smart on women due to the bell bottom cut, and, of course, is completely uniform as they wear exactly the same as men - however, it is not strictly speaking formal (although the traditional reasons means that they are, in a sense).

Of course, issuing both trousers and skirt would be sensible, however the circumstances under which the former are worn in preference to the latter would have to be somewhat restricted.

Not in the military (yet) myself, either, I hasten to add
 

Viola

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,469
Location
NSW, AUS
Cobden said:
I'm not suggesting it permanently - obviously, when in the field etc. trousers are far more suitable, however, the problem comes in with it being, for all intents and purposes, a dress uniform; thus, in my mind, you need to take into account tradition, formality, smartness and uniformity. Tradition dictates that it should be skirts for obvious reasons, and I'm sure you'd agree that a skirt is more formal than a pair of trousers (this is going to be the most formal day uniform for the USAF, I believe). Smartness is slightly trickier - the problem is not that skirts are neccessarily smarter than trousers, rather that military uniforms (for want of a better way of putting it) aren't supposed to be fashionable, and the styles of trousers that are smart on woman are, to some extent, smart due to fashion inherent in the cut: simply put, uniformed women's trousers are rather hideous looking masculine cut trousers, which simply don't look smart, whereas by having more feminine cut trousers would, to some extent, negate the point of the uniform itself. The final problem, uniformity, conversely, is in favour of trousers, as it would make the men and the women look the same on parade, however, if there are other obvious differences in the uniform, such as a different cap, this in some ways negates the argument in favour of trousers.

I don't think I do agree any skirt is inherently any more formal than any pair of trousers.

What is your argument against a pair of more femininely cut trousers? How does it negate the point of the uniform? In fact a pair of pants that fit would seem to be the best of both worlds if you are arguing that women cannot wear the regular pants: close enough for general visual cohesion on parade, but smarter and better fitting than dude's pants.

Your last point seems less a condemnation of pants, and more pointing out its silly to have gender-specific hats.[huh]
 

Miss Neecerie

I'll Lock Up
Messages
6,616
Location
The land of Sinatra, Hoboken
Viola said:
I don't think I do agree any skirt is inherently any more formal than any pair of trousers.

What is your argument against a pair of more femininely cut trousers? How does it negate the point of the uniform? In fact a pair of pants that fit would seem to be the best of both worlds if you are arguing that women cannot wear the regular pants: close enough for general visual cohesion on parade, but smarter and better fitting than dude's pants.

Your last point seems less a condemnation of pants, and more pointing out its silly to have gender-specific hats.[huh]


Agreed...if a skirt is more formal then trousers...maybe the men should wear skirts as well then. ;)
 

Jovan

Suspended
Messages
4,095
Location
Gainesville, Florida
I'm loving those belted coats. I only have one thing to ask. One thing.

HOW ARE THE ARMHOLES??? </deckard>

One hopes they are more fitted on the "custom tailored" BB ones.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
109,130
Messages
3,074,694
Members
54,104
Latest member
joejosephlo
Top