Blues if not flying
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
I shall rise to the bait.
Donning and removing overalls is one thing. Flying clothing is all together a different matter.
It is called an Aircrew Equipment Assembly and is composed of multiple layers each of which must be removed in order to change into blues. In the winter the correctly kitted aircrew, in the sqn, will be wearing long johns and a aircrew vest, an aircrew shirt, possibly an immersion suit thermal layer and then the flying suit. Removal of this lot takes time and can be warm work in a heated building. The mix of suited aircrew and shirt-sleeved blue wearers is an incompatibility as far as central heating goes.
OTOH, when the flying suit is worn solely as a growbag in a bunker or elsewhere then IMHO it is being abused.
In the V-force we flew with a diversionb bag and our blues etc and always changed if we diverted. Our kit was stored in large purpose-designed lockers and we would only change in the locker room as we also had to don AVS and possibly g-pants - there was nothing to be gained by commuting in a flying suit.
The flying clothing sections also provided clean towels and handled the aircrew laundry. They would also have ready access to the flying suits as they need regular servicing, a fact often overlooked.
Gradually people living in the messes or quarters started to wear flying suits when going to ops as the need for g-pants ceased and they often eschewed the AVS. The locker rooms started to fall in to disuse and new buildings started to be built with smaller changing rooms.
You simply can't change back as the stroke of a pen.
So proper changing and locker facilities need to be provided and aircrew should don their AEA at work and not at home. They should only need to change again at cease work and not for movement around the unit.
Donning and removing overalls is one thing. Flying clothing is all together a different matter.
It is called an Aircrew Equipment Assembly and is composed of multiple layers each of which must be removed in order to change into blues. In the winter the correctly kitted aircrew, in the sqn, will be wearing long johns and a aircrew vest, an aircrew shirt, possibly an immersion suit thermal layer and then the flying suit. Removal of this lot takes time and can be warm work in a heated building. The mix of suited aircrew and shirt-sleeved blue wearers is an incompatibility as far as central heating goes.
OTOH, when the flying suit is worn solely as a growbag in a bunker or elsewhere then IMHO it is being abused.
In the V-force we flew with a diversionb bag and our blues etc and always changed if we diverted. Our kit was stored in large purpose-designed lockers and we would only change in the locker room as we also had to don AVS and possibly g-pants - there was nothing to be gained by commuting in a flying suit.
The flying clothing sections also provided clean towels and handled the aircrew laundry. They would also have ready access to the flying suits as they need regular servicing, a fact often overlooked.
Gradually people living in the messes or quarters started to wear flying suits when going to ops as the need for g-pants ceased and they often eschewed the AVS. The locker rooms started to fall in to disuse and new buildings started to be built with smaller changing rooms.
You simply can't change back as the stroke of a pen.
So proper changing and locker facilities need to be provided and aircrew should don their AEA at work and not at home. They should only need to change again at cease work and not for movement around the unit.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Pontius Navigator
I agree AEA is a pain in the proverbial to put on and remove, yes I have worn it on numerous occasions, and I did not mean it to sound like you should get changed to go to lunch.
If you are due to go flying that day ... wear your AEA (PPE to the rest of us)
If you have been flying that day ... wear your AEA.
I can’t see anyone having an issue with the above, however, if you are not programmed to fly, not on standby to fly, not been flying, are on light duties or an admin day etc why can't you wear blues?
I have seen aircrew who have been off flying for months, one with a broken ankle springs to mind, and yet they still wear flying suits everyday!
And as for lockers, you should try living with a small groundcrew type one, and getting all your kit into that, and yes we do have more than you think, you could hold a party in your average aircrew locker.
I agree AEA is a pain in the proverbial to put on and remove, yes I have worn it on numerous occasions, and I did not mean it to sound like you should get changed to go to lunch.
If you are due to go flying that day ... wear your AEA (PPE to the rest of us)
If you have been flying that day ... wear your AEA.
I can’t see anyone having an issue with the above, however, if you are not programmed to fly, not on standby to fly, not been flying, are on light duties or an admin day etc why can't you wear blues?
I have seen aircrew who have been off flying for months, one with a broken ankle springs to mind, and yet they still wear flying suits everyday!
And as for lockers, you should try living with a small groundcrew type one, and getting all your kit into that, and yes we do have more than you think, you could hold a party in your average aircrew locker.
Last edited by Rigger1; 3rd Oct 2008 at 09:12. Reason: Spelling
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Rigger, agree. I remember one ex-Waddo FC type at Coningsby who only wore a grow bag. More of necessity I guess with the emphasis on grow.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: EU Land
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wearing Uniform in Public Dilemma
From IBN 27/08
‘the practice of covering up uniform was instigated in response to the Irish Republican terrorism campaign of the 1980s and 1990s – but is no longer relevant.’
True, the Irish Republican threat is no longer relevant, but…
From today’s BBC
The government's terrorist threat level has remained pegged at its second highest rating - severe - since last summer.
'Severe' threat level
Senior Whitehall officials say the police and security service are working near capacity and the threat level is unlikely to be reduced soon.
They say that it currently lies at the high end of severe, with no sign of it being downgraded.
And I seem to remember considerable concern last year about a plot to kidnap and behead a British serviceman somewhere in the Midlands. Maybe that’s why we’ve opted for No.2 HD; the militants won’t be targeting RAC rescuemen, so as long as we don’t have brevets or medal ribbons on our shirts, we’ll be safely anonymous!
But that sort of defeats the idea of being identifiable in the community.
‘the practice of covering up uniform was instigated in response to the Irish Republican terrorism campaign of the 1980s and 1990s – but is no longer relevant.’
True, the Irish Republican threat is no longer relevant, but…
From today’s BBC
The government's terrorist threat level has remained pegged at its second highest rating - severe - since last summer.
'Severe' threat level
Senior Whitehall officials say the police and security service are working near capacity and the threat level is unlikely to be reduced soon.
They say that it currently lies at the high end of severe, with no sign of it being downgraded.
And I seem to remember considerable concern last year about a plot to kidnap and behead a British serviceman somewhere in the Midlands. Maybe that’s why we’ve opted for No.2 HD; the militants won’t be targeting RAC rescuemen, so as long as we don’t have brevets or medal ribbons on our shirts, we’ll be safely anonymous!
But that sort of defeats the idea of being identifiable in the community.
What Rubbish!
The replies I mean, not the dress regs!
I read page 1 and couldn't be bothered with the rest as it was such a load of twaddle! The ruling has absolutely nothing to do with wearing flying suit when only flying. As someone correctly said, it says flying related, therefore that covers just about all eventualities. It has nothing to with being in JHC either as Air has full command on this one so, JHC or not, the rules apply if you're in the RAF. All it is about is raising the RAF's profile which just has to be a good thing. No more covering up when driving to work, be proud! And certainly no walking over to the car park with a civvy jacket on just because you're too idle to salute.
Come on guys, it won't change anything except that you will be recognised as RAF and not an amorphous mass in CS95. Those of you who are bleating because 'a mate read it and told me what he thought it meant' continue, day in day out across stations and on here, to give the RAF the worst possible name.
You exasparate me, you really do. In 23 years and 4 days of wearing a blue suit I can still say that I'm proud of being in the RAF and this ruling is a step towards raising our profile to where it really should be.
I read page 1 and couldn't be bothered with the rest as it was such a load of twaddle! The ruling has absolutely nothing to do with wearing flying suit when only flying. As someone correctly said, it says flying related, therefore that covers just about all eventualities. It has nothing to with being in JHC either as Air has full command on this one so, JHC or not, the rules apply if you're in the RAF. All it is about is raising the RAF's profile which just has to be a good thing. No more covering up when driving to work, be proud! And certainly no walking over to the car park with a civvy jacket on just because you're too idle to salute.
Come on guys, it won't change anything except that you will be recognised as RAF and not an amorphous mass in CS95. Those of you who are bleating because 'a mate read it and told me what he thought it meant' continue, day in day out across stations and on here, to give the RAF the worst possible name.
You exasparate me, you really do. In 23 years and 4 days of wearing a blue suit I can still say that I'm proud of being in the RAF and this ruling is a step towards raising our profile to where it really should be.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Hyperspace...
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But when it comes to flying suits ….. don’t get me started.
If you have an issue with it, go and do selection, and presuming you are deemed suitable, do the necessary trg, then you can wear one yourself.
Until then, dry your eyes, princess.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can of worms
It wasnt long ago when I read that service people returning from Theatre were not aloud to wear uniform onward from brize unless in a motor vehicle. Wearing uniform on a train plane or on foot was forbidden. So where and why does that rule and this newer rule seperate?
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
MG, there is more than one strand to this thread and you have focussed solely on the flying suit issue.
What about the expense of swapping to blue overalls that the public won't see anyway?
What about the loss of 'war-fighting' edge? I browsed through the AP today, yup Friday and black flag. Operational support was a reason for bunker wallahs wearing CS95.
CS95 does not aid in individual Service recognition but after 30 or more years of covering up the daily wear of an RAC patrolman doesn't help either. Add an annoymous blue bomber jacket and you disappear completely.
The short lived, RAF blue, zip pocketed, zip fronted No 2 was a distinctive uniform. Aircrew had brevets and some had medals. A modern working dress jacket would enable people to wear their medal ribbons and really stand out from the crowd.
An annoymous woolly pully or annoymous blouson do not look smart and do not help identity. Blue overalls, vice green ones, are a waste of scarce cash.
What about the expense of swapping to blue overalls that the public won't see anyway?
What about the loss of 'war-fighting' edge? I browsed through the AP today, yup Friday and black flag. Operational support was a reason for bunker wallahs wearing CS95.
CS95 does not aid in individual Service recognition but after 30 or more years of covering up the daily wear of an RAC patrolman doesn't help either. Add an annoymous blue bomber jacket and you disappear completely.
The short lived, RAF blue, zip pocketed, zip fronted No 2 was a distinctive uniform. Aircrew had brevets and some had medals. A modern working dress jacket would enable people to wear their medal ribbons and really stand out from the crowd.
An annoymous woolly pully or annoymous blouson do not look smart and do not help identity. Blue overalls, vice green ones, are a waste of scarce cash.
PN, I do agree that our No 2 dress leaves quite a bit to be desired. The zip up jacket is annoymous and the public don't, at the moment know what we stand for. If, however, we do start wearing the uniform in public on a regualr basis, there is the faintest possiblity that Joe Public might accuse an RAC patrolman of being a member of the RAF! As for improvements to blues, how about a proper rankslide to replace the abhorant practice of stapling or sellotaping together? I wouldn't be adverse to seeing wings and medals pinned on a shirt.
As for your other points, 'loss of war fighting edge'? Nope, can't see how wearing blues helps nor hinders when in an office.
Blue overalls? They were blue when I joined and we were fighting on ops, albeit only in a few key areas. Green overalls will be replaced with blue when they need to be. I guess that it will be phased in, not 'you are to wear the new ones on Monday'. Green are hardly necessary for camouflage and thinner ones in desert will still be used, I imagine.
Finally, I concentrated on flying suits 'cos that's the title of the thread!
As for your other points, 'loss of war fighting edge'? Nope, can't see how wearing blues helps nor hinders when in an office.
Blue overalls? They were blue when I joined and we were fighting on ops, albeit only in a few key areas. Green overalls will be replaced with blue when they need to be. I guess that it will be phased in, not 'you are to wear the new ones on Monday'. Green are hardly necessary for camouflage and thinner ones in desert will still be used, I imagine.
Finally, I concentrated on flying suits 'cos that's the title of the thread!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: In My Own Little World
Age: 44
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Inquisitor wrote:
Flying suits symbolise the hard work and achievements aircrew have made to get where they are. They identify us as such and we are proud to wear them. Taking that away is a slap in the face, frankly. It makes no difference to your working day, or your lot in life, if we wear them or not, so what exactly IS your problem?
If you have an issue with it, go and do selection, and presuming you are deemed suitable, do the necessary trg, then you can wear one yourself.
Until then, dry your eyes, princess.
Oh poor Princess Inquisitor
Surely your wings are your reward for all your acheivements and IIRC you can, and do, wear those on your 2HD jumper. Do you really feel that precious that you need constant recongnition of your hard work and achievements that you need to wear your growbag, and not *just* your wings?
I think it is you that needs to dry your eyes
But then what do I know, I'm just a lowly engineer who wears blues, unless my pilots are nice enough to take me up in one of their helicopters, and then I might get to wear a flying suit too!
Flying suits symbolise the hard work and achievements aircrew have made to get where they are. They identify us as such and we are proud to wear them. Taking that away is a slap in the face, frankly. It makes no difference to your working day, or your lot in life, if we wear them or not, so what exactly IS your problem?
If you have an issue with it, go and do selection, and presuming you are deemed suitable, do the necessary trg, then you can wear one yourself.
Until then, dry your eyes, princess.
Oh poor Princess Inquisitor
Surely your wings are your reward for all your acheivements and IIRC you can, and do, wear those on your 2HD jumper. Do you really feel that precious that you need constant recongnition of your hard work and achievements that you need to wear your growbag, and not *just* your wings?
I think it is you that needs to dry your eyes
But then what do I know, I'm just a lowly engineer who wears blues, unless my pilots are nice enough to take me up in one of their helicopters, and then I might get to wear a flying suit too!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Hyperspace...
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, once again, what exactly IS some people's issue with aircrew wearing flying suits? I have not yet seen a convincing argument as to why we shouldn't. It makes not one blind bit of difference to you. Petty envy is the only thing that springs to mind. Like I said, you want to wear one? Get selected, do the trg, qualify.
Aircrew on a flying tour should wear flying suits.
Those who work in an office (aircrew on ground tours included) should wear blues.
Those who work in the field or on ops (not REMFS in UK bunkers) should wear CS95.
Those who do manual labour, or work in a dirty environment, should wear overalls, or suitable PPE, and change out of it at the end of their shift (like any other similar job in civvy street).
Now, what is so difficult about all that?
I'm willing to bet that if the IBN stated that ALL RAF personnel are to wear flying suits, there would be little complaint from the "Nasty Aircrew in their flying suits make me feel inferior" brigade....
Besides, in blues there is always the chance, from behind, or from a distance, of Aircrew being mistaken for somebody unimportant who didn't try hard enough at school. Or the danger of a SWO confusing you with somebody who gives a sh!t! Geez, you'll be bleating about our wheelbarrow-loads of flying pay every month next......
Aircrew on a flying tour should wear flying suits.
Those who work in an office (aircrew on ground tours included) should wear blues.
Those who work in the field or on ops (not REMFS in UK bunkers) should wear CS95.
Those who do manual labour, or work in a dirty environment, should wear overalls, or suitable PPE, and change out of it at the end of their shift (like any other similar job in civvy street).
Now, what is so difficult about all that?
I'm willing to bet that if the IBN stated that ALL RAF personnel are to wear flying suits, there would be little complaint from the "Nasty Aircrew in their flying suits make me feel inferior" brigade....
Besides, in blues there is always the chance, from behind, or from a distance, of Aircrew being mistaken for somebody unimportant who didn't try hard enough at school. Or the danger of a SWO confusing you with somebody who gives a sh!t! Geez, you'll be bleating about our wheelbarrow-loads of flying pay every month next......
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: GONE BY 2012
Age: 51
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying Pay?
No thanks - I'll take my PAS pension at 55 yrs.
Keep wearing my flying suit and take home the benefits of being a Wg Cdr without the need to get promoted and having to wear blues!
No thanks - I'll take my PAS pension at 55 yrs.
Keep wearing my flying suit and take home the benefits of being a Wg Cdr without the need to get promoted and having to wear blues!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: England
Age: 52
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Envy coloured egyptian cotton man sized baby grows.........
The policy is largely irrelevant as it only airs already existing rules. I am more concerned about the reaction of some of the non-flyers whose only contribution to this professional aircrew forum is deride and denigrate the flying professionals for whom it exists.
There are rather too many non-aircrew who seem to take great satisfaction in the idea that we flyers will lose sleep because we might have to wear blues once in a while. I am sorry to burst your bubbles ladies but we don't really care - most of us will continue to wear flying suits if on flying or flying related duties like the order says. For an average aircrew mate on a squadron that would be all working days with a letter 'y' in them.
I am not in any way criticising the vast majority of professional ground crew in the RAF, and in the unlikely event that one of you is reading this, I would just like to say thank-you. Those of you I am referring to know who you are and should be ashamed of yourselves. You are the ones being divisive, and sniping at flying suits and flying pay makes you sound sad, jealous little unfortunates who didn't make selection. If you really don't like working in an organization which employs aircrew, and provides them with appropriate clothing which they actually wear, then why did you join the RAF, ffs?
I for one will enjoy wearing my envy coloured egyptian cotton man-sized baby grow all the more for the rage that it so obviously causes in some sad,unbalanced individuals. For good measure I will don a leather jacket and chip-bag hat to boot. I imagine this look, combined with a pair of premium brand aviation sunglasses, will have some of you apoplectic! Now, as they say in England, I must fly!
There are rather too many non-aircrew who seem to take great satisfaction in the idea that we flyers will lose sleep because we might have to wear blues once in a while. I am sorry to burst your bubbles ladies but we don't really care - most of us will continue to wear flying suits if on flying or flying related duties like the order says. For an average aircrew mate on a squadron that would be all working days with a letter 'y' in them.
I am not in any way criticising the vast majority of professional ground crew in the RAF, and in the unlikely event that one of you is reading this, I would just like to say thank-you. Those of you I am referring to know who you are and should be ashamed of yourselves. You are the ones being divisive, and sniping at flying suits and flying pay makes you sound sad, jealous little unfortunates who didn't make selection. If you really don't like working in an organization which employs aircrew, and provides them with appropriate clothing which they actually wear, then why did you join the RAF, ffs?
I for one will enjoy wearing my envy coloured egyptian cotton man-sized baby grow all the more for the rage that it so obviously causes in some sad,unbalanced individuals. For good measure I will don a leather jacket and chip-bag hat to boot. I imagine this look, combined with a pair of premium brand aviation sunglasses, will have some of you apoplectic! Now, as they say in England, I must fly!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What Pylot said.
On a serious note, I couldn't give a fat pigs derrier whether I have to go to work in the babygrow or blues.
However, what it will do is make our jobs harder to crew the last minute aeromed, Comp A or spec as no one is in correct rig. Only if this situation happens will this be changed. ...and no we dont have lockers or locker rooms.
Yes we are in the military, but to a man we are professional and all we want to do is do our job to the best of our abilities especially in the cases listed above. If we cannot due to this directive then the directive needs changing, and our concerns regarding tasking and merely doing our job needs to be addressed.
What we have seen over the last six months is a gradual introduction of several minor factors which make our job harder to perform; eg new planning software which has put us back on whiteboards and excel spreadsheets; an imprest system which means you can't afford to eat ($57 per day for breakfast lunch and supper) and this directive. I just know there will be those saying " dry your eyes", but they have made the job harder and less enjoyable. FACT.
Although these are uncertain times, the pools are drying up and people are still leaving and planning to leave. The train is only half full and the rest of the carriage are now thinking of getting off at the next stop.
Trivial this may be, but combine it with the other trivialities and then try and explain to me how there isnt a push factor.
On a serious note, I couldn't give a fat pigs derrier whether I have to go to work in the babygrow or blues.
However, what it will do is make our jobs harder to crew the last minute aeromed, Comp A or spec as no one is in correct rig. Only if this situation happens will this be changed. ...and no we dont have lockers or locker rooms.
Yes we are in the military, but to a man we are professional and all we want to do is do our job to the best of our abilities especially in the cases listed above. If we cannot due to this directive then the directive needs changing, and our concerns regarding tasking and merely doing our job needs to be addressed.
What we have seen over the last six months is a gradual introduction of several minor factors which make our job harder to perform; eg new planning software which has put us back on whiteboards and excel spreadsheets; an imprest system which means you can't afford to eat ($57 per day for breakfast lunch and supper) and this directive. I just know there will be those saying " dry your eyes", but they have made the job harder and less enjoyable. FACT.
Although these are uncertain times, the pools are drying up and people are still leaving and planning to leave. The train is only half full and the rest of the carriage are now thinking of getting off at the next stop.
Trivial this may be, but combine it with the other trivialities and then try and explain to me how there isnt a push factor.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: England
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wearing uniform to/from work.
What about the part of the IBN that states you are expected to wear uniform to/from work ....... ? Mixed clothing and civilian clothing will not be tolerated. Do we all get hostile environments and defensive driving training, backed up with a trusty 9mm? I'll take my chances in front of the staish as opposed to durka durka jihadist!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Grabbers, mixed civvies/uniform was never permitted. You could wear a civvie jacket over your shirt in your car. Once in the car park at work you were not permitted to wear that jacket to the sqn. If you chose to fill up the car so attired on the way home then you were breaking the rules.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Puken
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest I thing there's little point in getting one's aircrew long-johns in a twist over this.
This new directive will get a thorough ignoring refecting the level of importance it carries.
Sadly, it's been borne out by a bunch of Airships whose last experience of operations was probably, er, um, the Cold War? These characters whose job it is to provide and support for the operational aspects of our force have clearly lost touch with what's important; i.e..... ensuring the RAF has the capability and capacity to deliver to its customers, something which is lacking at the moment.
This new directive will get a thorough ignoring refecting the level of importance it carries.
Sadly, it's been borne out by a bunch of Airships whose last experience of operations was probably, er, um, the Cold War? These characters whose job it is to provide and support for the operational aspects of our force have clearly lost touch with what's important; i.e..... ensuring the RAF has the capability and capacity to deliver to its customers, something which is lacking at the moment.
Flying suits symbolise the hard work and achievements aircrew have made to get where they are. They identify us as such and we are proud to wear them. Taking that away is a slap in the face, frankly. It makes no difference to your working day, or your lot in life, if we wear them or not, so what exactly IS your problem?
If you have an issue with it, go and do selection, and presuming you are deemed suitable, do the necessary trg, then you can wear one yourself.
Until then, dry your eyes, princess
If you have an issue with it, go and do selection, and presuming you are deemed suitable, do the necessary trg, then you can wear one yourself.
Until then, dry your eyes, princess
I await the day you turn up for a job with a civie airline.