Massif Rocks!

Just In Case You Don’t Think Pinks And Greens Are Happening

PEO Soldier recently published this informational piece on the the US Army’s proposed Pinks and Greens uniform. A lot of work is being put into this effort.

Photo by PEO Soldier’s Ron Lee.

What is it?

Pink and Green Uniform is the service uniform from the World War II era. Army officers wore the Pink and Green Uniform from the early 1930s to the early 1950s. It is widely recognized as the best dress uniform the Army has ever fielded.

This uniform will be made from great fabrics and tailored for each Soldier, featuring quality construction and a classic, proven design. New eco-friendly textile production processes will be utilized for the first time in the U.S. through this project.

What is the Army doing?

In 2018, the Army could return to its iconic WWII-era uniform which could become the everyday business-wear uniform for all Soldiers. This would replace the current Army Service Uniform, which would be used as a more formal dress uniform.

Based on Sergeant Major of the Army’s interest and his belief that the uniform would reconnect today’s Soldier with the history of the Army, an exclusive Army Times survey was sent out to its readers. The survey received a favorable response from more than 70 percent of the Soldiers supporting the return of the historic World War II uniform.

Taking advantage of upgrades in fabric technology, the Army has developed design options, sketches and prototype uniforms to support the Army’s decision-making process. This was done in collaboration with the Center for Military History, the Army’s industry partners and the Reserve Officer Training Corps program at Texas A&M University, whose cadets have historically worn a pinks and greens-type of uniform.

Initial prototypes have been demonstrated on live Soldier models to Army leadership and the media in various venues, including at the Association of the United States Army convention and the Army-Navy football game where feedback was instantaneous and positive.

What continued efforts does the Army have planned for the future?

In order to maximize the positive interest in this new uniform, the Army has planned key engagements to assist with a possible design decision and introduction of the Pink and Green Uniform to the Army workforce:

-Limited User Evaluation with 150 Soldiers from the New England Recruiting Battalion
-Traveling historical exhibit of the Pink and Green Uniform at Army Installations and other public events
-Interviews/video/digital images of Soldiers supporting evaluations
-Based on Soldier feedback the Army will make a decision in 2018.

Why is this important to the Army?

The reintroduction of this uniform is an effort to create a deeper understanding of, and connection to the Army in communities where awareness of the Total Army needs to increase. The Army believes this high-quality uniform will strengthen pride, bolster recruiting and enhance readiness.


PEO Soldier
U.S. Army Uniforms and Symbols

Related video:

Sgt. Maj. of the Army talks Pink & Green

51 Responses to “Just In Case You Don’t Think Pinks And Greens Are Happening”

  1. Strike-Hold says:

    I know a lot of people come out bitching and moaning at every mention of this effort, but I for one support it and think its not only a great morale and esprit de corps boosting move; I also applaud the extensive and inclusive way the effort is being conducted. It stands in STARK contrast to the Black Beret, UCP, ACU, and ASU efforts. So, kudos.

    I just hope that they also bring back the brown jump boots for the airborne troops while they’re at it as well.

  2. ThatBlueFalcon says:

    If only the Army spent half as much time messaging the new changes to pistol and rifle marksmanship, or maybe upgrading stuff that guys actually use.

    If only.

    • SSD says:

      They are spending more time modernizing your combat equipment.

      • Seamus says:

        SSD-I think BF was talking about rifle and pistol training as apposed to rifle and pistol equipment.

        BF-this is a big Army and they can do more than one thing at a time. Pinks and Greens look nice and the lineage is something worth going back to (can you say MAGA?) Likewise efforts are being made to improve pistol and rifle marksmanship (sadly not enough though)

  3. ThatBlueFalcon says:

    Also, if anyone thinks that the soldier feedback will make a difference, think again. Just like the Army APFUs, the decision has already been made.

    • Mac679 says:

      Soldier feedback…. You mean like the Soldier feedback saying that Soldiers wanted this uniform over the ASU? There were several surveys soliciting Soldier feedback prior to adoption of the ASU that indicated preference for pinks and greens to be the next dress uniform after Class As.

    • badjujuu says:

      Those black APFUs are awesome – very slimming for Warrant Officers

      • CrustyWarrant says:

        Haha. Well, the new PT uniform looks better than the previous one but I am not a fan of the material. Also, I did not like the color scheme but so be it. I am all for the Pink and Greens and gave positive feedback on the survey.

    • AbnMedOps says:

      Welll…it was “feedback”, not a vote. The Army doesn’t run on votes.


  4. JM Gavin says:

    A lot of folks on the interwebz opine that the Army should be focused on my important things than this, to which I say “the Army can multi-task.”

    IMO, this is the first uniform change since the war started that was not sparked by what I call “Marine Corps uniform envy.” Strongly concur with Strike-Hold.


    • Paul says:

      Pretty sure this still has a tinge of “Marine Corps uniform envy”. See Marine Corps Service uniforms, especially the Alphas. Not to say it’s a bad thing, I’m sure Soldiers will be quite excited about these and it’s good to see the Army infusing some history into their choice.

      • CodyS says:

        The USMC service uniform is rooted as a surplus Army uniform I’m pretty sure. The fact that this is a return of an Army uniform from almost the same era doesnt feel like marine uniform envy to me, since it was always the Army’s anyway.

  5. Thisguysays says:

    I agree whole heartedly. I understand the naysayers and feel they have a valid argument. In my opinion the pros outweighs the cons. In some ways this is about the Army getting back to who and what it is. Soldiers of today have little connection to the Army of the past that wore blue. There is far more connection to the Army of the past that wore the uniform this effort is based on. You can still find WWII on TV every night of the week. Although, Divisions existed prior to WWII it was then that their histories really began to be written.

    • 32sbct says:

      I’ll stick up for the WW I Soldiers. The current divisional numbering system began in 1917 for WW I. That’s also when when their histories began to be written, not WW II. Particularly for the infantry divisions since armor was in its infancy in WW I and airborne was yet to be developed. That’s where the 3rd ID became “the Rock of the Marne”, the 1st ID became “the Big Red One” and the 82nd became the “All Americans”, etc. It’s also when the the shoulder sleeve insignias were established that are still in use to this day. Carry on.

      • Will Rodriguez says:

        32sbct thanks for chiming in. Great points about our history goes back before WWII. The eagle on the 101st patch dates back to Civil War history.

        The premise that current soldiers history connection dates back to WWII is based on two factors. First the Army does a HORRIBLE job of inculcating Army pride (we do “OK” with unit pride sometimes), second leaders throughout the Army are professionally lazy in developing their appreciation of history (cue up LTC Baldwin’s essay on the subject).

        Yep we can and should blame Army culture but eventually that condemnation falls on us. We are the Army and if we aren’t doing anything to change it we are part of the problem.

  6. Tech says:

    Someone help me with how this is going to “enhance readiness.” I’ve tried to remain neutral in my opinion, but let’s be honest. Either that seems a bold statement to make, or I’m really missing something here.

    • JM Gavin says:

      Acronym, acronym, cool buzzword, meaningless jargon. “Enhance” and “readiness” have long been meaningless boilerplate favorites, and are trotted out because, I mean, who can counter or oppose anything that enhances readiness??? It’s Army bureaucrat language. Ignore it. We all do.

    • badjujuu says:

      “which could become the everyday business-wear uniform for all Soldiers”

      • Tech says:

        That’s my favorite for exactly this reason; the uniform arguably detracts from readiness. ever shown up to work in ASUs, as instructed, and then gotten told to go out and PMCS trucks? better not scuff up those kicks though, we’ve got an inspection right before release.

  7. JBar says:

    This is a great idea that I am very happy to see implemented. It looks great. First Scorpion, now this? Please let the good choices continue.

  8. Joe says:

    What does this even mean? Can someone please translate this code for me?

    “The reintroduction of this uniform is an effort to create a deeper understanding of, and connection to the Army in communities where awareness of the Total Army needs to increase.”

    • Jon, OPT says:

      It’s a shura with the American people that the Army can wear, a body borne ambassador of freedom, it is the halberd bearing stoic knight at the forward edge of freedom… it’s, it’s glorious…

  9. 10thMountainMan says:

    The more I see it the more I like it. I’ll be proud to wear this uniform. I’m curious how the SMA intends to “reduce bling,” on his uniform. Would the Army limit the number of badges and ribbons? Perhaps not allow foreign awards/badges or regimental insignia? I’m for it, but wonder how they’ll accomplish it.

    • AbnMedOps says:

      Retire some of the recently created badges? Such as CAB? Return green-tabs to being only for actual “Green Tab Leaders” (i.e. Combat Arms in Combat Arms assignments)?

      One thing worth ADDING might be an expectation that officers wear marksmanship badges…from CURRENT qualification, conducted under some muchly improved modern combat shooting standards! It might be a good shock to the system towards an emphasis on (individualized) training! It’s not the be-all-end-all, but just imagine if every officer, Combat Arms or otherwise, felt a distinct pressure (and was afforded opportunity) to improve this critical indicator of competence, much like AMEDD officers are (mostly) expected to get down and train hard with the troops and lead by example in earning the EFMB.

      • SSD says:

        I’m not sure how old you are but I was never Combat Arms and I wore leadership tabs in both LRS and SF as a support Soldier, in the late 80s and early 90s.

        • AbnMedOps says:

          I was 87-15…my recollection is that AR 670-1 used to specify “Combat Arms”, and listed IN, AR, FA, and I think EN and ADA, but omitted to list SF and AV, until changed sometime around 9-11 to include all branches…can’t remember if pre- or post-.

          There might very well have been some local interpretation though, because despite what the reg might have said, I know SF leaders wore green tabs!

      • Will Rodriguez says:

        Infantry Officers absolutely should wear marksmanship badges. I ensured every officer in my company was qualified expert. It wasn’t that hard if one applies oneself. (Had one platoon leader who had to go the range repeatedly to earn the qualification.) The company earned had an unheard of 70% expert qualification rate.

        Training emphasis means something when the leaders have to do it too.

        • xdarrows says:

          EVERY officer should wear marksmanship qualification badges AND
          AR 623-105 should be amended to absolutely prohibit “top block” (Most Qualified) block checks for officers without the following:

          – Expert rifle and/or pistol qualification
          – 270 or above on APFT

      • CrustyWarrant says:

        As a former MP, I wore green tabs on my class As and if you suggesting getting rid of the CAB; then convert it to a ribbon.

  10. Bob says:

    This is a great article from 1968 about uniform traditions and what let the Army to adopt the old green Class A. Talks extensively on the whys of adopting a new dress uniform.

    • SSD says:

      Good stuff

    • Will Rodriguez says:

      Thanks for sharing Rob. It was very informative. The actual role of the Ike jacket and how it was actually employed was new to me.

      So many competing factors! Human behavior (some will/won’t tailor/maintain) be different but establish a tradition, be economical impacted by the current Army budget.

      The fact that blues, a gray and continuing with “pinks and greens” were all considered and the reasons they weren’t adopted would be good info to have for those that want to wade into the discussion.

      It’s also of note that dress blues have always existed in the Army’s uniform wardrobe. Interesting tidbits on high collars and wearing blue in the Spanish American War. The biggest problem in developing Army uniforms seems to be the Army itself.

  11. Bob says:

    In other thoughts, this uniform will look good when the premium model is purchased and it’s tailored and worn by Soldiers were are in good physical condition. It will look like a bag of ass on most troops because they will buy the cheapest model off the rack at the Clothing Sales and toss it on. See if they don’t.

    • Joe says:

      Fact. Marine Officers are always trotted out as looking great in uniform. Its not that they’re handsome devils. They have those damn things tailored. Actually tailored by someone who is qualified.

  12. Desert Lizard says:

    Wait til troops are made to wear PT belts with it.

  13. Adun says:

    I think the uniform is a good change from the current uniform, but I also think that there are better uses of the time. How about we switch to this one and then congress mandates that dress uniforms won’t change again for a long period of time so we can stop wasting resources on garrison stuff?

  14. Badjujuu says:

    Say what you want….but I almost feel like I dont deserve this uniform.
    Despite my continuous 15+ years service with multiple deployments.

  15. cj says:

    uniforms are nice but don’t mean nothing unless you bring back the ww2 attitude. West Point let an open communist like Lt. Spenser Rapone flourish spread his propaganda and thumb his nose at the whole institution with his Che Guevara t-shirt and communism will win crap in his hat. no way the ww2 military would have put up with that but its seemed excepted. the army has a bigger problem than uniforms…

  16. Tremis says:

    Dress Greens to Dress Blues to Dress Other Shade of Green in like a weeks time. And we’re still going to hear how the the Navy has a problem with too many uniforms.
    It’s a fine looking uniform, as is the current one that nobody has had time to even wear out yet.

  17. DAN III says:

    ANOTHER costly uniform change. Along with this perhaps DoD should return to defending our borders and terminate our hostilities in the ‘stan and elsewhere.

    Bring the troops home. Give them nice uniforms reminiscent of a period of time where we were victorious and honorable. Then top it all off with re-issuing the M1 Garand as the main battle rifle.

  18. mine bigger than yours says:

    I’ll take the bump in clothing allowance intended for us to begin procurement of said uniform. Though I intend to just use it for stripper money

  19. Chris says:

    Way back when they were changing the class As from “green” to a “slightly-different-shade-of-green” I said that if they were going to spend the money, why not go to a uniform that actually looked good, like the pinks and greens.

    I like the idea of the blues going back to being a dress uniform, and utilizing the pinks and greens as a service uniform.