SIG Sauer Academy

PEO Soldier Conducting Survey on ASU

20120917-154121.jpgTraining and Doctrine Command is looking for feedback on the Army Service Uniform. It’s for all Soldiers (Active Duty, Guard, and Reserve) and you must have AKO access to participate.

The survey site officially launches September 17, 2012 and will remain active until October 9, 2012, so make sure to take the time to offer your input and make your voice heard.

Links to the survey can be found at:

CAC Enforced:

7 Responses to “PEO Soldier Conducting Survey on ASU”

  1. Reed says:

    So is this the first step to show how despised the Blue ASU is, to get it Axed like UCP? The Blues are a huge joke.

  2. CanfieldOO7 says:

    I see no issue with them, they actually create a more professional appearance if youve worn them off of a military installation and have had civilians comment on them(going out for lunch on payday activities, and a few bars after a post deployment ball). The only issue i have with them are the cost of getting new ones and the damned hat.

    The ACUs on the other hand are garbage and if the Army was anything like it used to be there would be several people losing their jobs for such an incompetent decision that endangers the lives of our soldiers downrange. At least someone pulled their head out of their ass and gave the go ahead for Multicam in OEF. Now if only they would stop the madness and just authorize Multicam to be worn in garrison also.

  3. Buckaroomedic says:

    Really? It’s a “joke”? What part?

    I personally like it, major improvement over the prior Class A’s and B’s. At least the ASU is based on Army history.

    The only thing I don’t like is the white shirt. This shirt should only be worn with the ASU after Retreat. During the day a khaki shirt should be worn with the uniform.

  4. Old Soldier says:

    Retired Former Action Guy. Never had to wear the new uniform (Thank God!) Just went to my youngest son’s graduation from basic though.

    Short answer? Combined with the black beret, the new uniform looks like the bastard love that would result if Che Guevara @ss-fuqued a bus driver or ice cream salesman.

  5. Jack says:

    The whole uniform change has gotten completely out of hand. Whenever the U.S. Army personnel are seen wearing the full-dress greens and summer class-A greens, they are easier to distinguish from the other branches of the armed forces. Replacing the full-dress greens with the blue-on-blue is still a mistake. The blue-on-blue was the iconic and exclusive trademark of the Honor Guard at Arlington. Making this uniform a standard issue, in place of the dress greens, was just like making the black beret a standard issue.
    Whenever people see the U.S. Army personnel wearing the blue-on-blue, they either mistake them for U.S. Air Force or assume that the U.S. Army personnel are handling a funeral detail. It would not surprise me if the blue-on-blue uniform were to be dubbed the “funeral garb” or “funeral wear”. Almost anything used in the armed forces gets a nick-name, deserving or not. The blue-on-blue uniform is no exception.

    As I recall, some person said that the only full-dress greens around is worn by the Marines (actually sage brown with the khaki tan). Whoever that person is, needs to go see an eye doctor. I know the color green when I see it.

    One footnote: When the U.S. Air Force became an independent branch in 1947 (they were originally part of the U.S. Army), they made the color blue their trademark color. That way, they could be easier to distinguish from the other branches of the armed forces. Nowadays, things are not so clear.

    Given the recent trend, it appeared that all branches of the armed services had gotten into the so-called bandwagon of changing new uniforms. The question is why. Back in the 1980s, the woodland pattern BDUs was used by all branches of the service (excluding the Coast Guard). It was actually very easy to distinguish them apart. Now the armed services is going to have four different types of fatigues that is going to be a logistic nightmare and headache for the taxpayer. When Robert McNamara became the Secretary of Defense in the early 60s, he pointed out why three separate branches needed to have three different types of dress shoes for the full dress uniforms, when they can share the same type of dress shoes. This was a case of economics and efficiency. McNamara may not have not have been a very popular person. But for once, he actually made sense. The BDU/DBU proved to be cost effective and popular to those serving. The fatigues was a model example of the saying “if it’s not broken, don’t fix it.” With the four different kinds of fatigues now in service or entering service, the new saying looks like “if it’s not broken, keep fixing it until it’s broken.”

    Clearly the uniform changes has gone berserk and had gotten out of hand. The U.S. Armed Forces has gone from being a credible force to becoming one that is not worth taking seriously. In fairness, the Marines should not take the blame for starting this trend, nor should the Army have gotten into it simply because the Marines did. The only uniform change conducted by the Marines was the combat fatigues and the PT (Physical Training) set comprised of shorts, T-shirt, and sweats. All other uniforms (full dress, full dress summer, and ceremonial) were retained and remained the same. If the Army had not gone on to develop the ACU, not only would they have saved 100 million dollars but also spare themselves from being the subject of ridicule. The ridicule would have a negative effect on recruitment and reenlistment –if it has not happened already.