View Full Version : ABU
Any thoughts on the Airforce's new cammo, the ABU?
Surgicalcric
06-23-2007, 12:23
They suck just like the ACU's...
Changing the pattern doesnt make them blend in any better...
They are also made of a heavier weight material then the winter BDU's.
Crip
That bad, eh?
I've seen them in person at the local AF base on display next to ACUs. They are definitely a darker shade than the ACUs, and the boots are not tan, but rather a subdued bluish grey.
I wonder why the decision for such a pattern. Was it supposedly practical application research? Or just something to make the AF boys look cooler?
I’m in the National Guard. I would like to see the Army switch to something all around better personally.
Monsoon65
08-02-2007, 17:21
Because we want to look unique! Different! Cool!
I have no idea why we changed. I thought that everyone being on the same page with the BDU was a good idea. If I went to any base, I could buy uniforms. Not anymore.
My Wing CO had the new ones. They are heavier, like a winter weight BDU, so I bet that will suck in the Box. I didn't compare them directly to the ACU, but I thought they looked similiar. I think besides the pattern, the AF uniform had another color in it, Slate Blue.
I think the main complaint is that after the AF flushed those nasty blue Tiger Stripes, they asked for input from the troops. Most asked for sleeve pockets and to get rid of the sleeve stripes. Neither was done. In fact, I think the stripes are bigger than what we are wearing on our BDUs now.
The new ABU was designed specifically to have a "unique" USAF field uniform, plain and simple. None of the SOF recommendations that were passed on to the Air Force Uniform Board (AFUB) were incorporated in the final design. My troops that are using the ABU condemn them with earnest. Supposedly there's a new lightweight version in the works.
Monsoon65
10-05-2007, 16:53
My troops that are using the ABU condemn them with earnest. Supposedly there's a new lightweight version in the works.
PRC117F:
What are some of their complaints? The ones I'm reading about are that the first bunch had a real problem with colors. The pants and jackets were way off!! Also, they said they are pretty hot and heavy and the "shamrock" boots aren't making any friends, either.
1. There's a map pocket on the inside of the blouse. How do I access it while wearing body armor?
2. No Arm pockets/flaps. During the testing (I served on the AF Uniform Board for two years) we in SOF made numerous recommendations on the pockets/flaps. They liked the idea and advised that it would be adopted. Arm pockets were ruled out for the ABU’s blouse, but the Air Force contradicted itself by adding them to the APEC (all-purpose environmental coat AKA GoreTex Jacket). Why would we need them on the coat if we don’t need them on the uniform itself?
3. No underarm air vent/holes. Once again, numerous recommendations made with regard to this, and no vent/holes to relieve excess perspiration.
4. The blue-gray tiger-stripe design is not condusive to field-wear. It looks like nobody wanted to listen to the camouflage experts. The Air Force was singularly interested in standing out as Air Force.
5. Material too thick for hot climes.
tom kelly
10-05-2007, 19:09
Follow the MONEY,I will bet that some politican or General officer in the decision making process has ties to the primary contractor who is making the new uniforms.Regards, tom kelly
The Reaper
10-05-2007, 19:24
I am not so sure about that.
I think that they gave the Air Force leadership what they wanted, which is more of a style, morale, and service identity statement.
Given the fact that the AF leadership is almost all fighter pilots, that shows what they think is important in a uniform.
The curious thing to me is the role of the AF SNCOs in this. Of course, given the ACU, you could ask the same question about the Army.
TR
Monsoon65
10-05-2007, 19:52
You're right, TR. The AF was looking for a style, morale and a service identity statement. Initially, when they said they were moving away from the BDU, the new uniform would NOT be used for deployments or contingencies. It was to be a home station uniform only.
When they came out with that abortion of a blue tiger stripe, the troops had a fit and it went back to the drawing board. When they came out with the digital tiger stripes, they went to the field and asked what the Airmen liked and disliked about the new uniform. I think most were asking for sleeve pockets and no stripes on the sleeves anymore. We got the inside map pocket and the little pen pocket on the sleeve.
PRC117F is right. The AF Uniform Board said that sleeve pockets weren't a priority and that it would interfere with the sleeve insignia. Then they turned around and came out with the Goretex raingear with sleeve pockets and stripes on the tab on the front of the jacket.
When it came to the actual camo pattern, most guys were wondering if it would really work. I don't think anyone got a straight answer to that question; I know I still haven't.
As for the AF SNCOs, I can just answer for myself. I told the troops that if they didn't like it, take the survey they were supplying and let higher HQ know. Tell them what's good and what's bad with the new uniform.
Im prior AF and Ill tell you, I got scared for some time seeing the growing pains with the new uniform. some of the shit they came up with initially was PLAIN scary. At first, you tucked in the shirt and wore some honor guard belt or something. It went downhill and then they got some fashion folks in ole Jumpers office.
Now, on top of the F/(A)- 22 and the mighty F-35 and preds... and Reepers... and level 3 SATs... they want to throw some more money away by altering the service dress. It looked like a mix of the pirate shirt from Seinfeld, the Army Air Corp and the current Service dress.
Intel_Airman
04-25-2008, 06:52
This is an older thread, but I just wanted to say the ABU is horrible and makes the ACU look like the perfect uniform. I was issued my ABU's prior to all my training and deployment. Once we got to Ft. Lewis we were issued ACU's, and once in theatre we got the advanced ACU's. We are working ILO slots so we don't even wear ABU's outside the wire.
The ABU's were supposed to offer numerous sizing options. With pants and tops being numbered sizes 32, 34, 36, etc. However, they aren't true to their numbers and fit really bad. They should have just kept the standard sizing. The material is garbage, I had to wear mine recently on my 4 day pass and after wearing ACU's the last 4 months I hated it. The material is ridiculously heavy and doesn't breath well. It feels like you are wearing a piece of tent.
The cut brings nothing to the table that would make it a "battle uniform". I love the ACU for it's extra pockets, small collar, velcro, and zippers. Hell the advanced ACU is so comfortable it feels like pajamas. But the AF gave us a map pocket on the inside of our shirts! A map pocket... we don't even have any maps and aren't even trained in MGRS (we use lat long) until we go off with the Army!
I'm done ranting. AF leadership took the road less traveled once again. Have you seen our new service dress that is on the way?
The ABU's were supposed to offer numerous sizing options.
They've delivered on that promise. I see maternity ABUs on the front rack in the MCSS at Peterson AFB each time I head into the commissary. :D
Thank the Marine Corps for starting these uniform shenanigans. :rolleyes:
Philkilla
04-25-2008, 11:42
At least the Marine Corps got it right, it seems every other branch just wanted to jump on the cool train..:p
The Army should stick with multicam, but I think someone else is getting use out of that too and they don't want to share (neither would I).
Grand58742
02-14-2009, 06:44
And still bringing back the thread for an unanswered question.
Yes, side by side, they are darker than the ACU pattern, but more than 100" away, you really can't tell, which is why all our "authorized" field gear is ACU.
Yes, the sage boots suck, which is why the desert boots are still authorized for wear, even encouraged, all around the Air Force. After a month in the sandbox, the sage ones already look like desert boots. Effectively ruined after one month of wear since you are frowned on having brownish green boots at home station.
Yes, the uniforms are too heavy of a material and made for someone sitting in a nice air conditioned office in the summer or a heated one in the winter. No regards for someone standing outside in the winter wind or summer heat. Suffice to say, they suck downrange. I had a set in Iraq and ended up boxing them up after three days and went with the DCUs (this was before everyone had the ABUs and DCUs were still authorized) instead.
No, they still have yet to fix the two toned shirt/pant color matching, at least overseas. Just bought two new sets a few months ago and now that they are starting to fade, you can see the color difference.
However, they are sturdy and pretty much live up to their name of wash and wear. Permanent creases and all. And they are practicaly indestructable, far outlasting summer weight BDUs when it comes to rips and tears. The new ones coming out don't have the stupid map pocket that everyone cuts out and there is a "combat" version that is made of fire resistant materials. And instead of the velcro on the pockets that the Army tends to hate, we went with buttons. Smart move on our part for actually listning to the Army complaints for once. I do like the pants with the extra pockets in the lower leg and the small inner compartments in the cargo pockets.
We still have a ways to go in our uniform designs, but the Air Force is always behind the Army and Marines when it comes to this.