# Latest SMA notes



## goon175 (Jan 30, 2012)

This is the e-mail I recieved today, detailing the changes that will be  coming down this year. I agree with some of it, but there are a few things that are retarded. The sideburn rule is particularly stupid. I can see having them eliminate at mid-ear, but at the top of the ear? That looks not only unprofessional, but stupid as fuck.



> *NCOER
> 
> -Many changes are coming to the new NCOER. Final product should be complete by April. The time line for implementation following that has not been established.
> 
> ...


----------



## reed11b (Jan 30, 2012)

goon175 said:


> This is the e-mail I recieved today, detailing the changes that will be coming down this year. I agree with some of it, but there are a few things that are retarded. The sideburn rule is particularly stupid. I can see having them eliminate at mid-ear, but at the top of the ear? That looks not only unprofessional, but stupid as fuck.


Sooo, the focus is back on looks and off of training huh? While some of it is over due (Neck tattoos, since they are often related to gang affiliation) and I like that the APFT is being brought back in for schools, most of this is the wrong focus at the wrong time IMNSHO.
Reed
ADDED: To better illustrate my point, these changes will drive away soldiers that are good at doing a soldiers core responsibility, war fighting. Individuals that strive in extremely regulated and structured environments often do poorly in chaotic environment. Some members of this board served in the mid-90's when there were very few combat vets left in service and I know that I, and many others often thought that the wired tight around the axle, detail focused control freak was an A-hole, but that when combat happened, they were the guys to be beside. Fast forward 10-15 years when we are finally being shot at, and those anal retentive control freaks were often not the combat gods we had hoped they would be. Instead they often froze, gave countermanding orders, or orders that made little or no sense. And many of the laid back NCO's, that we liked, but feared would do poorly under stress, were usually the ones keeping there cool, and giving good directions. Clearly this is not universal, but it happened enough to me and others that I have spoken with that I am VERY WARY around the control freaks in leadership positions.


----------



## AWP (Jan 30, 2012)

WTF? Really? I thought the sideburns was stupid, but then I continued down that email of retardation and saw that grooming standards will be enforced OFF DUTY? Sleeve tattoos will be prohibited? Half-sleeve, full-sleeve? Seriously? Females can wear cosmetics "conservatively?" What's the definition of "conservative" in the eyes of the Army? An officer/ NCO that signs a commanders checklist isn't legally accountable? That seriously needs a legal review?

What Barnum and Bailey group of CSM's came up with this nonsense?


----------



## CDG (Jan 30, 2012)

I have always thought the military height/weight requirements did not make sense.  If you are 6'2" and 220# with 10% BF you are out of regs.  That is horseshit.  They should just have BF% regs and then a PT test.  If you aren't a fatass and you can pass your PT test, then who cares?  The argument about being able to carry the person plus their gear always seems to come up, but if the military didn't work so hard to keep people weak, this would not be an issue.

They are going to regulate civilian clothing standards OFF-BASE?  WTF?

Finally, what would be the reasoning behind not allowing commercial pressing of the ACU?  Is there something that commercial pressing does to the uniform?


----------



## x SF med (Jan 30, 2012)

CDG- commercial pressing is a high heat/high pressure system and the sizing/starch (which goes slightly acid in heat) used by commercial processes along with the heat/pressure removes the IR protection and causes the material to degrade.  I see no problem with having garrison ACUs that are commercially pressed, and field uniforms that are washed then rinsed to death and never see an iron (gee, the gen 1 BDU, and the OG 107 'jungles' were done that way...)


----------



## CDG (Jan 30, 2012)

x SF med said:


> CDG- commercial pressing is a high heat/high pressure system and the sizing/starch (which goes slightly acid in heat) used by commercial processes along with the heat/pressure removes the IR protection and causes the material to degrade. I see no problem with having garrison ACUs that are commercially pressed, and field uniforms that are washed then rinsed to death and never see an iron (gee, the gen 1 BDU, and the OG 107 'jungles' were done that way...)


 
I see. Thank you for the explanation.


----------



## reed11b (Jan 30, 2012)

x SF med said:


> CDG- commercial pressing is a high heat/high pressure system and the sizing/starch (which goes slightly acid in heat) used by commercial processes along with the heat/pressure removes the IR protection and causes the material to degrade. I see no problem with having garrison ACUs that are commercially pressed, and field uniforms that are washed then rinsed to death and never see an iron (gee, the gen 1 BDU, and the OG 107 'jungles' were done that way...)


A home iron also degrades the IR protection and by creating flat angles, even w/o starch, create a uniform that "shines" brightly in NODS. IMNSOHO, NO ACU should be starched and if looking pretty is so important, then we need a distinct garrison uniform.
Reed


----------



## Brill (Jan 30, 2012)

goon175 said:


> This is the e-mail I recieved today, detailing the changes that will be coming down this year. I agree with some of it, but there are a few things that are retarded. The sideburn rule is particularly stupid. I can see having them eliminate at mid-ear, but at the top of the ear? *That looks not only unprofessional, but stupid as fuck*.


 
But Five Fingers are still banned so it's all good.


----------



## goon175 (Jan 30, 2012)

Got you good! How's that big red X!? ahahhaha

I find it funny that they are gonna have guys shave their sideburns off, which is a normal part of a normal hair cut, yet there is not mention of getting rid of the hitler 'stache, that is absolutely ridiculous looking and unprofessional. Let guys grow a normal looking moustache, or just ban the thing, one or the other!


----------



## Brill (Jan 30, 2012)

goon175 said:


> Got you good! How's that big red X!? ahahhaha


 
You're just pissed about the "-Males will be prohibited from wearing cosmetics to include nail polish,.."


----------



## Marauder06 (Jan 30, 2012)

> I have always thought the military height/weight requirements did not make sense. If you are 6'2" and 220# with 10% BF you are out of regs. That is horseshit. They should just have BF% regs and then a PT test. If you aren't a fatass and you can pass your PT test, then who cares? The argument about being able to carry the person plus their gear always seems to come up, but if the military didn't work so hard to keep people weak, this would not be an issue.


 
A guy with the specs you gave is well within regs; that's why we have the tape test, right?  I'm 6'5" and weigh 240, I'm "overweight according to the Army but well "underfat" so there's no drama.  I agree that it's arbitrary and there is probably a better way to measure fitness, such as what you mentioned.  I'd also like the Army to take a look at "lifestyle" issues that have a greater affect on health and readiness.



> They are going to regulate civilian clothing standards OFF-BASE? WTF?


I'm cool with that, as long as it's not too onerous for the Soldiers. We get paid and represent the service 24/7...



> Finally, what would be the reasoning behind not allowing commercial pressing of the ACU? Is there something that commercial pressing does to the uniform?


 
Yeah, I don't know what that's all about.  We should just pull the trigger and go over to multicam and forget about the ACU anyway.


----------



## surgicalcric (Jan 30, 2012)

goon175 said:


> I find it funny that they are gonna have guys shave their sideburns off...


 
SMA must have received that recommendation from the 5th Group CSM.  

Seriously though, good luck getting SF guys to get rid of their sideburns, especially me.

Crip


----------



## goon175 (Jan 30, 2012)

I'd look straight retarded with them shaved up that high. My wife would kill me as well.


----------



## CDG (Jan 30, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> A guy with the specs you gave is well within regs; that's why we have the tape test, right? I'm 6'5" and weigh 240, I'm "overweight according to the Army but well "underfat" so there's no drama. I agree that it's arbitrary and there is probably a better way to measure fitness, such as what you mentioned. I'd also like the Army to take a look at "lifestyle" issues that have a greater affect on health and readiness.
> Got it.  I must have misunderstood how the BF% and height/weight chart interact with each other.  So height/weight on its own does not mean failing. but if you are out of regs on that they tape you?
> 
> I'm cool with that, as long as it's not too onerous for the Soldiers. We get paid and represent the service 24/7...
> Agreed. I should have stated that I agree with controlling it to an extent (pants around the knees, gang related attire, etc.).  I would hate to see it turn into long pants and button-up shirts unless in uniform or PT gear!


----------



## DA SWO (Jan 30, 2012)

What have you been doing?

ARMY TRAINING SIR!

Seriously, the garrison life will drive soldiers away, ironic since many of these soldiers have complained about the ops tempo.


----------



## surgicalcric (Jan 30, 2012)

I agree with a many of the points the SMA talks about.  

However some of it is just silly: sideburns, civilian clothing, being clean shaven off duty - in fact I am only clean shaven about til about noon to name a few.


----------



## reed11b (Jan 30, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> A guy with the specs you gave is well within regs; that's why we have the tape test, right? I'm 6'5" and weigh 240, I'm "overweight according to the Army but well "underfat" so there's no drama. I agree that it's arbitrary and there is probably a better way to measure fitness, such as what you mentioned. I'd also like the Army to take a look at "lifestyle" issues that have a greater affect on health and readiness.


 
You may tape well sir, but I and many others know folks that are built like athletes, but don't have a thick neck that fail tape, and obvious fat asses with fat necks that pass it. Use a more accurate fat% test and then there really would be no drama.
Reed

P.S. Not built like a bodybuilder, if I fail height and weight it means I'm fat and no more donuts for me!


----------



## LibraryLady (Jan 31, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> ... Females can wear cosmetics "conservatively?" What's the definition of "conservative" in the eyes of the Army?...


 
Snort.  Worked for one officer that considered "conservative" to be none at all.  THAT one will raise a huge stink with the gals.

LL


----------



## Teufel (Jan 31, 2012)

It kind of looks like Marine regs by the way.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jan 31, 2012)

-Many changes are coming to the new NCOER. Final product should be complete by April. The time line for implementation following that has not been established.

-New NCOER will be aligned with the new leadership doctrine (ADRP 6-22) and designed to prevent inflation.
*Good luck, inflater's gonna inflate regardless of what kind of paperwork you make. *

*Height/Weight/APFT

*Bla bla height weight blah. BMI/Fatness/whatever should only come into play if you can't pass a PT test, as a diagnostic measure to see why the fuck said shmedlap can't pass the PT Test... ie, is it because he goes for thirds at the chow hall every day, or does he have tiny heart syndrome and fall out of every run because of it?* *If a soldier passes the PT standards with 95% or better at 235 lbs, does it matter if they're 4'9"?  *

-No more marginal 1059’s, every Soldier that starts the course will be enrolled. If a Soldier fails to meet any course standard the 1059 will reflect this failure. No more “turn-aways” prior to the start of the course.

-The Board recommended that some form of reprimand should be given to the chain of command of any Soldiers that reports to school and fails to meet APFT and/or HT/WT. Officers and NCO’s that sign the commanders checklist should be held accountable. This is pending legal review.
*Makes sense, don't waste the school's time and pre-screen at the unit level to not send choads wasting slots*

-The Board recommended that the regulation should be changed to require units to update APFT and HT/WT data within E-MILPO on a regular basis. No requirement currently exists.

*AR 670-1 update

-Many changes are coming to AR 670-1. This is just a summary of some of them. Do not begin to enforce until the regulation is complete and published!

-New revision of the regulation will define the following terms; eccentric, faddish, conservative, inconspicuous, unsightly, hair braids/plaits.

-AR 670-1 will be a punitive order in the future.
*Bout damn time*

-Sideburns will not extend below the top of the ear.
*Meh, what constitutes top of the ear... top of the ear as it attaches to your nug, or are you talking top of the ear as the highest point of the ear when holding a ruler parallel to the marching surface when at the position of attention? Plus*

-Soldier will be clean shaven on and off duty.
*MEH*
-Female and male hair grooming standards will become more restrictive and better defined.

-Females will be allowed to put their hair into a pony tail during PT.
*makes sense*

-Males will be prohibited from wearing cosmetics to include nail polish, females may wear cosmetics conservatively, but can only wear nail polish in service, mess or dress uniforms.
*Yay for DADT revocation, gotta put this crap in the books*

-Females fingernail length will not exceed ¼ in, no fake nails, add-ons, or extensions will be authorized.
*good*

-Tattoos will not be visible above the neck line when the IPFU is worn.
Tattoos will not extend below the wrist line and not on the hands. Sleeve tattoos will be prohibited (this one will be grandfathered).
*good*

-Soldiers will not walk while engaged in activities that require the hand salute. (eating, cell phone use, etc…) -ACUs will not be commercially pressed; hand ironing of the ACU (UCP) only will be authorized.
*WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU IRONING SOMETHING THAT SPECIFICALLY SAYS TO LAUNDER ONLY AND NOT DO SHIT ELSE...... but hey, let's drop $99883191083 on a uniform that's supposed to be IR neutral, specifically state to just wash and that's it on the tags, then iron the fucker. HERP DERP USASMA eating brains since 1972*

-Bags worn over the shoulder will only be black or ACU without logos.
*meh*

-The new regulation will specify civilian clothes standards both on and off duty and both on and off post.
*meh, good luck*

-No visible body piercings on or off duty and on or off post, males will never wear earrings. Ear gauging will be unauthorized.
*Good*

-No dental ornamentation will be authorized.
*Diamonds and gold are what you keep in your mouf.. oh wait*

-Soldiers will be authorized to wear authorized ballistic eyewear in garrison.
*What an idea, we can wear issued eyepro in uniform? Why does this crap need to be in 670-1... better yet, why the hell did REMF's think that you couldn't wear issued eyepro in uniform?*

-Officers will wear non-subdued rank on their headgear in garrison.
*Gotta have the bling for long range avoidance!*


----------



## medicchick (Jan 31, 2012)

x SF med said:


> (gee, the gen 1 BDU, and the OG 107 'jungles' were done that way...)


Damn, was I even born yet?








Sorry, the ebil on my shoulder made me do it...


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jan 31, 2012)

you got it wrong, the troll's first issued uniform was something along these lines


----------



## Marauder06 (Jan 31, 2012)

goon175 said:


> I'd look straight retarded with them shaved up that high. My wife would kill me as well.


 
Concur.

Are we allowed to use umbrellas with our dress uniforms now?  I can't remember.


----------



## dknob (Jan 31, 2012)

holy fuck @ the new side burn regulations. 
Does this nonsense apply to the National Guard?


You know why hes doing this crap to right? So people leave the Army and others don't join. In the end? The troop cuts that Panetta wanted.

Make it as butt fucking gay as possible to drive people away.


----------



## x SF med (Jan 31, 2012)

Ranger Psych said:


> you got it wrong, the troll's first issued uniform was something along these lines


 
RP, Teufel and Free....  don't friggin cross any bridges for the next few hundred years - you've been put on the Troll-net, we are few, but we live a long friggin time and don't forget a whole lot of slights...  and RP, you must have done something really wrong...  2 O's agreed with your silly sasquatch Ranger ass....  no BBQ for you.


----------



## Brill (Jan 31, 2012)

dknob said:


> holy fuck @ the new side burn regulations.
> Does this nonsense apply to the National Guard?


 
Sure it does.


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 1, 2012)

dknob said:


> holy fuck @ the new side burn regulations.
> Does this nonsense apply to the National Guard?
> ...





lindy said:


> Sure it does.


 
In fact, I heard it applies ONLY to the Guard.


----------



## AWP (Feb 1, 2012)

When did the Guard get uniform regulations?

I feel old.


----------



## Brill (Feb 1, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> When did the Guard get uniform regulations?
> 
> I feel old.


 
When we go to the range or field, it's hard to tell if we're Guard, militia, or just a crazy hunting party.


----------



## reed11b (Feb 1, 2012)

The hate was more for being Os-see-furs then for the Guard comments. 
Reed


----------



## rv808 (Feb 2, 2012)

Sounds exciting..I can't wait.


----------

