The brown Temperate Combat Boot (AKA: Mk IV Cbt Boot) - No longer CADPAT

[Jarnhamar]

We had a guy with laminated chits.
Boot chit, aftermarket rucksack chit, aftermarket chest rig chit, no shaving chit.

Where do we draw the line?

I'm not sure about other bases but petawawa is boots, black, military looking.

 

[x_para76]

The no shaving chit is taking the piss I agree. And you shouldn't need a chit for the rest of that kit if it's being used in the field. The reason that there is so much after market kit out there is because there is demand for it which created by junk that is issued.

 

[Mr. St-Cyr]

A lot of locations (and by locations I mean the people therein) in the province of Quebec are anal about what boots you wear. I've even had people say displaced comments to me regarding my 5.11 socks that were exposed between my Original Swat SEK 9000 boot and my pant blouse. And I've had people go as far as saying my boot sole's treads were too ''aggressive'' for army wear.

You can still wear non issue boots at your own peril of course; the official policy pretty much everywhere around here (Quebec) is you have to wear issue only. And that is the same word I've been getting from my CoC since 2006; every year we are told to wear issue and as far as I know boot chits weren't authorized anymore (or so I heard, I have never verified). If that policy is respected by the troops and applied by the CoC is a whole other issue, of course.

So, on the one hand we have RSM's telling us ''Ottawa says the surgeon general said issue boots for all'' and the next day I see a Major General visiting my course wearing Original Swats.

 

[Jarnhamar]

So, on the one hand we have RSM's telling us ''Ottawa says the surgeon general said issue boots for all'' and the next day I see a Major General visiting my course wearing Original Swats.

Always great for morale.

 

[PuckChaser]

So, on the one hand we have RSM's telling us ''Ottawa says the surgeon general said issue boots for all'' and the next day I see a Major General visiting my course wearing Original Swats.

Don't forget that apparently if you don't have a chit for special boots, VAC won't cover you if you're injured while wearing them. As if there's a difference in the SWAT boots bought at CANEX by someone with a chit and without...

 

[Bzzliteyr]

I just went in to get new Boot, General Purpose and was told that if they don't have my size I'll be seeing the brown boots.

I guess I'll find out next week.  My current pair has two of the CTS grey insoles, a set of super civvy insoles AND my orthotics in them and I still have room.

 

[daftandbarmy]

The no shaving chit is taking the piss I agree. And you shouldn't need a chit for the rest of that kit if it's being used in the field. The reason that there is so much after market kit out there is because there is demand for it which created by junk that is issued.

No shaving? Surely you were a member of 'Gungy 3 PARA' then?  ;D

 

[x_para76]

No 1st battalion I'm afraid.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Don't forget that apparently if you don't have a chit for special boots, VAC won't cover you if you're injured while wearing them. As if there's a difference in the SWAT boots bought at CANEX by someone with a chit and without...

I believe that's an old wives tale that has previously been debunked here.

 

[PuckChaser]

I believe that's an old wives tale that has previously been debunked here.

Someone needs to let Clothing Stores at Kingston know that, it was mentioned while I was trying on my "custom" desert boots.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

A lot of locations (and by locations I mean the people therein) in the province of Quebec are anal about what boots you wear. I've even had people say displaced comments to me regarding my 5.11 socks that were exposed between my Original Swat SEK 9000 boot and my pant blouse. And I've had people go as far as saying my boot sole's treads were too ''aggressive'' for army wear.

You can still wear non issue boots at your own peril of course; the official policy pretty much everywhere around here (Quebec) is you have to wear issue only. And that is the same word I've been getting from my CoC since 2006; every year we are told to wear issue and as far as I know boot chits weren't authorized anymore (or so I heard, I have never verified). If that policy is respected by the troops and applied by the CoC is a whole other issue, of course.

So, on the one hand we have RSM's telling us ''Ottawa says the surgeon general said issue boots for all'' and the next day I see a Major General visiting my course wearing Original Swats.

The CoC doesn't have the power to override a medical chit. They may go to the source and question it, but unless they hold a medical degree, they have no business countermanding what a MO says.

I'd also take the RSM comments about what the 'Surgeon General' had to say without a reference.

 

[x_para76]

Can we not agree that the use of non-issue kit is the least of the CF's concerns? The CF is faced with significant budget cuts and should probably be more focused on how those will be implemented as opposed to what boots a soldier chooses to wear. I would have thought that the lessons learned in Afghanistan would have reinforced the use of non issue kit and eliminated any debates over it's use.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Someone needs to let Clothing Stores at Kingston know that, it was mentioned while I was trying on my "custom" desert boots.

Tell them to show you a reference.

While your at it, ask them why they are issuing boots on the basis of VAC policy and not what the CF says.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Can we not agree that the use of non-issue kit is the least of the CF's concerns? The CF is faced with significant budget cuts and should probably be more focused on how those will be implemented as opposed to what boots a soldier chooses to wear. I would have thought that the lessons learned in Afghanistan would have reinforced the use of non issue kit and eliminated any debates over it's use.

Nope. They're still around

 

[x_para76]

Damn those old dinosaurs!  :crybaby:

 

[CombatDoc]

So, on the one hand we have RSM's telling us ''Ottawa says the surgeon general said issue boots for all'' and the next day I see a Major General visiting my course wearing Original Swats.

Your RSMs are wrong.

 

[CombatDoc]

Don't forget that apparently if you don't have a chit for special boots, VAC won't cover you if you're injured while wearing them. As if there's a difference in the SWAT boots bought at CANEX by someone with a chit and without...

Really?  I put this comment in the urban myth category. Unless you can provide a policy or reference to the contrary, my understanding is that VAC is concerned mainly about whether or not a medical condition is attributable to military service. Furthermore, I'll bet they can't even tell if Mk 3s, Danners, 5.11 or Swats are the issue boot.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

In 1 CMBG there were only two kinds of boots authorized for wear: black, and tan.  Now we have brown as well.

Makes it kind of simple....

 

[PuckChaser]

Really?  I put this comment in the urban myth category. Unless you can provide a policy or reference to the contrary, my understanding is that VAC is concerned mainly about whether or not a medical condition is attributable to military service. Furthermore, I'll bet they can't even tell if Mk 3s, Danners, 5.11 or Swats are the issue boot.

Absolutely. I've never seen a reference, or heard a reference but have had numerous supply techs spread the myth along all without documentation. I'm not a confrontational guy, so I normally just nod and smile, but one day I'll ask someone to prove it.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Absolutely. I've never seen a reference, or heard a reference but have had numerous supply techs spread the myth along all without documentation. I'm not a confrontational guy, so I normally just nod and smile, but one day I'll ask someone to prove it.

I would start by asking the local VAC rep.