Quote Originally Posted by Na Heilthirich View Post
These dress regs should carry a Government health warning: "Not to be read by former RSMs of the Scottish Regiments with dicky tickers!"

I can certainly imagine some of my former RSMs collapsing in fits of apoplexy if they read it.

Firstly the document appears to have been written by someone so afraid of the Grocer's Apostrophe that he has gone too far the other way. Right from the first paragraph, below a portrait of HM we have a reference to the Queens uniform. I know it's OK to be gay now in the British Armed Forces, but do we really want a uniform specifically for queens?

The kilts look like they have been bought from Gold Brothers at £25 a piece, vide the pleating of the officer's kilt on p. 7. The soldier on p. 11's legs are dressed so highly (and his kilt so long) that the legs are barely visible. I can imagine my old RSM shouting "Are ye feeling the cauld, laddie? Have ye borrowed yer mammy's tights?" Likewise, his jacket on p. 21 is so poorly tailored with so much excess material at the chest, it looks like it's tailored for a woman.

On p. 23 the officer's glengarry looks like it's been put on with a steamhammer and his trews are so long they look like those leggings that were fashionable for women in the eighties. Perhaps his Sam Browne was last polished in the eighties as well. The officer's steamhammer has really revved up a gear by the time he uses it to put on his glengarry for p. 32.

As soldier of the early 1960's, I can't help but agree with you on dress standards-------but the lads of this century can still fight as well as they ever could. We should be very proud of them. I am, as I am quite sure that you are.