| Submit your comments on this article |
| Government |
| USN: Uniforms "will burn robustly" |
| 2013-01-12 |
| Navy working uniforms are extremely flammable and will melt in a fire, putting sailors at risk, the Navy announced Wednesday. The nylon-and-cotton (referred to as NYCO) uniforms worn by sailors on ships and at bases "will burn robustly," and turn into a "sticky molten material," according to a test conducted in October by the Navy Clothing and Textile Research Facility. "If this sticky molten material came in contact with skin it would contribute to increased burn injury due to conductive energy transfer," the report concluded. "The use of the NYCO material in an environment where there is potential for a flame or thermal threat is not recommended." "It will melt and burn to consumption," Rear Adm. John Kirby, chief of information, said in a statement. There have been no uniform requirement changes made after the finding. Navy officials said they are committed to sailor safety. "Where there is a need, fire retardant/flame resistant clothing is provided," Kirby said. Sailors on ships are regularly exposed to the threat of fire, especially those working with or near planes or engines. The Navy removed its requirement that all uniforms be flame-resistant in 1996. |
| Posted by:Pappy |
| #8 Agree wid #1 - IMO the USN is looking for a PCorrect excuse to begin prepping the future Fleet wid GWCC = Sun-resisting materials + lubes. lEST WE FERGIT, SOLAR/SUN-RESISTANCE = 'TIS BUT ONE FORM OF "HEAT-RESISTANCE". The Navy got the Super-AEGIS, got the Stealth Techs, got CVN 21, etc. but OOOOOOOPPPPSSSSS they neglected per the Sun. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2013-01-12 21:11 |
| #7 NYCO also know as BYON (Bring your own Napalm ....to the party) |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2013-01-12 15:14 |
| #6 "Purple suit syndrome" USN, Ret. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2013-01-12 12:50 |
| #5 2 major flight deck and hangar fires during my time, and the cotton based clothing worked just fine. agree with earlier post about the uniform board justifying its existence, that and lining the pockets of the Navy Exchange. latest goof; the pixelated cammies, or whatever they're called; looks to me like a keep up with the army and air force syndrome. seriously, so the pixels work to hide people; so the bad guys will look at a boat and see nobody on it. really? |
| Posted by: USN,Ret. 2013-01-12 03:33 |
| #4 In 1969 we wore Wool, and cotton, NOT burnable easily. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2013-01-12 01:58 |
| #3 Sailors on ships are regularly exposed to the threat of fire, especially those working with or near planes or engines. The Navy removed its requirement that all uniforms be flame-resistant in 1996. You also have fires in the laundry rooms, paint lockers, etc. And that's just on a normal day. Never mind combat. I can't believe that they dropped the requirement that all uniforms are fire-retardant. The Navy uniform board should be required to wear any uniforms they come up with on a ship. |
| Posted by: Rambler in Virginia 2013-01-12 01:21 |
| #2 Shouldn't be a problem as long as they don't go into combat, and aren't around the usual fires and industrial accidents you have working around machinery. Yeah, put me down in the WTF? column. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2013-01-12 01:16 |
| #1 Jesus H. Tapdancing Christ...I've been out of the regular navy for 32 years now, and the only thing that hasn't changed about the service in that time is that (1) the Navy Uniform Board has way too much time on its hands and (2) spends way too much money justifying its ongoing existence. The last time I went through 32nd Street NAVSTA firefighting school as a weekend warrior back in 1989, the main classroom had a pair of double-knit poly Khaki trousers pinned to the bulletin board. They had literally been melted from the knees to the ankles, in a demonstration of why polyester didn't belong aboard a ship |
| Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) 2013-01-12 00:22 |