7
7
0
See article below.
The Defense Department has issued a formal notice asking American manufacturers who want to make an athletic shoe for service members to come forward and be counted.
As individual as Soldiers feet, ankles, knees, stride, gait, etc - do we really want to mandate which shoes a Soldier can wear?
Is this uniformity for uniformity sake or is there a benefit?
The Defense Department has issued a formal notice asking American manufacturers who want to make an athletic shoe for service members to come forward and be counted.
Army
Shoes
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 61
19
19
0
I don't agree with it but here is a way that they can work it. When new recruits come into basic, have them do a running shoe clinic. They would have to run on a treadmill and they would need to have professional's there to analyze their gait, foot strike, etc. They would also have to analyze their arch. Then they could get a better idea of what kind of runner they were and offer various running shoes for each different type of runner. This option would be time consuming and costly so I doubt it would come to fruition.
I hope, when they are finding manufacturers for the "official" sneaker, they take into account that not all runners are created the same. I really hope they don't shove a sneaker down my throat that is for an under-pronator when I'm an over-pronator. It will lead to more personnel hurt, which means more personnel on profile, which finally means less personnel ready to deploy to conduct their wartime mission.
(19)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Yeah, that's all wonderful and all; doing a gait and form analysis in Basic. It'll give the new joe an answer as to what shoes to buy. The downfall to that is that a person's strike and stride and form all change during the course of their life.
With the emphasis on one-size-fits-all exercises, service members will continue to be hurt. With any form of exercises, service members will continue to be hurt. Freak incidents and accidents happen, especially while doing any sort of physical exertion. Those incidents influence the wear and tear on a body. The changes in geometry within a body can be gradual or can be drastic.
What all of this means is that the BAS, TMC, or AMC would need to be able to re-evaluate a service member perhaps annually. Then those results would have to be cross-referenced to the dizzying array of solutions on the market for the SM to go and purchase. Or perhaps have ALL those shoes on hand in a warehouse for issue, sort of like a CIF for PT shoes. Then the question of whether the joe wants minimalist or lightweight or full support or full cushion.
As was stated above, the logistics and execution of this idea would be daunting.
With the emphasis on one-size-fits-all exercises, service members will continue to be hurt. With any form of exercises, service members will continue to be hurt. Freak incidents and accidents happen, especially while doing any sort of physical exertion. Those incidents influence the wear and tear on a body. The changes in geometry within a body can be gradual or can be drastic.
What all of this means is that the BAS, TMC, or AMC would need to be able to re-evaluate a service member perhaps annually. Then those results would have to be cross-referenced to the dizzying array of solutions on the market for the SM to go and purchase. Or perhaps have ALL those shoes on hand in a warehouse for issue, sort of like a CIF for PT shoes. Then the question of whether the joe wants minimalist or lightweight or full support or full cushion.
As was stated above, the logistics and execution of this idea would be daunting.
(2)
(0)
LTC Eric Coger
When I in-processed at Fort Drum, they were doing a study. I had to run across a machine that imaged my foot impact and stride/gait. There were several things we did including some NFL combine-like things such as a shuttle sprint and vertical leap. They gave me the results and handed me a list of shoes by model that were suited to my style. Do this every time we PCS and it will cover your annual physical for that year, a fitness assessment and check if your gait has changed over time to recommend a change to shoes.
(1)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
With most shoe companies running a whole list of the different styles of shoes in their "Line", I don't think it would be too far off to have a company bid for this. They would then take their "line" of shoes and just make black and gold versions for the army. The actual selection of each individual shoe would still fall on the individual soldier. This is not the best answer but if the Army is going to force us to compy then it would at least be acceptable to me.
(0)
(0)
CW3 Brian Harris
One or two American-brand shoe manufacturers could easily produce shoes that not only meet the uniformity of aesthetics the DoD wants, but also meet the varying needs of each individual. There could be styles for minimalists, memory foam inserts, narrow and wide widths, and support those form a high arch to flatfoot, just to name a few examples. Creating a balanced sneaker to fit each individual would not really be that hard, since most athletic shoe companies have been dabbling in the same for years. DoD just needs to make sure the sneakers purchased meet the standards by law, and are a quality made product. Frankly, I think it is absurd to see a formation of individuals in a standard uniform, but then look at their feet to see sneakers in odd styles or flashy colors. We're not in the military to be in a fashion pageant!
(0)
(0)
9
9
0
Unless the Army is willing to shell out to buy every Soldier Saucony's and Pearl Izumi's every few months, no. There is no one size fits all when it comes to footwear. This would send profiles through the roof.
(9)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SSG Cedeno
I like your question for real. A lot of leaders have to deal with this type of thing. I fight with certain things on a daily basis as the 1SG.
25M: Multimedia Illustrator, SSG, Army | RallyPoint professional military profile.
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SSG Cedeno,
I apologize for putting that info on my last comment. I copied and pasted your name and thats what it did and i can't remove it.
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
SFC Chambliss,
I agree with your last statement, standards are standards, and we must enforce them if they are in place.
I agree with your last statement, standards are standards, and we must enforce them if they are in place.
(1)
(0)
6
6
0
CSM Maynard,
I recently saw this article posted about this and I was kind of baffled. In an age where the military in general is trying to reduce costs in the long haul, it seems to me that it is a step backward when trying to create a standardized shoe. Doing this will only increase knee, ankle and other joint issues as all of our bodies are designed differently. Another poster made mention of how we already have designated boots. This bares no comparison to the stress induced on the joints when running as the majority of the time boots are not worn for physical fitness training and they normally are not worn for prolonged running. I think I have to lean toward the argument that this is just for uniformity purposes and has no other benefit. I would also imagine like most other things, once the Army developed these so called standard running shoes, than they would also create a standardized price that didn't benefit anyone, but the person selling them. This sounds like another persons idea to leave their mark on the military right as they are retiring.
SFC Rosenlund
(6)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google