BDU pockets-why?

Ok,so here is the deal.I have an post vietnam jungle coat and a ton of BDUs.The Jungle coat has slanted pockets,which are easier to use,more natural for the hand.Now why in the world would they swich to old fasion vertical pockets?I cant remember if I asked this already,if I have-someone tell me and disregard this.

Here's a guess and only a guess. Aesthetics. Appearance is a big thing for the military. Especially for the Army and USMC post-Vietnam. I'm not talking the mid- to late 70's. The 80s, with Ronald and the Evil Empire brought about the need for a regeneration of a professional standing military. Whether it was needed to combat the continued threat of Communism or not is anyones guess.

But by this point many of our nations military leaders, who were young LTs/CPTs and NCOs in Vietnam, were beginning to guess what were perceived as the reasons for failure in Vietnam. And the basic jist of it is what I call BLOD (Basic Lack Of Discipline). To get things straight and back on track an over zealousness of starched, shined and dress right dress was instituted. The perception that anything that looked out of the norm was evil was prevelent. (And for those that doubt this, when it gets to the point where BDE leadership begins talking about a room SOP for the entire establishment, ie, every 1 man room will look like every other, every 4 man room will look like every other, it's a bit redonculous.)

Like I said, just a guess.

Second guess is simply Lighthouse for the Blind. Sometimes things are done solely to make a job easier.

My dad had said the same thing,for looks and to make things easier.But...it is camouflage!No one should see your pockets!lol Oh well,thanks for the guess Tenewel.I am glad that ACUs and Marine coats are back on the right track.

Ever had a full colonel or general inspect you from a foot away? Camo or not it's what they see. Appearance is has more power in the US military than function.

My personal opinion would be to get rid of the pockets altogeter. We're in a time of continuous training for war or in war. Why come up with a new shirt to wear under armor? Just take the pockets off the current uniform and save the extra money on the Soldiers. I never had an issue with the straight vertical pockets. They're too small and not deep enough to need to dig through it unless you throw a few pennies in there. And I've been in units that didn't allow you to keep anything in pockets because it made them look bulky and took away that pressed, starched look.

Tenewel,you make a very good point.The amour does stop you from useing them anyway.They do seem to lack any use these days.

I agree that the top pockets should have gone away years ago. You couldn't get into them with TA 50 on so what good were they?
Seems like the Army has finaly figured it out - sorta. Now there are good sized angled sleve pockets on the current stuff.
Sarge

Pockets are still needed for many things. We carried tons of stuff when in the field or deployed. Things like the casualty feeder and witness cards, excerpts from the SOP for reports, maps, protractors, personal papers, batteries, small notebooks, and all kinds of small items. The return to the slanted chest pockets are a step in the right direction, as are the sleeve pockets. But, I and many that I know, have absolutely no use for the "magazine" calf pockets on the pants. Anything with weight only flops around too much when dismounted. Only thing I ever carried in mine were tourniquets and spare cans of dip! A front thigh pocket, like the Brits had on their old Battle Dress would work better for many.