Natural Uniforms Contrast Trim Scrub Top & Pant Set (Hot Pink/Black M)
- Marcus Uniforms combines shipping
- International shipping available
- Sold as set only
- Includes top and pant
- Straight leg pant
Active Uniforms Contrast Trim Top & Pant Set made of 65/35 Poly/Cotton. This set includes a v-neck top with contrast trim on the v-neck and 2 lower pockets, set-in sleeves, back elastic and side slits. The straight leg pant features a drawstring front, back elastic, two side pockets, two cargo pockets, one with a smaller pocket. Inseam approximately 30″. Please note: Active Uniforms is a division of Natural Uniforms. Does not run large.
List Price: $ 14.61
Price: $ 14.61
Uniforms, Equipment and Weapons of the American Expeditionary Forces in World War I
Uniforms, Equipment and Weapons of the American Expeditionary Forces in World War I is a detailed look at the uniforms, equipment, weapons, personal items, insignia, and specialist equipment of the American Army during the Great War. This comprehensive study uses over 100 original black and white photographs of American soldiers, many of which are previously unpublished. The book also shows over 700 full color photographs of original items as well as recreated scenes that bring many of these ite
List Price: $ 79.95
Price: $ 56.21
GOOD FOR THE $,
I MUST SAY THAT I WAS PLEASED WITH THE QUALITY OF THE SCRUBS WHEN I GOT THEM. THEY DO RUN SOMEWHAT BIG BUT WORTH THE MONEY. I WILL BUY AGAIN!
Was this review helpful to you?
scrubs,
Nice scrubs. Color holds up well to washing. Size comes small, so order next size up for good fit. Fast delivery. Wish it came in other contrast colors with the black. Well i guess you can’t have everything.
Was this review helpful to you?
Why don’t they make more sizes!,
I have been wearing natural uniform scrub sets for 5 years (the only scrubs I buy). They are good quality and hold up wash after wash. I always wash mine inside out and the color fades a bit after a couple of years. I also purchase the “Women’s Scrub Set – Contrast Trim Top & Pant” by Natural Uniform. These run a little larger if you are looking for more room. The style is different but they are great scrub sets as well. My only complaint is I wish they would make these in Medium… Come on Natural Uniform, cater to my needs
Was this review helpful to you?
Bottom line: It’s the only game in town!,
I got this massive work at a used book store. I traded practically an SUV full of books for credit and this is what I got. Why should you care about that fact? The reason I explain this is because this is pretty much the only way I ever would have wound up with a copy. The book is like a lot of Schiffer books; ongodly expensive.
Now, that being said, there is next to nothing on the US Army in WW1. There was a small collector’s guide in the 80s, and now this. I don’t think anyone’s even tried a book like this before, and for that alone, I highly praise the author for taking it on.
I do, however, have issues with it. The author makes some pretty poor statements, showing some very bad research (such as the modern Army only issuing dress blue uniforms to “specialty” troops. It will soon be the ONLY dress uniform the Army has, for everyone). Once he gets into his topic, though, I found very few errors.
He does an admirable job of going through other people’s collections to get photos of surviving items. Good job, there. But the quality of photography is extremely poor in many cases, and I’d guess he took some of the photos with his “point and click” camera. The flash photography is THAT bad in some places.
And I find it very odd that many of the “re-enacting” shots (and there are a great deal of these) aren’t marked as such. But I’d guess anyone buying this book would know those photos aren’t original. I must ask one thing of anyone thinking of writing such a book of their own:
PLEASE, for the love of all that is holy, don’t put yourself in photos in your own book!
There are a curious number of lapses in some items. Not an original “trench” shotgun is shown in the book? C’mon, he can find over a dozen original boots, but not an original WW1 trench shotgun? I know several collectors (myself included) who have them in their gun safes!
I must give the author credit also for leaving out the exceptions for the most part. Far too often, people want to include the “cool” stuff that ha sno bearing on the topic. The author here pretty much avoids that trap.
In the end, I want it known that I did not feel cheated by getting this work. The author did a fine (yet mildly self-serving) job. For me the bottom line is this; Can I find a better work than this? NO, I can’t. For that reason, and that reason chiefly, I now have it in my bookshelf.
If you’re really into WW1 American stuff, you should have this right beside Canfield’s book on WW1 weapons.
Was this review helpful to you?
|I paid full price! But am keeping it!,
I agree with the other reviewer (no. 1) … heck I have several items in my collection that are not even mentioned in the book. That being said I have probably been collecting WW1 stuff longer than the author. I have thought of putting together a book like this but hats off to the author he actually had the guts to do it, Bravo! Love the photos and layout. A good resource for items that I don’t have (yet or dont want) I would have to say that even thought it is not as good as a Canfield book it is a nice book that I would Probably pay full fair again to get onto my book shelf. Print it in the US next time!!! A recommended book!
Was this review helpful to you?
|UNIFORMS, EQUIPMENT, AND WEAPONS OF THE AMERICAN EXPEDITIONARY FORCES IN WORLD WAR I,
UNIFORMS, EQUIPMENT, AND WEAPONS OF THE AMERICAN EXPEDITIONARY FORCES IN WORLD WAR I
BRET WARNER
SCHIFFER PUBLISHING, 2006
HARDCOVER, $79.95, 330 PAGES, PHOTOGRAPHS, ENDNOTES, BIBLIOGRAPHY
Experiences in the first years of the 20th Century had shown the United States Army that it was impractical to maintain the dark blue uniform it had worn since the American Revolution while campaigning in the field. In 1902, the United States Army adopted a field service uniform, which was issued starting in 1903. It consisted of a khaki cotton sack coat and breeches for the summer and warmer climates and an olive drab woolen coat and breeches for more temperate weather. This basic pattern was slightly revised over the years, and on August 15, 1917, the War Department issued Special Regulations No. 42 describing the uniform worn in Europe by the American Expeditionary Force (AEF). With millions of men entering the service, the tailoring of the wool service coat was simplified. The service hat and canvas leggings conyinued to be issued to troops stationed in the United States, but troops assigned to the American Expeditionary Force in Europe received new items including both French and British made overseas caps, spiral puttees, and steel trench helmets. The U.S. Army experimented with steel helmets but because of manufacturing issues, elected to use the British steel helmet instead. Until the end of the war, the vast majority of trench helmets used by the U.S. Army were obtained from the British. The Britishy manufactured helmet can be distinguished from an American manufactured helmet in two ways. The firs is that the side loops for the chainstrip are held in place with split rivets on British helmets and with solid head rivet on American produced helmets. The second method, if the lining is present, in that British produced helmets have a red stamp on the white underside of the lining with: BRODIE’S STEEL HELMET REGISTERED NO. 081,990. WAR OFFICE PATTERN PATENT NO. 11803/15 In December, 1917, there was a pattern change in the collar discs for economic reasons. The regimental number was moved to the disc with the U.S.while the company letter remained on the disc with the branch device. Earlier discs continued in use. On February 2, 1901, the Nurse Corps became a permanent part of the U.S. Army Medical Department under the Army Reorganization Act (31 Statute 753) passed by the U.S. Congress. Nurses were appointed to the Regular Army. In 1917, the U.S. Signal Corps was authorized to recruit bi-lingual (French and English) telephone operators for service with the A.E.F. in France. The uniform for both organizations was similar, consisting of Navy blue wool Norfolk-style jacket and matching wool skirt. The Nurse Corps also had specialized work clothing. In 1918, a secondary standard coat with internal pockets was manufactured for the A.E.F., some in the U.S. and some in Great Britain. Shoulder sleeve insignia was also introduced in 1918 but was generally not worn until after the Armistice with the exception of the 81st Division “Wildcats,” the 5th Division “Red Diamonds,” and some units of the 26th “Yankee” Division. The basic arm for the soldiers of the A.E.F. was the bolt-action, magazine-fed Springfield Rifle Model 1903. It weighed 9.69 pounds with the 16-inch bayonet affixed. The soldier carried a basic “load” of 60 pounds of .30 caliber ball ammunition. The cartridges were packed five to a clip, 12 clips per cloth bandolier, weighing just under 4 pounds. Nearly 600,000 Springfields, enough to equip a field army of 1,000,000 men, were on hand in 1917. The problem was that nearly 4,000,000 soldiers would be called to arms. The available rifles were used to outfit the early organizing Regular Army and National Guard divisions. About 200,000 Krag-Jorgensen Norwegian-made rifles, the standard rifle of the U.S. Army from 1893 to 1903, were on hand. A British-deigned Enfield Rifle, chambered for the U.S. .30 caliber round, was put into production in August, 1917 to take advantage of the existing manufacturing facilities that had been turning out Enfields for the British Army. Some units exchanged their issued rifles for another model upon arrival in France. Some soldiers and all officers carried the U.S. Semi-Automatic Pistol, Colt .45 Caliber, Model 1911. The sidearm had been developed in response to the experiences in the Philippines where “knock-down” power was needed to deal with the headlong charges of the Moros. The Colt .45 delivered the goods. Heavy machine guns used by the A.E.F. were of American design but usually of foreign manufacture. All the major inventors of machine guns-Hiram Maxim, Benjamin Hotchkiss, Isaac Lewis, and John Browning-were Americans, some of whom had taken their wares to Europe to seek a market prior to World War I. The early machine gun of American manufacture, the Benet-Mercie, didn’t compare favorably with the very good guns manufactured by Maxim, Hotchkiss, and…
Read more
Was this review helpful to you?
|