Spotlight on better uniforms for female soldiers

WASHINGTON— Imagine U.S. combat troops and aviators wearing body armor that fits so poorly that it’s tough to position a weapon to shoot, combat uniforms with knee pads that hit around mid-shin and flight suits that make it nearly impossible to urinate while in flight.

For many female troops, it’s just another day on the battlefield as they wear clothing and protective gear designed primarily for men. Each of these issues is now getting some attention from the military.

Seven hundred female Army troops are testing a new combat uniform for women with shorter sleeves and knee pads in the right place for their generally shorter legs. A committee on women’s issues has recommended that flight suits be redesigned for both men and women so it’s unnecessary to completely disrobe before urinating. And engineers have been looking at ways to design body armor that better fits the contours of a woman’s body.

Some military women are reluctant to embrace changes that would set them apart from their male colleagues, but several former and current military women said the changes certainly beat the consequences of the current one-piece flight suits or being unable to engage in battle or defend themselves because of uncooperative gear.

Female troops are about 20 percent more likely than their male counterparts to report musculoskeletal disorders, and poorly fitting body armor could at least in part be a factor. For female aviators, dehydration can be a hazard if they opt not to drink water before flights, and those who wait too long to use the bathroom can experience urinary problems.

Some of the challenges for women came up in focus groups conducted with both male and female service members, a majority of whom reported that the equipment given to females was inadequate, “including, but not limited to poor quality or outdated equipment, lack of necessary equipment, tardy issue of equipment, and equipment not sized or designed for women,” according to a 2009 report by the Defense Department Advisory Committee on Women in the Services. The report noted that the problems weren’t always confined to women.

“When your gear doesn’t fit right, it’s going to make you more vulnerable and less effective,” said Spc. Chandra Banks, 27, an Army reservist who has done two tours in Iraq and now works as a research fellow for the nonprofit Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America.

Banks said she noticed improvements in her body armor during her second deployment, but the armor was so large it still chafed her hips when she had to sit for hours in a Humvee, and aggravated a knee injury because of the armor’s unevenly distributed weight. She said better-fitting body armor would also make it easier to position a rifle or machine gun for shooting.

In January, the congressionally appointed Military Leadership Diversity Commission recommended to Congress and President Barack Obama that women be allowed to fully serve in combat. The reality, however, is that women already are serving in the war zones in positions such as truck drivers and helicopter pilots. About 14 percent of all service members are women, and about 220,000 women have gone to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Army is well under way in developing a woman’s combat uniform that would replace the “unisex” one designed primarily for a man’s body. It is similar to combat uniforms in women’s sizes offered by the Air Force and Marines. The Army Uniform Board will vote this fall on whether to adopt it.

The goal is to give the approximately 70,000 women in the Army a better fitting and more professional looking uniform that doesn’t stand out when they are in formation, said Maj. Sequana Robinson, assistant product manager for clothing at the Army’s Program Executive Office Soldier at Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

A better fitting uniform “raises motivation and the performance level because a person feels more professional,” Robinson said. “So, it’s the same uniform. It is not, not a form-fitting uniform. It’s just a uniform that’s based on female body dimensions. It’s less material because women are different than men.”

For the first time since 1988, engineers at the Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center in Massachusetts are doing an anthropometric survey of thousands of troops to better gauge body shapes and measurements within the Army’s force. They are measuring 13,000 troops, including 5,000 female active duty and National Guard members.