View Full Version : So we got a new camo huh?
Oldschool45B
05-29-2009, 09:46
Take this with a grain of salt, maybe a can or 5lb bag of it. But RUMINT has it that SOCOM has selected a new camo pattern for us all to wear. There are even pics of it.
http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/4590/digitalsocompatterne.jpg
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/3687/mpaor.jpg
So in a effort to sort out some sort of accuracy, has anyone seen it, seen anyone in it or heard any new details about it?
Take this with a grain of salt, maybe a can or 5lb bag of it. But RUMINT has it that SOCOM has selected a new camo pattern for us all to wear. There are even pics of it.
http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/4590/digitalsocompatterne.jpg
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/3687/mpaor.jpg
So in a effort to sort out some sort of accuracy, has anyone seen it, seen anyone in it or heard any new details about it?
The images you linked are to a digital version of Multi-cam that isn't from Crye.
Same colors and similar pattern, but digitized.
They are avalible online.
No link, or experience .
Ever since the ACU's came out everybody thinks they're getting a new uniform next month.... :rolleyes:
Take this with a grain of salt, maybe a can or 5lb bag of it. But RUMINT has it that SOCOM has selected a new camo pattern for us all to wear. There are even pics of it.
http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/4590/digitalsocompatterne.jpg
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/3687/mpaor.jpg
So in a effort to sort out some sort of accuracy, has anyone seen it, seen anyone in it or heard any new details about it?
So where is the authentication of this RUMINT from USSOCOM. Who or what Document, e-mail ?
Facts play better than rumor........
So where is the authentication of this RUMINT from USSOCOM. Who or what Document, e-mail ?
Facts play better than rumor........
I don't consider this authentication,, But it may lead somewhere..
http://domhyde.wordpress.com/tag/arid-camo
New USSOCOM Camouflage
Thursday, May 14th, 2009
According to industry sources the Program Manager for SOF Survival, Support, and Equipment Systems announced that two camouflage patterns known as AOR1 (Desert) and AOR2 (Wooded) would be transitioned in SOF and that certain contracted systems in Khaki and Ranger Green would move to the new color schemes.
Posted in Camo, PM-SSS | No Comments »
http://soldiersystems.net/category/camo/
US SOCOM news: new camo, new rifle New Camo Well, after months and months of speculation on military fanboy and wannabe sites, it now seems official that the US Special Operation Command is going to transition to a new camouflage pattern for its uniforms and personal combat gear.
http://strikehold.wordpress.com/2009/05/16/us-socom-news-new-camo-new-rifle/
Oldschool45B
05-29-2009, 13:55
Thats not the digital multicam. The digital multi cam has two additional colors in it that this pattern lacks.
New pattern:
http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/4590/digitalsocompatterne.jpg
Multicam digital
http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/3595/digitalmulticamey6.jpg
So I guess that is the best documentation we will get until they issue it. IF they issue it.
What - another officer stuck in an out-of-branch good deal R&D slot needing to push something unnecessary through the system to justify his LOM? :rolleyes:
Richard's $.02 :munchin
be advised that there is no such thing as "Digital Multicam"
there is a commercial pattern that knockoffs the pattern organization, coloration and then pixelates the result
this is NOT from CRYE nor is it Multicam (tm)
re: the AOR patterns - Eagle, and LBT both had gear samples made up in these colors displayed at the SHOT show. I was not terribly impressed, but as long as the color does the job, then no worries.
New uniforms/patterns??? I'm going to hold my breath. Someone wake me up when I pass out in a minute or two.
greenberetTFS
06-03-2009, 11:54
What - another officer stuck in an out-of-branch good deal R&D slot needing to push something unnecessary through the system to justify his LOM?
Richard's $.02
Look guys,It's great if they can come up with a camo pattern that can make you almost invisible by blending in to the terriain to the enemy....... :rolleyes: But, with all your armor nowadays,does it really make a difference? :confused: I never had an opportunity to wear the gear so please forgive me if I'm stepping on toes here...... ;)
GB TFS :munchin
So where is the authentication of this RUMINT from USSOCOM. Who or what Document, e-mail ?
Facts play better than rumor........
I recommended to the CDR that we hold a GOSSEX (gossip exercise), wherein we assign NAIs to validate intel derived from RUMINT.
:rolleyes:
I recommended to the CDR that we hold a GOSSEX (gossip exercise), wherein we assign NAIs to validate intel derived from RUMINT.
:rolleyes:Stay safe.
Wew, I'm back. That was a rough one. I must have been out at least 22 hours. Did I miss any news releases from SOCOM on the uniforms?
I recommended to the CDR that we hold a GOSSEX (gossip exercise), wherein we assign NAIs to validate intel derived from RUMINT.
:rolleyes:
Very Good....... Hope the CDR got this set up.:p
Very Good....... Hope the CDR got this set up.:p
He's working on it. We would really like some resolution before we LD, or we'll have to rely on GUESSINT (which, when corroborated several times, turns into RUMINT).
:D
Utah Bob
06-05-2009, 13:51
I hear the new generation camo will be shape-shifter capable. You can look like a tree, a rock, Bin Laden, a water buffalo, a warrant officer, etc. at the flip of a switch.
I think they call it Chameleoflage but I could be wrong.
Batteries not included.:rolleyes:
The Reaper
06-05-2009, 17:20
...a warrant officer....
Negative, they have a union.
TR
I think we should just go for broke and use the Army Blue Service Uniform.
Dress greens for the field. Sence Army Blue Service Uniform will be used instead.
strike-hold
06-07-2009, 01:57
A little update....
http://strikehold.wordpress.com/2009/06/06/socom-pcu-development-scar-user-review/
RAVEN756
06-14-2009, 14:56
It has been a while since I have been on here. Here is a link to an apparent manufacturer already attempting production of kit in the one of newer patterns.
http://soldiersystems.net/2009/06/11/boonie/boonie/
I have heard this same rumor over at 5th. We do need a better uniform than that piece of shit ACU. Whoever come up with that color is an idiot.
I have seen this camo worn in combat, but only issued to select units.
RAVEN756
06-18-2009, 20:45
Apparently a few are roaming around Ft.Campbell w/Multicam...... Unkwn unit.
ACU was chosen over the other camouflage patters because apparently it functions better in the desert. Multicam however would be better for operating in the green zones of Afghanistan.
Aussies have recently been wearing their standard DPCU in the green zones of Oruzgan province in place of the DPDU.
I defiantly agree the ACU has had its day; great idea in theory, a universal camouflage but I don’t think it will really work.
The Reaper
06-19-2009, 08:12
ACU was chosen over the other camouflage patters because apparently it functions better in the desert. Multicam however would be better for operating in the green zones of Afghanistan.
Source?
TR
Sure thing TR
The debate in the discussion of this area can go on forever since no perfect uniform exists.
This is in part because of the way the United States tested its new uniform camouflage patterns. I was at a defense technology conference a little while ago where the Australian Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO) our rough equivalent of DARPA was discussing future appropriations for our armed forces. Its a partnership program with the academics in our universities.
One of the major points of discussion was the potential of following the United States lead in the use of a universal camouflage pattern. Several options were discussed most settling on the use of some sort of Multicam derivative but this was pretty idle speculation since we have not carried out any official testing like the US military has.
What was however discussed were the green zones of Afghanistan. A convincing argument was made that the US military trials did not take into account that terrain during testing.
The full report ‘Universal Camouflage for the Future Warrior’ can be retrieved here
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA433081&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
What is known is that the testing procedure was not set up to foresee the green zone terrain in which a large portion of combat takes place in Afghanistan (due in part to the thick terrain and river systems). In fact the testing dealt only with Woodland, Urban, Desert and Desert/Urban. Nothing like the brighter greens and dark browns associated with the green zones were tested during the trials. It is also worth noting that jungle terrain was also not tested.
So when the testing was done the currant pattern on the ACU was selected because of its high marks in the afore mentioned terrains. This is obviously correct when considering what those terrains look like, it won the battle within the set context. This is why multicam was not selected; it did not meet the testing standard set. As the DSTO people pointed out, if the testing were done again with a more wide variety of terrains a better cam pattern may have emerged.
Sure thing TR
The debate in the discussion of this area can go on forever since no perfect uniform exists.
This is in part because of the way the United States tested its new uniform camouflage patterns. I was at a defense technology conference a little while ago where the Australian Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO) our rough equivalent of DARPA was discussing future appropriations for our armed forces. Its a partnership program with the academics in our universities.
One of the major points of discussion was the potential of following the United States lead in the use of a universal camouflage pattern. Several options were discussed most settling on the use of some sort of Multicam derivative but this was pretty idle speculation since we have not carried out any official testing like the US military has.
What was however discussed were the green zones of Afghanistan. A convincing argument was made that the US military trials did not take into account that terrain during testing.
The full report ‘Universal Camouflage for the Future Warrior’ can be retrieved here
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA433081&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
What is known is that the testing procedure was not set up to foresee the green zone terrain in which a large portion of combat takes place in Afghanistan (due in part to the thick terrain and river systems). In fact the testing dealt only with Woodland, Urban, Desert and Desert/Urban. Nothing like the brighter greens and dark browns associated with the green zones were tested during the trials. It is also worth noting that jungle terrain was also not tested.
So when the testing was done the currant pattern on the ACU was selected because of its high marks in the afore mentioned terrains. This is obviously correct when considering what those terrains look like, it won the battle within the set context. This is why multicam was not selected; it did not meet the testing standard set. As the DSTO people pointed out, if the testing were done again with a more wide variety of terrains a better cam pattern may have emerged.
Wasn't CRY not being large enough to fulfill a big Army contract. The main reason they didn't pick MC? IMO, I have not seen any other pattern blend in both Desert and Woodland as good as MC.
Hit the links in this link related to Camo testing.
http://www.milspecmonkey.com/articles.html
Recent directive issued to us regarding uniforms:
"Wear what makes sense."
That is exactly what we needed to hear. I will interpret that broadly.
Granted, the rest of the force doesn't get the latitude that we do.
The Reaper
06-21-2009, 18:45
BBRA, until someone abuses it.
TR
ACU was chosen over the other camouflage patters because apparently it functions better in the desert.
OcdtADF, I won't speak for TR, but I believe his request for sources was in reference to your statement above. The Natick document you later linked makes no mention of the Universal Camouflage Pattern (UCP), let alone the fact it was chosen for the reason you cite. Please either put up a reputable, perferably official, reference that proves that UCP was chosen for its superiority in desert-specific environments, or stop stating "facts" about how things are decided in the US Army.
Gene Econ
06-21-2009, 19:56
Wasn't CRY not being large enough to fulfill a big Army contract. The main reason they didn't pick MC? IMO, I have not seen any other pattern blend in both Desert and Woodland as good as MC.
Hit the links in this link related to Camo testing.
http://www.milspecmonkey.com/articles.html
KG:
Night Desert pattern.
Gene
Razor
If you like I can provide further clarification on the subject.
The patterns tested in the report I linked to are the basis of the currant ACU.
The Urban Track Pattern listed in the report is the Universal Camouflage Pattern. It was digitised after the trial and the colour black was removed. This gave it the capability of the All Over Brush Pattern. Thus the UCP was born.
I’m sorry; I assumed that most people would have known this.
Here is another source that confirms my statement.
http://www.armytimes.com/legacy/new/0-ARMYPAPER-2997500.php
Cadet,
Again, the statement that UCP was chosen because it performed better in a desert environment is misleading at best, and outright wrong at worst. Read the sources you've listed a bit more carefully, and you'll find that Urban Track (and yes, I had heard that UCP is a modified version of Urban Track, but kudos for the catty passive-aggressive swipe, regardless) finished dead last among the Phase IV finalists, bested by Desert All Over Brush, Woodland Track and Scorpion (aka Multicam). Further, the overall "winner", Desert All Over Brush, was chosen for its performance across the spectrum of the three tested environments (desert, woodland and urban), not for outstanding performance in a single environment, although unsurprisingly it peformed better in desert and urban terrains. In others words, it was a better "jack of all trades; master of none" than the other patterns, in the opinion of the selection panel. Interestingly enough, however, Desert All Over Brush was not one of the two finalist patterns, which were the two bottom performers--Multicam and Urban Track.
Razor
Your right about everything you say in your post. Though I’m not sure what you’re arguing. Yes urban track did not finish first in any area of the testing. Except one of the urban tests. The weaknesses associated with it during the trials were put down to the use of black on the uniform. Criticising the prototype before adjusting is a bit premature. Though the use of black remains a contentious issue amount camouflage developers and testers its removal from the urban track pattern was judged to have fixed the flaws associated with it.
PEO Response to criticism of the UCP
‘There has been much discussion about the Universal Camouflage Pattern used on the ACU. Extensive laboratory and field tests were conducted on 11 candidate patterns and colors during development. MultiCam, then called Scorpion, was one of the patterns subjected to a series of laboratory and field evaluations, in multiple, realistic, operational environments under varied terrain and lighting conditions in 2003-04. The camouflage pattern selected was determined to provide the best overall effective concealment in multiple, operational environments, including urban, woodland, and desert scenarios.’
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003418.html
While I will accept criticism of the assumption the testers made in relation to black; namely that its removal would remove urban track’s flaws. I’m not sure I can be so accommodating in relation to your assumptions about my argument.
For an interesting article by hyperstealth biotech on the use of black in uniforms
http://www.hyperstealth.com/acupat/
Note there is an opposition argument about black arguably more detectable when moving. I’m not sure what side of the black in uniform debate I’m on.
My assertion, one that I’m not sure you’ve spoken to is that testing in desert, woodland, urban and desert urban was not sufficient to provide a decent camouflage outcome for the future force warrior program. Within the parameters set, the UCP was the best pattern they could get. I’m sure if they tested it again with a more diverse set of terrains they would have discovered that the patterns flaws were probably broader than the use of black in its texturing. Almost all PEO responses to the discussion of the camouflage choice sight its ‘tested’ superiority in the mentioned areas. My statement about the Camo being the best for the desert should be taken in that context. What the PRO responses don’t do is discuss whether those areas are the ones being encountered by soldiers under fire.
There has been a lot of conspiracy debate over the decision to use the Urban Track pattern. It seems to me that the discussion for the most part needs to be about the testing procedure itself. Considering the amount of money involved the United States Military probably should have seen this coming. Most of my familiarity with this issue is from the position of an outsider. My knowledge about testing procedure comes from my own country and may not be totally applicable. Also our Aussie desert camouflage (DPDU) looks like a packet of brown jelly beans. Probably why were using Auscam in parts of Afghanistan. My country needs a discussion like this, because Auscam, though surprisingly effective (this is luck, because we have a similar coloured environment, the Brits would be screwed if they tried to use DPM) was not designed for Afghanistan nor does it take advantage of a digitised pattern. I wish the discussion about camouflage was like this in our country.
As previosly stated it also seems that the argument has already been made about the ACU in Afghanistan
Recently the army has decided to order a new combat uniform for Afghanistan. An article in the army times, quoting HR2346 pointed out that while functional in Iraq it was not suited for Afghanistan. The House Resolution Ordered The DOD to:
There is also a report on the matter floating around. It was attached to HR 2346. Have not been able to find it.
‘Take immediate action to provide combat uniforms to personnel deployed to Afghanistan with a camouflage pattern that is suited to the environment of Afghanistan’
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/06/military_afghanistan_uniforms_061509w/
Here is an interesting little piece on the UCP, it gives some discussion (unofficial) of the bias towards what the trails saw as ‘currant and future operating environments’
http://www.slate.com/id/2106359/
Slantwire
06-24-2009, 07:21
Criticising the prototype before adjusting is a bit premature.
Deciding that black swatches contributed to Urban Track's failure is perfectly fair. Deciding that removing black from the pattern would improve it, is a logical next step. The decision to adjust one pattern without considering adjustments to the other patterns, strikes me as odd.
Declaring the adjusted Urban Track prototype to be the winner without testing the adjusted pattern would be more premature than criticizing the original Urban Track.
The Reaper
06-24-2009, 09:24
This is based on 30 years of military experience, not on any Natick study.
Black, in a uniform intended to be laundered, will never stay black, it quickly fades to shades of charcoal and gray, which frequently occur in nature.
Beyond very close ranges, the colors of camo lose their individual identity and become a conglomeration recognized only as the overall shade of the individual colors. BDUs become a brownish green. DCUs appear tan, ACUs appear a greenish tan, which I have not often seen in the areas I have operated, with the possible exception of a savannah or chaparral, in certain seasons.
The overall color of the ACUs made it a liability in a forest or jungle environment. It was also not particularly effective at night, due to its light colors, which means that it stood out about half of the time, in any environment.
I did not see the problem with having different uniforms for different theaters. We isssued overwhites for snowy areas, didn't we? We have cold weather gear for cold climates, and hot weather gear for hot environments. The overall cost to DA to maintain extra uniforms, plate carriers, rucks, etc. would likely be a drop in the bucket, in the big picture.
The Crye MC looks good and seems to perform well in almost all environments. I do not think that there is a better pattern if we are limited to a single uniform. On the other hand, the costs are very high, and Crye may have some issues making enough for a refit of half a million troops.
Time will tell, but IMHO, the ACU is flawed in camo and in design, and was a mistake.
TR
The Reaper
06-24-2009, 09:25
This is based on 30 years of military experience, not on any Natick study.
Black, in a uniform intended to be laundered, will never stay black, it quickly fades to shades of charcoal and gray, which frequently occur in nature.
Beyond very close ranges, the colors of camo lose their individual identity and become a conglomeration recognized only as the overall blended shade of the individual colors. BDUs become a brownish green. DCUs appear tan, ACUs appear a greenish tan, which I have not often seen in the areas I have operated, with the possible exception of a savannah or chaparral, in certain seasons.
The overall color of the ACUs made it a liability in a forest or jungle environment. It was also not particularly effective at night, due to its light colors, which means that it stood out about half of the time, in any environment.
I did not see the problem with having different uniforms for different theaters. We isssued overwhites for snowy areas, didn't we? We have cold weather gear for cold climates, and hot weather gear for hot environments. The overall cost to DA to maintain extra uniforms, plate carriers, rucks, etc. would likely be a drop in the bucket, in the big picture.
The Crye MC looks good and seems to perform well in almost all environments. I do not think that there is a better pattern if we are limited to a single uniform. On the other hand, the costs are very high, and Crye may have some issues making enough for a refit of half a million troops.
Time will tell, but IMHO, the ACU is flawed in camo and in design, and was a mistake.
TR
Eagle5US
06-24-2009, 09:30
‘Take immediate action to provide combat uniforms to personnel deployed to Afghanistan with a camouflage pattern that is suited to the environment of Afghanistan’
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/06/military_afghanistan_uniforms_061509w/
Here is an interesting little piece on the UCP, it gives some discussion (unofficial) of the bias towards what the trails saw as ‘currant and future operating environments’
http://www.slate.com/id/2106359/
Well, I am getting RFI in about 3 weeks en-route to Afghanistan with the 82nd ABN...dime to doughnuts I get more ACU:rolleyes:
I'll post up after issue...
Eagle
Though I’m not sure what you’re arguing...
Let me clarify it for you:
ACU was chosen over the other camouflage patters (sic) because apparently it functions better in the desert.
Note your bolded words. From the Natick sources listed in this thread, UCP/Urban Track was not the best pattern for use in the desert, as you asserted in the quote above; rather, Desert All Over Brush (DAOB) outperformed Urban Track in both desert and urban environments, during the day and at night, according to Natick's testing. According to test results, Urban Track only beat DAOB in the daytime woodland environment test at Ft. Benning, and the night IR woodland environment tests at Ft. Benning and Ft. Polk. I've spent quality time in the woods at Ft. Benning, and I have a hard time accepting that UCP adequately concealed its wearer against the daytime colors that predominate there, but that's neither here nor there.
My argument is that your statement that UCP was chosen for its superior performance in desert environments is both unsupported and incorrect.
Further, using a Slate article written by an art, design and automotive author gives the appearance of grasping at straws, rather than strengthening your position.
As a self-admitted outsider to the R&D and selection processes of the US Army, it may be a better choice to simply remain silent regarding them, than make definitive statements based on conjecture.
Dozer523
06-24-2009, 10:18
". . . Desert All Over Brush, was chosen for its performance across the spectrum of the three tested environments (desert, woodland and urban), not for outstanding performance in a single environment, although unsurprisingly it peformed better in desert and urban terrains. In others words, it was a better "jack of all trades; master of none" than the other patterns, in the opinion of the selection panel. Interestingly enough, however, Desert All Over Brush was not one of the two finalist patterns, which were the two bottom performers--Multicam and Urban Track.
Richard,
Do you think a LOM will be enough?;)
There is a really good peice in the latest army times that really rips into the ACU for the reasons people have been mentioning. I can't link to it because of subscription issues. If you have one give it a read.
TR
I totally agree with you,
Its also good to see some discussion about the use of black. I would like to get more opinions on whether its use/disuse is a good idea. I really have not been able to make my mind up about it.
Razor
Please just let it go mate, your ignoring the testing the UCP was put through after the initial trial. Your also not talking about the category limitations.
There is a really good peice in the latest army times that really rips into the ACU for the reasons people have been mentioning. I can't link to it because of subscription issues. If you have one give it a read.
TR
I totally agree with you,
Its also good to see some discussion about the use of black. I would like to get more opinions on whether its use/disuse is a good idea. I really have not been able to make my mind up about it.
Razor
Please just let it go mate, your ignoring the testing the UCP was put through after the initial trial. Your also not talking about the category limitations.
As far as the Black go's. Twice now, one time very recently. We tried a Black Uniform. Like stated above. Black uniforms fade to Grey. We just field tested a Black Uniform. After one week on the Range, only washed once. It faded considerably.
The Reaper
06-24-2009, 15:14
There is a really good peice in the latest army times that really rips into the ACU for the reasons people have been mentioning. I can't link to it because of subscription issues. If you have one give it a read.
TR
I totally agree with you,
Its also good to see some discussion about the use of black. I would like to get more opinions on whether its use/disuse is a good idea. I really have not been able to make my mind up about it.
Razor
Please just let it go mate, your ignoring the testing the UCP was put through after the initial trial. Your also not talking about the category limitations.
Cadet:
I think you should consider your status here when interacting with QPs and the staff, mate.
Have a very SF day.
TR
.... Black uniforms fade to Grey. We just field tested a Black Uniform......
Black Uniforms look really cool....
But in a prone position in an exposed position on a hot sunny they suck.
Well, we used to wear a uniform for about 20 years. Green Utilities in the 50s to 70s, jungles mid-60s to mid 80s, BDUs early 80s into the 00s.
Now we've got it down to 20/30 months or so. Dang, just when all the extras come on line it's time to change out for a new one.
rubberneck
06-24-2009, 15:39
On the other hand, the costs are very high, and Crye may have some issues making enough for a refit of half a million troops.
TR
Is there anything that would prevent the army from buying a license to use the multicam pattern from Crye and then using other vendors to make the uniforms? As a businessman if I had a superior product but lacked the capacity to fill an order that size, that would probably the route that I would take. I'd rather have a big fat royalty check rolling in and my product being used, rather than to have a great design that can't be implemented on a large scale.
Black Uniforms look really cool....
But in a prone position in an exposed position on a hot sunny they suck.
Well, we used to wear a uniform for about 20 years. Green Utilities in the 50s to 70s, jungles mid-60s to mid 80s, BDUs early 80s into the 00s.
Now we've got it down to 20/30 months or so. Dang, just when all the extras come on line it's time to change out for a new one.
You're right, It's not only the uniform, its all the kit. Body armor, helmet covers, all the pouches, rucksacks, camelbacks etc. as well... All bought with big army $$.
Guess what... the minute that the Army "officially" calls the ACU pattern a mistake, then all the minions will be free to do the same and then re-order (or simply get re-RFI'd) the same stuff in a pattern that won't stand out like a whore in church when worn against a uniform of another patter (like multicam, for example)...
It boggles my mind that, while in the middle of a war, we decide to adopt the worst performer that turns out to be so bad that we are looking for a replacement damn near as soon as we convert everythign over to the new patter and we're not talkign about wholesale firings, and/or recalling now-retired decision-makers on the carpet to explain their decision making process.
Boggles my mind from a war-fighting perspective and from the position of fiscal responsibility.
Dozer523
06-25-2009, 08:34
I remember in the early 80's when we switched from the perma-press tuck-in- the-shirt, back-pocket-buttons-got-caught-on-everything-and-popped-off, sure wish you could actually USE the other pockets, ohhhhhh and what a nice baseball cap to the initial BDU. That was SO cool, tucked out, lotsa useable pockets and oooohhhhh camoflage (just like the cool Armies).:cool:
Then the black in the patterns turned blue!:mad:
Which wasn't that bad . . . cause we were issued jungles. Jungles are mega- Cool! (They had pockets INSIDE pockets!) And you could get into the chest pockets. And you could sew on all your "chesticles". And your branch! oh well . . . :boohoo
69harley
06-26-2009, 06:39
Seems like the Marines got it right. But then the Marines have always had the best uniform.
Could the Army use the Marine pattern/colors but have a version made that does not have the USMC markings in the pattern?
Allot of talk has been about the two Marine color patterns and how great they are. Why cant the Army use them?
This would also sort of get most service members back to having the same uniform.
Dozer523
06-26-2009, 07:47
Seems like the Marines got it right. But then the Marines have always had the best uniform.
Could the Army use the Marine pattern/colors but have a version made that does not have the USMC markings in the pattern?
Allot of talk has been about the two Marine color patterns and how great they are. Why cant the Army use them?
This would also sort of get most service members back to having the same uniform.
Right. I really like the way USMC worked all that yellow into the scheme. But, as far as "the Marines have always had the best uniform" that's what Harry Truman thought obout the "sea-going bellhops".
Jake0331
06-26-2009, 20:37
The Marine digitals ("digies") were being phased in when I was on my last half of my contract. It is obviously better than the old woodlands or tri-colors, but the colors are still bold and don't do nearly as well as the Multicam pattern. My biggest gripe about the digies is the way they fit; way too tight every place compared to the old style BDUs. When I was in Asskrakistan, I read a Marine Corps Times article that mentioned that the new tailoring was made while keeping in mind that women must wear the uniform as well. After all, it is so important to have your non-combatants look nice, and feel nice, too. Needless to say, none of my shit fit, and I never wore them except for my last tour when it was required. I rejected the "relish" and was fortunate enough, since I was issued the old BDUs, to be able to wear them until my separation. I like the shoulder pockets, by the way.
Are the ACUs tailored differently compared to the old BDUs? And how about some of the Crye gear? Interesting to know.
Bottom line is someone in the acquisitions departments of all the services has a distant cousin making new patterns or some sort of sweetheart deal waiting for them should they jump on all these new uniforms.
Oldschool45B
06-28-2009, 12:33
I found this interesting....
Eagle5US
06-28-2009, 13:11
I found this interesting....
ummm...what:confused:
Dozer523
06-28-2009, 16:25
ummm...what:confused:
Yeah. . . me too:confused:
I found this interesting....
I see what you're saying.;) But then, in this case, that may not necessarily be a good thing.
Is there anything that would prevent the army from buying a license to use the multicam pattern from Crye and then using other vendors to make the uniforms? As a businessman if I had a superior product but lacked the capacity to fill an order that size, that would probably the route that I would take. I'd rather have a big fat royalty check rolling in and my product being used, rather than to have a great design that can't be implemented on a large scale.
FWIW, I like your question.
IIRC, some vendors already license multi-cam for their own products. TAD Gear comes to mind immediately but that list also includes Arc'Teryx, Kifaru International, and Dropzone Tactical.
I found this interesting....
It is the pattern not how often it repeats.
Look at the wall paper in your house, same thing.
The larger the drum at printing the more distance between repeats.
Oldschool45B
06-28-2009, 18:33
What I found interesting is that the original CADPAT, MARPAT, ACU's and the new Navy pattern all seem to use the same algorithm in their pattern generation. Everyone gets accused of copying so and so (It has been said the Army copied the Marine pattern, mostly by Marines of course) and then claim their pattern is unique and they didn't copy anyone, but when in reality the only thing different is the color schemes. And we all are copying the Canadians.
I wonder how much R&D money was actually spent in designing the new uniforms....... After all, changing colors can be sooooo trying sometimes. It makes me sick to think about how much money has been wasted on the ACU's, from R&D to fielding. What a joke.
ummm...what:confused:
Yeah. . . me too:confused:My "creative" side of the brain ain't working I guess.:confused:
Stay safe.
Jake0331
06-29-2009, 00:46
Good find, Oldschool. Someone's collecting a fat royalty check. So is his brother, General so-and-so who keeps pimping the design to all the services.
Utah Bob
06-29-2009, 07:20
I found this interesting....
I think those red stripes would give you away.:D
Grand58742
07-23-2009, 02:19
Just for the sake of curiosity, how much would it cost per soldier to outfit the Army with a new camouflage pattern? Not just SOF units, but the "big Army" as a whole. I figure someone out here has a ball park figure. I saw the RFI cost when I went through ILO training a couple of years ago, but didn't pay much attention as I signed my life away.
New uniforms (four?), basic RFI issue: load carrying system, field gear like rucks, sleeping systems, OTV covers, helmet covers, etcetera.
Just being curious. Google didn't come up with anything that I could find.
Eagle5US
08-06-2009, 15:22
Deploying with a non-SOF, ABN BCT
Everything is ACU.
When I asked about multi-cam stuff being issued...the contractor dude laughed and said we would probably be in Iran before multi-cam was issued out:D
Eagle
Smokin Joe
08-06-2009, 18:22
Deploying with a non-SOF, ABN BCT
Everything is ACU.
When I asked about multi-cam stuff being issued...the contractor dude laughed and said we would probably be in Iran before multi-cam was issued out:D
Eagle
Good luck and stay safe Doc!
Just for the sake of curiosity, how much would it cost per soldier to outfit the Army with a new camouflage pattern? Not just SOF units, but the "big Army" as a whole. I figure someone out here has a ball park figure. I saw the RFI cost when I went through ILO training a couple of years ago, but didn't pay much attention as I signed my life away.
New uniforms (four?), basic RFI issue: load carrying system, field gear like rucks, sleeping systems, OTV covers, helmet covers, etcetera.
Just being curious. Google didn't come up with anything that I could find.
estimates for total force is in excess of $5 Billion
Tatonka316
08-06-2009, 19:56
Well done, Utah Bob! I needed that laugh!!!
Peregrino
08-06-2009, 21:17
Deploying with a non-SOF, ABN BCT
Everything is ACU.
When I asked about multi-cam stuff being issued...the contractor dude laughed and said we would probably be in Iran before multi-cam was issued out:D
Eagle
Your contractor contact's comment might not be as humerous as he thinks if the current foreign policy team keeps "winning friends and influencing enemies". We could be there as quickly as the next election cycle. :(
When I asked about multi-cam stuff being issued...the contractor dude laughed and said we would probably be in Iran before multi-cam was issued out.
Maybe going with burqas or a mullah's garb might be a better option then. :rolleyes:
Richard's $.02 :munchin
JoJoTheMonk
08-13-2009, 00:37
Check out the new Army Times, it talks about how Congress told Big Army to pick a new uniform camo by September. Looks like they are looking into Multicam since SOF has been using it for some time. Whether or not they will actually pick Crye's Multicam unlike last time or they might do a variation of the camo.
Surgicalcric
08-13-2009, 00:42
Check out the new Army Times...
You need to check out the email you received when you registered here and follow the instructions contained therein.
Oh, welcome to PS.com.
Crip
LongWire
08-18-2009, 04:23
Army Times~
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/08/army_camo_081709w/
New camo for Afghanistan?
By Matthew Cox - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Aug 17, 2009 16:45:16 EDT
The Army is eyeing MultiCam, a camouflage pattern preferred by special operations forces, to replace the pixelated pattern on the combat uniforms soldiers wear in Afghanistan.
The hunt for a new camo design follows a growing groundswell of rank-and-file criticism that the current pattern on the Army Combat Uniform is ineffective in the rugged Afghan terrain — and elsewhere.
“The general consensus on the ACU pattern among many, many soldiers is that it is ineffective in breaking up a soldier’s outline in just about every environment except in urban areas and the local gravel pit,” Army Chief Warrant Officer 2 mark Ulsh wrote to Army Times. “As an aviator, I can tell you that from the air most other nations’ camouflage masks a soldier better than the ACU does.”
Similar complaints made their way to an influential member of Congress, who gave senior Army leaders a Sept. 30 deadline to present a plan that includes the budgetary and logistical details for outfitting roughly 40,000 soldiers serving in Afghanistan with a new camouflage pattern.
The directive to find an alternative to the Universal Camouflage Pattern comes just five years after it was introduced as the one-and-only camo design. It replaced both the Desert Camouflage Uniform and the woodland-patterned Battle Dress Uniform. Though the move to streamline soldiers’ clothing bags was generally applauded, many complained the result was a pattern that was not particularly effective in either desert or woodland surroundings.
Complaints about its ineffectiveness have grown as the Army has increased the number of soldiers deployed to Afghanistan.
Program Executive Office Soldier, the command responsible for developing uniforms and equipment, declined to be interviewed for this story.
“PEO Soldier and the Army continually strive to provide the best to our soldiers,” Army spokesman Maj. Jimmie Cummings said in an Aug. 6 written statement. “As such, a team led by Training and Doctrine Command is working an effort to determine if a change is required to our Universal Camouflage Pattern in support of soldiers operating in many different environments. It is premature to go into any detail on this effort at this time.”
Army officials, however, held a July 23 meeting with Crye Precision LLC, the company that developed MultiCam, to ask detailed questions about the availability of different MultiCam fabrics for making uniforms and soldier equipment, according to a source familiar with the issue who commented on the condition that he not be identified.
This meeting, however, was not the first time Army uniform officials saw the pattern that features seven shades of brown, tan and green. MultiCam, formerly known as “Scorpion,” was a top contender among a dozen experimental patterns when the Army began looking for a new camouflage design in early 2002 to replace the DCU and BDU.
But the Army passed on MultiCam in favor of a new pattern that PEO Soldier created with a digitized version of another contender, the “urban track” pattern. The Army modified that pattern by stripping out the highly visible black shade. The ACU’s mix of green, tan and gray would later become known as the Universal Camouflage Pattern.
In going with a digitized UCP, the Army followed the lead of the Marine Corps, which began fielding its new digitized pattern in 2002. The Army also considered the woodland and desert versions of the popular Marine digital uniform, but rejected the design in favor of a single, multiuse pattern.
INVESTIGATING COMPLAINTS
Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., launched the congressional camouflage mandate in mid-June, saying that he had heard complaints from “a dozen” Army noncommissioned officers that that ACU’s pattern is ineffective in Afghanistan.
Since then, dozens of soldiers have responded to an Army Times query seeking opinions of the Army’s current camouflage.
“The Army needs a new uniform, period. Not just for Afghanistan,” wrote 2nd Lt. Chris Cahak, who is serving in Iraq at Forward Operating Base Future. “The ACU uses ‘universal camouflage,’ meaning it doesn’t blend into anything. The article [‘Get new camo, Congress says,’ June 29] says the ACU works fine in Iraq, but that is a myth. There is no natural setting that I have seen anywhere that blends in with the ACU.”
Sgt. Ricky Hill of Fort Carson, Colo., agreed with Cahak that soldiers in Afghanistan aren’t the only ones who need a new camouflage pattern.
“The ACU pattern is horrible,” Hill wrote. “Whatever happened to the MultiCam pattern that was tested a few years ago? I don’t know who came up with this current ACU pattern, but it has failed miserably.”
Several soldiers who have written to Army Times defended the ACU pattern’s performance.
Sgt. 1st Class Ryan Hendricks wrote that the ACU’s performance was “spot on” when he was a platoon sergeant serving in Khost, Afghanistan.
“The ACUs we wore were perfect for the job of mountain warfare and in the towns and roads that we patrolled,” he wrote. “A lot of the time, I would have to use optics to find my squads patrolling in the distance.”
Capt. Joe Corsentino offered a different view.
“Being an aviator, I get a top-down view of the battlefield, and I can tell you 100 percent that the ACU stands out like a sore thumb in the Afghan environment,” he wrote.
many Army special operations units such as Delta Force, the 75th Ranger Regiment and some Special Forces teams apparently feel the UCP is not the best pattern in either war zone as they are wearing the MultiCam pattern in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Army Special Operations Command has tested MultiCam in different environments worldwide, including Iraq and Afghanistan, and found that it outperformed the ACU’s pattern, a senior Army officer with Special Forces told Army Times. The officer added that MultiCam is being considered as the future pattern of Army SOF.
Corsentino said in his letter that he also prefers MultiCam.
“I have worked with units who wore the MultiCam uniforms, and they were camouflaged much more effectively than soldiers wearing the ACU,” he wrote.
Soldiers participating in a Future Force Warrior Assessment in 2006 had the same opinion of MultiCam.
The nine-man squad that participated in the Air Assault Expeditionary Force experiment in fall 2006 at Fort Benning, Ga., wore MultiCam-patterned, Future Force Warrior uniforms in addition to a number of high-tech gadgets and gear. The force-on-force exercise was designed to assess how the experimental soldier kit would affect the performance of soldiers going against soldiers with the current-issue kit.
One of the questions in the post-exercise survey read, “Was the camouflage pattern of the FFW uniform not as good, about the same or better than the camo pattern on the ACU?”
All nine soldiers indicated that the MultiCam pattern was better than the ACU’s pattern, according to the July 2007 report from the Army Research Laboratory’s “Future Force Warrior: Insights from Air Assault Expeditionary Force Assessment.”
Here are the soldiers’ comments as they appeared in the report:
• “It blends better in the woods than the ACU.”
• “Got 5 feet from the OpFor and they didn’t see us until after we fired. With the ACUs, you’ll be seen a mile away.”
• “Numerous amount of times, we snuck within 10 feet of the enemies.”
• “I even lost my own guys a couple of times it worked so well.”
• “I’m telling you this uniform is way better in the field than ACUs. In fact, ACUs are nothing but a garrison uniform.”
• “It’s obvious; just look at it.”
• “The camouflage pattern is 50x better than the ACU uniform. When stationary or on the move it is hard to pick out in the tree line. The squads behind ours had trouble following us because they would lose sight of us so easily. We always knew where they were.”
• “We were having trouble seeing our guys when we would stop in the wood line, whereas anyone wearing ACUs was easy to spot. It is a far superior camouflage pattern than the ACU.”
LongWire
08-18-2009, 04:24
Crye Precision began working on camouflage in 2002, two years after Caleb Crye formed the company. The company had already been working with the Army to develop new soldier equipment. Then Crye became interested in designing a camouflage pattern that would allow soldiers to operate in multiple environments.
“We saw guys being deployed to a war in Afghanistan with a combination of camouflage patterns that just wasn’t effective,” Crye said, describing how soldiers at the time wore DCUs with woodland pattern body armor vests.
No one in the small company, including Crye, had military backgrounds, said Crye, who has a fine arts degree. The Crye team traveled extensively, taking pictures of terrain features, rocks and vegetation.
“We didn’t look at camouflage so much; we looked at a lot of environments, and we tried to find a lot of things that were common in as many environments as possible,” he told Army Times.
“If you start looking at pictures of rocks all day, there are just these shapes that show up.”
They also paid attention to the way animals use camouflage.
“We knew it was going to be half science, half trial and error,” Crye said. “Before we settled on printing real fabric, we probably had about 12 patterns. The first ones were really different.”
Still, MultiCam alone may not be the answer, some soldiers say.
“The Army should have one desert pattern and one woodland pattern, at a minimum,” Sgt. Adam Houtkooper wrote in a letter to Army Times. “Afghanistan varies widely in the amount and type of vegetation, so no one uniform will work for the entire country. … The bottom line is that bad camouflage risks soldiers’ lives, and the decision to force every soldier to wear a pattern that is ineffective has reduced the effectiveness of our force.”
Ive always liked how the night desert parka blends :D
In the news again, with some decent pictures and a pretty graph.
http://soldiersystems.net/2009/09/18/natick-camo-study-making-sense-part-ii/
The patterns are horrible, I can see every one of those people! :D
pjody187
09-21-2009, 10:04
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/09/army_new_camo_091409w/
LongWire
09-21-2009, 17:31
Knowing the army they will try and go with the UCP D pattern. That way they can retrofit everyone and save money to boot. The retrofit kit will include a cardboard cut out stencil and a rattle can of coyote brown. :D
Should be interesting to see what they come up with!!!!
Knowing the army they will try and go with the UCP D pattern. That way they can retrofit everyone and save money to boot. The retrofit kit will include a cardboard cut out stencil and a rattle can of coyote brown. :D
Should be interesting to see what they come up with!!!!
That will be the hope.
Look, IMO that pattern was thrown in there so that the Army can say that they were "partially right" in coming up with the abortion of a camo pattern that we have now. THe UCP-D is the Army's attempt to save face.
And there are people that will wear it in combat to give the Army that opportunity. I wonder what criteria that they used to come up with that pattern as "finalist " for the replacement of the ACU. Nevermind, I know... the criteria is that damn near ANY pattern would be better.
Monsoon65
09-24-2009, 17:39
Knowing the army they will try and go with the UCP D pattern. That way they can retrofit everyone and save money to boot. The retrofit kit will include a cardboard cut out stencil and a rattle can of coyote brown. :D
Should be interesting to see what they come up with!!!!
Quick, quick!! Market that idea to the Army. You'll be rolling in the greenbacks!!!
So, let me figure this chart out, multicam is the solution to a "one pattern" camo? It is after all the highest on ALL three areas. I mean come on, why would those sneaky-peat elite types be buying this stuff and wearing it other than to look cool in the chow-hall?
You know I freely admit that I'm not as smart as those brains at PEO Soldier. But why the fascination with urban camouflage? Woodland, jungle, desert, snow etc. But urban?
Dress like the natives...:D
Stay safe.
Seems to me the USMC comes out on top by using two seperate patterns. Why oh why is the USMC smarter than us?
x/S
I've gone to war wearing levi's, jungle boots and an MTV t-shirt, (it had a picture of Modonna, like a virgin on the back), picked it up in Cabo for $5.00
The rest of the team had similar threads, we fit in the scene quite well
Who likes the looks of the avatar to the left? War shirt worn by the 80% of the plains indians, circa 600BC until 1920's. It worked very well, took a variety of vegtable and plant dies. Quiet against tree branches, wore well over rock.
But the US uniform of the 7th cav, now that was great! Big brass bottons in the sun shine. O.k., o.k., they had better weapons, un-interrupted supply trains, more troops. But we faught a good fight.
Novice Snowflake
09-26-2009, 18:55
My guess is the Army will pick this one :D
http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/4590/digitalsocompatterne.jpg
Until then have to wait until 30 Sept.
My problem with the other camo is after a few washes.
Will it look faded like the current ACU :confused:
http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/3595/digitalmulticamey6.jpg
Think about it the current ACU and compare it with these three camo patterns.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Army_Combat_Uniform.jpg
My guts tell me the new ACU's will be in dark green. :cool:
LongWire
09-28-2009, 04:05
Best is the way the AF does things................ :D
I like the guy in the back row on the left without his cool blue baseball cap on - must've thought he was still on the flight-line. :D
Richard
Utah Bob
09-28-2009, 08:14
Best is the way the AF does things................ :D
Hilarious! :D
Defender968
09-28-2009, 08:43
Shaking my head, I'm very glad I'm not part of that goat rope of a service any more.
LongWire
09-28-2009, 09:24
Hilarious! :D
You cant make this shit up!!!! :D
I'm thinking there may just be way too many choices out there and its confusing the hell out of everybody - things were far simpler when all we had were OD Jungle Fatgues and aerosol cans of flat black spray paint. :D
And so it goes...:munchin
I'm thinking there may just be way too many choices out there and its confusing the hell out of everybody - things were far simpler when all we had were OD Jungle Fatgues and aerosol cans of flat black spray paint. :D
And so it goes...:munchin
I think Richards correct..
Our mil contractors only gain from the confusion and continued debate. The only salvation,, Grunts eat uniforms, so they need to be repurchased on a regular basis.
Personally,, I think low bid, with ANY pattern available.. With mix-n-match.. Let the choice be at Div level.. Similar bidding contracts are use in other countries..
Set up minimum standards for: Seasonal, Thermal, Info Red infrared, Fire Retardant, then camo of choice..
My $00.0002
Tx Bob
The Reaper
09-28-2009, 11:59
That should help with fratricide, given that just eight years ago, all services wore the BDU or DCU, and now we have a dozen or more camo patterns, and are looking to make it worse.
You don't just have to buy uniforms. All of the TA50 gear, to include everything from Gore-Tex to ammo pouches will change as well. That is where the money is.
TR
Utah Bob
09-28-2009, 12:57
I think Richards correct..
Our mil contractors only gain from the confusion and continued debate. The only salvation,, Grunts eat uniforms, so they need to be repurchased on a regular basis.
Personally,, I think low bid, with ANY pattern available.. With mix-n-match.. Let the choice be at Div level.. Similar bidding contracts are use in other countries..
Set up minimum standards for: Seasonal, Thermal, Info Red, Fire Retardant, then camo of choice..
My $00.0002
I thought that was Pravda.;)
Utah Bob
09-28-2009, 13:01
All I wear these days is western duds. I call it a Mickey Gilley suit.
Maximusoptimus
10-25-2009, 10:07
Here is an example of Danish M/84 Camo Woodland
The first tests of the BDU is made in 1978 under the name T/78
http://leifnoerholm.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/hjemmev-1.jpeg
I can not understand why you have so many camo uniforms in usa
this is probably the best woodland patten ever made.
Danny Muj
10-25-2009, 19:29
The Marine uniform was developed specifically for environments like these....
http://www.atari.com/us/images/games/FBK2/consolepc/1.jpg
You'll be surprised to know that there is a platoon of Marines hiding in the woodline above the crocodiles, perfectly camouflaged.
Eagle5US
10-25-2009, 20:53
Small update-
-Multi-Cam is in country (Stan)
-It is being issued to specific units (outside of SOF) who are in remote locations
-The new pants and spiderman tops with the built in, exterior, knee and elbow are being issued to these units (outside of SOF) as well
-It's only for uniform items, no kit
-I have worn the new issue "Mountain Boot" by Danner for the past 4 months - absolutely LOVE THEM. Comfortable, rugged, not too awfully hot, mondo support for ankle and arch. It was a good choice.
Eagle
Abu Jack
10-30-2009, 11:43
Someguys have it:
From the Log in page of AKO.
Sgt. Nicholas Irving, of 3rd Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment, takes aim during the "Defensive Shoot" event at Wagner Range on Fort Benning, Ga., during the Ninth annual U.S. Army International Sniper Competition held Oct. 15-22. (Photo by U.S. Army)
bravo22b
12-20-2009, 17:10
British troops to get first new camouflage in 40 years
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/12/20/uk.army.camouflage/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn
I think I've seen that pattern somewhere before...:eek:
Ok whats the verdict. They keep asking me here at MARSOC what is the Army going to use, are they changing, going to MC?
Is the Army going to change over to MC. Or are they going to change over to their version of MC, that sucks.
Saw this link on another board and found the ACU camo pattern interesting. Looks like a woodland but very different that USMC woodland. Reminds me of German camo.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2009/12/15/starr.afghan.supply.lines.cnn?iref=allsearch
Surgicalcric
12-20-2009, 18:42
First time I have seen the UCP-Delta in the field. To be quite honest it looks pretty good. Would love to see more footage/pics of it being used but it is already 100% improvement over the initial UCP...
Natick, bringing soldiers substandard gear since their inception...
LongWire
12-20-2009, 20:31
Ok whats the verdict. They keep asking me here at MARSOC what is the Army going to use, are they changing, going to MC?
Is the Army going to change over to MC. Or are they going to change over to their version of MC, that sucks.
From what I understand, or at least have heard, is that the ruling won't be until next month.
NousDefionsDoc
12-20-2009, 22:55
I'll bet a case of beer they don't go to MC.
Here's the story and reasoning behind the UKs change in uniform pattern - the video explanation for it all actually makes a lot of sense and something it might be worthwhile for our R&D ffolkes to consider in the future.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8422942.stm
Richard's $.02 :munchin
I'll bet a case of beer they don't go to MC.
I don't like the odds on that bet. Adopting ACU Delta will be a political face-saving move with our current abortion of a camo pattern painted as "almost right" and a "step in the right direction that just needed tweaking".
If the Army pics MC over ACU Delta, I'll be more than a little surprised.
Somehow I don't see the Brits needing to change their camo again in a couple of years down the road.
Lately I have been on another web site with mostly British active duty and retired who want two things to happen:
1) Keep the DPM
and...
2) Bring back the FN FAL (SLR/L1A1)
longrange1947
12-21-2009, 12:23
Just as a point of interest, Multi Terrain type camo is what is needed. If you make only a desert pattern and move very far at all you could move through arid and then semi arid to forested. What do you do, change uniforms as you move?
That is what the Big Army is looking at now to replace the crap called ACU. The digital stuff does not work. Multi Cam maybe the choice but this time it will be properly tested and vetted.
I thought this was interesting and didn't see it posted.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/12/16/letter.pdf
Above is a letter dated 10 Dec from Reps Skelton & Ortiz addressed to SecDef & CJCS querying soldiers' complaints related to:
Rucks
Training (cites soldiers going from BCT to warzone)
ACU (cites MC)
M4 (asks what SOF are using)
Streck-Fu
12-21-2009, 15:06
I thought this was interesting and didn't see it posted.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/12/16/letter.pdf (http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/12/16/letter.pdf://)
Your link is defective (has duplicated 'httphttp' and has the '://' misplaced. Looks like a paste typo.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/12/16/letter.pdf
Recent directive issued to us regarding uniforms:
"Wear what makes sense."
Exactly how it should be...within reason, of course.
The problem is that people now tie camoflage to a uniform standard instead of a force protection measure. Sadly this includes some SOF units. So much for "smarter not harder."
MC or UCPDelta either are an improvement over what is issued currently. I have been slowly kitting myself with MC over the last 6 month's. I had MC in Afghanistan when I was there though not issued myself and many other Pathfinders were using it.
I have used MC for a couple of years and it works extremely well in different terrains; grass, high/low desert, forest. If you don't move, near or far (no black outline in the distance), it blends perfectly. Saves in planning and terrain movement selection. Only wish they made it in quieter materials.
I think, not positive, that the military passed on it just before the first digi's came out, the reason being price. (probably because they already spent so much on the digital crap). They should of let the Quiet Professionals test it themselves, then we wouldn't be seeing squares all the time:D
My .02
Exactly how it should be...within reason, of course.
So... I probably should not come to my team with my kit in this new pattern i found?
Peregrino
04-21-2010, 04:53
I think that counts as telling.
PedOncoDoc
04-21-2010, 05:56
So... I probably should not come to my team with my kit in this new pattern i found?
It depends - is your primary AO music conerts for teenage girls? You'd fit right in there... :D
Maybe I missed it in the reading where it this is answered, but are these uniforms supposed to completely replace the ACU or is it just for troops to use in Afghan?
SGT Fonzy
longrange1947
04-21-2010, 17:47
It is to replace the failed ACU pattern, that was a mistake made by a snap judgment. I will leave it at that. :munchin
It is to replace the failed ACU pattern, that was a mistake made by a snap judgment. I will leave it at that. :munchin
snap judgement indeed
It is to replace the failed ACU pattern, that was a mistake made by a snap judgment. I will leave it at that. :munchin
That is outstanding. Am I the only one who is hoping we get sew on badges back? It's a pain to line up an EIB everytime I wash my uniform.
That is outstanding. Am I the only one who is hoping we get sew on badges back? It's a pain to line up an EIB everytime I wash my uniform.
I wouldn't get to hopeful just be glad you can get rid of the ACU first. Doubtful that the army will let a uniform look to functional...
Don't know for sure if this has been posted for sure, but, interesting none-the-less.
www.hyperstealth.com/camo-improvement/index.html
Part 2 is at the end.