PDA

View Full Version : All about Camouflage & BCU (inc cartoons)



SWJED
09-01-2008, 09:44 PM
Moderator's Note: There were seven threads on matters camouflage, BCU etc, including several which featured Oprah and cartoons. All now merged here and the title amended.


Who said Army doctrine writers don't have a sense of humor? Well - okay - but this brought a smile to our small mugs. Kudos CADD and a hat tip to LTC Shawn Stroud for sending this along.


http://www.smallwarsjournal.com/images/caddlife1.jpg

jkm_101_fso
09-11-2008, 05:20 PM
She came to Campbell while I was there, after the infamous "post OIF baby boom", to give away maternity and baby gifts to spouses.

They made her go to Air Assault School, first. She had to conduct two successful rappels from the tower before she could start her show.

Spud
09-13-2008, 08:05 AM
Pearls is without doubt my favourite online comic. Its dry wit and macabre sense of humour has instant appeal with me.

I'm sure Stephen would appreciate the modification to his work.

Rifleman
07-01-2009, 02:21 AM
What will it be? Multicam? A different colored digital? Anyone heard?

Link here: http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2009/06/military_afghanistan_uniforms_061509w/

Hacksaw
07-01-2009, 08:59 PM
Woodland:D

Van
07-01-2009, 11:57 PM
Hyperstealth Biotechnologies (http://www.hyperstealth.com/) did the research that led to the development of the Marine Corps camo, Canadian Camo, Jordanian Camo and many others. They use an extensive body of knowledge from diverse disciplines to develop sophisticated camouflage patterns.

Let's hear what they have to say about the Army pattern:

Designed for multiple environments ARPAT was derived from the U.S. Marines digital MARPAT, however one main difference with ARPAT was the removal of black in the pattern leaving it with three colors and with only one color scheme for Woodland, Desert, and Urban we believe it is equally ineffective in each environment, we affectionately refer to ARPAT as the Alternate Reality Pattern as we cannot determine on what scientific basis it was developed. (Source (http://www.hyperstealth.com/digital-design/index.htm))

As near as I can tell, the Army acquisition corps determined that all of Hyperstealth's experience and research wasn't as credible as the 'feeling' that black was unnecessary in the camo pattern.

The problem is that a pattern needs dark speckling to create the illusion of depth. Without the dark speckling, the colors will appear flat and stand out against the background (the complaint against the current pattern). Note that the discontinued six color "desert day pattern" (AKA "The Chocolate Chip Pattern") had this type of speckling, but was discontinued due to manufacturing costs.

reed11b
07-02-2009, 12:09 AM
My inner geardo votes for multicam...
Reed

George L. Singleton
07-02-2009, 12:57 AM
Hyperstealth Biotechnologies (http://www.hyperstealth.com/) did the research that led to the development of the Marine Corps camo, Canadian Camo, Jordanian Camo and many others. They use an extensive body of knowledge from diverse disciplines to develop sophisticated camouflage patterns.

Let's hear what they have to say about the Army pattern:
(Source (http://www.hyperstealth.com/digital-design/index.htm))

As near as I can tell, the Army acquisition corps determined that all of Hyperstealth's experience and research wasn't as credible as the 'feeling' that black was unnecessary in the camo pattern.

The problem is that a pattern needs dark speckling to create the illusion of depth. Without the dark speckling, the colors will appear flat and stand out against the background (the complaint against the current pattern). Note that the discontinued six color "desert day pattern" (AKA "The Chocolate Chip Pattern") had this type of speckling, but was discontinued due to manufacturing costs.


I vote to spend whatever it takes for effective camo uniforms. Petty penny counting in this time of trillions at war mega costs is stupid and absurd, the responsible bean counters should be summarily fired.

Ken White
07-02-2009, 01:00 AM
IIRC, the Natick rationale was that 'there is no black in nature...' one of the more brilliant statements by any Army proponent for something.

As for Woodland, one would hope not but the Army can be about that stupidly stubborn when someone tells them they have or had a bad idea. Scroll through the picures at the Multicam site (LINK) (http://www.multicampattern.com/gallery.html#) and note the Woodland - Multicam contrasts. The ACU has the same problem Woodland has as it is washed more or in harsh water /soaps, it fades badly and not only loses it anti IR properties but has an enhanced IR / thermal problem. Multicam seems to have found a solution to both problems.

The Army probably will not be willing to pay Crye for a license and will then develop its own pattern -- probably Woodland II which will be about as poor as Woodland was / is. Maybe they'll surprise me and do this right...

I'm with Rifleman and Reed, Multicam's about as good as it gets nowadays.

Added: and with George:
the responsible bean counters should be summarily fired.

IntelTrooper
07-02-2009, 01:33 AM
I've always been a fan of the Afghan Border Police pattern (http://www.towhey.com/Images/Other%20Images/P1010378.JPG), although I don't think it is any more effective at camouflaging the wearer than ACUs.

Rifleman
07-02-2009, 01:54 AM
There's always OG 107s.

After a few days in the field they usually looked like the last thing you had been rolling in, especially if they were a little faded out to start with. ;)

Ken White
07-02-2009, 01:59 AM
with mold? :D

slapout9
07-02-2009, 03:35 AM
Why don't they camouflage themselves like the Afghan population:wry:

jkm_101_fso
07-02-2009, 03:46 AM
Why don't they camouflage themselves like the Afghan population:wry:

Because the CSM's head would explode.

Ken White
07-02-2009, 04:11 AM
Need to make those guys responsible for training, give 'em something to do to keep them from silliness. Most experienced Soldier in a Battalion, theoretically, and no real job. The good ones find things that need doing, the others worry about police call and the type of watch cap being worn (if they allow them at all).

When one of you gentlemen gets to a position of power, change that paragraph in AR 600-200 that says a NCO selected by the Promotion Board will be promoted unless his Commander writes a letter to remove him for cause. Replace it with 'will be promoted when his Commander writes a letter of assent.' Commanders don't have time to write letters to preclude marginal people getting promoted so the slugs slide by. They will take time to write letters only for their really good people thus improving quality.

Promoting people just because they've been around a while is not conducive to rewarding quality performers or getting the best in position to do some good. Nor is promotion by photograph but that's another thread.

Schmedlap
07-02-2009, 04:41 AM
As near as I can tell, the Army acquisition corps determined that all of Hyperstealth's experience and research wasn't as credible as the 'feeling' that black was unnecessary in the camo pattern.

I always wondered what the rationale was for not just copying the Marine camo, rather than wasting money on our own R&D. Once again, the Army does not let me down. I expected nothing any more logical.


IIRC, the Natick rationale was that 'there is no black in nature...' one of the more brilliant statements by any Army proponent for something.

I recall a Ranger Instructor saying something similar. He said that "nothing in nature is completely black." Someone raised his hand and asked, "what about shade?" Pretty good question for someone who probably hasn't slept in 3 days and thinks that his notebook is a candy bar. Regardless, the RI told him to STFU. I forget what the significance of the claim was or what point he was trying to make. There is black everywhere in nature. Maybe he meant that nothing is completely black from head to toe, or from root to stem, or something like that.

IntelTrooper
07-02-2009, 04:56 AM
because the csm's head would explode.

roflmao. :d :d :d

IntelTrooper
07-02-2009, 05:04 AM
There is black everywhere in nature. Maybe he meant that nothing is completely black from head to toe, or from root to stem, or something like that.
I am so disillusioned... if the Army isn't an authority on zoological matters, what else could they be wrong about??
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/Jaguar-schwarzer-panther-zoologie.de-nk0005.JPG/398px-Jaguar-schwarzer-panther-zoologie.de-nk0005.JPG
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2229/2433918616_8f53534122.jpg?v=0
http://www.dkimages.com/discover/DKIMAGES/Discover/previews/968/65001622.JPG

William F. Owen
07-02-2009, 05:56 AM
There's always OG 107s.

After a few days in the field they usually looked like the last thing you had been rolling in, especially if they were a little faded out to start with. ;)

Worked and worked well. Nothing wrong with OG's. The IDF has thought about Camo clothing and always rejected it, because it reality, it never works, once its out of its intended environment! ACU is the dumbest thing I have ever seen. Any expeditionary army needs 3 kinds of cammo, if it want's to play dress up.

If I was King, and some folks (congress) wanted something other than OG, I's suggest looking the old WW2 Pattern SAS Smock.

http://www.xsmilitary.com/dbimages/CLJ082.jpg

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=7750&d=1149025252

Tom Odom
07-02-2009, 06:51 AM
They tested the ACU at JRTC and I share my office with the Natick rep. I did give him a ration of ####e including:


We've got a special man in the audience today, Right now, it's Mr Leo. He's a fashion consultant for the Army.

"Oh, thank you, Adrian. I'm just very happy to be here. I want to tell you something. You know, this whole camouflage thing for me doesn't work very well".

Why is that?

"Well, because you go in the jungle, I can't see you. You know, it's like wearing stripes and plaid. For me, I want to do something different."

Fuchs
07-02-2009, 12:32 PM
Black is indeed quite rare in nature, but that's not the problem.

It's indeed helpful to create contrast, but it simply fits into very few environments and a large share of darkness in patterns stands out even at long range if the background is light.

One key problem with dark/black camouflage (even if only partial) is that it's relatively easy to see in low light vision because it doesn't reflect the low light as other surfaces.


Overall, there are good reasons for and against black, and two cases when it's right and when not:

* Black is right if soldiers can best (only) really hide themselves in shadows.
This is true in very closed terrain where short range (up to 100m) camouflage is important and long-range camouflage less important. This has also an impact on the size of the pattern.

* Black is completely wrong in, well, the opposite case. Long lines of sight, long range combat, camouflage possible even outside of shadows.
Black is also wrong if the vegetation allows for effective hiding on open terrain, like on high grass.

I wouldn't just change the pattern to improve camouflage anyway; we need to go to 3D camouflaging.
Examples:
"Camouflage system"
http://www.pri.uk.com/html/clothingthumbs.html#systems2
and this
http://soldiersystems.net/2009/06/11/boonie/

It could even look orderly in garrison - and be sliced up along marked lines for deployment (and field training).

I would use such camo on arms, shoulders and chest.

Van
07-02-2009, 04:51 PM
Let's not scamper toward irrelevancies (any more than usual). Black in a camo pattern and solid black are completely different beasts. Solid black is dramatic and easy to make uniform, but is much worse than a solid khaki as a field uniform.

The important issue is not whether or not their are black animals in nature, but how black or other dark speckling effects the quality of a camo pattern. Camo is about deception and illusion. Easy but poorly thought out positions about 'black in nature' are secondary to the need to deceive the observer's eye and create the illusion that the uniform is consistent with the back ground.

It seems to me that there are so many camo patterns in the world, we could do brute force, competitive testing of all of them, and, if needed, make minor adjustments to the winner to circumvent copyright/patent/trademark problems. Compare Multicam (tm) to WW II German infantry patterns, or the current German Flecktarn.

wm
07-02-2009, 05:29 PM
Take a peek at this paper

Simons, D. J., & Chabris, C. F. (1999). Gorillas in our midst: Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception, 28, 1059-1074
and thisvideo (http://viscog.beckman.illinois.edu/flashmovie/15.php) to consider the ramifications of inattentinal blindness.
Here's the instructions on the video:

This link takes you to the basketball video from an experiment by Daniel Simons and Christopher Chabris. When viewing the video, try to count the total number of times that the people wearing white pass the basketball. Do not count the passes made by the people wearing black. When you're done, visit the main lab web site for more information. Please note that this video is copyrighted and is available on this web site for viewing purposes only -- it may not be downloaded, copied, saved or used for any other purpose. If you are interested in using this video in any other context, it is available on DVD from Viscog Productions, Inc. Please see the link below. (Note that the University of Illinois is not in any way affiliated with Viscog Productions and this link does not represent an endorsement of Viscog Productions or its products by the University.)


I suspect that has more to do with what folks can and can't see on the battlefield (and elsewhere) than what camo pattern one chooses to cut into a set of utilities.

J Wolfsberger
07-02-2009, 06:15 PM
and thisvideo (http://viscog.beckman.illinois.edu/flashmovie/15.php) to consider the ramifications of inattentinal blindness.


Wow.

Ken White
07-02-2009, 07:10 PM
or close to those trades who missed that should seek another field of endeavor... :D

Van
07-02-2009, 07:58 PM
WM, et al,
The gorilla video is great! And it should be part of any curriculum on observation. But...the key to that video and the associated Jedi mind trick is that the viewers are directed to count the basket ball passes. Misdirection that any stage magician or sleight of hand artist would be proud of.

Re: Camo

-Any edge when our soldiers' lives are on the line. Better camo is an easy edge. Simple, verifiable, quantifiable testing can rank order camo patterns (as HyperStealth shows on their website). And getting the better product to the soldiers is relatively easy (compared to providing materials and training for improvised camo, developing and implementing new training on concealment and deception, etc). (I have no vested interest in HyperStealth or their camo patterns, but they do lay out the science behind their patterns very clearly.)

-Camo is about the bullet that is marked "To Whom It May Concern". Camo (competently designed camo...) helps keep soldiers from standing out, and helps keep them from being selected as a "target of opportunity".

-Camo help enhance shock effect by assisting soldiers in getting closer to the enemy before pulling the trigger. Again, any edge.

A secondary consideration (to me) is "branding". Part of the reasoning for the new uniform was to make Soldiers distinctive, to make them stand out psychologically. This is at odds with combat effectiveness, and puts me in mind of General Vladimir Sukhomlinov 's observation about uniforms.

I guess my biggest frustration is that the Army and DoD certainly have the in-house capability to do competent camo design, but we're so bogged down in petty fiefdoms, ego-cases, and turfwars that we've castrated ourselves. An NCO with an average computer could design an competent camo pattern, anyone with a proper college education (one that includes scientific method) could develop testing, and the students and faculty of recon courses would be excellent participents for the "rank ordering" study of the resulting patterns. Everything would go beautifully until a contractor hints that retirement jobs may come open...

Sorry, the coffee was a little strong this morning :rolleyes:

SWCAdmin
07-02-2009, 10:17 PM
In the zero sum game of the defense budget, I would rather see new [almost anything] than new ACUs. They were an irrational compromise as noted earlier herein, carry on.

If we scatter enough spinach dip around the theater, they Army will blend right in. Bigger challenge with the Air Force pattern.

Ken White
07-03-2009, 12:01 AM
armed forces and that many bodies in camo would've doubled the clothing cost,plus and importantly, OG 107 would blend in most anywhere to an acceptable degree. Camo does provide an edge but it is awfully expensive if done right and even the good stuff like HyperStealth, MultiCam and a few others is not universal. Most will do one AO well but won't work elsewhere -- ACU for example was a disaster in the Jungle (Woodland isn't much better particularly after a few washings). Woodland doesn't do well in mountains or the desert...

The current ACU pattern (cut and form) is good, though they should slant the upper pockets outward instead of inward and just do 'em in plain old AF or Jungle Uniform sage. That's about the closest to being universal. It would sure be a lot cheaper. Makes little sense to pay big bucks for uniforms that will get ripped, torn and replaced every couple of weeks in hard combat.

patmc
07-03-2009, 01:34 AM
Somewhere along the line I remember hearing that the Marines offered to share their new camo, but the Army declined bc they wanted something unique, and multi-purpose for all environments, to save on the number of uniforms (just like badges save money on patches and sewing, even though they wear out and have to be replaced). The Army said no, the Marines said, your loss, patented it, and now its theirs. Who knows if that is true, but RUMINT is sometimes right.

My first field training experience as a cadet, wearing BDU's, we conducted STX lanes. When we halted, we took up positions and pulled security. I couldn't see the guy 10 ft from me in the woods. When we arrived in Kuwait for the mandatory trainup, we went to a range in our DCUs. Guys blended in with the desert and sand. Couple range pax wore ACUs and stood out clearly in the sand. That new stuff on the website looks really good, but our old stuff wasn't that bad.


I always wondered what the rationale was for not just copying the Marine camo, rather than wasting money on our own R&D. Once again, the Army does not let me down. I expected nothing any more logical.

Rifleman
07-03-2009, 04:03 AM
Worked and worked well. Nothing wrong with OG's. The IDF has thought about Camo clothing and always rejected it, because it reality, it never works, once its out of its intended environment!

Interestingly, it's common to see tiger stripes on SF troops from B-52 Delta, mobile guerrilla forces, and mobile strike forces in photos taken in the mid '60s.

In photos of MACVSOG recon teams taken later in the war they are almost always wearing OGs, both SF and the indigs.

The story I've heard is that tigers were great if the wearer was still but their boldness seemed to "jump" out at an observer if the wearer moved but that OGs appeared a little more blurry. I've even read accounts of SF having their tigers embroidered with patches and insignia and saving them for garrison wear. They called them "profile suits." So there's at least one case when it was camo for garrison and OGs for the field!

I don't know if the blurry v. bold appearance holds true with all dull solids or solids in other environments but I've also read that troops in the ETO found the German field grey quite effective.

Xenophon
07-03-2009, 10:10 PM
You mean the ACUs don't work in Afghanistan? You mean it's not a nation full of gravel driveways? I'm shocked. SHOCKED.

Anyone else think that the only way the ACU makes sense is if the Confederacy won the Civil War and had updated their uniforms?

slapout9
07-03-2009, 11:24 PM
Anyone else think that the only way the ACU makes sense is if the Confederacy won the Civil War and had updated their uniforms?


What do ya mean IF we won:D

Dayuhan
07-04-2009, 02:23 AM
Black in a camo pattern and solid black are completely different beasts...

The important issue is not whether or not their are black animals in nature, but how black or other dark speckling effects the quality of a camo pattern.

Here's one that uses black... 5 million years in development and known to be effective...

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b329/dayuhan/tiger.jpg

And another...

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b329/dayuhan/leopard.jpg

tequila
07-04-2009, 02:30 AM
What do ya mean IF we won:D

The white South won the insurgency against Reconstruction, no doubt, but you all definitely lost the war. :p

I always thought ACU meant that Afghanistan was full of fuchsia.

Everyone's favorite ACU photo:

http://tubestroker.wordpress.com/files/2009/07/acusofa.jpg

William F. Owen
07-04-2009, 08:37 AM
In photos of MACVSOG recon teams taken later in the war they are almost always wearing OGs, both SF and the indigs.

The story I've heard is that tigers were great if the wearer was still but their boldness seemed to "jump" out at an observer if the wearer moved but that OGs appeared a little more blurry. I've even read accounts of SF having their tigers embroidered with patches and insignia and saving them for garrison wear. They called them "profile suits." So there's at least one case when it was camo for garrison and OGs for the field!


All true. I have named attributed and recorded accounts from SOG Recon team members from 1965-72. OGs and web gear were often sprayed with black paint.
Some teams also wore "Half-black", having completely black trousers or tops, blended with an OG top or bottom.

In 1982, the IDF in Beirut, used dust and ashes to modify the colour of their OG's, so just like putting on camouflage cream, then dusted up their Gear before patrols. Personally, I believe something similar is the way forwards, be it, tape, cloth strips or some powder or washable paint type compounds.

Van
07-04-2009, 06:28 PM
Dayuhan,
Good examples, but note that the tiger's pattern is vertically oriented. It always annoyed me that the tigerstripe uniforms were more horizantal. If course, the real point is that orientation of the pattern may matter.

Re: Rifleman's
The story I've heard is that tigers were great if the wearer was still but their boldness seemed to "jump" out at an observer if the wearer moved
-Motion attracts the eye naturally, did the camo exaggerate this aspect of perception?

Consider the mountain lion as a baseline for a camo pattern. Their natural pattern is extremely subtle, blending tan, black, brown, and a ginger shade at an almost strand by strand level. Much like an extreme high resolution pixelated pattern. Look at their natural range, including mountains, jungles, temperate forests, deserts, and historically plains. If this efficient predator has a pattern that has worked for close to a million years in diverse environments, it is doing something right. And it is distinctively American.

The down side is that the puma's pattern had depth, using different colored topcoat and undercoat to create a shifting pattern every time it moves. The depth is essential to a good pattern, but it may be either too difficult to duplicate in mass production, or result in a fabric that is to thick for hot climates.

goesh
07-06-2009, 04:55 PM
- with the combat load most are humping these days, what the hell does it matter? they stand out like a rhino on a sheet of bare ice - how about some old timey herring bone OD and after a few days in the environment they blend in as best can be

Rex Brynen
07-06-2009, 05:56 PM
- with the combat load most are humping these days, what the hell does it matter? they stand out like a rhino on a sheet of bare ice

For those of you trying to visualize this, courtesy of World of Warcraft (http://thottbot.com/c29469):

http://i.thottbot.com/ss/s/71444.jpg

Damned if I can see him.

reed11b
07-06-2009, 08:06 PM
Rex..you should really put your inner nerd on time-out.
For the why does it matter argument, Infantry does not just assault. We are also key info finders. In order for infantry to do this well, he has to be able to blend in, the base uniform matters. Ghillie suits are great for there intended role, but there intended role does not cover all situations were infantry need to blend in. Ghillie suits snag and can leave a traceble trail when worn on movement. They also reduce movement.

goesh
07-07-2009, 01:07 PM
We are predatory, walking upright, frontal vision, opposable thumbs, large brain, canine teeth, its all in that visual cone of movement in front of us whether its Kraut gray or USA herring bone OD the man is wearing. Let SOG fancy themselves up, there are occasions for it, but quit wasting tax dollars across the boards when for every man snoopin and poopin the bush there are hundreds who don't need to be looking fancy. just my opinion.

pvebber
07-08-2009, 08:41 PM
Of course you could be in the Navy...Where I guess defense of blueberry patches is expected to be common ;)

Or we don't want the enemy to see us after we fall overboard...

http://www.new-navy-uniform.com/sitebuilder/images/approved_digi_-_high_res-735x637.jpg

Spud
07-08-2009, 11:33 PM
^ Apparently the 'porn tache' is part of the ensemble

Ken White
07-08-2009, 11:37 PM
I didn't know the Nyvy had any other kind... :D

Van
07-09-2009, 12:42 AM
Saw the Navy digi-flage outside about two hours ago. It might work after twilight, but I'm hard put to think of an environment, even urban, where it would not stand out like red rubber ball on an putting green in full daylight.

The original AF digital pattern's colors (Gray, Green, Tan, and Air Force Blue) worked better than this Navy pattern (and I would argue better than the current color scheme).

Schmedlap
07-09-2009, 12:54 AM
Saw the Navy digi-flage outside about two hours ago. It might work after twilight...
What? No reflective belt?

Kiwigrunt
07-09-2009, 01:08 AM
What? No reflective belt?

Don't need them on that anti-camo. Then again, if you make the belts wide enough, they may even help........to blind the enemy:p.

Rifleman
07-09-2009, 03:36 AM
Of course you could be in the Navy...Where I guess defense of blueberry patches is expected to be common ;)


We've come a long way since my OG 107s and Panama tread jungle boots.....mostly in the wrong direction.

Spud
07-09-2009, 06:45 AM
What? No reflective belt?

Our Navy instituted a High-Visibilty Camouflage :D

http://www.defence.gov.au/media/download/2009/jan/20090130/20080122ran8100087_008_lo.jpg

More to giggle at here http://www.defence.gov.au/media/download/2009/jan/20090130/index.htm

Blackjack
07-11-2009, 07:53 AM
Don't need them on that anti-camo. Then again, if you make the belts wide enough, they may even help........to blind the enemy:p.

Sew reflective belts into the uniforms at the waistline and cross the chest. It is more saftey oriented.

William F. Owen
07-11-2009, 08:30 AM
Saw the Navy digi-flage outside about two hours ago.

From the Latin words, Digita, meaning finger and Flagellum meaning to whip? So, "finger whipping good?"
:D

Kiwigrunt
07-13-2009, 09:21 AM
looks like the Chinese navy are also not too sure about this camoflage (http://wuxinghongqi.blogspot.com/2009/07/chinese-navy-amphibious-female-scouts.html) thing.:rolleyes::wry: She forgot to put cam-paint on her hands; I can see her...:confused:

Fuchs
08-13-2009, 07:51 PM
"A Picture Says a Thousand Words"
http://soldiersystems.net/tag/acu/

I think the ACU looks a bit too blue-ish on this photo, but other than that it's a good photo.
Good camouflage looks differently.
Multicam isn't truly good camo either; I prefer 3D camo on the arms and head:
http://www.pri.uk.com/pdfs/chameleonsuit.pdf

Van
09-21-2009, 01:30 AM
U.S. Army Natick Soldier TD&E Center publishes the latest study (http://www.scribd.com/doc/19823845/Photosimulation-Camouflage-Detection-Test) on camouflage.

Let the fire works commence.

Conspicuous by their absence were the old Desert Day 6-color ("Chocolate Chips"), the Australian pattern, the German standard and desert Flecktarns, and the TigerStripe varients. I wonder if Natick staff "didn't like them" the way they "didn't like" black in the orginal Army Pattern recommendations.

Also relevant to any discussion of camouflage is the older research from Hyper-Stealth (http://www.hyperstealth.com/acupat/).

davidbfpo
12-20-2009, 11:20 AM
Alas only one photo of the new UK military camouflage uniform:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/onthefrontline/6844734/British-Army-to-get-new-uniforms---turned-down-by-the-US-and-made-in-China.html

The link says it all.

William F. Owen
12-20-2009, 12:11 PM
Alas only one photo of the new UK military camouflage uniform:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/onthefrontline/6844734/British-Army-to-get-new-uniforms---turned-down-by-the-US-and-made-in-China.html


Truly depressing. Quite the stupidest thing I have seen in a very long time. - £250,000 to develop??? Ya All*H!

Why not just wear OD?

Fuchs
12-20-2009, 12:30 PM
Truly depressing. Quite the stupidest thing I have seen in a very long time. - £250,000 to develop??? Ya All*H!

Why not just wear OD?

You should have a look at the ACU's colours, that eases the pain (in regard to the British pattern).


It's said to be a Multicam version tailored for the UK, to look distinctly British instead of global Multicam. The costs are likely in great part license costs.

Multicam has a good reputation, but true combat/scout troops camouflage should be at last one step ahead of a mere print pattern:

link (http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.com/2009/08/modern-basic-individual-camouflage.html)

Ken White
12-20-2009, 05:24 PM
Why not just wear OD?simple, cheap, effective solutions to non-problems which the bureaucracy has ever-so-stupidly elevated to problem status in inane efforts to garner more funds from the taxpayers... ;)

Sheesh. :D

William F. Owen
12-21-2009, 07:12 AM
Multicam has a good reputation, but true combat/scout troops camouflage should be at last one step ahead of a mere print pattern:

link (http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.com/2009/08/modern-basic-individual-camouflage.html)

If it really works, then great, but "camouflage saves lives"? I just don't buy it as being that simple. It's grossly overselling a pretty marginal, if nor wholly irrelevant issue.

In "Wilf's Army" everyone just wears OG/US Govt OD - and adds what's needed as and when required.

Fuchs
12-21-2009, 08:10 AM
The law of diminishing returns is of course in effect.

Soldiers who already attempt to hide with cover, concealment, paint, natural camouflage (branches, grass) and shadows will have only small benefits from using a high-end camouflage.

But then again there are CvC's easy things that only seem to be easy and Murphy's law. Photos of WW2 soldiers with properly camouflaged helmets aren't exactly in the majority. It's tough to keep up a camouflage effort for weeks if it deteriorates to "useless" or even "tell-tale" within hours.


Camouflage clothing is relatively cheap and can make the difference between being detected and not being detected. That's especially true in the near-IR and IR spectrum (starlight scope, thermal).

There's also a psychological factor, just as with reliable rifles. Morale is ceteris paribus better if the equipment is being perceived as great - and an impressive clothing camouflage qualifies.

IntelTrooper
12-21-2009, 06:12 PM
looks like the Chinese navy are also not too sure about this camoflage (http://wuxinghongqi.blogspot.com/2009/07/chinese-navy-amphibious-female-scouts.html) thing.:rolleyes::wry: She forgot to put cam-paint on her hands; I can see her...:confused:

So if we ever go to war with China, I'll know to be on the lookout for the people who look like they stepped out of the Avatar movie...

braun
12-26-2009, 03:37 AM
I know that various Coalition SOF use multicam, but I'm starting to see photos of US line grunts using it as well...

http://cryptome.org/afpak-fun-06t-23.jpg

http://cryptome.org/afpak-fun-06t-29.jpg

These guys are 2nd Bn 12th Inf. Regt.

The uniforms are ACU cut in multicam and are probably COTS by Propper or Tru-Spec. Does this mean that the unit is providing them for the troops out of discretionary funds or is it part of a US Army-wide changeover?

Aussie troops in Afghanistan use their basic green DPCUs depending on the terrain and until the introduction of their new multicam-derived DPMs the Brits have been using green DPM tops with desert DPM bottoms for a little more disruption to their silhouette.

I gotta say I hope the Multicam changeover is US-Army-wide. Having seen some US Army personnel in Townsville recently wearing UCP ACUs they stood out like the proverbial dog's balls.

Schmedlap
03-31-2010, 03:19 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dn2yXSAvpxM

MikeGreene
04-05-2010, 03:44 PM
I saw my first set of multicam here in Kabul last week. On a contractor with a big, bushy beard and a belly to match. At IJC HQ. In the DFAC.

If the bad guys can't see us coming in oversized vehicles with big guns on the roof, he's certainly not going to notice the color of our uniforms.

If They want us to wear new Spring colors, I'll walk the runways of Kabul. I'd rather have the money spent on other stuff, though...

Kevin23
01-08-2011, 02:44 AM
By now as most of everyone on Small Wars has heard the Army is changing the camo for the ACU, which was instituted in it's current configuration in 2006 These new changes are to be put into place through 2011 in order to better conform to the types of landscapes US Forces are currently engaged in.

However, my question is, is this new camo pattern for the ACU really necessary as to me it appears the current pattern fit's into the landscape of say Afpak just fine instead of the new multicam being considered?

Although I would appreciate the inputs of forum members which more input and experience then I have on this issue.

awesome
01-08-2011, 03:10 AM
Yes, it is completely necessary. The ACU is only moderately effective in Afghanistan and Iraq. Multicam is superior. The problem was the Army thought they could save money by having one uniform that worked in all environments. The result was a uniform that didn't work - anywhere.

Xenophon
01-08-2011, 03:15 AM
Not true. Have you ever seen a soldier walking on a gravel driveway? Of course you haven't. They DISAPPEAR.

If only the Taliban would fight us in the rural U.S.

awesome
01-08-2011, 03:29 AM
You are right. There is one other environment the ACU works extremely well in.

http://www.soldiersperspective.us/images/December2006/ACU.jpg

John T. Fishel
01-08-2011, 01:30 PM
Kevin, you pushed a button of mine. The only services who regularly need camo uniforms are the army and Marines. While elements of the USAF (some of their special ops people and security police) need camo, mostly they don't. Likewise the navy - only SEALS and Seabees. If elements of these services are going to operate where they need camo, they can use other services like they did prior to the current camo craze. That brings me to the army and Marines: they operate on land in the same environments. Why do they need distinct camo uniforms? This camocraze costs me money as a taxpayer, is stupid and unnecessary. Sec Gates, can you please tell the service secretaries of the army and the navy to come up with a single (or like the Marines two) camo pattern that all services will adopt. Personally, as an old army guy, I'd make the Marines executive agent on the project.

Cheers

JohnT

Fuchs
01-08-2011, 02:00 PM
Army and Marines operate both on land - why do you need both?
Most likely none goes away, so there's at least the opportunity to let them compete for quality.

The navy camo patter is afaik not meant to camouflage, but to hide dirt such as lubricant stains - in order to defeat whatever is left of the 'spit and polish' school.

The air force needs a camo pattern in order to let their troops feel like soldiers. There's not that much else, after all.


Now about combat troops camo patterns (and all of this with the exception of snow camo):

They're overrated. A really good camouflage is not some pattern - no matter digitized or not - but three-dimensional objects that emulate the surroundings in shape and/or make the silhouette less human (http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.com/2009/08/modern-basic-individual-camouflage.html).

The Israeli helmet covers are an example of the latter, while ghillie suits are an extreme example of the former.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_V7Ehj7eG65Q/SoR1Ws3JliI/AAAAAAAABDo/fJelofR6ruc/s320/mitznefet.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_V7Ehj7eG65Q/SoR2rMEEKuI/AAAAAAAABEg/nO45ZH73vzI/s1600/13rdp22.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_V7Ehj7eG65Q/Sd3dZa2DRjI/AAAAAAAAARE/FuKayokcouc/s1600/barracuda.jpg


The BDU colours should only be the basis of the actual camouflage - and could even be returned to dark grey, for a really well-camouflaged soldier wouldn't expose much of his basic BDU camo.


Btw, wouldn't this be a nice camo for every air force?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_V7Ehj7eG65Q/S8JLAsLk-hI/AAAAAAAABtc/JZOJvfzXgxA/s1600/camouflage+demotivational.jpg

Kiwigrunt
01-21-2011, 10:19 PM
Huh? (http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/01/army-what-to-expect-in-2011-010111w/) From one to three?


New camo
The Army wants three new combat uniforms — a woodland variant, a desert variant and a “transitional” variant that covers everything in between.

Fuchs
01-22-2011, 12:09 AM
Yes, that was known for some time.
They don't seem to plan for arctic warfare these days.

SJPONeill
01-22-2011, 12:47 AM
To a certain extent the colours become irrelevant except the lowest level of adversary...possible in this century how the combat uniforms conceal signatures other than visual will be more important...

SethB
01-22-2011, 06:25 AM
Realistically we ought to have a khaki uniform for garrison, three patterns for in the field (woods, desert, snow), a dress uniform (long sleeve, short sleeve and jacket) and a mess uniform.

That would actually be cheaper than messing around with uniforms that work in all environments. Because they don't.

The US Army could save millions if we simply didn't wear flair.

BushrangerCZ
01-22-2011, 06:48 AM
The navy camo patter is afaik not meant to camouflage, but to hide dirt such as lubricant stains - in order to defeat whatever is left of the 'spit and polish' school.
The air force needs a camo pattern in order to let their troops feel like soldiers. There's not that much else, after all.


They can´t feel enough like soldiers in plain khaki or "feldgrau" overalls, or BDU´s or whatever?? Come on man... Are they children or what?? Look at Israelis, they do not seem to suffer from "not feeling like soldiers" syndrome. I had a good laugh when I read that Air Force and Navy uniforms justifications :-). And for land forces - if you sit in a MRAP or do obvious presence patrols (which is what majority of combat troops do), it does not matter anyway. No one does long range dismounted recce patrols in A-stan these days, due to exertion when wearing all ballistic protection. But that´s different thread.

Van
01-22-2011, 05:22 PM
They don't seem to plan for arctic warfare these days.

The white over-jackets and trousers are still in the system. If the terrain is snow covered, you would have to really work to convince me that there is a significant benefit to re-engineering that camo (side-by-side tests like Natick finally did on the ACUs).

And while you are right, that we should plan for everything, the current crop of threats inspires greater interest in better sunscreen and cooling systems than new skis.

Van
01-22-2011, 05:36 PM
Army and Marines operate both on land - why do you need both?...The navy camo patter is afaik not meant to camouflage...The air force needs a camo pattern in order to let their troops feel like soldiers.

Fuchs (et al), the camo patterns are branding, pure and simple. The Marine corps started it by breaking step with the "U.S." woodland pattern, to make themselves clearly identifiable as Marines (and yes, this was part of their official reasoning). And the floodgates opened. I'm am relieved and proud (as a former Coastie) that the one service that hasn't given in to this fad is the U.S. Coast Guard. Relieved, because the "logical" color scheme would involve the current shade of blue and international orange.

The "branding" piece of the puzzle is why the Army is loath to adopt Multi-Cam™. The "™" is the problem, it is not the Army's "™".

Did you hear the rumor that the Navy's camo is actually a cost cutting measure? It blends with the sea so well that if someone goes overboard, there is no point in looking for the sailor.. So why waste the fuel and time to turn the ship around to make a futile effort?

Kiwigrunt
01-22-2011, 08:19 PM
Did you hear the rumor that the Navy's camo is actually a cost cutting measure? It blends with the sea so well that if someone goes overboard, there is no point in looking for the sailor.. So why waste the fuel and time to turn the ship around to make a futile effort?

That makes sense. It is cheaper than issuing body armour to sailors.

SJPONeill
01-22-2011, 10:50 PM
That makes sense. It is cheaper than issuing body armour to sailors.

Well, actually no, issuing body armour to a sailor who then goes over the side takes care of the burial at sea as well...

JM2008
01-22-2011, 11:47 PM
The air force needs a camo pattern in order to let their troops feel like soldiers. There's not that much else, after all.

That's funny because the last stats I saw said the Air Force had over 1/3 of the KIAs in OEF/OIF. If your logic were true that the Air Force doesn't do anything to need camo because we sit on our bases then the Army and Marines would split that number and the Air Force and Navy might have one or two from IDF attacks. And to add to that I, as an Airman, have over 150 combat missions under my belt in Afghanistan... on the ground... outside the wire.

Now off my soap box and to answer the ACTUAL question posed in this thread. Both the Air Force and Army have realized that while the ACU/ABU patterns provide good concealment in the rocky terrain of Afghanistan, the vast difference in color palettes between that and the lush green vegetation in the valleys present the need for a camo pattern that can virtually change colors based on the environment around it and that is was multicam does. It does that through reflecting light from the surroundings that can change the colors actually seen by the human eye. It is truly a camo for MOST environments in Afghanistan at least.

As far as costing the tax payer more money: multicam was not developed through R&D from any of the services and it already in productive use in other countries, i.e. the UK.

Fuchs
01-23-2011, 01:41 AM
I want to see those KIA stats before I even consider the related argument.

Besides; air force personnel should only be employed in ground combat after transfer to the army. The German Luftwaffenfelddivisionen experience with poorly trained Luftwaffe troops being pressed into service in Luftwaffe line divisions is a damning one.


About the two different area necessitating two different camo patterns; there's a solution, if overgarments à la winter over-garment camo are acceptable at all.
Said solution is 70 years old; reversible camouflage smocks, over-trousers and helmet covers.

Keep the webbing, pouches, boots and weapons in a "light or medium grey with darker spots" pattern and you'll have one set of personal equipment that's ready for two completely different environments.


More elaborate single-type camo suits that go beyond mere patterns (see earlier post of mine) are even superior, of course.

Ken White
01-23-2011, 02:04 AM
That's funny because the last stats I saw said the Air Force had over 1/3 of the KIAs in OEF/OIF.By that do you mean opponent KIAs or US KIAs? If the former, I suspect that would be extremely difficult to determine with any accuracy. If the latter, US, the Stats seem to disagree with you. LINK (http://militarytimes.com/valor/sacrifice.php). Though I do note that the first listed Killed in Afghanistan is indeed USAF. Scroll down to the very bottom of the list at this LINK (http://icasualties.org/oef/Nationality.aspx?hndQry=US). Iraq casualties can be back linked from that page.

Having said all that, I have no doubt that the USAF -- and the guys and gals it sends over there -- do their jobs in combat on the ground as well as in the air -- and then some. Many other nations do not use their AF people as do we and the Security Squadron folks, the loggies who do convoys and most of all the FACS, JTACs and TACPs who go with the Infantry, SF and SOF certainly go out and get among 'em.:D
As far as costing the tax payer more money: multicam was not developed through R&D from any of the services and it already in productive use in other countries, i.e. the UK.It'll still cost more, it's a proprietary pattern and those who use it have to be willing and able to buy it from Crye or their designated suppliers who pay a license fee for for each inch of fabric and pass that cost on to the customer. For the UK, the determination was that it's affordable for about 150K troops. For the US, you're looking at probably four or more sets for over 1M or about ten times or more as many uniforms -- even if it's only a nickel a uniform it'll cost big bucks over a Natick developed pattern. :wry:

Plus, you've got the US Army and their "It wasn't invented by us" stupidity... :rolleyes:

Rifleman
01-23-2011, 03:07 AM
Am I the only one who misses OG107 jungle fatigues? They weren't always the best option when new but my faded-out ones usually looked like the last thing I had rolled in.

IntelTrooper
01-23-2011, 03:23 AM
Am I the only one who misses OG107s? They weren't always the best option when new but my faded-out ones usually looked like the last thing I had rolled in.
I am very much a fan of the OGs. I say bring them back -- it would solve all of this nonsense.

Ken White
01-23-2011, 04:56 AM
and even though the material wasn't IR suppressive they were more than adequate -- plus they're a whole lot cheaper...

Chris jM
01-23-2011, 05:42 AM
I think someone on this forum mentioned in a post last year that the OD concept could be taken a step further and integrated with the distribution of fabric paint/ spray to allow customisation at the lowest levels. If the fabric paint was relatively temporary and washed out or faded after a few days of wear then that's no problem, reapply when possible. For recognition purposes it could be applied through a cut-out template to preserve uniformity. It wouldn't be parade-ground pretty, but it would be a darn sight cheaper than the patented stuff and would be limited in effectiveness only by the adaptability of the soldiers and organisation employing it. Again, I think someone else on this board raised this idea first a while back so there is no originality here on my behalf. I do, however, think it holds merit.

Rifleman
01-23-2011, 06:43 AM
It was common for MACV-SOG Recon Teams to wear OGs and add some spray paint touches before a mission. This was often their choice even though tigers and the like were available.

Link: http://rallypointmilitaria.com/page/29

But I can't see conventional units going that way. The 1SGs I knew would have a fit.

SWJ Blog
04-02-2011, 11:11 AM
Oprah in Camouflage (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2011/04/oprah-in-camouflage/)

Entry Excerpt:

From SWJ's good super-hero friend Doctrine Man (http://www.facebook.com/#!/DoctrineMan):

http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/208797_199592126740613_110598432306650_559014_7050 726_n.jpg



--------
Read the full post (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2011/04/oprah-in-camouflage/) and make any comments at the SWJ Blog (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog).
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

SWJ Blog
06-05-2011, 09:20 PM
Army, Marine Corps clashing over cammies... (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2011/06/army-marine-corps-clashing-ove/)

Entry Excerpt:

... and the Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps is dead wrong on this one. Lance Bacon and Dan Lamothe of The Army Times report (http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/06/army-marine-corps-clash-over-camouflage-060411w/) on another one of those unnecessary distractions from fighting and wining wars. Key excerpts follow:


... Army officials have said they want soldiers to wear the best possible camouflage — even if that is the MARPAT. But Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps Carlton Kent says don’t count on it.
The Corps owns the rights to MARPAT and wants to retain it for its own use, Kent said late last year. Marine officials said they have no beef with anyone researching and testing MARPAT, but they want Marines distinguished from other service members on the battlefield...During most of my Marine Corps career the Corps and the Army wore the same camouflage uniform and there was no problem in identifying the differences between a Marine and a Soldier - from the cover/headgear, to the Corps' lack of unit identification and branch patches, to the different style rank insignias and other service devices, to the different way each service rolled the sleeves (Army's method was better in an NBC environment BTW), to the Devil Dogs’ white t-shirt peeking out at the neckline from under camouflage for goodness sake. The SgtMaj should fight the good fights and let the Army select the best possible uniform for their Soldiers and be flattered because the Corps led, by years, in the development and deployment of a state of the art uniform.



--------
Read the full post (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2011/06/army-marine-corps-clashing-ove/) and make any comments at the SWJ Blog (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog).
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

SWJ Blog
06-19-2011, 12:10 AM
Army Camouflage Pattern Update (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2011/06/army-camouflage-pattern-update/)

Entry Excerpt:

As a follow-up to our SWJ post, Army, Marine Corps clashing over cammies..., (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2011/06/army-marine-corps-clashing-ove/)CNN's Jennifer Rizzo reports Army sets out to buy three new camouflage patterns (http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/06/17/army.camouflage/). BLUF: "This time around, the Army is looking for a family of camouflage patterns that can be used across the globe - one for the desert, another for a wilderness/jungle environment, and a third transitional variant for 'places in the middle'..."



--------
Read the full post (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2011/06/army-camouflage-pattern-update/) and make any comments at the SWJ Blog (http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog).
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

AdamG
07-08-2012, 07:08 PM
I'm surprised we didn't have a thread on this already -


After eight years and a reported $5 billion in development, the U.S. Army is ditching its pixelated-looking uniform in favor of something that doesn't look like it was borrowed from the "Contra" Nintendo game. The design, known as the Universal Camouflage Pattern (UCP), has failed at doing what camo should do: Hide our soldiers.

http://now.msn.com/now/0625-new-army-uniforms.aspx?_p=68892046-cd97-46be-aa28-3956b2b34001


NATICK, Mass. — The Army is changing clothes.

Over the next year, America’s largest fighting force is swapping its camouflage pattern. The move is a quiet admission that the last uniform — a pixelated design that debuted in 2004 at a cost of $5 billion — was a colossal mistake.

Soldiers have roundly criticized the gray-green uniform for standing out almost everywhere it’s been worn. Industry insiders have called the financial mess surrounding the pattern a “fiasco.”

http://www.thedaily.com/page/2012/06/24/062412-news-camouflage-fiasco-1-5/

Golly. I suppose using $10 of brown leather dye would be a rice bowl breaker.

http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/3739/butternutselection.jpg

slapout9
07-09-2012, 04:41 AM
It's about damn time! Army men are supposed to be green!

ganulv
07-09-2012, 02:30 PM
I'm surprised we didn't have a thread on this already -

It’s here (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=12221). The whole concept of a works–anywhere camouflage pattern seems pie–in–the–sky to me, but at least MultiCam looks sharp.

Fuchs
07-09-2012, 02:58 PM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_V7Ehj7eG65Q/SoR0kSytw0I/AAAAAAAABDY/gJd7-vIrI-o/s320/contrast.jpg
:confused:


I guessed those uniforms were among the stuff that would be spray-painted or dyed on day 1 of a war. (All Western armies have such high-visibility things that require urgent modification once the #### hits the fan.)

Then I saw people with this "camo" pattern on photos from war zones...

socal1200r
07-09-2012, 04:10 PM
The idea of having one battle uniform that works in all operational environments is a losing proposition from the get go. Personally, I didn't see anything wrong with having BDUs/black boots and DCUs/tan boots for the USAF. But that was before the USMC and USA came out with their new-fangled pixelated uniforms, so the USAF just had to have something new too. At least the USMC still kept separate BDU and DCU styles, not a single style like the Army and AF did. If common sense ever makes it way to the Pentagon, it'll be the 8th wonder of the world...

Fuchs
07-09-2012, 06:05 PM
The idea of having one battle uniform that works in all operational environments is a losing proposition from the get go.


Actually, I think it's probably a very, very sensible idea as long as you have one version for hot weather and one for cold weather or can add some insulation to one standard piece.


It's in my opinion a terrible misconception (not in everyone's mind, but still too widespread) to expect camouflage patterns to camouflage men in plain sight. Camouflage works best (if not only) in combination with shadows, partial concealment and good distance.
Little to no movement, distractions/deception, poor light in general and breaking up silhouettes is of great importance, too.

In the end it's very advisable to view camo clothes only as the clothes you wear under your actual, situation-specific camo (snow coverall, foliage, ghillie to simple cloth straps) and you should only expect a good hiding effect if you conceal much of your body, don't move significantly and don't expose yourself much to light.

Grey, medium brown, olive-drab and many other really basic camouflage colours are probably satisfactory in my opinion. Camo patterns only deceive troops to think they need no additional camouflage.

As so often, my conclusions are not exactly mainstream. I can still add to this, of course:

Camouflage pattern BDUs should probably be available to non-combat troops only.

Reasoning: Combat troops should be aware of their insufficient camo and do something about it with an additional camo layer to get a much better effect than any 2D camo pattern can achieve, while support troops usually expect no combat and don't use additional camo all the time anyway.

ganulv
07-09-2012, 06:45 PM
Combat troops should be aware of their insufficient camo and do something about it with an additional camo layer to get a much better effect than any 2D camo pattern can achieve, while support troops usually expect no combat and don't use additional camo all the time anyway.

If a professional soldier is under the impression that clothing alone is sufficient to ensure concealment then his professionalization has been poor indeed. Not every recruit can be turned into a Ginsu Master of invisibility (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zekiZYSVdeQ), but surely any functionally literate individual able to perform the four operations can be taught that there is no such thing as a set of clothing which makes him disappear.

Fuchs
07-09-2012, 07:46 PM
There's a huge difference between knowing and doing. It's a tricky psychology thing.

Sadly, there's no lack of photographic evidence for sloppy to non-existing camo on well-trained troops (and their vehicles or guns) since 1916.

Hence my idea to make it bloody obvious that camo jobs in the field are necessary.

slapout9
07-09-2012, 08:02 PM
The Marines seem to know how to make camouflage uniforms. This image is from the Marine Corps Gazette website, notice how well the Marines are blinding in to the operational environment.

AdamG
07-09-2012, 10:14 PM
It’s here (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=12221).

Hmm, from early last year. Guess that's why I didn't get a search hit.


The whole concept of a works–anywhere camouflage pattern seems pie–in–the–sky to me, but at least MultiCam looks sharp.

So with all those pale grey-green uniforms (and associated gear) in stock, do we want the Army to have another schiesse-hemorrhage of cash for new stuff or are is the old stuff economically salvageable?

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/1638/butternut3.jpg

ganulv
07-09-2012, 10:54 PM
So with all those pale grey-green uniforms (and associated gear) in stock, do we want the Army to have another schiesse-hemorrhage of cash for new stuff or are is the old stuff economically salvageable?

what does that make the F-22? :confused: I don’t know, I’m sure the ANA will take as many ACUs as are offered them. Gotta run through the stockpiled BDUs and DCUs first, though, I guess. :rolleyes:

AdamG
07-10-2012, 01:26 AM
what does that make the F-22? :confused: I don’t know, I’m sure the ANA will take as many ACUs as are offered them. Gotta run through the stockpiled BDUs and DCUs first, though, I guess. :rolleyes:

Pretty sure both BDUs and DCUs got flushed out of the system through DRMO. Had a real hard time getting 'chocolate chips' for our Iraqis a few years back, too.

Dye the UCPs to some usable color.

Oh wait, that'd make sense. Sorry.

nb : an Army scheisse-hemorrhage of cash could never equal an Air Force scheisse-hemorrhage, you know that.

carl
07-10-2012, 02:42 AM
Camouflage pattern BDUs should probably be available to non-combat troops only.

Reasoning: Combat troops should be aware of their insufficient camo and do something about it with an additional camo layer to get a much better effect than any 2D camo pattern can achieve, while support troops usually expect no combat and don't use additional camo all the time anyway.

That's good thinking. A very shrewed (sic) appreciation of human nature.

slapout9
07-10-2012, 04:25 AM
That's good thinking. A very shrewed (sic) appreciation of human nature.

Yep, that is good thinking and part the reasoning why Army men are supposed to be Green. That was the base color and you added what you needed based on the environment. In winter up North we wore solid white. In the Desert probably some kind of a solid Tan would work.

Kiwigrunt
07-10-2012, 08:47 PM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_V7Ehj7eG65Q/SoR0kSytw0I/AAAAAAAABDY/gJd7-vIrI-o/s320/contrast.jpg


Left-over stockpiles of these uniforms could be sold on the civilian market as High-vis safety garments for hunters.:D

ganulv
07-10-2012, 10:46 PM
Left-over stockpiles of these uniforms could be sold on the civilian market as High-vis safety garments for hunters.:D

why don’t cha! :mad:

Fuchs
08-16-2012, 11:32 PM
It's incredible I didn't bring this up so far:

http://domhyde.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/acuisgreat.jpg

Fuchs
08-31-2012, 12:00 AM
Desert Brush, the Camo That Should Have Been
Posted on August 4, 2011

http://octactical.wordpress.com/2011/08/04/desert-brush-the-camo-that-should-have-been/
(photos there)


Desert Brush was part of the Natick camo trials to find a universal camouflage for the Army. In the end Desert Brush was the overall winner. However for some reason it was tossed aside and the decision was made to go with the current UCP instead, which wasn’t even part of the trials.


edit: Oops, got the wrong camo thread. I'm sure there's one that did not decompose yet. Maybe David can join them?

davidbfpo
08-31-2012, 09:18 AM
Fuchs remarked:
edit: Oops, got the wrong camo thread. I'm sure there's one that did not decompose yet. Maybe David can join them?

Yes there were seven threads on matters camouflage, BCU etc, including several which featured Oprah and cartoons. All now merged here and the title amended.

Kiwigrunt
06-21-2013, 11:34 PM
Our turn. NZ-ACU has arrived.

ganulv
06-21-2013, 11:48 PM
Our turn. NZ-ACU has arrived.
If I’m seeing right those guys are using Mystery Ranch packs. So it’s not all bad.

davidbfpo
06-22-2013, 10:18 AM
KiwiGrunt,

What is the metal tube being carried by the soldier in the foreground, that is on the right of his body? It looks like - for an amateur - to be a combat shotgun.

ganulv
06-22-2013, 01:05 PM
KiwiGrunt,

What is the metal tube being carried by the soldier in the foreground, that is on the right of his body? It looks like - for an amateur - to be a combat shotgun.
It does look like it, but it also looks like the barrel is being dragged on the ground. :confused:

Maybe it’s a piece of a breach kit?

Kiwigrunt
06-22-2013, 10:04 PM
It (http://www.defencecareers.mil.nz/army/about-the-army/equipment-technology) is indeed a (breaching) blunderbuss.

Fuchs
09-23-2013, 10:52 PM
http://soldiersystems.net/2013/09/23/despite-sma-chandlers-camo-revelation-industrial-base-even-more-concerned/

The German ground forces were even worse. They invented Flecktarn during WW2, but other than a very short use of camo patterns during the 50's in the Bundeswehr and a most simple line pattern (really just parallel lines on a green cloth) in the NVA, it too until the late 80's to introduce a Flecktarn pattern evaluated during the early 70's in almost unchanged form.


Something is wrong about how military bureaucracies change their equipment.

ganulv
05-26-2014, 09:04 PM
The Army has apparently chosen a replacement for UCP. It looks a lot like MultiCam.

I put together a related blog post [LINK (http://consanguinityandaffinity.wordpress.com/2014/05/26/camouflage-that-stands-out/)] (and stole Fuchs’ pic from upthread as part of it).

Fuchs
05-27-2014, 12:05 PM
some more:

http://soldiersystems.net/?s=scorpion

http://www.kamouflage.net/country/00181.php


The chest rigs and other pouches reduce the relevance of the pattern itself to the arms, legs and helmet cover anyway. All other surfaces will be disrupted by pouches et cetera, with plenty shadows.

I suppose combat and recce troops should not rely on a camo pattern on these surfaces, but apply 3D camouflage (anything from vegetation over ghillie suits to this:)
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_V7Ehj7eG65Q/SoR2rMEEKuI/AAAAAAAABEg/nO45ZH73vzI/s1600/13rdp22.jpg

It should be possible to have an overgarment for the arms only that applies such (spray paint-adapted) camo - and it should be reversible (greenish and yellowish for summer, greenish and brownish for autumn).

JMA
05-27-2014, 04:08 PM
What about the weapon?



some more:

http://soldiersystems.net/?s=scorpion

http://www.kamouflage.net/country/00181.php


The chest rigs and other pouches reduce the relevance of the pattern itself to the arms, legs and helmet cover anyway. All other surfaces will be disrupted by pouches et cetera, with plenty shadows.

I suppose combat and recce troops should not rely on a camo pattern on these surfaces, but apply 3D camouflage (anything from vegetation over ghillie suits to this:)
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_V7Ehj7eG65Q/SoR2rMEEKuI/AAAAAAAABEg/nO45ZH73vzI/s1600/13rdp22.jpg

It should be possible to have an overgarment for the arms only that applies such (spray paint-adapted) camo - and it should be reversible (greenish and yellowish for summer, greenish and brownish for autumn).

Fuchs
05-27-2014, 04:18 PM
Weapons aren't clothing.
The considerations are very different regarding weapons and munitions, so it's a very different topic.

jcustis
05-27-2014, 06:17 PM
The US Army has been issuing articles of equipment (packs, webbing, etc.) in the Multicam pattern for years now, and it will most likely follow the same pattern with this new (well, actually 10 years+ old) camouflage. I watched pallets of deployer bags and packs dropped off in Manas once as a battalion was flowing into theater, all in what was then referred to as the OCP (Objective Camouflage Pattern).

There are directives which govern the use of paint and various tapes to camouflage individual weapons.

The pattern is pretty much relevant to everything. The USMC has not followed the same logic.

JMA
05-28-2014, 08:27 AM
Weapons aren't clothing.

Why the need to state the obvious?


The considerations are very different regarding weapons and munitions, so it's a very different topic.At a personal level? Not sure about that... You can substantiate that statement?

Fuchs
05-28-2014, 12:36 PM
At a personal level? Not sure about that... You can substantiate that statement?

Different printing technology.

Emission of infrared radiation (energy) due to firing rather than due to body heat.

Munitions (such as rifle grenades, hand grenades, LAW) may be hidden behind textiles most of the time, only exposed during use.

Camouflage (such as netting) must not obstruct interface or operation of rifle (no problem with arms, for example).

Firing signatures are more important than weapon/munition visuals themselves.

Fuchs
05-28-2014, 12:52 PM
At a personal level? Not sure about that... You can substantiate that statement?

Different printing technology.

Emission of infrared radiation (energy) due to firing rather than due to body heat.

Munitions (such as rifle grenades, hand grenades, LAW) may be hidden behind textiles most of the time, only exposed during use.

Camouflage (such as netting) must not obstruct interface or operation of rifle (no problem with arms, for example).

Firing signatures are more important than weapon/munition visuals themselves.

Firn
05-30-2014, 06:10 PM
Just some minor observations on animal 'camouflage', for example tiger stripes and leopard spots, and why they should be use with carefully as a specific example.*

A great shot of a leopard which gets widely published is usually one in relative bright, low-angle light of the animal out in the open not actively stalking or hunting seen by us humans through a camera lens. It is bit like a soldier standing to attention during a ceremony on the parade ground as seen by a (enemy?) crow overlooking the scene.

1) For a leopard's prey, a deer, orange or reddish tones don't stand out of green and brown ones of similar brightness.

2) The colour spectrum of the predator, prey and habitat during it's prime hunting periods over the 24 h cycle is is different from the one observed during day time. Leopars tend to spent most of the day hidden and resting, investing their energy ressources when their chances are relatively high. Too much activity also tends to spook the jungle.

3) Cats see better at night then primates while their sight is more accute then deer prey. Truth be told I don't know how much light they gather relative to deer, but in general a stalk is easier in during a time full of long shadows, low light and coarse vision resolution.

4) Their coloration, patter and counter-shadowing works in conjunction with 1-3 plus the their often amazing fieldcraft in stalking, using terrain, vegation and shadows.

There is obviously not only the prey-predator relationship but also the role of competitors (bears, some birds), potential predators (tigers) and other jungle folk. For example some birds and monkeys are know to be keen spotters (generally in good light conditions) of the cats and sound loud warnings.

*There are of course many valid tendencies to be gained by close study.

It is overall a vast and rich topic with deep ties to other threads like animal vision and many others. So much to learn and understand and so little time. A nice primer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDcPlh7kCOk) on animal eyes by a lecture of Gresham university. New insights in Deer vision (http://www.dfw.state.or.us/resources/hunting/safety/docs/Deer_Vision.pdf) is of particular interest for hunters and other predators, showing also the evolutionary response of the prey's eye sight. You learn a great deal IMHO from different sources like Corbett books (http://www.amazon.com/The-Jim-Corbett-Omnibus-Rudraprayag/dp/0195627628/ref=pd_sim_b_4/178-7297585-3557908?ie=UTF8&refRID=027M059SY0EWTY28TRMF) and Peterson Reference Guide to the Behavior of North American Mammals (http://www.amazon.com/Peterson-Reference-Behavior-American-Mammals/dp/0618883452/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1401470423&sr=1-1&keywords=behavior+north+american+mammals) and from your personal experience out in the woods, up the mountains facing some animal stare.

ganulv
05-30-2014, 06:32 PM
2) The colour spectrum of the predator, prey and habitat during it's prime hunting periods over the 24 h cycle is is different from the one observed during day time.

3) Cats see better at night then primates while their sight is more accute then deer prey. Truth be told I don't know how much light they gather relative to deer, but in general a stalk is easier in during a time full of long shadows, low light and coarse vision resolution.

This is related to the fact that they are dichromats (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichromat#Color_detecting_abilities_of_dichromats) , yes?


For example some birds and monkeys are know to be keen spotters (generally in good light conditions) of the cats and sound loud warnings.

By the same token, this is related to the fact that primates are trichromats (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trichromat#Humans_and_other_animals_that_are_trich romats), right? And I believe that it has been suggested that some birds possess superior color vision to humans.

Firn
05-30-2014, 06:46 PM
This is related to the fact that they are dichromats (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichromat#Color_detecting_abilities_of_dichromats) , yes?



By the same token, this is related to the fact that primates are trichromats (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trichromat#Humans_and_other_animals_that_are_trich romats), right? And I believe that it has been suggested that some birds possess superior color vision to humans.

To a good degree. Keep in mind that a leopard moving silently through a ravine with thick vegatation can get hugely annoyed by birds and primates telegraphing their current location sitting on rocks and trees. In that case the reddish, orange, yellowish tones work against him. This aspect of his coat is a classic trade-off. Roe deer, red fox and red deer have also clearly not evolved their specific coloration in response to those pesky two-legged primates*. Their habbits a great deal, especially more experienced ladies tend to become nocturnal ghosts when human hunting pressure is high. They tend to chose their rest areas very well.

Countershading (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countershading) tends to be much more universal with little trade-off, from what I know. Just browse through your mental images of varios animals in their habitat during the times of activity and go through some field guides.

As said before the whole topic is so rich especially if you combine it with personal activities like birding, tracking and hunting.

*Obviously even their sommer coat is not just red. It also looks very different in shades of grey when they are most active and still open to shoot.

BushrangerCZ
06-06-2014, 08:09 PM
http://i840.photobucket.com/albums/zz324/photoamateurcz/LBX-0081-Combat_Pant_grande_zpscc5f104d.jpg
http://lbxtactical.com/collections/bottoms/products/proj-honor-camouflage-combat-pant

good price... however, I go with issued stuff. Not because it´s so good, but because I would feel like airsofter if buying even the uniform. Hopefully our failing logistics will not force me to deploy in PT sweatpants...