Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 126

Thread: All about Camouflage & BCU (inc cartoons)

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Small Wars Journal SWJED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Largo, Florida
    Posts
    3,989

    Default All about Camouflage & BCU (inc cartoons)

    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.

    Last edited by davidbfpo; 08-31-2012 at 09:19 AM. Reason: Add Mod's Note

  2. #2
    Council Member jkm_101_fso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Kabul
    Posts
    325

    Default Oprah was in CAMO!

    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.
    Sir, what the hell are we doing?

  3. #3
    Council Member Spud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canberra, ACT, Australia
    Posts
    122

    Default

    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.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  4. #4
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    499

    Default Congress orders new camo for Afghanistan

    What will it be? Multicam? A different colored digital? Anyone heard?

    Link here: http://www.militarytimes.com/news/20...forms_061509w/
    "Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen." - Jeff Cooper

  5. #5
    Council Member Hacksaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Lansing, KS
    Posts
    361

    Default How much do you want to bet....

    Woodland
    Hacksaw
    Say hello to my 2 x 4

  6. #6
    Council Member Van's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Posts
    414

    Default Regarding the origin of the current Army pattern

    Hyperstealth Biotechnologies 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)

    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.

  7. #7
    Council Member reed11b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Olympia WA
    Posts
    531

    Default

    My inner geardo votes for multicam...
    Reed
    Quote Originally Posted by sapperfitz82 View Post
    This truly is the bike helmet generation.

  8. #8
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Following on Van's comment,

    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) 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.

  9. #9
    Former Member George L. Singleton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    South of Mason Dixon Line
    Posts
    497

    Default Costs of camo should be ignored and endursed

    Quote Originally Posted by Van View Post
    Hyperstealth Biotechnologies 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)

    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.

  10. #10
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Van View Post
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
    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.

  11. #11
    Council Member IntelTrooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    RC-S, Afghanistan
    Posts
    302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
    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??


    "The status quo is not sustainable. All of DoD needs to be placed in a large bag and thoroughly shaken. Bureaucracy and micromanagement kill."
    -- Ken White


    "With a plan this complex, nothing can go wrong." -- Schmedlap

    "We are unlikely to usefully replicate the insights those unencumbered by a military staff college education might actually have." -- William F. Owen

  12. #12
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sierra Vista, AZ
    Posts
    175

    Default Marines

    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
    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.
    "What do you think this is, some kind of encounter group?"
    - Harry Callahan, The Enforcer.

  13. #13
    Council Member Van's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Posts
    414

    Default The Universal Camouflage Pattern Redux

    U.S. Army Natick Soldier TD&E Center publishes the latest study 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.

  14. #14
    Council Member Kevin23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    224

    Default Army changing camo again

    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.

  15. #15
    Registered User awesome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    6

    Default Necessary

    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.

  16. #16
    Council Member Xenophon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    MCB Quantico
    Posts
    119

    Default

    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.

  17. #17
    Registered User awesome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    6

    Default Sorry

    You are right. There is one other environment the ACU works extremely well in.


  18. #18
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Rancho La Espada, Blanchard, OK
    Posts
    1,065

    Default Everybody got camo

    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

  19. #19
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,074

    Default Oprah in Camouflage

    Oprah in Camouflage

    Entry Excerpt:

    From SWJ's good super-hero friend Doctrine Man:





    --------
    Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
    This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

  20. #20
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,074

    Default Army, Marine Corps clashing over cammies...

    Army, Marine Corps clashing over cammies...

    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 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 and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
    This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

Similar Threads

  1. Cartoons Condemning the Terrorist Attacks in Algeria and Morocco
    By marct in forum Media, Information & Cyber Warriors
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-23-2007, 08:20 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •