All about Camouflage & BCU (inc cartoons)

[Ken White]

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. 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. 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.

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.

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

[Rifleman]

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]

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]

and even though the material wasn't IR suppressive they were more than adequate -- plus they're a whole lot cheaper...

[Chris jM]

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]

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]

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.

[SWJ Blog]

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.

[SWJ Blog]

Army Camouflage Pattern Update

Entry Excerpt:

As a follow-up to our SWJ post, Army, Marine Corps clashing over cammies..., CNN's Jennifer Rizzo reports Army sets out to buy three new camouflage patterns. 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 and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

[AdamG]

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...8-3956b2b34001

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...ge-fiasco-1-5/

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

[slapout9]

It's about damn time! Army men are supposed to be green!

[ganulv]

I'm surprised we didn't have a thread on this already -

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

[Fuchs]

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]

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]

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]

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, 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]

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]

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]

It’s here.

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?

[ganulv]

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? 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.