Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 9/15/2009 2:40:58 PM EDT
Read this today:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/09/army_new_camo_091409w/

We talk a lot on here about camo-patterns. How bad ACU sucks, how great Multicam is, about the new AOR-1/2, and how the army needs a new pattern.

I like ACU, but it's not even close to the best pattern for it's intended "universal" purpose. We all know how great multicam is supposed to be.

Now the Army has a deadline of Sept 30th to find a new pattern after continuous complaints from soldiers about the performance of the ACU pattern.

Looking at the UCP-Delta pattern it just looks like stained ACUs. Better than the standard UCP but only marginally.

What do you THINK that the Army will field? I don't think most soldiers will be happy until we field multicam because of the cool factor if nothing else. But, will the Army really field a pattern that they didn't design in-house?

As an aside, wasn't the Army testing a set of mountain-combat ACUs? Basically the Crye combat uniforms in UCP? I think the Crye uniforms in multi-cam would be the best combat uniform the Army could issue, but we'll likely end up with just ACUs in multicam pattern.

If they do swap to Multi-cam there will be a ton of ACU pattern gear for sale CHEAP!
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 2:51:58 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 3:05:39 PM EDT
American Flecktarn?



Link Posted: 9/15/2009 3:12:30 PM EDT
Man, that looks like butt. You'd think they'd catch a fucking clue and take notice of what some units and organizations are choosing to wear.
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 3:14:10 PM EDT
Well, according to the Army TImes, it is down to multicam and that UCP-Delta abomonation. We'll see how it goes. We should have some sort of answer by the end of the year.
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 3:18:40 PM EDT
That still looks like shit...
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 3:28:29 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 3:37:33 PM EDT
Originally Posted By joker581:
Originally Posted By imortal:
Well, according to the Army TImes, it is down to multicam and that UCP-Delta abomonation. We'll see how it goes. We should have some sort of answer by the end of the year.


It would be awesome if they went with Multicam, but I have to believe that the Army will make the wrong choice and adopt UCP-D.


Yeah. Soldiers are gonna be pissed if it's UCP-D. I wonder how the commercial gear market will react to the decision? Will they drop UCP altogether like they did with Woodland or if multicam will be cheaper than now for soldiers?
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 3:46:28 PM EDT
Originally Posted By joker581:
Originally Posted By imortal:
Well, according to the Army TImes, it is down to multicam and that UCP-Delta abomonation. We'll see how it goes. We should have some sort of answer by the end of the year.


It would be awesome if they went with Multicam, but I have to believe that the Army will make the wrong choice and adopt UCP-D.


You're probably right, but it's frustrating as fuck to see them keep getting this wrong. Why they have this hard-on for a "universal" pattern I don't know.
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 4:21:38 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SSeric02:
Originally Posted By joker581:
Originally Posted By imortal:
Well, according to the Army TImes, it is down to multicam and that UCP-Delta abomonation. We'll see how it goes. We should have some sort of answer by the end of the year.


It would be awesome if they went with Multicam, but I have to believe that the Army will make the wrong choice and adopt UCP-D.


You're probably right, but it's frustrating as fuck to see them keep getting this wrong. Why they have this hard-on for a "universal" pattern I don't know.


It is digital- it is high-tech. It MUST be better!
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 4:28:07 PM EDT
Joker581

It would be awesome if they went with Multicam, but I have to believe that the Army will make the wrong choice and adopt UCP-D.


Sadly your are most likely correct...

We have not had a good track record of picking camo patterns since we retired the Woodland BDU's...

Just look at the original "chocolate chip" desert pattern and how they had to revise it until they got a good pattern.

Link Posted: 9/15/2009 4:34:40 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Harv24:
Joker581

It would be awesome if they went with Multicam, but I have to believe that the Army will make the wrong choice and adopt UCP-D.


Sadly your are most likely correct...

We have not had a good track record of picking camo patterns since we retired the Woodland BDU's...

Just look at the original "chocolate chip" desert pattern and how they had to revise it until they got a good pattern.


the marines did good
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 4:54:48 PM EDT
Originally Posted By starduks:

Originally Posted By Harv24:
Joker581

It would be awesome if they went with Multicam, but I have to believe that the Army will make the wrong choice and adopt UCP-D.


Sadly your are most likely correct...

We have not had a good track record of picking camo patterns since we retired the Woodland BDU's...

Just look at the original "chocolate chip" desert pattern and how they had to revise it until they got a good pattern.


the marines did good



No shit! How is it they nailed it the first time but the Army can't figure it out after, what ten year?!
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 4:55:35 PM EDT
Originally Posted By starduks:

Originally Posted By Harv24:
Joker581

It would be awesome if they went with Multicam, but I have to believe that the Army will make the wrong choice and adopt UCP-D.


Sadly your are most likely correct...

We have not had a good track record of picking camo patterns since we retired the Woodland BDU's...

Just look at the original "chocolate chip" desert pattern and how they had to revise it until they got a good pattern.


the marines did good


Marines I believe got their patterns from the Army's original trial. Army developed the desert and woodland digital patterns but opted instead for a universal pattern. While a universal pattern is a noble goal, it's pretty unrealistic. We do need multicam in the Army. UCP has run it's course.

I still dig multicam and 3-color desert.

Link Posted: 9/15/2009 4:56:31 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 5:04:54 PM EDT
They didn't choose MultiCam the first time they had the opportunity because it "wasn't invented here". Look for UCP-D to get the nod. Hope I am wrong, but if internal politics play into it again, MultiCam will continue to be a "special uses" camo.

Just my uneducated opinion.
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 5:13:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/15/2009 5:14:06 PM EDT by TCBA_Joe]
Originally Posted By TimW:
They didn't choose MultiCam the first time they had the opportunity because it "wasn't invented here". Look for UCP-D to get the nod. Hope I am wrong, but if internal politics play into it again, MultiCam will continue to be a "special uses" camo.

Just my uneducated opinion.


That's what I think. But, why won't higher listen to us. I understand why the HK416 wasn't adopted. It wasn't enough of a revolution to justify spending the money. Well, UCP-D is to UCP as M4 is to 416. It's stupid and probably while more effective than UCP, it isn't revolutionary enough to justify spending money on it.

If leadership wants to boost morale and confidence, a simple change like multicam would do wonders. We're getting commercial stuff all the time, outside contractors are developing some amazing stuff, but why can't the same be true of camouflage?
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 5:17:20 PM EDT
Found this:
Awesome, it looks nearly identical to the UCP carrier underneath it.
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 5:17:54 PM EDT
Red jackets and bearskin hats!
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 5:29:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By TCBA_Joe:
Originally Posted By starduks:

Originally Posted By Harv24:
Joker581

It would be awesome if they went with Multicam, but I have to believe that the Army will make the wrong choice and adopt UCP-D.


Sadly your are most likely correct...

We have not had a good track record of picking camo patterns since we retired the Woodland BDU's...

Just look at the original "chocolate chip" desert pattern and how they had to revise it until they got a good pattern.


the marines did good


Marines I believe got their patterns from the Army's original trial. Army developed the desert and woodland digital patterns but opted instead for a universal pattern. While a universal pattern is a noble goal, it's pretty unrealistic. We do need multicam in the Army. UCP has run it's course.

I still dig multicam and 3-color desert.



MARCORSYSCOM ran trials in 2000 for a new uniform. They tested a bunch of patterns and color variations (one of my Platoon Sergeants was in the Basic Sniper Course at Quantico and participated in some of them) and ended up using a pattern developed from the Canadian's CADPAT with colors similar to old tiger stripes for the woodland, and then developed the desert pattern off that with testing out at 29 Palms during CAX. Online survey's were also conducted, and contributed to some of the uniform features.

The big Army needs to wake up and smell the coffee- a single universal pattern is a pipe dream.
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 5:30:49 PM EDT
In the same Army Times article they say that if UCP-D is adopted Rep. Fuller says that we will still be using UCP body armor which to me kind of defeats the purpose of spending millions up on millions of $$$ if the UCP is so bad, and I think that it does need improvement, then why not scrap it all together rather than leave it in body armor, packs, camelbaks, etc. Just does not make much sense to me which probably means that is just what we will be doing. On page 4 of the same Army Times issue I thought that a SSG had a good idea. His idea was to take satelitte photos from likely battlegrounds i.e. Middle East and Afganistan at the current time and take the colors from those satelitte imagery and designate them onto a camo. pattern. It could not be much worse than the current situation we are in.
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 5:53:00 PM EDT
Originally Posted By whick1:
In the same Army Times article they say that if UCP-D is adopted Rep. Fuller says that we will still be using UCP body armor which to me kind of defeats the purpose of spending millions up on millions of $$$ if the UCP is so bad, and I think that it does need improvement, then why not scrap it all together rather than leave it in body armor, packs, camelbaks, etc. Just does not make much sense to me which probably means that is just what we will be doing. On page 4 of the same Army Times issue I thought that a SSG had a good idea. His idea was to take satelitte photos from likely battlegrounds i.e. Middle East and Afganistan at the current time and take the colors from those satelitte imagery and designate them onto a camo. pattern. It could not be much worse than the current situation we are in.


Here's my read on it, the big Army will choose the UCP-D because they think it will get the clowns in DC to get off their backs, and they can still use the UCP pattern gear with it and not break the bank on a whole new kit of everything.
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 6:12:30 PM EDT
That UCP-D looks horrible.

My guess is they will pick Multicam because it's used by some Spec Ops and Ranger Units and the Army tends to follow the lead of the Special Forces and Ranger Units. Like they did with the Beret being issued to everyone.
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 6:39:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/15/2009 6:41:43 PM EDT by skebe]
Originally Posted By SSeric02:
Originally Posted By whick1:
In the same Army Times article they say that if UCP-D is adopted Rep. Fuller says that we will still be using UCP body armor which to me kind of defeats the purpose of spending millions up on millions of $$$ if the UCP is so bad, and I think that it does need improvement, then why not scrap it all together rather than leave it in body armor, packs, camelbaks, etc. Just does not make much sense to me which probably means that is just what we will be doing. On page 4 of the same Army Times issue I thought that a SSG had a good idea. His idea was to take satelitte photos from likely battlegrounds i.e. Middle East and Afganistan at the current time and take the colors from those satelitte imagery and designate them onto a camo. pattern. It could not be much worse than the current situation we are in.


Here's my read on it, the big Army will choose the UCP-D because they think it will get the clowns in DC to get off their backs, and they can still use the UCP pattern gear with it and not break the bank on a whole new kit of everything.


Yeah I see that happening as well to.

The rock stars still get to pick what they want but big green won't get serious on the issue for the regular troops and support crews.

They'll only do what it takes to get the poloticos off their backs. Not what it takes to really take care of the plain folks in the dirt.

ETA: I hope I'm wrong, really and truly. But I don't see the Army publicly admitting UCP was a mistake (if they go with MC).
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 4:46:47 AM EDT
I "heard" that Army units in the next 6 months will be receiving a uniform similar to Desert Marpat for deployments until a suitable choice can be found.
Take that at face value


I would almost just expect them to follow the Corps. Run a desert and woodland with brown kit...
Almost makes sense.
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 6:07:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/16/2009 6:07:44 AM EDT by SSeric02]
Originally Posted By MOS2111:
I "heard" that Army units in the next 6 months will be receiving a uniform similar to Desert Marpat for deployments until a suitable choice can be found.
Take that at face value


I would almost just expect them to follow the Corps. Run a desert and woodland with brown kit...
Almost makes sense.


Yep, the answer is staring them in the face- MARPAT woodland/desrt, AOR 1/2, etc.
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 7:11:01 AM EDT
They should just go with multicam, imho.
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 9:14:45 AM EDT
Personally I'm happy with the fact that they haven't gone to MC, I don't want to look like a poseur with all my MC stuff on any more than I already do

AOR camo's are what would make the most sense, or just changing the coloration of the UCP to something that exists in nature. (NOT just adding big mud splotches.)
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 1:13:52 PM EDT
Originally Posted By drew5337:
Personally I'm happy with the fact that they haven't gone to MC, I don't want to look like a poseur with all my MC stuff on any more than I already do

AOR camo's are what would make the most sense, or just changing the coloration of the UCP to something that exists in nature. (NOT just adding big mud splotches.)


Yeah, so you don't want the best possible tool to go to soldiers because range-monekys would look like posers. yeah...
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 1:16:17 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/16/2009 3:12:54 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SSeric02:
Originally Posted By MOS2111:
I "heard" that Army units in the next 6 months will be receiving a uniform similar to Desert Marpat for deployments until a suitable choice can be found.
Take that at face value


I would almost just expect them to follow the Corps. Run a desert and woodland with brown kit...
Almost makes sense.


Yep, the answer is staring them in the face- MARPAT woodland/desrt, AOR 1/2, etc.


I think AOR1/2/ is the only logical 'political' choice the Army can make.
The Army would never adopt a USMC developed pattern.
They'll start to phase in UCP-D patten uniforms, using the same armor/web gear, and then a few years later they'll decide to use AOR 1 & 2. They can save face since it's an "Army-developed" pattern.
Link Posted: 9/19/2009 6:33:39 PM EDT
I have this strange feeling that we are going to get the monkey poop ucp delta uniform. The reports from the field will be Multicam reigns supreme in Afghanistan, but the brass won't listen to it. They want an Army made camo pattern. They want a digital pattern. My only concern is this. Why are we sending a pattern that has no science, no field testing, no data, no anything in a combat zone to test??????? Why are we risking the lives of good Soldiers so bureaucrats can continue to make money for their retirement funds? I would have rather the Army used the DCU vs Multicam instead of the UCP Delta. How many Soldiers do we have to lose to realize that a Universal Camo Pattern sucks??????
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 9:00:20 AM EDT
Originally Posted By archangel7999:
I have this strange feeling that we are going to get the monkey poop ucp delta uniform. The reports from the field will be Multicam reigns supreme in Afghanistan, but the brass won't listen to it. They want an Army made camo pattern. They want a digital pattern. My only concern is this. Why are we sending a pattern that has no science, no field testing, no data, no anything in a combat zone to test??????? Why are we risking the lives of good Soldiers so bureaucrats can continue to make money for their retirement funds? I would have rather the Army used the DCU vs Multicam instead of the UCP Delta. How many Soldiers do we have to lose to realize that a Universal Camo Pattern sucks??????


Because in their eyes these poor souls are expendable. I don't think much of Multicam but ACU/UCP is by far worse. Sadly I believe they will throw on the mud stains, rip the tax payers a new one and sacrifice soldiers to "try it out". All this in the name of making a buck because like it or not war is an industry and the workers(our soldiers) and the consumers(the enemy) are not of any concern to the profiteers. That being said the Marines got it right and I don't understand why all the various branches having to have their own special camo(seems a bit childish)these types of logistic(or lack thereof) I thought were dealt with in WWII with all the various weapons issuing and getting the ammo for those. I digress, Politicians make money, and soldiers get killed.
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 9:04:30 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 9:08:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/20/2009 1:15:27 PM EDT by HeavyMetal]
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 6:44:15 PM EDT
All they have to do is take an existing patten and add color to it. Gee, I wonder if they will choose multicam? It's all aout the money anyways.
Link Posted: 9/20/2009 9:08:37 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SSeric02:
Originally Posted By MOS2111:
I "heard" that Army units in the next 6 months will be receiving a uniform similar to Desert Marpat for deployments until a suitable choice can be found.
Take that at face value


I would almost just expect them to follow the Corps. Run a desert and woodland with brown kit...
Almost makes sense.


Yep, the answer is staring them in the face- MARPAT woodland/desrt, AOR 1/2, etc.


I agree with this, but I also think that the Army brass is to stuck on the idea of a universal digital camo and to proud to consider anything out of house; or soldiers
would alrea be using Marpat or Multicam or probably the best camouflage British DPM.
Link Posted: 9/21/2009 2:54:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/21/2009 8:48:21 AM EDT by Tim_McBride]
All of you are forgetting the real concern of High Ranking SGMs and Generals; How will this uniform look on Soliders in garrison.

This is all they really care about.
Link Posted: 9/21/2009 7:17:33 AM EDT
Well, all I can say in my first post on the AR15 forums is at least its not the Awesome ABU. I'll save the bashing for another day though.
Link Posted: 9/21/2009 8:13:19 AM EDT
Originally Posted By USAFJam32:
Well, all I can say in my first post on the AR15 forums is at least its not the Awesome ABU. I'll save the bashing for another day though.


Yeah, no agrument there. The Chiefs really did a doozie on ya'll.
Link Posted: 9/21/2009 12:42:42 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Tim_McBride:
All of you are forgetting the real concern of High Ranking SGMs and Generals; How will this uniform look on Soliders in garrison.

This is all they really care about.


In which case I would think they would choose multicam as opposed to having soldiers walking around who look like they spent the night out, slept in their uniforms and puked and shat over themselves in the morning...

Or at least thats what I hope they think...
Link Posted: 9/22/2009 5:02:43 AM EDT
I am of the understanding that multicam wasn't chosen because the pattern was trademarked and the Army didn't want to pay a royalty for every uniform. Which is funny considering they payed a royalty on every Colt M16 they bought.
Link Posted: 9/22/2009 7:55:53 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TANGOCHASER:
I am of the understanding that multicam wasn't chosen because the pattern was trademarked and the Army didn't want to pay a royalty for every uniform. Which is funny considering they payed a royalty on every Colt M16 they bought.



as far as i can tell, that's just a rumor. Ive yet to find any evidence of that being true except some people who have "inside knowledge that they heard from a friends of a friend of a cousin, who's brothers best friend heard from a soldier who read it some where". and besides didn't the Army jointly develope the Scorpion( the name of Multicam at the time) pattern with crye?
Link Posted: 9/23/2009 12:29:25 AM EDT
Multicam pattern is trademarked thoug. thats why a lot of gear distributor won't carry the pattern.
Link Posted: 9/23/2009 1:21:12 AM EDT
I understand the trademark issue...
but they could use MC color in ACU digital pattern
Link Posted: 9/23/2009 3:11:25 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Frens:
I understand the trademark issue...
but they could use MC color in ACU digital pattern

X-Camo?

Link Posted: 9/25/2009 9:36:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2009 10:50:50 AM EDT by D_CRISIS]
I'm rooting for the Multicam

I love that stuff

I will go into combat in my PTs or my boxers before I go in that UCP-delta crap
Link Posted: 9/26/2009 2:06:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/26/2009 2:07:00 PM EDT by kitteh]
(sigh)

This is now the de-facto UCP-Delta thread, thanks to some really immature people (ex-servicemen, if you can believe it) who got the alpha thread locked with their petty contretemps.

Here is some interesting info I posted in the alpha UCP-Delta thread:

Camo for Afghanistan - The Rest of the Story

On Friday September 18th, Soldier Systems Daily was granted an exclusive interview with PEO-Soldier’s COL William Cole, Project Manager Soldier Protection and Individual Equipment, Todd Wendt, Deputy Product Manager Soldier Clothing and Individual Equipment, and Cheryl Stewardson, Team Leader, Soldier Integrated Protection, at the U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development & Engineering Center. The topic of our conversation was alternative camouflage patterns. Our goal at SSD for the interview was to cut through the misinformation and conjecture currently permeating the web on this subject and get to the facts. Up to now no one, including us, has adequately told the story of what is actually going on.

As a result of a photosimulation study conducted in 2007 by Natick as well as recent Congressional language directing the Army to provide an enhanced camouflage capability for Soldiers on operations in Afghanistan, the Army is undertaking a four-phased initiative to explore alternate camouflage patterns for the Army Combat Uniform (ACU). Additionally, the Army regularly conducts post combat surveys and had noted several comments that Soldiers were most dissatisfied with UCP’s performance in Woodland environments. Based on this information, the Infantry School suggested that perhaps a Brown shade should be added to the UCP color palette.

The Army’s objective is twofold: to identify an ACU camouflage that will provide effective concealment for Soldiers serving in Operation Enduring Freedom, and to evaluate a long-term camouflage plan for the Army. When COL Cole made his initial decisions on developing a course of action one of the main considerations was Fire Resistance. Whatever was going to be tested and fielded had to be FR. Additionally, they had to meet military specifications for infrared identification and be Berry compliant. Two patterns that met these specifications were readily available; MultiCam® and the Army’s Universal Camouflage Pattern. Recently, many have called for the complete elimination of UCP yet touted the performance of MARPAT. As we will discuss later, the patterns are the same, just with different pigments. If MARPAT performs well, UCP could be tweaked in order to enhance its characteristics and that is exactly what the Army did.

In conjunction with this interview, SSD was provided an exclusive look at the five alternative patterns named UCP-Alpha through Echo developed for the wear test.


Oddly enough, immediately after the story broke, strange conclusions began to surface around the internet that there was a significance to the UCP-Delta moniker. We can assure you that the Delta designation denotes no affiliation to any particular unit but rather is the phonetic alphabet for the letter D. PEO-Soldier used the alphabet since they were not sure initially how many variants they would need to work on. As it turns out, due to time constraints and some solid rudimentary research, they only produced five patterns. Of the five, only Charlie and Delta showed significant promise for further testing. Initially patterns were developed in .jpg format and then fabric was printed on a dot matrix printer.

According to Cheryl Stewardson, Natick researchers then conducted a modified photosimulation test similar to the one conducted in 2007. However, in this test 200 Soldiers at Forts Hood and Campbell with recent combat experience in Afghanistan were shown images of Afghani terrain that had been altered by superimposing photos of ACUs in the Charlie and Delta variants on them. During this testing, UCP-Delta was selected as the most promising pattern.

Some interesting facts about the US digital patterns were revealed during this interview. The digital camouflage is printed using a screen process. MARPAT, UCP, and the AOR patterns all use the same screens. Current UCP utilizes only three of the four screens required to produce MARPAT and AOR but UCP-Delta will add the fourth screen to apply the Coyote to the pattern.

Phase I By the end of September 2009, the Army will provide two alternate uniforms to designated battalions of Soldiers serving in Operation Enduring Freedom. The two alternate uniforms will utilize the MultiCam® and Universal Camouflage Pattern – Delta (UCP-D). The UCP-Delta pattern was derived from the standard UCP by reducing the Urban Grey and Sand colors, and adding Coyote Brown which constitutes 30% of the pattern.

One battalion will receive the MultiCam® uniform, while the other will receive the UCP-Delta uniform. In addition to their test uniforms and equipment both battalions will also be issued a full complement of standard UCP equipment. This will allow commanders to outfit their troops based on METT-TC. While PEO-Soldier plans to use the IOTV in standard UCP for this test, they will provide test forces with the Tactical Assault Platform in UCP-Delta. The TAPS is similar to a chest rig that attaches to the IOTV. Additionally, PEO-Soldier is fast tracking a UCP-Delta solution for the rear of the IOTV. The battalion outfitted in MultiCam® will receive a full complement of TA-50 in that pattern including IOTV, Plate Carrier, MOLLE, and TAP.

Phase II By the end of October 2009, the Army will begin collecting data in theater to measure the suitability of various camouflage patterns. This phase will include feedback from Soldiers in Operation Enduring Freedom; photosimulation of uniform colors and patterns, along with associated Operational Clothing and Individual Equipment (OCIE) such as body armor, helmets, and rucksacks, against a variety of backgrounds common to Afghanistan including foliage, high desert, and mountains; and a photographic study in theater. Specific emphasis will be placed on ensuring accurate RGB values. The Army will analyze the data throughout the collection period in preparation for Phase III.

The next round of Photo simulation studies will include six patterns. However, not all of the patterns have yet been released. COL Cole confirmed that UCP-Delta, MultiCam®, AOR-2 and a newly developed pattern based on the UCP pattern with an entirely new colorway will be tested. The new pattern retains the four screen process but replaces even UCP-Delta’s colors with a pallet based on a photometric study of Afghanistan.

Another goal of this photosimulation study is to measure the effects of a variety of field equipment colors including UCP, Coyote, Khaki, and Ranger Green have when used with different uniform patterns.

Phase III By the end of January 2010, Army leaders will make a decision whether or not to produce and field alternate uniforms and OCIE to selected units in specific regions of Operation Enduring Freedom.

Phase IV At a date to be determined, the Army will establish and evaluate a long-term plan for ACU camouflage. If a new pattern is selected, even for limited use in Afghanistan, it may very well promulgate throughout the Army if it is demonstrates improved camouflage traits.

Link Posted: 9/26/2009 6:42:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Tim_McBride:
All of you are forgetting the real concern of High Ranking SGMs and Generals; How will this uniform look on Soliders in garrison.

This is all they really care about.


more like how will they look with those stupid ass berets....... in a formation for 4 hours during a brigade change of command.



Link Posted: 9/27/2009 4:26:39 PM EDT
I just want Multicam.

Whatever they do...I'd like them to authorize it for everywhere...and I'd buy my own...happy as can be in my MC.

But choosing MC would be great for effectiveness...GREATER for our morale.
Link Posted: 9/27/2009 5:10:12 PM EDT
Originally Posted By LaRue556:
I just want Multicam.

Whatever they do...I'd like them to authorize it for everywhere...and I'd buy my own...happy as can be in my MC.

But choosing MC would be great for effectiveness...GREATER for our morale.


And the folks in charge of the selection process care how much about the morale(much less the effectivness) of the groundpounders?


Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top