ARCHIVED
 OlKev 
Member
Joined: Sep 2001  TX, USA
 Posts: 1582 Feedback: 100% (2) |
Posted: 6/3/2012 11:42:32 AM
[Last Edit: 6/3/2012 11:47:47 AM by OlKev]
THE IMAGE ABOVE IS A PAID ADVERTISEMENT Soldiers Could Go Reptilian with New CamoThis month, soldiers will begin testing a camouflage pattern that
looks more like reptile scales than terrain as part of the field-trial
portion of the Army’s camouflage improvement effort. The start of the field evaluation comes five months after Army
uniform officials announced the finalists that had emerged from the
service’s exhaustive Phase IV Camouflage Improvement effort. A handful
of vendors were awarded contracts to make camouflage-patterned material
for uniforms and equipment. Ultimately, the winner’s pattern could end
up replacing the Army’s embattled Universal Camouflage Pattern, known as
UCP, which was adopted in 2004.     Arid Transitional WoodlandIn my mind, Multicam is the smart move since it is proven on the battlefield and there is so much in the inventory already. but with the digital craze, and four patterns ADS/Hyperstealth may have a leg up. The other two patterns seem pretty radical. What do you think? |
|
|
|
Dawg180
Student of the Assault Rifle
Team Member
Joined: Dec 2002 IL, USA
Posts: 15750 Feedback: 100% (151) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 1:16:37 PM
It seems that no matter how many times Multicam is proven to be the winner in a universal camo comparison, the military refuses to adopt it and then runs yet another test.
I would say there is a great deal of pushback from the powers that be to make sure that multicam does not become the service wide universal camo pattern. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2012 2:03:01 PM
i've heard that there will be a woodland and desert version of multicam, or whatever the crye entry is. i don't know anyone that's seen it... or their australian camo that they got paid a shitload of money to design. i'd like to see that too.
|
|
|
|
SKD_Tactical
Member
Industry Partner
Joined: Jun 2004 USA
Posts: 14843 Feedback: 100% (352) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 2:36:40 PM
But I FINALLY have matching everything! Seriously another camo pattern??? it took 13 years for me to get issued everything in once color scheme.
SOS |
|
|
Bonk2029
Missing my Puggie.
Team Member
Joined: Apr 2004 VA, USA
Posts: 7801 Feedback: 100% (6) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 2:50:39 PM
Originally Posted By Dawg180:
It seems that no matter how many times Multicam is proven to be the winner in a universal camo comparison, the military refuses to adopt it and then runs yet another test. I agree. Multicam works in Afghanistan, we already have the infrastructure to start pushing it out to the troops, get on with it already. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2012 3:09:10 PM
[Last Edit: 6/3/2012 3:10:04 PM by FDC]
Originally Posted By OlKev:
What do you think? Quit wasting my tax money and issue one set of field uniforms with gear across the services(it worked in the 90s and early 2000s). No AF smurf puke blue, no Navy drown me matching color of the ocean blue, no Army gravel pit gray, no little EGAs microprinted in your shit. Put together a joint uniform panel chaired by either the USMC or Army, give them a budget, some left/right limits, and a year to find a solution and call it a day. I'm sick of wasting my own money on required gear. The first time the Army has gotten this halfway correct is with the current RFI issue; there is some halfway decent gear in there. Now I am clearing CIF prepping to PCS, and on my 8 page CIF record, I have 5 different patterns: Woodland, 3 Color Desert, UCP, OCP, and arctic overwihites. I've only deployed 3 times, but each time was a different pattern––DCU to Iraq, ACU and OCP to Afghanistan. Fuck |
|
|
raf
Sr. Staff, Armory and Outdoors Communities
Site Staff
Joined: May 2001 RI, USA
Posts: 23347 Feedback: 100% (10) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 6:15:27 PM
Originally Posted By FDC:
Originally Posted By OlKev:
What do you think? Quit wasting my tax money and issue one set of field uniforms with gear across the services(it worked in the 90s and early 2000s). No AF smurf puke blue, no Navy drown me matching color of the ocean blue, no Army gravel pit gray, no little EGAs microprinted in your shit. Put together a joint uniform panel chaired by either the USMC or Army, give them a budget, some left/right limits, and a year to find a solution and call it a day. I'm sick of wasting my own money on required gear. The first time the Army has gotten this halfway correct is with the current RFI issue; there is some halfway decent gear in there. Now I am clearing CIF prepping to PCS, and on my 8 page CIF record, I have 5 different patterns: Woodland, 3 Color Desert, UCP, OCP, and arctic overwihites. I've only deployed 3 times, but each time was a different pattern––DCU to Iraq, ACU and OCP to Afghanistan. Fuck Good news and bad news. Good news is that mil butgets will soon be so tight that for economy of scale unifors will be,..........more cross-service than they are now. Bad news is that the mil budgets will be so tight that a good many people will be wearing/using older stuff for a long while. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2012 6:25:40 PM
[Last Edit: 6/3/2012 6:26:50 PM by SilentType]
Multicam.
Stuff works and everyone and their brother makes it. Until we get camo that works like the suit the Predator wore than I think we're good-to-go. Although I wish the nylon webbing and hook and loop in MC were more affordable for manufacturers. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2012 8:14:47 PM
[Last Edit: 6/3/2012 8:15:11 PM by TPDavis]
Originally Posted By SKD_Tactical:
But I FINALLY have matching everything! Seriously another camo pattern??? it took 13 years for me to get issued everything in once color scheme.
SOS My thoughts exactly. |
|
|
Madcap72
I wish all the ladies, were holes in the road...
Team Member
Joined: Aug 2009  IRN
Posts: 18471 Feedback: 0% (0) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 8:26:31 PM
The majority of troops would be fine with plain OD uniforms.
The primary purpose of US uniforms is to identify service members AS service members. Only the minority actually NEED a uniform that will disrupt their outline and attempt to blend into terrain. The Military would be better off investing in rapid uniform printing for specific theater needs. |
|
|
jtb0311
Member
Team Member
Joined: Sep 2007 TN, USA
Posts: 2534 Feedback: 100% (3) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 8:32:12 PM
Originally Posted By Dawg180:
It seems that no matter how many times Multicam is proven to be the winner in a universal camo comparison, the military refuses to adopt it and then runs yet another test. Multicam has been in widespread use with the U.S. Army in Afghanistan for a year or more. |
|
|
|
jtb0311
Member
Team Member
Joined: Sep 2007 TN, USA
Posts: 2535 Feedback: 100% (3) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 8:33:27 PM
Originally Posted By Bonk2029:
Originally Posted By Dawg180:
It seems that no matter how many times Multicam is proven to be the winner in a universal camo comparison, the military refuses to adopt it and then runs yet another test. I agree. Multicam works in Afghanistan, we already have the infrastructure to start pushing it out to the troops, get on with it already. MC has been issued to Army units deploying to Afghanistan for quite some time. |
|
|
|
jtb0311
Member
Team Member
Joined: Sep 2007 TN, USA
Posts: 2536 Feedback: 100% (3) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 8:35:10 PM
Originally Posted By SilentType:
Multicam. Stuff works and everyone and their brother makes it. Multicam is current issue for US Army personnel in Afghanistan. |
|
|
|
Black-Tiger
GIVE THEM NOTHING, BUT TAKE EVERYTHING!
Team Member
Joined: Jan 2006 AZ, USA
Posts: 22861 Feedback: 100% (14) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 8:37:08 PM
Multicam is damn effective, A-TACS is also very effective.
|
|
|
jtb0311
Member
Team Member
Joined: Sep 2007 TN, USA
Posts: 2537 Feedback: 100% (3) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 8:38:35 PM
Originally Posted By Madcap72:
The majority of troops would be fine with plain OD uniforms. The primary purpose of US uniforms is to identify service members AS service members. Only the minority actually NEED a uniform that will disrupt their outline and attempt to blend into terrain. The Military would be better off investing in rapid uniform printing for specific theater needs. This I really like. The Israelis have a brownish green utility uniform that has worked for decades. Our own OG-107s were great for a long time too. I can understand the use of real cammies for light infantry, SF, recon types, but why bother with people who are in fixed positions or ride into battle in vehicles? After a day of sweating and getting dusty, pretty much everything looks the same regardless. |
|
|
|
Black-Tiger
GIVE THEM NOTHING, BUT TAKE EVERYTHING!
Team Member
Joined: Jan 2006 AZ, USA
Posts: 22862 Feedback: 100% (14) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 8:39:13 PM
Originally Posted By jtb0311:
Originally Posted By Bonk2029:
Originally Posted By Dawg180:
It seems that no matter how many times Multicam is proven to be the winner in a universal camo comparison, the military refuses to adopt it and then runs yet another test. I agree. Multicam works in Afghanistan, we already have the infrastructure to start pushing it out to the troops, get on with it already. MC has been issued to Army units deploying to Afghanistan for quite some time. And is currently issued to our brothers across the pond in England...  |
|
|
Madcap72
I wish all the ladies, were holes in the road...
Team Member
Joined: Aug 2009 IRN
Posts: 18474 Feedback: 0% (0) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 8:44:06 PM
Originally Posted By jtb0311: Originally Posted By Madcap72: The majority of troops would be fine with plain OD uniforms. The primary purpose of US uniforms is to identify service members AS service members. Only the minority actually NEED a uniform that will disrupt their outline and attempt to blend into terrain. The Military would be better off investing in rapid uniform printing for specific theater needs. This I really like. The Israelis have a brownish green utility uniform that has worked for decades. Our own OG-107s were great for a long time too. I can understand the use of real cammies for light infantry, SF, recon types, but why bother with people who are in fixed positions or ride into battle in vehicles? After a day of sweating and getting dusty, pretty much everything looks the same regardless. Pretty much. When people where getting all hyped up over multicam vs. MARPAT I used to make sarcastic posts about how MARPAT hid Marines in front of trucks better than multicam.  One camo can NEVER, EVER work for everything, or at least as well as purpose made patterns for the spatial dispersion of the area operated in. |
|
|
MisterPX
Go Scott Go!
Team Member
Joined: Mar 2004 WI, USA
Posts: 9605 Feedback: 100% (33) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 8:56:22 PM
As much as I like other patterns over multicam, enough already. It's already in the system, vendors already have contracts, so just phase it in.
|
|
|
TheOTHERmaninblack
Member
Team Member
Joined: Jul 2009 WY, USA
Posts: 2553 Feedback: 100% (8) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/3/2012 9:46:09 PM
Originally Posted By Madcap72: Originally Posted By jtb0311: Originally Posted By Madcap72: The majority of troops would be fine with plain OD uniforms. The primary purpose of US uniforms is to identify service members AS service members. Only the minority actually NEED a uniform that will disrupt their outline and attempt to blend into terrain. The Military would be better off investing in rapid uniform printing for specific theater needs. This I really like. The Israelis have a brownish green utility uniform that has worked for decades. Our own OG-107s were great for a long time too. I can understand the use of real cammies for light infantry, SF, recon types, but why bother with people who are in fixed positions or ride into battle in vehicles? After a day of sweating and getting dusty, pretty much everything looks the same regardless. Pretty much. When people where getting all hyped up over multicam vs. MARPAT I used to make sarcastic posts about how MARPAT hid Marines in front of trucks better than multicam. One camo can NEVER, EVER work for everything, or at least as well as purpose made patterns for the spatial dispersion of the area operated in. I have to agree. On pretty much the whole thing. As for multicam. I was up in the tall trees the other day with a bunch of other guys, most of whom were wearing old VN eara tiger stripe. One guy was wearing marpat, and another multicam. I was using the multicam guy to index the others. I'd see him first, a LOOONG way off, and then scan out from him to find the others. Marpat guy was hardest to find because of the dark colors, but the tiger stripe worked a treat too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2012 11:01:46 PM
With so much Multicam already purchased in large quantity it shouldn't take much to outfit the entire Army with it and Marines as well frankly
Why go to a whole new camo pattern and end up allowing the MC to go to waste as surplus along with the ACU for a new third camo pattern?  . |
|
|
|
lew
Proud US A-hole
Team Member
Joined: Sep 2005 MI, USA
Posts: 4305 Feedback: 100% (5) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/4/2012 8:59:44 AM
Originally Posted By SilentType:
With so much Multicam already purchased in large quantity it shouldn't take much to outfit the entire Army with it and Marines as well frankly Why go to a whole new camo pattern and end up allowing the MC to go to waste as surplus along with the ACU for a new third camo pattern? .This is a government organization we are talking about. 
I agree with the "MC is already here and needs to be phased in completely" crowd. It's as good as it gets (or really damn close) for an across-the-board camo pattern. It's time to stop fiddle fartin' around with a million new patterns. This camo selection process reminds me of the perpetual infantry carbine trials. Does uniform procurement follow the same playbook as weapons selection? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2012 9:02:37 AM
Originally Posted By Black-Tiger:
And is currently issued to our brothers across the pond in England... http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z152/Misanthropic_gods/mtp_in_use_2.jpg Fun fact: if you look closely, the British Multicam is actually their DPM pattern with Multicam colors |
|
|
|
satellite
Yo, homie. Is that my briefcase?
Team Member
Joined: May 2006  AFG
Posts: 3671 Feedback: 100% (1) Link To This Post |
Posted: 6/4/2012 9:13:31 AM
Why did ATACS and ATACS FG lose out early? My experiences around both patterns show it to be pretty effective.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2012 9:49:01 AM
[Last Edit: 6/4/2012 9:50:36 AM by Layer60]
Originally Posted By Dawg180:
It seems that no matter how many times Multicam is proven to be the winner in a universal camo comparison, the military refuses to adopt it and then runs yet another test. I would say there is a great deal of pushback from the powers that be to make sure that multicam does not become the service wide universal camo pattern. It's pretty clear at this point. I don't know why they have such a resistance to something that works so much better than anything else currently in use. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2012 9:50:08 AM
Originally Posted By Black-Tiger:
Originally Posted By jtb0311:
Originally Posted By Bonk2029:
Originally Posted By Dawg180:
It seems that no matter how many times Multicam is proven to be the winner in a universal camo comparison, the military refuses to adopt it and then runs yet another test. I agree. Multicam works in Afghanistan, we already have the infrastructure to start pushing it out to the troops, get on with it already. MC has been issued to Army units deploying to Afghanistan for quite some time. And is currently issued to our brothers across the pond in England... http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z152/Misanthropic_gods/mtp_in_use_2.jpg Good show!  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/4/2012 10:04:57 AM
[Last Edit: 6/4/2012 10:36:48 AM by OlKev]
Originally Posted By SilentType: Well, if you do that it eliminates the possibility of some desk jockey colonel from the Defense Logistics Agency from getting his star.With so much Multicam already purchased in large quantity it shouldn't take much to outfit the entire Army with it and Marines as well frankly Why go to a whole new camo pattern and end up allowing the MC to go to waste as surplus along with the ACU for a new third camo pattern? .Originally Posted By satellite: Why did ATACS and ATACS FG lose out early? My experiences around both patterns show it to be pretty effective. From the A-TACS Facebook Page via Grey Ops: Dec 14th, 2011– In advance of the US Army Camouflage
Improvement effort down select due to take place on December 15th, we wish to
inform our loyal supporters and partners that we will not be a part of the
final down select. As the process moves forward we wish all of the finalists
the best. With regards to
our pattern family submission, we set out to do something radically different
from the accepted norm, based on our A-TACS concept, but wholly unique. The
pattern submission was designed and specifically suited to meet the
requirements set forth in the initial RFP. However, our patterns use more color
and use it in a different way than most patterns, making them a challenge to
evaluate using pre-existing and outdated methodology for evaluation–the same
methodology that produced the current UCP pattern. Often times, it is easier to
take the path of least resistance than to raise the bar and develop new
standards. After all, the end result is to offer the best possible concealment
to our service men and women. Now with the
introduction of our new A-TACS FG Camo platform, Digital Concealment Systems
will continue to focus on it’s core mission. To provide new technology and the
very best concealment options to Special Operations, Law Enforcement and
Tactical Professionals worldwide. It is our firm belief that those individuals
who lay their lives on the line each and every day in service, deserve nothing
less. The Army is currently in Phase IV of the competition. Here is the timeline:  |
|
|
ARCHIVED
