The Marine Corps has been accused of "going it alone" when it came to adopting its combat uniform. While I once cheered the decision not to share, now I'm not so sure.
One thing has occurred that no one is talking about though.
The US Army, Australia and the UK (I believe) are all wearing Crye Precision as their combat uniform. I'm not sure how I feel about that one. First I'm not sold that Crye is the best of breed and second I'm not solid on the idea of US forces wearing the same kit as our allies. Its a small thing and maybe it doesn't really matter but I would think being able to identify US personnel from those of another country could prove valuable in certain situations.
I'm gonna have to chew on this some more.
It does highlight what I feel is a growing problem. World wide standardization on US gear. Even the Chinese are wearing our old style Kevlar helmets. If it isn't an issue now (standardization) then I think one day it will be. Gear, techniques, even training. Something is unsettling about it.
If you want to bang your head about uniforms then the GAO report on it is the best. I read the entire report and it is just sad.
ReplyDeleteAs for the USMC not sharing with the other services, already about 20 other countries have copied our pattern anyway. Plus when working with Allies it just confuses them. Except for only a couple nations most military's have never heard of the USMC and we just confuse them.
Honestly i think it is a mistake to have separate service uniforms.
yeah. great points. i know i would much rather have the US Army wearing Marine Pattern than going with Crye...especially since Crye seems like a world wide pattern now.
Deleteone thing the Army needs to seriously wrap its head around is not having all their gear in multicam. pick ranger green or coyote brown but multicam for everything? not very versatile.
Deletehttp://soldiersystems.net/2013/10/12/us-army-camouflage-improvement-effort-us-army-awards-contract-to-crye-for-ocp/#comments
ReplyDeleteBig Army fucks up again.
They just blew up the Army camouflage phase IV competition. Years of solicitations, tests, research ruined by a bunch of mediocre bureaucrats disguised as Army generals.
The competition was to supposed to determine the best camouflage in visual, Near Infa-Red and Infa Red spectrums so that Army soldiers were not saddled with a disaster like UCP. Crye Precision was one of the four finalists. However, this Multicam decision is not about the family of Crye Precision for a temperate/air/transitional camouflage. This isn't even about who won the actual competition to determine the best camouflage patterns.
This is about Big Army chickening out and going with an easy opt-out of more of the same instead of deciding to acquire the best camouflage pattern for its soldiers in any environment. In essence, it is a failure of leadership by Army leadership.
Multicam looks good....in transitional environments. But in arid regions, it looks like shit since it is too dark. In temperate regions, it looks like shit since it is too light. As for Near-IR and IR, there are better patterns available as well. In other words, this decision is just as bad as UCP was in 2004 because our soldiers will stand out if they don't happen to be in a semi-arid environment.
In a football game this would be the equivalent of the home team punting on 1st down at the visitor's 5yd line.
Why anyone would trust these buffoons with JLTV, GCV, AMPV, Scout Helos, when they fuck-up small, but essential program like picking the best camouflage patterns so our soldiers don't stick out like sore-thumbs I will never know.
It's a good thing Gen. Paralus is sitting there at his keyboard, bitching, instead of trying to do something, like become a general on the camouflage committee.
DeleteHey, General McSpadden turns up to talk shit. Good to see you. I haven't seen your usual F35 fanboy posts lately.
DeleteBig Army fucked up. It's that simple.
totally agree Paralus. they defaulted to the simplest and might i add CHEAPEST (in the short run) choice available. what do we get to see now? a glut of high quality, barely used ACU gear on the market for a song. i'll probably buy some and dye it white first a couple of times ( to kill the ACU pattern) then in the color of my choice (probably black, ranger green and coyote brown) for beater bags...
Deletebut back to David. he's mostly harmless, he's just another misguided (as i once was) fan of a faulty, failed and corrupt program. you must forgive sheeple. they don't know any better.
That's General Admiral Wing Commander McSpadden to you.
DeleteSeems like a cool way to confuse the adversary. Independent nations share the same 'look' - and then USMC shows up. Subtle but effective to mess with any scout's reports back to Head-Quarters.
ReplyDeleteAnd waiting up the sleeve are - yep, 'blueberries', on ships of all things. More confusion to the enemy.
If this upsets folks here in this Blog, it will sure mess up the enemy trying to figure out who is wearing and why ?
Possibly the best camo yet - right there but giving you not much of any clue - until the Aussies crank out "Waltzing Matilda" or something... But that would be a breach of the Geneva Convention anyway !
"It does highlight what I feel is a growing problem. World wide standardization on US gear. Something is unsettling about it."
ReplyDeleteThe French built two Maginot lines
One in France (Duh) and the other, in Czechoslovakia.
The second line was handed over to Germany "to keep the peace", and the next day, hundreds of German military engineers descended on the line. Within weeks, they'd weighed it, measured it, and tested their heavy artillery pieces on it.
So when they went against the real maginot line, they knew exactly what it took to crack the armor
I'm always dubious about claims of "export" models. The US army didnt get a "monkey model" in the M119 or the M777
Whenever Soviet equipment was shown as wildly out matched, they were quick to blame the local crews, or the lower standard export models, but the reality is Soviet units operating Soviet equipment have had some pretty ropey encounters
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Rimon_20
well, those Migs were outnumbered.
DeletePlus, the Soviets were always known to be rather rigid flyers and at this point were still heavily reliant on GCI and would be until the 1980s.
oh, and at least 1 North Korean pilot went up against an Israeli flight in 1973.
He allegedly flew well, but was shot down when his wingman abandoned him.
This is why I am all for one standard Camo Uniform. I do like the Canadian CADPAT and the Flecktarn that the RAN has.
ReplyDeleteDenmark is on Multicam too!
ReplyDeletewow!!!!!! you do know this is how conspiracy theories get started. we're talking about this on a tactical and practical level and soon someone will spin it to us saying that a one world military is in development!!!
DeleteIm not to worried :-)
Deleteat least DK, UK and US are already working together all the time
The Marine decision not to share their camo patterns was one of the most petulant things I have ever seen.
ReplyDeleteThey DESIGNED little marine emblems right into the uniforms so no other service branch could use them, which of course made the Army jealous, causing them to blow 1.4 billion USD on shitty UCP.
For the Australian Army, I believe its only in Afghanistan. The standard multi is still the Jungle bean.
ReplyDeleteOr the "bunny ears" camp pattern as it is sometimes lovingly called...
DeleteHearts and Bunnies
DeleteNow the Brits can sneak in and raid the supply room, with ease
ReplyDeleteThe Brits use MTP. multi Terrain Pattern which is based on the existing DPM and desert patterns mixed together. Although similar to US and Australian patterns it is not really compatible and are not approved by the British ministry of defence. The US carried out trials and found out that the old desert pattern used by the British was the best for places like Afghanistan. The new pattern being used and those being used by the US and Australia are a compromise for all terrains so therefore has drawbacks.The Crye precision pattern was put forward years ago but was rejected by the US army. The Brits were the first to adopt the pattern so the assumption that many nations are standardising to the US is not correct. Most nations forces carry out the same trials as each other so many are going to come up with the same results. These are based on the operations in Afghanistan mostly and since various forces are operating together its inevitable that standardization will occur. I know many British soldiers who have served in Afghanistan and I have family members still there. Most seem to approve of the new pattern and say its great for that environment.
ReplyDeleteGOR' Floggin' RAM! Are they still playing dress up GI Joe?
ReplyDeleteIf the Marines want their own camo pattern it's no different than wanting their own dress uniforms, distinctive and stand out.
If ya don't like it, that's just tough titty l'il kitty.
At least this way Brits and US forces will avoid Blue on Blue.
My view is, each service should issue Utilities in OD Green, Coyote brown or Khaki when garrison or barracks.
The camo uniforms should be a 782 gear issue for those units being deployed and only field or combat units should get them. The camo pattern should match the terrain and not just be designed to work where ever.
The current Navy utility uniform is ridiculous for shipboard wear, the USAF is a good pattern for jungle combat but an airfield flight line? That's what reflective belts were made for.
The Army is large enough to field several camo patterns for all it's AO's and the pattern should fit the terrain.
Wearing Olive Drab sateen BDU's in the field and three days later the OD/Khaki/ Coyote Brn starts to take on the color and texture of the terrain making a very effective camouflage in itself from natural material.
What I'm saying basically is, every swinging dick and clappin' clitoris in the military doesn't need High Tech Visible and IR camouflaged uniforms.
Sitting at a desk, working a flight line, sailing a ship needs a different set of uniforms than the ones the Infantry/Rifleman needs in ground combat.
I recall camo was banned by the US Army in WW2 Europe because of blue on blue since the Wehrmacht made extensive use of Cammies and US troops shot at cammie clad troops on sight.
It was better to have a uniform that clearly showed who was who.
Commonality between to different allies means clearly recognized camo patterns reducing the chances of fratricide.
This is war we are talking about not some silly ast fashion show.
Then again what do I know I'm just an old guy with another stinky opinion.
Scuttlebutt is that ADS Tech's US4CES is going to be the next Army camo pattern. If that is true then expect all the multicam gear to get sent overseas as "foreign aid" instead of hitting the US surplus market. Which sucks, because the Medium Ruck in Multicam is a damn good piece of kit.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI don't know much about Australia but Britain uses mtp which is essentially rescaled dpm in multicam colours and have been doing so since 2010 ;the same time when the us military started to use it. the austrailan variant (AMP) was introduced approximately a year after. In short Britain uses the same colours but a different pattern which makes the uniform a seemingly darker shade than multicam. Australia and the us use exactly the same uniform. so you dont look that much like Britain but a lot like Australia.
ReplyDeletewoodland dpm is still used but as of 2010 active combat soldiers are no longer issued desert dpm. desert dpm is still in use but only by a fraction of the british military, mostly by veterans who may still have the old desert pattern. woodland dpm is slowly fading away as it stand majority of the british military use mtp. if you live in britain then you probably could get surplus desert and woodland dpm very easily.
Delete