The Conservative Cave
Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: txradioguy on June 27, 2012, 06:40:56 AM
-
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.â€
As Army researchers work furiously on a newer, better camouflage, it’s natural to ask what went wrong and how they’ll avoid the same missteps this time around. In a candid interview with The Daily, several of those researchers said Army brass interfered in the selection process during the last round, letting looks and politics get in the way of science.
“It got into political hands before the soldiers ever got the uniforms,†said Cheryl Stewardson, a textile technologist at the Army research center in Natick, Mass., where most of the armed forces camouflage patterns are made.
The researchers say that science is carrying the day this time, as they run four patterns through a rigorous battery of tests. The goal is to give soldiers different patterns suitable for different environments, plus a single neutral pattern — matching the whole family — to be used on more expensive body armor and other gear. The selection will involve hundreds of computer trials as well on-the-ground testing at half a dozen locations around the world.
But until the new pattern is put in the field — a move that’s still a year or more away — soldiers in Afghanistan have been given a temporary fix: a greenish, blended replacement called MultiCam. The changeover came only after several non-commissioned officers complained to late Pennsylvania Rep. John Murtha, and he took up the cause in 2009. Outside of Afghanistan, the rest of the Army is still stuck with the gray Universal Camouflage Pattern, or UCP. And some soldiers truly hate it.
“Essentially, the Army designed a universal uniform that universally failed in every environment,†said an Army specialist who served two tours in Iraq, wearing UCP in Baghdad and the deserts outside Basra. “The only time I have ever seen it work well was in a gravel pit.â€
The specialist asked that his name be withheld because he wasn’t authorized to speak to the press.
“As a cavalry scout, it is my job to stay hidden. Wearing a uniform that stands out this badly makes it hard to do our job effectively,†he said. “If we can see our own guys across a distance because of it, then so can our enemy.â€
The fact that the government spent $5 billion on a camouflage design that actually made its soldiers more visible — and then took eight years to correct the problem — has also left people in the camouflage industry incensed. The total cost comes from the Army itself and includes the price of developing the pattern and producing it for the entire service branch.
http://www.thedaily.com/page/2012/06/24/062412-news-camouflage-fiasco-1-5/
-
Sad part is, Multicam was a competitor on the 2004 competition. The army could have gone with MARPAT or Multicam, but wamted to design their own.
-
Sad part is, Multicam was a competitor on the 2004 competition. The army could have gone with MARPAT or Multicam, but wamted to design their own.
Honestly we should have never given up what we had. Tri-colors were working just fine in the desert...woodland camo for the rest of the time.
Here's hoping that we go back to BDU's and black boots! :cheersmate:
-
Maybe you want to shine boots, but I don't. It's a distractor from the mission. You can keep it.
-
Maybe you want to shine boots, but I don't. It's a distractor from the mission. You can keep it.
It wasn't exactly one of my favorite things to do...but it went a long was with a soldiers self discipline and pride in the uniform.
-
NATICK, Mass. —
“It got into political hands before the soldiers ever got the uniforms,†said Cheryl Stewardson, a textile technologist at the Army research center in Natick, Mass., where most of the armed forces camouflage patterns are made.
2004 huh?....I bet the 2 senators from the state of Massive-2-shits had a lot to do with that decision, especially the one that had all the Viet Nam era MIA-POW records destroyed.
-
I'm so glad I'm out. As goofy as the dungarees looked, they weren't nearly as ass-hattish looking as that "aquaflage."
-
I was never a fan of the ACU pattern, but the rough-side-out boots are a big improvement. My least-favorite feature of the ACUs isn't the pattern, but the Velcro pocket closures which make noise when they're new and don't work worth a crap when they're old.
Really it was a stupid idea to think one camo pattern could work in everything from jungle to barren desert, the BDUs/DCUs were a pretty decent mix, even if the only real advantage of the DCUs over chocolate chips was that there were fewer colors and so it was cheaper to print (Technically there was less brown in the DCUs, but after two hours they're both covered in dust and salt stains from sweat anyway, so it's a difference that only matters at Natick). The only place that I've ever been thing ACUs actually look like is the desert southwest in the US, which has a lot more pale green foliage than SW Asian desert. I'm not a big fan of Multi-cam or Brit MODs, either, though MARPAT and modern Flecktarn are both good (The brown MARPAT is colored more for temperate Fall and Winter than it is for sandy desert, but darker earthtones work better in Afghanistan than they did in Iraq, where the MARPAT kind of stood out about like ACUs do in Afghanistan).
It's not entirely correct to say the whole pile of money was wasted, since the uniforms were issued and will have been in use for about eight years. While it's a timeless fact that Soldiers do love to grandstand and make drama about their equipment, and individual dismounts being identified and picked off while trying to be stealthy solely due to the ACUs being too visible has to be one of the rearmost trailing causes of GWOT casualties (Hummers and other generally-sand-colored vehicles hit with IEDs would by far be number one), still it's time for this one to go.
-
It wasn't exactly one of my favorite things to do...but it went a long was with a soldiers self discipline and pride in the uniform.
bingo.
h5
-
I was never a fan of the ACU pattern, but the rough-side-out boots are a big improvement. My least-favorite feature of the ACUs isn't the pattern, but the Velcro pocket closures which make noise when they're new and don't work worth a crap when they're old.
Really it was a stupid idea to think one camo pattern could work in everything from jungle to barren desert, the BDUs/DCUs were a pretty decent mix, even if the only real advantage of the DCUs over chocolate chips was that there were fewer colors and so it was cheaper to print (Technically there was less brown in the DCUs, but after two hours they're both covered in dust and salt stains from sweat anyway, so it's a difference that only matters at Natick). The only place that I've ever been thing ACUs actually look like is the desert southwest in the US, which has a lot more pale green foliage than SW Asian desert. I'm not a big fan of Multi-cam or Brit MODs, either, though MARPAT and modern Flecktarn are both good (The brown MARPAT is colored more for temperate Fall and Winter than it is for sandy desert, but darker earthtones work better in Afghanistan than they did in Iraq, where the MARPAT kind of stood out about like ACUs do in Afghanistan).
It's not entirely correct to say the whole pile of money was wasted, since the uniforms were issued and will have been in use for about eight years. While it's a timeless fact that Soldiers do love to grandstand and make drama about their equipment, and individual dismounts being identified and picked off while trying to be stealthy solely due to the ACUs being too visible has to be one of the rearmost trailing causes of GWOT casualties (Hummers and other generally-sand-colored vehicles hit with IEDs would by far be number one), still it's time for this one to go.
Which would be why they replaced the velcro on the cargo with buttons. Those pockets were the worst offenders of the ones that would let go and look like ass.
-
Really it was a stupid idea to think one camo pattern could work in everything from jungle to barren desert,
They were trying to implement the same principles that have worked so well with "universal" aircraft procurement over the last 60 years. The feather merchants & mouse turd dicers have done more damage to the military than all enemy forces combined.
-
My least-favorite feature of the ACUs isn't the pattern, but the Velcro pocket closures which make noise when they're new and don't work worth a crap when they're old.
Blessedly, at least the side cargo pockets are back to being buttoned.
-
They were trying to implement the same principles that have worked so well with "universal" aircraft procurement over the last 60 years. The feather merchants & mouse turd dicers have done more damage to the military than all enemy forces combined.
"Mouse turd dicers?"
Is that the current euphemism for "bean counters?" :rotf:
h5
-
"Mouse turd dicers?"
Is that the current euphemism for "bean counters?" :rotf:
h5
Actually an old euphemism. Mouse turd dicing is much more refined than common bean counting. A top notch "dicer" takes years of training. They can divide the common Mousturdius Americanas into virtually infinite units.
-
Actually an old euphemism. Mouse turd dicing is much more refined than common bean counting. A top notch "dicer" takes years of training. They can divide the common Mousturdius Americanas into virtually infinite units.
Ah, I see you've met my last G8, DRM, and fiscal law attorney.
-
Ah, I see you've met my last G8, DRM, and fiscal law attorney.
I don't think so but, if the foo shits.....