Jump to content

Army to recommend Multicam for entire force


32sbct
 Share

Recommended Posts

Here is the article from Military.com. Finally I think the Army is getting it right.

 

After years of testing, Army uniform officials are planning to recommend that MultiCam should replace today's pixilated design as the official camouflage pattern the service issues to all soldiers, Military.com has learned.

Made by Crye Precision LLC of Brooklyn, N.Y., MultiCam is the pattern that outperformed the service's Universal Camouflage Pattern, or UCP, to become the Army's pattern for soldiers deploying to Afghanistan. UCP was nonetheless adopted in 2004, but came under congressional scrutiny when soldiers complained about its poor performance in Afghanistan.

Army uniform experts and scientists have been evaluating a handful of patterns that emerged from the service's exhaustive Phase IV camouflage improvement effort.

Program Executive Office Soldier would not comment on future camouflage recommendations.

"The Phase IV patterns are undergoing field trials and the data from those trials will be taken to Army senior leadership for review," said PEO Soldier spokeswoman Debi Dawson in a June 28 "media alert." "This will be followed by a cost-benefit analysis to determine if the Army will adopt a new camouflage pattern."

 

But officials running the camouflage effort are now looking at two options to recommend to the service's senior leadership this fall.

One option would be to make MultiCam the Army's official camouflage pattern, sources tell Military.com.

The second option would be to make MultiCam the service's pattern for garrison and general deployment use, but also to have a family of approved camouflage patterns that could be issued for specific areas of the world.

Earlier this week, UCP came under fire again in a story by The Daily, an online news site, which quoted several Army scientists from Natick Soldier Systems Center, Mass., alleging that the Army selected UCP long before testing was complete.

 

It was the first time Natick officials have publically pointed the finger at PEO Soldier and Army leaders, charging that UCP cost taxpayers billions in uniforms and matching body armor, backpacks and other equipment.

Congressional officials said they were surprised to see Natick scientists quoted directly questioning the Army's decision to adopt the pattern.

"This is the first time I have seen or heard that," said one staffer in the office of Senate Armed Service Committee Chairman Sen. Carl Levin. "Obviously, we are very concerned about this."

But criticism of the UCP is nothing new. In fact, two Natick studies – one completed in 2009 and the other in 2006, showed that MultiCam outperformed UCP in multiple environments.

Then in June 2009, Pennsylvania's Democratic Rep. John Murtha, who was then chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, got involved in camouflage issue. Murtha pushed the service to look for a better camouflage pattern after receiving complaints from sergeants about the UCP's poor performance in the war zone. Murtha died in 2010, but his directive prompted the Army to launch a multi-phase camouflage effort. Many patterns were evaluated in Afghanistan, but MultiCam was the clear winner for the country's multi-terrain environment.

Earlier this year, the Army awarded contracts to four vendors to make camouflage-patterned material for uniforms and equipment as a result of Phase IV of the service's camouflage improvement effort.

In addition to Crye Precision, ADS, Inc., teamed with Hyperstealth, Inc., of Virginia Beach, Va.; Brookwood Companies, Inc of New York; and Kryptek, Inc. of Fairbanks, Alaska were chosen.

In March, the Army decided to drop the fifth finalist -- which was a government pattern developed at Natick. The pattern was too similar to one of the industry submissions, which scored higher in the initial evaluation, uniform officials said.

Natick officials would not release details of its pattern, but experts say it was likely from the Scorpion effort, a pattern developed by Crye Precision that was very similar to MultiCam. So far Crye officials have refused to reveal details about the pattern selected for Army evaluation.

Each finalist submitted a family of camouflage patterns for desert, woodland, and transitional along with a single coordinated pattern for individual equipment such as body armor and load-bearing gear so soldiers wouldn't have to change their kit from one environment to the next.

It's still unclear whether soldier body armor and other equipment will be produced and fielded in a specific camouflage pattern or a solid color such as "coyote brown," a color that the Marine Corps adopted for all of its individual equipment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is true, why not shut down the trials now?

 

I mean, if they've already made up their mind, what's the point of continuing the expensive trial process?

 

 

 

I think this story is the product of some misunderstandings, or a "high official" spewing something "off the record" s/he thinks will soothe the concerned public who've read the "$5bn uniform fiasco" stories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its adoption by the British Army is already well under-way. In British parlance it's called MTP /Multi-Terrain Pattern. The old two-colour desert pattern and DPM woodland pattern are gradually being phased out in favour of MTP. I think the target date for complete transition is 2015-16. I suppose that allows for older stocks to be depleted through natural wastage? With drastic cuts in military expenditure in the current economic climate it's a case of waste not/want not! The pattern is just like the US version and the cut of the combat uniform is not dissimilar. Kitted-up in the field it can be difficult to distinguish between US and British troops..their weapons are a key distinguishing feature.

 

post-8022-1341505047.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My recollection of the initial trials; was that the submitting maker of the (then) 'MultiCam' design pattern (most likely Crye Precision), was, at that time, unable to supply the quantity of fabric necessary, within the time constraints required, in order to be awarded the contract.

 

This led to the adoption of the UCP, over the known superiority of the MultiCam pattern, because the maker of UCP was already 'geared-up' to supply required amounts of fabric.

IIRC, the UCP pattern, actually (then) ranked "third" on the list of the most desirable camouflage patterns.

 

Why the Government didn't simply provide Crye Precision (or whomever) with the loan necessary to quickly update it's production capability, or at least co-ordinate/suggest a Licensing Agreement to obtain required levels, is beyond me...

 

Kinda like: Let's buy 500,000 Ford "Edsels", 'cause we can get them 'right-now'; and it will take a little longer to procure the "Cadillacs".

 

 

"The Phase IV patterns are undergoing field trials and the data from those trials will be taken to Army senior leadership for review," said PEO Soldier spokeswoman Debi Dawson in a June 28 "media alert." "This will be followed by a cost-benefit analysis to determine if the Army will adopt a new camouflage pattern."

How can they be so bold as to even suggest the comparison of "cost" versus "benefit". Might as well have stated: "treasure versus blood".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is true, why not shut down the trials now?

 

I mean, if they've already made up their mind, what's the point of continuing the expensive trial process?

I think this story is the product of some misunderstandings, or a "high official" spewing something "off the record" s/he thinks will soothe the concerned public who've read the "$5bn uniform fiasco" stories.

 

I believe that the trials are continuing is because they are still looking at the option of Multi cam for day to day and general deployment and up to two other uniforms for special environments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bravo_2_zero
Its adoption by the British Army is already well under-way. In British parlance it's called MTP /Multi-Terrain Pattern. The old two-colour desert pattern and DPM woodland pattern are gradually being phased out in favour of MTP. I think the target date for complete transition is 2015-16. I suppose that allows for older stocks to be depleted through natural wastage? With drastic cuts in military expenditure in the current economic climate it's a case of waste not/want not! The pattern is just like the US version and the cut of the combat uniform is not dissimilar. Kitted-up in the field it can be difficult to distinguish between US and British troops..their weapons are a key distinguishing feature.

 

post-8022-1341505047.jpg

 

 

Be a dam sight quicker if they weren't all being sold on eBay !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just took the army 8 years and 5 billion dollars to figure out "moon camo" no worky on planet earth :rolleyes:

 

 

Blends into the background beautifully....not! :pinch:

 

post-8022-1341517244.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

m1ashooter

Blends in with the pavement great. I just love wasting my tax dollars. I say let the army go back to the pinks and greens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blends in with the pavement great. I just love wasting my tax dollars. I say let the army go back to the pinks and greens.

 

Pinks 'n' Greens? Now you're talking! Sharpest uniform the US Army ever had IMHO! Back...to the future!! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I think the UCP ACU was fairly effective in Iraq. Not as good in Afghanistan or any woodland type environment. I don't think there is a single camo pattern that will be effective in all types of area or terrain. Multicam in a jungle would probably be less than optimal, not a disaster but not as effective as the old ERDL pattern from the Vietnam era. I'm curious to see once the final decision is made how long it will take to change over to the new uniform. The change to the ACU actually went pretty fast. They came out in 2005 and I had two sets by early 2006. I can't remember when the Army finally cut off the wear of the BDU uniform. I think it was around 2009 but I remember that the field jacket, wet weather gear, etc. was extended longer than the wear out date for the uniform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pinks 'n' Greens? Now you're talking! Sharpest uniform the US Army ever had IMHO! Back...to the future!! ;)

 

Pinks and greens was an officer only uniform. Nice for its time, but I'm not interested in wearing my grandfather's dress uniform. I'll stick with the current blue ASU. I think it looks great. Much better than the old dress greens and I'll leave the WW II stuff to the vets from that era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Guy Cramer (one of the designers of US4CES [a pattern currently being trialed]) on the adoption of OCP (multicam) Army-wide:

Given that Phase IV Field Trials are just beginning within the next few weeks, if true these, two options follow the same mistake that the Army made with UCP "the Army selected UCP long before testing was complete.".

 

 

He and I agree - let the trials get to completion and then make an informed decision.

 

It was a knee-jerk decision that got us UCP. let's not make another one to alleviate public irritation or "save face".

 

Another thing he and I agree on is that the media has taken this "$5bn camo failure" story and totally screwed it up, which is leading to more confusion on the issue.

 

 

Are Digital Pixel Camouflage Patterns Ineffective? - Guy Cramer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pinks and greens was an officer only uniform. Nice for its time, but I'm not interested in wearing my grandfather's dress uniform. I'll stick with the current blue ASU. I think it looks great. Much better than the old dress greens and I'll leave the WW II stuff to the vets from that era.

 

 

Yes...I know! Here's an example of the new "blues" I photographed a couple of weeks ago, here worn Ranger-style. Blousing is the key!

 

post-8022-1341559766.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spathologist
Pinks and greens was an officer only uniform. Nice for its time, but I'm not interested in wearing my grandfather's dress uniform. I'll stick with the current blue ASU. I think it looks great.

 

And, as an added plus, you'll be all set for a uniform for your post-Army career as a security guard!

 

How anyone thinks the ASU looks military, or even good, is beyond me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spathologist
Yes...I know! Here's an example of the new "blues" I photographed a couple of weeks ago, here worn Ranger-style. Blousing is the key!

 

post-8022-1341559766.jpg

 

I'm sorry, that just looks like sweetheart

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hawkdriver

I can't stomach the $650 cost of the ASU's. Not a problem for enlisted folk that get them issued, but when you have to buy them at $650 a pop, and your clothing allowance is $200, that barely buys the pants.

As for the MC, I think it is a mistake to make it a garrison uniform. The things look used and faded right off the rack. I lay money that within a few months of it going final, people will be complaining about the looks of the MC uniform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And, as an added plus, you'll be all set for a uniform for your post-Army career as a security guard!

 

How anyone thinks the ASU looks military, or even good, is beyond me.

 

Well the ASU is essentially the the dress green but in blue. You can't tell me the dress green looked better. I'm not a fan of any dress uniform with bloused boots. However, I can't argue with one aspect of your post. The class B uniform without the coat does look like a security guard. I also prefer the ASU with the service cap as opposed to the beret. Think of the honor guard at the tomb of the unknowns in Arlington. I think they look very sharp. I guess your preference is for the dress green with the Beetle Bailey hat. To each his own but I thought that uniform looked dated years ago. Not to mention the ugly green shirt. They should have kept khaki shirt. Now the Khaki summer uniform, that was nice. Wish we still had that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't stomach the $650 cost of the ASU's. Not a problem for enlisted folk that get them issued, but when you have to buy them at $650 a pop, and your clothing allowance is $200, that barely buys the pants.

As for the MC, I think it is a mistake to make it a garrison uniform. The things look used and faded right off the rack. I lay money that within a few months of it going final, people will be complaining about the looks of the MC uniform.

 

 

You are correct. I think the FRACU material makes these fade quickly. The other aspect I'm not thrilled with is the Pemethrin insecticide they are impregnated with. Who knows what that will do to you long term. Its one thing to wear it in an area that is a malaria zone, but something else to wear it every day for years and years. However this turns out I only have a few years to go before I pop smoke and break contact so I won't be wearing these for long (if at all).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the ASU is essentially the the dress green but in blue. You can't tell me the dress green looked better. I'm not a fan of any dress uniform with bloused boots. However, I can't argue with one aspect of your post. The class B uniform without the coat does look like a security guard. I also prefer the ASU with the service cap as opposed to the beret. Think of the honor guard at the tomb of the unknowns in Arlington. I think they look very sharp. I guess your preference is for the dress green with the Beetle Bailey hat. To each his own but I thought that uniform looked dated years ago. Not to mention the ugly green shirt. They should have kept khaki shirt. Now the Khaki summer uniform, that was nice. Wish we still had that one.

 

 

Now if they would add SSI's to the ASU and do away with the pathetic Combat Experience Badges, I would be quite happy with the new uniform.

 

-Ski

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spathologist
Well the ASU is essentially the the dress green but in blue. You can't tell me the dress green looked better.

 

It's not the green Class A in blue. It's a butchered Dress Blues, and the ugliest and most non-military uniform to come out since maternity utilities.

 

If you were in something resembling military shape and had the green Class A properly fitted, it absolutely looked better as a military uniform than the ...thing...we're cursed with now.

 

Wearout date is the end of 2014...I'll be wearing greens to my retirement ceremony.

 

And yeah, FRACUs suck. They'll need to make them in 50/50 NYCO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will never be a single camo pattern (unless we perfect Predator light-bending invisibility) for every environment. Isn't that why we had the BDU and DCU in the 1990s? And the polyester green shirts were terrible, but I think I rocked the Class A greens. :lol:

post-32676-1341691684.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...