DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Gadgets and Gear » Army Gets Sweet New Combat Threads

Army Gets Sweet New Combat Threads

combat-shirt.jpg

PEO Soldier has now begun to out­fit its troops with a sleek new “com­bat shirt” that is com­fort­able under body armor and also has flash-​​resistent prop­er­ties to stave off the severe burns that can result from road­side bombs.

It looks pretty cool, and I know from inter­views with PEO Soldier offi­cials that they put a lot of thought into this new uni­form item. I gotta say, one thing that’s been a result of con­tin­ued com­bat oper­a­tions with such an adapt­able enemy is the near-​​constant refin­ing of ser­vices’ gear. The Soldier of today looks pretty darn dif­fer­ent from the Soldier of Kosovo days — or even from those of the kick off of OIF.

From our story on Military​.com…

The flame-​​resistant ACS is in devel­op­ment for use under body armor. It is designed to replace two lay­ers, the Army Combat Uniform jacket and moisture-​​wicking T-​​shirt, thus reduc­ing bulk and heat stress.

“As providers of the world’s best equip­ment to the world’s best Soldiers, we col­lect and rely on Soldiers’ input and ideas to con­stantly improve all of our prod­ucts,” said Brig. Gen. R. Mark Brown, Program Executive Officer Soldier. “All of our cloth­ing and equip­ment is battle-​​proven and live-​​fire tested. Those labels can’t be earned in a laboratory.”

The ACS fea­tures a mock-​​turtleneck, long sleeves in the uni­ver­sal cam­ou­flage pat­tern, flat seams that reduce bulk and chaf­ing and built-​​in anti-​​abrasion elbow pads. The shirt is moisture-​​wicking, anti-​​microbial and odor-​​resistant.

The lat­est ver­sion of the shirt includes upgrades based on Soldier feed­back col­lected since the shirt was first dis­trib­uted in the spring for limited-​​user evaluations.

“Even though we devel­oped the Army Combat Shirt to be lighter, more com­fort­able and breath­able, we lis­tened to Soldiers who tested it and said they wanted it to be even more breath­able and com­fort­able,” said Maj. Clay Williamson, assis­tant prod­uct man­ager for cloth­ing and indi­vid­ual equip­ment. “The fab­ric that made up the torso of the ACS was replaced with a fab­ric that pro­vides breatha­bil­ity that is off the charts.”

However, to retain mod­esty, the orig­i­nal fab­ric was main­tained in the mid-​​chest area. Both fab­rics have a four-​​way stretch.

Another change that increased breatha­bil­ity was replac­ing the elas­tic cuffs designed to keep out sand with adjustable cuffs sim­i­lar to ACU jacket cuffs. The cuffs can be loos­ened for ven­ti­la­tion or tight­ened to keep out sand and other debris. Changes were also made to the neck band.

Although the ACS was designed to be worn under the Interceptor Body Armor, test par­tic­i­pants noted the short breaks between patrols made it imprac­ti­cal to change into the ACU jacket. They wanted changes to the ACS that would iden­tify them and their unit. In response, hook and loop tape was added to the right sleeve to accom­mo­date a name tape, rank and infrared flag. The left sleeve also sports hook and loop tape for a unit patch.

The ACS with the most recent improve­ments will be avail­able in late September for follow-​​on user eval­u­a­tions. The shirt is still a devel­op­men­tal gar­ment, and fur­ther field­ing will be deter­mined by the Department of the Army. 

– Christian

Share |

September 19th, 2007 | Gadgets and Gear | 374857 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2007/09/19/army-gets-sweet-new-combat-threads/Army+Gets+Sweet+New+Combat+Threads2007-09-19+17%3A31%3A23Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Opening Up the PLA | Osprey on the Way » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. JRS says:
    September 19, 2007 at 1:48 pm

    Oh come on, they need to credit Crye Precision. It seems like a bla­tant ripoff of the company’s Crye Combat Shirt.
    http://​www​.crye​pre​ci​sion​.com/​p​r​o​d​u​c​t​1​.​a​s​p​?​P​=​CS1

    Reply
  2. Foreign.Boy says:
    September 19, 2007 at 1:56 pm

    Available in time for the fall lineup **smirk**

    Reply
  3. JRS says:
    September 19, 2007 at 2:17 pm

    It’s so the flag looks like it’s fly­ing in th wind when walk­ing for­ward. Basically it looks weird when the flag is the “proper” one on the right side. it looks like it’s fly­ing backward.

    Reply
  4. Mike says:
    September 19, 2007 at 3:58 pm

    Jeff.. Its as sim­ple as what would the flag do if you were charg­ing for­ward? It would fly like that, not the other way. We don’t want a retreat­ing flag now do we?

    Reply
  5. Christian Lowe says:
    September 19, 2007 at 3:59 pm

    JRS…
    Yep, that shirt’s made by Crye. Their design and some man­u­fac­ture for the Army. Good catch.
    Jeff…
    The rea­son why troops wear the flag patch with the blue (stars) field for­ward is because that’s the reg­u­la­tion when you’re deployed. Since OIF, the Pentagon has autho­rized all troops — whether actu­ally deployed or not — to wear the deployed flag patch in sol­i­dar­ity with those down range.

    Reply
  6. Jack O'Derry says:
    September 19, 2007 at 4:40 pm

    And notice how nicely the pat­tern stands out from that wood­land background!

    Reply
  7. Raraavis says:
    September 19, 2007 at 4:54 pm

    I don’t know why the Army Marketing logo needs to be on the shirt but oth­er­wise it looks like a good idea.

    Reply
  8. Wes says:
    September 20, 2007 at 10:03 am

    “However, to retain mod­esty, the orig­i­nal fab­ric was main­tained in the mid-​​chest area.“
    Huh? “Modesty”? Whose mod­esty? Females? Fatties?
    Besides, that change defeats the pur­pose of this gar­ment; oth­er­wise why replace just the chest area with the stretch fab­ric at all? Why adopt this shirt at all?
    “Both fab­rics have a four-​​way stretch.“
    The reg­u­lar ACU fab­ric is NOT four-​​way stretch. But the very con­cept of this shirt requires it to be stretch­able. The first vetr­sion (like the Crye) fea­tured full torso stretch fab­ric. Yet more Army stu­pid­ity, like the ACU “Universal Cammo” Moon cammo…

    Reply
  9. Byron Skinner says:
    September 20, 2007 at 12:50 pm

    Good Morning Folks,
    Regardless of color or style it’s refresh­ing that the mil­i­tary is finally adress­ing the issue of flame retard­ing in com­bat uni­forms.
    ALLONS,
    Byron Skinner

    Reply
  10. Roy Smith says:
    September 20, 2007 at 3:27 pm

    I hate to also be off-topic,but I remem­ber about 2 or more years ago that Kiran Chetry on Fox News was talk­ing to a for­mer sol­der & Iraq War Vet(he must have been in his twen­ties) who made a pro­tec­tive face guard that looked like a cross between a motocross face shield & (for lack of a bet­ter descrip­tion) Darth Vader’s face mask to be worn in con­junc­tion with the new hel­mets our troops are cur­rently wear­ing. I never could find any more infor­ma­tion on this face shield or who this per­son was. Anybody have any clue what I’m talk­ing about?

    Reply
  11. Kevin Halse says:
    September 20, 2007 at 4:37 pm

    What are the stats for it? I know it won’t give an armor class bonus, but will it con­fer DR vs. heat damage?

    Reply
  12. Willie says:
    September 20, 2007 at 5:29 pm

    Okay besides the shame­less adver­tis­ing on the front, use­ful to the sniper who has in in sights to know that you are indeed U.S. Army, my beef is the nice big star “tar­get” cen­ter chest. Yeah that’s some sweeeeet camo there, baby!! But at least the mock turtle­neck should appeal to the ipod gen­er­a­tion since his Steveness wears one to every Apple event. Next our boys need an iphone to call in an airstrike or to play some sweet games dur­ing the airstrike and of course the Levi’s Steve Jobs wears, too!!

    Reply
  13. David says:
    September 20, 2007 at 8:02 pm

    Ok Willie, you must not have read about how it is made for use “under­neath the inter­cep­tor body armor.” I think this is a great idea. Soldiers today are wear­ing too much gear out on the bat­tle­field, and all the gear together raises the body tem­per­a­ture sev­eral degrees. Cut out the logo in the chest though, because it is just tacky. Soldiers shouldn’t be wear­ing it around, they should only wear it when they have the IBA on.

    Reply
  14. BludBlu says:
    September 20, 2007 at 9:37 pm

    Great idea. Make it all camo and get it to the troops, ASAP! The ACU top is just too darn hot any­way. ACU sleeves down and worn under body armor and it’s a major issue. Soldiers need to stay cool. The new gear will reduce heat injuries and improve sol­dier per­for­mance. To the peo­ple that make the deci­sions, make it happen.

    Reply
  15. desertsnake1991 says:
    September 21, 2007 at 6:00 am

    Main thing is, it needs to BREATHE. I seri­ously doubt it will be light­weight AND Fire-​​flash resistant.Something needs to be done about all the Yahoos run­ning around the AO with Sand col­ored flight suits on…stupidest idea that has come out of this fiasco of a war uni­form wise so far. Remark about the Darth Vader mask…it can be seen worn (pri­mar­ily) by UH-​​60 Crewchiefs and door gun­ners. Its silly, they last about 7 flights and serve no pur­pose other than mak­ing you look “scary”. Another tax­payer funded boondoggle.

    Reply
  16. Cameron Gill says:
    September 21, 2007 at 6:24 am

    I think it looks pretty cool, could do with­out the designeresque logo in the chest though. A rank insignia would look bet­ter and more pro­fes­sional worn on the chest.

    Reply
  17. RICHARD KIGGINS says:
    September 21, 2007 at 10:45 am

    OK, it sounds great. Now what was the rea­son for vel­cro patches? If the ACU top wont be worn under body armor can we return to sew on patches? Please

    Reply
  18. grenadavet says:
    September 22, 2007 at 12:30 pm

    Back in the day ‚we already had the ulti­mate body armor under­gar­ment. It’s called a T-shirt,lightweight,sweatwicking and com­fort­able under body armor.

    Reply
  19. Adrian says:
    September 23, 2007 at 12:26 am

    I’m glad the Marine Corps doesn’t have to have fash­ion shows to main­tain it’s cred­itabil­ity. Seriously though, why can’t our tax dol­lars be bet­ter spent on bet­ter body armor or vehi­cles that can take a hit from I.E.Ds and etc., but I agree the tshirt is fine. I think I’d rather sweat my ars off in armor or a vehi­cle that’ll keep me alive. All this extra crap.…whatever.

    Reply
  20. SSG AIRBORNE says:
    September 23, 2007 at 3:40 pm

    I wish more would be done for equip­ment instead of all these fancy look­ing clothes

    Reply
  21. SSG AIRBORNE says:
    September 23, 2007 at 3:46 pm

    I wish more would be done for equip­ment instead of all these fancy look­ing clothes

    Reply
  22. Raymond says:
    September 23, 2007 at 4:06 pm

    Why in an arena like this peo­ple always take shots at other ser­vices. Late time i looked all ser­vices are in all loca­tions. Remember we’re all fight­ing together for one cause, The American peo­ple. I can care less how we look, Just do your best and get the job done.

    Reply
  23. the Cenobyte says:
    September 24, 2007 at 2:28 pm

    My Wife got a few of these just a few days back. They are really nice and under armor they are much nicer than the dou­ble layer. They breath well, wick water away, stretch well, and have sil­ver thread­ing in the right places to keep the smell down. All in all this is a great bit of gear.

    Reply
  24. "Slick" says:
    September 25, 2007 at 11:50 am

    Ok, It’s an alright idea. As being on an Army ROTC schol­ar­ship, to be an offi­cer in 3 years, I do believe the ACU’s need a new pat­tern. Turns out, the Marine Corps dig­i­tal pat­tern is highly effec­tive in the woodland/​swamp enviro and they keep their Sand cammo which is per­fect. (Our ACU’s our only effec­tive in the (desert)mountainious ter­rain and places like Baghdad.)
    Seems like those PEO guys are wor­ry­ing about looks and add ons to this ACU. Good idea for when we hit Iraq, but to erase the BDU and jun­gle war­fare (SF) school even though we’re still doing OPS in South America? These pen­cil heads need to be a lit­tle more real­is­tic.
    Yes, I do agree that money needs to be spent on bet­ter equip­ment. The new Cougar :) and body armour.
    And the Army Blues.… That really irri­tates me.
    All in all, Salute!
    »>~—-~»

    Reply
  25. Josh Morrow says:
    October 3, 2007 at 10:38 am

    “Oh come on, they need to credit Crye Precision. It seems like a bla­tant ripoff of the company’s Crye Combat Shirt.“
    http://​www​.crye​pre​ci​sion​.com/​p​r​o​d​u​c​t​1​.​a​s​p​?​P​=​CS1
    I agree! Plus Crye devel­oped a much bet­ter uni­ver­sal Camo pat­tern, called Multi Cam, than ANYONE else. It was tested under Project Scorpion at the same time as the ACU but for some stu­pid rea­son the Army liked the ACU better.….…Dumb Asses.….. All in all though I think that if they are going to start mak­ing a shirt for us to wear under our armor instead of the full on ACU top.….….…why have the top at all! The shirt can be our new top. It would be more com­fort­able, more effec­tive in use and prac­ti­cal­ity and still pro­vide full body cam­ou­flage and concealment.

    Reply
  26. andrew says:
    October 7, 2007 at 10:31 pm

    I just took one of these shirts for a test run. their great so far. the turtle­neck helps with the neck pro­tecter that i have to ware and the form mit­ing fab­ric­dosent bunch under my gear. id like the sleeves a bit big­ger so that i can roll them in the day if I need to. As for the logo I totaly agree it needs to go.

    Reply
  27. Chad Primeaux says:
    October 17, 2007 at 4:49 pm

    I WANT ONE!!!

    Reply
  28. Jane says:
    October 24, 2007 at 2:17 pm

    If you do a Google Search on Army Combat Shirt, a link pops up where you can find more info: mas​sif​.com

    Reply
  29. flood says:
    November 13, 2007 at 8:56 pm

    Besides Massif​.com, any­one know where we could pur­chase these yet?

    Reply
  30. Timothy A. Bokousky says:
    March 19, 2008 at 1:16 pm

    The face shield you’re talk­ing about might be the one from DOWN EAST INC.

    Reply
  31. TCD2 says:
    March 29, 2008 at 11:06 am

    Does any­one know the reg­u­la­tion on this shirt? I cant find any memo’s or pol­icy let­ters, or any­thing relat­ing it to 670–1? I was at one FOB wear­ing it from my truck to the tent after I got off mis­sion, and they told me that it was not allowed to be worn there on their fob? Umm… why cre­ate a shirt to where while deployed for mis­sion under the armor, if you can­not wear it at all on the freakin fob? I’ll keep check­ing back for updates, thanks!

    Reply
  32. mike says:
    April 28, 2008 at 9:09 am

    Quit your cry­ing. That Crye pre­ci­sion shirt is garbage com­pared to the real deal.

    Reply
  33. AttilaEomer says:
    May 17, 2008 at 3:43 pm

    cadets aren’t allowed to post com­ments on the type of uni­form we wear. but i con­cur, the flip­pin’ shirt’s nice, but we should switch to mul­ti­cam. it’s mucho bet­tero. if he was in mul­ti­cam in that same pic­ture, he’d be damn near invisible.

    Reply
  34. John says:
    June 11, 2008 at 4:52 pm

    This new uni­form is nice it is cool and feels good to have on. We just got these I like it very much. Its met to be worn under­body armor I don

    Reply
  35. Veteran says:
    June 14, 2008 at 12:11 pm

    John, you’re stu­pid. Camoflauge is intended to con­ceal, dis­rupt and blend. The ACU does not, mul­ti­cam does. Since color doesn’t mat­ter, how ’bout you take your dumb ass on patrol wear­ing floures­cent orange. And while you’re at it a big sign that reads “Darwinism at its finest”. Your com­ments dis­re­gard any bit of cred­i­bilty car­ried on the topic. Lastly, news­flash smart guy. The UCP pat­tern on the ACU was only selected to save the Army money and to com­pete with Marine Corps. recruit­ing since they already had a dig­i­tal scheme. The sad thing is that almost 70 per­cent of sol­diers know the ACU pat­tern is shit and it looks stupid.

    Reply
  36. smaj says:
    June 23, 2008 at 4:51 am

    Although I dis­agree with the pat­tern and qual­ity of ACU’s as do many MULTI CAM fans, I am inter­ested in the ACS as it does pro­vide flame pro­tec­tion and it is cooler. Safety x 2. Does any­one have info on the lim­its and con­di­tions of wear. How about a AR 670–1 update? FOB Pheonix in Kabul, AFG alledgidly has a no ACS pol­icy as an outer garmet as it is alledged do oth­ers. Interesting, it must be a hard call for the lead­er­ship to deny com­fort and protection.

    Reply
  37. fever says:
    June 25, 2008 at 5:58 pm

    The flag is worn with the blue/​stars fac­ing for­word because it sym­bol­izes the flag mov­ing for­word as if being car­ried on a flag pole, when the army is advanc­ing the flag is worn that way..I have the ACS, I like it but as with many of you the grey/​sage pat­tern is useless.…it makes for nice pajam­mas though.

    Reply
  38. MJL says:
    June 26, 2008 at 2:52 am

    I really hope the com­ment about wear­ing this ACU for iden­ti­fi­ca­tion and not for camoflage because we fight in the open and only urban ops is from some pot smok­ing burnout and not a Soldier.
    Get real guy, have you ever been in a gun fight? Have you ever been to Afghanistan? Do you under­stand that the ACU was meant to be a com­bat uni­form, one in which to fight with and not for ID pur­poses like some American Legion vet? Camoflage is not meant to make some­one dis­ap­pear like the Predator, it is meant to help blend into the envi­ron­ment and break up a defined sil­hou­ette. The ACU does not accom­plish this very well. Not sure what was meant by get­ting con­ceal­ment at night, but if you took the time to view the ACU with NVGs, you will notice it glows. Plus, being the light color that it is, the ACU does not do much to blend in dur­ing hours of lim­ited vis­i­bil­ity. Additionally, vel­cro on a uni­form is a bad idea. It is hard to main­tain noise dis­ci­pline in a patrol base when you have to rip open a vel­cro pocket (yes, us light infantry guys still use patrol bases in com­bat).
    Bottom Line, the ACU is not con­ducive to a com­bat envi­ron­ment. The BDU/​DCU uni­form was much bet­ter suited for com­bat. There is no such thing as an all ter­rain camoflage pat­tern. When my unit deployed to Afghanistan, we went in DCUs and wished we had the BDUs to help blend in with the ter­rain. Our AO was RC-​​East, where there was lots of foliage there.
    Unfortunately, the ACUs were designed by peo­ple with lit­tle to no com­bat expe­ri­ence. I hope this will be a les­son learned on future uni­form changes.

    Reply
  39. derrick says:
    July 25, 2008 at 5:03 pm

    I’m a deploied sol­dier and these things are great com­bined with the new armor

    Reply
  40. Dwight says:
    August 15, 2008 at 3:29 pm

    The new Army Combat Shirts are the dumb­est thing ever. Starting with the logo. It looks like some­thing that some joe would get at a recruiter’s office as a thank you for join­ing The Army. To add more. The sleeves are very tight and keep the heat in and don’t allow your arms to air out. As a con­clu­sion. The col­lar on the shirt is very anoy­ing and feels as if i had 550 cord tied tightly around my neck. I wish that The Army would have came out with the same asc that The Marines have. They seem to have a solu­tion to all those glitches i described.

    Reply
  41. Dustin says:
    October 13, 2008 at 6:03 pm

    I have spent 3 con­sec­u­tive tours in Iraq.…. The uni­form is fit­ting to every­thing else the army does. It doesn’t make sense. None of it. 1) its meant to be worn under the armor and breathe bet­ter… How come the only parts that breathe are cov­ered by the armor? 2) Whats with the place­ment of the name tape and rank… if you are wear­ing your gear then you already have it on your IBA/​IOTV. I agree there is no sense in wear­ing Nomex around the fob if you are not on mis­sion but seri­ously… on the sleeve? 3) IR Tabs that has vel­cro that stays open just as long as you have your fin­ger on it, good one guys. 4) Still get­ting no where with the pat­tern, I have an idea. How about I put on an ass­less banana suit and just go walk­ing through sadr city singing hymns. Urban war­fare… noth­ing on us is con­cealed any­more at all. They see us, they know our poli­cies, they know how to get us and get away and we can’t do any­thing about it. Just give us a uni­form so that when I go take a steamy one off the side of Tampa I don’t stick out like a fag at a bach­e­lor party. We don’t get the lux­ury of doing any­thing with­out break­ing some stan­dard and now the Army is mak­ing sure we are even more uncom­fort­able with their upgrades. Thank you, I will take my ETS because I am done with the pid­dly games

    Reply
  42. red65black says:
    November 15, 2008 at 12:24 am

    I have one ques­tion? is multi cam being used through out the army. I s this being issued?

    Reply
  43. INF LT. says:
    December 6, 2008 at 11:41 am

    Only SF, Rangers and infantry sol­diers should have input on the specs of a com­bat uni­form. POAGS while won­der­ful for sup­port­ing the mis­sion do not spend the same amount of energy eqip­ping them­selves for solely com­bat func­tions. Gunslingers invest time, thought and traing­ing into the sim­plest of per­for­mance events (mag changes, imme­di­ate action, fire com­mands etc.) The guys who know how to use their kit effec­tively and under­stand what its like to sweat your nuts off all day in a uni­form that doesn’t breath with a piece of vel­cro rub­bing your neck raw and a blown out crotch seam all the while stand­ing out amidst the mud col­ored build­ings and ter­rain should be the ones offer­ing rec­om­men­da­tions on how to cor­rect the ACU deba­cle. Bottom line is the ACU is a heap­ing pile of shit and should be fixed before we worry about a new .50 cal machine gun when the M2 is just fine or invest thou­sands on goofy XM8s. BTW, HK 416 gas­less uppers with a 6.8mm con­fig­u­ra­tion would also be a sound invest­ment in case any of you project war­rior dip shits ever surf the web to see how many grunts hate your shit.

    Reply
  44. SGTGUNBUNNY says:
    December 14, 2008 at 2:34 pm

    First off, its POGS…Personnel Other then Grunts. Secondly to say that only SF, Rangers, and Infantry should have say on com­bat uni­forms specs is damn retarded. As an Artilleryman, I have spent 2 deploy­ments doing com­bat patrols; dis­mounted and mounted…so INF LT…get real!! The ACS is a good con­cept and idea, but unlike all mil­i­tary gear it will need improve­ment ie: soft skin humvees to M1114s to M1151s to MRAPS and Strikers. But I do agree that the Army wates too much time and money on use­less gear and ideas. The ACS is a great idea that needs work and will come around in time. And one more question..if you need noise dis­ci­pline, why would you have some­thing you need in a vel­cro pocket?

    Reply
  45. Derek says:
    February 2, 2009 at 9:19 pm

    For all of you who are con­fused about the wear of the ACS here is MILPERS mes­sage regard­ing the wear of the ACS and the POC for this pol­icy.
    From: DAADMINISTRATOR@​PTSC.​PENTAGON.​MIL [mailto:DAADMINISTRATOR@PTSC.PENTAGON.MIL] On Behalf Of PTC WASHINGTON DC/​/​ALARACT/​/​
    Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 8:45 AM
    To: DCS G1 Agency Mail
    Subject: ALARACT 207/​2008
    Importance: Low
    UNCLASSIFIED/​/​
    PRECEDENCE TO: ROUTINE DTG: 221242Z AUG 08
    PRECEDENCE CC: ROUTINE
    TYPE: DMS SIGNED/​ENCRYPTED
    FROM PLA: PTC WASHINGTON DC/​/​ALARACT/​/​
    FROM D/​N: C:US,O:U.S. Government,OU:DoD,OU:ARMY,OU:Organizations,
    L:CONUS,L:WASHINGTON DC,OU:DA PENTAGON
    TELECOMMUNICATIONS(uc),OU:ALARACT RELEASE AUTHORITY(UC)
    SUBJECT: ALARACT 207/​2008
    TEXT:
    UNCLASSIFIED/​/​
    THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN BY THE PENTAGON TELECOMMUNICATIONS CENTER ON BEHALF OF DA WASHINGTON DC/​/​DAPE-​​HRI/​/​
    SUBJECT: WEAR POLICY FOR THE ARMY COMBAT SHIRT (ACS)
    1. THIS MESSAGE SERVES AS IMPLEMENTING INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE ARMY COMBAT SHIRT.
    2. ON 1 APR 08, THE ACS WAS APPROVED FOR FIELDING TO DEPLOYED SOLDIERS IN IRAQI, AFGHANISTAN, AND KUWAIT. CURRENTLY THE ACS HAS THE “ARMY STRONG” LOGO STENCILED ON THE FRONT OF THE SHIRT. IN THE NEAR FUTURE, THE “ARMY STRONG” LOGO WILL BE REMOVED, AS OTHER BRANCHES OF SERVICE WILL ALSO BE PURCHASING THE ACS FOR WEAR WITH BODY ARMOR. THE “TEAM SOLDIER CERTIFIED GEAR” LOGO WILL BE HEAT TRANSFERRED IN TO THE LABEL INSIDE OF THE SHIRT TO DEMONSTRATE AUTHENTICITY ONCE THE “ARMY STRONG” LOGO IS REMOVED.
    3. THE ACS IS A UNIFORM ENHANCEMENT DESIGNED TO PROVIDE FLAME PROTECTION FOR INDIVIDUAL SOLDIERS, WHILE MAXIMIZING BREATHABILITY, MOISTURE MANAGEMENT AND COMFORT WHEN WORN AS A SYSTEM INCLUDING INTERCEPTOR BODY ARMOR (IBA) AND FIRE RESISTANT UNIFORM TROUSERS SUCH AS THE FIRE RESISTANT ARMY COMBAT UNIFORM (FRACU) OR ARMY AIRCREW COMBAT UNIFORM (A2CU) TROUSERS.
    4. THE ACS IS CONSTRUCTED WITH FLAME RESISTANT FABRICS. THE MORE SUBSTANTIAL SLEEVE AND SHOULDER FABRIC PROVIDES GREATER PROTECTION OF EXPOSED AREAS. THE LIGHER MOISTURE MANAGEMENT “TRUNK” PROVIDES FLAME PROTECTION, WHILE MAXIMIZING BREATHABILITY UNDER THE INDIVIDUAL IBA.
    5. THE ACS IS DESIGNED TO BE WORN WITH THE IBA AND IS CLASSIFIED AS A COMBAT SHIRT. THE RIGHT SHOULDER SLEVE OF THE ACS IS EQUIPPED WITH HOOK AND LOOP FOR THE WEARING OF THE SOLDIER’S LAST NAMETAPE AND RANK INSIGNIA.
    6. THE SHOULDER SLEEVE INSIGNIA AND THE INFRARED SUBDUED FLAG WILL BE WORN ON THE LEFT SHOULDER SLEEVE.
    7. THE ACS WILL BE WORN TUCKED INTO THE TROUSERS.
    8. THE ACS CAN BE WORN AS A STAND ALONE ITEM AND IS DESIGNED TO BE WORN NEXT-​​TO-​​SKIN, WITHOUT A T-​​SHIRT, IN HOT WEATHER. HOWEVER, THIS DOES NOT PRECLUDE WEAR OF FEMALE UNDERGARMENTS OR T-​​SHIRTS CURRENTLY APPROVED FOR WEAR.
    9. THE ACS CAN BE LAUNDERED NORMALLY AND DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY SPECIAL TREATMENT.
    10. THE ACS WILL ONLY BE WORN IN A DEPLOYED OR FIELD ENVIRONMENT.
    11. POC FOR UNIFORM POLICY IS SGM K. EASLEY, DSN 225‑5406, COMM
    (703) 695‑5406. E-​​MAIL IS KATRINA.​EASLEY@​HQDA.​ARMY.​MIL.
    12. THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE DCS, G-​​1.
    13. EXPIRATION DATE CANNOT BE DETERMINED.
    ===============================================================

    Reply
  46. Ben says:
    April 6, 2009 at 3:19 pm

    heres the deal… i’ve worn it, its not bad but it sure isnt great. the arms dont breath at all, and they are so bulky with the pog padding that you cant bend your arms. the torso is SO strechy that you cant even take the damn thing off. the army strong logo is just super gay. i got this great idea! how bout we just car­pet bomb ALL these mofos and get the hell back to liv­ing our lives!

    Reply
  47. Ben says:
    April 6, 2009 at 3:24 pm

    oh yeah, every­one who wears one with­out wear­ing body armor just looks gay too… its meant to be worn UNDER body armor. its not so you can catch the eye of the fat chick sit­ting across the chow hall… or fat dude, what­ever your pre­frence. wear your ACU’s and be thank­ful you get to sit in an air con­di­tioned office.

    Reply
  48. Peter Thornton says:
    July 2, 2009 at 2:01 pm

    I am lookig for a Marpat Digicam Shirt can you help and a Baseball cap to match

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      For someone who trashes all the readers of the blog you sure do...
      a1189
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
      These devices vibrate tissue and bone not just...
      WJS
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      So are you saying the grenade launcher is a hoax or the M-16?...
      WJS
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Dear Cannon Fodder; Only politically correct patriots should be accepted...
      Zandor
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
      LOL Still all this pissing an moaning about the editorial...
      Philo
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      I'd say go read some history on fascist ideology and then compare that...
      Philo
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Islame isn't a race, genius……
      Philo
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      I sure as hell don't need to have someone take pictures of me...
      Zandor
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "Now please tell me where in the Bible Jesus or his disciples...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      No, I am not a muslim. And no, the Koran does not say anything about...
      DualityOfMan
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage