We’re running a story this afternoon on Military.com that talks about language inserted into the late 2009 war supplemental bill by Jack Murtha calling on the Army to study whether the current “ArPat” digital all-in-one camo pattern is the best option for troops in Afghanistan.
According our reporter Bryan Mitchell, Murtha was jaw boning with some Ranger types who complained about how the ArpPat camo stood out like a sore thumb in the craggy hills and forested vales of eastern Afghanistan.
The move in Congress was prompted by Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), Chairman of the Defense Appropriations subcommittee, who said he was first made aware of the issue during a visit with a group of noncommissioned officer Rangers serving at Fort Benning, Ga.
Murtha queried Army leaders and learned the concern was not reserved to a handful of Georgia troops. Similar sentiments had been voiced throughout units with experience serving in Afghanistan.
“The reason is that the current uniform has been primarily designed for a desert combat, like in Iraq, and obviously the terrain is much different in Afghanistan,” Murtha said in an e-mail to Military.com.
“I spoke to both General Casey and General Petraeus about the issue. They also have heard the same thing, said that the Army is looking into the situation, and that funding is available for new uniforms if the Army decides to go that route.“
And I’ve heard the complaints as well. No one really understood why the Army picked the sort of old-school loden colored camo. Especially since the service had already developed the MultiCam pattern with Crye Precision and Natick.
And isn’t that what it all boils down to? Everyone wants MultiCam. “Spec Ops guys get to wear it…why can’t I?” I even scoped out some photos of Air Force PJs sporting MultiCam during a deployment to Djibouti. And practically every cover shot from our friends at Tactical-Life.com features a MultiCam clad “operator” firing the highest speed shorty carbine around.
Look, I like MultiCam like the rest of them. But I also understand why the Army did what it did. They spent millions of dollars and lots of time studying what would work best in a range of environments with an eye toward making the Soldier’s loadout easier — one functional combat uniform for a range of environments. MultiCam was tested alongside the current ArPat (I was at Army Times Co. when the service was deciding the pattern and was following it closely with my friend Matt Cox there) and several other options and the ArPat camo won out. It was new. It was revolutionary and it was unpopular. That’s what makes me think it might have been the right choice.
But I’m willing to be convinced otherwise.
Also, we don’t have a ton of cash lying around, and some in the Army argue that the service has spent billions fielding the new uniforms and other gear in the pattern. Unless it sticks out like a sore thumb, why spend millions more to inject another version? And keep in mind the flaming hoops the Army is being forced to jump through as a line inserted by one congressman forces them to evaluate all these uniform alternatives. Nothing’s going to come of it, I guarantee you that. But Petraeus, Casey and Stevenson will have to placate the Democratic bull by saying “that’s a very good idea. we’ll spend time, money and resources looking into it for you, but we’re still going to come up with the same answer…”
I liked the congressional intervention on the M4 carbine issue, but I don’t see the sense in this one.
– Christian
forested vales of eastern Afghanistan.–
lost ma right here..
The Army fielded a uniform in the ACU that was so flimsy (but surprisingly comfortable) that they had to reissue uniforms mid-deployment. The ACU with its no-wrinkle fabric and velcro to eliminate sewing was supposed to save troops money. Instead it transferred that cost and then some to the rest of the taxpayers to keep replacing the entire uniform when the uniform tore or faded. Now the ACU is going through a redesign to change the stitching and remove some velcro to make it more durable.
Along with its structural issues, the universal qualities of the camo pattern have been called into question. The Army made the time honored mistake of trying to find a one size fits all pattern that satisfies nobody. Now we’re here in a debate over another camo pattern that might fit the bill better but we can’t afford.
First Glance Making the Army order new Uniforms seems a good Idea Problems though soon Come up when you really start looking into It.
First: PRICE. this is the biggest issue, Remember your not just replacing a uniform your replacing the web gear, the body armor, the helmet cover or even new helmet, Cold weather gear,PAcks an entire system would have too be put in place Driving up costs costs that the ACU was meant too cut.
Second: Funding. The Order by congress does not allocate money too the army for the Change that means the Army has to do this out of pocket, that means Cutting need equipment procurement budgets
Third: Leftovers. the order strangely is aimed only at the army when the USAF uses another new uniform who’s cammo pattern is very very close in color range too the ACU and is causing more trouble then the ACU but there is no order for the Air force too issue a Replacement for the Airman battle uniform.
Too multicam lovers I too love it and think that American Snipers and Spec ops should be using it and Are but Changing the army back two a two uniform system is going too do more harm then good over all. Congress should have butted out of the uniforms or spoke up sooner before issue but now is too late and too much damage.
I would ask:
“How many uniform variations does a French Foreign Legionnaire have?“
When I was in the Ranger bat, we kept the desert camo in the C bag and the Woodland camo in the D bag. Upon deployment order, you repacked IAW the updated packing list. In the case of afghanistan, there is a rear area. Who cares if two to four extra uniforms are included in the packing list?
For the past seven years, the army has been lighting cigars with $100 bills when it came to equipping troops. Now they suddenly want to cry about the crap uniform every soldier is subjected to?
Essentially the Army has a camel of a uniform.
I really think anything is better than this crappy digital soldiers are issued now.I mean yeah its comfortable but the pattern to me sucks!
Also I thought SPEC-OPS wore all black and wore stealthy looking masks.LOL
Enough with all the whining about BDUs! This entire debate sounds like a bunch of highschool girls trying to pick out the perfect dress for the junior high prom.
The army, marines and AF should all have the same BDUs. To save money issue everyone the same 2 that the marines now use. I think nearly everyone likes them. It will save a ton of money and end this debate.
Also, pls get rid of those “french” berets the army issues. That was the worst uniform idea since the USAF chose their blue uniforms.
Jack
Byron Skinner you need to get your facts correct before you post. The MV-22 squadrons are NOT repeat NOT stationed at Cherry Point like you claim. They are in fact stationed at MCAS Jacksonville which is part of Camp Lejeune.
First of all, the ABU’s are not blue, nor are they pixelated. The only people in the AF that NEED a good camo blend are special forces, and maybe Security Forces. The majority of airmen are maintainers. I work on a flight line, not in the backwoods of some 3rd world country. If I was deployed, I’d still be inside the wire, building JDAMS on a MAC pad. The Air Force is NOT the Army, and it will never be the Army. Let the Army switch uniforms if their a**es stick out, but leave the AF alone. We don’t need it, no matter how much Gates wants us to be like the Army.
The 2nd MAW MV-22s and the higher echelon maintenance and test center are at MCAS New River in Jacksonville. 3rd MAW Ch-46 units should start transitioning this year to the MV-22, they will be at Camp Pendleton MCAS.
Having a single uniform, that works equally well in all environments. Also means you have a uniform that is as equally poor for said environments. In other words it excels at nothing, except mediocrity.
If you can’t have two separate patterns. Then the better solution would be to develop a reversible ACU or MultiCam. One side darker for the woodlands, the other side lighter for the desert. If not that, then a way/method of altering the uniform while in transition to, or once in theater.
Maybe they could borrow Coors Cold Certified tech.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-c0v-opkRM
I wonder if the ACU came about because the Army got so sick of foreign forces adopting their patterns. They had to find one that nobody else would want.
Good Afternoon Mike,
What ever Mike, I sure the ever diligent Congressman Murtha will get to the bottom of the MV-22 problem and report to the nation. On and how about the EFV Congressman Murtha, why is it so screwed up, and why has tax payers money been funding such a boondoggle project?
Then he can explain how he voted funds for both these projects all these years that you knew nothing about, not even what Joe Six Pack was reading in the papers, let alone those more concerned, who have expressed their opinions in the on going debates here on defense tech over the years.
Is not the public Congressman Murtha entitled to an accountability of how their tax money is being spent?
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
The Army needs a two color uniform just like the Marines, Hell I bet they adapt that uniform, just cause it will be cheaper than Multicam. Multicam is awesome but awesome comes at a price. ARPAT is great in the deserts of the western US, Great Antelope hunting camo. but asides a field filled with North American Sage I don’t know where else it blends in.
But Remember the Army Just copied the Marines, They can’t even copy right
Correct me if im wrong. Marines use their coloring, because of an agreement with the marine and army that the army cant use the same colors. Also i believe multi cam has a copyright on it also. That at least a certain percentage of the team can only wear multicam. Could be wrong i guess, I just know its somewhere here in the forums.
Correct me if im wrong. Marines use their coloring, because of an agreement with the marine and army that the army cant use the same colors. Also i believe multi cam has a copyright on it also. That at least a certain percentage of the team can only wear multicam. Could be wrong i guess, I just know its somewhere here in the forums.
sorry if i double posted
Interesting post. Thank you for your service and I commend your bravery.
The only situation I’ve seen where ACU was truly effective was some photos of some 1st ID soldiers in a defensive position on a rocky outcropping in Afghanistan. They blended in perfectly. Other then those rare moments, ACU is pretty bad. Woodland and the 3-color desert pattern were very effective. Don’t get me wrong, the “BDU” style jacket is poorly designed. Even with buying the longer length jacket, it was still too short and the lower pockets were useless when wearing any sort of gear. In my opinion, the best battle uniform was the Vietnam era jungle fatigue. Pockets were placed well. the overall lenght of the jacket was great. you could wear a pistol belt and it didn’t cover the lower pockets. Maybe going back to a simple OD green combat uniform isn’t such a bad idea. Oh and lets lose the Velcro!
coolhand77 — Murth was a Marine if he didn’t care about the troops, then why are we talking about it now. Simple, because when Murth was made aware of it, he started doing something, while the fat cats of the higher esalon set and drank their wine in the club. Murth was the one person that cared. Semper Fi
i think changing uniforms is a good idea but not cost effective
Why are you all caring how much something cost? Cost is irrelevant. You can’t put a price on someones life. This might be the first thing Murtha did that makes sense.
I am not an ACU fan but have learned to live with it. I also have to defend its capability in the eastern Afghanistan mountains. I was there as we changed from DCU to ACU and I saw how well our new camo fit in with the terrain, especially after a few days of collecting the local dirt. Our Afghans wore BDU Woodlands and they were more visible than our guys. The only concern I have is that it seems to light in wooded areas on our East Coast. I still think we need two types like our Marines. I never hear them complaining about what they have.
Sarmajor
Maybe the marines don’t complain because they just don’t complain and don’t want to be perceived as a bunch of whining sissies?
hey i feel the army actually rushed the acu. they wanted digital like the marines. but unless you are sitting on a gravel road or a standing in front of a cinderblock building you do tick out like a sore thumb. there is no such thing as universal camoflouge. unless you are the predator from the movies. until we have that technology we need more than one uniform in the army. i personally think multi cam is the better option. plus the marines have a different desert and woodland uniform. and they both work weel for those enviroments. i have 19 years of service and hell i hate changing uniforms but lets pick one that doesn’t make us stand out when we need to blend.
Zach:
Cost becomes an issue when your budget is getting tighter and you have to choose between new uniforms, training ammunition, and spare parts (always the first to be cut). Generally I’d agree with your comment that you can’t place a price on life, but sometimes you have to choose what you can do without more than something else.
“Correct me if I’m wrong. Marines use their coloring, because of an agreement with the Marines and Army that the Army can’t use the same colors. Also, I believe Multicam has a copyright on it also. That at least a certain percentage of the team can only wear Multicam. Could be wrong I guess, I just know it’s somewhere here in the forums.“
The reason why the Army doesn’t or can’t use MARPATs has nothing to do with color, it’s because it’s a copyrighted pattern with EGAs (Eagle Globe & Anchor) and I believe USMC printed throughout as an identifier. I’d imagine that if the Army wanted to use MARPAT they’d probably have to license it from the Marine Corps or I suppose they could use commercially available copies that are out there that don’t have the EGAs.
As for Multicam, I think that it’s stated in this article that Multicam was originally developed for the Army. The reason why the Army doesn’t use it is because they chose ACUs in UCP instead, something about them preferring a digital pattern IIRC.
Economics my man. The digies were cheaper. Crye Precision lost the bidding war dude. The digies are also manufactured in the prisons of Mexico. Go figure. Multi-Cam is now commercialized. It will not be incorperated into the conventional side of the house. Only SOF personnel will be authorized to wear it. Get rid of the Digies.
Can I get a hell yeah!
Tan dye in the washing mashine and bingo, you have a uniform suitable for Afghanistan’s terrains.
Look the simple fact is, that if the military (all branches) wanted to save their soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen money. we would all wear the same combat uniform! one would say usmc, us army us air force and so on. I think its a good idea to once and for all figure out which is the best uniform/uniforms for all boots on ground soldiers. I do understand the importance of each service having its own identity, so simply have your own dress uniform and call it good!
TB,
We should put the budget constraints on something else besides the military then.
Shadow,
That sounds like a wonderful idea… but the leaders of the branches would NEVER agree to it, congress would need to force it on them.
Ok just for all you guys that obviously only seen the concrete side of Iraq, Im just letting you know that in both the desert and palm groves of Iraq ACUs weren’t worth a dam. And now that I’m in Afghanistan I can say the same thing, ACUs only blend into 3 things, other people wearing them, grey rocks or concrete, and floral design couches.
I’d have to say to Christian, the current US Army pattern does stick out like the proverbial sore thumb, at least appears to in all vids and imagery I’ve seen (I’m no serviceman so haven’t seen it in the field).
Most of all I’d say the fact is darker than the MultiCam stands against it, as th human eye is adept at picking up darker objects, presumably based principally on the frequent ‘hunter-in-nature’ theoretical evolutionary situations that Mankind found itself in — i.e. shadows, shaded quarry under bushes, trees etc, so would appear to me it makes a great deal more sense to be tuned to the darker colour spectrum in order to better identify targets (also anyone noticed most animals exhibit darker rather than white colours?)
I’m a Brit, our servicemen are getting shit on by our govt right now, lost 5 guys the other day. And our govt is busy proposing 3bil pounds less to defense — whilst we are dragging the fatcats out of parliament for their ‘expenses’. Still you guys have the cash, I’d say go for the multicam, save lives, lower enemy certainty.
Take care guys.
I don’t know what all the testing equipment says, but my eyeballs say Multicam.
Hi I’m from holland and from the perspective of our small country it seems very strange to see US soldiers in such a bad cammoflage. We had open days of the army three weeks ago and a group of US soldiers where there and they where visible in the woods. Then again, I once was in Africa where on a safari we looked for Rino’s and Elephants. These are grey (bid greyer than ACU) and very big, but difficult to spot, its almost difficult to spot an elephant in a plain hiding behind a small thin tree.
So grey is not as bad as we think, but looking at all the picktures Multicam is most of the time the better camouflage. That makes the US coverments choise so strange out old olive greens seems better than the ACU now that would have saved money!
a simple thought… for anyone who has actually been to Afghanistan or Iraq ian open environment will tell you that Acu’s are a beam of blue tinted light that give you away better than if you were wearing whitw on some occasions. Have you ever seen a picture of someone wearing them when there was a flash on the camera? that ominous blueish glow? So think about that and then put that same glowing material on troops and send them to THE BRIGHTEST PART OF THE GLOBE and expect them to not stick out. In Afgh you can easily see our troops. We’re the little blueish glowing things up against the green grass and brown dirt. I’m a big fan of if its not broke, don’t fix it. The Green Maachine isn’t. Someone who will never again be in combat will continue to make fatal (literally) decisions for our troops and as long as it’s political and not about wht really works they will be put in harms way needlessly time and time again. Maybe combat soldiers should have a say in what they feel confident wearing into combat and garrison soldiers can either deal with it, or have a garrison uniform. What was wrong with woodland? What was wrong with 3 color desert? I was in the Army at the time, and they were both effective. I was out during the introduction of the ACU and now that i’ve come back it’s all backwards. Unless youre in a gravel pit or formation ACU’s don;t blend into anything. So let’s talk about Multicam… It works. Enough said. You have seen the proof and Alot of Airborne troops are authorized Multicam accessories. I know that 4/25 and 173rd let their men use it because it’s effective. Most environments and All lighting conditions. You’ve seen the pictures. My multicam sniper suit is nice having one base i can take anywhere. And remember that in combat you don’t have to be invisible. All you have to do is see them before they see you. The best part of multicam is that it blends in every ligthing condition so you don’t have to worry about hiding under something or in the shadows anymore. From someone who has used it where it counts I will say that it is an answer to our current issue we’re facing in Afghanistan right now. Even in Iraq troops would feel more confident not feeling llike theyre being made a more obvious target because of their uniform. Humans have used camo for thousands of years in primative parts of the world. You dont go to war with road guard vests on. As a marksman i think its bad enough the shadows that naturally are made from the human body. And while the basic Infantry troop has to go out there with nothing to break up the shape of his body, give hime some kind of advantage. It’s here… It’s ready… and It works… The time has come.
I believe all services should field the Marine corps camo pattern. Yes multicam may be better than it but the uniforms should also be used to deny the enemy intelligence. With each service having its own pattern it makes it pretty easy to tell the enemy which service is there. Granted a USAF CCT may wear ACU uniforms to blend in with their peers so they don’t stick out the to enemy but why not make them wear the same camo pattern in the first place. What started off with the USMC having a great idea and then copyrighting it turned it a “who can make the best camo pattern” between the services
The deficiencies of the ACU are so numerous it is a waste of time for me to list them. No one with a brain in their head and any field experience outside of BCT would say that the ACU is a good uniform, in any environment. End of story. Fire the idiots who approved it. Replace it completely with Multicam. Multicam is the closest thing I have seen to a universally affective pattern. It doesn’t have to be perfect. It just needs to not stand out like a sore thumb like the current uniform does. And get rid of the velcro. Incredibly stupid on so many levels. Amateurs came up with this uniform. It is an embarassment to the Army.
I was part of ACU testing at Fort Campbell… I had ACUs while most of my unit did not. while at the range, in the woods, at night… I stood out like a sore thumb compared to those with the old BDUs. Standing in front of a pile of gravel… ACUs are amazing. add some dark colors or at night… bad, bad stuff. either change to two separate camos w/ cayote brown TA-50 (like the marines) or, if you HAVE to go universal.… switch to multicam.
I was part of ACU testing at Fort Campbell… I had ACUs while most of my unit did not. while at the range, in the woods, at night… I stood out like a sore thumb compared to those with the old BDUs. Standing in front of a pile of gravel… ACUs are amazing. add some dark colors or at night… bad, bad stuff. either change to two separate camos w/ coyote brown TA-50 (like the marines) or, if you HAVE to go universal.… switch to multicam.
The real scandal is that the Army ignored its own testing. Supposedly ACU (UCP) is supposedly a digitized urban track pattern with black removed. Well, even so, Desert All Over Brush did best in prior testing, not Urban Track. Second, Crye only came in late and it performed well too (and there is much anecodtal evidence to support its value). Three, ACU as fielded never went heads up in testing against other paterns, including the pre-digitizing winner, All Over Brush Desert (looks kind of like Rhodesian). Four, digitizing (in realty pixilating) and removing black had no basis in testing; it was just the popular urban legend that black sucks in camo, which is not exactly true, especially in open spaces, where black suggests shadows and helps a lot.
This Natick Army PPT about the testing is still out there. Look it up. The real question and the real scandal is why after doing that testing, did the army just arbitrarily digitize the Marpat with three very peculiar colors that were never tested in a structured way? It’s a national scandal, because it sucks in woods, its moderate in desert, and it’s OK but nothing special in urban unlike Crye Multicam, Bulldog Tactical Mirage, the Desert All Over Brush from Natick, or other possible contenders for a universal pattern.
I’m in the Army, and i can tell you that we look like ghosts in the field with the ACU, replace it!
ACU makes you look like a damn ghost in the moonlight, i.e. it really sucks at night
In any case, any uniform should be able to be modified to suit YOUR environment. Any uniform should be able to have lighter, darker, greener, browner, smoother, or rougher garnish added to further break up the outline, and change shapes and colors to match your background. Adding a few tabs on each limb or major section of the body with velcro on the back side would permit attaching a finite number of garnish elements in a way that could be much more efficient than having a specialized uniform for each.
The next Army uniform should have:
Button closure pockets and cuffs
Sew-on name tapes, skill badges, unit patches
Branch Insignia
Outer side opening breat pockets
and preferrably be in multicam or a light olive.
Look. The Multicam should not have a sewn on name, unit badge, etc..
It should still be velcro, so if SF gets caught they can take off their name and rank. The new uniform is sexy though.
The ACU is Garbage. ACU is an embarrassment and failure. The research was done by some geeks in a lab and not by input from REAL competent combat veterans with trigger time. It took some Rangers to bypass General Fuller to get the truth out.
The geeks at PEO need to concentrate on the current conflict we are in and not one 10 years down the road. The Marines got it right. It has only cost us billions to figure this out.
Imagine being in the Air Farce. We were told the ABU was a garrison uniform when they were testing it. We all knew it was a lie. Then they add hints of BLUE in the final version for “Heraldry” purposes. No shoulder pockets, but we have a highly non-usable ankle pocket for our tactical blackberries. What a bunch of REMF A-Holes.
I am SO ashamed of the US Air Force when I wear this absolute joke of a combat uniform.