Army scraps eye-catching pixel camo uniforms

[Panzersharkcat]

Yeah, it was the Rangers who were furious about it. To keep a distinct look, they switched to tan berets.

[Zaune]

Within a single service, yes. But the same color scheme can mean two different things in the air force and the army.

So have one service pick a recognisably different shade of the same colour, or stick a large and distinctive regimental or squadron cap badge on it. Problem solved.

If the Paras and RM can put up with wearing the same pattern DPM as each other, then so can the US Army and USMC.

It was those two units, particularly the Parachute Regiment, whom I was thinking of when I brought up berets. They're quite useful PsyOps tools for COIN operations; civilians apparently find them less intimidating than ballistic helmets, but any insurgent spotting them gets a loud and clear message of "these people are very, very good at their job and taking them on will be extremely unpleasant".

Not much good at protecting your head, of course, but not many helmets will stop rounds from a proper designated-marksman's rifle anyway.

[Simon_Jester]

Since people have been designing different-colored camouflage for different environments for something like sixty years, one might reasonably criticize the Army for having forgotten this basic lesson.

The idea of having a DPM pattern that works OK in either without being as good as one designed for a specific environment does have a logical base - in Helmand (for example) a unit could go from patrolling the Green Zone in the morning to desert in the afternoon. A pattern that doesn't stick out like a sore thumb in either is therefore an advantage. Of course, that doesn't excuse a pattern that works great against all the wizzy kit the world's best armies use, but is ineffective against the Mk 1 Eyeball.

That's kind of what I'm getting at. It's a lovely idea to have this omni-adaptable all-conditions camouflage pattern. But it's also a lovely idea to have a submarine aircraft carrier. We know submarine aircraft carriers are an impractical idea no matter how cool they sound, and no matter how much high-tech you use to implement them.

Some ideas should not make it off the drawing board, or at least should be stopped before they run up a nine or ten-figure budget. When that doesn't happen, someone is not doing their job properly.

The best you can say about this is that the Army gave into the temptation to think they could do something impossible, then fell into groupthink and refused to admit it wasn't working very well, and spent billions of dollars on it before thinking it over and deciding they'd made a mistake.

[Sea Skimmer]

I have a quick question. I've assumed for a long time that a reason for the continued use of this pattern was its possible suitability for urban warfare. I.e. In Iraq, surrounded by concrete etc, the 'flatness' and 'greyness' were serendipitous benefits. Is this true?

Partly yes, it was driven by the massive expansion of urban areas and emphasis on urban fighting. But the real jist was, we always want to fight at night, we write it into our doctrine to do so, so why not make the camo for the night, and also the basic issue that the colors of terrain can change radically in a short trip in any country. Plainly troops are not going to be able to change uniforms every half hour, and even stocking multiple styles of NBC warfare suits in particular is extremely expensive as well as very heavy logistically to the point nobody on earth does it. Same goes for backpacks, webgear and similar equipment. So trying to make a one pattern fits all camo is highly desirable. Look like its not going to work until someone makes color shifting fabric work, much money is being thrown in that direction, but this was hardly an idea without any merit. It was for example a huge issue in the first Gulf War that the army had no desert camo covers for all its green backpacks, and repainting vehicles took forever because the CAR paint is silly toxic, but Saddam Insane was nice enough to let us bullshit around for six months fixing problems like that.

[Ryan Thunder]

Why don't they just have some neutral-colour NBC suits and then different covers for them?

[Elfdart]

Note how UCP sticks out like a sore thumb in either environment due to its colours, compared to the relatively successful applications of the principle.

Maybe it's designed so the troops can blend in if they hide under concrete bridges or something. That's about as close a color match as I can think of.

[Elfdart]

What's worse, the Marine Corps owns the patent to MARPAT, refused to let other services use this camouflage pattern, or others like it (see the Marine Corps' reaction to the Navy Working Uniform).

Wait.... PATENT WARS in the Military? WTF? Why aren't there any laws / rules against this? If one service devises new ways to heal wounds, can they patent them so that the others can't use it?

Aren't they supposed to be uh, on the same side?

I remember reading that back in the late 70s the Marines wanted to ditch the M-16 for the 5.56 version of the FAL (FNC?) or the Galil ARM simply to have a different rifle from the Army.

[Beowulf]

Why don't they just have some neutral-colour NBC suits and then different covers for them?

Brilliant! Another layer of cloth to help make my NBC equipment like a sauna. I'd be wearing on my torso: undershirt, ABU top, super heavy NBC pants (they're kinda like overalls, in that you have a bib going up), super heavy NBC top, then camo cover. Oh, and this being war conditions, add in plate carrier, SAPI plates, and other webgear. Oh, and donning the colored covers may end up adding additional time to the process, which means it's longer to get back to actually fighting. Anyways, the army had a tough time coming up with desert colored covers for packs for ODS. What makes you think coming up with correctly colored NBC equipment will be any better?

[Ryan Thunder]

Why yes, its totally obvious that its a bad idea to put a thin layer of coloured breathable cloth over it.

You miserable pedant.

[Sea Skimmer]

The number one reason not to use a camo fabric top cover is in fact it would make the suit soak up more liquid chemical agent and become vastly harder to decontaminate. You don't want anything that will hold liquid against the charcoal suit, web gear and body armor ect.. is in fact a serious hazard in that respect but such is life under chemical attack. Since the suits aren't truly sealed any free liquid is very dangerous. So is contaminated dirt and dust, thus all that fear of Saddam's supposed 'dusty' chemical weapons. Best strategy is avoid being hit by the liquid, but good luck trying if you aren't in a vehicle or building.

The only acceptable top covers are basically plastic bags like the US Army SCALP, specifically to keep liquid off everything under them and provide something more like a true seal, and because only certain modified plastics can resist nerve and blister agents your choice of color is limited, and patterns aren't going to happen realistically. These bags are of course, going to be absurdly hot, far hotter then a normal suit or a extra layer of fabric. Some nations with lower budgets only issue such plastic bag suits, but resistance used in isolation is measured in hours instead of days for the charcoal suits.

[Mr Bean]

Why yes, its totally obvious that its a bad idea to put a thin layer of coloured breathable cloth over it.

Great now your NBC suit soaks up the Sarin, Super Ebola or Radioactive Particles your NBC is suit is supposed to protect you and your fellow soldiers against. Ryan you know nothing about Nuclear, Chemical or Biological Warfare so let me clue you in from someone who spent a portion of my life drilling what to do in the event of an NBC attack and had to do several mass cas drills where you learn why a bathtub chemical attack and a Dirty Plutonium/Uranium bomb have vastly different decom procedures and why you should do stuff in situation A that will kill people if you do it in Situation B.

If it can breath it can absorb the toxins the NBC suit is supposed to protect you and everyone else from. In full MOPP gear you are in your own personal sweat tent as it is but you can rest easy in the fact that you can be washed off quickly by the foam systems because your suit is designed not to pick up anything and easily shed the things it does pick up. It's why you can hop out of MOPP gear inside any standard clean room get sprayed down and get in a fresh suit with a minimum of downtime with most agents. You don't need to strip naked take two shows and use a multi-part airlock. If you were wearing any kind of breathable fabric your going to be tracking that stuff wherever you go, it's going to get on things like your equipment on the inner doors which means your going to have to wear it and forget about touching people or rubbing up against a door frame because your going to leave behind death for the people that suit is supposed to let you help save.

And lets not forget if your being shot at, gotta be fun to be a medic trying to cut through the outer later to get to the suit itself and trying to prevent the edges from touching or entering the suit because your carrying around your own lethal dose on the outer skin of that covering.

[Ryan Thunder]

Well gee I guess I should be ashamed for typing anything in the first place, you are a giant of military science.

[Mr Bean]

Well gee I guess I should be ashamed for typing anything in the first place, you are a giant of military science.

Yes you should, because admitting you were ignorant of the subject and said something demonstrated that ignorance would require you to admit your wrong. And we both know how hard it is for you to admit that, it's why you still wear that VI title.

[Sea Skimmer]

Hey Bean how about you stop being retarded, he asked a damn question. That IS an admission of ignorance and a completely valid, reasonable one. You post stuff that's wrong all the damn time and rarely admit it.

[Mr Bean]

Hey Bean how about you stop being retarded, he asked a damn question. That IS an admission of ignorance and a completely valid, reasonable one. You post stuff that's wrong all the damn time and rarely admit it.

Care to provide an example Skimmer I am happy to admit when my facts are in error or my memory is faulty.

And Skimmer did you miss this post?

Why yes, its totally obvious that its a bad idea to put a thin layer of coloured breathable cloth over it.

You miserable pedant.

That's not much of a question and it's what I was replying to.

[Ryan Thunder]

Well gee I guess I should be ashamed for typing anything in the first place, you are a giant of military science.

Yes you should, because admitting you were ignorant of the subject and said something demonstrated that ignorance would require you to admit your wrong. And we both know how hard it is for you to admit that, it's why you still wear that VI title.

You might have a point if I'd said something like "They should just have a coloured cover."

But instead I asked why they did not. Sea Skimmer explained it adequately, without need for your try-hard bleating.

Thank you, Sea Skimmer, for answering the question instead of harassing me for asking it.

[Sea Skimmer]

[
Care to provide an example Skimmer I am happy to admit when my facts are in error or my memory is faulty.

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 2&t=155163
How about right here in which you made a long post, not a comment on the fly or anything like it, riddled with errors, some a lot more basic then how NBC protection works, which I pointed out, then never said a thing in reply. I don't really care about that either, but I'm also not jumping on people for not knowing the answer to a very specific and obscure problem.

And Skimmer did you miss this post?

No, and I don't care about it either because it was a perfectly reasonable reply to someone else being an asshole about a perfectly reasonable question while not actually giving a very good answer. You then showing up to be another asshole, no, not reasonable either. This isn't some damn question about how does a light switch work or why shouldn't I drive on the wrong side of the road. Retardation like this is why this place has been slowly dying for years.

That's not much of a question and it's what I was replying to.

Actually it still is fucking valid, assuming that random people should know this sort of information is fucking stupid. Especially in a thread that isn't even in our science or history or military forum in the first place.

[Mr Bean]

How about right here in which you made a long post, not a comment on the fly or anything like it, riddled with errors, some a lot more basic then how NBC protection works, which I pointed out, then never said a thing in reply. I don't really care about that either, but I'm also not jumping on people for not knowing the answer to a very specific and obscure problem.

I'll stand by that post minus the errors you pointed out such as my neglecting the American company weapons platoon but I'll stand by the Japanese squad makeups as that's what my sources (Japanese Infantry Weapons) which included a company level and battalion level breakdown of how the Japanese army was equipped in the Pacific and noted the difference vs so called Continental forces (In China and elsewhere) vs the Island forces with the fact the Island forces had many fewer side arms yet much more grenade issuance as well as the complete lack of certain anti-tank methods in both theaters (The 20mm rifle for example was almost non-existent vs American forces in many islands per that same source)

That's all arguments for another thread, I did not explicitly say it then I'll say it now where your information contradicts mine on American units I'll admit to going from memory rather than sources and thus I was likely incorrect, the fact I did not admit being wrong there and then was only because I was not explicitly challenged on it conversation moved on from there.
Not an excuse just an observation.

No, and I don't care about it either because it was a perfectly reasonable reply to someone else being an asshole about a perfectly reasonable question while not actually giving a very good answer. You then showing up to be another asshole, no, not reasonable either. This isn't some damn question about how does a light switch work or why shouldn't I drive on the wrong side of the road. Retardation like this is why this place has been slowly dying for years.

-two posts combined-

Actually it still is fucking valid, assuming that random people should know this sort of information is fucking stupid. Especially in a thread that isn't even in our science or history or military forum in the first place.

I responded as "an asshole" because Ryan spoke as such, asshole prompts asshole and all that. I won't say different now, Ryan still merited it. Every time the Moderator staff considered removing that VI Ryan will almost instantly remind us why it was hung on him to begin with. Like clockwork once per month he commits a title worthy offense like this is the DMV and he needs to go in every one in awhile and renew his jackass plates.