You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Science & Technology
Marines tell Army, find your own Camo, we're hiding here
2011-06-08
The Army is weighing different camouflage patterns as it moves to select a new set of uniforms. The older Universal Camouflage Pattern has been criticized as ineffective, and some soldiers see the Marine Corps' MARPAT (Marine Pattern) as vastly superior.

Brig. Gen. Peter Fuller, former head of Program Executive Office Soldier which is responsible for military gear, earlier told the Army Times that the Army could remove the Corps' emblem and appropriate the uniform for Army use if it proves most effective in field tests. That's something the Marines don't want to see happen, claiming the uniform is their property and that Marines should be distinguished from other soldiers.

But a spokeswoman in Fuller's department told FoxNews.com that MARPAT is "not a leading choice for the Army's next combat uniform."

Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#12  TW, no offense intended. But I've worn everything from the Gomer Pyle OD green fatigues, to BDU (which all services wore in the 80's to early 90's), to Chocolate-chip to Desert "pinks" (which some of the USAF and Navy still use) to the ACU.

Im not any smarter, Im just old.
Posted by: OldSpook   2011-06-08 23:11  

#11  CAMO.

So many styles; so little time.

-at-
Posted by: Kojo Glaigum4712   2011-06-08 22:18  

#10  Â Â TW not true.

OldSpook, it's a good thing I don't mind being corrected by someone who knows more on the subject than I. Especially because it happens so often round these here parts. ;-)
Posted by: trailing wife   2011-06-08 21:51  

#9  TW not true. We all wore BDU for nearly 2 decades, and OD before that. The Marines had their cap, we had ours, but the uniforms are for the most part identical since the Korean war. Speaking about fighting uniforms.

Dress uniforms are different - I hated the Army Green class A, I always preferred my Blues (everyone that went to Korea got their made there, for the longest time that was pretty much an Army tradition). Army should never have gotten rid of the Khakis IMHO.

As for this snit, the USMC will get over themselves if the Army takes MARPAT - after all the USMC pretty much lifted it from CADPAT with a differing color set. And both of them came from DIGICAM create by US Army Natick depot. It was used by the Army in the early 80's. I got pics of my old unit, the 2ACR with "DualTex" on our vehicles long before the Canadians and USMC commissioned their studies. And I found some online as well.



Yep that's an M60 Turret in "digital camo" somewhere likely between 80 and 84. So... shut yer cake hole about digi camo Marines. The Army Cavalry got there first. Scouts OUT!

;-)

(And if you want to get picky, the Germans and their Flecktarn and Wehrmacht predecessors are pretty close to being predecessors of all this).

The very first US use of digital pattern camo was by the 2nd ACR, the longest serving combat regiment on continuous active duty in the US Military.

(I knew there had to be another old Dragoon with pics on the web of this by now)
Posted by: OldSpook   2011-06-08 21:33  

#8  The new design SHOULD do a better job of concealing the individual's thermal signature than the current ones do.
Posted by: Pancho Angise6853   2011-06-08 18:53  

#7  The different branches of the armed services have always had different uniforms, both in design and in colour. In Britain, each of the different regiments has a different dress uniform, if I recall correctly, all of them garish. ;-). The Marines want to be instantly distinguished from the Army, and the Army should wnt the same. It doesn't take much change to trigger identification as other. The Army should get over it and choose a co our and pattern that is good enough and different enough that it's visually distressing when a soldier and a marine re standing next to one another.
Posted by: trailing wife   2011-06-08 18:46  

#6   To be honest how effective is Camo these days?

The intent is to distort rather than hide like a cloaking device. When the enemy has a long look, they can probably make out their target to lay a good line of sight on it. However, in the chaos of combat when you get glimpses rather than the long stare, it can make the difference in blending with your surroundings.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2011-06-08 17:53  

#5  From the outside, it seems like a pretty anti-patriotic approach for the Marines to seem to be telling the Army to bleed instead of using the most effective camouflage, one that the USMC happens to have. This is not an argument over beret color or dress uniforms. This affects casualties.

I do not understand this other than some Marine general's ego leading to stupidity that might make Army soldiers end up with less effective camouflage. It seems this is mainly to preserve the USMC "uniqueness" in some fit of childish pique. The USMC must realize is not the only combat service and should be part of the team and do things that help other parts of the team. The USMC is nto uinique other than part of its culture and PR. The Army also has infantry, does helicopter and waterborne assaults, fights close in as infantry, sustains casualties and bleeds for the nation. The Marines must remember that the Army is traditionally tasked with things the Marines Corps is too small to sustain or not structured to accomplish.

This is not the marketing of laundry soap, it is the effectiveness of a branch of the US military.

Why the apparent childishness of the Marines about this?
Posted by: The Other Beldar   2011-06-08 15:54  

#4  Wait till the LGBT demand Pink Camo
Posted by: GolfBravoUSMC   2011-06-08 12:13  

#3  To be honest how effective is Camo these days? I'm not talking about special forces or sniper teams, but for the guys on base, or on patrol. The enemy sees the Hummers, they know where the base is. If your attacked and take cover I suspect the camo helps a little but at that point your gunfire is generally giving away your position anyway. Is the camo that important? Perhaps I'm wrong, but I'd think they could keep the same uniforms for a lot longer. This isn't the Federation with uniform changes every four years, at least it shouldn't be.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2011-06-08 11:57  

#2  When militarism (an end to itself) trumps legitimate military function. I see it as another manifestation of human nature. Rather than simply copy something which has worked, organizations will choose inferior imitations just to be different.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2011-06-08 10:35  

#1  ...so we the taxpayer are going to be stuck with duplication of work to deliver basically the same functional item. $$$

When militarism (an end to itself) trumps legitimate military function.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2011-06-08 08:40  

00:00