I posted this just two weeks ago and it remains just as true today as it did then. The Army Uniform Board was to be briefed on the program on 28 Feb. As far as I know that happened. Everyone was up in arms on Thursday and Friday because they didn’t hear anything. No kidding. Of course they didn’t, because that’s not how it works.
Of course, we’ve had another rash of people claiming on various forms of social media that they’ve seen this Army PowerPoint Briefing that tells all. That horribly put together thing keeps showing up like a bad penny and if you believe it, I’ve got some swamp land in Suffolk, VA I’d like to sell you. If I’d have created something like that when I was an action officer I’d have become CINC Snack and never given another project. So here once agin, is the truth as I believe it be.
Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you know that the US Army is currently looking for a replacement for the so-called Universal Camouflage Pattern (UCP) currently worn by Soldiers in virtually all environments except Afghanistan. Now, after months and months of silence, PEO Soldier has provided an update to the US Army Camouflage Improvement Effort. I know, this thing seems to be going on forever, but there is light at the end of the tunnel. The results of the most exhaustive camouflage testing in history will be briefed to the Army Uniform Board on 28 February.
If you’re familiar with how the Army Uniform Board works, they don’t announce their findings directly from the board but rather later, an announcement will be made once the Chief of Staff of the Army gives his approval. Considering the gravity of this decision, the Secretary of the Army will most likely also give his approval. There is precedent for this. When the Army officially announced the adoption of MultiCam for use in Afghanistan as Operation Enduring Freedom Camouflage Pattern (OCP).
We said that this is the most exhaustive camouflage testing in history and since last Summer the Army has been running the four families of patterns along with baseline patterns through the paces in locations that replicate the nine Military Operating Environments. Over the past couple of months sources have told us that testing was curtailed in two locations due to fires and that the Army had to go back and reaccomplish data collection. The Army wants to make sure that the record is complete and that their decision is based on the data. Consequently, we are told that an independent auditor has been used to verify the integrity of the data. No matter the decision, it will be based on facts so there won’t be any second guessing the choice a year or two down the road.
So when will we see a final Army announcement? Sequestration and continuing resolution notwithstanding, the switch for ACUs, the day-to-day uniform of the Army is essentially cost neutral. It’s a matter of altering contracts to procure the new pattern(s) rather than UCP. The real, long-term sunk cost is in the Organizational Clothing and Individual Equipment such as the IOTV and MOLLE. It costs more and lasts longer than a uniform. However, we understand the Army has a few concepts up their sleeve to ease the transition. When UCP was fielded it was all in. The Army essentially transitioned everything to UCP in about five years and issued ACUs to each Soldier gratis. I don’t think recapitalization will go so smoothly this time. The US Army officially adopted the woodland camouflage pattern in 1981. The old OD green fatigues could still be worn until September 30 1987. OD field equipment was still being used up until the advent of UCP. Based on budget shortfalls I would expect serving Soldiers will have to purchase new uniforms with their annual clothing allowance and expect a longer transition period than with UCP. Also, don’t expect any changes to the actual cut of the ACU along with the camouflage change. It will be the same uniform but with an entirely new paint job.
In conclusion, I would say that no matter which family of pattern they select; ADS/Cramer, Brookwood, Crye or Kryptek, the Army will announce its decision when it’s good and ready and not a day sooner.
Lets hope they make a logical decision and it doesnt fall victim to the budget cuts. This will be a good step in the right direction of resetting our military and stepping into the future of warfare. Our warriors are the most combat trained and exoerienced as we have ever seen and we should not let that go. Lord kniws we will need it if war ever comes from certain places. Thanks to our military for everything.
However, if allowed I think a lot of soldiers will give up some of their hard-earned money and buy new uniforms & equipment just to get rid of UCP. Never seen so much hatred for a pattern.
It will be very interesting to see which pattern comes up on top from this.
The UCP was a horrible decision. From what I’ve seen of the patterns trialed at the time I’d have to say the All-Over Brush was the best.
I have a theory why they didn’t choose that pattern (other than political/economic meddling, wanting to one-up the marines with a CADPAT version of their own, etc.): All-Over Brush plenty like the British DPM (both being brush-stroke patterns).
Last time a gradient pattern, a brush pattern, and two irregular patterns were competing, all of them abandoned for a grey-grey-sand CADPAT.
This time there’s a gradient pattern, a pixel pattern, a non-pixellated digital pattern and a smokey version of the ERDL in the running (kinda like with the German eichenlaubmuster and rauchentarn patterns in WWII).
Will last time’s contender win? Or will they be returning back to basics? Or will they just say “And now for something completely different”?
As long as I can plow under the wetlands I’ll buy the swamp you got in Suffolk…for a decent price though.
Hopefully budget cuts will result in the DoD being forced to come to a Service Common solution. We all use to wear woodland BDUs and ALICE. I think that the conventional forces should be forced to do the same thing now. There’s no reason to have OTVs, IOTVs, SPCS, IMTVs, PCs, FILBE, MOLLE, ACUs, ABUs, NWUs, MCCUs, etc. The DoD needs to make decision and stop nickle and diming themselves to death. If SOCOM can maintain a level of commonality in their associated personal equipment and weapon programs I see no reason why the conventional forces can’t.
So I did some digging on recent contracts for DOD. here’s one from march 8th that looked interesting.
ADS, Inc., Virginia Beach, Va.**, was issued a modification exercising the third option year on contract (SPM8EJ-09-D-0003/P00021). The modification is a firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract with a maximum $3,549,597,144 in support of the Special Operational Equipment Tailored Logistics Support Program. Location of performance is in Virginia with a March 9, 2014 performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and federal civilian agencies. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2013 through fiscal 2014 Defense Working Capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pa.
————
Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support note: DLA Troop Support provides food, clothing and textiles, medical supplies and equipment and construction equipment and supplies to government organizations
That’s TLS. It has nothing to do with Camo. If you had read the remainder of the award notice the other three TLS providers were also awarded an additional year.
Ahh i see. thanks for the input.