TYR Tactical

An RAAF Variant of AMP?

Did the Royal Australian Air Force take a page from the US play book and develop a specialized Blue variant of the Australian MultiCam Pattern originally created by Crye Precision? If so, they are bluer than even the original USAF Tigerstripe Pattern.


Normally, we won’t publish something without at least two sets of verification. Unfortunately, we couldn’t get that for this one but we believe it to be real. We are still unsure if this is a trial pattern or a planned version for the RAAF.

AMP was developed by Crye Precision under contract to the Australian military for use in Afghanistan. It integrates MultiCam and its very effective color palette with some of the more traditional Australian camouflage elements found in the long serving DPCU pattern.

Tags: ,

34 Responses to “An RAAF Variant of AMP?”

  1. BradKAF308 says:

    Why do they do this? We want a more casual uniform, but don’t want to look Infantry? Really? Air Forces and Navys are used to spending Shit loads of money on planes an ships so they don’t mind wasting it on clothing? WTF? Even if this time it isn’t legit others have done it. Dumb.

  2. Platypus says:

    Haha…good one the RAAF

  3. BM says:

    Dear lord. We heard about this but thought it was a joke. It still looks like a joke.

  4. Dan M says:

    I think people forget what camoflague is actually for. We already have a distinguishable pattern for our country we dont need one for each service. Our armed forces are much too small.

  5. bulldog 76 says:

    poor ausies 🙁

  6. Craig P says:

    Surely this is P*ss taking?? If not let’s hope it doesn’t extend to the Airforce Defence Guards (ADGIES) they already have it tough!

  7. Stryker Magnum says:

    I love Auscam. Don’t know why they had to replace it.

  8. Jay says:

    Don’t be so surprised if this is genuine. The ADF always does its best to take COTS products which have been combat tested and favoured by the Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen and change them. Once again a huge waste of money for nothing other than simply trying to market a particular service of the ADF. Well done RAAF. How about you waste more money on a crap uniform instead of actually trying to develop a genuine capability to help us deploy somewhere instead of just relying on the Yanks’ all the time.

  9. Jordan says:

    I suppose they don’t need to camouflage, because they don’t know how

  10. an actual raafie says:

    for those uninitiated, the cost of uniform production will not change. As the DPCU/Auscams are phased out of RAAF, it is replaced by this new pattern.

  11. GMK says:

    Wait ’til you see AMP in the DPP (DPCU) colour palette..

  12. David says:

    This is a trial pattern at this stage. The RAAF upper echelon have a dislike for being mistaken for Army hence the push for a different colour scheme. They tried to get a different coloured DPCU as the RAN did and failed and now they want to try for this type of scheme.

  13. wazza says:

    Give this RU486 now. Cams should be for CAMOFLAGUE & NOT A FASHION STATEMENT!!!. As a Aussie taxpayer stop wasting our tax dollars on crap such as individual service cams , stick to what you have got in a workable common uniform and spend the money on capability and training !!

  14. steave says:

    Buy some ordanance for your planes

  15. Scott says:

    Is this a new member of the Wiggles??

  16. waz says:

    Now the RAAFSAS will cop even more shit.

  17. Wilbur says:

    I have the same thought as I do for the navy uniforms- if they want to be different, why don’t they just adopt the army cut of clothing but dyed in one colour only? A light khaki colour, say, (like the WW2 ground crew used to have) and no silly fashion statements….

  18. Rob says:

    Maybe this will lead to additional legislation that will require all NATO countries adopt the same uniform and camo pattern, say by the year 2045?

  19. Aaron says:

    The Navy wears Grey Auscam.

    • Strike-Hold says:

      I wonder how long it will take before they adopt a “grey” version of AMP – with built-in, bicep reflector belts so that they don’t get “too” camouflaged whilst on board ship…

  20. Tom says:

    Reminds me of an old GI Joe 80s action figure, does anyone remember those old toys. It almost seems like every camouflage effort is just a page from the old GI Joe toy line from Hasbro. I cant wait for the crimeson color battle dress to make its debut, right up there with white storm troopers.

  21. B707-338 says:

    For those that are complaining of this being a waste of money you can rest easy. The stipulation for an Air Force identifiable uniform was that it was to be cost neutral. It is being made from the same cut as the existing uniform but instead of paying x amount of dollars on the existing fabric the same money will be spent of the new fabric. No extra cost.

    While I agree that the new scheme takes a bit of getting use to, it actually isn’t that bad. There are many militaries that use a similar colour scheme so this isn’t a new idea. The reason the RAAF is looking at the multicam pattern instead of the AUSCAM pattern is because the Army may soon be moving to the multicam pattern. It would be silly to introduce a new uniform in a soon to be obsolete pattern.

    The uniform is not trying to be a camouflage so you can stop using that as an argument. It is to have our own identifiable uniform, just as the Navy has done. The US military have gone down the same path where all 4 services have a different pattern and be identifiable.

    • bulldog76 says:

      but we are changing that and all going to one pattern

    • BradKAF308 says:

      You are arguing infavour of what everyone else sees as negative points. If it’s not cam (very obvious) don’t make it in a pattern that mimics camoflage. It looks like a stupid fashion statement.
      But the Navy did it. Yea that’s dumb too. Thier corporate identifier are those big grey things in the water.
      You want to be distinctive? Air Forces are very safety conscious also. So make it orange. Both objectives served. You are proving it isn’t a fashion contest. But that doesn’t look cool. You are the Air Forse. It’s the plans that are cool. Your objective is to be professional!
      The US mil did it. Yea and list to all the bitching from the Americans. They think it’s dumb too. Currently don’t look to the Americans for military fashion advise.
      The pattern should be universal for all services so in time of need a soldier can go to any supply facility and get replacement clothing.
      Minor note: Every thing in the military exists to support the Infantry! Directly or indirectly. Too many senior people for get this. Yea occationaly the Navy or Air Force does stuff independantly. But that’s not the norm, and not why they exist.

  22. dave says:

    Does Crye know your are making a copy of their camouflage?

    • BM says:

      You have got to be kidding? It is clearly stated above that CP worked with the ADF to develop AMP. Or do you just look at the pictures?

  23. Drew says:

    Don’t all RAAF ground crew have a secondary role of static airfield defence in support of the Adgie’s. Kinda going to stick out a lot sitting in that gun pit don’t you think???

  24. B707-338 says:

    No one has stated any thing about being a fashion statement than some of the idiotic comments on here. The only people who think cams are a fashion statement are the wanna be soldiers who wear there cams on the weekend. If you want to keep on using fashion as an argument go right ahead. If that is the case I am all for jeans and a t-shirt. However I would rather a uniform that shows the person wearing it is RAAF. It is a simple concept that most militaries around the world are adopting.

    Brad, why the hell would we pick orange……If we are going to have an identifiable uniform for the RAAF then make it an identifiable uniform. Obviously you are not in the RAAF so why are you worried. I am happy for someone who is in the RAAF to complain about something they have to wear, but not you. From most accounts the first reaction is that they think the blue uniform will look stupid until they see it in real life. That is the part you are missing.

    An everyday wear uniform does not need to be DPCU or multicam. There are some details about those uniforms that make them expensive to process which will not be needed for the RAAF uniform, making them a lot less expensive to make. If you want to waste money outfitting everyone in a uniform they don’t need on a daily basis then fine. I would rather save that money for something else.

    Drew, As I stated above, this is an everyday uniform that is cheaper to make. There will always be the more expensive multicams or DPCU to wear on Operations when it is required. This is not the uniform that they will wear in a gun pit.

    Brad I have to ask this, what does the following comment have to do with uniforms? Minor note: Every thing in the military exists to support the Infantry! Directly or indirectly. Too many senior people for get this. Yea occationaly the Navy or Air Force does stuff independantly. But that’s not the norm, and not why they exist.

    • Angry says:

      B707-338. I think you have been sitting in an office to long and not adventuring to an actual war zone. It is quite obvious that your new uniform is pathetic, let alone dangerous to future RAAF soldiers. I am surprised Crye Precision wasted their time coming up a design for RAAF. This is perhaps the reason for the back log at CP HQ…

      In case you forgot what camouflage is, (which is evident you have), then read below.

      “Camouflage is the use of any combination of materials, coloration or illumination for concealment, either by making objects hard to see, or by disguising them as something else.”

      Note – The key word in that paragraph is concealment.

      The new pattern RAAF have come up with is not appropriate to RAAF serviceman, that is unless you have blue walls painted in your office? The Navy cams of grey Auscam is suitable to the backdrop of ships/submarines. SF soldier utilise this pattern when working on water operations. I am not sure what background you think the blue MC will suit, however it is not in any current theatre. There are many new camouflaged patters available that are quite effective in most environments if you were that determined to stand out from Army/Navy.

      Overall, I cannot believe that money is being wasted on this pathetic excuse for camouflage when active SF soldiers cannot get a spare set of MC for live operations. Your kind disgust me.

    • Gav says:

      B707-338, while I understand the esprit de corps that has inspired this desire for a unique RAAF uniform, no amount of spin will change the fact that this “uniform” is using a camouflage pattern because camouflage patterns are fashionable these days (in the eyes of some people- usually those who have never had to wear it as a uniform). As Angry pointed out, cam’ serves a purpose. When that purpose is deliberately ignored/circumvented, by either the use of bright colours (the example above) or by putting reflective tape and big golden badges on it (RAN camouflage) then the purpose of the uniform is fashion, not function.

      Why not go back to the old RAAF blue work dress? It made sure nobody mistook you for soldiers (also seen by the Army as a plus), it was practical, hard wearing and, compared to DPCU or AMP, cheap. Going from specially made JG overalls to civilian work gear, such as King Gee khakis, saved the army millions in the 90’s. How much did it cost the RAAF o go from their work blues to DPCU, let alone something completely new? (The same point can apply to the RAN’s cam’s, too, though their grey overalls were a problem in the tropics and doing some tasks).

      Also, don’t forget DPCU/DPDU is not “Army cam’ “, it’s a national field camouflage uniform. The fact that it’s most closely associated with the Army is because the majority of people who wear it are Army.

      As for being “cost neutral”, if the RAAF/DMO achieve that then it will be near miraculous. Just having staff in R2 at Russell or Campbell Park, to man the project and administer the trials and issues to users, is an added cost. So unless the new uniforms are cheaper than DPCU, it can’t be cost neutral.

      This will be another WOFTAM project, like so many others I’ve seen since ’75. And with even less justification than most for ever being considered.

      BTW, you’re wrong about other countries moving to service-unique cam uniforms- the US government has just come down hard on the US forces and ordered them to adopt a single, NATIONAL, set of cam’ uniforms- no more “USMC” woven into MARPAT or blue tigerstripe USAF suits. Hopefully our government will follow suit and slap down whatever idiot 2-star/3-star thought this was a good idea. Or at least stop it at first pass and order a budget review

  25. blackduck says:

    If the RAAF wish to go there own way then let them fill their boots. As long as it protects the boys and girls from environmental and workplace hazards, is comfortable to wear and durable.
    I assume that members posted forward will still be issued DPCU /AMP as required.
    However if we are discussing the merits of a distinctive protective working dress that does not have a secondary role of concealment, then a single colour material would probably make more sense. Less complex to produce than a 5 or so colour palate and would still be distinctly RAAF.