SIG MMG 338 Program Series

The Army’s Ongoing Schizophrenia Over the Future of Camouflage

Since November I’ve been watching a rather interesting drama play itself out on Fed Biz Opps, the US Government’s website used to communicate procurement opportunities with the public. Aimed at industry, these postings spell out what the Government is buying. Normally, this isn’t a big issue. But in this instance it involves a constant flip flop over camouflage patterns.

Specifically, the Army wants to purchase 15,000 yards of Permethrin treated 50/50 NYCO fabric. It’s generally used to manufacture the Army Combat Uniform. The Permethrin treatment has been added to the fabric over the past few years as an insect repellant. That isn’t the issue. The issue has been whether to purchase the fabric in the Army’s current standard issue Universal Camouflage Pattern or in the Operational Camouflage Pattern known commercially as MultiCam by Crye Precision.

Originally posted 20 November, 2103, Army Contracting Command at Natick Soldier Systems Center posted a presolicitation, used to give industry a heads up, entitled “To purchase a minimum of 15,000 yards of Permethrin treated 50:50 Cotton/Nylon fabric from an EPA approved vendor” for “an acquisition requirement to purchase a minimum of 15,000 yards of Permethrin treated 50:50 Cotton Nylon (CoNy) fabric from an EPA approved Vendor. Fabric will be in the Operational Camouflage pattern…” Pretty cut and dried right?

OCP Definitely OCP

But then, January 13th came and the actual solicitation was released and they asked for “50:50 Nylon:Cotton fabric in accordance with MIL-DTL-44436B Class 8; Universal Camouflage Pattern (UCP) (emphasis added) treated with permethrin meeting the requirements of GL/PD 07-13D Type I, Class 2 and GL/PD 07-14D Type I, Class 2, as described in the Statement of Work, Section C, of this solicitation.”

It's gotta be UCP

Naturally, the head scratching began. The purchase of the fabric in OCP was right on track with the “soft launch” transition to OCP from UCP and here the Army is, asking for the old stuff. What was going on? The Army even went so far as to address the issue in a Q&A update to the solicitation. Their statement sounds like it put the issue to bed. But did it?

Q and A

Flipping isn’t any good unless there’s some flopping to go along with it right? Well this story has got some for you. On 06 February, 2014, an update to the solicitation reverted back to the original requirement, “Natick Soldier Research Development and Engineering Center’s (NSRDEC) has an acquisition requirement to purchase a minimum of 15,000 yards of Permethrin treated 50:50 Cotton Nylon (CoNy) fabric from an EPA approved Vendor. Fabric will be in the Operational Camouflage pattern…” Maybe it’s an administrative error, and maybe it’s schizophrenia, but either way, it’s painful to watch. UCP? OCP? Whatever works.

UCP-OCP whatever works

At this point I don’t even bother to ask the Army what they are up to as they have stopped communicating with me regarding camouflage as well as my colleagues at other websites. All any of us can do is watch what the Army does and report on its actions. In this case, ‘schizophrenia’ is the best word I can come up with to describe those actions. Yes, we’ve downloaded the documents and will post them here on SSD if the Army once again decides to alter the public record by deleting solicitation documents.

Hopefully, the Army will choose a single course of action regarding camouflage and make it work. The Soldier, industry and SSD are waiting.

53 Responses to “The Army’s Ongoing Schizophrenia Over the Future of Camouflage”

  1. DBACK028 says:

    Well, let me be the first to say thank you for your effort in providing information for all of us in both the military and non military world. Kinda funny that they couldn’t answer your Q&A answers directly…it’s obvious that the question that was “irrelevant” was actually very relevant to the conversation…otherwise you wouldn’t have asked the questions. Summing up the last three years….The Army doesn’t know what the hell it wants and won’t know what the hell its doing until congress busts down the door and says: “Guess what! We’re going back to pickle suits!” Thanks again SSD and any other websites for keeping us updated. Maybe congress will be smart and put everyone in MARPAT OR AOR (since the last time I checked that wasn’t “contracted and owned” only by the Navy…maybe it is I don’t know). Thanks again. I’ll be waiting and checking in as always to see if you ever have updates!

    • Sal says:

      I can already hear Amos foaming at the mouth lol.

      • straps says:

        GEN Amos is. Not. Helping.

        He bitches if someone tells him that the USMC needs to move away from MARPAT.

        He bitches if someone tells him that someone other than USMC will adopt the color schema (minus the EGA, of course).

        GEN Amos would be having a better time of it–on many fronts–if he got his head around the idea of “defensible ground.”

        • Will says:

          I’m not sure what your point is, but the Marine Corps transitioned to MARPAT for very little cost. I can’t find the number, but I remember reading that the development was around $500,000. Basically the Marine Corps took the Canadian patterns and modified the colors. Secondly, the Marine Corps adopted coyote brown 782 gear, which conveniently enough, matches both desert and woodland MARPAT. The Marine Corps even went so far as to adopt olive mojave boots in order to be effective in most environments. The Marine Corps didn’t transition overnight either. The uniforms and 782 gear were supplied to Marines as the older equipment became unserviceable. So, there really isn’t much of a cost difference when you supply a Marine with a woodland pack, or a coyote pack. The real cost comes when you require an entire branch to turn in serviceable gear simply to have it swapped out for another color.

          It seems to me that the Army started the nonsense by spending tens of millions of dollars to field a color scheme that anyone who isn’t blind could have told you would not work. I really believe the Army wanted to have the digital pattern, but they didn’t want to directly copy the Marine Corps. In addition the Army made EVERYTHING in UCP, or foliage. So, after spending millions on a useless pattern they spend millions more to study camp patters, and then ultimately end up with Multicam? Are you seeing the waste here?

          Shortly there after, the Air Force and the Navy had to play catch up, and fielded a camp pattern that they even admit is not a field uniform. Who the hell makes a combat uniform in digital blue? Or grey tiger stripe?

          At the end of the day, does the cost matter? They should be more upset that they fielded ineffective patterns, instead of trying to make everyone equal. The government wastes so much money on so much other stupid garbage that Congress getting involved in uniform issues is a giant slap in the face.

          • SubandSand says:

            I’m guessing that you never had to wear the Navy’s Utility Uniform. I gladly put on my digital aquaflauge compared to the prisoner/janitor/gas station attendant looking uniform that was Utilities. Yeah they were cheaper to buy but if you looked at the light blue shirt wrong it stained and was unserviceable. The pants and shirt tore upon the slightest thought of brushing against anything that could offer a snag and was unserviceable. And if you managed not to do the above the crotch would blow out in about three months and the shirt would start unraveling in four and was unserviceable. Give me the NWUs any day.

          • JBAR says:

            I second SubandSand’s comment. The Aquaflauge uniform utilized an existing pattern, and just altered the colors.The colors prevent the uniform from being thrown away due to the shipboard environment (grease, paint, etc.). It maintains the dark blue for the traditional service color. Also, the Navy needed a “military” style uniform vice the prisoner/janitor/gas station attendant one for motivation and pride. I was an instructor for the past 6 years, and I could tell a huge difference in the ownership of the uniform. Sailors enjoy being in the military, and they finally got a military cut uniform that DOES serve a purpose. Yes, the current uniform is a fire risk. All of the following uniforms were also. Only the engineers working in high risk fire zones has nonflammable coveralls, so the NWU I’s were not a new hazard. That issue is also being fixed. There will also always be the old timers who liked the uniforms they served in. There is no problem with that, but times change and there are usually good reasons (hopefully) for changes. Although there are skeptics, especially outside of the Navy, the uniform is a success and was an excellent decision.

          • Kory S says:

            Marpat actually only costed 319 thousand.

            • Kory S says:

              Cost*

            • Kory S says:

              Cost

            • SSD says:

              In all fairness, if you are going to say that the transition to MARPAT cost only ~$500k then the Army didn’t spend $5b or $10b or whatever number we are using this week.

              They fielded uniforms and equipment. The development costs were inconsequential.

              • Kory S says:

                No they spent around 2.3 million I think. Correct me if I’m wrong.

                • SSD says:

                  Who? The Army? There really wasn’t any development. They took the screens from MARPAT and swapped out the colors.

                    • SSD says:

                      Pretty graphic but that doesn’t make it correct. I think the numbers came out of the GAO report but I seriously question them along with pretty much everything in that report.

                  • DBACK028 says:

                    could that 2.3 million also include the research that was done prior? what with Multicam, under brush camo, and some other camouflage, and then ACU…they did a similar test to what they’re doing now…correct?

                    • SSD says:

                      It was all separate. Essentially, there was no development for UCP. It wasn’t as if UCP was a candidate in the 02-04 trials.

                      There has never been a test like the one they just ran; Ever…anywhere.

                  • DBACK028 says:

                    I didn’t know that it was all separate…that’s really interesting. I was under the impression that there was another research program, like the one that is currently….underway? put on hold? I don’t know…but that’s funny that there wasn’t actually a “research” project for UCP…kinda makes puts it into a better perspective of why it was issued in the first place…worked with with Night Vision, a good concept that it should blend into everything…huh…I guess it makes a little more since now. But UCP still had to be field tested before issued right? So wouldn’t whoever tested it catch the flaw before it was issued…honestly I’ve got a million questions on this topic.

  2. Ben says:

    I just don’t get it, the majority of the Army already has RFI issued OCP uniforms, just make the switch already! It is costing the average joe a lot of money as garrison commands are enforcing UCP only uniform/kit as the “peacetime Army” nonesense intensifys.

    • SSD says:

      You have Defender M uniforms. The garrison Army wears NYCO.

      • 32sbct says:

        Don’t forget, the UCP “Defender M” FRACU has been authorized for daily wear for several years now. As my NYCO ACUs have become unserviceable, I’ve replaced them with unissued FRACU uniforms I purchased for very little money off Ebay. I have one good NYCO ACU left that I save for wear on ceremonial occasions.

        Thanks as always for the update.

      • JBAR says:

        Is cost the reason for not continuing to use the Defender M uniforms? They are safer, correct?

        • SSD says:

          FR uniforms are more expensive and don’t last as long. They are a necessary evil for the current threat but not something you need to wear day to day.

      • Ben says:

        Thank you for presuming to educate, i’m well aware, temporarily wearing fracu’s why the transition to a NYCO multicam uniform makes more sense than hemoraging money with UCP uniforms.

        • SSD says:

          Problem is, not everyone has FRACUs.

          I have to educate. If I don’t, people roll with some amazingly bad assumptions. You sir, are a rare jewel that knows the difference.

  3. Angry Misha says:

    I really appreciate SSD’s in depth coverage of this fiasco. However, I’m tired of hearing about it. It reminds me of the Vltor “Fortis” aka “Bren Ten” debacle. A lot of drumming up excitement, followed by initially “acceptable” delays with promises of “great things” and then fizzle.. poof “vaporware”. I have resigned myself to the fact that when in garrison I will still be wearing UCP. Yeah, yeah, I’m aware that I if I don’t want to read it, I can choose not to. This fact coupled with the realization that I’m a glutton for punishment, I will, like today, avoid reading it and skip to the “Cliff Notes” aka; “The Comments”.

  4. Strike-Hold says:

    The bit that got me was the rationalization of “we’re going back to UCP becuase the cut-and-sew vendor we’ve selected has a lot of Foliage Green trim and add-ons and they kicked up a fuss about being stuck with all that inventory that they can’t shift, and then having to buy it all in Tan 499 instead.”

    No, that’s not what it ACTUALLY said – but that’s what it meant…

  5. GW says:

    I am dismayed. Hesitate-disintegrate. I can hear my first Squad leader from Dallas Texas yelling this in my ear.

  6. JohnC says:

    Question.
    The screenshot above mentions buying 15K yards of the fabric. But, camouflage apparel isn’t like other clothing, where you can cut willy-nilly, right (i.e., the colors/shapes/pattern are supposed be random-ish and placed specifically on the body)? How do the they go about doing that? Seems expensive. (Or, do they just assume whoever’s wearing it will eventually be covered with enough grime and piles of molle pouches that “good enough for government work” is good enough?)

  7. xdarrows says:

    SSD, thanks again for your fantastic coverage of this issue. It’s painful to read (and even more painful to keep putting on UCP while my OCP is hanging in the closet).

    Any chance you’ve been able to brief any Congressmen on this?

  8. cimg says:

    Holy Crap! Even in 2103 we are still debating UCP vs OCP!!! Ha ha.

    “Originally posted 20 November, 2103, Army Contracting Command at Natick Soldier Systems Center posted a presolicitation,…”

    Gotta add some humor to the madness…..

    over the weekend ATSO I was wearing ABUs, with Woodland MOPP gear, with a ACU helmet cover and IOTV, with a green ALICE pack.

    • Philip says:

      At least your suit matched… last exercise I played in, my MOPP suit was a woodland top with 3-color desert pants. And a banged-up green PASGT.

      They said it was “just for training so matching didn’t matter” — not that I cared, but I found it amusing.

  9. Ridiculous.

    Just go with Multicam.

    It’s just awesome.

  10. majrod says:

    Thanks for staying on top of this SSD, depressing as it is.

  11. m5 says:

    What’s the big deal? 15000 yards is not. If the Army will continue to use UCP in garrison for some time anyway, using up the existing foliage trim some vendor happens to have is probably sensible. Surely it’s on sale.

    What is used by deployed troops is quite another matter. The major camouflage improvement study seemed like a sensible thing to do. Burrying the results of the study – essentially pretending it never happened – and going with an old pattern already in usage (OCP), now this seems pretty strange, if not outright stupid.

    Nothing new here though. UCP was chosen from outside the previous camo competion. Had they chosen the 3rd (out of 4) runner up in 2002/3, rather than UCP, a lot of this flip-flopping could have been avoided. The 3rd runner up was a pattern developed by a contractor called Scorpion. Later renamed as Multicam, and adopted as OCP by the Army.

  12. Mick says:

    Like a train wreck, I just cannot look away. SSD, know it’s frustrating, but I enjoy and appreciate these little updates… and even if you’re not getting answers, keep asking questions! Maybe you’ll get some more info crumbs here and there…

    MIck.

  13. pbr549 says:

    I don’t think that the majority of the Army has been issued OCP through RFI. Out of the 150ish Soldiers in the AC/RC BDE I’m assigned to, I’d be surprised if more than 20 have OCP uniforms.

    • Rick says:

      Very accurate. A majority of our Army has not been deployed in the past four years.

      – Rick

  14. tdg187x says:

    it doesn’t make sense for anyone to be bidding out uniform contracts at this point considering the congressional push to have the same utility uniform for all the services

  15. SubandSand says:

    Can you say cluster fuck? Come on, I know you can. Cluster fuck.

  16. JBAR says:

    SSD, if you were the one who submitted the questions for the solicitation’s use of UCP, you saved them how much money? It looks like they screwed up, then, instead of following the rules (as far as I know), said to contact them/her via email instead of through the post/website.

  17. Kory S says:

    The Army brass just makes me want to throw up. What do they care if soldiers have an ineffective camouflage pattern (OCP is only in Stan and we have combat units around the world facing life and death.) I mean as long as UCP keeps fresh recruits rolling in and allows them to put money on fantastic weapons projects that run for a few decades and then gets cancelled with nothing being achieved.

  18. Kory S says:

    Also guys talking about the Nwu I pattern it is not for combat it is to hide stains and is much more durable and cost effective than Blue working Uniforms in the long run so Nwu is perfectly reasonable.

  19. 10thMountainMan says:

    I take solace in the fact that after a week in the field, UCP blends in perfectly.

  20. HOLLYWOOD319 says:

    Quote from NATICK’s CO- “I came in like a wrecking ball!”

  21. Mike B. says:

    Just another day in the Army. Some asshat is playing games, and too afraid to make a real decision. If the Army’s already using MC as the uniform camp in A-Stan. And that’s what they chose for the rest of the Army, then they need to piss or get off the Pot..