Updated – US Army Photos of Scorpion W2 Operational Camouflage Pattern Variant of Army Combat Uniform

MSG Benjamin Owens in OCP ACU - US Army Photo (3)

These US Army photos of MSG Benjamin Owens wearing the Operational Camouflage Pattern (Scorpion W2) variant of the Army Combat Uniform with the new zippered upper arm pockets adapted from the Army Combat Shirt appeared this evening on the web. MSG Owens serves as the Senior Enlisted Advisor to COL Robert Mortlock, Project Manager (PM) Soldier Protection and Individual Equipment (SPIE) at PEO Soldier.

MSG Benjamin Owens in OCP ACU - US Army Photo (1)

As you can see, the Scorpion W2 pattern is similar to MultiCam but not an exact match. I am unsure if we can extrapolate anything from the boot or t-shirt color in the photo as industry has been told that boots would be Coyote and these look to be the current issue Tan. Now that I have higher quality photos I believe the coloring of boot and T-shirt is correct.

MSG Benjamin Owens in OCP ACU - US Army Photo (2)

Updated with additional, higher resolution photos.

305 Responses to “Updated – US Army Photos of Scorpion W2 Operational Camouflage Pattern Variant of Army Combat Uniform”

  1. Lucky says:

    For the first time in damn near a decade, I feel like a Soldier

    • SSD says:

      Looks good, doesn’t it?

      • FormerDirtDart says:

        Probably should have included this image to better show the upper arm pockets
        Upper Arm Pocket

        • All American says:

          Who in the world thinks patches were a smart idea should be througn in jail. Waste of money and again will be the only service who can not roll up there sleeves what morons!!!

      • FormerDirtDart says:

        Also, now we can just speculate about the “dark jungle-woodland variant and a lighter pattern for desert environs”

      • JulietHotel says:


      • Chad T. says:

        The cut of the blouse looks much better. I can’t see the extra panel running along the side like the current ACUs.

      • Matthew Dzemske says:

        This is one of the major problems with the big green machine. Why does it matter how it *looks*? The concern, like soldiers, should be how it *performs*. You’ve got infantry TM/FMs memorised? You’ve studied counterinsurgency for years? You can build an AR, you practice combat skills on your own time, and are regularly called upon because you *do* know these things? Well, that sucks…miss a spot shaving, have the hair on the nape of your neck touching your collar, and didn’t starch or spit shine your boots (because I like having healthy feet, and that IR coating is pretty cool). Congratulations, you’re now an undisciplined shitbag.
        During ever conflict, the appearance regs get more strict, and our combat ability gets shittier. Instead of worrying about new dress uniforms, new ACUs (total waste of time; as Multicam was tested alongside the ACU pattern. MC tested the best, ACU the worst. We all know what happened next. And just so we *look* professional.)
        Has a new uniform enhanced combat performance in and of itself? Combat training, a new doctrine that teaches counterinsurgency tactics AS WELL as conventional skills. Get back to basics…if people taught in madrasahs are frankly beating our fancy looking asses, a change of clothes is NOT the answer, although I will concede dropping a near useless camouflage pattern is a step in the right direction.

        • SGTFON says:

          Amen Matthew. just more money to be wasted buying new tents, assault packs, helmet covers etc that could be used to RD a more lethal round or better armor for us to wear.

  2. ted says:

    I have a problem. I like to use multiple puppet accounts to play games on SSD and disparage fine Americans who put their life on the line in order to defend America.

  3. Mike says:

    Dude has the highest boot blouses I have ever seen on a solider, period. Higher than brand new Pvt checking into the fleet, high.

  4. Sgt A says:

    Well, it’s almost Multicam, but not in a bad way. At least nobody will be crowing about appropriating our MARPAT, since this is a better solution for the Army.
    Can’t help but notice the tan undershirt, especially in light of the recent Army PT Uniform ALARACT, but that’s a discussion for elsewhere.
    Bravo Zulu on finally putting out a proper fighting uniform for soldiers, just wish it could have gotten to them sooner.

  5. eagle 1 says:

    multi-cam needs to sue…

    • Steven S says:

      I don’t see a case for it. The W2 version looks essentially like the original scorpion (maybe the scale is slightly larger?).

      The only distinguishable difference between the original, seems to be the colors. The color scheme appears to have been modified to look almost exactly like Multicam (they were similar to begin with due to the heritage).

      Also, it’s difficult to sue over colors in the first place, and since the colors for Multicam resemble and originate from the original scorpion owned by the Army, I just don’t see the point in trying because they won’t win, well at least from my reasoning.

    • Jeff Clement says:

      Wasn’t MultiCam developed from work originally commissioned and paid for by the DOD? I think the biggest driver for going with one of the Scorpion variants (vice keeping the current OCP/MultiCam) was sticking with intellectual property the DOD already owned. So if anybody could sue anybody, it would be the DOD suing Crye precision over MultiCam (which Crye Precision clearly did their homework on years ago)…

      The biggest question is why didn’t the Army go with a Scorpion variant instead of UCP years ago, which is an issue that has been beat to death and then some [authoritatively, in fact (and using facts) here in SSD].

      • SSD says:

        Yeah, that’s a good question, why didn’t the Army sue Crye for MultiCam years ago? And why did it pay for MultiCam all those years if it really owned it all along?

        • Dani Homados says:

          Help me SS, didn’t Crye develop Scorpion I? Then they modified it to MultiCam? Natuck modified MultiCam to Skorpion II? All to avoid paying Caleb Crye the $22m he asked to turn over the rights to the whole program? IMV, Army “leadership” should be embarassed. Caleb Crye has been flat ripped off after years of working fairly selflessly, and honorably, to better hide working soldiers in combat. Over less money than they’ll spend on grass seed Army wide this year.

          • Dokt says:

            Consider that Crye was paid by the Army to develop Scorpion to begin with.

            It seems to me that it’s more than fair since the Army has allowed him to profit off a derivative of their intellectual property (assuming the Army 100% owns the rights to Scorpion).

      • Greg says:

        Thats the Trillion dollar question that probably might never be answered.

  6. Erik says:

    I’m actually rather surprised: given their history I would have assumed they have worked hi-viz neon and a reflective belt into the W2

    It’s a hell if a step in the right direction from that abortion of a pattern that they used for the last decade.


  7. Lucky says:

    Yes, now release them already DLA, I will GLADLY spend extra money to outfit myself. Also, is anybody else ritualistically burning their ACU’s?

  8. 32sbct says:

    Finally some pictures! I will be waiting in line the first day it is available for sale. I hope the powers that be let us use serviceable multicam uniforms and gear. It is different, but since they are stressing fiscal responsibility this would be a smart thing to do. That being said I doubt that will happen. Maybe the gear but not uniform items.

    • Explosive Hazard says:

      I suspect gear in MultiCam will be fine for a couple years until they can get all the issued gear in Scorpion. Uniforms I can understand that being a no go because you wouldn’t want Joe running around with a MultiCam top and Scorpion bottoms. At least with the gear it will be more difficult to notice and you will be using it in the field anyway. I can’t wait to switch over.

      • FormerDirtDart says:

        According to the Army Times:
        “The Army is seeking to over-dye existing Modular Lightweight Load carrying Equipment (MOLLE) and Improved Outer Tactical Vests (IOTV) that are the digital Universal Camouflage Pattern to create a darker color that more closely matches coyote brown.”

        So, that should be fun.

        • SSD says:

          Holy shit. They got that from me. I’ve been writing about that plan for over a year. Go read about what’s really happening with that here on SSD.

          • Steven S says:

            Yep, the Army Times always seem to be late to the party.

            You sure do a good job getting the stuff out there early, SSD.

            Btw, that quote is almost exactly what was put on the Wikipedia page for Scorpion 2 too.

            Talking about that, I guess I’ll change the picture with the one with the MSG, if it hasn’t already been done yet.

            • SSD says:

              I can’t help what Wikipedia says, but please change out that incorrect photo. Desert and Woodland variants of Scorpion were developed years ago. However, afaik, there are no plans to develop new versions or field them. As it is, Scorpion is treading on thin ice irt the NDAA’s Enyart Amendment.

              • FormerDirtDart says:

                I just hope a collection of meatheads don’t read the Army Times, and on their own initiative, go and try to dye all their OCIE coyote.

              • MAC says:

                I would like to see them crank out the scorpion desert and woodland versions and be done with it…

              • Steven S says:

                I can’t change the photo at the moment. Wikipedia requires a 4 day old account with at least 10 edits…..

    • straps says:

      It’ll be pretty damned funny to see people camped out in front of MCSS like they do at the Mall when the hot new Nike comes out. And yeah, if I get good scoop I will be one of those people.

  9. Airborne1971 says:

    Anyone notice the subdued flag? I wonder if this is what we are going to?

    • SSD says:

      I wouldn’t get too worked up over what you see on MSG Owens’ uniform in these photos. He has Velcro name tapes and those went out awhile back.

      • Hardchawger says:

        Many Soldiers still wear velcro nametapes on their ACUs to this day.

        • Cav Guy says:

          And by “many” do you actually mean “only the cheap ones who won’t be going in front of the board any time soon”. The pressure to get sew on is insane. I’ll just assume that you’re a cook.

          • Jon, OPT says:

            I can think of a branch that is almost all senior NCOs that still has about 80% Velcro nametapes.

            Jon, OPT

          • 10thMountainMan says:

            Ummm No. Sew on and velcro are both authorized and I see them both all over post. I prefer sew on but wear the velcro when I go to the field/range. As for boards, not sure about this because it was a while ago, but aren’t you supposed to be in ASUs for those?

            • COL REMF says:

              I have 11 sets of ACUs in varying degrees of condition, and I refuse to do sew-on anything. Haven’t had a clothing allowance since Bush-the-elder was President, and thanks to SSD and official announcement have known that I will need spend more money to go to my fourth type of utilities (after heavy BDUs, cotton LW BDUs, 50/50 LW BDUs, DCUs (issued but had to pay for sewing)), ACUs (which I bought to sag money on starching BDUs)). I still have seven pairs of green jungle boots, and nine pairs of desert ten boots, yet I look forward to paying to transitioning to get new OCP ensemble next year. But I’m annoyed about having to pay for a fourth generation of PT uniforms. It’s not that I can’t afford any of it, it’s just that I need that money to buy some of the new commercial kit seen on SSD

              • DSM says:

                Buy a sewing machine, rip everything off one of those old pair of BDUs and teach yourself how to put it all back on. It’ll pay for itself in a few uniforms.

            • Hardchawger says:

              +1 to responding to CAV Guy lol. But perhaps he was referring to downrange boards. haha.

          • Hardchawger says:

            No, I am not a cook lol. I been a combat engineer, MP and now Signal.

            But I was referring to the total force; including Guard and Reservists who I just completed an advanced course with. BTW, I am Regular Army.

            In my last unit, many people in my battalion preferred to keep the velcro on the name tapes. And yes, the majority were enlisted.

            For the record, all my uniforms are sew on and I do not do that because I am an officer.

  10. CAVstrong says:

    I’m for it!
    I love it!!
    I want it now!!

  11. Mike says:

    Can’t tell from the pictures if they removed that stupid fucking extra fabric with Velcro to give the blouse a collar or not. Props to them of they did, seeing as how that was a stupid idea … But without it, how will we be able to spot the posers so easily!?

  12. Explosive Hazard says:

    Its the pattern we should have had in 2004. Better late than never I suppose. We can all rejoice that the era of UCP is almost over. We will once again have an effective pattern.

    • FormerDirtDart says:

      Actually, if the went by the result from the trails in 2004, the Army would have been wearing Desert All Over Brush

    • Steven S says:

      More effective than UCP, Yes.
      Compared to what can be done in today’s age, No.
      Most importantly, all of this money and time for this, Unacceptable.

  13. Steven S says:

    I was under the impression that it was going to look more different than the original scorpion in terms of the pattern elements, oh well.

    The next thing I want to see is the performance in the IR spectrum (going to be a long time before someone can test that out)

    Oh yeah, I think its about time to start calling it by it’s official name, since it have been released officially 🙂

    • SSD says:

      Why did you think that?

      • Steven S says:

        Well, I was under the impression primarily by other sites such as Kit Up which stated it looked more like Multicam but never specified what.

        So in my mind I was thinking, its being called Scorpion W2, and it’s supposedly looks even more similar to Multicam than before. So it must be more than just another Natick recoloring job. So I figured they added more pattern elements to scorpion to make it look more like Multicam and hopefully mimic it’s better performance.

        Anyways, in relation to you, I do remember that you mention something vague about this in the comment sections on one of your articles. It aligned to what I was thinking at the time. I spent awhile trying to look for the comment, but I can’t seem to find it. Maybe, I imagined it? Idk.

        Nethertheless, I don’t blame anyone on my misunderstanding/assumption.

        A few extra things to note though:

        From a designing perspective, I don’t consider recoloring a pattern to be enough to justify 2.0 or in this case W2. So this adds to the whole thing of me thinking it’s more than a paint job.

        The next thing, to summarize somewhat, this whole camouflage fiasco is quite depressing to me as a American and a amateur designer. At the beginning of the CIE, I was very optimistic about the Army, and I thought they were finally going to do things right. For awhile I was very optimistic even when there was delays and they had to more testing. However, as months and years gone by with more delays, no announcements, and then finally ignoring the results of the CIE, I become much more pestimistic at each step but still retain some hope. That sliver of hope may have added to me being a bit disillusioned on what the scorpion W2 would look like.

        • SSD says:

          I’ve commented about the patterns in comments after seeing what KitUp! Published. Their article made it sound like the pattern had been recently altered. I have seen no evidence that this is the case. The pattern was apparently altered years ago to increase its effectiveness.

          • Sgt A says:

            I too got the impression that this was one of the Natick in-house patterns that was part of the Phase IV selection arrangement, and what concerns me is that this still lost to the Crye submissions, but has been chosen because of the existing in-house licensing.

            Since nobody appears to have made claims which are factually contrary to Caleb Crye’s statement from earlier this year that they could reduce their cut of the pattern licensing to bring the cost of Multicam equipment to within 1% of the ACU patterned equipment, this still feels like a big army grade case of mismanagement, made not catastrophic because at least the W2-Scorpion end product is usable at the end of the day, it’s just upsetting that innovative firms trying so hard to deliver what the Army itself spend research funds to determine was the best available solution get the door slammed in their face like this.

  14. Jon Meyer says:

    I actually like it better than Multi-Cam. As far as implementation, execution, approved gear, fabric materials, and pretty much everything else, the Army will go out of its way to fuck it up.

  15. fryer duck says:

    So is there any speculation on what the book end patterns are going to look like? Are we going to get reissued the old desert and woodland patterns or are they going to tweak the color pallet of the new “OCP”?

    • Explosive Hazard says:

      I’m betting AOR 1 and 2 will be issued as bookends for those that need it. And with the draw down in Afghanistan and the eventual pull out I doubt anyone on the conventional side will get issued anything other than OCP. Especially since OCP works well in a lot of different terrains. Unless you get deployed to an actual jungle or an open sandy desert OCP will be fine. Furthermore, even if you go to those places don’t expect a bookend unless you are performing in a combat mission. Joint training with a friendly nation probably won’t get you different gear.

      • DSM says:

        If they’re planning on Scorpion TA50 then I’d actually lean towards them fielding an as yet unseen tropical and arid versions of Scorpion not unlike what Crye put out recently. The vanity of clashing camouflage in what will become more and more a garrison force once again won’t be lost on leadership.

        • SSD says:

          It will be OCP OCIE for all, not just OIF.

        • Explosive Hazard says:

          I’m not so sure that tropic and arid versions of scorpion exist the same way that tropic and arid versions of multicam do. Additionally the Army submitted desert brush and digital woodland for Phase IV. This is why I think AOR 1 and 2 will be used. They are both very effective and proven patterns that are already used by the DOD, owned by the Navy and abide by NDAA 2014. SEAL’s and CAG have been mixing AOR patterns with multicam for a while now. I’ve seen SEAL’s wearing multicam pants with AOR 1 tops. It looks weird up close but I’m guessing it works.

          The Army’s recent test pitting MARPAT vs 3 color desert and M81 woodland may have been more than just “analog vs digital” it might have also been to determine if mixing analog and digital made any kind of difference in detection. If the tests prove that it doesn’t then there is no reason why you couldn’t have scorpion gear on top of AOR 1 and 2.

          • DSM says:

            I do not disagree at all on effectiveness. My point being based just on the “look” of soldiers in formation in mixed styles of camo. Sure, when UCP was initially fielded there were all sorts of combinations happening, but, that was also in the middle of two conflicts. Reading the tea leaves of the return of a more garrison force I don’t think you’d see that.
            That’s just a hunch so at this time one of us may be right or we may both proven wrong!

            • Explosive Hazard says:

              With the bookends though it will be issued on an as needed basis so the vast majority of soldiers will never get arid or tropical. So there shouldn’t be a mix of camo styles in a garrison formation. Chances are pretty good too that any conventional soldiers that do get the bookends will have to turn them in after deployment so they can get re-issued.

              The 3 color desert is also a terrible performer in NIR so I doubt it would get issued ever again. But, like you said I could be way wrong about that. Perhaps there is a decent arid version of scorpion already developed.

      • Jon, OPT says:

        Since when did the Army obtain rights to those patterns? They are SOCOM specific last I checked.

        Jon, OPT

        • Explosive Hazard says:

          AOR 1 and 2 belong to the Navy. Non SOF seaman have been issued AOR 2. The Marines have a hissy fit anytime anyone other than NSW personnel are issued AOR 1. But I don’t think the Navy would have any issues sharing the patterns with the Army.

  16. cueball95 says:

    time for Scorpion W2 pinup girls?

  17. Doc says:

    Those new sleeve pockets look horrible, a gigantic panel of pile. I’m glad I never had to use the reg Army combat shirts. They need to change back that to the acu flap style.

    Happy to see no more ucp for conus though. A step in the right direction at the least!

  18. tom says:

    So deff coyote brown boots?

  19. 10thMountainMan says:

    Look forward to wearing it. I wonder how long it will take to get all the sew on accessories such as name tapes, rank and scare badges? I hate all the velcro/pin-on crap and prefer to get everything sewn.

    • Dan says:

      Multicam name tapes should be fine, the fabric used is so narrow/small there are no vertical elements, so Multicam=Scorpian W2 for a while.

    • SSD says:

      I’m thinking Summer 2015

    • Hardchawger says:

      As you see in my multicam photo, we were issued ranks and name tapes. Plus sites like 800nametape dot com already sell it.

  20. DSM says:

    All the CMSgt’s that might be monitoring take notice to those sleeve pockets and their expansive real estate that offers you ample space for your chevrons. You’ve got no excuse to hate on sleeve pockets now. Let’s end Air Force Inc’s love affair with that abortion of a uniform called the ABU and at least dress like you’re part of the military again.

  21. Badjujuu says:

    Looks good. Great actually compared to UCP. But I am not so sure about that big patch of velcro on the sleeve. Seems to be an overkill. It doesn’t look proportional to the rest of the uniform. I mean Damn. That velcro takes up half of his arm.

    • SSD says:

      Maybe one of the guys at PEO Soldier was a 1st CAV guy

      • 10thMountainMan says:

        You beat me to it. Now 1st CAV can stop looking like assbags with portions of their patch hanging off the edge of the pile.

      • MAC says:

        This was likely a deal with the air force to get them on board. Monster chevrons that mean nothing…

        • DSM says:

          Surprisingly so those massive chevrons are about the only things that have survived the uniform boards. McPeak tried about 20yrs ago but they came back fast. They’re about the only heritage piece AF uniforms have since they change crap every few years to whatever the flavor of the day is.

          • SSD says:

            Remember when enlisted didn’t wear rank at all but rather just an ASNP?

            • DSM says:

              Yep, McPeak-ism. In one formation we had name tapes, ASNP w/o stripes, and ASNP w/stripes. If my memory serves me correctly if your Velcro was flush with the pocket you didn’t need stripes but when they brought the stripes back they raised the Velcro a half inch off the pocket. I wonder if someone has a 2903 from back then?!
              Functionally the ASNP made sense. They made a limited return on the sleeves when body armor and combat shirts made their appearance.

              • SSD says:

                The problem with the ASNP was that they insisted on the black leather ones. They should have gone to a cloth embroidered version like aircrew actually wear.

      • GW says:

        FIRST TEAM!!!

  22. sjl777 says:

    The velcro on the arm pockets looks large enough for CMSgt subdued rank. Maybe the Air Force could see the light and make the switch.

    • SSD says:

      Maybe that’s why they did it

      • Cap'n Drew says:

        Don’t get my hopes up.

        • Philip says:


          Although I’m hoping the sleeve panels can be used for MAJCOM and unit patches, and the SNCO mafia can just suck it up and wear a chest rank patch like everyone else, as the uniform was designed.

          Either way, as long as we ditch the ABUs, I really don’t care what we do.

          • DSM says:

            Gotta disagree there. If they did one thing right with the ABU it was to keep them clean of unnecessary patches. In the BDUs with your function badge(s), specialty badge like SP or Fire, MAJCOM, and then unit patch it made people look like Boy Scouts with merit badges. Just far too busy.

            I don’t disagree with sleeve chevrons. Like I’ve said elsewhere on here they’re about the only consistent item on an AF uniform throughout the years. When heritage doesn’t hurt or hinder I say embrace it and keep it going.

            I wouldn’t disagree with chest rank either but I’d fear all that empty Velcro would be too inviting for all sorts of giddy gabber patches. Unit pride and cohesion issues, nah, I wouldn’t think so.

            • Cap'n Drew says:

              Majcom and squadron patches go back at least to the 1950s. They’re as much a part of our heritage as giant NCO stripes.

  23. Y.T. says:

    I like the old style pockets better. This new 5×7 piece of velcro reminds me too much of the maternity ACU and that abortion they called a field jacket.

    • Hardchawger says:

      I guess they need the right dimension for the 1st Cav or 2nd ID patches since they are so big lol

  24. rob k says:

    I like the old pockets better, the enormous velcro looks a bit strange. I miss sewing on patches on my BUDs. Viewing this on my phone, but am I the only on who thinks the t-shirt looks more olive-brown than tan?

    • Thisguysays says:

      The intent was to make the pockets more functional which I like. I agree the Velcro is a bit much. I’d rather have patches sewn on. I’m not sure on the t-shirt color but the boots appear to me to be much darker than the current tan.

  25. bulldog76 says:

    i has a plan so we bring back the vietnam era og 107 gen 3 cut of uniform but heres the kicker in the current camo pattern and modern materials …. oh wait aminute thats just common sense cant have that in the army

  26. The Dude says:

    I am certainly not an expert, but from these photo’s it appears that Natick enlarged the scale of the original Scorpion which could be linked to the findings of NIR trials, where multicam, and the digital patterns lose thier disruptive effect when the small patterns blend together. This is seen in the US4CES paterns where they basically enlarged the current digit pattern and changed the layering of colors to provide the disruptive effect desired on the sillhouette in the NIR spectrum.

    This also reminds me of the changes from ERDL to M81, where the patterns are very similar, but the scale, and predominant color was changed to suit a woodland environment of eastern Europe vs. the jungles of Vietnam.

  27. Mitchell Fuller says:

    I’m sure SSD when able will provide a side by side comparison of MultiCam and New OCP for us to analyze.

    • SSD says:

      Until we can get access to fabric that will be tough.

      • Mitchell Fuller says:

        Thanks for info re fabric samples needed first, when you do post side by side comparison, I hope your site doesn’t crash due to all the hits you’ll be getting. Smile

        • SSD says:

          My friend at Predator Intelligence used the photos issued by the Army to do a rudimentary analysis.
          Scorpion vs MultiCam

          I wouldn’t put much in the color shading differences due to lighting but the patterns are definitely distinguishable.

          • Hardchawger says:

            Interesting that the bottom is Scorpion W2 but yet the top photo is Multicam in which the MSG is wearing. So I thought we will be wearing W2?

            • SSD says:

              Bottom photo is MultiCam OCP printed on Tencate Defender-M. The top photo is of MSG Owens wearing Scorpion W2 printed on 50/50 NYCO.

            • Stiggy says:

              You’ve got the pictures mixed up. Top is the master sergeant’s Scorpion ACU. Bottom is Multicam.

              • Riceball says:

                No, he’s got it right. I thought it was reversed too at first but when you look closely you can tell that SSD is right. The give away is the dark splotch nearest to the pocket on the left side of the image, notice the tiny light colored dot inside and compare that the pictures of the MSG and you’ll see it there.

          • DSM says:

            Great comparison photos. It is fairly distinguishable when viewed in that context, but, not in an altogether bad way. Ah, the sincerest form of flattery…

            • Mitchell Fuller says:

              Neat photos, thanks. Technical question, why does MC on Tencate always look like the colors are washed out even when brand new?

              • SSD says:

                It’s the way the fabric absorbs the dyes. Think about it, a material that resists flame, isn’t going to allow dyes to be absorbed into the fibers.

  28. J says:

    UK did that with MTP. Gave it a few British branding characteristics, inherited from DPM, and increased the pattern scale by 30%.
    Scorpion looks very good, and cant see the performance being that different from MC in the Ulu.

  29. paul says:

    I was really hoping that the shoulder pockets would be A2CU/flight crew pockets that have the flap AND zipper – not this abortion of a pocket. What the f is that?

    • SSD says:

      It’s the sleeve pocket from the ACS

      • Rick says:

        Because the ACS was a triumph of US army clothing design. I can’t see a reason to keep any of the features from that abortion


      • Cap'n Drew says:

        But the pocket openings on the ACSes I was issued didn’t point down; they were parallel with the sleeve & perpendicular to the ground when you arms were at your side. These have the forward tilt of the ACU coat with the zipper opening of the ACS. What gives?

    • That Blue Falcon says:

      Yeah, that’s what I expected too, not this nonsense. Soldier untested, Army approved.

      • SSD says:

        The Army Combat Shirt has been in use for years and far more guys have used it than the A2CU. The pocket has been thoroughly Soldier tested.

        • That Blue Falcon says:

          Doesn’t make it a good design, which was the hint. We always hear “soldier tested” but the ‘soldiers’ in the test are rarely front line dudes. Hell, I was voluntold to test some EOD robots and the PSQ-20 while I was at Benning, and I had no combat experience at all… But my words held weight.

          Just because guys use it doesn’t make it a good solution. I.e. the standard issued boots and the issued plate carrier.

          • 10thMountainMan says:

            I like the combat shirt and loathe the current pocket flap design. Never liked how skill tabs get separated from the unit patch. Also the constant opening and closing of the pocket flap accelerates the fraying of the patches. This will keep things looking sharper.

            • Hardchawger says:

              I despised the ACS because of the mandarin collar while the other services had the zipper. I new grunts when I was with 4ID that purchases the multicam zippered combat shirt instead. Gives a better look.

              • 10thMountainMan says:

                I agree some of the after market ones were superior due to the zipper. The ACS was far better under kit than the traditional jacket however. I also liked the pocket design because it allowed me to reach across my chest instead of over my shoulder. Much more ergonomic than the regular ACU jacket.

              • SSD says:

                It’s a Mock Turtleneck collar, not a Mandarin-style. The ACU has a convertible Mandarin-style collar.

  30. JNB says:

    Does anyone think that this will incline the USAF to change the current pattern on the ABU and adopt Multicam or Scorpion?

    • SSD says:

      I hope so, but they’ve got a lot of uniforms sitting at DLA they have to buy out.

    • DSM says:

      As long as Scorpion passes muster with Congress and legislation any change the AF makes would have to be to Scorpion and its ACU cut. So while there is the hope of saying “eventually” I’m afraid that it’d be later than sooner. The AF has bigger problems at the moment with sizable cuts in personnel looming.
      As for the stocks of ABUs at the DLA there’s probably something that can be done with them through foreign military aid. Ultimately their only real use would as shop rags at the base motor pool.

    • Hardchawger says:

      If not, they could change their ABU to our ACU 🙂

  31. Cav Guy says:

    That’s a lot of Velcro. Speculation: the new T-12 parachute will not have a harness. It’ll just Velcro directly to your uniform.

  32. Steven S says:

    SSD, is the Army’s “Digital vs Analog” testing still going on for October?

  33. Jon, OPT says:

    The real 800 lb gorilla in the room is this: will the Army authorize RFI OCP uniforms to be worn for at least a transitional period? I’m guessing it will be addressed when wear in and out dates are announced.

    Jon, OPT

    • Thisguysays says:

      I think we all hope so.

      • Jon, OPT says:

        If decisions are now being driven by budgetary responsibility, then it makes sense for both the unit, and its Soldiers who have the items. Then, if they authorize that Multicam, what is to say a Soldier can’t wear a non-issued item in the Crye MC pattern? Oh dear God here we go again…

        Jon, OPT

    • SSD says:

      I’m not going to hold my breath on that one, at least at the DA level. however, I am sure we are going to start seeing that RFI gear being put to good use, at least in the field as local commanders authorize its use.

      For SOF, I am sure that everyone will just switch over to the Level 9 or equivalent uniform as the transition begins.

      • Jon, OPT says:

        I know some SGMs who would authorize PCU 9, also know others who would have an anneurism and bi-polar fit in their efforts to show the rest of the Army just how good we are at doing “What right looks like.”

        Time and unit policy will tell.

        Jon, OPT

        • SSD says:

          When in Rome…if you’re at a service school, break out all the Army you can give. At your unit? Do your thing.

          • Jon, OPT says:

            You under estimate the ramifications of just being exposed on post to other units. Also the fact that level 9 has sleeve Velcro that is barely compatible with patches, no nametape, no rank… It’s also a half assed field uniform, so it is lose lose for the SF guy wearing it aside from any CDI factor, or Regular Army envy factor. Just my, and many others’ opinion after a combat rotation wearing it.

            Jon, OPT

    • DSM says:

      People need to start pinging their Congress to push the issue. Seriously, their staffers love to be able to crunch and add up numbers. Tally up the cost of your OCP issue and spread the word.

  34. TominVA says:

    Glad to see the Army making a sensible choice in camouflage. Now both Marine Corps and Army just need to eliminate velcro from all individual clothing and equipment, and we’ll be there.

    • SSD says:

      What do you have against Velcro?

      • Hardchawger says:

        On the uniform, it serves no purpose. I do not need velcro to decide which combat patch I want to wear for the day or have the option of going sterile when I cannot.

        Also, the ludicrous reason that was the basis for the only service to not roll up their sleeves.

        • SSD says:

          You have that Velcro because:

          A. Soldiers complained about how much it cost to have a set of BDUs sewn up with patches and badges.

          B. At one time the Army taught its troops to wear sterile uniforms into combat.

          C. SOF guys had it on their uniforms.

          • Luddite4Change says:

            A. Soldiers complained about how much it cost to have a set of BDUs sewn up with patches and badges.

            Until you have to pay to sew on new velcro.

            B. At one time the Army taught its troops to wear sterile uniforms into combat.

            Do we really think the enemy is that stupid? We still put bumper numbers on vehicles and ID numbers on aircraft. Most Army’s we ever fought didn’t have unit patches, and we still figured out what divisional units they were from.

            C. SOF guys had it on their uniforms.

            Alot of SOF guys I know think that it is just as bad.

            • Hardchawger says:

              SSD, I been in uniform since the early 80s and still counting. So, as a Soldier, I just wish that you listen to the feedback we are providing.

            • Jon, OPT says:

              How do they attach their call signs? Or perhaps the SOF guys you know don’t warrant a job that wears a call sign?

              We had velcro BEFORE the ACU for these specific reasons:

              1. ID that we are US (flag, not fucking reversed, a real US flag).

              2. Callsigns, so we could ID each other.

              3. IR patches, IFF, so we don’t fall prey to Blue on Blue incidents, especially from the sky where big things get dropped and shot that go BOOM.


              The Army did what it did with this and decided unit patches could be put on that way.

              My recommendations (since people are supposedly listening):

              1. Drop the flag, it was added around 2004 for no good reason other than to remind us we are US, because some nervous dude who lacks confidence thought the rest of the Army was like him, forgetting what we are fighting for (ironically it happened when most enlistments for guys who came in before 911 were expiring and the non-believers were on their way out). IR flags only during combat ops, when necessary. I’ll buy the backwards flag, but only on right sleeve, if your display it like it’s correct anywhere else, you are just a moron baiting an argument you will lose to national protocol.

              2. Scale oversized unit patches, sorry 1 CAV, 2 ID, the rest of the Army doesn’t need to keep hearing about your shit, scale your shit to fit, you can use your old patches to serve your friends scrumpets while telling them stories of how hard you were wearing a patch that weighed four pounds soaking wet.

              3. Go back to sleeves up authorization. Once again, another thing sold to us after breakout of hostilities, while still in BDUs. Sleeves down to show solidarity with deployed forces. I’ve been deployed, the last thing I thought was, damn, fuckers at home better be suffering with me, idiocy.

              4. This is the one thing I will say that brings back old shit, but put the branch back on the O’s uniform, I don’t care where.

              5. Standardize a Battle Roster tape for use in combat, make a damn reg about it, and issue it to your troops. The (ACU) uniform was “born of” great ideas from combat troops, but the modifications we make for functionality in today’s combat GO COMPLETELY IGNORED, AND BECOME VIOLATIONS OF POLICY, OFTEN UCMJ OFFENSES. WTF happened to being an evolving organization (learning organization) that progresses with good ideas born of necessity, from within?

              Lastly… cut it with the FR bullshit, no really, completely cut that program on the individual uniform level. Keep it for the ECWCS, fine, but make the uniform from ripstop 100% cotton. You (the Army) can manufacture multiple uniforms on the dollar you put into Tencate, or what ever fabric, to give us a uniform that is comfortable, and won’t drip. Spend the extra money on… you guessed it… extra uniforms in case someone’s uniform rips, which by the way, is what all your shitty FR stuff does anyway, it rips (mostly at seams) and it is VERY uncomfortable to the wearer. How is it uncomfortable? The pores in the uniform don’t breath. Don’t tell me I’m lazy or to grow stronger, how about you grow smarter by listening to your users?

              Just my .02 after almost 19 years in service, watching all this bullshit go down: BDU, sleeve flag, beret drama, Mods, ACU, FR, UCP debacle, OCP, ALICE to MOLLE, etc etc.

              Looking forward: Jungle uniform in a synthetic fabric? Unless you can find a synthetic that doesn’t adhere to the human body, meets FR so it doesn’t melt, and doesn’t seal its pores in heat when wet and clogged with dirt; choose the natural, inexpensive, easily replaced fabrics that already exist. I would rather wear cotton, wool, even linen or hemp than some of the bullshit that is out there today, in fact they makes great fabrics compared to the stuff I have seen that is supposedly better than yesterday.

              /RANT, recommendations

              Not pointed all at you Luddite, more of a response to this thread. in general.

              MSG, USA

            • majrod says:

              FWIW we actually painted over bumper numbers and taped them up in ’91 before leaving the port to prevent the enemy from knowing we were putting a corps way out on the left flank.

              As for taking patches off of uniforms for OPSEC seems to work quite well for the Russians…

              We often figured out what divisional units we were facing from prisoners. That’s AFTER we were surprised in places like the Ardennes, the Yalu or during Tet.

              It’s only recently fighting irregular forces that we seem to have forgotten the basics of OPSEC.

              There’s a lesson there…

        • COL REMF says:

          I have four combat patches for am

        • COL REMF says:

          I have four combat patches from my six AF and IZ deployment, and sometimes I change them during the day depending on which meeting or VTC I’m going to; useful for rapport building which is critical when engages in bureaucratic “combat.” You can think I’m an a-clown if you want to, but it works, and proves I haven’t been hiding like some of my peers

          • Luddite4Change says:

            I have 6 and would never had considered putting that much thought into it. Of course, that could be why I didn’t retire as an O-6.

          • Hardchawger says:

            No, I do not think you are foolish for doing that. I always wear my 101st combat patch and we had GEN Odierno around for a visit. So, then I put on my 4ID patch when I greeted him. 🙂

            Well, the velcro for badges went out the door ASAP and then it was just pin or sew-on. Also, the way that velcro frays and the cost to get it sewn on defeated the initial cost incentives. I just think the uniform will look sharper in garrison with it removed.

            Also, the point was to go sterile but Commands will get on your case in garrison or downrange if you try to have no name tapes on. We are an operational Army and do not intend to be like the SOF community. Those guys can do whatever they want with their uniform and look. Apples and oranges. I do remember when the use to cut the BDU and take off the bottom pockets on the coat and put it on the sleeves. That was their MO.

      • TominVA says:

        Velcro is way too noisy. I like to pretend that one day we’ll be involved in a war in which noise discipline will be crucial to survival. It’s happened before – ask any Vietnam vet. We tend to lose sight of important things like that. Another example – not related to noise discipline – is crew-served ring mounts. When I was in a firing battery, you couldn’t sell your soul and both testicles to get the parts to install the paltry few ring-mounts we had (and forget about ballistic protection). But a year into Iraq, our convoys bristled with machine guns with 360 armor. Necessity is the mother of re-invention I guess.

        Velcro seems like an easy fix we could do now.

        As for patches, I know the Army loves them. Sew them on. It’s not THAT expensive.

        • SSD says:

          I’m curious how Velcro is going to give your position away? Perhaps you could leave that Snickers bar in your pocket while the enemy is within earshot.

          • 10thMountainMan says:

            Mmmmmm Snickers….

          • TominVA says:

            Take any of the chest rigs that have appeared on this sight. Stick a mag in it, close it up and then rip it open. You’ll hear it very easily and so will people in the next room. Not good.

            When you cross the LD, you should always assume the enemy is within earshot. Hey, Snickers satisfies, but whether it’s chow, a map, batteries, paper and pen, ammo, or anything else, there is likely to always be something you need to get to while in close proximity to your adversary.

            In Vietnam, Soldiers and Marines became passed masters at securing their gear to minimize noise that could get them killed – they gladly traded in their noisy aluminum canteens for the quieter plastic ones, but then it was still a tough call as to when to drink. A full canteen was quiet. A half-full canteen allowed water to slosh around – noisy. When they really believed they could get killed, it’s amazing what Soldiers and Marines paid careful attention too.

            The presence of Velcro is a direct result of garrison-based thinking and fairy-dusting away threats and lessons already learned the hard way. It needs to go.

            Another issue, and I’m far from the only one who believes this, is the waterproof breathable fabrics used on our outerwear. I am a HUGE fan of being warm and dry, but the nylon surface fabrics are to rustily, too noisy. A quieter blend is needed.

            • SSD says:

              If you’re switching mags, you’re engaging the enemy. He knows you’re there. You load a mag and make your weapon ready before you cross the LD, not once you’re within earshot of the enemy. A canteen or a buckle is something different than opening a magazine pouch. That’s not something you are doing all of the time. You’re making something an issue that really isn’t.
              Quieter face fabrics for clothing? I’m with you there, but Velcro is the phantom threat that guys point to but isn’t really an issue.

              • TominVA says:

                Suppose you’ve established a patrol base, something that is typically in close proximity to evil-doers. You’ve spent the day/night crawling and wading through all kinds of crud. In addition to cleaning your weapon, might you not want to clean your magazines?

                Riiiipppppp! Such a combat faux pas and so unnecessary.

                How unlikely is such a scenario really? I can’t believe all that much.

                Why take the risk?

                “…the phantom threat that guys point to…” So it’s not just me?

                Why take the risk? Every effort should be made to ensure that field uniforms and equipment are as functional and quiet as possible. If this means returning to buttons, frankly I’m all for it.

                • SSD says:

                  No, it’s not just you. The gun stores are full of guys that come up with stuff like this.

                  • cueball95 says:

                    no offense SSD, but im also a pro button guy. I personally think velcro is noisy and obnoxious, not to mention it sucks for pockets. And my girlfirend’s favorite panties always get stuck in the velcro 😀

                • Rogue Male says:

                  It’s the movement of going to the pocket that will give you away, not the Velcro, regardless of the super-duper cam you’re wearing…;)

              • TominVA says:

                Totally unrelated subject:

                Do you know of any “real-world” reviews of the Mystery Ranch SATL pack, the one supposedly issued by SOCOM? I’d love to know how it performs. The Marine Corps FILBE seems like a real beast. I’d love to know how well it delivers too. It would be a great post.


                • SSD says:

                  I will work on that. I’ll see Mystery Ranch this week at OR.

                • Crayon eating booger eater says:

                  I have it. I’ve used it OCONUS.

                  Good: BVS keeps the pack nicely positioned. Great construction, quality. That mid zipper that runs from top to bottom is really handy, as it lets you get right to what you need. The side straps with fastex are handy, as I’ve used it to secure an M4 (muzzle down in the small side pocket), as well as a shooting mat for range work, and an old school iso-mat when out camping. Really nice to shoot off of, as well…not so small that you can’t good elevation off it, not so big that it’s too much…in fact it’s my go-to pack for rifle work: those long ext pockets make it easy to get to what I need when in position when using it for support, and the top pocket is still reachable to other nick-knacks I might need. Waist straps are good.

                  Not so good: Wish that top flag would detach like the Tactiplane design. I’d like that mid line zipper to detach at the top, like the 3 day pack assault pack’s tri-zip. Wish there were more MOLLE so I could place other pouches/whatever on the exterior. The two vertical exterior pouches are handy for larger items, but if you need to find smaller items, they can get a little lost in there.

                  It’s a good item.

            • Terry B says:

              From the combat history I have studied and my own experiences, noise and light discipline is always a challenge that has to be addressed and mitigated. That is a valid concern and is not going to change.

              However, an alert enemy will likely detect Americans for any number of other reasons long before we are within “Velcro range”.

              Besides, this change to the sleeve pockets (now with zippers) means that you can access the pocket contents without Velcro noise. That is an improvement.

              If it was up to me I would replace the silly slanted patch pockets on the chest of the jacket with the same pockets from the sleeves (sans Velcro and with zippers outboard).

              That would be a lot more useful. A damn pocket should be sized and placed in a manner that makes it functional – not decorative.

              Just my opinion.

              • SSD says:

                The pockets that are there now were designed to be small, flat and simple so that they would be more comfortable while wearing armor.

                However, considering it is no longer worn with armor, I agree, something more functional like Napoleon pockets would be better.

                • Terry B says:

                  I know that was the rationale for the current chest pockets. But (had I been asked at the time) why have pockets at all if you can’t put anything in them. Some of the smaller soldiers have a pocket that is barely 2″ deep. What’s the point of that?

                  When then CPT Yarborough was designing the M1942 paratrooper uniform they decided that the cargo pocket on the legs should be sized to carry 3 K ration components.

                  And that was regardless of the size of the trooper! In fact, all the pockets on that uniform were sized and placed for a specific functional purpose – not scaled for cosmetic appearance like today.

                  That is the way it should be done and that is why that style, largely unchanged, was still so functional 20 years later in Vietnam and beyond.

                  I don’t want to turn back the clock – but that is the way I would want and expect our uniforms to be designed today. Is that too much to ask?

                  • SSD says:

                    I’ve seen those tiny pockets you are talking about. Pretty silly huh? The concept had utility but I suppose it became fashion once the reality of making those small uniforms sunk in.

              • TominVA says:

                “…an alert enemy will likely detect Americans for any number of other reasons long before we are within “Velcro range”

                What about an un-alert enemy, say at 0400? Why help them out? And whatever those “any number of other reasons” may be, they’d have to be pretty loud to be heard outside of Velcro range, which I suggest is further than you imagine. Whatever the “other reasons” may be, our officers and NCOs need to stomp them out.

                Also, keep in mind that some of our potential adversaries, even now, have not grown up pounding their ear drums with iPods. They can still hear as God intended; that is to say, better – maybe much better – than we can.

                • SSD says:

                  This can be dealt with easily. Leadership, TTPs and Training. Velcro is there when you need it, don’t go digging in your pockets when you don’t.

                • Terry B says:


                  I’ve spent a lot of time out with Soldiers and Marines in training and in “real world” operations in the Infantry and SF. That includes instructing small unit tactics at the Q Course a few years back.

                  And like many of the folks here I have also OPFORed US and Allied soldiers countless time. I’m pretty familiar with our noise and light discipline weaknesses and habitual signatures.

                  Under the best of circumstances and with the most proficient and disciplined units, even relatively small groups of heavily laden men moving creates an unmistakable (and largely unavoidable) noise signature.

                  That is why leaders are supposed to be trained to consider and employ prep fires and other diversionary noises to mask the sounds that their forces make when in close proximity to the enemy

                  But in reference to “other reasons”; one easy example is the smell of cigarette smoke. Granted fewer smoke today then was common when I joined – but I can still smell a smoker at a considerable distance. Not to mention seeing them light up from even further.

                  Of course I could also mention that we tend to be chatty kathys – especially if we are sitting still for any time. Both with each other and on radios.

                  Now, I won’t argue with you that anything soldiers carry or wear that makes or could make noise, or light or odor is something leaders and individual troopers should consider in their pre-mission planning and pre-combat checks.

                  But bottom line: all I can tell you is in my experience Velcro noise just was never a factor in compromising a patrol. No matter how far you or I think that particular noise travels.

      • armypa82 says:

        I have no tactical reason whatsoever against Velcro. I just get fat drinking coffee, running sick call, with no time to PT. I just don’t like Velcro because I’m a despicable garrison fatso. I don’t like how it wears down after I reach for my pharmacopeia for the billionth time. I don’t like how my unit patches gets frayed at the edges after examining my patients. I don’t like having to remove my patches before a wash. I don’t like how they stick to my street fighter tshirts despite turning them inside out. I don’t like how it’s so loud when I try to discreetly pull my iPhone out to play candy crush during my battalion’s numerous interminable meetings.

        I miss the buttons. I miss the worn rings you saw in your pocket tops from pressing them too much. I miss having poguey bait stowed in my cargo pockets that I can pull out ever so discreetly. I miss the ritualistic trip to the new duty station sew shop to put on a new unit patch. I’m glad to have the return of the excitement of having a new gee-whiz badge on my BDUs.

        I don’t have good reasons. I have plain, selfish garrison officer complaints.

    • DSM says:

      Ha! I remember the BDU days when people paid the ever present Korean sew shops that are outside every post to put the Velcro on!

  35. SSD says:

    I’m not really sure why guys are complaining about the pile field on the sleeve pockets. There’s really no more there than is on the current ACU style with its separate pocket and flap.

    • Terry B says:


    • Explosive Hazard says:

      Because soldiers. They can never be completely content with anything.

    • Terry B says:

      Apparently Velcro is akin to the mark of the beast. The more you have the quicker you are going to hell. Seriously, we have had Velcro on equipment since the mid 60s. When did it become so dangerous?

      The OD Field jacket had Velcro cuffs from 65 on (and before gore tex started being issued in the mid 80s we actually wore the darn thing in the field). The ALICE packs had the Velcro map pocket in the top flap. The nylon OD M16 cleaning kit pouch had Velcro. The LBV we wore in the 80s had Velcro on all the pouches.

      And for the life of me I don’t recall anyone in those days – oldtimer or newby – that was concerned enough about the potential noise to even gripe about it.

      And of course just about everyone in the SOF community started using velcro in various forms and fashions on BDUs and DCUs years before ACUs of any color were around.

      And as a side note, once we put pockets on the sleeves fully rolling gave way to a couple of turns of the cuff sometimes called a “combat roll”. I’m sure a lot of folks on here remember that. And that really had nothing to do with the Velcro.

      • DAN III says:

        Hey Terry, I guess you never tried opening a velcro sealed pocket one-handed, have you ?

        Velcro has it’s place. But not on military combat uniforms. The crap goes bad with washings and usage. Before long it doesn’t seal. It’s noisy. It doesn’t lend itself to being opened easily, one handed. Lastly, it’s a cheap solution to buttons and buttons holes. But hey, we got to fund these undeclared wars and the invaders to our southern border. Right Terry ?

        Your argument that velcro has been used in the past doesn’t mean we should continue to repeat the same mistake.

        • SSD says:

          To that I say, not all Velcro is created equal.

        • Terry B says:


          I certainly agree that Velcro is not the best fastener solution in every situation. But it is a pretty good solution in many applications.

          My point wasn’t just that it was used in the past but has been used continuously for a long time. Just trying to provide some context to the younger folks that might think the Army didn’t use Velcro before ACUs

          And yes I have opened ammo pouches and pockets with Velcro successfully one handed from time to time. That is not to say every pocket or pouch is well designed to make that easy.

          The chest pocket on the ACU (which I bitched about earlier on this thread) is one example. That particular pocket usually requires me to two hand it. That’s one of the reasons I never used those pockets much.

          On the other hand, velcro on the cargo pocket tended to open too easy. For that application Velcro was obviously a bad choice and the Army eventually corrected that problem.

          Not sure if Velcro is cheaper than buttons. Probably not since ACUs cost a lot more that BDUs.

          I am pretty sure that velcro on uniforms has nothing to do with the vast Illuminati conspiracy to fund wars and destroy our country. But I could be wrong.

          Your mileage may vary.

        • Riceball says:

          How about magnets instead? It would make opening easy like velcro but it secures like a button and it doesn’t wear out and it won’t pop off. Just to be straight, I’m not talking about exposed magnets but sewn in to the fabric of the pockets along with a thin piece of metal to attach to that’s also sewn into the fabric so there’s no exposed metal anywhere. The only possible concern I can see is proximity to electronics but I don’t think that any magnet in clothing is going to be large or strong enough to have any effect on electronics and a compass can simply be held a little further out.

          • Terry B says:


            I actually have a couple of open top pistol mag pouches that use what I think they call “rare earth” magnets sewn between nylon layers.

            They seem to work pretty well in that application but I’ve only used them in a static range situation so I can’t vouch for how suitable they are for rougher use.

            I seem to recall seeing some civilian softshell type jackets for sale that use magnetic closures but have never seen one first hand. Maybe SSD or someone else here has tried them.

      • DSM says:

        Ah yes, and so everyone is clear on the “combat roll” policy it’s perfectly fine if you’re a zipper suited sun god but if you’re actually doing work it’s poo-poo’d upon.

  36. Onecomment says:

    Is it just me or does this specific uniform that hes wearing look not frumpy?

    Lol maybe they modified just his to look a little more conforming. It would be great if everybody had it that way so that it doesnt make the uniform look like it adds 10 lbs :/

    • DSM says:

      Given that it’s a wear test uniform it was probably custom cut for him and then pressed for the glamour shot unveiling of their new stuff.

      • 10thMountainMan says:

        Could also be he’s an E8 that actually took and passed an APFT since being an E6.

        • Badjujuu says:

          Hahahahahhaah. True story….

        • Jon, OPT says:

          I’m actually pretty impressed by this, he doesn’t look like a shitbag. I am also sure they shot this much like a DA photo for symmetry and to exemplify the uniform to standard.

          Jon, OPT

          • Ab5olut3zero says:

            IMO, it looks like his uniform is a size too large and they pinned it in the back to make part of it look like it was sized correctly. Notice his sleeves and trouser legs- much bulkier than they should be even in ACUs and his blousing looks to be done halfway up his calf pockets. Just looks oversized to me.

  37. Reverend says:

    The geometry of the pattern looks terrible.

  38. Steven S says:

    Thanks for the high-rez photo update.

    I now notice the pattern repeat on the MSG. (the lower right of the coat and the upper right of the trousers.)

    • CAVstrong says:

      I also a couple of repeating “splotches” however it looks like the pattern underneath the splotches doesn’t repeat in the same manner.

      • DSM says:

        Yeah, the “splotches” repeat but it looks like they were dragged/dropped over the underlying pattern.

    • Steven S says:

      *notice a pattern repeat*

      • rrossouw says:

        I’ll need to see a full pattern repeat width, but it could be that the same shapes were re-used at different vertical positions along the horizontal.

        The print or the screens for the pattern elements are not the same.

        South African Police camo had something like this.
        A 3 color pattern with the screen sizes of the 2 printed colors being different, causing interesting repeats as the patterns go in and out of phase.

        Resulting in a “repeat less” pattern.

  39. DSM says:

    Why the preference of black over brown thread for name and rank insignia?

    • Terry B says:

      Visibility. Brown was tried for awhile in the 90s during Kuwait rotations I had some myself. Brown lettering tended to blend into the background even when the nametapes were the old light tan color. With the darker scorpion / multicam tapes brown lettering would be very hard to read.

      • COL REMF says:

        I wore brown on tan rank and tapes on DCUs in Kuwait for a year in he 90s and concur difficult to see but still easier than black-on-green BDU rank/tapes. However I don’t care what color is on the new uniform provide its not 70s pickle-suit rank/tapes

      • Hardchawger says:

        And the Air Force wore brown name tags with their Multicam in Afghanistan and the nice yellow color with the blue aquaflage the Navy has.

      • DSM says:

        I was AF and we always had brown lettering on our DCU tapes. I mean in the big picture it’s immaterial but it just struck me as odd.

  40. Mac says:

    SSD am I seeing an old green BDU patch on his arm?

  41. Hardchawger says:

    Just an observation. Since they stated that this will be available next summer, does anyone think that the official kick-off date will be on the Army’s birthday?

    • SSD says:

      That would be cool

      • Hardchawger says:

        I am now reading the digital Army Times and two pages are dedicated to the new camo. Also, Soldier’s comments on the uniform where everyone is hollering to remove the mandarin collar and get rid of all the velcro. SMA said the new pocket sleeves is from Soldier feedback and due to every unit patch could not fit on the current pockets, so they lowered it an extra inch. Mandarin collar will be decided by the next uniform board, if its to be removed. Velcro for those supposed elbow and knew pads have been removed too.

        • Mike B. says:

          What are all the changes that were made, and what are the 5 on teh table they are talking about in Army Times?

  42. zach says:

    The level of contrast on this is terrible. The area around his stomach without any real differentiation is the size of a football, other than a small dark area. Yes, I understand micro and macro pattern and it blows on this. I think people are just so happy something was chosen that they are not being critical enough of it.

    • DSM says:

      His gear will cover that area when he’s in the field. 🙂

      • rrossouw says:

        I concur with zach, this sucks more than MultiCAM (a higher texture version) sucks in terms of texture match.
        Very simple measures exist to determine if the texture matches the fD1.2 that research shows is the fractal dimension to match for any natural environment.

        In terms of macro pattern formation this might work better than MultiCAM, given the larger scale.

        @ DDSM – What happens if the soldier is “unlucky” in the cut of his kit and gets all the bits with low contrast or high contrast?

        I guess then he’s bullet bait.

        Reminds me of a pattern generation logic where a print pattern was made up of areas optimised for woodland and areas for desert – a 50/50 split.
        So in any given uniform issue to a unit ~30% of the soldiers would have good woodland kit, ~30% would have good desert kit and the remaining 40% would have mixes.

        The source of the logic was willing to put ~50% of his force at higher risk way by virtue of not having suitable camo for the environment.

        • COL REMF says:

          Unlucky random fabric pattern sections was also a problem with BDUs. Often shirts (because of the materail used for the pockers) or hats would have too much brown or tan, which in Panama and other very green locations was/is bad, which caused many Soldiers to dig through all of the shirts and hats in their size to finds the ones with (randomly) the most green sections of fabric. Even standard Multcam sucks in the jungle or forest because it has to much browns and tans which is why Thai and Canadian uniforms look like they do. Bookend patterns are necessary bust costly, and may not be issued on a wide scale as was the case with DCUs, and OG 107s in CONUS

          • Really?! says:

            You nailed it, Colonel. In BDUs the brown is too dark for most areas of the US. It would have been better with some type of dead-leaf-brown as seen in Real Tree/Mossy Oak variants.

            Additionally, I think the green in BDUs was a fine shade, but the black should have come in smaller patches. Think about dark shadows between the bark of any oak, pine, shadow between leaves, etc… All small doses of “black”.

            And, post is relevant to the discussion at hand, because the Army is about to take a serious look at M81, as a bookend pattern.

          • COL REMF says:

            Sorry that my iPhone facilitates typos that make my prose read like that produced by a quasi-illiterate teenager

        • DSM says:

          Gallows humor partner. I think this mostly is the problem when attempting to design a “do everything” camouflage pattern. When used in the environs designed for it this pattern will be effective and it’d be other indicators that’d compromise the soldier; i.e. movement, which is the same for all camouflage.
          I can nitpick on this or that but at the end of the day I think this pattern is great and will be functional. But yes, specific tropical and arid patterns should be pursued.

          • COL REMF says:

            W2 will indeed serve well in CONUS training and most overseas locations. Concur that nitpicking is as productive as late night blogging under the effects of mediocre red wine. In the average Soldiers career, the vast majority will never need to be issued bookend patterns, and they won’t be produce in massive quantities because of cost. The only way the change would be better is if I could get the local CIF to DX the seven sets of poor-wearing Tencate D OCP uniforms for the new W2 sets next year. But that’s never going to happen. And I’m still irritated by the new ninja PT uniform and the reflective belt I’ll have to wear with twice a year. Now it’s time to get back to life.

  43. jjj0309 says:

    So, where is Scorpion W2 thing? All I see is Multicam.
    No, seriously, I can’t tell any difference. Even on side by side.

  44. DAN III says:

    But did Army shitcan all the velcro and the jacket closure zipper ?

    Also, who is producing the new pattern uniform ? More UNICOR felons ? Among many other issues with the ACU, the stitching was horrific.

    So….the pattern may be better but is the construction any better.

    1. No velcro. No velcro ANYWHERE !
    2. Buttons only (But that would cost more, right .fedgov ?)
    3. No jacket closure zipper.
    4. No manufacturing by UNICOR, federal, incarcerated, criminal felons.

    • Hardchawger says:

      I agree sir. And I just saw a pregnant woman at the PX today with her maternity ACUs and the Velcro will be the hideous same. They said they made the Velcro longer due to bigger patches but I see the same problem on the right sleeve with a flag and 1st Cav combat patch. The board should vote to remove it.

    • CAVstrong says:

      I like it. It’d be interesting to see if they can get away with adopting OCP Based bookends or if they’ll need to adopt historic patterns.

    • Greg says:

      If it is, then thats the most “gold” looking pattern i’ve ever seen!

  45. james says:

    I like that its a more “open” pattern, that is, less densely patterned than current multicam. Should make it look less monotone at distance, but you have to wonder if that isn’t a strong point of multicam in some environments. Is it just the lighting, or does it also look more green and a bit darker overall than multicam?

  46. Mike B. says:

    Just saw the cover of The Army Times, and it stated there are 6 updates to teh new uniform, and 5 more on the table. Besides the camo pattern, and shoulder pockets, andone know of the rest?

    • Hardchawger says:

      Yes, I wrote about it above. One was getting rid of the mandarin collar and pen holder from three to two and removing leg pocket.

    • bulldog76 says:

      first for me O.o if there would be more changes ide hope they would be the following, no more zipper an will be switching to buttons as the main closure for the Tunic (what im calling the acu tops as of now) back to a real collar like the bdu had the sewing on of patches and name tapes well i think that about covers it actually ……..

  47. Jake says:

    My first thought was that they copied the uniform of the Colonial Marines from the movie Aliens…

    I love this new pattern, though how are you supposed to hide on Grandma’s sofa like you could in ACUs?

    • Hardchawger says:

      Actually, the uniforms in Aliens circa 1986 resemble more of UCP, since they were grayish. The current video game has a multicam look to it.

      • Riceball says:

        If you’ve seen the reproductions that fans have made it’s really not that grey, the base color is a greyish tan with the splotches in faded shades of brownish green and khaki with little squiggles in a whitish color. It’s like an oddly colored version of ERDL and would probably be marginally more effective than UCP in real life.

  48. Guest says:

    Any idea if the Army will give a stipend for the purchase of these new uniforms?

    • SSD says:

      Yep, it’s called an annual clothing allowance.

      • Jon, OPT says:

        What? That is for beer to celebrate my enlistment. You mean we are supposed to spend that on uniforms? I thought that was comp for having to wear a uniform???

        • COL REMF says:

          Off topic, and not complaining because officers do get paid significantly more, but we don’t get annual clothing allowance and therefore must use our pay to buy both uniforms AND alcohol, and it seems no Class 6 (package store for Navy/Marines) stocks $2 Everclear like they did in the 90s. Everyone, including aggressive MPs, was a winner on that deal.

        • 10thMountainMan says:

          My clothing allowance for next year is already claimed by the dress mess. About five minutes after I pinned on SFC I was reminded I am now expected to “dress appropriately” at all of our fancy parties. Throw in the new PTs and this stuff and next year is going to be the uniformpocalypse. Maybe I’ll hold off on the PTs. Somethings gotta give.

          • SSD says:

            It ain’t a 9 to 5. It’s a profession.

            • 10thMountainMan says:

              You’re not kidding. For all of my false outrage though I’m actually pretty happy about where Army uniforms are headed. The ASUs are a huge improvement over the green suit. I like the look and improved cut of the new APFU and getting rid of UCP makes me a very happy panda.

      • Guest says:

        So no…

  49. jmac says:

    Terrible position of attention. Boots not even near 45* angle. Bad leadership example. Never hold up in The Corps.
    Just messing with the Army Brethren.
    Really glad you guys have an answer now. It’s been frustrating watching this for so long.
    The chain is long, keep up the good work brothers.

    • 10thMountainMan says:

      Don’t you have some equipment to go trademark? Lol I kid. We’re happy to see this ending as well.