Naturally, when you get that many industry pros together, they are going to talk programs. Of course, there was lots of talk regarding CSASS and Modular Handgun but the sod goods folks wanted to talk about the US Army’s impending Operational Camouflage Pattern transition.
Announced last year, the US Army plans to begin issuing the new pattern beginning early Summer 2015 to replace the Universal Camouflage Pattern initially fielded in 2004. Operational Camouflage Pattern or OCP arose from the ashes of the uncompleted Camouflage Improvement Effort which began in 2011. A developmental camouflage pattern called Scorpion W2 was selected by the Army for fielding as OCP after the Army unilaterally broke off talks with Crye Precision who had created a pattern commercially called MultiCam. MultiCam has been in use with USSOCOM for many years and was adopted for use by the Army in 2010 strictly for use in Afghanistan also under the nomenclature of OCP. The US Air Force also used MultiCam OCP for their deployed forces and will continue to use the new OCP variant as well.
A couple of items stuck out in my OCP conversations with industry.
First, OCP NYCO fabric is all that is being printed and it has only been delivered so far to NIB/NISH and Federal Prison Industries for assembly into ACUs. No commercial vendors have received fabric yet to manufacture ACUs for the Army.
Second, there is currently no plan to release fabric to companies for commercial sale. This means no commercial OCP ACUs like those offered in other patterns by companies like Propper and Tru-Spec. It’s a pretty significant issue that will affect military outfitters which service Army customers outside of Army posts as well as online.
While no one has been printing OCP Cordura, this issue will most likely affect that fabric as well, meaning no commercial OCP (Scorpion W2) equipment. This falls in line with what I expected early on with OCP (Scorpion W2) being restricted to US government use and MultiCam being used for commercial OCP sales. Remember what we told you early on; OCP is OCP.
However, these are pretty cautious actions by an Army that claims to “have appropriate rights to use OCP.” They are certainly tiptoeing through the tulips.
And the saga continues . . . . .
Have they finalized the ACU changes they’d mentioned previously? IE: mandarin collar or fold down? IR IFF tag on left, right, or both? Just curious if they’ve nailed that down yet. Pattern aside, the improvements to the uniform seem to be a step in the right direction, or at least the intent is there. Execution with Big Army is always the final factor.
I agree with some of the changes. I don’t like the prospect of possibly losing the lower leg pockets. I think they’re the most functional part of the uniform. I’d have also preferred they kept the flaps on the arm sleeves and simply used button closures, like the Marine Corps Combat Ensemble. The zipper on the coat pockets will get stuck after a while, just like on the spider-man (ACS) shirt.
lengthening the sleeve pockets was a good touch though. My 1st CAV patch on the right sleeve either dips below the pocket, or I have to scrunch the flag and flap a bit to get it to fit. Either way looks stupid, and the scrunch renders the pocket useless, once I have it right I won’t fuck with it.
Yes, a single shoulder sleeve insignia for one division warrants the redesign of uniform pockets for the entire Army…
Look at it as a blessing in disguise brother- now your pocket can hold two packs of smokes!
I’ve also argued that the CAV patch could be taken down a notch in size.
I was almost lynched because of that statement.
There’s absolutely no way in hell the horsey guys will down size their patch to fit on uniforms. The rest of the Army just needs to accept that their uniforms need to be tailored to the CAV, not the other way around 😉
Call bullshit on them dude, 1CAV and 2ID downsized it to fit the ASU CSID worn on the right breast, it can and has been done already.
Jon, OPT
I still remember the grumbles from CAV guys about the CSID…many even refused to transition to the ASU until the very last minute because of it. Not that it really matters, since we never wear the fancy stuff, save for very few occasions. Once or twice a year, maybe.
I’m sure it was fought tooth and nail, no one likes traditions changed for the greater good.
Jon, OPT
I agree with the button closures. They rarely fail and are easy and cheap to replace yourself if they do. Also IMO, the pen pocket should be somewhere out of the way, specifically not on my forearm where I can’t get to my pens because I’ve got other stuff strapped around them. I advocate inside or alongside the shoulder pocket. But that’s neither here nor there…
Being an old guy who at one point had button closures on sleeve pockets I can tell you that they are a PITA to access, particularly in the cold. Silent? Yes. Useful? Painfully so.
True Dat, but zippers are also a PITA, specially once stuck and frozen.
Granted, but if the zipper fails, your options become severely limited, and rapidly so. I’m decent with a needle and thread but I doubt I could sew a zipper in place. At the moment it’s an academic concern and doesn’t matter until it really matters.
Yes, IF your zipper fails it will be a PITA to replace – but in the meantime, it makes accessing the contents of you pockets a helluva lot easier than a button-closure does. Practicality wins.
Another old fart chiming in about buttons: We can go back to buttons if we NEVER fight someone who can put ISR in the air (improbable, given the UAV capabilities now available in shopping malls), and therefore NEVER use camo netting…
Ah, the folly of youth. These young guys, never been snagged by the net monster.
Ah yes, the infamous net monster. If you think it was bad on cammies try on vehicles and collapsible shelters that fit on the back of 5 tons.
We can debate buttons vs other closure options until the Army changes it again. I’m still interested if they’ve decided on the changes made and if you’ve heard anything?
I wonder how long it will take to outfit the force using such limited production. Also curious how long it will take to see OCP for uniforms like the A2CU and the female cut alternate uniform.
I thought I read somewhere (buried in one of the cryptic PEO statements, perhaps) that the female cut, alternate ACU would be manufactured along side the traditional cut uniforms.
They will. Unsure about the schedule for maternity uniform.
A2CUs already exist in OCP and are issued at RFIs quite frequently. So long as OCP is really OCP at the end of the day. But who know, they may need to start making them in OCP too…
I just hope the aviators don’t feel left out if their OCP isn’t OCP.
I would take the NAVAIR 2-P Drifire suit anyday or just give me back my green or tan 1-P flight suits. The A2CU is garbage no matter what color it is.
The situation you have sounds very much like what we Brits have with MTP, it isn’t released to non official manufacturers, resulting in some remarkably similar patterns appearing, Vista and Eribus spring to mind, both of which are a very close match.
The fact that Scorpion OCP is only being printed on the garrison ACU (as of now anyway) is curious. Could this mean that Scorpion may only be short lived, since congress is still chiming in once in a while about all services being in the same combat duds by 2018? Or is the Army simply admitting, in its own way, that the new OCP is simply a cheap knock-off of Multicam (real OCP), and that the new OCP is simply what Soldiers will get issued in their initial clothing bags and be able to purchase at MCSS, while Multicam will remain the real OCP for deployments and eventual adoption by all branches?
No, read this story for the prioritization of transition.
https://ssdaily.tempurl.host/2014/06/30/latest-info-us-army-transition-scorpion-camouflage-including-accessory-colors-schedules/
Read it. Even commented on it a couple times. It was the post where I asked you why Scorpion was considered NDAA14 compliant, but the PHIV winner wasn’t, especially in light of your revelation a couple weeks ago about the fact that the Army is expressing to congress that Scorpion OCP is not a legacy pattern, but a new pattern that all services “could” or “would” adopt. It was also the post where I speculated that the COA would not, in fact, save anyone any money at all. This is also been demonstrated as true since the manufacturers are paying the same royalties for Scorpion W2 prints as they are for MC. I imagine that the fee-to-print is precisely why this is only being done in house and that this particular version of OCP will die a quick and quiet death a few years from now. Magically MC will start showing up in initial issue and MCSS, still dubbed OCP, and no one at the top will utter a single word.
Facts from your stories:
A. Scorpion W2 was never fully vetted for its effectiveness.
B. Scorpion W2 costs more or less the same to print as commercial Multicam.
C. Congress is still asking for follow-up to single cammo for all branches.
D. MC was officially renamed from O(EF)CP to simply OCP in 2013.
E. OCP is OCP (Army doesn’t see or recognize a difference).
F. Deployers all over the world are slowly getting MC OCP, but not Scorpion.
I think this is simply a quick garrison fix to do away with UCP, since the Army itself is thoroughly embarrassed by it. I envision that as old hands at PEO are traded out that the MC family of patterns or the PHIV winner will be introduced to congress as the DoD’s official camouflage for all services. I think that instead of slowly attriting MC gear as supplies dry up, the opposite will eventually prove true. We’ll be seeing the Army’s knock off in formation along side PHIV and MC gear and uniforms for the next ten years or more, and most people won’t know the difference anyway. Scorpion will have a quick run, mark my words.
The writing’s on the wall.
I am told COL Mortlock is scheduled to leave PM SCIE this month. It will be interesting to see how this goes once he is gone. Perhaps those who are less emotionally involved in this series of unfortunate events will find a better path.
One can only hope.
Thanks for keeping us posted by the way. Almost no one gets this issue right, in the once-in-a-blue-moon that they bother to write about it. Too much disinformation out there. Even the Chief of Staff and the SMA can’t seem to get their nuances straight. I’m surprised that SMA Chandler doesn’t seem to know what’s going on, in light of the fact that he’s the defacto originator of AR 670-1 and all things spanglely.
Would get a huge kick if Congress said, screw all this, use the Marine digicam and be done with it and forced the Corps to open the pattern up for use to all, but knowing congress all the services will get stuck using some horrible UCP type pattern
…you mean like AOR 1 and AOR 2? I’d take it in a heartbeat over UCP.
I’d honestly be pretty bummed that all my OCP/MC would be obsolete, but we’d at least have a pattern that worked in daylight.
It will quite a long time before all of your MultiCam while be obsolete.
MARPAT is not restricted anymore, any branch can use it now. However, I would not recommend doing that. MARPAT, while effective, is somewhat outdated now. We can develop a much better camouflage pattern today, but there is no push to do that.
Isn’t the Multicam available to civilians superior to the W2? Scorpion looks like a faded multicam.
I would say, “Yes.”
At what point does good enough trump best? At what point do we give up trying chasing perfection and settle for functionality and practically. At what point do we teach our soldiers to rely on field craft or skill instead of a fancy piece of equipment we give them.
If everyone else is wearing Mulitcam should we too? Or should we wear something uniquely American?
I don’t know anymore. I have avidly followed this story for the past four years…..not I am growing tired of it….we just need to pick something and continue mission. There are other significantly more important issues for us to consider at this point…….
Rant complete.
The Army should just give up on this. There is no point of trying to adopt this new OCP when there a significant likelihood that congress will force a change within the next few years. When that happens, we are going to have a lot of gear in UCP, OCP I, and OCP II lying around collecting dust. Talk about a big waste of money.
What the Army should do is show a example and lead. Try to get the other branches on board, figure out the requirements, develop it, and test it. If for some reason a branch does’t get on board with the effort, lets take the USMC as example. Then continue on, as long as you have the other branches on the project, the the USMC will eventually be forced to change by someone (POTUS/SecDef/Congress).
That will never happen, for one thing it makes too much sense and we can’t have things actually make sense now. Secondly, inter-service rivalry and pride will also get in the way, much as it did when the Corps originally came out with MARPAT, after all of these years of individual service camo patterns they’re going to be very reluctant to change.
That’s why this needs to be a DoD level project. The DoD needs to come out and say here is the patterns and uniform cuts you are authorized to use. Deal with it. If the service Chiefs and Sergeant Majors balk at that….fire them. They’re supposed to be military professionals if they can’t follow orders then they don’t need to be in charge.
I totally agree, it should be a DoD level project so that no service can complain (too much) about which branch is running the program. Ultimately, I think that the best compromise, if we’re dead set on keeping the service unique combat uniform, is to come up with a single common family of camo patterns (desert, woodland, & transitional) and then allow each branch to design their own uniform around it. The Army would then have their ACUs in the official common pattern and likewise the Corps would have their MCCUs made in the same camo pattern(s). I would even go as far as to dictate which materials are acceptable to use so that every manufacturer would get their fabric from the supplier(s) and then just sew them according to each branches specifications.
Sounds like a great plan.
Nope. Service-specific cuts just means a whole bunch more LIN’s and NSN’s screwing up the logistics pipeline.
I wish they would release a definitive timeline or atleast a notional date :/
Keep your ACU trousers on, it’s Summer 2015.