SIG SAUER - Never Settle

Marine Corps Cold Weather Clothing Evaluations

Not to be outdone by the Army, the US Marine Corps is evaluating upgrades to their Mountain Cold Weather Clothing & Equipment Program in Norway this Winter.

The MCWCP is a family of cold weather clothing items designed to support Marines operating in wet/cold and dry/cold or mountainous environments with a threshold temperature range from 4.4 to -31.6 °C (40 to -25 °F) when used as a system. The objective temperature range extends down to -37.2°C

Specifically, they are looking at product improvements to Level 1 and 3. They are also exploring mesh underwear for level 1. For Level 3 they want to enhance wicking/moisture transport and drying time and to decide whether it should be wool or synthetic.

There’s a Softshell uniform solution for insulation being evaluated as well. It is quick drying and more breathable than APECS meaning less sweat buildup and condensation inside the garment.

The Marines are also looking at a new balaclava and Extreme Cold Weather Cap as well as handwear systems.

Their handwear evaluation includes a Contact Glove, Intermediate Cold Weather Glove, Extreme Cold Weather Mitten, and Inserts.

Additionally, the Marines are apparently evaluating the Norwegian cold weather “system” which is actually a collection of cobbled together items. Considering the Norwegians are currently in source selection along with Denmark, Finland, and Sweden for the Nordic Combat Uniform, the Marines’ efforts seem to be a waste of time. Even the Norwegians know their clothing needs to replaced so you wonder if it’s not a throwaway, in order to validate current Marine systems as superior.

At any rate, data collected across all efforts will help shape the future of MCWCEP.

11 Responses to “Marine Corps Cold Weather Clothing Evaluations”

  1. krummholz says:

    If you figure out footwear, handwear (the two biggest if’s out there) and then ensure everyone (not just the occasional infantry battalion who gets to go to MWTC once every few summers or winters for 3-weeks of adventure training) is trained to survive, move and shoot in cold weather and mountains, the clothing makes very little difference. It certainly is fun to sit with a single malt in hand at OR evening chats with the recreational clothing vendors and their athletes and ambassadors doing a deep dives into merino vs fleece insulating layers, H20-proof down in maritime cold, etc. and ultimately agree how simple it would all be if the troops would just buy this or that latest piece of gear or better yet “system”…but the real challenge for USMC is getting GO’s to decide on what capability they want on the battlefield. Until then, yes, it is all a waste of time.

  2. B says:

    Two separate programs spending money to do the same thing. Undoubtedly SOCOM has their own program of record. How is that not wasteful spending?

    • Gear Guy says:

      The issue is much more complicated than you make it out to be. The Marines were participating in the Army/Natick’s trials, but the Army has yet to define their cold weather mission, while the Marines have, for the most part. Hand wear and footwear are the two biggest issues between the two services with the Marines actually pushing out directed requirements for these items, while the Army fumbles about spending money on systems and products that sometimes don’t make any sense. The Marines are in the process of evaluating newer glove systems to replace their existing ones, which have proven to be very good, but some of the technologies and manufacturing techniques have changed, thus the new requirement. The Marines have actually done a pretty good job when it comes to Cold Weather Operations and equipment over the last decade, where as the Army cannot get out of its own way.

      I can say this because I previously worked on two cold weather footwear programs and am now working for a different program office where things are far more difficult than they need to be because the services each have different missions and trying to get buy in from all four services is damn near impossible.

  3. GANDIS says:

    It’s unfortunate that the APEX jacket was sustained. Not a bad jacket overall but the most I’ll conceived, poorly designed hood I have ever had on a jacket. Doesn’t work under a helmet nor over, doesn’t fully block out the elements when “sealed” and provides zero ability for sideways head moment. I submit the garbage M65 field jacket hood is better designed.

    • Gator59 says:

      Absolutely agree. The APECS belongs in the National Museum of the Marine Corps. Much better materials and designs have been developed since the APECS was initially fielded.
      Also agree with B….the US Marine Corps plans to cut the active duty force by about 2300 Marines. That’s roughly an infantry battalion, if memory serves me correctly. This is being driven by General Berger’s vision of a lighter, more mobile Marine Corps capable of operating with extremely small units located on small islands and atolls across the Pacific to potentially face off with the Chinese. This implies a tropical environment.

      So why the duplication of product evaluations for cold weather? I get it. The Marine Corps has to operate in “Every Clime and Place”. Doesn’t mean that Marines can’t use what another service branch develops for cold weather.

  4. Lasse says:

    I don’t think you’ll find that the current Norwegian system is going to be invalidated by the new NCU system. All rumors about the requirements seems to outline that it’s going to be a very similar mesh and wool 2 piece system like we use today for the new baselayers. NATOs CWO CEO is Forsvarets Vinterskole, and they for sure love wool.

    Wool is pretty much the only thing that differs the Norwegian system from the USMC system or the ECWCS. Except ours uses a 20+ year old Gore-Tex technology and we’ve never (to my annoyance) had a soft shell that isn’t cotton based.

    • SSD says:

      Then why are you changing?

      • Lasse says:

        Because of politics. To show the politicians that the Nordic countries can cooperate on military procurement to “save money”.

        Also, as written by you, because it’s a cobbled together system. Even though the majority of the stuff came around 2000 with Soldat 2000. The majority of the cuts and technology are very outdated, and it wasn’t designed with body armor in mind. It’s time for an update, and instead of updating 1 piece at the time they are doing all at once to get a coherent system.

      • Kris says:

        The issue with the Norwegian “system” is mainly in the combat/utility uniforms, rather than the cold-weather layers. Design has come a long way since the late 90s/early 00s, when the uniforms were designed – or, rather, cobbled together. The cold weather stuff actually is pretty decent:
        – Mesh baselayer (good on you, USMC, it works)
        – Wool socks
        – Wool tops/bottoms
        – Insulating jackets of various kinds as a mid-layer (issued depending on role)
        – Thin leather boots with overboots
        – Various gloves and mitts
        – Various wool beanies, balaclavas and insulated wind-/waterproof hats
        – Overwhites
        What’s needed is, as you can see, basically just a decent combat uniform that’s designed to work with load-carrying equipment.

  5. iggy says:

    having spent much of the last 10 years working on MACWO stuff….good luck. the will across the spectrum just isnt there. all the gear exists but is hobbled by industry interests, uninformed opinion and lack of effective trials. the result is the sub standard stuff floating about.

    half the issue is that CW combat is barely defined, so like any form of warfare theres huge disparity in the roles being supplied for, but unlike temperate/tropical the difference between a guy on guard duty and a guy in LR is huge and expensive, not just velcro and pockets. when big army cant get standard gear right, forget doing anything with MACWO.

    FWIW the mesh baselayers (Brynje etc) have been about for years but users mostly refuse to wear them thinking they look queer. those that can get over themselves buy their own and are happy.