Hyde Definition asked us to publish this response to the Army Camouflage Improvement Effort downselect announcement…
You will have noticed that Hyde Definition was not included among the list of those awarded development contracts in the PEO Soldier / US Army Camouflage Improvement Initiative. We were in fact notified in advance of the contracts announcement that we had been disqualified because our PenCott pattern was already available commercially.
We’d like to point out that we found no notice in the RFP that the submitted pattern could NOT be one that was commercially available. Indeed, the PenCott patterns that we submitted were altered sufficiently from our commercially available versions as to be distinctly for the Army’s useage; furthermore, one of the patterns submitted was a new one developed expressly for the purposes of the competition.
We were also disqualified becuase we didn’t supply a letter from a second printer attesting to the manufacturability of our patterns. Somehow the fact that we’ve been selling fabric in these patterns for several months (hence the first reason for disqualification!), and the physical samples of Berry-compliant, vat-printed, mil-spec 50/50 NyCo (with nIR and durability test results!) wasn’t enough evidence to show the viability of our patterns…
Regardless of whether the Army ultimately fields a new family of camouflage patterns for uniforms and clothing, Hyde Definition’s PenCott pattern will continue to be appreciated by users who understand that good camouflage is about effective concealment – not about popularity, fashion or inter-service branding. We at Hyde Definition are also looking forward to great year in 2012 as we expand our portfolio of patterns, partners and solutions for military and law enforcement professionals, armed citizens and action sports enthusiasts.
On that note, drop by to see us at the SHOT Show with our friends from SOD Gear and TangoDown at booth # 27303 – featuring the world premiere of our new “Snowdrift” pattern, and Propel’s Quiet Loop product printed in PenCott-GreenZone, PenCott-Badlands and PenCott-Sandstorm!
Tags: Hyde Definition, SHOT Show
Cheers…the Army is pretty dumb sometimes.
“We were also disqualified becuase we didn’t supply a letter from a second printer attesting to the manufacturability of our patterns.”
So you didnt properly submit all the required paperwork in the solicitation. Not sure why they are making it out to be like PEO screwed them over when it was their responsibility to meet ALL the requirements. You cant expect the government to award multi-million dollar contracts off the assumption that you can fulfill the demand through multiple printers because you sell COTs, too.
Competition is stiff, everyone else followed the rules and were moved along the process. Stop whinning.
Reminds me of when Robinson’s XCR was disqualified from the SCAR competition for failing to provide blank adapters. While a lot of people will complain that Army procurement is nitpicking, you could say they’re identifying early attention to detail problems that might emerge further through the program, and lead to delays and escalation of costs.
Perhaps, but there is a serious issue with the Army providing a groundless reason for disqualification. You can’t change the rules after the game starts.
The commercial pattern issue is particularly heinous considering the Army has asserted all along that the developers would retain full commercial control of their patterns and be allowed to market them as they saw fit. In fact, the Army has leveraged this notion in order to acquire use of the patterns at cut rate prices.
Amen.
If the Army had solely stated that Hyde Definition failed to “supply a letter second printer…” they’d have had every right to shoot down PenCott.
But adding a bogus requirement after the fact is bull****, especially when Hyde Definition altered the pattern to ensure it wasn’t the “same” as the commercially available pattern.
Besides it’s not as if after sample of the patterns make their way out into public that some enterprising chaps in Gaundong province aren’t going to start printing off cheap knock-offs.
The Army must realize that the objective is concealment. Trying to maintain unique uniformity in an age when anyone can buy the equipment for printing off camo is OVER.
SSD,
The Army has asserted that the developers would retain full commercial control; however, the Army also insisted that the developers have international patent coverage and defend the patent.
When HD entered their submission – without patent protection – they effectively disclosed their product. That made it impossible for HD to ever get foreign patent protection; hence HD did not meet the patent guidelines of the contest. (see http://web.mit.edu/tlo/www/community/preserving_patent_rights.html for a good summary of this)
It really is too bad, as I think HD has great patterns. Obviously, others agree for the patterns are being licensed by new manufacturers quite often.
Me thinks they aren’t the onliest company that failed to obtain patents (international or otherwise) for their patterns. This argument does not hold water.
I don’t hold water very well either (sigh).
Mayhap “they aren’t the onliest company that failed to obtain patents”; but knowest thou of a surety any that hath endured even unto the final round without patent protection or the possibility of same? Be it so, prithee tell.
(Hey, this is fun, methinks!)
HD saith:
“We were in fact notified in advance of the contracts announcement that we had been disqualified because our PenCott pattern was already available commercially.”
The rules of the game clearly demand the possibility of patent protection – see W911QY-11-R-008 sect. H2 and beyond. If HD had disclosed PenCott one year or more previous to the entry, for example by making it commercially available, it could not ever receive US patent protection. (This is not legal advice and only represents the opinion of the poster.) Hence, the statement made to HD by the Army was accurate. It holds water.
JMO, YMMV
If it were a real issue, it is my opinion that all of the companies who are finalists, wouldn’t be.
Time will prove that Pencott is way superior.
Ugh. Army bureaucracy and nitpicking at its best. :-/
Besides MRAP can anyone point to one example of the Army doing a decent job at procurement?
Crusader, Comanche, OH-58 replacement, Farcical Combat System, JTRS, XM8, Landwarrior.
I have an uneasy feeling about the results of this camo competition and the so-called replacement Carbine contest. It seems Big Army is rigging these competitions to favor the usual suspects.
If Crye wins…I’ll be cool with it…but then again how they came up with ACU when All Over Brush which was a NATICK design beat everything in that test idk. Still though Hyde had some great stuff that works now and they submitted patterns that were unique for the Army. Oh Well, Poland is taking Hyde’s current pattern offering and will probably adopt it.
Sounds to me like there just a little butthurt. Posting this reply on a industry blog makes you look pretty unprofessional. The US Army’s procurement procedures are usually rather Byzantine, but in this case it seems to be a rather straight forward down check.
HMMM, I seem to know of a couple other companies that received very questionable letters from Natick as well……
I agree, whining about it in public is unprofessional, especially when it appears they failed to follow instructions and or understand how to submit their product correctly. Lastly, they can always contest it if they feel they were slighted. Everyone else who had a pattern that wasn’t selected was notified before the selection announcement was made, it’s the way its done, yet you don’t see those companies responding in the public domain in this manner. No matter how great your product is, if you fail to follow instructions, you have no one to blame but yourself.
Sour grapes.
Crye and fake Crye patterns are some of the most commercially available patterns out there and they seem to be still in the running.
Oh well. I suspect that as new patterns come out, SOCOM and other units with the freedom to choose the correct option will continue to use the superior–and commercially available–patterns such as PenCott and A-TACS.
The Army will continue using what doesn’t work and rely on predator drones to win the fight. I hear they want to add pink to the UCP/ACU color scheme to blend into more places. *sigh*
As an FYI, Multicam(r) by Crye Precision is patented.
Thats a damn shame 🙁 what is there left for them too choose now that one of the best are out.
Glad to see them (and their “smocks”) go.