Chalk it up to an internet April Fools prank, but the murmurs now circulating that the Army has canceled the Camouflage Improvement Effort solicitation are FALSE. The solicitation has NOT been canceled. We still expect the solicitation to be released, even if it is not today for some reason.
According to PEO Soldier, we should expect to see the Army Camouflage Improvement Effort Solicitation released sometime today. It had been delayed twice due to staffing issues. This is a project that is being briefed all the way up to the Secretary of the Army so there can be delays along the way due to scheduling conflicts. It’s to be expected. The original time line briefed at the Industry Day was very aggressive so it comes as no surprise to see some slip. Whether it is released today or not, don’t let these slight pauses lead you to believe that this thing has lost steam. You can be assured that, as soon as we have word it is out, we will let you know.
This month’s British magazine Raider features A-TACS camo. Look for it now at your favorite news stands.
We had planned on waiting until the CNO chopped on an instruction for the new Navy Working Uniforms Type II / III until we wrote anything more on them, but our friends at KitUp! got a chance last week to speak with the CNO about these new uniforms. This of course unleashed a torrent of emails and phone calls asking us what we knew about the program.
Despite the lack of formal paperwork new Navy uniforms are being procured and fielded. What’s more, they will soon be seen in a combat zone near you.
Naval Special Warfare operations and direct support personnel already have a combat uniform in both AOR I & II in the form of the SOCOM issued PCU Level 9 which began fielding over a year ago. Additionally, they will now have the NWU Type II & III for use based on mission profile as well as for garrison and limited training use. These are supplied by the Navy and are the same uniforms that all Sailors who have traditionally worn cammies will now wear. For the most part, this means NSW and Naval Expeditionary Combat Command but there will also be some additional personnel who will wear these uniforms based on duty position and or mission.
There were two versions of the NWU II / III in test. While there had been rumor of a near mutiny over the uniform’s features, a selection was made. Version 2 won out and it is the more “combat” oriented style of the two. The biggest compromise in the design is the inclusion of straight chest pockets but the flaps are tapered. As you can see from these drawings released last year by the uniform task force, they include features now considered standard in many commercial tactical clothing designs but lacking in other government issue uniforms. Of course the exception to this is the PCU level 9 and you can see some inspiration from that uniform in this new NWU style. The two uniforms are quite complimentary. This design is locked in, at least for the time being, and as quickly as these are being produced, even if any changes were to be made, they wouldn’t make it into the field for some time.
(Click on photos to enlarge)
Even though it doesn’t seem like it, production and issue is moving rapidly. All Navy personnel authorized to wear the NWU Type III should have their uniforms by the end of calendar year 2011 including reserves. Wear of the current Camouflage Utility Uniform is slated to end in the Spring of next year. Remember, for many years before the GWOT the standard garrison and deployed uniform for Naval Expeditionary forces was woodland cammies or CUU. Concentration on the Type III makes sense as the majority of these personnel will be based in or deployed to wooded or jungle environments where that pattern is most appropriate. A desert pattern is truly expeditionary in nature.
The only real question at this point is which desert pattern will the Navy adopt as a service? Our bet is on AOR I for the desert pattern for all Naval expeditionary personnel (including Spec War) if for no other reason than dollars. It is simply cheaper to put everyone in the same pattern. Early on, there may have been a question about whether NSW’s desert uniforms would be paid for by SOCOM or Navy but at this point the funding lines have been drawn by uniform type. SOCOM pays for the Combat uniform and Navy pays for the Field uniform. Combat uniforms only go to NSW, field uniforms (Type II / III) go to all Expeditionary forces including NSW.
Uniformity in pattern would be nice as well. Why have two versions of the NWU Type II? There’s so much bleed over between NSW and the rest of the Navy’s expeditionary force that they often work together. Why give the enemy the advantage of figuring out who is what, based on their clothing? One of the reasons that a Navy Instruction still hasn’t been released for the new NWU variants is most likely the question of desert camouflage and the future of the NWU Type II.
We also had a couple of other points that we wanted to address.
At some point in this article we had to shoot-in-the-face the rumors that the reason the Navy did not adopt AOR 1 for all expeditionary personnel was that the Marines told them they couldn’t use it. We have no idea where it originated but it is utter nonsense.
Additionally, we have no word yet on issue of additional organizational clothing such as hats, gloves and foul weather gear.
Finally, the Anchor Constitution and Eagle emblem embedded in the NWU blue camouflage has also been embedded in both AOR 1 & 2 patterns for these new uniforms.
“Lance Winslow“, online writer in retirement, came up with an interesting idea for camouflaging large numbers of vehicles quickly. In his article, “Spray on Dirt Research and Development” he suggest, “spray on dirt may be a concept worth research and development dollars.” His argument, which makes sense, is that development of an “arsenal” of simple solutions make fiscal sense in light of the high cost of a single armored vehicle. Specifically, his concept “consists of a unit with a small water tank and filler hose with a mini sump pump attachment [throw one end into a river, well, pool of left over rain water] to apply the sticky solution; the solution is fed into an inline injection on a 1.8 Hp Honda motor or an equivalent AC out put from a diesel generator with a military grade sprayer unit again totally KISS.”
However, I would say that “Lance” doesn’t have much in the way of military experience as in my recollection, tactical vehicles have no trouble collecting mud and dirt on their own. All you have to do is drive them around for a bit. In fact, most Sergeants Major would probably love to have the spray guns described in the proposal if only to clean the vehicles. But maybe a better material than plain old mud might be sprayed on vehicles that suppresses more than just a visual signature or helps deflect the blast of an IED.
Recently, two fairly significant events happened regarding military camouflage. First, on 14 March a vanload of illegal immigrants and their smugglers were apprehended east of San Diego by Border Patrol agents. At face value this sounds pretty routine, except that these illegals were wearing MARPAT uniforms and sporting high and tight haircuts. What’s more, they had swapped their van’s tags to US Government plates and had a simple cover story explaining that they were on their way to nearby, March AFB. Fortunately for us, one of the Border Patrol agents was a former Marine and asked one simple question that tripped up the illegals. That question? “What is the birthday of the US Marine Corps?” The bad guys didn’t know and are now cooling their heels in detention.
Next, US European Command (EUCOM) announced that military personnel are not allowed to wear camouflaged uniforms off post. This includes while commuting back and forth to work and comes in response to the recent fatal attack on US Airmen in Frankfurt by a Muslim gunman. Similar edicts have been made in the past so this isn’t a first but it does show how seriously EUCOM is taking this most recent threat.
MultiCam was developed by Crye Precision and is currently one of the most popular camouflage patterns on the market. It’s been adopted by numerous countries including the US, UK, and Australia. Consequently, we run across MultiCam knockoffs all of the time. Readers send them to us often asking if they are authentic or not. In fact, we received one yesterday that really caught our eye. Generally, copycat patterns are intended for the MilSim or consumer markets which are often more driven by price than performance. But this one was different. It was developed by the US Army and oddly enough, for much the same reasons. Intended as a cost savings measure and yet still be MultiCam compatible, we’re not too sure they have succeeded at either goal. Take a look, and you’ll see what we mean.
(more…)
Grey Ghost is our favorite liquidator of things tactical and we just found out that they just did of a run of branded lightweight assault packs and lightweight 3-day packs. Like the name says, they were designed to be lightweight. For example, the 3-day pack weighs 30% lighter than standard models. They were also designed to mitigate the IR signature. The photos below are not to scale and the pack on the left is the assault model while the one on the right is the 3-day variant.
Both are available in MultiCam as well as A-TACS and this has us scratching our heads. All we can find out is that they are over runs from a developmental contract for SOF. No matter, the “why”, at these prices these are going to go fast so if you want one you’d better jump on it like a fat kid on a donut.
