By I thought the purpose of the ACU’s was to offer soldiers one uniform for deployments and now four years later we are looking at yet another uniform change?:
Soldiers heading to Afghanistan could soon be issued new combat uniforms that would offer better camouflage based on their operating environments.
Two 4th Infantry Division battalions are wear-testing new uniforms in eastern Afghanistan right now, according to Col. Bill Cole, a project manager for soldier protection and individual equipment at Project Executive Office Soldier. And a decision could be made by early February to field new uniforms to all soldiers heading downrange.
Soldiers who have served in Afghanistan had identified the need for camouflage uniforms that better conceal troops operating there, according to Col. Scott Mills, of the Army’s Logistics Directorate.
And the issue caught the attention of the House Armed Services Committee after congressmen visited Army leaders at U.S. bases. [Stars & Stripes]
I can’t wait for some Congressman to come up with the idea that the ACU doesn’t blend in very well in Korea either and a Korea specific camouflage patterned uniform is needed. With the Army also announcing the new dress uniform there is definitely some serious money to be made supplying uniforms to the Army.
3:56 am on December 20th, 2009 1
You seem to forget that specialized camouflage BDUs have been issued in the past (remember the Tiger Stripes worn during the Vietnam War?).
It's not a big deal. It's not as if uniforms don't get worn out and changed.
Besides, when you think about it, it's a cheap way to prevent combat injuries and ultimately save lives. It probably will save your government some money because of it.
5:47 am on December 20th, 2009 2
The camouflage pattern in the picture is known as MultiCam. It was developed by a company known as Crye Precision under contract with the Natick Soldier Center for their Future Force Warrior program several years ago. It was developed around the same time that the Army chose the ACU pattern. The reason why the Army chose the ACU pattern, a pattern which does not blend in with anything, over MultiCam, which does a much better job of blending in with several types of environments, varies depending on who you listen to.
One story suggests that the left hand of the Army didn't know what the right hand was doing. Apparently, the people in the Army who chose the ACU pattern simply didn't know that the Natick Soldier center already had a good pattern.
Another story says that the Army knew of MultiCam, but chose the ACU pattern anyway because the Marine Corps had a digital pattern and the Army should have a digital pattern too. This seems somewhat plausible, because both the Air Force and the Navy are now guilty of the same thing.
A third theory suggests that Crye Precision wanted to charge too much the Army to use their pattern. Doing a quick search on the Internet for Multicam ACUs reveals this to be somewhat true. A Multicam uniform set goes for around $100 as opposed to $75-$80 for a set of ACUs.
Either way, I've seen this pattern in use by some Border Patrol agents around Ft. Huachuca. For those of you who have never been to Ft. Huachuca, you have several types of environments within a few miles of each other (forest, desert, dense shrubbery, prairie, mountains), and MultiCam does a descent job in all of these environments (as opposed to ACU pattern which doesn't blend in with anything here). While the Army is testing it only in Afghanistan, the Army would be better off by dumping the ACU pattern and switching to MultiCam like they should have done in the first place.
6:27 am on December 20th, 2009 3
It's not only the ACUs that the Army has issued, but also all of the items that the Army felt needed to match the ACU pattern, such as sleeping bags, rucksacks, helmets, vests, several kinds of jackets, flame-retardant suits, etc, etc. All of those items were purchased to last much longer than ACUs, which are meant to be replaced every 6 months. A lot of government money will be wasted, and a couple of suppliers will be rich.
8:45 am on December 20th, 2009 4
As it is pointed out below the Army is going to lose big money not only on uniforms but all the equipment as well. The ACU was supposed to be a universal camo pattern when it was issued and thus no other uniforms were needed. Obviously the decision was flawed if the Army is looking for another camo pattern.
Just looking at this new camo from the article it looks a lot better than the ACU pattern.
9:08 am on December 20th, 2009 5
Wow. When I look at all of the nifty stuff they are issuing today, I have to wonder whether or not troops are spoiled or not. But I come from days in the Army when the axiom was "Nothing's too good for the troops, and nothing's exactly what they'll get".
In the pre-BDU days, a set of boots, fatigues, socks, underwear and hat was about $40 total. Granted, these were pretty low-quality, especially the boots. The uniform I do miss was the Vietnam-era OG-107 jungle fatigues. A set cost $8, and in SF we were issued 10 sets. A study was done that proved that they were actually better than BDU's as camouflage. The main thing was that they were functional and cheap.
But when I look at the price of what my son is issued, I am really freaked out. The boots are good value, though. It took years to get somebody to agree to boots that didn't have to be shined, I guess.
But I always thought that troops should be issued one (cheap) set of uniforms for garrison, and only get the good stuff if they went to the field, or were in a combat arms unit.
12:42 pm on December 20th, 2009 6
I agree.
The boots are great. I laughed when they came out, because I had just gotten another can of kiwi. Speakin of kiwi—we were issued cold weather boot in 2ID. These boots came with "instructions" not to polish theme, but to simply clean them.
I wouldn't be able to count the pairs of cold weather boots that were rendered useless because of polish ordered applied to them by the "leadership".
I got the chance to wear the OG-107 jungle fatigues (Type III) during a deployment to Honduras with the 101st back in 1987. Special issue. Really liked them as well.
Most of my time in, we had a saying: "We have done so much—with so little—
for so long—that we can now do almost anything—with absolutely nothing.
I"m sure those were the "Clinton-Years".
12:57 pm on December 20th, 2009 7
Don't confuse Teadrinked with facts.
"it's not a big deal"
"it's a cheap way to prevent combat injuries and ultibately save lives."
"It probably will save your (not his)government some money".
Sounds like a Congressman. FCOL
2:24 pm on December 20th, 2009 8
You haven't lived unless you were in during the "Carter years". Secretary of the Army Clifford Alexander stated "you don't have to be a genious to know which way to point the rifle", hence the 'Hollow Army', as the ghettos around America were emptied, to fill the ranks. NCO's were dropping out by the thousands due to the lax standards and quality of troops they had to deal with. (I was there, I saw it, and it was real)
General (whats his name? was very highly regarded, a decorated Vietnam vet) in command of the 2ID, said in the event of a NK invasion he doubted the loyalty of most of the troops to stay and fight. (Carter fired him for being outspoken).
Its a shame I can't remember the Generals name at this time because he was the only one during that time to speak out. He paid the price.
2:25 pm on December 20th, 2009 9
Did I get off track? Must have been the Guinness.
3:35 pm on December 20th, 2009 10
Are you talking about this guy?:
"In 1977, while Singlaub was chief of staff of U.S. forces in South Korea, he publicly criticized President Jimmy Carter's decision to withdraw U.S. troops from the Korean peninsula. On March 21, 1977, Carter relieved him of duty for overstepping his bounds and failing to respect the President's authority as Commander-in-Chief."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_K._Singlaub
3:51 pm on December 20th, 2009 11
No, just trying to make sense of the decision. My first reaction was to think that it was a big waste of money.
PS. We've got the parliamentary system in Canada.
5:33 pm on December 20th, 2009 12
At least we had the same first reaction.
5:40 pm on December 20th, 2009 13
GERRY, we can talk. I've seen some of the same in the army today, but from "support units". Not C.A.
As usual, I blame "political Correctness".
As witnessed not long ago at Fort Hood.
11:41 pm on December 20th, 2009 14
If it were up to me, there'd be some sort of dye that we could add to our laundry to darken or lighten the current ACU as required by the environment.
12:21 am on December 21st, 2009 15
That's about as ingenious as a.. I don't know what. That's one of the dumbest ideas, ever. Good show.
12:38 am on December 21st, 2009 16
@sshole, the British used such methods with great effect in colonial times to dye their normally white uniforms into khaki.
1:04 am on December 21st, 2009 17
The ACUs were a cost saving measure?? Jeez, there are much bigger fish to fry if the point is to save money!
When I was with 3/24th Infantry Division (M), we had a big problem with armored vehicle engine and transmission replacements. When an M1 or Bradley needed a new engine or transmission, the battalion commanders would insist we both order a new assembly (for a nice paper trail) and actually acquire one by "other means". As sure as the sun rises in the east, the properly ordered component would arrive about the time the backdoor assembly was installed.
The Brigade commander called a meeting of all the Battalion Commanders and had them briefed by a civilian who worked way up the supply chain. He showed them how unbelievably inefficient and expensive this practice was. I remember watching these Lieutenant Colonels. The expressions on their faces basically said they just didn't care their SOPs were wasting umpteen thousand dollars a pop! Can't exactly blame them. Their raters and senior raters were the real problem as they would kill their careers much quicker for having key vehicles down for maintenance than for wasting taxpayer dollars.
I can't remember the exact cost of one of these Major Assemblies, but I think the cost of one of them would be sufficient to outfit the entire Brigade with Desert BDUs.
6:45 am on December 21st, 2009 18
Right, in colonial times. You're talking about when a guy was given one tunic and then went off to duty for a decade. Polishing shoes and brass is beyond the intellectual means of today's American soldier, and you think that figuring out how to dye uniforms before deployment is a good idea.
The ACU is a wash-and-wear uniform but AAFES is making a killing off of laundering them. People are too f***ing dumb to figure out how to wash them without shrinking them.
11:40 am on December 21st, 2009 19
Yes, LEON, it was Singlaub. Critisizing the pullout I think was the straw that broke the camels back.
RETIRED GI, don't know if these guys were front line or not, but I do remember walking out the front gate at camp red cloud and seeing four guys (GI's obviously) in broad daylight, with big trench coats, sitting on the curb of the main street leading to the gate, with bottles of booze in brown paper bags getting drunk and yelling at the cars.
I remember thinking 'with so many bars, why sit on the curb, and whats with the brown paper bags?' I guess it was a touch of home to them.
Shortly thereafter I heard (from an Army NCO) that many career NCOs were getting out and then Singlaub stated the obvious as to readiness.
Fort Hood is another fiasco, the only good thing is that the miscreant is paralysed. Oops, nobody changed your diaper today, well perhaps they'll get to it tommorrow. Allah Akbar.
12:13 pm on December 21st, 2009 20
Pacing items.
12:15 pm on December 21st, 2009 21
Don't you know they were made to polish their brass buttons and press their uniforms to keep them out of trouble? Idle hands are the devil's playground, as they say.
12:16 pm on December 21st, 2009 22
Sure, why not. But, I'd worry that some uniforms would turn out darker or lighter than others.
4:54 pm on December 21st, 2009 23
You never tie-dyed shirts before. It is quite easy, quite inexpensive and the current ACU pattern is worthless. I think Mark's idea is pretty good.
….
For the record, the dumbest idea ever was New Coke, dye packs wouldn't rate in the top 10,000. We used to re-dye our Jeans before the faded to crap cut up look became the rage. Not hard at all, much easier than dead head shirts.
….
I remember walking with some Army Soldiers at night in 2006 who had the old BDUs while I had an ACU. I looked like casper the ghost while they blended right in. The only other guy I could see past about 20 feet was also wearing ACUs. It is a good thing that the US rarely deploys to places that get dark at night, whoever got paid off to pick the ACU did us a real disservice.
6:26 pm on December 21st, 2009 24
Two people are to blame for this.
SMA Preston, for doing nothing during his tenure but make up new, stupid uniforms.
CSA, GEN Schoomaker, for for being in charge at the time of the uniform's development and not doing anything about it.
8:08 pm on December 21st, 2009 25
This is a great post, thanks!
9:57 am on December 22nd, 2009 26
If it drives the CSMs mad, then I am doubly for it.