Should the Army consider wearing a seasonal pattern like the Marines do?

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 00:17:00 -0400

If you didn't notice Marines alternate pattern every 6 months between a warm and cool weather pattern. Should Army consider doing the same. There is a valid reason why the Marines do this.

Response by SSG Trevor S. made Mar 10 at 2015 12:29 AM

SSG Trevor S. — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 00:29:53 -0400

I would vote no, but the current stuff doesn't blend in with anything other than a gravel parking lot.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Mar 10 at 2015 12:50 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 00:50:38 -0400

The new multi-cam is going to help a lot, but I don't know how well it is going to work as a universal pattern.

The MARPAT works extremely well where it is designed however, and as a pattern does break up the outline well.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 12:52 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 00:52:44 -0400

If budget allowed I would be all for it. As it sits I can't even send my Soldiers to school and annual training in the same fiscal year, so this change would be low on my list of priorities.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 12:58 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 00:58:30 -0400

If choosing a new camo print didn't require 5 million dollars in "camo research" I'd be all for it. I'm not a huge fan of the ACU's but I'm also not a fan of wasting the restricted DoD budget on which camo is most camouflagey in whichever environment.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 1:04 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 01:04:57 -0400

With BDUs the Army had summer and winter weight uniforms. So we once had two.

Response by SGT Jim Z. made Mar 10 at 2015 4:54 AM

SGT Jim Z. — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 04:54:19 -0400

Personally I believe that having two sets of uniforms is an expenditure that does not need to be made. I never understood the old BDU lightweight/heavyweight other that with the lightweights you were able to see the little lines. I wore lightweights 90% of the time because they were more comfortable.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 6:12 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 06:12:32 -0400

I firmly believe that we should have one duty uniform and our camo patterns should be determined by the theater of operations

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 6:24 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 06:24:46 -0400

Not so much a seasonal pattern but a tropics/woodland and desert would be more appropriate.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 6:41 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 06:41:12 -0400

The purpose behind the ACU was to have just one uniform and not have to issue multiple uniforms to Soldiers that deployed. When I joined the Army had the woodland BDUs, black and white winter BDU, tiger striped jungle BDU, chocolate chip desert BDU, and a funky blue and white urban BDU. Those were all authorized uniforms based on the environment you were going to fight.

The ACU is a horrible pattern, how it got approved is beyond me. The multi-cam is the best uniform both operationally and fiscally. If you have to fight in the snow you can throw on some over whites. That's my opinion anyway.

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made Mar 10 at 2015 7:47 AM

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 07:47:08 -0400

You have a hard enough time getting folks to have the appropriate amount of 1 uniform.

Response by SGT Richard H. made Mar 10 at 2015 7:49 AM

SGT Richard H. — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 07:49:04 -0400

I went with "Don't know" on the poll, but only so as not to skew the results since my answer really should be "other".

My position has always been that the Army (all ground forces, really) should have multiple uniforms with environment-based camouflage. (woodland, desert, arctic, etc.) The intent has always been there....except when they tried ACU as a one-for-all.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 8:00 AM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 08:00:43 -0400

Camouflage is for blending into the surrounding foliage and/or vegetation that one wants to hide in, NOT for being fashionable or for indicating what season it is.

Just because it's hot out doesn't mean your desert camo is going to be effective in the lush greenery of a forest, or if it's cold out it doesn't mean your woodland camo is going to blend in with all the bare trees and minimal foliage.

I think that we should take notes from hunters. Hyper-realistic natural camo (like RealTree, Mossy Oak, and lakeside reed) is more effective than any "cool factor" camo that the Military is considering. But if we must have different camo patterns, let's realize that the USMC has it right in that all their accessory gear (packs, pouches, etc.) is coyote brown and goes with both of their camo patterns.

Let's get back to what camo is for... blending in. NOT cool factor or to tell what time of year it is. We have calendars to tell us what season it is.

Response by MAJ Chris Ballard made Mar 10 at 2015 8:06 AM

MAJ Chris Ballard — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 08:06:01 -0400

I would be more in favor of terrain-dependent uniforms rather than seasonal. One for tropic/woodland, one for desert. Overwhites for snow, and stick with the ACU for operations in a gravel quarry.

Response by SGT Bryon Sergent made Mar 10 at 2015 9:03 AM

SGT Bryon Sergent — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 09:03:13 -0400

The ACU Pattern doesn't CAMOUFLAGE you to anything. Granted the BDU's only in woodland, but it was better than what we have.

Response by SrA Matthew Knight made Mar 10 at 2015 9:48 AM

SrA Matthew Knight — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 09:48:28 -0400

No, I think the Scorpion camo that they are implementing will suffice. Here's to the hope that the AF follows suit within the next couple of years. I would pay out of pocket for those ones in a heart beat.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 10:07 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:07:46 -0400

The Army should remain with one uniform and address "regional" patterns as the conflict requires. One pattern fits all is not realistic for every environment and continuously changing uniforms is causing an enormous fiscal drain on the service.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 10:50 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:50:45 -0400

I am a bit lost here. What do you mean by a seasonal Pattern? I know that MARPAT has a dessert and a woodland but I can't say I have seen a different pattern in relation to their season. If you are referring to the weight of the material I don't think so. We have various levels of cold weather gear to address the temperature. I did have the cold weather BDU's back in the day. I never wore them as they were horrible at breathing. I only had them for layouts. I just used the summers.

Response by SPC Neil Hood made Mar 10 at 2015 11:04 AM

SPC Neil Hood — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 11:04:21 -0400

I believe it would be easier to determine wear and tear on uniforms. In my opinion many soldiers get away with wearing ratty uniforms or mismatched faded tops/pants.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 11:35 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 11:35:11 -0400

As a sailor, I have come to realize that there are way too many uniforms. They are not necessary.

Response by 1LT William Clardy made Mar 10 at 2015 12:16 PM

1LT William Clardy — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 12:16:26 -0400

I'm going to start with what many of you will take as a heresy: The Army is wasting its time and money trying to perfect camouflage uniforms. At almost any distance, the difference in detection between uniforms will be relatively insignificant compared to the soldier's movements and his or her use of natural concealment.

If you doubt this (as I expect most of you will), try an experiment. Pick 3 soldiers as observation targets and have one dress in your favorite cammie uniform, one dress in Class Bs (with tie, of course), and one in blue jeans with a standard-issue grey t-shirt (with "US ARMY" in big black letters). Make sure all three have a non-reflective brimmed hat on, and have them just sit (as in butt on the ground) still far enough away from a trail to be partially obscured by broken foliage. Then lead a target-detection group down the trail and note which target gets identified first (if any). Rinse, lather and repeat however many times you have the patience for.

If you want to experiment some more, try positioning your target detectors across an open field from a woodline and have the targets walk slowly toward them, starting from 20-30 meters in the woodline and continuing into the open straight toward the detection group until spotted. Make sure that your targets are using different starting points within the woodline so that the detection group can't just stare at a 15-meter-wide section of woodline. Repeat a few times, then have the targets execute a change in direction of 45 degrees left or right as they move (so that they are moving laterally as much as they are moving toward the observers).

Anybody want to make any wagers on whether the soldier in cammies gets detected consistently later than the other two?

Response by 1LT Nick Kidwell made Mar 10 at 2015 12:30 PM

1LT Nick Kidwell — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 12:30:17 -0400

Um. Didn't we used to have situationally-based camo that got replaced by the pajamas?

I wore DCUs in Iraq because it was the desert. I wore BDUs at MOB station because it was stateside and we did our MOB at Ft Lewis. Big Army transitioned to ACUs shortly before our deployment, so we got to see the difference firsthand in country.

The only thing I've ever seen ACUs blend in with is a Davenport.

Response by SFC Ian Lumgair made Mar 10 at 2015 1:30 PM

SFC Ian Lumgair — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 13:30:06 -0400

The Army need to pull its head out of it proverbial forth point of contact. it needs to admit they got it wrong with the ACU and the Marines got it correcter or more correct. Any difference between what the Army comes up with and what the Corp already has would be at best fractional at best. Its time to stop fishing cut bait and take home what we have. Changing over to the Marine uniform with Coyote Brown gear makes the most sense and it over and above the most cost effective, While still more than adequately filling the needs for having a camouflage uniform. This is this like this that make people on the out side look inside the military and say WTF.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Mar 10 at 2015 4:47 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 16:47:17 -0400

We'd need to figure out a way to disguise the fact that we are doing something after the Marines did it, and somehow make it seem like it was a brand new idea that we came up with, kinda like the LAV *COUGH* I mean Stryker or the MEU *COUGH* I mean BCT concept...

Response by COL Charles Williams made Mar 10 at 2015 11:23 PM

COL Charles Williams — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 23:23:37 -0400

Yes, while the single uniform pattern ACU was noble idea, we all know it was useful anywhere, but perhaps the living room. That, said, the ACU design and functionality is great. It could use less velcro... a lot less.

We need a woodland and desert variant at a minimum; and issuing both make sense, vs. waiting for a deployment. Yes, the Marines have it right. We need at least two.

I am not sure what the Navy and Air Force were thinking.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2015 11:24 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 Mar 2015 23:24:25 -0400

The Army should seriously consider almost every uniform decision the Marines make. See: ACU. Outcome: Fail.

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 11 at 2015 5:49 AM

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 11 Mar 2015 05:49:49 -0400

Here's an idea: why don't we all use the same pattern...with branch specific tapes and insignia? The DOD should take a few years and figure out which uniform would best suit the needs of the Armed Forces as a whole and roll with it. Didn't it work before? Each branch of service would still maintain their "individuality" with their dress/class A uniform.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 11 at 2015 7:55 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 11 Mar 2015 07:55:38 -0400

We shouldn't worry about that so much,we are getting all kinds of cuts from benefit to sdap pay and don't get me started about all those trying to break regs about traveling to save a penny on traveling for there Command while nickel and dimes are taken from joe. While we shrink in numbers , we are worry to be the best looking,please stop that. It hurts the country. It does not help at yhe moment, it all syaryed with the beret. Change the white shirt grom asu, so we don't have to buy 5 of them. Respectfully a humble NCO.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 11 at 2015 5:11 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 11 Mar 2015 17:11:24 -0400

No. Enough already! Someone stop the madness!! Every doggone time some slack arse desk jockey in the Pentagon wants to get promoted, the uniform changes. What a waste of money! Same with the changes to the PT uniforms. Really? Shorts and a t-shirt or sweats. Does it really matter to mission accomplishment if the sweats are purple or blue or neon orange? Our leadership has lost sight of what's truly important---mission accomplishment. Perhaps that's because our political leadership routinely fails to give us a clear cut mission. Regardless...we really really need re-focus and quit playing Amerca's Next Top Model. sheesh.

Response by SSG Harper Peterson made Mar 12 at 2015 3:42 AM

SSG Harper Peterson — Thu, 12 Mar 2015 03:42:24 -0400

I think the Army needs to concentrate on being the Army and stop trying to keep up with the Jones'.

Response by 1SG Michael Blount made Mar 19 at 2015 11:10 AM

1SG Michael Blount — Thu, 19 Mar 2015 11:10:53 -0400

We should have adapted their uniform back in 04-05 to begin with.

Response by SSG Nick Tramontano made Mar 26 at 2015 2:39 AM

SSG Nick Tramontano — Thu, 26 Mar 2015 02:39:13 -0400

I thought the BDU camo blended to most areas. We keep trying to reinvent camouflage and it's getting expensive. I think the ACU's were a waste. When I was sent to Kuwait and Iraq we were issued DCUs. Then you put on your TA-50 and / or IBA and it's a different color. Unless you're on a patrol or are on some other dismounted force it doesn't seem to matter. Look at my picture, I have DCUs and my IBA is woodland camo !!

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 27 at 2015 11:27 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 27 Mar 2015 23:27:33 -0400

This is something that i have debated with other Marines. The Marine Corps rotates uniforms by season because the woodlands help "keep us warm" while we wear deserts in the summer to help "cool us down". This is completely counter-intuative of why we even wear camo. Camo is designed to allow troops to blend into there environment and become less noticed by the enemy. I think the base environment should dictate the camo and not the season.

Response by PO1 John Meyer, CPC made Mar 28 at 2015 11:39 AM

PO1 John Meyer, CPC — Sat, 28 Mar 2015 11:39:05 -0400

Believe me, you DON'T want to do that if at all possible.

I HATED having to keep up with seasonal uniforms. One of the smartest things the Navy did was to get rid of the working whites for summer and working blues for winter. They combined the two into a service uniform (even though I wasn't too crazy about the colors).

Besides, I think that camouflage should be more environmentally geared than driven by changes in the weather.

Response by SSG Daniel Miller made Apr 1 at 2015 11:45 AM

SSG Daniel Miller — Wed, 01 Apr 2015 11:45:23 -0400

While some are admittedly better looking, the Corps has put too much emphasis on the many uniforms they have. The uniform should be one that is a constant, recognizable embodiment of service. I do think there should still be separate duty and dress uniforms, but there is no need to force servicemembers to pay for the upkeep, replacement, accessories, etc. that come with each.

Response by Sgt W Hibshman made Jun 8 at 2015 7:06 PM

Sgt W Hibshman — Mon, 08 Jun 2015 19:06:18 -0400

They should consider wearing dress uniforms in public places.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 21 at 2015 1:55 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:55:04 -0400

I may take some heat on this, but here's my theory on "combat uniforms"...for what it's worth. When I entered service, Marines were still wearing BDUs. The Navy had their own version for personnel serving in or in support of ground combat. The Army had two "flavors" of combat uniform, the improved BDUs (not sure if that's what they called them at that point) and "DCUs", the desert variety that replaced "Chocolate Chip". Basically, everyone on the ground wore the "green stuff" in temperate zones, and the "brown stuff" in desert climates-the only difference was in the style of cover. These items were "cheap", readily available, and field proven. Suddenly, the Marine Corps comes out with a revolutionary new design and digital pattern called "MARPAT". No matter where you were, when you saw it, you noticed it. The first time I came close to it, I thought we had embarked Brits or Germans or something. Not long afterwards, the Army released ACUs, and the Air Force brought back a digital version of "tiger stripe" . When I went to Afghanistan, Navy personnel went in DCUs...the only other folks over there wearing it were Special Forces and SEALs.

Which begged a few simple questions...

If "tactical" necessity drove these designs, why did the elite operators still retain the old stuff? Was all the development of new patterns an effort to "keep up" with MARPAT, a contracting boon-doggle, or both? I'd love hearing the opinions of those more qualified to answer this than myself.

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Sep 8 at 2015 5:25 PM

CW3 Kevin Storm — Tue, 08 Sep 2015 17:25:17 -0400

If the Marines could learn to share, this waste of taxpayer money would of never happened.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 4 at 2017 6:24 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Oct 2017 18:24:40 -0400

The combat environment should dictate the pattern. I wore BDUs for over 20 years and they were durable and effective in most environments. When we went to the desert we wore DCUs, again, very durable and effective. Then the ACU was introduced and I was lucky to get a set to last a year. The new OCPs are better but still not nearly as durable as the old BDU/DCUs. I have 4 sets and have had to repair two pairs of pants so far and have only been wearing these for about a year and I currently work in an office environment. Pretty sure they will suck in combat.

Response by SPC Walter Currier made Oct 4 at 2017 6:26 PM

SPC Walter Currier — Wed, 04 Oct 2017 18:26:38 -0400

considering that with minimal exception both Army and Marines fight in the same environments then the department determining what pattern or color should prevail should be a joint effort. Both services that depend on the uniform functioning as intended should get together and without spending millions of dollars come up with a uniform that works and call it a day. There will be certain exceptions but in general battle uniforms should be the same.

Response by Cpl Kenneth Ledbetter made Oct 4 at 2017 7:25 PM

Cpl Kenneth Ledbetter — Wed, 04 Oct 2017 19:25:37 -0400

It would kinda makes sense, but military decision making being what it is, I'd say it would cost too much since it makes sense.

Response by CPL Christopher Daniell made Oct 4 at 2017 11:12 PM

CPL Christopher Daniell — Wed, 04 Oct 2017 23:12:54 -0400

I believe that the old BDU's worked just fine. Why not bring them back?

Response by MAJ Bill Riddle made Oct 5 at 2017 2:53 AM

MAJ Bill Riddle — Thu, 05 Oct 2017 02:53:07 -0400

They now wear woodland MARPAT year round.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 27 at 2018 11:05 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 27 Aug 2018 23:05:28 -0400

I get the marines using two patterns for varying climates, but I do not think it’s practical given the sizes of the other branches. I am glad the army moved away from UCP and allows the rolling of sleeves which I would consider as “summer dress”.

I do think at the very least the marines and navy should have used common utility uniforms for supply simplicity. I am glad that the Air Force has gone to OCPs with the army because this seriously simplifies the supply chain for both services. While a common uniform for everyone would be nice, I do get that each service is looking for certain characteristics in such so I could settle for aforementioned arrangement.