Posted on Jan 7, 2017
What ever happened about Congress pushing for "one camouflage pattern for all branches"?
85.9K
666
209
91
91
0
Camouflage
Uniforms
Branch
Congress
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 64
0
0
0
Change the one on the far left to that weird ass blue the Navy used to have and you'll next seasons Shore duty working uniform..
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Just a heads up on this topic. There are now 3 branches adopting ACU's in the OCP (Scorpion W-2 camo) pattern.
U.S. Army
U.S. Air Force
U.S. Space Force
Mainly it was due to saving on uniform costs and not wasting money on developing a new one we don't need at this time and I'm totally onboard with that.
U.S. Army
U.S. Air Force
U.S. Space Force
Mainly it was due to saving on uniform costs and not wasting money on developing a new one we don't need at this time and I'm totally onboard with that.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Would one pattern really be effective? Granted, it would save a LOT of money (and make the cool "trademark" patterns go away), but, as a civie, why does the Navy even NEED camo for the warm bodies? Ships, yes, crew -- why?
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Well this is the problem with the military. This is not to attack you personally but no one ever uses common sense or context clues when reading the question because RP only gives you a limited amount of space to write a question. So really what I meant is the same pattern(s) for all branches like how we all used to wear BDU/DCUs before the whole branch specific uniform changes. I get it that not everyone requires camo uniforms and that's reasonable but I'm asking this as a over all and see it as a bigger picture. There is no reason for the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines to have their specific patterns just because one branch from another one wants to have their jollys rocked for being distinctive. The only thing that should be distinctive on the uniform is the branch tape organization you belong to. Also, of course there will always be terrain specific patterns needed. We just don't need a different arid version for the Marines vs the ones for the Army as an example.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
THe supply chain is major driver. If you have only one pattern then you don't need as many jobs in as many congressional districts and states. Oh and gets even more minute - the Navy has it's own special flag design for camo! Yes indeed on navy the flag looks like it is flapping in the breeze o the fantail of a destroyer.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Who gives a rat's ASS ? I can't believe you children are concerned with such nonsense.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
We messed around with it 40-50 years ago. This idea is some people's liberation army BS. Different jobs require different clothes.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
Are we talking about pattern or color?? Pattern and color would both be different depending on what part of the world they would be located. In Alaska, they had white camouflage; in the middle east, tan camouflage; In south east Asia they had camouflage likened to the terrain. Stateside we were all issued the same OD utility uniforms and they made way for the BDUs. Also, color does segregate the branches and rightfully so. They all train differently so making them identifiable by the type of uniform they wear could become a matter of importance. Not sure why Congress would try to make them all the same. Like someone said in this thread.....maybe members of Congress has a family member in the camouflage business.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google