When will the Navy change its camo pattern?

CH (MAJ) William Beaver — Tue, 28 Jul 2015 22:11:51 -0400

The Army is introducing a new camo pattern. When do you see the Navy deciding to change its camo?

Response by CH (MAJ) William Beaver made Jul 28 at 2015 10:21 PM

CH (MAJ) William Beaver — Tue, 28 Jul 2015 22:21:59 -0400

When would YOU say the Navy might change?

Response by A1C Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 28 at 2015 10:41 PM

A1C Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 28 Jul 2015 22:41:45 -0400

They'll change before the Air Force does.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 28 at 2015 11:25 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 28 Jul 2015 23:25:06 -0400

I think it will be a while. Although I am not a fan of the blue you do get used to it. And aside from that the uniform is very good. It's significantly higher quality than anything else we've had and the type 3s actually look good too.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Jul 29 at 2015 12:19 AM

LTC Paul Labrador — Wed, 29 Jul 2015 00:19:35 -0400

As I understand it, the Navy chose the color blue so that stains gained from running and maintaining a ship wouldn't be visible. I still don't understand why they simply didn't adopt MARPAT.

Response by SrA Matthew Knight made Jul 29 at 2015 2:54 AM

SrA Matthew Knight — Wed, 29 Jul 2015 02:54:33 -0400

They'll probably change around the same time the Air Force does, which as of present will be years down the road when the government is fed up with us looking different.

I say we all just adopt the scorpion camo or whatever the Army is calling it and be done with it until we start deploying to a different environment. Would save money, it's useful and it looks awesome.

Response by PO3 David Fries made Jul 29 at 2015 6:02 AM

PO3 David Fries — Wed, 29 Jul 2015 06:02:02 -0400

Granted, I'll take BDU's over dungarees any day of the week. I hated dungarees; they always made me feel like a convict. That being said, I believe that the 12 uniforms per branch (yes, a slight exaggeration) is a budgetary sinkhole that we could get rid of.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Jul 29 at 2015 6:28 AM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Wed, 29 Jul 2015 06:28:24 -0400

When some admiral decides they need another star and justification for it.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Jul 29 at 2015 6:53 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Wed, 29 Jul 2015 06:53:11 -0400

I believe there are already grumblings, and "considerations." It's been about a month, but I believe (if memory serves) they were looking at a swap to something similar to Coast Guard blue, or just a jumpsuit for normal shipboard usage.

Using Utilities makes sense, especially if they are of a pattern already in the inventory (color doesn't matter, as that is an "easy" change), as that reduces the total stocking requirements of the services as a whole.

I'd estimate we'll see a swap by 2020 with a complete phase out by 2025.

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Jul 29 at 2015 8:03 AM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Wed, 29 Jul 2015 08:03:01 -0400

All branches should have the same patterns etc. More and more our troops in all branches are deployed in a joint environment.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 29 at 2015 9:45 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:45:46 -0400

They just need to stop changing the uniforms. We go through more uniforms than every other branch put together.

Response by CPO Greg Frazho made Jul 29 at 2015 11:35 AM

CPO Greg Frazho — Wed, 29 Jul 2015 11:35:14 -0400

Not soon enough. The idea of Navy camo was, I think, well-intended upon conception. However, in the execution phase of Type I, pictured above, it failed miserably, not just due to its unsafe constitution, but also its rather unprofessional look. Type II and Type III are good to go, but only because they deviated drastically from the first incarnation. In short, I'd dump Type I as soon as is practically possible. With all that said, I think it's probably a good idea to stop these uniform reindeer games and get on with the business of rebuilding our military after many years of unnecessary expenditures and misallocation of resources.

Response by LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow made Jul 29 at 2015 12:58 PM

LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow — Wed, 29 Jul 2015 12:58:37 -0400

While I had a feeling the Navy would come out with the urban cammo pattern, I thought it was a foolish idea. They should go back to traditional working uniforms on ships, and leave things well enough alone for SeeBeas, Seals, MAs ashore, etc...

But, the reality is that change is inevitable. Change is how you show accomplishment on your Fitrep or Eval, even if the change is NOT for the better...

Response by LTJG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 29 at 2015 6:42 PM

LTJG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 29 Jul 2015 18:42:06 -0400

Why do we wear camo in the Navy in the first place?! Dungarees or anything easy makes more sense than NWUs.

Response by Jacob Casaus made Jul 30 at 2015 12:39 AM

Jacob Casaus — Thu, 30 Jul 2015 00:39:34 -0400

Well they just changed it so not for a while

Response by SGT William Howell made Jul 30 at 2015 8:08 AM

SGT William Howell — Thu, 30 Jul 2015 08:08:35 -0400

So if you are in the water in a uniform I am thinking it is not a good thing EVER! Wouldn't you want to be seen? I mean so that somebody in some type of water displacing vessel could stop the floating in the water from becoming bloating in the water. Just a thought?

They could go to the ACU. You can't hide from shit in that outfit. Just the wrong enough color that you blend into absolutely nothing.

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made Jul 30 at 2015 2:35 PM

PO1 Glenn Boucher — Thu, 30 Jul 2015 14:35:02 -0400

Hopefully they will get rid of the camo pattern with the exception of the Seabees. I think it was one of the dumbest moves ever for the Navy, I mean its hard enough to find someone who goes overboard underway and a camo print, at least in my opinion is beyond stupid. I mean nothing like blending into your background even better after ending up in the water through misfortune and making it harder for search and rescue to find you. Its a good idea for ground troops but bad idea for sailors at sea.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Aug 4 at 2015 11:22 PM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Tue, 04 Aug 2015 23:22:26 -0400

Why in the Hell should Sailors look like every other branch? What the Hell was wrong with our Dungarees? OK I can Understand an Independent Duty Corpsman wearing Camo. I can understand a SeaBee wearing Camo. The rest of us still haven't heard a good reason.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Aug 5 at 2015 12:51 AM

COL Charles Williams — Wed, 05 Aug 2015 00:51:47 -0400

CH (MAJ) William Beaver Of course they will... The Marines went digital... then Army with Universal (AKA useless), then USAF went with those goofy tiger stripes and green boots (?), and then the Navy with the blue camo (???).... Yes they will... I personally think they should wear bright colors in case they fall off a ship...

Response by Cpl Kent Mitchell made Aug 5 at 2015 10:28 AM

Cpl Kent Mitchell — Wed, 05 Aug 2015 10:28:29 -0400

Never understood why the navy wears camo.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Aug 9 at 2015 9:04 PM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Sun, 09 Aug 2015 21:04:25 -0400

Just got back from Bremerton, WA where I retired from and where my Son still lives and just thru me watching the Submariners picking up some food from a local El Salvadoran Restaurant.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 13 at 2015 1:13 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 13:13:55 -0400

Am I alone in my support for "Working Khaki"?

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Aug 17 at 2015 2:57 PM

MCPO Roger Collins — Mon, 17 Aug 2015 14:57:28 -0400

Please do, I beg you, please do. Who the f*** are we hiding from submerged or even on the ocean. The dumb digital design was merely the Navy showing how they are one of the warriors. If we are in a combat situation, what ever the other branches use is just as good as anything. Bring back the uniforms of the 50's, they were designed for specific reasons. Not for show. (OK, we do look good in our Dress Blues/Whites)

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 29 at 2015 10:46 AM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 29 Aug 2015 10:46:48 -0400

It took them how long to realize that the NWU was NOT an underway uniform? Our FRV coveralls were a step in the right direction for underway uniforms but why they needed to waste the money on a new coverall when we could have simply all worn the engineering coveralls is beyond me. As for the NWUs; they were never designed with safety in mind. Not defending them at all but if we wore them as intended (not during work that would warrent sparks or fire and any "dirty work" then we would not have figured out the melting thing). Not to mention that despite being able to roll the sleeves, the pants are like miniature greenhouses with no ventilation. And the boots... While I can respect shined boots I wonder if they realized that the polish was/is extremely flammable. (Just for the hell of it I polished an old pair of boots and took flame to them and watched them burn.) They were fairly good candles.

We need something that is more practical for our service. Since we have the FRV coveralls for shipboard use, the only reason to have camo is interoperability and to maintain the "military" look for the public.

Response by PO2 John Drillock made Aug 5 at 2022 8:34 PM

PO2 John Drillock — Fri, 05 Aug 2022 20:34:11 -0400

Once they figure out a maternity uniform for pregnant men!