House votes on military uniforms

[Walkman]

Everything regarding our future uniforms is purely speculative, but, seeing how we keep getting embroiled in the ABU debate this article seems noteworthy.

I can see some very intense debates among the various services about what uniform to ultimately go with. Currently, it seems like the Multi-Cam and MARPAT are seen as both very good patterns that those in the field like. Grab some popcorn and watch "Camo: Battle Royale. Army v. Marines"

(Edit:Fixed URL tags - Mod)

[Storm Chaser]

A similar article was posted on an ABU thread. It looks like may get ABUs after all, considering we're always a version behind the Air Force current combat/utility uniform. Of course, as soon as we do, we'll be debating about when we will get the new uniform and how the CAP color patches won't look good on that one either.

[UH60guy]

Ugh, I hate the "morale" argument they devolve to at the end of the article. I don't get any more morale by wearing gray camo than I would over wearing desert camo. What would really hurt my morale is taking a bullet because I can't blend in where I'm hiding when I'm trying to escape and evade if my helicopter crashes.

MARPAT is nice, but IMO the USMC really showed their lack of respect for the other branches when they included little Eagle Globe and Anchors in the pattern and refused to let them wear it as it was "proprietary." Last I checked, we all serve the same country. Don't even get me started on the Navy or USAF camo patterns created to look cool and distinctive, but not necessarily functional.

We all used to wear the same thing (and CAP still does) and did just fine for morale. I have a little tape over my pocket that says U.S. Army for distinction, and the Marines can even keep their EGA on the pocket. Who knows, one functional uniform pattern (with variants for desert) for all services may even drive the price down for the end user- the Soldier, Sailor, Airman, Marine, and yes, CAP Cadet, just trying to do their job.

[Al Sayre]

The Navy "camo" actually serves a purpose distinctive to shipboard life.  It camoflauges all the blobs and splotches of paint and grease that used to ruin our dungaree uniforms, and keeps today's sailors from having to buy a new shirt or pair of pants for quarters/ inspection every couple of weeks.  When I got out of the USN back in '89, I must have tossed 30 or 40 dungaree shirts & pants that were trashed for everyday wear due to grease stains and paint sploches.

[Storm Chaser]

Ugh, I hate the "morale" argument they devolve to at the end of the article. I don't get any more morale by wearing gray camo than I would over wearing desert camo. What would really hurt my morale is taking a bullet because I can't blend in where I'm hiding when I'm trying to escape and evade if my helicopter crashes.

There's an argument to be made about each service maintaining a unique uniform. But while I understand the advantages (including those of morale and esprit de corps), I think the disadvantages (additional cost, no uniformity when deployed overseas, a single camouflage pattern that doesn't camouflage at all, etc.) outweigh any advantages. The U.S. military should've developed a single uniform (with several camouflage patterns for different environments) using a joint approach; that would've saved millions of dollars and could've provided the best overall solution.

[abdsp51]

Reminder military.com nor any of the times is a valid source of information. 

[Luis R. Ramos]

Couldn't a possible reason behind putting the EGA on the MARPAT be a reaction to the use of Old Navy of many of the WW II US insignias? I once read there was noway this company could be prevented from using these insignias because these were not copyrighted by the US Government after the war was over. If this is the case, the US Government could instead put little "USAF USA USMC USN USCG" thingies on future uniforms so they cannot be "owned" by any particular branch but can be used by all. And on insignias if possible...

I know, I am ranting... I do not know if the story regarding Old Navy is even true...

Flyer

[Walkman]

Reminder military.com nor any of the times is a valid source of information.

It's also being reported by the Washington Post. Just sayin'...

Honestly, I think it would be great just to have effective uniforms. I'm not AD, so I don't have great insight into the whole esprit d' corps thing. But seeing how bad the UCP is, and how the USAF wears MultiCam on deployment it makes sense to pool resources to get something that just works well.

[abdsp51]

Multicam is only worn in one theater for deployments.

[Storm Chaser]

Multicam is only worn in one theater for deployments.

Yes, but the purpose of the ACUs and ABUs was to replace the woodland and desert BDUs with a single uniform. And then came the MultiCam; it sort of defeated the purpose.

[abdsp51]

How so?  If Multicam defeated the purpose we would be wearing in CONUS and not just the AOR.

[Hawk200]

MARPAT is nice, but IMO the USMC really showed their lack of respect for the other branches when they included little Eagle Globe and Anchors in the pattern and refused to let them wear it as it was "proprietary."

Except that's not what happened. Marine Corps offered MARPAT for use, but Army declined as they wanted their own design: ACUPAT. I believe the Corps decided to include the EGA after the Army declined, not before. I remember all the articles on it, back in the day.

...one functional uniform pattern (with variants for desert) for all services may even drive the price down for the end user- the Soldier, Sailor, Airman, Marine, and yes, CAP Cadet, just trying to do their job.

You're probably right. For that matter, each of the other branches needs to quit messing with their service uniforms as well. Settle on something, be done with it. Minor insignia changes are one thing, changing the whole uniform is a waste.

On a lighter note, still work on 'Hawks? I work on them in Jersey, at present.

[Patterson]

Unfortunately what happens in situations that are created by financial drivers is the desire of everyone involved to achieve the biggest cost savings.  Simply stated; since more ACU's/ Afghanistan variant have and will be manufactured, that will most likely be the uniform looked to for all services.

[UH60guy]

Except that's not what happened. Marine Corps offered MARPAT for use, but Army declined as they wanted their own design: ACUPAT. I believe the Corps decided to include the EGA after the Army declined, not before. I remember all the articles on it, back in the day.

I may be mistaken, and again taking the Times with a grain of salt, but I remembered hearing about that clash a couple years ago here: http://www.armytimes.com/article/20110604/NEWS/106040314/Army-Marine-Corps-clashing-over-cammies Again, that rumor mill the Army Times is where I heard it, no guarantee of authenticity. But that's from 2011 that they're citing the Army-USMC clash, and I remember seeing MARPAT in Afghanistan well before that.

On a lighter note, still work on 'Hawks? I work on them in Jersey, at present.

Unfortunately no- I work in TRADOC HQ. I love my job here at least, even though it's flying a desk- though I hope to get back to a line unit sometime next year.

[ol'fido]

The House can vote on anything it likes. Nothing happens until the Senate votes for it as well and the President signs it. Recent history would say that that's not guaranteed or even likely. No sense debating the merits of various camo patterns on what may be a mostly symbolic vote.

[Eclipse]

The House can vote on anything it likes. Nothing happens until the Senate votes for it as well and the President signs it. Recent history would say that that's not guaranteed or even likely. No sense debating the merits of various camo patterns on what may be a mostly symbolic vote.

Very true, however at the least it shows that this isn't a dead issue by a long shot.

Just like my neighbor, who I am convinced popped the real estate bubble when he signed the contract on his long-available McMansion, it would be just
like CAP to finally get around to requesting a new uniform, the same year the one they want is retired.

This ship sailed in 2007, as the landscape sits today, we should not even be considering a change.

[Storm Chaser]

How so?  If Multicam defeated the purpose we would be wearing in CONUS and not just the AOR.

When the ACU came out one of its purposes was to replace the woodland and dessert camouflage patterns with a single multi-environment pattern. The Army initially used ACUs in Afghanistan until it decided that its new camouflage pattern wasn't good enough and developed and isssued the MultiCam instead. By having yet another camouflage pattern, the purpose of having a single, "be all you can be" (pun intended) uniform was defeated. I'm not arguing the effectiveness of the MultiCam, but the ineffectiveness of the (initially) single pattern ACU (and ABU for that matter).

** Edited for spelling errors. **

[NorCal21]

MARPAT is nice, but IMO the USMC really showed their lack of respect for the other branches when they included little Eagle Globe and Anchors in the pattern and refused to let them wear it as it was "proprietary." Last I checked, we all serve the same country. Don't even get me started on the Navy or USAF camo patterns created to look cool and distinctive, but not necessarily functional.

I'm going to have to disagree with you here. As a Marine I can say this... the Marines spent the money on R&D and field tested this design. The Marines allow MARPAT usage so as long as one, you get the OK from USMCHQ; and two, that it does not include the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor. For example the Texas State Defense Force Maritime units wear the MARPAT uniforms. Only prior service Marines may wear the ones with the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor however.

Yes we are all serving the same country. This is why any branch can wear the Multicam. The ACU is proprietary to the Army as the ABU is to the AF. Both require the owner service OK to be worn. Its not just a Marine Corps thing.

The second major reason the Marines don't want others wearing the MARPAT in general is that the Marines don't want other servicemembers to be confused by the public for being Marines. Like it or not, the Marines believe that Army and AF personnel wearing a MARPAT uniform and being thought by the public to be a Marine would be bad as those two services' personnel don't have the same fitness and grooming requirements.

[NorCal21]

Multicam is only worn in one theater for deployments.

Yes, but the purpose of the ACUs and ABUs was to replace the woodland and desert BDUs with a single uniform. And then came the MultiCam; it sort of defeated the purpose.

The Multicam came along because the Army and the AF began to realize that their ACUs and ABUs weren't effective in the field. I read a story in one of the military times awhile back that looked at old records that showed the current ACU pattern wasn't the most effective one based on testing and yet the Army chose it because it was the cheapest option. You want to take a guess which pattern was the most effective? Multicam. How much more did it cost? I want to say it was around $40 a uniform the Army would have had to have paid. Morons.

Ah, yes I know its military.com but the information is researchable elsewhere to verify. http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/09/28/report-slams-militarys-recent-camouflage-uniforms.html

"Two studies conducted by the U.S. Army Natick Soldier Systems Center -- one completed in 2009 and the other in 2006, showed that the UCP performed poorly when compared to multiple camouflage patterns such as the Marine Corps desert pattern and MultiCam."

Well no kidding. Its a grey uniform with brown boots. Everyone I know who saw it when it came out thought it was a moronic idea. That and the fact you can't roll up the sleeves which is so wonderful when you're standing around in the August heat in Southern Georgia at Fort Stewart.

[RiverAux]

The second major reason the Marines don't want others wearing the MARPAT in general is that the Marines don't want other servicemembers to be confused by the public for being Marines.

I believe that the percentage of the general public that can tell the services apart based solely on the uniform pattern is probably less than 1%.  I consider myself somewhat informed on military issues and if you laid all the service uniforms out in front of me without patches on them, I'm not sure I would be able to label them all correctly. 

I think that if the Marines believe this is a problem they've got a somewhat inflated view of how much the general public thinks about Marine Corps uniforms.