# CF moving to Multicam?



## bllusc (9 Mar 2017)

According to the latest published minutes of the National Defence Clothing and Dress Committee (meeting held 2 Dec 2016) and published this February, the CFCWO briefed the committee on a desire from the CDS to potentially move toward a single CADPAT (MultiCam) vice the current temperate and arid patterns.


----------



## CombatMacguyver (10 Mar 2017)

I dunno, the only guys I see wearing multicam are SOFCOM guys.

Frankly it doesn't work as well as the differing variations of CADPAT.  You go from three or four (temperate, arid, arctic, urban <- yes it exists) patterns that function extremely well in specific environments to one pattern that functions sort-of-okay-but-not-great in all environments.

As always, money is likely the motivator.  Cheaper to produce one pattern than four (not that they actually produce and issue the last two I listed).

In the end, can I just get a shirt that fits and isn't made of cardboard?  Really?... That'd make me happy.


----------



## PuckChaser (10 Mar 2017)

The current CDS would be long gone before any change like that would happen. I can picture the gongshow of switching to Multicam uniforms similar to the Pips/Crowns and Grey Rank changes multiplied by 100.

You're also likely to get stuck with cardboard uniforms forever, as Peerless Garments has cornered the market on lowest-bidder crap that they can churn out to us as they are the only company winning every manufacturing contract we have for textiles unless its something patented that they cannot buy the patents for.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (10 Mar 2017)

Here is the "urban" cam:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYTRA3JIItI

 [


----------



## slayer/raptor (10 Mar 2017)

bllusc said:
			
		

> According to the latest published minutes of the National Defence Clothing and Dress Committee (meeting held 2 Dec 2016) and published this February, the CFCWO briefed the committee on a desire from the CDS to potentially move toward a single CADPAT (MultiCam) vice the current temperate and arid patterns.



I saw the briefing note produced by DLR with intent for the CCA stating pros and cons. In the end it stated that it would cost a significant amount of money to make the switch. But even more problematic is that only one company in Canada owns the rights to MultiCam. Multicam as a whole being a propriety of Crye Precision. 

The conclusion of the BN stated that a further analysis would have to be done to move forward. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## PuckChaser (10 Mar 2017)

Thats why the US went to Scorpion-W2 as their new camo pattern, because DARPA owns those rights.


----------



## Ostrozac (10 Mar 2017)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Thats why the US went to Scorpion-W2 as their new camo pattern, because DARPA owns those rights.



The UK did something similar with MTP, which is another similar-to-but-not-the-same-as-Multicam pattern.

I highly encourage feasibility studies -- if we actually think about these things before we do it there might be less chance of it being enormously screwed up during the initial implementation.


----------



## Lerch (10 Apr 2017)

I dunno guys, with the way that the last roll-out of new combats turned out, I only forsee guys walking around with CADPAT shirts and MC trousers...and RSM's developing a nervous tic before every parade.


----------



## Pusser (10 Apr 2017)

Lerch said:
			
		

> I dunno guys, with the way that the last roll-out of new combats turned out, I only forsee guys walking around with CADPAT shirts and MC trousers...and RSM's developing a nervous tic before every *parade*.



That would never happen if we didn't keep trying to parade in clothing that was never supposed to be used for parades!  There is NO good reason for any unit to "parade" in operational clothing.  Just as there is no good reason for anyone to wear operational clothing in climate-controlled offices in Canada.  Perhaps if we only used operational clothing for the purposes for which it was designed (field/sea operations) than we wouldn't have the shortages we do with desk officers wearing out our most expensive clothing while sitting at a computer in Ottawa.


----------



## daftandbarmy (10 Apr 2017)

Pusser said:
			
		

> That would never happen if we didn't keep trying to parade in clothing that was never supposed to be used for parades!  There is NO good reason for any unit to "parade" in operational clothing.  Just as there is no good reason for anyone to wear operational clothing in climate-controlled offices in Canada.  Perhaps if we only used operational clothing for the purposes for which it was designed (field/sea operations) than we wouldn't have the shortages we do with desk officers wearing out our most expensive clothing while sitting at a computer in Ottawa.



But then you'd have to use an iron and boot polish all the time


----------



## FSTO (10 Apr 2017)

Pusser said:
			
		

> That would never happen if we didn't keep trying to parade in clothing that was never supposed to be used for parades!  There is NO good reason for any unit to "parade" in operational clothing.  Just as there is no good reason for anyone to wear operational clothing in climate-controlled offices in Canada.  Perhaps if we only used operational clothing for the purposes for which it was designed (field/sea operations) than we wouldn't have the shortages we do with desk officers wearing out our most expensive clothing while sitting at a computer in Ottawa.



It seems to be a losing battle Pusser. Did you see the pictures of the CDS at MARPAC and the honour guard in NCD's and CADPAT?






Why do we have orders and directives when this crap goes on?

I also saw pictures from yesterday of the same outfit in Calgary.


----------



## jollyjacktar (10 Apr 2017)

If its any consolation, Pusser, I wear salt and peppers while I sail my desk.  Even though I don't get the points to support that as it's not my dress of the day.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (10 Apr 2017)

Really? Really? to quote Trump: Sad!!!

Who in god's green earth came up with the idea of a guard in NCD wearing white web belt and bayonet holders ? ? ? ? ?






Give me a break.   :facepalm:   :surrender:


----------



## Eye In The Sky (10 Apr 2017)

FSTO said:
			
		

> It seems to be a losing battle Pusser. Did you see the pictures of the CDS at MARPAC and the honour guard in NCD's and CADPAT?



Quick!! Someone wake up the Lt(N) on the right!!   8)

Who is the ginger/civi dude to the left of the CDS in the picture?


----------



## FSTO (10 Apr 2017)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Really? Really? to quote Trump: Sad!!!
> 
> Who in god's green earth came up with the idea of a guard in NCD wearing white web belt and bayonet holders ? ? ? ?
> 
> Give me a break.   :facepalm:   :surrender:



To be fair, from my spies out west who told me that MARPAC pushed back but the directive came down from CDS to make it so.


----------



## dapaterson (10 Apr 2017)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Who is the ginger/civi dude to the left of the CDS in the picture?



At least he has the decency to look perturbed about what's going on...


----------



## Eye In The Sky (10 Apr 2017)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> At least he has the decency to look perturbed about what's going on...



Maybe he spotted _Sleepy_


----------



## Colin Parkinson (10 Apr 2017)

Here is a all in one camouflage


----------



## Eye In The Sky (10 Apr 2017)

Don't even joke about that, are we will all be raiding the cadet QMs to get it back...


----------



## dimsum (10 Apr 2017)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Really? Really? to quote Trump: Sad!!!
> 
> Who in god's green earth came up with the idea of a guard in NCD wearing white web belt and bayonet holders ? ? ? ? ?



Well, the CDS did the same in Comox a little while ago, as did the Comd RCAF in the fall.  

The folks across the pond do homecoming parades in combats as well:


----------



## FSTO (10 Apr 2017)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Well, the CDS did the same in Comox a little while ago, as did the Comd RCAF in the fall.
> 
> The folks across the pond do homecoming parades in combats as well:


 So its an army and RCAF thing. I think it's wrong and I hate seeing the Navy being sucked down into this slovenly attitude, but if people are making it up as they go along, I guess our next parade we'll do white gaiters for the sailors and black leather gaiters and brown gloves for the officers. 

To quote my parents, "Would you jump off a bridge because everyone else is doing it?"


----------



## dapaterson (10 Apr 2017)

FSTO said:
			
		

> So its an army and RCAF thing. I think it's wrong and I hate seeing the Navy being sucked down into this slovenly attitude, but if people are making it up as they go along, I guess our next parade we'll do white gaiters for the sailors and black leather gaiters and brown gloves for the officers.



Yep.  I figured the RCN would be the first to do nude formal parades.  Although I thought the officers might try to colour co-ordinate their gaiters and gloves, if that's _all_ that they'll be wearing...


----------



## Loachman (10 Apr 2017)

Generally, in Commonwealth and other Armed Forces, today's service dress uniform was yesterday's combat uniform. The predecessor units of the one on parade in the preceding photograph once fought in the same scarlets as the band is wearing, which was subsequently replaced with khaki drab service dress for field use. Tomorrow's field uniform will likely be form-fitting spandex with a powered armored exoskeleton and modular built-in radios, sensors, and weapons, and automatic chameleon camouflage, whereupon today's CADPAT will become the dress uniform.

And the IDF does not even issue a dress uniform to the vast majority of it's personnel.


----------



## FSTO (10 Apr 2017)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Generally, in Commonwealth and other Armed Forces, today's service dress uniform was yesterday's combat uniform. The predecessor units of the one on parade in the preceding photograph once fought in the same scarlets as the band is wearing, which was subsequently replaced with khaki drab service dress for field use. Tomorrow's field uniform will likely be form-fitting spandex with a powered armored exoskeleton and modular built-in radios, sensors, and weapons, and automatic chameleon camouflage, whereupon today's *CADPAT will become the dress uniform*.
> 
> And the IDF does not even issue a dress uniform to the vast majority of it's personnel.



I'm glad I'll be retired before that happens.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (10 Apr 2017)

FSTO said:
			
		

> So its an army and RCAF thing. I think it's wrong and I hate seeing the Navy being sucked down into this slovenly attitude, but if people are making it up as they go along, I guess our next parade we'll do white gaiters for the sailors and black leather gaiters and brown gloves for the officers.
> 
> To quote my parents, "Would you jump off a bridge because everyone else is doing it?"



There was a saying when I was in the army...

"No inspection-ready unit will likely pass combat, and no combat-ready unit will likely pass an inspection".

I've done CofC parades in combat w/FFO.

Come to think of it, what I consider the most important type of parades, they all seem to be in CADPAT...


----------



## FSTO (10 Apr 2017)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> There was a saying when I was in the army...
> 
> "No inspection-ready unit will likely pass combat, and no combat-ready unit will likely pass an inspection".
> 
> I've done CofC parades in combat w/FFO.



Just because these "traditions" are part of the Army does not mean they have to leak over into the RCN. I have no snappy sayings to counteract your Army mantra, I just feel in my bones that the creeping leisure suit Larry look has no place in the Navy when we're ashore.


----------



## MilEME09 (11 Apr 2017)

Pusser said:
			
		

> That would never happen if we didn't keep trying to parade in clothing that was never supposed to be used for parades!  There is NO good reason for any unit to "parade" in operational clothing.  Just as there is no good reason for anyone to wear operational clothing in climate-controlled offices in Canada.  Perhaps if we only used operational clothing for the purposes for which it was designed (field/sea operations) than we wouldn't have the shortages we do with desk officers wearing out our most expensive clothing while sitting at a computer in Ottawa.


So a return of Garrison dress?

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk


----------



## Kat Stevens (11 Apr 2017)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> So a return of Garrison dress?
> 
> Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk



Now that I'll never ever have to wear it again, I say go for it!


----------



## daftandbarmy (11 Apr 2017)

FSTO said:
			
		

> Just because these "traditions" are part of the Army does not mean they have to leak over into the RCN. I have no snappy sayings to counteract your Army mantra, I just feel in my bones that the creeping leisure suit Larry look has no place in the Navy when we're ashore.



I must admit that I think it's stupid (and somewhat disrespectful) to parade the colours in combat/Cadpat gear. Unless you're in a theatre of operations I guess. 

I assume that it's a bad habit we've acquired from Uncle Sam. Good thing we don't have helmet liners anymore or I assume we'd be polishing those too, instead of our boots and the rocks


----------



## Happy Guy (11 Apr 2017)

When I joined the CF, over 34 years ago, all parades were done in CF greens and forage caps.  We never wore combats while on a formal parade.  The default these days to wear operational dress for almost all occasions really bothers me. We now have an entire generation of soldiers (I don't know about the Navy or AF) who probably don't even know how to wear the DEUs properly.  I was at CFSU(O) Clothing Stores several years ago and an Army Cpl didn't know which direction the CD should be while wearing undressed ribbons. The group that she was with didn't know either.  I had to show her and her friends.

At the risk of sounding like a dinosaur, I was an NCO not so long ago, I am deeply disappointed at the slovenly dress standards today.  Members wearing wrinkled CADPAT uniforms with scrunched name tags and flags.  People wear poorly ironed shirts and boots/shoes with no effort to even brush shine them.  No one seems to respect the uniform that they are wearing these days. SrNCOs not doing their jobs to enforce dress discipline and young Officers flaunting the dress regulations gets me upset.  Although I shall be retiring soon, I still make a conscientious effort to ensure that my uniforms are clean, tidy and presentable in the streets.  Yes, I try to look presentable while I wear civilian clothes too but this is more to please my wife than the general public.

Sigh, ... I'm a cranky old soon to be pensioned dinosaur.

Cheers


----------



## Eye In The Sky (11 Apr 2017)

Happy Guy said:
			
		

> SrNCOs not doing their jobs to enforce dress discipline...



Why do people always point to the Sgts and never the Warrant Officers? 

I see 2 different but related problems with the standard of dress seen these days:

1.  Self-discipline; the levels are down (doing the right thing, the right way, at the right time, when no one is watching).  And not just the jnr ranks, either.  I see as many shitpump uniforms on Junior Officers as I do Jnr ranks (Avr - MCpl).

2.  Enforcement of standards;  this is not _just_ a Snr NCO problem (Warrant Officers are not Snr NCOs, the same as OCdt's are not Jnr Officers.  Yes, there's a big deal and yes, people still want to kick others who let things like this go because ""its not important").  Cpl's are Jnr NCOs, the same as MCpl's are.  If I see an Avr out of dress, who am I going to correct?  I am going to find the MCpl on his/her crew and talk to them.  They should then speak to the Cpl on his/her crew, who should pull the Avr aside.  If its bad enough, sure I will correct on the spot but I am still going to find that MCpl.  If I don't MAKE the Cpl do his job and MAKE the MCpl do their job, and let them know, yes I AM watching, what is the motivation for them to do it, all the time?  It used to be a different thing, but I refer you to Point #1 above.

This goes for Officers as well.  If you see people in your unit lines that look like they ironed their 3B, as an example, with a cold potato...well, you have a unit Warrant Officer of some kind to handle that if they are NCMs.  If they are Officers and subordinates, deal with it yourself, go to the unit Adjt or whoever is the *hammer* in the Jnr Officer world.  If they are senior to you, well deal with it the best way you can.  Maybe talk to the MWO, who will talk to the DCO or something and then the message gets sent out to everyone.  Personally, I have no issues at all telling a Jnr Officer they are doing something contrary to CF/RCAF/Wing/Sqn Dress Instructions.  There is a professional way to do it, of course, but it has and likely will happen again and is usually worded as a suggestion.  

If dress and deportment standards are that atrocious at a unit anyone is in, and you are a minimum rank of Jnr NCO (Cpl), then that is a leadership issue that you need to be part of the solution to.  If the MCpls and Lt's are all walking around like bags of shit, then that suggests to me that the Sgts and Capt's aren't doing their jobs as superiors.  

** reference for my "Warrant Officers are not Snr NCOs" comment.  QR & O, Vol 1, Chap 1, Art 1.02 'Definitions'

*"non-commissioned officer" (sous-officier)means a member holding the rank of sergeant or corporal;*

and CAF Rank & Appointment Insignia.  

Dress and deportment aren't the only things that have seen a drop in the standard;  GSK (General Service Knowledge) has as well.  Like referring to anyone in the NCM Corps above the rank of Sgt/P02 as a SNCO.


----------



## jollyjacktar (11 Apr 2017)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Why do people always point to the Sgts and never the Warrant Officers?



Cuz Sgts are the backbone of the organization.


----------



## jollyjacktar (11 Apr 2017)

Happy Guy said:
			
		

> Sigh, ... I'm a cranky old soon to be pensioned dinosaur.



You'll need to change your moniker then, me thinks.


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Apr 2017)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Generally, in Commonwealth and other Armed Forces, today's service dress uniform was yesterday's combat uniform. The predecessor units of the one on parade in the preceding photograph once fought in the same scarlets as the band is wearing, which was subsequently replaced with khaki drab service dress for field use. Tomorrow's field uniform will likely be form-fitting spandex with a powered armored exoskeleton and modular built-in radios, sensors, and weapons, and automatic chameleon camouflage, whereupon today's CADPAT will become the dress uniform.


*mind blown*


----------



## Ostrozac (11 Apr 2017)

Happy Guy said:
			
		

> When I joined the CF, over 34 years ago, all parades were done in CF greens and forage caps.  We never wore combats while on a formal parade.



I joined the CF over 26 years ago, and my sense at that time was that dress for parades seemed to be very much unit dependent. The Canadian Airborne Regiment seemed to rarely wear CFs (or later DEU), while the battalions of The RCR were bringing dress uniforms and colours for parades while deployed on operations in Cyprus.

I've suggested in the past that we should readopt Battle Dress (in appropriate modern synthetic fabrics) to fill the niche that was supposed to be filled by Garrison Dress -- a uniform cheaper and better looking than Combat Uniform but still durable enough for routine garrison work (have you ever crawled under a desk to reattach a disconnected printer cable while in DEU 3B? I have, and you don't resurface looking ready for parade).


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (11 Apr 2017)

Ostrozac said:
			
		

> (have you ever crawled under a desk to reattach a disconnected printer cable while in DEU 3B? I have, and you don't resurface looking ready for parade).



OK. I just *have* to intervene here.

First, are you seriously suggesting that the one time in your life (Ok, maybe two or three out of a 26 years career) that you had to get under your desk to reattach a cable justifies dressing sloppily in CADPAT or acquiring a "garrison" dress of sorts?

Second, even while working at desk jobs in DEU, nobody is suggesting that you should be as spit and polish as if you were about to step on parade. There is the daily standard (and I have said it before - the standard is following good business attire practices from the professionals in your city, and no, I don't count engineers and software coders as professionals  ;D) which is clean, generally pressed and shoes black and clean - not necessarily "spit-shinned", and then there is the parade level for parades and important functions which has all the polish and crisp press in the world.

Finally, and I know this is something else the Navy is anal retentive about ... but have you considered getting your office cleaned properly by the personnel responsible for cleaning it up?  You know, regular cleaning stations of everything, over, under and all nook and crannies followed by an inspection, flashlight in hand, and perhaps a Captain's inspection from time to time! Then you could go under your desk occasionally without coming out covered in dust  [.


----------



## Happy Guy (11 Apr 2017)

I have reattached a cable underneath my desk while in DEU 3B.  I placed a couple of paper towels on the carpet to protect my pants.  When I got up I straighten my pants and shirt and I looked fine.

What you seem to be advocating is a return to a work dress uniform which I used to call the bus driver uniform.  I wore work dress while I posted in Calgary and garrison dress while I was working at LFCHQ St Hubert.  It was functional if you worked in an office environment or warehouse.  The problem with the work dress was that you didn't look military.  I do not want a return to a work dress type uniform because of the high cost, and we (the CAF) are frankly not capable of designing a uniform that is functional, comfortable, stylish and sufficiently military looking.  I believe that the Army made a bad style and comfort choice when we got rid of the CF Greens and accepted the DEUs.  A return to more universally recognized khaki brown uniform with a more modern cut would have been better. 

I'm with OGBD here, what we have now is fine.  Leave it alone.

Back on topic, I'll agree that further analysis is required.  I've seen the British, US Army and USMC versions of the MultiCam and I have no idea which of these cam patterns will suit our requirements.  I think that if we do change the Army operational dress please re-look at the design of the uniform and not just the cam pattern.  Get rid of the velcro as much as you can!  Give me buttons for my pockets any day.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (11 Apr 2017)

But...what would we do with the patches everyone is sporting now?

It might be out officially now;  RCAF pers will be allowed to wear sqn patches, skill/qual badges, etc on their CADPAT now.


----------



## MilEME09 (11 Apr 2017)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> But...what would we do with the patches everyone is sporting now?
> 
> It might be out officially now;  RCAF pers will be allowed to wear sqn patches, skill/qual badges, etc on their CADPAT now.


I have started seeing senior officers wearing Div patches so im not surprised.

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk


----------



## George Wallace (11 Apr 2017)

Happy Guy said:
			
		

> you seem to be advocating is a return to a work dress uniform which I used to call the bus driver uniform.  I wore work dress while I posted in Calgary and garrison dress while I was working at LFCHQ St Hubert.  It was functional if you worked in an office environment or warehouse.  The problem with the work dress was that you didn't look military.  I do not want a return to a work dress type uniform because of the high cost, and we (the CAF) are frankly not capable of designing a uniform that is functional, comfortable, stylish and sufficiently military looking.  I believe that the Army made a bad style and comfort choice when we got rid of the CF Greens and accepted the DEUs.  A return to more universally recognized khaki brown uniform with a more modern cut would have been better.



Well....If having Work Dress pants and boots bloused doesn't look military, I don't know what would.  I guess you will win the argument though, as there seems to be a shortage of boots.   >


----------



## dapaterson (11 Apr 2017)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Well....If having Work Dress pants and boots bloused doesn't look military, I don't know what would.  I guess you will win the argument though, as there seems to be a shortage of boots.   >



Work dress looked like a bus driver or possibly a gas station attendant.  With addition of the ascot, I'm at a loss for words for a description...


----------



## George Wallace (11 Apr 2017)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Work dress looked like a bus driver or possibly a gas station attendant.  With addition of the ascot, I'm at a loss for words for a description...



I was living on a Radar Base in Saskatchewan when Work Dress came out.  Airmen never had Cbt Boots, so ankle boots were the order of the day.  With the initial issue, there was also a ball cap.  In those days, they didn't look much like bus drivers to me, although that is what they later became known as; but more like the local farmers out in the wheat fields.  They fit right in at the local Seed Mills and Grain Elevators.  

Perhaps we should bring back the pants, bloused of course, and Red T-shirts with unit crests on the Left Breast.  Commanders would wear orange T-shirts, Engineers wear yellow, Medical wear green......etc.  With the trend to go "retro" lately, this would take us back to the '60's and fit right in.....and should last us until Star Date 2050.


----------



## Kat Stevens (11 Apr 2017)

I was posted to my first regiment in 1980.  We had a routine on Fridays of parade, maintenance morning, sports afternoon, refreshments at the Jolly Miller.  Only one parade a month was in "greens", the other three were in varying orders of dress, combat and work dress. These were very much formal parades, 0700 weapons draw, fall in in front of the barracks, markers called, march on your markers, the lot. Daily dress was combat with regimental tee shirt underneath.  This was 37 years ago, but then us 1 CBG guys were always non conformists.


----------



## McG (11 Apr 2017)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Work dress looked like a bus driver or possibly a gas station attendant.  With addition of the ascot, I'm at a loss for words for a description...


Google can help you with that:


----------



## jollyjacktar (11 Apr 2017)

If that doesn't just scream "pump jockey", nothing will.


----------



## dapaterson (11 Apr 2017)

I dunno.. the first google image when I type "CF work dress ascot" is below; given the odd headdress I'm thinking it must be some Reserve highland regiment...


----------



## George Wallace (11 Apr 2017)

Hmmmm?  dapaterson's version of "CF work dress ascot" does look like a promising proposal, for non-male members who identify with this gender (Being non-gender specific in this discussion.).     :warstory:


----------



## Blackadder1916 (12 Apr 2017)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> I must admit that *I think it's stupid (and somewhat disrespectful) to parade the colours in combat/Cadpat gear*. Unless you're in a theatre of operations I guess.
> 
> I assume that it's a bad habit we've acquired from Uncle Sam. Good thing we don't have helmet liners anymore or I assume we'd be polishing those too, instead of our boots and the rocks



Agreed.  But if you compare the two above photos, you will notice (if you look closely) that, in the Brit parade, the colour party is in No. 1 dress (i.e. blues) so they make more than an effort to "respect the colours".  The Canadian colour party, on the other hand . . . I suppose we should be grateful that the boots are, at least, blackened.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (13 Apr 2017)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> It might be out officially now;  RCAF pers will be allowed to wear sqn patches, skill/qual badges, etc on their CADPAT now.



Looks like it must be official...https://www.facebook.com/ALCOMANR/posts/1456958294324788


----------



## Flavus101 (13 Apr 2017)

Looks absolutely ridiculous. 

This whole fascination with velcro (whoops, I mean hook and loop) is mind boggling. Buttons are much more quiet and they rarely open up when you brush against something, velcro on the other hand...


----------



## Eye In The Sky (13 Apr 2017)

Flavus101 said:
			
		

> Looks absolutely ridiculous.



Hoping you include all the C Army patches and stuff that are getting thrown on CADPAT too.  Its not just the RCAF...but, I wish we weren't following suit.

I will hold onto my non Velcro sleeve CADPAT for as long as I can.  Maybe even longer!


----------



## daftandbarmy (13 Apr 2017)

Flavus101 said:
			
		

> Looks absolutely ridiculous.
> 
> This whole fascination with velcro (whoops, I mean hook and loop) is mind boggling. Buttons are much more quiet and they rarely open up when you brush against something, velcro on the other hand...



Tsk.. you should know that all it takes is some Special Forces training: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSK3maq8Cyk


----------



## GK .Dundas (13 Apr 2017)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Tsk.. you should know that all it takes is some Special Forces training:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSK3maq8Cyk


 Don't knock it it actually does work. I mean did you hear the Velcro  , I  didn't .


----------



## dimsum (13 Apr 2017)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Looks like it must be official...https://www.facebook.com/ALCOMANR/posts/1456958294324788



So one can have full-colour (no "at least 50% green" or similar restrictions) patches on CADPAT, but not on flight suits.  

Also, CWO Scarcella (on the right) must be making some sort of quiet revolt statement by continuing to wear the old-style faded CADPAT  >


----------



## Eye In The Sky (13 Apr 2017)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> So one can have full-colour (no "at least 50% green" or similar restrictions) patches on CADPAT, but not on flight suits.
> 
> Also, CWO Scarcella (on the right) must be making some sort of quiet revolt statement by continuing to wear the old-style faded CADPAT  >



Isn't the 1 CAD motto *"Fac, ut ego dico, non ut faciam tibi"?

Maybe "they didn't have any of his size"...that's what I get told when I need to exchange my operational dress the last few months.   >

*according to Google translate, that is Latin for "do as I say, not as I do"   ^-^


----------



## Flavus101 (14 Apr 2017)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Hoping you include all the C Army patches and stuff that are getting thrown on CADPAT too.  Its not just the RCAF...but, I wish we weren't following suit.
> 
> I will hold onto my non Velcro sleeve CADPAT for as long as I can.  Maybe even longer!



Absolutely I include those as well.

Same here, I like the old style pants better too...


----------



## Loachman (15 Apr 2017)

FSTO said:
			
		

> So its an army and RCAF thing. I think it's wrong and I hate seeing the Navy being sucked down into this slovenly attitude, but if people are making it up as they go along, I guess our next parade we'll do white gaiters for the sailors and black leather gaiters and brown gloves for the officers.
> 
> To quote my parents, "Would you jump off a bridge because everyone else is doing it?"



They've jumped off of the bridge in North Korea, too - even adding helmets with flipped-up NVGs to massed goose-steppers in Kim Fat-Boy's parade yesterday.


----------



## FSTO (15 Apr 2017)

Loachman said:
			
		

> They've jumped off of the bridge in North Korea, too - even adding helmets with flipped-up NVGs to massed goose-steppers in Kim Fat-Boy's parade yesterday.



So you want to emulate North Korea? Have at er. I guess.


----------



## Loachman (16 Apr 2017)

Where, dear boy, did I profess any emulative desire?

I was merely providing an indicator of a possible global military fashion tsunami.

But it would amuse me greatly to see fighter pilots parade like those* at 3:17 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKgf6_Mn7V4. Ours could add oxygen masks and G-suits as proof of their superiority.

* And no, I've not fallen for the propaganda. None of those guys have ever touched an aeroplane.


----------



## FSTO (16 Apr 2017)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Where, dear boy, did I profess any emulative desire?
> 
> I was merely providing an indicator of a possible global military fashion tsunami.
> 
> ...



Or a ship, or a tank that has seen a dirt road!
Well one thing I have to give the Chinese is that their NCO's will never to have worry about sizing their platoons!


----------



## Eye In The Sky (16 Apr 2017)

I am personally thoroughly impressed...that they could muster up THAT many pairs of white gloves at once!!  I bet they all have keepers too!!


----------



## jollyjacktar (16 Apr 2017)

Say what you will, their drill and precision on parade is a thing of beauty to behold.  I never get tired of watching these videos as I can appreciate the amount of effort, dedication and time it took to be perfect like that.  Besides, the hotties in the pink uniforms and white go-go boots are especially compelling to my eyes.


----------



## Loachman (16 Apr 2017)

Sizing, and assessment for other physical attributes, was most likely done at the point of conscription where these people were streamed into a purely parade function. That level of drill excellence is only achievable if it is a specialty.


----------



## SupersonicMax (16 Apr 2017)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Say what you will, their drill and precision on parade is a thing of beauty to behold.  I never get tired of watching these videos as I can appreciate the amount of effort, dedication and time it took to be perfect like that.  Besides, the hotties in the pink uniforms and white go-go boots are especially compelling to my eyes.



I personnally see perfection (in anything other than very few scenarios) as a waste of time, especially something as cosmetic as drill (don't need to be perfect to understand the whole reacting to orders and all)

Aiming for perfection during training?  Certainly.  Demanding a perfect result?  You'll spend 80% of your time chasing the last 20% of the results.  Waste of time that you could spend broadening your knowledge and skills.


----------



## Rifleman62 (16 Apr 2017)

No rain on their parade. Those who screw up drill in NK are shot. Big incentive.  ;D


----------



## armyvern (16 Apr 2017)

FSTO said:
			
		

> It seems to be a losing battle Pusser. Did you see the pictures of the CDS at MARPAC and the honour guard in NCD's and CADPAT?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm Army.  The only thing good that I see about this pic is my son. It'd be even better if my son was not in cadpat with the flags out.


----------



## jollyjacktar (16 Apr 2017)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> I personnally see perfection (in anything other than very few scenarios) as a waste of time, especially something as cosmetic as drill (don't need to be perfect to understand the whole reacting to orders and all)
> 
> Aiming for perfection during training?  Certainly.  Demanding a perfect result?  You'll spend 80% of your time chasing the last 20% of the results.  Waste of time that you could spend broadening your knowledge and skills.



This is a propaganda pageant, a tool, put on for the world to see and admire.  This has an important purpose to China and I agree with Loachman, this is probably all these people do for the State while they're in uniform.  They have plenty of people and can afford to have just show performers on the payroll.

Could they be doing something better with their lives?  Maybe... but the same could be said for all those professional athletes.  They're at the top of their tier, doing what they do to the best of their ability.  Could they have put those years of training and dedication into something more beneficial to society?  Again, maybe...  doesn't stop all the sports fans from ohhhing and ahhing while watching them to their thing.

Maybe those Chinese kids spend 80% of their time in uniform chasing that 20%.  They seem, to my eyes, to have caught it nevertheless.  Sure, you're right, good enough is usually good enough.  I can still stand back and watch someone do something much better than I could ever hope to achieve and admire their work.  (sure as fuck, they look better than what's on display in the photo of our colour party, et al)


----------



## RedcapCrusader (19 Oct 2017)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> I'm Army.  The only thing good that I see about this pic is my son. It'd be even better if my son was not in cadpat with the flags out.



What's so bad about the photo? Not every occasion where the Colours are flown require dress uniforms. Yes, the Colours are prestigious and shall be treated no different than royalty, however, our predecessors flew the colours and national ensign while covered in dirt, grease, grime, and blood of their brothers.

The whole "buttons and bows" bullshit is just that, bullshit.

I am no more less respectful to my fallen brothers and sisters because of the type of uniform I wore when the colours were flown.


----------



## RedcapCrusader (19 Oct 2017)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> There was a saying when I was in the army...
> 
> "No inspection-ready unit will likely pass combat, and no combat-ready unit will likely pass an inspection".
> 
> ...



Amen.


----------



## Remius (19 Oct 2017)

LunchMeat said:
			
		

> What's so bad about the photo? Not every occasion where the Colours are flown require dress uniforms. Yes, the Colours are prestigious and shall be treated no different than royalty, however, our predecessors flew the colours and national ensign while covered in dirt, grease, grime, and blood of their brothers.
> 
> The whole "buttons and bows" bullshit is just that, bullshit.
> 
> I am no more less respectful to my fallen brothers and sisters because of the type of uniform I wore when the colours were flown.




There is a lot wrong with it.


----------



## MilEME09 (1 Aug 2018)

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/christie-blatchford-defence-chief-wants-to-toss-canadian-made-uniforms-for-u-s-version-at-a-cost-of-500m?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1533159660

Apparently the timeline is short to switch us all to multicam. Personally I like CADPAT over multi any day, I this this as a waste of budget


----------



## Infanteer (1 Aug 2018)

We will have a lot in common with the US Army, the Aussies, and the Brits, along with every other nation's SOF.


----------



## PuckChaser (1 Aug 2018)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> Apparently the timeline is short to switch us all to multicam. Personally I like CADPAT over multi any day, I this this as a waste of budget



How much does it cost us to have 2 different styles of uniform to stock, with a unique to Canada pattern, and 2 different sets of gear (ruck covers, tacvests, hats, gloves, small packs)? Of course any initial issue of uniforms is going to cost a lot of money, you're kitting out almost 90,000 people with 3 uniforms each. I'm sure when CADPAT came out people complained about the cost.


----------



## dapaterson (1 Aug 2018)

If the Army moves to MultiCam, CANSOF will move to CADPAT, just to be different...


----------



## MilEME09 (1 Aug 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> How much does it cost us to have 2 different styles of uniform to stock, with a unique to Canada pattern, and 2 different sets of gear (ruck covers, tacvests, hats, gloves, small packs)? Of course any initial issue of uniforms is going to cost a lot of money, you're kitting out almost 90,000 people with 3 uniforms each. I'm sure when CADPAT came out people complained about the cost.



Yes, im also in the camp that one camo cant fit all situations.


----------



## PuckChaser (1 Aug 2018)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> Yes, im also in the camp that one camo cant fit all situations.



Of course not. But good enough for most situations is the most economical, with unique skillsets (snipers, Recce Pl) perhaps requiring something a little different. Most of the people wearing these uniforms are never going to need the actual camoflauge as they don't make a "Base/KAF Timmies lineup" camo pattern.


----------



## Furniture (1 Aug 2018)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> Yes, im also in the camp that one camo cant fit all situations.


Not 100% no, but CADPAT TW suits one environment for a few months of the year at best. It's too green to work most places we actually go and have to worry about blending into the environment. Multicam is a 90% solution for most of the environments we deal with, which is far better than two cam patterns that suit one or two environments well and the rest poorly. 

True about CANSOFCOM though, I bet they'll go retro with the WWII USMC Frogskin, nothing is cooler than retro right now!


----------



## MilEME09 (1 Aug 2018)

Multicam, boot allowance, whats next? Buying our own chest rigs?


----------



## McG (2 Aug 2018)

Furniture said:
			
		

> Not 100% no, but CADPAT TW suits one environment for a few months of the year at best. It's too green to work most places we actually go and have to worry about blending into the environment. Multicam is a 90% solution for most of the environments we deal with, which is far better than two cam patterns that suit one or two environments well and the rest poorly.


CADPAT TW is superior to Multicam in all forests that I have visited in central and Eastern Europe, regardless of season. Now that we are worried about Russia, maybe it is past the time for buying the optimal uniform for fighting Taliban?



			
				PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Of course not. But good enough for most situations is the most economical, with unique skillsets (snipers, Recce Pl) perhaps requiring something a little different. Most of the people wearing these uniforms are never going to need the actual camoflauge as they don't make a "Base/KAF Timmies lineup" camo pattern.


If that is the mindset, then just put everybody back to the old olive colour. Cheaper, works in more places, and looks good in the boardwalk too.


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Aug 2018)

Furniture said:
			
		

> Not 100% no, but CADPAT TW suits one environment for a few months of the year at best. It's too green to work most places we actually go and have to worry about blending into the environment. Multicam is a 90% solution for most of the environments we deal with, which is far better than two cam patterns that suit one or two environments well and the rest poorly.
> 
> True about CANSOFCOM though, I bet they'll go retro with the WWII USMC Frogskin, nothing is cooler than retro right now!



If we have more than one cam pattern deployed on major operations where some 'real shooting' is going on, you can probably count on a lot of Blue on Blues. 

Just sayin'....


----------



## CBH99 (2 Aug 2018)

Cadpat TW I find works extremely well in the woods during the summer, absolutely.  Perhaps not here in Alberta, where even the woods are brown...legend has it you guys have something called trees, in the northern part of the province?  I'm still skeptical, but I hear they are brown even if these magical things actually do exist?

But in BC and especially Ontario, that gets this other mythical thing I've heard of called rain...looks like it works well!!



Perhaps we could use multi-cam for deployed operations like the Yanks, Brits, Aussies, etc -- and keep the Cadpat here.  We already have the supply system full of Cadpat everything, why change ALL of it?  Expensive, complicated, and just begging for more problems.  

Keep the multi-cam for deployed operations, if the CDS is stating that his observation was the Arid Cadpat is worn out & needs replacing - replace the Arid stuff with multi-cam.  Easy.  Simple.  Less complicated.


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Aug 2018)

I think we'll be fighting Taliban types over Russian forces in Europe for a while yet.


----------



## brihard (2 Aug 2018)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> If we have more than one cam pattern deployed on major operations where some 'real shooting' is going on, you can probably count on a lot of Blue on Blues.
> 
> Just sayin'....



In Kandahar there was CADPAT AR, Multicam, ACU, DPM, and various other patterns being used by various coalition partners / local forces on integrated operations. It didn’t seem to be a cause of blue on blue. I think your concern on this might be a bit overly inflated.


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Aug 2018)

Brihard said:
			
		

> In Kandahar there was CADPAT AR, Multicam, ACU, DPM, and various other patterns being used by various coalition partners / local forces on integrated operations. It didn’t seem to be a cause of blue on blue. I think your concern on this might be a bit overly inflated.



I've seen it _almost_ happen a couple of times, usually in ambush situations and hot pursuits.

That's OK though, we'll all have 'battlefield beacons' to make sure that we don't pop the wrong people, right? 

"One piece of equipment that would almost certainly have saved Pritchard's life was the 'battlefield beacon', worn by soldiers to allow commanders to see the whereabouts of all their troops during a firefight. Almost all major armies have this technology – but not the British infantry." https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/14/british-soldier-blue-on-blue-killing


----------



## Old Sweat (2 Aug 2018)

I can think of one example where commonality of pattern probably would have payed off. It involved two master bombardiers from 2 RCHA who were in a FOO party with the OMLT. They were sent out as a sub-OP with an American ETT and an Afghan National Army unit. Shortly after the organization went firm on their objective the Americans told them intelligence had intercepted a Taliban transmission that went words to the effect that"there are two Canadian with them. I don't know what they are doing, but better kill them." They refused an offer to be evacuated. Long story short, the Taliban did their best. One of our guys survived a rifle bullet glancing off his helmet. Eventually both were wounded and evacuated; one as result of a combination of concussion from the bullet strike on his helmet and heat stroke, while the other lasted three days including one spell of 15 hours directing air and aviation continually. Both survived to receive MMVs, and the last I saw both were sergeants.


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Aug 2018)

Christie Blatchford: Defence chief wants to toss Canadian-made uniforms for U.S. version — at a cost of $500M

The Canadian military is looking for a new camouflage uniform for its 95,000 regular and reserve force members — potentially at a cost of as much as $500 million — and the boss favours one originally developed for the U.S. army.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/christie-blatchford-defence-chief-wants-to-toss-canadian-made-uniforms-for-u-s-version-at-a-cost-of-500m


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (3 Aug 2018)

Why don't we just spend the money and have more CADPAT made?


----------



## Nfld Sapper (3 Aug 2018)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Why don't we just spend the money and have more CADPAT made?



My god man you are applying logic to the situation .....   ;D


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (3 Aug 2018)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> My god man you are applying logic to the situation .....   ;D



Sure multicam would give us one uniform but it creates a new set of problems i.e. every other piece of kit we own is CADPAT.  

Better money could be spent buying new fighting rigs for soldiers or you know, winter kit like mukluks.

Our individual kit issue is presently a clusterbomb.


----------



## FSTO (3 Aug 2018)

LunchMeat said:
			
		

> What's so bad about the photo? Not every occasion where the Colours are flown require dress uniforms. Yes, the Colours are prestigious and shall be treated no different than royalty, however, our predecessors flew the colours and national ensign while covered in dirt, grease, grime, and blood of their brothers.
> 
> The whole "buttons and bows" bullshit is just that, bullshit.


That’s a flag party in the photo not a colour party. You should know the difference.


----------



## Journeyman (3 Aug 2018)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Our individual kit issue procurement, writ large, is presently a clusterbomb.


Or at least, that's how it seems;  success stories appear to be scarce.  :dunno:


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Aug 2018)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Why don't we just spend the money and have more CADPAT made?



Or better yet, _Heritage CADPAT_. I miss the chest pockets that are designed to hold 7.62mm mags


----------



## Altair (3 Aug 2018)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Why don't we just spend the money and have more CADPAT made?


One does not make it to CDS by coming up with simple solutions like that.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (3 Aug 2018)

It just struck me that the various articles on the topic claim that the CDS mentioned getting Multicam uniforms for the "68,000 regular and 27,000 reserve members of the CAF.

Is he thinking of putting the whole Navy in Multicam?

I mean, it's not as if in the Navy we are issued with the Army's combat uniform at the beginning of our careers and then keep it for the duration. We only draw them on short loans when needed and return them after.


----------



## Furniture (3 Aug 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> It just struck me that the various articles on the topic claim that the CDS mentioned getting Multicam uniforms for the "68,000 regular and 27,000 reserve members of the CAF.
> 
> Is he thinking of putting the whole Navy in Multicam?
> 
> I mean, it's not as if in the Navy we are issued with the Army's combat uniform at the beginning of our careers and then keep it for the duration. We only draw them on short loans when needed and return them after.



You don't let minor details get in the way when spinning people up about government spending. "The CDS wants to wast $500 Millions of dollars on fashion!" Looks better in the headlines than, "The CDS is looking to phase in a new camoflage pattern uniform as we replace worn out uniforms that have been cycled through many deployments over the years"


----------



## PuckChaser (3 Aug 2018)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Better money could be spent buying new fighting rigs for soldiers or you know, winter kit like mukluks.



That project has been 0 funded for years, wasn't even listed in the defense "review".

How much does it cost to hold 2 identical stocks of camo uniforms, complete with the 300 or so other items (rain gear, rucks, vests, gloves)? The initial cost is high, as with any major uniform purchase. The switch to multicam (or a similar "good enough" pattern for all environments) saves us money in the long term by reducing duplicates when we do buy those fighting rigs.


----------



## FSTO (3 Aug 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> It just struck me that the various articles on the topic claim that the CDS mentioned getting Multicam uniforms for the "68,000 regular and 27,000 reserve members of the CAF.
> 
> *Is he thinking of putting the whole Navy in Multicam?
> 
> *I mean, it's not as if in the Navy we are issued with the Army's combat uniform at the beginning of our careers and then keep it for the duration. We only draw them on short loans when needed and return them after.



This.
I was having lunch with a fellow Naval Officer who is on his way to Staff College this summer and we got into the subject of the CAF and Joint. In his time at CJOC he continually got the feeling from his Army brethren that the Navy and Air Force folks weren't really jumping for joy when the Army started talking "Joint". Well its crap like this from the CDS that fosters those feelings or when an Army Officer tells an MPA pilot that he should become more joint in his thinking. Excuse me but Maritime Air and the Navy were operating in the joint environment long before that Army officer was a dirty thought in the back of his father's mind!


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (3 Aug 2018)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Or better yet, _Heritage CADPAT_. I miss the chest pockets that are designed to hold 7.62mm mags



Yah!  Then I can carry my M1A1 in Mali and be a designated marksman!


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Aug 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> It just struck me that the various articles on the topic claim that the CDS mentioned getting Multicam uniforms for the "68,000 regular and 27,000 reserve members of the CAF.
> 
> Is he thinking of putting the whole Navy in Multicam?
> 
> I mean, it's not as if in the Navy we are issued with the Army's combat uniform at the beginning of our careers and then keep it for the duration. We only draw them on short loans when needed and return them after.



Ever since we left the safe harbour of 'Combat Green' it's been a fashion roller coaster, so it's about time the Navy and Air Force joined us in the kaleidoscope merry go round. I mean years of wearing various shades of blue is sooooooo not 'leading change' enough.


----------



## dimsum (3 Aug 2018)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Ever since we left the safe harbour of 'Combat Green' it's been a fashion roller coaster, so it's about time the Navy and Air Force joined us in the kaleidoscope merry go round. I mean years of wearing various shades of blue is sooooooo not 'leading change' enough.



I don't know about you, but I've seen my fair share of "new" flight suits that have faded into tan in some parts and stayed green in others.  It's almost like Multicam, except green only in armpits and crotch  :-X


----------



## brihard (3 Aug 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> except green only in... crotch  :-X



Green (adjective)

...4 (of a person) inexperienced or naive.
‘a green recruit fresh from college’


----------



## SeaKingTacco (3 Aug 2018)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> Yah!  Then I can carry my M1A1 in Mali and be a designated marksman!



Whoa, whoa, Sport. The only thing that you will be carrying over the next little while, is your bowl of 10:00 am soup.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (3 Aug 2018)

Yes, well! I have to admit that the fly-boys (and girls) I have seen on ship all seem to wear tan only uniforms. It was something else of theirs that turned green ... some times.  ;D


----------



## PuckChaser (3 Aug 2018)

FSTO said:
			
		

> This.
> I was having lunch with a fellow Naval Officer who is on his way to Staff College this summer and we got into the subject of the CAF and Joint. In his time at CJOC he continually got the feeling from his Army brethren that the Navy and Air Force folks weren't really jumping for joy when the Army started talking "Joint". Well its crap like this from the CDS that fosters those feelings or when an Army Officer tells an MPA pilot that he should become more joint in his thinking. Excuse me but Maritime Air and the Navy were operating in the joint environment long before that Army officer was a dirty thought in the back of his father's mind!



That chip on your shoulder is pretty huge. You're forgetting the Army and Navy were doing joint operations hundreds of years before people figured out flying machines. You're also forgetting the fact that the Army relied on the expertise of individuals like PO2 Craig Blake to conduct its operations in Afghanistan.

Don't worry, the CDS won't take away your precious 16 pieces of flair NCDs. There are plenty of RCN members who are posted to Army units that would actually need a field uniform, and are happy to trade their NCDs for it.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (3 Aug 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> I don't know about you, but I've seen my fair share of "new" flight suits that have faded into tan in some parts and stayed green in others.  It's almost like Multicam, except green only in armpits and crotch  :-X



it's even closer to Multicam when you wear your 4 year old faded flying shirt with your brand spanking green-as-trees-in-June new pants!


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (3 Aug 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Don't worry, the CDS won't take away your precious 16 pieces of flair NCDs. There are plenty of RCN members who are posted to Army units that would actually need a field uniform, and are happy to trade their NCDs for it.



Actually, Puckchaser, the bit in yellow is impossible - and lack of understanding by some is part of the problem with the CAF bad trip about "jointness".

Wearing the naval environmental uniform does not make one RCN anymore than wearing green makes you Army. We have single unified service - this has not changed since re-introduction of distinct uniforms. Someone in a naval uniform posted to an Army unit is under the Land Force Command - now called the Canadian Army - regardless, just as someone in light blue posted to a naval unit is now under Maritime Command (now called RCN), even though the uniform they wear is not from that "element".

Which leads to the real question, which is what the Hell does "joint" mean in the CAF? What is it's purpose?

And on that score, I have to say that the concept seems to have appeared at the time (or shortly after) the creation of the original dot-coms structure. Also, to those of us in the RCN or RCAF (the actual commands as defined in the unified structure) it does seem that the concept of joint originated from the Army (Land Force Command) and appears strikingly limited to asking "what can the other commands do to alleviate my manpower shortage" that occurred to them with the Afghanistan war. This regardless of the other commands own personnel shortages. I think the "Army" got the bug from listening to other nations' command teams that did not have a single unified service. In those countries, deciding how to create inter-services command relationships is needed. Not for us.

Funny enough, we never seems to need it before then. During the Gulf War (I), when the Navy needed air cover for its Task Group, the Air Force had no problem providing it under the overall command of the Commodore. When those air assets had to be protected on land, the Army provided the troops - again without any problems being under the overall command of the "Navy". We didn't need to talk "jointness" to do it because we were a single service. Same thing for the Oka crisis. My patrol boat (PBL CAPTOR) and her crew easily slipped right under the command of the general in charge of the whole ops. I don't recall a situation where a unit I served in couldn't get the appropriate air support when need be. 

That is why I prefer to talk of a concept of combined operations rather than Jointness in the case of the CAF. And really, what it means is that we should look into more details into making sure that whatever we acquire as materiel makes it possible to work together. Going back to the Oka crisis example: We did not have radio communication capability on the patrol boat to communicate directly with the land forces we supported. So we had to jury-rig something to bridge the comms gap. Too many such examples exist.

Here's a more recent example of what could be done in that direction that would be more useful: We just learned - not long ago - that the new Army air defence radar deployed in the Baltic states are not "NATO" compatible. But the real question is, are they compatible with CCS330? In other words, when the "Army" defined it's requirements, did they consider the possibility that the missiles to shoot down whatever they wish to shoot could come from a "battery" onboard a Canadian frigate? That perhaps, what they wish to shoot down could be taken down by an ESSM launched from our ships in support of the "Army" radar?

To me, those type of technical questions are where "jointness" should go in Canada, because the issues such as integrated supply, management, administration,finance, support in general and even the command relationship in the field are already unified.


----------



## PuckChaser (3 Aug 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Here's a more recent example of what could be done in that direction that would be more useful: We just learned - not long ago - that the new Army air defence radar deployed in the Baltic states are not "NATO" compatible. But the real question is, are they compatible with CCS330? In other words, when the "Army" defined it's requirements, did they consider the possibility that the missiles to shoot down whatever they wish to shoot could come from a "battery" onboard a Canadian frigate? That perhaps, what they wish to shoot down could be taken down by an ESSM launched from our ships in support of the "Army" radar?
> 
> To me, those type of technical questions are where "jointness" should go in Canada, because the issues such as integrated supply, management, administration,finance, support in general and even the command relationship in the field are already unified.



That's a great example. Considering we upgraded our rifles without buying a sling that fits, doesn't surprise me that whoever was buying the Army radar didn't speak with the CSC project folks to find out what protocol everyone was going to use. There's also probably a distinct lack of truly joint doctrine driving any equipment purchases, so everything is bought in isolation. We also have CC130Js that cannot support a parachutist who weighs over 350 lbs, when a civilian CASA can throw a guy out the back weighing as much as the chute will allow.

We preach "joint", but realistically we never push the limits to train completely in that environment, and our procurement/doctrine review system isn't agile enough to fix those changes.


----------



## Infanteer (3 Aug 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Wearing the naval environmental uniform does not make one RCN anymore than wearing green makes you Army. We have single unified service - this has not changed since re-introduction of distinct uniforms. Someone in a naval uniform posted to an Army unit is under the Land Force Command - now called the Canadian Army - regardless, just as someone in light blue posted to a naval unit is now under Maritime Command (now called RCN), even though the uniform they wear is not from that "element".



[pedantic]Well, one could say that if you belong to an occupation in which the occupation authority is the Commander RCN, then you are in the Navy, regardless of where you are posted.[/pedantic]



> Which leads to the real question, which is what the Hell does "joint" mean in the CAF? What is it's purpose?...I think the "Army" got the bug from listening to other nations' command teams that did not have a single unified service. In those countries, deciding how to create inter-services command relationships is needed. Not for us.



To me, "joint" is making sure that an Army radio can talk to a Navy radio (or any other technology), and that Army and Navy people understand each other when they talk on the radio (or any other TTP).  You can have a single service, but if elements don't work together, then you've got capability issues.

The US loves and needs joint because it has the most incredible and all-consuming inter-service rivalries, due in part to the huge resource piles at stake.  Their Navy has an Army that has its own Air Force, and joint is the word as they need to ensure that two of the exact same platforms flown by different services have some degree of compatibility.

For the rest of us, "joint" is more of a buzzword than anything, as service cooperation is relatively sparse.  When the RCAF is the only service to fly fighter aircraft, you don't need to figure out joint doctrine for fighter employment (like the US, which has three services under two separate departments that fly fighter aircraft)!



> That is why I prefer to talk of a concept of combined operations rather than Jointness in the case of the CAF.



Combined operations refers to working with other countries.  "Joint" is about making sure our soldiers, sailors, and aviators can talk (or do stuff together), while "combined" is about making sure our soldiers and sailors can talk (or do stuff together) with [insert country X]'s soldiers, sailors, and aviators.


----------



## brihard (3 Aug 2018)

I was under the impression that the remaining ‘joint’ conundrums are due to be remedied by WEEDFORGEN in a few months?  ???


----------



## FSTO (3 Aug 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> That chip on your shoulder is pretty huge. You're forgetting the Army and Navy were doing joint operations hundreds of years before people figured out flying machines. You're also forgetting the fact that the Army relied on the expertise of individuals like PO2 Craig Blake to conduct its operations in Afghanistan.
> 
> Don't worry, the CDS won't take away your precious 16 pieces of flair NCDs. There are plenty of RCN members who are posted to Army units that would actually need a field uniform, and are happy to trade their NCDs for it.



I don't give a rats ass about the NCD's. Name and rank is all they need because you should only wear it at sea.

That being said, OGBD has probably given the best explanation of the actual make up of the CAF I've ever heard.


----------



## Furniture (3 Aug 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Here's a more recent example of what could be done in that direction that would be more useful: We just learned - not long ago - that the new Army air defence radar deployed in the Baltic states are not "NATO" compatible. But the real question is, are they compatible with CCS330? In other words, when the "Army" defined it's requirements, did they consider the possibility that the missiles to shoot down whatever they wish to shoot could come from a "battery" onboard a Canadian frigate? That perhaps, what they wish to shoot down could be taken down by an ESSM launched from our ships in support of the "Army" radar?
> 
> To me, those type of technical questions are where "jointness" should go in Canada, because the issues such as integrated supply, management, administration,finance, support in general and even the command relationship in the field are already unified.



Did the RCN consult the rest of the CAF before choosing CMS330? Did the navy talk with the army about AD and determine that the ESSM was compatible with army systems, and the best tool for the job? Pretty weak example to make the argument that army bad, navy good. 

Back to the actual topic, can anyone come up with a reason that a phased replacement of CADPAT TW/AR with a single pattern is a bad idea beyond the usual we need money for other things, Or CADPAT is Canadian so therefore best? 

On a side note I find the objection to improving/changing operational uniforms funny on a site that spent a few years lashing out at DEU changes because operational kit was being ignored...


----------



## dimsum (3 Aug 2018)

Furniture said:
			
		

> Back to the actual topic, can anyone come up with a reason that a phased replacement of CADPAT TW/AR with a single pattern is a bad idea beyond the usual we need money for other things, Or CADPAT is Canadian so therefore best?
> 
> On a side note I find the objection to improving/changing operational uniforms funny on a site that spent a few years lashing out at DEU changes because operational kit was being ignored...



Agree.  I'm a little confused why CADPAT TW is even going to be issued to recruits - why not just issue Multicam when it's phased in?  Is it because they need to get rid of CADPAT by attrition?


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Aug 2018)

Furniture said:
			
		

> Back to the actual topic, can anyone come up with a reason that a phased replacement of CADPAT TW/AR with a single pattern is a bad idea beyond the usual we need money for other things, Or CADPAT is Canadian so therefore best?



FWIW, after about 3 days on field ops it's hard to tell what colour anyone's uniform is as a result of all the mud, sweat and dust (and the uniform/ LB equipment profile is more important than colours in avoiding blue on blue) so the actual cam pattern is probably only relevant to the REMFs anyways


----------



## brihard (4 Aug 2018)

Single pattern? No thanks.

We could just as easily find ourselves operating in a desert as we could a jungle / woodlands. Would AR have been suitable in Bosnia? TW in Kandahar or Mali? I would contend that we are likely to operate in disparate enough climates that we should have a couple of different palates available. There are even 'Arid' and 'Tropic' variants of Multicam now.

It defies credulity to think a single camouflage pattern can genuinely suit the majority of environments we're likely to work given the variety of terrain we have found ourselves in, not hypothetically.

Multicam looks cool, and we all like to look cool. But my issued camouflage speaks to my survivability, so I want that decision to be research based.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (4 Aug 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Actually, Puckchaser, the bit in yellow is impossible - and lack of understanding by some is part of the problem with the CAF bad trip about "jointness".
> 
> Wearing the naval environmental uniform does not make one RCN anymore than wearing green makes you Army. We have single unified service - this has not changed since re-introduction of distinct uniforms. Someone in a naval uniform posted to an Army unit is under the Land Force Command - now called the Canadian Army - regardless, just as someone in light blue posted to a naval unit is now under Maritime Command (now called RCN), even though the uniform they wear is not from that "element".




Well explained, and a good example of uniform colour not determining whether one is actually army, navy or air force would be the decision in this grievance.

https://www.canada.ca/en/military-grievances-external-review/services/case-summaries/case-2012-101.html


> Case Summary
> 
> F&R Date: 2012–10–10
> 
> ...


----------



## Eye In The Sky (4 Aug 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Agree.  I'm a little confused why CADPAT TW is even going to be issued to recruits - why not just issue Multicam when it's phased in?  Is it because they need to get rid of CADPAT by attrition?



That's what I'd bet on.  Same as Cadets getting the old combats that were left in warehouses when we went to CADPAT back in the early 2000s.

They mention $500 for the multicam.  I wonder how much the equivalent #s of CADPAT would cost.  Maybe this has the potential to save money?


----------



## rmc_wannabe (4 Aug 2018)

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> They mention $500 for the multicam.  I wonder how much the equivalent #s of CADPAT would cost.  Maybe this has the potential to save money?



Since Crye owns the patent for Multicam maybe this is a unique way to sole source from a cheaper manufacturer, rather than wait for the usual cataclysmic and more expensive fuck up that is a "Made in Quebe-.....Er......Canada" "solution."


----------



## PuckChaser (4 Aug 2018)

Its Winnipeg this time,  Peerless Garments wins every contract for clothing.


----------



## RDBZ (4 Aug 2018)

Brihard said:
			
		

> Single pattern? No thanks.
> 
> We could just as easily find ourselves operating in a desert as we could a jungle / woodlands. Would AR have been suitable in Bosnia? TW in Kandahar or Mali? I would contend that we are likely to operate in disparate enough climates that we should have a couple of different palates available.* There are even 'Arid' and 'Tropic' variants of Multicam now*.
> 
> ...



Add to those the Australian Defence Force's multicam variant which utilizes a colour palette based the old AUSCAM.


----------



## dimsum (4 Aug 2018)

RDBZ said:
			
		

> Add to those the Australian Defence Force's multicam variant which utilizes a colour palette based the old AUSCAM.



Damn.  I was starting to get used to "bunnies and love hearts" by the end of my tour


----------



## RDBZ (5 Aug 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Damn.  I was starting to get used to "bunnies and love hearts" by the end of my tour



Auscam was an OK evolution of the USMC P42 pattern.


----------



## Furniture (5 Aug 2018)

Brihard said:
			
		

> Single pattern? No thanks.
> 
> We could just as easily find ourselves operating in a desert as we could a jungle / woodlands. Would AR have been suitable in Bosnia? TW in Kandahar or Mali? I would contend that we are likely to operate in disparate enough climates that we should have a couple of different palates available. There are even 'Arid' and 'Tropic' variants of Multicam now.
> 
> ...



You're correct that a pattern tailored to the terrain we operate in is obviously going to be better than a transitional pattern designed to be "good enough" most places. The problem with multiple patterns is we never seem to have enough of the right ones at the right times, and we are never going to have a big enough budget to issue all of our people with multiple patterns. If we have an 80% solution for most places we are likely to go we are farther ahead than using TW in Kabul/Kandahar, or AR in open grasslands/forrests. Further to that, if our AOR is big enough we may need something passable in the dessert, but also something that works in green spaces, or irrigated areas adjacent to desserts.

Also... we have seen what "research based" has lead to in boots, rucks, etc... do we really need more research when others have done it for us? If Multicam/transitional patterns are such a bad idea why have most other anglosphere nations switched to MC, or something very similar?


----------



## daftandbarmy (5 Aug 2018)

Furniture said:
			
		

> If Multicam/transitional patterns are such a bad idea why have most other anglosphere nations switched to MC, or something very similar?



Because we have the luxury of focusing on 'combat fashion minutae' while other countries are more concerned about sustaining capabilities that will help ensure national survival?

It's a Maslow thing....


----------



## OceanBonfire (10 Aug 2018)

> *Fit, Function, Fight: Our Uniform, Our Future*
> 
> 
> There has been a fair amount of media speculation over the past week regarding the future of the Canadian Armed Forces’ combat uniforms. This issue matters to every member of the profession of arms, because our uniforms are more than our working clothing, or a symbol of our service. They are a combat system. And like any combat system, they are carefully designed to meet our operational needs.
> ...



https://ml-fd.caf-fac.ca/en/2018/08/17529


----------



## AlDazz (15 May 2019)

Well trained units perform all of their duties to a high standard so your saying is of little value.  Our soldiers carry out their duties in operational theaters or on parade square with the precision that's required.  What uniform their in is simply a matter of geography. 

As fare as milticam goes there is quite a difference between a west coast jungle and a middle eastern desert.  Is one uniform really the answer?  It is for the bean counters but I'm not sure our soldiers would agree.


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 May 2019)

[quote author=AlDazz] What uniform their in is simply a matter of geography. 
[/quote]
Our military is a business driven by politics.


----------

