# Marine‘s new clothes



## Recce41 (16 Jan 2002)

The Marines have started to receive their new MarPat. It is like the CamPat. But due to ours is patented, it differs alil. You can see it at
www.tecom.usmc.mil/mcub/utility/

 Sgt J.    CD,CDS com  :tank:


----------



## Michael Dorosh (17 Jan 2002)

From STARS AND STRIPES:

Marines‘ followed Canadians‘ example
in use of digitally-designed ‘cammies‘ 
By Sandra Jontz
Washington bureau

WASHINGTON — They might be the few and the proud, but the U.S. Marine Corps isn’t alone in its trailblazing effort to make a distinctively flashy fashion statement.

The Canadian army was there first.

The Marine Corps just started field-testing the computer-generated, digitally dappled "cammies," or camouflage uniforms, while the Canadian forces began field-testing them in 1995.

In fact, the Canadian army has been researching the feasibility of digitally designed uniforms and collecting data since 1988, said Canadian Lt. Col. Jacques Levesque, project manager for the Clothe solider program.

"We’re at the leading edge of this," he said.

Both the Corps’ pixilated uniform and the "new Canadian disruptive pattern," or CADPAT, are designed to blend better with surroundings, while standing out among other services’ uniforms.

"This is working out very well," Levesque said. "In the past, the armies of the world have always been about fashion statements, among other things."

Canadian research proves the pixilated uniforms hide soldiers better, he said. For example, between two soldiers standing side-by-side, one clad in the digitally designed uniform and the other in the traditional battle dress uniform, there is a 40 percent less chance of being detected from 200 meters away in the improved version, he said.

And there’s an entire science behind the production of the uniforms. Different fabrics absorb dyes differently, and the Canadian army has spent five years working with companies to perfect the mix to render the best pattern.

"It’s like cooking a soup," Levesque said. "You add a little of this and a little more of that and cook it for different lengths of time."

The Canadian government holds the copyright to the digital pattern and the Danish company DADCON owns the algorithms and digital analysis that make up the patterns.

Canadian officials shared some of its information and manufacturers with the Marine Corps, but the Canadian design cannot be duplicated because of copyright laws.

The Marine Corps solicited bids from vendors and received more than 100 submissions, Marine spokesman Capt. Pete Mitchell said.

Army Research Labs in Natick, Mass., created the design prototype and American Power Source of Massachusetts was awarded the contract to manufacture 340 uniforms the Corps is using in field tests, said Carlos Patricio, production manager for American Power Source in Fall River.

The company experienced "a certain level of difficulty" in producing the uniforms because of the complexity of the design, but managed it, he said. 

American Power Source anticipates being one of several companies to bid for future business, he added.

He could not elaborate on the company’s role because of a confidentiality agreement signed with the Marine Corps, he said.

Corps Commandant Gen. James Jones wanted his service to find new uniforms that would stand out when compared with those worn by the Army, Navy or Air Force. Yet, the uniforms also had to fulfill its original intent of camouflaging a Marine in combat.

The techno guise serves both purposes, Mitchell said. 

The U.S. and Canadian uniforms are similar, but nowhere near the same, Mitchell said.

"[The vendor] presented us something unique and interesting and what they presented to us was modified and matriculated over time to what it has become," Mitchell said. "We are enlarging the pattern and instituting a unique color scheme. The end result is something unique to the Marines."

By mid- to late summer, the Corps plans to issue the new uniforms, costing $45 to $50 apiece, to recruits and Marines entering Officer Candidate School. Right now, Marines in Okinawa, Japan, and Camp Pendleton, Calif., are field-testing the woodland green uniforms, and those at Twenty-Nine Palms, Calif., have the brown desert ones.

Marines at the scout sniper school along with camouflage laboratory technicians, others with camouflage expertise and roughly 36,000 people who responded to an online survey helped develop the pixilated pattern, Mitchell said.


----------



## cagomez (25 Jan 2002)

Well chalk one up for us ! I‘m not sure if I remember this correctly but I also remember hearing on the radio that nations are also impressed by the communications integration systems of our navy. If someone could verify this then chalk up another point. I understood the whole scientific approach of the digi cam but in terms of the actual fabric, is it similar to gortex (breathable or enhanced in any other way) or is it just our old combats with a paint job. One rumor that I heard though is that the CADPAT pattern fades easy. Regardless, can‘t wait till I get my set.    :cam:


----------



## rceme_rat (25 Jan 2002)

The fading question always bothered me - were the old cbts designed to be their optimum shade when new, or after used for years?  I guess the same applies here.

Hopefully, or with a little luck, the fading of the pixelated pattern will have been acounted for so that good cam is provided throughout the life of the cbts.

A question on uniforms since I haven‘t been keeping in touch on this issue -- I‘ve heard garrison dress is gone for good.  Does this leave only dress and cbt, and if so, who is wearing what as daily uniform?  I.e. - NDHQ is probably in dress uniform, units are probably (hopefully) in cbt -- what about the various formation headquarters, etc.

Thanks.


----------



## Jungle (25 Jan 2002)

Rat,
You are correct, the garrison dress is gone forever, so is the tan CF. Now, the Army "dress of the day" is combats in all units, unless stated otherwise. As far as I know, all Army pers wear combats as work dress.


----------



## Recce41 (25 Jan 2002)

Yes all field units wear cbts. The new cbts are crap, though they make you dizzy when doing drill in it. Also it does not wash well.
 Sgt J.  CD,CDS com


----------



## Gunner (25 Jan 2002)

> The new cbts are crap, though they make you dizzy when doing drill in it.


The last thing we want is combats that make you dizzy when you do drill...LOL!  Everyone I‘ve spoken to likes them alot.  There was alot of soldier (particularly infantry) feedback in their design.


----------



## Jungle (25 Jan 2002)

This is the first negative comment i hear about the CADPAT combats, except a few people who think we look like relish jars... but combats are not supposed to look "cute"; they should be effective at concealment, and the CADPAT certainly is the best in that regard. Even the new USMC pattern is nowhere near as effective as ours. Now, I am sure the uniforms are not perfect... but what is ? recce41, I respect your opinion, but I don‘t believe the uniforms are "crap".


----------



## Recce41 (25 Jan 2002)

Its not a negative comment. The colour is not as colour fast as it should be. Most like them because they look cool oooooooooo. It is a good pat but they have more MLBU friendly. As for the dizzy part it was just a side note. My brotherin law has said about the colour, I‘ve only have worn them a few times so they have not had the number of washs. but the ones I have now are better the an the first batch. 
 Sgt J.   CD,CDS com


----------



## rceme_rat (25 Jan 2002)

This is generally good news.  I was not a fan of the tan uniforms -- got dirty too easily and never looked as sharp as the greens in the first place.  Add the extra expense of stocking so many different line items and it just didn‘t make sense.

As far as garrison dress went, I thought the expense didn‘t justify the perceived savings on combats -- and I never understood why soldiers couldn‘t be allowed to look like soldiers.  Far as I‘m concerned, combats should be de rigeur for everybody.  Even NDHQ.  With CADPAT, the guys will even look clean and tidy so the civvies won‘t have to be afraid.

(As an aside, the garrison dress was truly a half measure.  The pants that were selected never made it to issue, and the jacket was a low-quality version.  The prototype I saw was sharp, functional, and something you would have been proud to wear.    Probably too expensive, and someone expressed a concern that the pants were "too cool" - they were afraid their son would take them for school leaving them without a uniform in the morning!)

Nice to see some reasonableness coming back on some issues.


----------



## JRMACDONALD (26 Jan 2002)

Recce 41-1."The new cbts are crap"-  explain please!
2."they make you dizzy when doing drill in it"- the guy doing drill or the the guy giving drill!( always thought armoured guys were dizzy doing drill!)  3. Why , exactly , do ARMOURED RECCE need a cam pat ? ( when do you ever Un ***  a 12 -40 ton  tgt!!!??)


----------



## Recce41 (26 Jan 2002)

Well lil boy , Armour does do drill. 2. Recce does dismount if you a lil Res plug understood that Armour Recce does not use tanks. As for the campat, it does not wash well it fades and looks worse than the old. So before you say stuff think first. Just because most Res donot spend alot of time in the field, does not have to moke them look stupid. I do this 24/7, what you do it Tues and maybe a weekend or two and summer for a week or two.

 Sgt J.   CD,CDS com  (Airborne, Bold and Swift)


----------



## JRMACDONALD (26 Jan 2002)

Recce 41- was just asking a question, for detail.  PS-don‘t be digging a hole you can‘t get out of. this lil Res plug has more time in the Reg F than you do. ( WO, The RCR, retired Jul 2000) spent over 9 yrs in 4CMBG, so i ve done more mech tactic than you‘ll, probably, read about.( only 3yrs in AAP, ADV TOW GNR) (oops, i forgot, 3yrs with 3CDO)      email me , so we can slag each other over a beer!


----------



## Recce41 (26 Jan 2002)

Sorry if you took it wrong but there are res, that get on here with s*** for knowledge and slam everyone because for them its cool. Sent E-mail
 Sgt  J. CD,CDS com Airborne, Bold and Swift  :tank:


----------



## Gunner (26 Jan 2002)

> there are res, that get on here with s*** for knowledge


Recce 41, that doesn‘t give you the right to jump all over them.  As a Sergeant, I would hope that you realize that your role is to eductate and train those with less experience and training.  All you do by denigrating the Res F is show that you are not living up to the creed of an NCO.

Coincidently, there are alot of  Regs that have s*** for knowledge.  Don‘t think it is Res F specific.  Idiots and incompetents are everywhere!


----------



## Recce41 (26 Jan 2002)

Yes your right Gunner, but think of it this way. I‘ve reply to posts here ,and have had Res/ non military persons, say I don‘t know what I‘m talking about. I might not know everything , no one does but when you know that info people should not bock at it. And persons who fake they are someone they are not . It would be like you posting arty info and me saying its wrong. We  even in the Regs we have Stupids.

 Sgt J. CD,CDS com  :tank:


----------



## Gunner (26 Jan 2002)

> I‘ve reply to posts here ,and have had Res/ non military persons,
> say I don‘t know what I‘m talking about.


I understand, but in this case, it wasn‘t someone who didn‘t know what he was talking about, rather it was an ex reg.  Everyone is entitled to an opinion .... the war diary needs intelligent and experienced posters who can guide the opinions of those with less experience.  Exactly a role for a good Sergeant!  Who knows how your comments will influence some young cadet or reservists sometime later in his/her career.  Your comments could save someone‘s life!

Cheers,


----------



## cagomez (28 Jan 2002)

Im a res and I have a question, (please dont flame me    ) About the new combats, I just got fitted for them and am expecting to get them in a few years, the logistics guy said a month but I‘ve learned. Anyway are they simple the old combats with a paint job or made of some new type of gortex fabric. Are there any new pockets and buttons ... etc. For instance do the breast pockets now fit 30 rnd mags or are they still the same size. Ive noticed on posters the rank slip on now go on the front and the buttons are the same rip proof type as all our other clothing but cant find any other similarities/differences besides the cam pattern, which does make me dizzy. Ive read on another post that that was one of the benefits, that the eye has a hard time focusing on it hence being more effective. I certainly hope that you can actually sew on name plates now. That hole velcro nonsense doesn‘t make much sense. I bet those will be lost alot in the field. If anyone (res, reg or other) has answers to my questions it would be appreciated.


----------



## fortuncookie5084 (28 Jan 2002)

Reference the velcro name plates on the Gore Tex and CADPATs...you can simply remove them in the field if your chain of command allows you to do so.  

From my friends training for Op Palladium ROTO 10 the word is that the new cbt‘s look great but wear quicky.  The fabric is optimised for the disruptive pattern, not for durability or comfort.  They tell me that when they‘re crawling around they are prone to being worn out and torn, much more so than the OD‘s.  

In any case, CADPAT is a superior final product than is MARPAT.  Perhaps the ten year wait was worth it.


----------



## Recce41 (28 Jan 2002)

Its like I said. They wear and fade fast. Wait until they are washed in the MLBW, 20/30 times.
 They are just our old in new colours. 

 Sgt J.  CD,CDS com


----------



## cagomez (29 Jan 2002)

In my experience The old combats at least dried fast and were pretty rugged, except for that combat lingerie phenomenon that occurred as they got older. Are the new combats still in development phase and will improvments/upgrades and reissues occur overtime ?


----------



## Recce41 (2 Feb 2002)

Did anyone see the Marpat in the Globe and Mail. It‘s not as green and looks heavier material.

 Sgt J.  CD,CDS com  :tank:


----------



## henleykg (6 Nov 2003)

> Even the new USMC pattern is nowhere near as effective as ours.


Sorry and no disrespect but that is an incorrect statement. It is a fact that CADPAT was designed for the temperate and desiduous areas of North America and Europe--ONLY. 
MARPAT, however was designed to be a highly functional pattern in any type of vegetation. The test program that was performed on the color scheme of MARPAT proved the colors and pattern to be superior over not only CADPAT but several other patterns. 

There are many references to a NATO test that was conducted finding CADPAT to be the superior NATO pattern. It should be known that the NATO test was conducted PRIOR to the design and release of MARPAT.

Read here for more info on MARPAT
 http://www.militarymorons.com/misc/misc.html#marpat


----------



## kurokaze (6 Nov 2003)

nevermind


----------

