Army vs. USMC MARPAT battle ends

| April 19, 2012

Last year we had a rather furious battle here when the Army made overtures to the USMC about borrowing their MARPAT (Marine pattern) uniform design. Well, jerry920 sends us a link from Fox News that says that the Army s backing off from that particular battle;

Brig. Gen. Peter Fuller, former head of Program Executive Office Soldier which is responsible for military gear, earlier told the Army Times that the Army could remove the Corps’ emblem and appropriate the uniform for Army use if it proves most effective in field tests. That’s something the Marines don’t want to see happen, claiming the uniform is their property and that Marines should be distinguished from other soldiers.

But a spokeswoman in Fuller’s department told FoxNews.com that MARPAT is “not a leading choice for the Army’s next combat uniform.”

“MARPAT is not technically competing in the Army’s camouflage efforts at all; it is being used as a benchmark pattern” along with a camouflage pattern used in Afghanistan and Navy patterns, spokeswoman Debi Dawson said in an email.

I’m glad because I just bought a set of multicams to wear in support of TSO while he’s in Afghanistan and I don’t want to lay out more money. You know when I went in the Army, a set of fatigues cost $13 and another $12 for boots. Jump boots were $20. At some point this uniform shit needs to end.

Category: Military issues

57 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Hondo

Addition: and in any case, even if the states fund it, that’s still money that’s spent needlessly if the uniform change is itself needless in the first place.

Muqdadiyah19D

I don’t think I would have ever had that first-formation anxiety about wearing the proper headgear/gloves/eyepro/winter/summer/BDU/ACU/black-or-grey-watch-cap-or-is-it-fleece/winterboot/summerboot/BDU-kevlar-or-ACU-Kevlar-cover/which-one-is-it-wet-weather-pattern/CIF didn’t issue, it’s not on my CIF list/issued-Oakleys/”sorry I only have an ACU camelback/Havn’t drawn an ACU ruck from CIF/”which pattern canteen holster?”/black-fleece-ACU-fleece-who makes the real army fleece?/ if the Army would stick with one freakikng cammo pattern.

Green leather shells or black shells? Green glove liners or black? “Sergeant, why does this matter on my packing list?”

WOTN

You’re right Hondo. So, the formula for the clothing industry stimulus packagee of an Army (tactical) uniform change is roughly:
($60*8)+($20*2)*1,000,000 Troops (Uniforms alone)= $360,000,000 PLUS
$3,000 * 1 Million (TA-50)= $3,000,000,000 PLUS
Vehicle & other major equipment painting costs ((UNKNOWN))

In other words, a uniform change costs the government MORE than $3.36 Billion, more if they also change the boots but between $180 Million and $250 Million of that comes directly out of the paychecks of Soldiers.

But what about effective camoflauge? Given a simple device known as a reflective belt, it is rendered useless for camoflauge. HENCE no one on a FOB can claim a real need for effective camo.
Yeah, but what about those that actually go out on patrols? Yeah, the bulk of those are doing it in MRAPs or other Military vehicles, which are NOT camoflauged. (Doesn’t mean they will never need to dismount and attain concealment.)
So, basically we are left with “Light” Infantry, Special Forces, and Snipers that truly need effective camoflauge as a part of their every day job. Snipers aren’t going to be constrained by ANY uniform. SF aren’t far behind them in conformance to uniform regulations. And to be honest, there aren’t that many dismounted, i.e. “Light” Infantry in today’s environment.

You know what. Let’s get those guys the coolest, best camoflauge money can buy, based on the voting of every one of them from E-5 to 0-3 (that have actually served in a combat line unit), and voted on by that same set of individuals. Patent the pattern and issue to ONLY those conducting those ops, but authorize it for wear from the time of issue until 4 years after completion of that duty, in FOB, off FOB, and in Garrison. Yeah, the REMF’s will bitch and moan, but if they want a set, they can ask for Reclas into those MOS’s and transfer into those line units.

Anonymous

Marines are Distinguished among the armed services and they came up with the pattern, the army just should keep multicam or go to the ATACS style camo they are good patterns. The Army needs to Quit whinning about it, they will just put Velcro on everything and screw it up anyway… Velcro is real tactical

Hondo

WOTN: Decent analysis, and I won’t quibble about the numbers – I think you’re at least in the ballpark.

I’d argue that several units had it right in the 1970s/early 1980s. Procure the best camouflage, and make N sets of that a CIF item (4 was the number then, if I recall correctly). Then use something like the old “pickle suit” (reasonably priced, easy to care for, actually looked pretty good if properly sized/in good repair/pressed/worn properly with highly shined boots) for routine garrison duty – and prohibit the wear of the camouflage uniforms when not deployed or engaging in a field training exercise.

Yes, that would be a one-time cost. It would also ensure (1) EVERYONE had the requisite proper camouflage, (2) would minimize future costs by subjecting field uniforms to wear and tear only when such was needed, and (3) would save soldiers $$$. But what do I know.

However, I can’t agree about the “let the ‘special’ folks wear different uniforms all the time” aspect. It’s called a “uniform” for obvious reasons. Special headgear already identifies those in the high-speed/low-drag units; badges show permanent qualifications. And IMO, we don’t need any more reason for internal divisiveness within the Army (or between the services). There’s currently way too much of an “I’m an operator, you’re just a REMF – so you don’t matter” attitude within the Army. One can argue the proper mix, but support personnel are needed just as much as operators – or you ain’t gonna operate for long. (And good luck walking home or small-boating units across the Atlantic or Pacific.)

Unless, of course, we want to contract out ALL support functions, including combat support and combat logistics. I have a real problem with that on both philosophical and financial grounds. That’s getting damn close in my book to hiring mercenaries. And great nations who start depending on mercenaries to fight their wars tend not to stay great nations for very long.

Hondo

Anonymous (#54): Marines are excellent military professionals. But their uniform’s camouflage pattern isn’t what makes them such excellent military professionals.

Further: the USMC doesn’t own the damn MARPAT patent. That patent is owned by the US Government, not the USMC. Read page 1 of the patent.

And if you really want to argue that the Marines “looking different” is more important that preventing battlefield casualties – well, you need to go take a hard look at yourself in the mirror. You’re literally saying that you’re willing to allow some of your brothers-in-arms to be wounded or killed just so that Marines can continue to look “special”.

Last time I checked, DoD’s mission is to defend the country. That means we (ALL the services) need to cooperate to accomplish assigned missions while minimizing friendly casualties. It doesn’t mean we should squabble like High School schoolgirls over who had the coolest “party dress” first.

Ann

Jonn I wholeheartedly agree with your complaints on pricing. For several years Marines have consistently asked for better equipment, new barracks, new aircraft and vehicles, easing the tattoo restrictions, better deployment/dwell time ratios, among other things. HQMC listened, told us how valuable our input is, and gave us an absurdly expensive running suit. We were less than enthused. A full set costs as much as a pair of good quality boots. I don’t understand why we needed to use official New Balance gear which I assume is the main reason it’s so ridiculously expensive.

I also never understood the justification of spending the money and time developing and issuing the new Air Force and Navy utilities.