Army's Pixel Camouflage Gets the Boot



After eight years and $5 billion, the U.S. Army admits its pixelated Universal Camouflage Pattern (UCP) was a "colossal mistake." It may have been hip, but it didn't hide soldiers in any environment -except on the living room sofa.
“Essentially, the Army designed a universal uniform that universally failed in every environment,” said an Army specialist who served two tours in Iraq, wearing UCP in Baghdad and the deserts outside Basra.  “The only time I have ever seen it work well was in a gravel pit.”

The specialist asked that his name be withheld because he wasn’t authorized to speak to the press.

“As a cavalry scout, it is my job to stay hidden. Wearing a uniform that stands out this badly makes it hard to do our job effectively,” he said. “If we can see our own guys across a distance because of it, then so can our enemy.”

The fact that the government spent $5 billion on a camouflage design that actually made its soldiers more visible — and then took eight years to correct the problem — has also left people in the camouflage industry incensed. The total cost comes from the Army itself and includes the price of developing the pattern and producing it for the entire service branch.

The Daily has the story of how the UCP came about and what the Army is doing about it now. Link -via Metafilter, where you'll find more camouflage links.

There are a few articles floating around online outlining the difference in digicam...namely the Army's pattern, USMC's two patterns and how each came to be.

Bottom line, USMC had enlisted input beyond desk jockeys, infantry even, and ended up with two patterns that work well. The Army relied on Os and bureaucrats and got something that only works on flowered furniture. And is expensive...and doesn't look particularly squared away on any soldier for some reason...
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
The ACU pattern was the butt of a lot of jokes when I was in the Army, and we suspected at the time that it was selected for political reasons. It was just so wrong, and so obviously wrong, that it could only have been the product of some Pentagon level nepotism.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
everyone here on post or happy about it. i agree with you jennifer, its not about the money spent. we would spend what ever it cost to keep our men and women safe,its about the design flaws.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
The ACUs worked well if you were covered in mud or dust, also you could not sew combat skills patches on the uniform. The only positive thing is that the ripped less than the BDUs, for me at least.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Sammy, mine are coming from wondering how many service people were injured or lost their lives because of this fiasco. Talk about playing directly into the enemies hands...
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I laughed so hard when I read that the army had spent $5billion on a camo design that made people more visible but I'm not sure whether my tears were from laughter or the sheer waste of money.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Login to comment.
Click here to access all of this post's 10 comments




Email This Post to a Friend
"Army's Pixel Camouflage Gets the Boot"

Separate multiple emails with a comma. Limit 5.

 

Success! Your email has been sent!

close window
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
 
Learn More