In a message dated 96-08-16 09:48:56 EDT, you write:
> << On Thu, 15 Aug 1996 23:41:07 -0400 PsyWraith@aol.com writes:
> Little known fact folks. US Battle Dress Uniforms (BDU's) are
.Theoretically they are supposed to dampen thermal imaging, which leaves
> the ones that don't, the hands, feet, head etc. My point is that 99%
> Paul >>
Well Paul, all BDU's are supposed to have the ability to thermal mask. I know
all the field units on Bragg have dampening BDU's. 82nd and USASOC, and that's
stock from Clothing Sales. Not sure why you didn't have them at the School.
And having head, hands and feet still exposed still doesn't give you a normal
human silhouette. That is an edge you may be able to use, especially against
tired sentries.
Morgul Sine Pari Airborne All The Way!
> On Fri, 16 Aug 1996 PsyWraith@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 96-08-16 09:48:56 EDT, you write:
I
> know all the field units on Bragg have dampening BDU's. 82nd and
"All" BDUs? Aren't we forgetting a small detail here: USA is NOT
the whole world, again. I don't seem to recall the Chinese army using those.
Nor the Tsetshenian rebels. Or the Filipino Communist guerrillas.
Only countries with extraordinary amounts of money to waste on neat tech
will have neat tech. So have the BDUs with thermal dampening, but with a
cost attached. They could go under a general cost for "ECM" or somesuch for
infantry. Mind you, I don't think the Finnish army has IR dampeners in their
BDUs, either...Some of the combat harnesses we used were from the sixties...
Why throw them away and buy new, expensive ones, when they
still work just fine? Early footage from Yugoslavia showed T-34 tanks
rolling in front of an "armoured column". Why didn't they use M1a1 Abrams?
Guess what: They couldn't afford to equip their whole army with them... Same
with the BDUs. They cost more.
-Oh, and don't forget one of the Murphy's rules of combat: All
else being equal, the side with the simpler uniforms wins...