OT New American Uniforms

23 posts ยท Jan 1 2005 to Jan 8 2005

From: Don M <dmaddox1@h...>

Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 15:51:32 -0600

Subject: OT New American Uniforms

Looking at the general to blue/gray trend of the new American uniforms.
Do we have a Space fleet or something? Or have the dudes at D.O.D.
just been watching too much Sci-fi? From what I can see only the USMC
is still fighting earth bound........)

the Army's digitized camouflage pattern.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?O23C6232A

Air Force test utility uniform

http://www.af.mil/photos/story_photos.asp?storyID=123005370
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123005369

Navy's new working uniform

http://www.navy.mil/local/view_photos.asp?id=334&page=2

From: Unknown Sender <@

Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 18:09:42 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

Supposedly the reason for the USN to wear gray is to make targeting by snipers
harder when in port. Reason number two were that oil stains etcwould
disappearmore in a grayscale uniform. There were a couple more reasons
mensioned too, but my memory fails me. Don't
ask me where I read it though... :-/

I can not figure out why USAF ground grews would wear grey... Working on
tarmac and concrete runways? But then, why would airfield security personell
and guards wear it, it doesn't contain enough green to be anywhere near
effective in the bush... Although, I have to admit that the revival of tiger
stripe makes me happy, I've always liked it for some unknown
reason... :)

/Johan the lurker.

> --- Don M <dmaddox1@hot.rr.com> wrote:

> Looking at the general to blue/gray trend of the new
http://www.af.mil/photos/story_photos.asp?storyID=123005370
> http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123005369
http://www.navy.mil/local/view_photos.asp?id=334&page=2
> [quoted text omitted]

From: ShldWulf@a...

Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 06:31:07 EST

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

In a message dated 1/1/2005 2:51:23 PM Mountain Standard Time,
> dmaddox1@hot.rr.com writes:

They've a new pattern too. Very similar to the Army one that I've seen.
Predomiently green and darker colors.

Randy

From: Brian Burger <yh728@v...>

Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 22:50:42 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

> On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 ShldWulf@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 1/1/2005 2:51:23 PM Mountain Standard Time,

That's MARPAT, which is a derivation of CADPAT, the Canadian Forces' new (as
of 1998ish) camo pattern.

It looks like all the US services are going digital, more or less.

Canadian Land Forces info here: (long URL, sorry)
http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/Chief_Land_Staff/Clothe_the_soldier/hab/1/1
3_e.asp

There are lots more photos on the Cdn Forces website; run a search for CADPAT
to find them.

It's nice to see the US is, once again, trying to catch up to Canada. <large,
evil grin> Actually, this stuff was a Canadian invention; the US Marines
worked with the CF on their MARPAT pattern.

These patterns are pretty easy to fake on miniatures - use a stiff brush
and stipple/drybrush over the basecoat, to get the ragged edges that the
fractal pixelization gives the real thing.

From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>

Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 11:55:54 -0500

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

> It's nice to see the US is, once again, trying to catch up to

<grin> It's a nice change from us trying to catch up to the Australians

From: Rrok Anroll <coldnovemberrain_2000@y...>

Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 10:27:57 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

Yeah, I suppose if there's an army that would know about blending in
with trees and seeming almost non-existant, it's the Canadains! <very
big, very evil grin>

BTW, do they still have the Red Devils....?

> Brian Burger <yh728@victoria.tc.ca> wrote:
It's nice to see the US is, once again, trying to catch up to Canada.
Actually, this stuff was a Canadian invention; the US Marines worked with the
CF on their MARPAT pattern.

From: Brian Burger <yh728@v...>

Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 18:32:39 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

> On Mon, 3 Jan 2005, Rrok Anroll wrote:

> Yeah, I suppose if there's an army that would know about blending in

See, it's working! Canada's military is *so* *well* *camoflauged* that not
even citizens of our closest ally & neighbour know they exist.

Of course, if the camo fails, we just resort to the Orbital Mind Control
Lasers. Which don't, of course, exist. Really.

> BTW, do they still have the Red Devils....?

I think that was a WW2 para unit, wasn't it?

Canada currently has para-capable companies, but not (with the political
disbanding of the Airborne in the 90s) a full para battalion. (and that's an
ugly story all around, which other people are better qualified to tell. I'll
stick to denying Orbital Mind Control Laser rumours & tweaking Yankee
sensibilities...)

From: Don M <dmaddox1@h...>

Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 20:43:42 -0600

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

Yeah, I suppose if there's an army that would know about blending in with
trees and seeming almost non-existant, it's the Canadains!
<very big, very evil grin>

They could (still) be in scarlet and they would be hard to detect. It might be
a good idea come to think of it, masquerade as deer hunters no one would
notice them coming until it was far too late.....)

From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>

Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 21:46:41 -0500

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

> > BTW, do they still have the Red Devils....?

The Red Devils are the British Parachute Regiment's display team.

From: Brian Burger <yh728@v...>

Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 19:01:22 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

> On Mon, 3 Jan 2005, Laserlight wrote:

> > > BTW, do they still have the Red Devils....?

Ah, knew I'd heard the name somewhere, and was too lazy to Google it. Thanks!

From: Paul M. M. Jacobus <paul@o...>

Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 07:51:48 -0500 (EST)

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

> See, it's working! Canada's military is *so* *well* *camoflauged* that

> not even citizens of our closest ally & neighbour know they exist.

When the Candian submarine accident happened last fall, the universal comment
among my friends was "the Canadians have a submarine?"

-P.

From: Adrian Johnson <ajohnson@i...>

Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:32:14 -0700

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

Laserlight responded:

> I think that was a WW2 para unit, wasn't it?

The "Red Devils" is the official name for their display team now, but the
term originally was the nickname for the WWII-era British paras in
general, not just display guys. The Parachute Regiment are the Red Devils...

(They originated the custom of parachute units wearing red (maroon in some
places) berets, since copied in many other countries... and they fought very
well against pretty much everyone they went up against, hence "red" and
"devils")

From: Bradley, Jason (US - Minneapolis) <jabradley@d...>

Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:34:45 -0600

Subject: RE: OT New American Uniforms

I thought they got trashed during Market Garden in WWII?

Jason

[quoted original message omitted]

From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>

Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 14:13:01 -0500

Subject: RE: OT New American Uniforms

Jason:
> I thought they got trashed during Market Garden in WWII?

"Fought well", not "won". See "A Bridge Too Far"

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 20:16:02 +0100

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 12:34:45 -0600, Bradley, Jason (US - Minneapolis)
> <jabradley@deloitte.com> wrote:

You do NOT drop airborne into the assembly area of an SS Panzer Corps and come
out on top. Testosterone is not a substitute for heavy weapons.

However, the 1st ABN did acquit themselves rather heroically. Had Montgomery
not been a congenital moron stupid enough to attack down a
literal two-lane front, they would have been rescued.

From: Jared Hilal <jlhilal@y...>

Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 11:22:48 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

> --- Don M <dmaddox1@hot.rr.com> wrote:

> They could (still) be in scarlet and they would be hard to detect.

You don't get much news from Wisconsin, do you? (appologies if that's poor
taste)

J

From: Don M <dmaddox1@h...>

Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:59:58 -0600

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

You don't get much news from Wisconsin, do you? (appologies if that's poor
taste)

J

That kind of news travels nation wide rather quickly. You know I'd forgotten
all about the mad hunter story from up there. The two can't be confused as
Canadians are far to polite for such behavior.

From: Don M <dmaddox1@h...>

Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 14:01:58 -0600

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

And did an outstanding withdrawal under fire and night river
crossing.........No small feat.

"Fought well", not "won". See "A Bridge Too Far"

From: Robert W. Eldridge <bob_eldridge@m...>

Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 18:02:51 -0500

Subject: RE: OT New American Uniforms

Doesn't mean they didn't fight extremely well - as for instance John
Frost's 2 Para at Arnhem bridge. The 1st Airborne Division at Arnhem was
placed in an untenable position by a combination of bad generalship
(Montgomery and Browning, not the division commander), bad staff work, and
politics, and as always the poor bloody infantry paid the price for others
ineptitude.

[quoted original message omitted]

From: ShldWulf@a...

Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 05:46:46 EST

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

In a message dated 1/2/2005 11:53:02 PM Mountain Standard Time,
> yh728@victoria.tc.ca writes:
It looks like all the US services are going digital, more or less. They are.
But what is REALLY a hoot is that the uniform patterns have been out already
for about tow years now. Paintball players have been wearing them, (albeit in
MUCH more comfortable materials:o) all over.

Randy

From: ShldWulf@a...

Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 05:51:28 EST

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

In a message dated 1/3/2005 7:34:10 PM Mountain Standard Time,
> yh728@victoria.tc.ca writes:
See, it's working! Canada's military is *so* *well* *camoflauged* that not
even citizens of our closest ally & neighbour know they exist. I used to hang
out on the Conspiricy theory boards on AOL. (Hey do I complain about what YOU
folks do for laughs?:o) It's obvious from listening into

those boards that the camo is NOT working as well as you think.

You'd be surprised how many (thousands to hear some tell it) of "Canadian"
speaking troops local U.S. Citizens have met "in-the-woods" or directing
high way traffic. (Or on our small town street corners for that matter:o)

Your CAMO may be part of the problem but you REALLY have to do something

about your accents;o)

(As for favorite conspiricy theories... mine is what a friend and I came up
with. It's all a bunch of practial jokers walking around and 'tweeking' the
paranoid:o)

Randy

From: ShldWulf@a...

Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 05:53:43 EST

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

In a message dated 1/4/2005 5:53:22 AM Mountain Standard Time,
paul@otd.com writes: When the Candian submarine accident happened last fall,
the universal comment among my friends was "the Canadians have a submarine?"
Oh heck we knew about them. They visit the Secret Great Salt Lake Sub base
here all the time. (Yes a 'joke' my Navy reserve buddy tells ever time someone
asks him when in uniform, why he's a submarine squadron person in Utah;o)

See I told you.

Randy

From: Brian Burger <yh728@v...>

Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2005 15:52:59 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: OT New American Uniforms

> On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 ShldWulf@aol.com wrote:

> Your CAMO may be part of the problem but you REALLY have to do

I think you mean 'aboot' our accents, eh?

> (As for favorite conspiricy theories... mine is what a friend and I

Perhaps thats what "They" want you to think - or maybe that is what the
Orbital Mind Control Lasers are beaming down these days. <cue Twilight Zone
music, fading out...>

"The Truth may be out there, but the lies are inside your head" - Terry
Pratchett, in one of his Discworld novels...