First of all, apologies for the Daily Mail link, but...
I was pointed to [url= http://www.****/news/article-2523058/Camouflage-suits-make-wearers-impossible-see.html ]this 'story'[/url] about new camoflage that intrigued me. As you will se in the pics, it is quite amazing. The thing is, I can't help but wonder why it has taken so long.
I remember when the Canadian Army got new camo that was supposed to be designed for northern coniferous forests. Except that while, yes, the camo didn't exactly clash with the surroundings, it never really blended in.
So why couldn't they get the right greens and browns in the military, but some hunter can now?
I mean, this is neat, but it doesn't hold a candle to the Daily Mail pics:
[img] 
[/img]
[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CADPAT ]From this article[/url]
[img] 
[/img]
😉
😆
Oh probably at bit wrong?
'New' obviously has a different meaning in Daily Mail world. [url= http://www.realtree.com/camo/realtree-camo-patterns ]Realtree camo[/url] has been round for years (first licensed in 1986)
I guess that does make a difference to my question, rusty90, but I wonder, then, why it is not in the interests of the military to replicate such precise camo.
I mean, think of the stuff they used in 'Nam. Considering how consistent the forests and terrain were, is it just that they couldn't get the colours right?
The photo's look great but you kinda get the idea that they stage the photo's so the pattern matched the environment. If you go to the Realtree site, there 13 pattern's! Yes [url= http://www.realtree.com/camo/realtree-camo-patterns ]13 possible camo pattern's[/url].
That great for your sportsman with money to burn, but 13 possible uniforms for every soldier... yeah right.
[img] 
[/img]
Though looking in more depth, not all of those 13 are camo as we know it..
[img] 
[/img]
You'll notice that all the camouflage suits in that article are different, and are matched to suit their surroundings perfectly. This is great if you always hunt in a duck pond / up a tree. Take that tree suit man and put him in the grass and he'll be in contrast massively with his surroundings.
Troops are often on the ground in different environments, so camouflage that is adequate in many types of environment makes more sense.
As proof, here's some science!
[img] 
[/img]
Because it's very specific to the environment it's used in. There are various Realtree patterns based on the environment they're intended to be used in and they work well (as shown in the photos) when they exactly match the background. Hunters generally know in advance exactly where they'll be using it, the military don't.why it is not in the interests of the military to replicate such precise camo.
I've got a [url= 
]Realtree Xtra Green[/url] jacket that works well in the mixed woodland I usually shoot in, if I go somewhere else it really doesn't work as well.
Plus it's not exactly cheap!
That's why the current British army camo was introduced, as in some areas of Iraq & Ghan, personnel move quickly from semidesert to wooded to mountain areas. Neither the older (86 ?) dark pattern designed for N Europe, nor the pale desert pattern, were suitable for all of these. The newish pattern is a good compromise.
In the USA, if you are hunting, you probably have a specific window in which to shoot and you will most likely know the area to which you are going very specifically, a particular lake or wood. So that allows you to nip down to Cabelas and browse the camo to select exactly what you want.
Soldiers can't stop to change clothes when they run out of trees into a village or a clearing.
That bloke in the top pic would not be quite so invisible in summertime. Although.. maybe.. cos the tree trunk doens't change colour does it?
Have you seen the urban camouflage version? It's very good:
[img] 
[/img]
Apart from some sniping situations camo isn't that significant a factor in military use anyway. I was taught that concealment depends on the 7 S's :
Shape
Shine
Shadow
Silhouette
Sound
Smell
Sudden movement
(If I remember that correctly after all these years)
You're assuming that the Military always want to remain hidden. How would that translate to an overt peacekeeping scenario like ISAF? When the professionals want to remain unseen, they will do.
[img] 
[/img]
Have those Canadian gentlemen forgotten their cam cream?
Why we are seen;
Shape
Shine
Shadow
Silhouette
[s]Sound[/s]
[s]Smell[/s]
[s]Sudden[/s] movement
They've added thermal/IR I think. And I think they teach surface rather than shine.
Realtree camo has been around for years, quite popular with shooters & fieldsports enthusiasts, but it's huge in America, all 'hunters' wear it, nearly all the time, and have stacks of it, in all patterns and every garment going.
It does match some surroundings well, but it's quite specific, and it's effectiveness is a bit unknown, all depends what you're trying to hide from, and what their vision actually allows them to see.
There are different principles for camo, there's imitation (realtree) and those that are designed to trick the eye, not by direct imitation, but by the use of specific patterns and colours.
My main problem with realtree camo is that it makes you look an utter bell
As mention above^^ a lot of current camoflage is designed to act outside of the visible electromagnetic spectrum, as a large number of modern battles are really now only fought at night.
The UK is now using MTP (Multi terrain pattern) which is very similar to the US Army uniform. Instead of having 95 pattern in woodland (and there are actually two or three different version of the 95 DPM as well) and desert patterns we now have just one which is designed to work almost everywhere.
MTP is nothing new - the Americans even did one that worked equally well in both desert and jungle environments.
[img] 
[/img]
I do find it slightly odd that most US hunters then have to put a fluorescent orange vest on over their camo gear, so another hunter doesn't miss them and shoot in their direction?
95 was useless in the jungle. In fact it was pretty shit everywhere (although slightly better than the old combats which came in "fat" only). Lightweights and stone shirts for camp, junglies for the field and camwhites for the cold. I've not had a proper ganders at the MTP stuff though.
The yank orange pattern is still real tree, but designed to work on animals who see in shades of grey...
Hence being Merkins they get that little bit more warning that they are about to shoot a friendly whilst to the quarry they remain hidden.
I've not had a proper ganders at the MTP stuff though.
Imagine CS95 but with layers of pockets upon useless pockets, which makes even the "hot weather" one too heavy for temperate use, and also makes it impossible to iron properly. Then add loads of velcro, to ensure that you become stuck to your mates when sat next to them in a vehicle. Then add some more velcro, so everything sticks to it inside your washing machine. Then move the pen-holder to the wrong side.
Otherwise, brilliant.
The whole point of camo is to break up the shape of a person at a distance, not close enough to smell. Zebra are camouflaged, but close up they're dazzling black and white; look at them from a distance of a couple of hundred metres, the stripes visually blend to make them look a dusty brown, blending into the savanna background.
American camo has been bloody awful for years, and the digital ACU pattern is only useful if you're fighting in a concrete construction site. Their desert camo wasn't much better, especially compared to the British Desert DPM, which is still in use. As Wrecker says, Soldier 95 DPM is only useful in local temperate forests; fighting in multiple terrain situations needs something more sophisticated, which is where Multicam comes in.
A design created by Crye Precision, it was offered to the US military, who turned it down, sticking to their preferred Digital designs.
The British military were more open to new designs, asking Crye to create a variation of Multicam using the style cues from Soldier 95 DPM, called MTP, Multi-Terrain Pattern, because troops out in Iraq and Afghanistan were already doing something similar, mixing Desert DPM and Soldier 95 DPM to try to match the mix of arid scrub and greenery that occurs out there.
I wish I could have got a job designing camo patterns, the subject fascinates me, how mixing graphic patterns and colours can render something almost invisible from a distance.
There are lots of pretty ones, but they're very limited in actual use, because of the environment they're supposed to be used in, the 'Urban' camo which some military use, is a good case, as it's nearly always blue, when it needs to be much more neutral. Australian camo is pretty bright, but in the Australian bush, it's actually pretty effective.
It would be bloody useless in a European theatre.
I always liked the Vietnam US SF issue tiger stripe. Alley as ****.
There are loads of variations on the Vietnam era tiger stripes, as they were generally made 'in country'. Some were green and black, some had lots of gold in them.
US Navy Seals have AOR 1 and 2, basically digital camo for either arid or temperate theatres that they mix and match, far more effective than their older stuff. The. US 'acu' camo pattern was chosen on cost, and generally slated as an actual camo, having been beaten in trials by several other patterns including Multicam.
MTP is the S95 colour palette in Crye Precision's Multicam pattern. Most of the Royals and Poole based guys I know use Multicam, as do the Blades and Aussie SF guys I know. It's a good compromise for many environments. Mind you, they have just released several different colour palette versions of it, black, desert and tropical. They are more of an answer to the new Kryptek patterns that are the current buzz. Friend of mine who runs Platatac, a big Aussie tactical gear manufacturer and supplier has just been over here on a whistle stop tour of SF and near SF units taking orders for the stuff.
Back in the day, good old British DPM regularly own concealment and camouflage competitions and trials against all sorts of fancy cutting edge stuff. It's not a bad camouflage, it was just designed for different theatres than those our forces are expected to fight in nowadays. Not much chance we will be dishing it out to the Reds in Eastern Europe...
also makes it impossible to iron properly
Wait.. You iron camo?
The orange stuff is called blaze orange btw, and is for deer hunting because deer only see in black and white. Duck hunting stuff otoh is like we would expect camo to look. In Wisconsin when we go over in autumn half the male population wear blaze orange as normal clothing 🙂
Wait.. You iron camo?
It's also works dress, as 95 kit was. So you couldn't get away with not ironing it. We never wore 95s in the field anyway. Too thin/flimsy. Can't beat proper denim trops.
A bloke came into work the other day and asked me to give him a quote to vinyl wrap his HiLux in real tree cammo pattern, I suggested it was a bad idea!
Imagine CS95 but with layers of pockets upon useless pockets, which makes even the "hot weather" one too heavy for temperate use, and also makes it impossible to iron properly. Then add loads of velcro, to ensure that you become stuck to your mates when sat next to them in a vehicle. Then add some more velcro, so everything sticks to it inside your washing machine. Then move the pen-holder to the wrong side.
One of the best descriptions I've seen yet. Don't forget the compass pocket you can't fit a compass in.
I've seen all sorts of weird ironing patterns just lately in MTP!
The US Army ACU camo works perfectly, as long as you are the guy on this couch:
[img] 
[/img]
It is horrible just about anywhere else!
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
camo fat bike with hunting attachment niche?!
http://www.realtree.tv/watch/dmlkZW89MTUyMw==/the-cogburn-cb4-bike-in-realtree-xtra-camo
Loving the cat gif 🙂
In Wisconsin when we go over in autumn half the male population wear blaze orange as normal clothing
Some couples have been known to go to their Senior Prom in camo or even get married wearting it! 
[img] http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRPOPGob-THX02fHcnxTWJouuEbR5N2WaSW_RS8Xg-3L4Qb3TZv [/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
Human vision gives priority to the processing of movement above all else, then solid lines and recognisable shapes etc such as the human face.
So military cammo does not really need to be perfect. What it needs to do is break up solid lines and break up recognisable features (eg faces stand out like a sore thumb to human vision, so if you can rub grime/camo paint on it and generally break up the features...then all the better). It also needs to blend in with many different backgrounds, so specific patterns like others have mentioned are out. Staying dead still when necessary will be enough extra camouflage for most soldiers. Sometimes you will notice soldiers in European settings adding foliage to their helmets to blend in with the surrounding folliage and also to break up the very obvious and solid lines the helmet confers.
Snipers however, will quite often blend themselves into the surroundings more using Ghillie suits.
I've seen C95 and MTP through the most advanced equipment (not yet) available and the MTP is fantastic. It works well under any sensor or lens as well as the naked eye.
Military camoflage has to do so much more than beat the eyes of an animal.
I like bumping into people walking in the street wearing camo troons or jackets. I just say "sorry mate, I didn't see you" 🙂
I like bumping into people walking in the street wearing camo troons or jackets. I just say "sorry mate, I didn't see you"
Mine's speckled light green/dark green/black, it tends to stand out in an urban situation, so that argument doesn't wash. It's excellent for wildlife photography, though.
And a lot of people who wear camo kit would likely just punch you in the face if you pulled that stunt, not being too tolerant of that sort of 'wit'. 😉
JoeG, that photo just about sums up that horrid Digital ACU, Kayak23, my Danish Flecktarn jacket would blend in perfectly in your woodland photo, bloody useless in Helmand Province, though!
I've got one of these jackets: [IMG] 
[/IMG]
It's USAF issue, APEC digital Tigerstripe, in Goretex. APEC stands for All-Purpose Environmental Camouflage.
Which basically means it's useless in most circumstances, however, it looks pretty, and is fine for wearing while standing guard on a remote airbase in Nevada.
I like the pattern, it's a lovely jacket to wear, very soft, with heavy Cordura along the sleeves and shoulders, and cost me £85, new, unworn. Beats a crappy, non-waterproof SuperDry jacket costing £150 with knock-off of US Woodland camo printed on it.
Which is why I buy military surplus kit; it's well made, comfy, and bloody cheap. And I like the pretty patterns... 😀
My favourite jacket is one of these, cost me thirty quid, and is lovely to wear, polycotton, so very soft and quiet, wind-proof, and is a really nice pattern, doesn't show the crap too much:
[img] 
[/img]
Danish M84 field jacket
Mine's speckled light green/dark green/black, it tends to stand out in an urban situation, so that argument doesn't wash. It's excellent for wildlife photography, though.
And a lot of people who wear camo kit would likely just punch you in the face if you pulled that stunt, not being too tolerant of that sort of 'wit'.
Most people who wear that stuff where I live are fairly useless sacks of... nothing. They also wear animal fleeces with pictures of howling wolves & stallions under starry skies. Is that you? Would you punch someone in the face for bumping into to you? Not very tolerant is it? 😉
I've got one of these jackets:
There is a similar version in another camoflage that was issued to the US Army for a while. If you see one grab it - really nice windproof shell and quite a few of them were made by Patagonia. The quality is excellent - just not found one in my size yet.
US Army calls it [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Cold_Weather_Clothing_System ]ECWS[/url]
The gear has evolved over the past 20-25 years, more than the camo pattern varies.
Off on a tangent I love the STW daily mail link page 🙂
[img] 
[/img]
I haven't been able to find any of my camouflage clothing for ages. Shame as it was very effective.
As a little aside story, the thread reminded me of a mate who was in the RAF on guard duty.Basic training in a field, in Wales, middle of the night cradling his wooden rifle, half asleep, when suddenly the "field" in full camouflage and armed with SLR's, rose up in front of him and passed through the campsite he was guarding. Needless to say he kept quite and pretended he was asleep.
Most people who wear that stuff where I live are fairly useless sacks of... nothing. They also wear animal fleeces with pictures of howling wolves & stallions under starry skies. Is that you? Would you punch someone in the face for bumping into to you? Not very tolerant is it?
As are many of the people around here who wear top to bottom British Army DPM, which was kinda my point.
But someone deliberately barging into a person, just because they're wearing a particular style of jacket is pretty intolerant too, but I guess you knew that. 😉
I see a lot of fishermen wearing RealTree, or knock-offs, which does amuse me a bit; fish react to silhouettes, and movement, camo doesn't make the slightest bit of difference to a carp in a murky river. Still, if it keeps 'em happy to pay loads for something that doesn't work, fine.
It does also amuse me seeing people wearing fashion clothing styled after the US Army M95 jacket, which my Danish M84 is, and paying stupid amounts of money for it, just 'cos it has Superdry and some spurious Japanese kanji on one shoulder, and a Woodland camo pattern, when they could buy military surplus kit for a fraction of the price; £130 against £30? No brainer, that.
Tom B - Member
I haven't been able to find any of my camouflage clothing for ages. Shame as it was very effective.
Coat, now! 😆
when they could buy military surplus kit for a fraction of the price
Point missed 🙂
We were asked to make some very cool camo gear made of custom Crye stuff. Had no velcro, (all button) for some guys that came over a few months back. Jackets and trousers and some harness stuff.
Count where did you get the Danish jacket? Can you recommend a good on line place?
Point missed
Well, no, not really, I understand marketing, and product recognition, the whole Cult/Superdry thing is very clever, using the Japlish that appears on Japanese clothing, and turning it around and selling it to a European market, the placing of brightly coloured logos at eye-level on jacket shoulders is genius, and it clearly works.
I'm too aware to fall for it, preferring to buy products based on quality and price, not what fancy logo is embossed on it.
I do have a Superdry beanie hat, though...
It's why I wear a lot of Uniqlo gear, although I do have a fair bit of cycling-specific gear with logos on, mostly bought in the sales...
Although I do have a North Face Nuptse jacket. I bought it long before the dance culture made it ubiquitous, and a share of a work lottery win paid for it... 😉
[i]I'm too aware to fall for it, preferring to buy products based on quality and price[/i]
Point missed, again...
Yes. The point is that people don't want army surplus kit for a fraction of the price 🙂
hydro graphics in york realtree'd a spec SX i think it was, there was a thread on here. nice.
Well if you're interested in MultiCam-ing your bike...
[img] 
[/img]
I bought a superdry jacket in the sales a few years ago. It was neither super, nor dry.
Global Hypercolour Camo 8)
So I was constantly ruining trous by gardening and lifting and bumping stuff around in them, and this thred prompted my to have a bit of a google....
Dragon supplies were asked by the parachute reg to run up some trops to the same spec as the originals (the hard denim, not tea bag type) and so I gots myself a pair!
[img] 
[/img]
(that's not me BTW)
These things are the shit; the most hard wearing combats I was ever issued.
I haven't stretched to the shirt though. MrsW put her foot down 😳
so I gots myself a pair!
You must be the coolest dude at the airsoft club 😆 Do you have some skateboard knee pads to wear over the top of them?
Behind the times, they have been doing this for years...
[url= http://www.hydro-graphics.co.uk/showcase.php ]Hydrographics Show Case - Click on Mountain Bike[/url]
Guys, without being funny or anything, but blokes that wear army gear who aren't in the actual army = Not a good look.
OK?
Yes. The point is that people don't want army surplus kit for a fraction of the price
No, they prefer to wander round covered in pointless logos advertising someone else's product, having paid over the odds for the privilege. And it still has a camo pattern on!
I don't mind wearing band t-shirts, and it's difficult to avoid with bike-specific gear, but if I can buy shirts, sweatshirts, jeans, etc, without logos, the happier I am these days. Even my Vans are plain black, with tiny discrete logos on.
Count did you see my question above?
[i]No, they prefer to wander round covered in pointless logos advertising someone else's product, having paid over the odds for the privilege. And it still has a camo pattern on![/i]
so your fashion statement is "I'm anti fashion" whereas their fashion statement is "I like this brand"
Tip, they haven't bought it [i]because[/i] of the camo pattern ok? The Military thing was fashionable for a bit, but there's a world between "actual" camo stuff and fashion camo and military cut and wot-not.
I'd post the vid of the bit in Devil wears Prada where Meryl pulls apart the girls attitude to fashion, but you prob still wouldn't get it.
We're all doing fashion Zero, whether we get it from the high street, Charity shops, or surplus shops, it's still fashion straight (maybe a bit wiggly) from the pages of Cosmo and Vogue
No, they prefer to wander round covered in pointless logos advertising someone else's product, having paid over the odds for the privilege. And it still has a camo pattern on!
Is that better or worse than sneering at people's clothing choice on an internet forum? I can't tell, help me out.
Is there actually someone in the picture posted by kayak23..?
[img] [/img]
I've spent five minutes looking...
Is that better or worse than sneering at people's clothing choice on an internet forum? I can't tell, help me out.
Well you don't get the awesome smugness that you get from letting the world know of your brand-free existence, before reeling off a list of branded goods you own and why they don't count.
Is that better or worse than sneering at people's clothing choice on an internet forum?
Don't worry, those of us who actually left the safety of camp and required camouflage are pretty thick skinned. Blue is good camo for the Naafi dwelling duffers though. Slimming too!
Guys, without being funny or anything, but blokes that wear army gear who aren't in the actual army = Not a good look.
OK?
😀
But they'll punch you in the face for bumping into them.
cmon folks share the best surplus shops for this stuff then, every time I look it is either overpriced or has bullet holes in it due to being "used"!!
cmon folks share the best surplus shops for this stuff then
Get yourself a friend in the forces...