US Military camo-patterns

[ode]

I´m just wondering why does the US military use different camo-patterns with it´s branches (right word?)

The Marines use MARPAT which has three different patterns-Woodland, Desert and Urban if I´ve understood correctly.
The Army is starting to use ACU-pattern (was it really ACU and if it was what is the meaning of it) which is meant to fit in all areas.
The Air Force is also testing some kind of digital Tiger Stripe. Did it went through? Sorry to say but it looked awful :)
The Navy is also testing (or has it already adopted it?) some kind of digital-pattern.

I understand that the Navy uses pattern of it´s own but why do the grond troops (Army, Marines and Air Force ground personnal) use different camos?
They all work under the same government and work together with each other, so what is the purpose of using different camos?

It somehow looks like they are competing with each other about who has the coolest camos:)

So, people who know better, can you kindly explain to me what is the idea of having different camos.
Why couldn´t the Army for example adopt MARPAT, it is afterall very nice and effecting looking pattern. Or did the Army just wanted to have an all-around camo?

[James]

This very question has been troubling us all since the dawn of time. I am not able to provide an answer.

[D.Sigurdsson]

I can not answer all of you questions but in regards to why they are not using the same unis anymore, well, before the "woodland" camo they had diffirent camos.
The woodland became a "global" camo for the US forces in the early 80's and now they are going their seperate ways camo wise.

[jetsetter]

The woodland cammo was made for use in Europe for fighting against the Soviets. Now things are different and the US is fighting in different enviroments.

[FallenAngel]

There is no official urban MARPAT pattern, just woodland and desert.

yes, ACU is the right acronym and means "Army Combat Uniform"

The US Army couldnt adopt MARPAT because the Marines have a copyright on it. Besides, the Army wanted one camo for all enviroments (personally I think this is a fvckin' stupid idea) to streamline the supply issue.

As for the Air Force and Navy, well, they are just jumpin' on the "let's get new uniforms" bandwagon.

It should be noted though that the services have always had different uniforms until the introduction of woodland in the early 80s.

[11F5S]

This very question has been troubling us all since the dawn of time. I am not able to provide an answer.

Two reasons: 1. Because they want to and 2. Because they can.

BTW, Durning the dawn of time we weren't concerned about it. :)

P.S. The Army didn't adopt a version of MARPAT, because no self respecting soldier would want to be mistaken for a Jarhead :P

[ode]

Thank you all for your answers..


The US Army couldnt adopt MARPAT because the Marines have a copyright on it.

I don´t really understand the idea of this. After researching a great camo the Marines don´t want any other branches of the same organization, the US Military, to use and benefit from it?
They are all American-units and serve the same country and purpouse(spelling?)

I understand that the Army wanted to get their ACU (which I think is also a bit dumb-idea) but if they would have wanted to use MARPAT (or ARMPAT to them I guess :)) would it have been impossible because of copyright reasons? No offense to any lawmakers, but isn´t it a bit dumb to prevent the Army to get something they think would have been best to them because of copyright reasons?
Shouldn´t it be best for the whole country if it´s armed forces are equipped with best equipment available? I understand copyright issues when thinking about the use of CADPAT in Finnish Army for example, but Marines and Army are both members of the same Military after all.

[usa320]

It somehow looks like they are competing with each other about who has the coolest camos:)


basically sums it up.

The marines dont want the "stupid grunts" to look like Marines, and the Army doesnt want the "Damn jarheads" too look like soldiers.

[Ratamacue]

Basically, the Marines started the whole thing. They switched to MARPAT and brown boots not only for practicality, but to make themselves more easily recognizable, not unlike the Marines in WW2, who wore green utilities and camouflage helmet covers. My guess is that this prompted the other services to decide to modernize their camo and look individual as well.

[11F5S]

Historically the USMC and the US Army have had different combat uniforms...during the Vietnam War this changed when the USMC began wearing "OG-107 "Jungle Fatigues" (Army design)) and continued with the adaption of BDU's.

[11F5S]

The marines dont want the "stupid grunts" to look like Marines, and the Army doesnt want the "Damn jarheads" too look like soldiers.

You ought to stick to your area of expertise.... stocking shelves.

[11F5S]

Basically, the Marines started the whole thing. They switched to MARPAT and brown boots not only for practicality, but to make themselves more easily recognizable, not unlike the Marines in WW2, who wore green utilities and camouflage helmet covers. My guess is that this prompted the other services to decide to modernize their camo and look individual as well.

The US Army wanted to create a uniform that was more suitable and versatile for it's needs today....BDU's were a twenty+ year old design.

If the Army had wanted to use a cammo pattern that was like MARPAT it would have been easy to get around the USMC patent.

Prior to Vietnam the USMC had it's own unique utilitiy uniform and wore brown boots that were manufactured with the leather rough side out...which they proceeded to spitshine in boot camp. :lol: I don't recall when they changed to black boots.

[Scrim]

Before Vietnam, the only other time historically Im aware of that Marines and Soldiers wore the exact same combat uniform, was during WW1 when Marines arriving in France were ordered to shed their green uniforms and adopt the Army's olive drab (much browner in appearance).
So having different combat uniforms really is nothing new.

And 11F5S is right, damn those new brown boots are hard to spit shine. ;)

[mi35d]

The Marine Corps doesn't "own" the patent on their camo pattern. Since they're a US government entity, the US gorvernment owns it and therefore this is a moot point.

The US Army's stated reason is that they wanted ONE uniform to handle various environments instead of having several uniform combinations.

Its an assinine situation. At some point the DOD should have stepped in and said, "...enough. All of you will use the same pattern or minor variations therein". It reduces procurement and restocking costs and makes inter-service work that much easier. This crap with each service trying to be lone wolves on the issue just stretches the budget even more than it already is. DOD does this with equipment - weapons, rucks, etc. why not with uniforms as well???

Then again, the ACU is an assinine uniform in many ways as well. Velcro sucks. They plan on using velcro for name tapes, etc. but then when it comes to qualification badges - they're PIN-ONS! Something in the order of 92% of the soldiers questioned said, "NO!" to the pin ons but the uniform board knows better. (Armchair office pukes piss me off.) And of course in all of this as well, is the doing away with 170 years of Army tradition - branch insignia worn by officers will be removed to make a more "unified" Army. (****, officers don't need esprit de corps. We get our jollies from paying for these new uniforms and boots at the end of the year! Whooo-hoo!)

Whoops! Have I been ranting? Sorry.

[witchdoctor]

Politics baby, it's all about politics!

[11F5S]

The Marine Corps doesn't "own" the patent on their camo pattern. Since they're a US government entity, the US gorvernment owns it and therefore this is a moot point

Tell it to the Marines



The Marine Corps has filed the patent applications for the three patents to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, as directed by the CMC. The Marine Corps will also submit other patent applications as a result of the innovation camouflage studies recently conducted.

Application for Combat Utility Uniform Design Patent

The Marine Corps Systems Command has submitted a design patent application to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for the proprietary Marine Corps Combat Utility Uniform. The following information is provided regarding the status of the combat utility uniform patent application:

Design Patent No. : 29/ 143,340
Issue Approval Date : Pending
Patent Title : United States Marine Corps Combat Utility Uniform


Application for Proprietary Camouflage Design Patent Technology

The Marine Corps Systems Command has submitted a design patent application to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for the proprietary Marine Corps camouflage patterns. The following information is provided regarding the status of the proprietary camouflage design patent application:

Design Patent No.: 29/ 143,683
Issue Approval Date: Pending
Patent Title: Camouflage Pattern for Sheet Material and Uniforms

Application for Camouflage Utility Pattern and Fabric

The Marine Corps Systems Command has submitted the utility patent application to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for the personal clothing, individual equipment and weapon systems Marine Corps camouflage patterns. The following information is provided regarding the status of the camouflage utility pattern and fabric application:

Design Patent No.: Pending
Issue Approval Date: Pending
Patent Title: Improved Camouflage U.S. Marine Corps Utility Uniform

[11F5S]

Then again, the ACU is an assinine uniform in many ways as well. Velcro sucks. They plan on using velcro for name tapes, etc. but then when it comes to qualification badges - they're PIN-ONS! Something in the order of 92% of the soldiers questioned said, "NO!" to the pin ons but the uniform board knows better. (Armchair office pukes piss me off.) And of course in all of this as well, is the doing away with 170 years of Army tradition - branch insignia worn by officers will be removed to make a more "unified" Army. (****, officers don't need esprit de corps. We get our jollies from paying for these new uniforms and boots at the end of the year! Whooo-hoo!)

Badges and other such accoutrements shouldn't be worn on combat/field uniforms period....they serve no purpose and they are a waste of money...the same goes for combat patches.

As far as doing away with 170 years of Army tradition...I believe they did away with muskets a while back too.

[FallenAngel]

Then again, the ACU is an assinine uniform in many ways as well. Velcro sucks. They plan on using velcro for name tapes, etc. but then when it comes to qualification badges - they're PIN-ONS! Something in the order of 92% of the soldiers questioned said, "NO!" to the pin ons but the uniform board knows better. (Armchair office pukes piss me off.) And of course in all of this as well, is the doing away with 170 years of Army tradition - branch insignia worn by officers will be removed to make a more "unified" Army. (****, officers don't need esprit de corps. We get our jollies from paying for these new uniforms and boots at the end of the year! Whooo-hoo!)

Badges and other such accoutrements shouldn't be worn on combat/field uniforms period....they serve no purpose and they are a waste of money...the same goes for combat patches.


You're starting to sound like a Marine ;)

[callous]

I believe it was Robert McNamara who was the Defense Secretary from 1961 to 1968. Whom ordered all branches of the US military to adopt the same BDU's and weapons. I think it was a good idea and the military should've stuck with it.

[11F5S]

Then again, the ACU is an assinine uniform in many ways as well. Velcro sucks. They plan on using velcro for name tapes, etc. but then when it comes to qualification badges - they're PIN-ONS! Something in the order of 92% of the soldiers questioned said, "NO!" to the pin ons but the uniform board knows better. (Armchair office pukes piss me off.) And of course in all of this as well, is the doing away with 170 years of Army tradition - branch insignia worn by officers will be removed to make a more "unified" Army. (****, officers don't need esprit de corps. We get our jollies from paying for these new uniforms and boots at the end of the year! Whooo-hoo!)

Badges and other such accoutrements shouldn't be worn on combat/field uniforms period....they serve no purpose and they are a waste of money...the same goes for combat patches.


You're starting to sound like a Marine ;)

Not at all! I said "on combat/field uniforms", I didn't say anything about their use on service or dress uniforms. :)

[Slater]

The US Air Force tried the Velcro leather nameplates on BDU's during the McPeak era. No one liked them (including me). They were cheaper than sewing on stripes, patches, tapes, and qualification bades but just looked, well, crappy.

[mi35d]

We're not talking about a weapons system. We're talking about a symbol of honor for a group of personnel that have worn that symbol in nearly every engagement since our inception as a nation.

To follow your analogy, it would be keeping things "modern" by getting rid of the "useless" anchor and globe on Marine uniforms. (The word "marine" on a nametape is enough.) To simplify Army logistics, get rid of the Ranger tab - just a bit of fluff on the shoulder. And of course, get rid of all the multi-colored berets. Not necessary. Etc. Etc. Etc.

The military is going out of its way to make sure every group is recognized yet within the army, a cherished symbol for officers - pride in your branch designation DOES run deep - is brushed aside without even a care.