17 thoughts on “Multicam in Afghanistan”

  1. I think its cool to see The Red Bulls are in combat.

    The last decades has certainly brought a lot of patches out of mothballs!

  2. good post…got a couple of thoughts on it over at my blog with a link back here…basically, I think there is no “one pattern does it all” approach, the Marines stuck with 2 patterns (of course it costs a lot less to equip them than it does the Army) but I think multicam is a step in the right direction…maybe they will create the mythical “digital multicam”

  3. Anything is better than ACUs which only seem to work within 100 meters of the Tigris or Euprhates rivers, and nowhere else.

  4. The sad part is, how much money did the Army waste trying to keep up with the Marine Corps and the digital camo craze, wasting money on a uniform that doesn’t do the job. The Multi-Cam is superior, obviously.

    And before I get yelled at for saying that the Army was having some sort of Marine-envy, take a look at the USAF’s and the Navy’s sad attempts as well…

    1. The Army started fielding the ACU before the Marines decided to go with their digi-pat.

      The problem isn’t so much the Army wasting money (it’s a relative drop in the bucket considering they spent 20 years trying to develop the RAH-66!), but that the troops get hit in the wallet pretty badly when you revamp the uniforms.

    2. ‘Phib complains frequently about the cost to maintain the “Seabag.” When I was in we were able to choose between the old dungaree style and the new utilites (which didn’t last long). The old style looked like what a sailor man would wear. The utilites looked like something you might wear in a steel mill. I bought Seafarers as soon as I could get to the Navy Exchange in Newport. I finally threw away the last of my utilites that were issued in boot about 8 months after I got aboard Courtney.

      Frankly, I don’t see how the Chiefs and Officers are able to maintain their uniforms without spending a lot. And the Navy camo is silly beyond description.

  5. I’m with Huey148 that no one pattern fits most situations, although Multi-Cam seems to do a better job than most. Crye’s marketing doesn’t seem to show a lot of different background settings that allow viewers a chance to see how well it works, and what they do have appears to be photoshopped to make the colors and patterns look blended.

    I don’t imagine there’s any solution for having to burn cash to keep the seabag current, but it can be costly. Crye’s online retail costs are prohibitive for civilians, let alone for military personnel.

    1. Well, the battalions that are using multicam in A-stan are being issued sets, as organizational clothing and individual equipment (OCIE- what you Marines would call 782 gear), rather than having to buy a set. They still have to maintain the regular 4 sets of ACUs for their clothing bag, presumably back in storage CONUS. So I’m not really worried about the cost, since it isn’t coming out of these troops wallets.

      And I agree that you’ll never come up with a single uniform that is optimal for all environments. Were it up to me, CONUS soldiers in training would be issued and wear OD jungle fatigues, with the appropriate uniforms issued when mobilized for a given theater.

    2. PS I meant to mention, for we hunter/outdoorsman types, that Natural Gear has some patterns that seem to blend in well. Their gear isn’t designed for warfighters, but, since I’m not doing that anymore, thought you folks might be interested in a look-see.

  6. I’m a Red Bull combat veteran (2nd BN 135th INF) so it is indeed nice to see the 34th ID “Red Bull” doing what they do best. “ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK”

Comments are closed.