# Why Is the Marine Corps Fighting With the Navy Over a Camouflage Pattern?



## Ravage (Jan 17, 2013)

http://www.theatlantic.com/national...th-the-navy-over-a-camouflage-pattern/267232/







Military combat uniforms have two purposes: to camouflage soldiers, and to hold together in rugged conditions. It stands to reason that there's only one "best" pattern, and one best stitching and manufacture. It should follow that when such a uniform is developed, the entire military should transition to it.

In 2002, the Marine Corps adopted a digital camouflage pattern called MARPAT. Rigorous field-testing proved that it was more effective than the splotched woodland pattern in use at the time, and the Combat Utility Uniform (of which it was a part) was a striking change for such a conservative institution.

Not to be outdone, the Army drew up digital plans of its own, and in 2005 issued a redesigned combat uniform in a "universal camouflage pattern" (UCP). Three years after the Marines made the change, four years after the invasion of Afghanistan, and two years after the invasion of Iraq, you might think the Army would have been loaded with data on how best to camouflage soldiers in known combat zones. You would be wrong.

In fact, not only did the Army dismiss the requirements of the operating environments, but it also literally chose the poorest performing pattern of its field tests. The "universal" in UCP refers to jungle, desert, and urban environments. In designing a uniform for wear in every environment, it designed a uniform that was effective in none.

As for durability, not long after the Army combat uniform appeared in Iraq, soldiers discovered that the uniform's crotch seams were prone to ripping open on the battlefield. Rather than fix the problem, however, the Army simply shipped more boxes of defective uniforms to supply sergeants. Stitching techniques were revisited the following year, and in 2007, uniforms already in circulation were tailored to compensate for the frustrating and distracting deficiency.

As it would turn out, MultiCam -- a pattern that the Army had originally passed over in favor of the universal pattern -- was discovered to work quite well in Afghanistan. The Army began issuing MultiCam combat uniforms to deployed soldiers, but continued (and continues to this day) peddling universal pattern combat uniforms to soldiers stateside -- a combat uniform that will never again be used in combat.

Such dysfunction is not unique to the Army. MARPAT was a success not only in function, but also in adding distinction to the Marines wearing it. Naturally the Air Force wanted in on that action, and set about to make its own mark on the camouflage world. It's first choice? A Vietnam-era blue tiger-stripe pattern. (You know, to blend in with the trees on Pandora.)

After an outcry in the ranks, the leadership settled on a color scheme slightly more subdued. The new uniform did, however, have the benefit of being "winter weight" only, which was just perfect for service in Iraq.

The Marine Corps has remained loyal to the effective MARPAT, and rightfully so. But when the Navy decided to migrate to a digital pattern three years ago, it chose a desert scheme a few shades too close to that of the Marines, and the Corps balked. The Navy has since restricted its digital desert pattern to Special Warfare units. (The Marine Corps has also warned the Army against infringing on its design.) Essentially, the branches of the U.S. military are now engaged in the same intellectual property battle as Google and Apple.

To make matters worse, the new Navy Working Uniform has been found to be highly flammable, and "will burn robustly" if exposed to fire. In fact, it turns into a "sticky molten material."
Nobody expects the military to make smart financial decisions. While the six-hundred-dollar hammer was a myth, such boondoggles as the F-35 joint strike fighter are very real. And while it is the world's best jet for fighting Transformers or supporting Iron Man, it is the worst for modern, non-computer-generated battlefields. (The Air Force isn't exactly flying a lot of sorties against the Taliban fighter jets.)

But everyone should expect and demand that the Defense Department purchase durable combat uniforms printed with the most effective camouflage pattern. Only the galactic stupidity of the Pentagon would allow inferior concealment in the name of public relations and marketing, which is what this uniform arms race amounts to. Each branch wants its members to have a distinct appearance, and there's nothing wrong with that. Such matters should, however, be confined to dress uniforms. As a matter of camouflage in hostile areas, a standard combat uniform across the branches is the only sane option.

From a financial perspective, it makes sense as well. Four combat uniforms require distinct accouterments and gear, to say nothing of manufacturing times and transportation overseas. If standards are an issue, I'll offer a baseline: a pattern that blends into the relevant operating environment; stitching that doesn't rip at the crotch; material that doesn't melt onto the skin. And the Pentagon should leave the embarrassing copyright battles to the smartphone industry. I'd like to think the United States military has more pressing things to worry about.


----------



## Ravage (Jan 17, 2013)

Why not go back to the tried and tested Woodland (at home etc), and only use the "what works" (MC, MARPAT, AOR, whatever) in the appropriate AO?


----------



## fox1371 (Jan 17, 2013)

They're not fighting....

This happened awhile ago.  Join the military and then you'll be up to date with this stuff!


----------



## AWP (Jan 17, 2013)

Ravage said:


> But everyone should expect and demand that the Defense Department purchase durable combat uniforms printed with the most effective camouflage pattern. Only the galactic stupidity of the Pentagon would allow inferior concealment in the name of public relations and marketing, which is what this uniform arms race amounts to. Each branch wants its members to have a distinct appearance, and there's nothing wrong with that. Such matters should, however, be confined to dress uniforms. As a matter of camouflage in hostile areas, a standard combat uniform across the branches is the only sane option.
> 
> From a financial perspective, it makes sense as well. Four combat uniforms require distinct accouterments and gear, to say nothing of manufacturing times and transportation overseas. If standards are an issue, I'll offer a baseline: a pattern that blends into the relevant operating environment; stitching that doesn't rip at the crotch; material that doesn't melt onto the skin. And the Pentagon should leave the embarrassing copyright battles to the smartphone industry. I'd like to think the United States military has more pressing things to worry about.


 
Discard the entire article...these two paragraphs are what matter and our services don't seem to understand that.


----------



## A11Amer!can (Jan 25, 2013)

The military services are becoming jokingly political.


----------



## RackMaster (Jan 25, 2013)

This quote is the only reason I'll admit to reading the whole article and with it, I want a job on Pandora...



> Naturally the Air Force wanted in on that action, and set about to make its own mark on the camouflage world. It's first choice? A Vietnam-era blue tiger-stripe pattern. (You know, to blend in with the trees on Pandora.)


----------



## JohnnyBoyUSMC (Jan 25, 2013)

A11Amer!can said:


> The military services are becoming jokingly political.


 
Eh not really sure it's politics, more of a pride and distinction of branch thing than anything else. Personally I say let whoever use whatever works for them in the field, I'm not gonna gripe about it!


----------



## ThunderHorse (Feb 1, 2013)

This is what I do know about this whole ordeal, the fabric quality that my uniform is made of sucks you know what.  The MCCUU or however it is...doesn't seem to blow out crotches, or stain as easily.  In regards to stains I'm talking about dirt...you get muddy in ACUs and that crap does not come out.


----------



## B3dlam (Feb 6, 2013)

What exactly can the Marine core do if the navy or army decided to wear MarPat?  Cry really loud? 

The new coast guard uniforms are horrid as well they paid no attention to the actual everyday comfort they are a royal pain to wear day to day I am just transitioning to coveralls and flight suits as much as possible these days.


----------



## Marine0311 (Feb 6, 2013)

B3dlam said:


> What exactly can the Marine core do if the navy or army decided to wear MarPat? Cry really loud?
> 
> The new coast guard uniforms are horrid as well they paid no attention to the actual everyday comfort they are a royal pain to wear day to day I am just transitioning to coveralls and flight suits as much as possible these days.


 
It's "Marine Corps" not "core". Both "Navy" and "Army" have capital letters.


----------



## B3dlam (Feb 6, 2013)

Marine0311 said:


> It's "Marine Corps" not "core". Both "Navy" and "Army" have capital letters.


Noted apologies no offense intended!


----------



## pardus (Feb 6, 2013)

B3dlam said:


> What exactly can the Marine core do if the navy or army decided to wear MarPat? Cry really loud?
> .


 
Jesus...

Apart from your other fuck ups with situational awareness and insulting the fighting forces of this country through your ignorance, do you know that MARPAT is copyrighted?

I hope you're better at your job than current affairs...


----------



## B3dlam (Feb 6, 2013)

pardus said:


> Jesus...
> 
> Apart from your other fuck ups with situational awareness and insulting the fighting forces of this country through your ignorance, do you know that MARPAT is copyrighted?
> 
> I hope you're better at your job than current affairs...


 
I understand that MarPat is copyrighted and that makes sense.  I am not a governmental law professor so I will admit my ignorance however I wasn't aware one branch of the military could take another branch to court over copyright infringement it seems like it would be a mired bog of Sovereign Immunity among other things and again I am no expert just attempting to learn here.

I have nothing but respect for the US Marine Corps.  With that said I do believe that if we have one pattern that works as was mentioned in the original article why not allow everyone to use it.  Is it merely an issue of each service maintaining its own identity? 

It just irks me that soldiers lives may be put at risk due to an issue of copyright.


----------



## pardus (Feb 6, 2013)

B3dlam said:


> It just irks me that soldiers lives may be put at risk due to an issue of copyright.


 
I'm guessing that you're young...

You need to realize that "Soldiers" lives are meaningless to politicians until it effects their re-election.


----------



## B3dlam (Feb 6, 2013)

pardus said:


> I'm guessing that you're young...
> 
> You need to realize that "Soldiers" lives are meaningless to politicians until it effects their re-election.


 
If this was an issue of politicians screwing over soldiers I would understand completely.  I guess I was just surprised to see one branch denying another branch something that could help them however I guess when you get high enough up in the ranks you have to become a politician of sorts.


----------



## DrkEgl (Feb 12, 2013)

The NWU Type II (Navy desert digital) isn't simply restricted to NSW; it's also designated for support and other NECC units within the appropriate AOR.  The NWU Type III (Navy green digital) which replaced my lovely woodlands is sort of growing on me, though I hope not literally.  I have heard all the same rumor about Marine Corps jealousy or confusion.  I find it difficult to think any actual jealousy exists and ridiculous to think any true confusion exists.  The potential for confusion was framed in a way that a Marine wouldn't be able to distinguish between another Marine and a Navy (Seabee or Sailor) wearing the Type III.  If that is a legitimate concern, I am terrified. 

I'll be, um, "field testing" the Type II uniform a little later this year.  I'll give you my honest opinion when I get back.


----------



## Teufel (Feb 12, 2013)

B3dlam said:


> If this was an issue of politicians screwing over soldiers I would understand completely. I guess I was just surprised to see one branch denying another branch something that could help them however I guess when you get high enough up in the ranks you have to become a politician of sorts.



The Marine Corps wants to be be unique. Didn't the other branches want the same thing?  Isn't that why the Army went to an obnoxious grey camouflage pattern? Then the Air Force went to a terrible tiger stripe grey pattern?  Then the Navy decided to adopt a blue and gold camo pattern?  There is something to be said about looking different.  Granted it didn't really work out for the other services because of corrupt procurement practices.  If you want the best camo pattern just adopt the multicam.  Which most SOF units have done.  You don't need the Marine Corps' pattern.  If the Marine Corps wants to do its own thing....well why not?  So much money has been spent on camouflage development by all the services.  Why is it that the service with by far the smallest budget and who spent the LEAST amount of money on camouflage development being accused of monopolizing a camouflage pattern?  If you want to wear MARPAT....then sign the dotted line and join the Marine Corps.  We have always been the most ornery of the services.  It's part of what makes us who we are.


----------



## Teufel (Feb 12, 2013)

DrkEgl said:


> The NWU Type II (Navy desert digital) isn't simply restricted to NSW; it's also designated for support and other NECC units within the appropriate AOR. The NWU Type III (Navy green digital) which replaced my lovely woodlands is sort of growing on me, though I hope not literally. I have heard all the same rumor about Marine Corps jealousy or confusion. I find it difficult to think any actual jealousy exists and ridiculous to think any true confusion exists. The potential for confusion was framed in a way that a Marine wouldn't be able to distinguish between another Marine and a Navy (Seabee or Sailor) wearing the Type III. If that is a legitimate concern, I am terrified.
> 
> I'll be, um, "field testing" the Type II uniform a little later this year. I'll give you my honest opinion when I get back.


 
Marine Corps jealousy?  I have no response to this.


----------



## DrkEgl (Feb 12, 2013)

Teufel said:


> Marine Corps jealousy? I have no response to this.


 
I agree. It's absurd and I rejected it prima facie.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Feb 12, 2013)

According to NAVADMIN 374/09 wear of NWU type II is restricted to NSW units and support units attached to NSW units.
http://www.public.navy.mil/bupers-npc/reference/messages/Documents/NAVADMINS/NAV2009/NAV09374.txt

The original reason that I'd read back then was that the female bulldog felt scorned by the male squid that he would flatter himself with having a desert pattern that so closely resembles MARPAT.  Again, this whole copyright of the freakin' pattern by the Corps shows how prima donna they can get.  Whatever happened to one team one fight, especially since the Jarheads and Squids are in the same freakin department.


----------



## Teufel (Feb 12, 2013)

ThunderHorse said:


> According to NAVADMIN 374/09 wear of NWU type II is restricted to NSW units and support units attached to NSW units.
> http://www.public.navy.mil/bupers-npc/reference/messages/Documents/NAVADMINS/NAV2009/NAV09374.txt
> 
> The original reason that I'd read back then was that the female bulldog felt scorned by the male squid that he would flatter himself with having a desert pattern that so closely resembles MARPAT. Again, this whole copyright of the freakin' pattern by the Corps shows how prima donna they can get. Whatever happened to one team one fight, especially since the Jarheads and Squids are in the same freakin department.


 
Did you just quote a NAVADMIN?  Aren't you in the Army?  Correction, aren't you a 2nd Lt who has yet to hit the operating forces?  I have seen divers, EOD and Seabees wearing the new cammies.  The woodland digital pattern anyway.  

Primadonnas?  Have you ever deployed with any Marines in your long military career?  I assume that you have not since you are still in your entry level officer pipeline.  I contest that you have no basis to make such an unflattering assessment of my service.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Feb 12, 2013)

I guess I needed a pirate smiley for my sarcasm.  By sourcing the NAVADMIN I provided facts.  The NAVADMIN was in specific reference to the wear of NWU type II and not NWU type III (Woodland).  I'm pretty sure all of NECC at this point has issued NWU type III to their sailors.  

In regards to Marines, a man I consider my brother is a Corporal, I'm very good friends with the Marines I had the pleasure of being in the same class at Armor school with.  All I'm saying is that up in the headshed there was a fit about it because it was "too similar," also the cut worn by NSW personnel vs the remainder of the NECC is also different...ergo why on the uniform worn by the Seabees you still have the waist level pockets and non angled chest pockets.


----------



## Salt USMC (Feb 16, 2013)

Its not super-duper hard to tell apart Marines in woodlands and sailors in the type-III pattern.

-The Navy's pattern looks very, very faded.  MARPAT tends to retain its colors even after many years of wear. 
-Navy pattern has level chest pocket whereas Marines has angled pockets.  Also the Marine pocket flaps are rectangular.
-Navy has velcro on the shoulder pockets.  MARPAT doesnt have that unless you add it (Or are wearing the FROG shirts)
-The black color patches on the Navy uniform are more-or-less vertically oriented, where MARPAT has horizontally oriented patches.
-Most importantly, the sailor typically wearing the type III will have long nasty hair!!


----------



## Teufel (Feb 16, 2013)

Deathy McDeath said:


> Its not super-duper hard to tell apart Marines in woodlands and sailors in the type-III pattern.
> 
> -The Navy's pattern looks very, very faded. MARPAT tends to retain its colors even after many years of wear.
> -Navy pattern has level chest pocket whereas Marines has angled pockets. Also the Marine pocket flaps are rectangular.
> ...


 
This is why people say hey doc when they see me huh


----------



## Salt USMC (Feb 17, 2013)

Perhaps!


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 17, 2013)

Teufel said:


> This is why people say hey doc when they see me huh


 
I think it's because you've been wounded so many times, you've been awarded an honorary medic MOS.


----------



## pardus (Feb 17, 2013)

ThunderHorse said:


> I guess I needed a pirate smiley for my sarcasm. By sourcing the NAVADMIN I provided facts. The NAVADMIN was in specific reference to the wear of NWU type II and not NWU type III (Woodland). I'm pretty sure all of NECC at this point has issued NWU type III to their sailors.
> 
> In regards to Marines, a man I consider my brother is a Corporal, I'm very good friends with the Marines I had the pleasure of being in the same class at Armor school with. All I'm saying is that up in the headshed there was a fit about it because it was "too similar," also the cut worn by NSW personnel vs the remainder of the NECC is also different...ergo why on the uniform worn by the Seabees you still have the waist level pockets and non angled chest pockets.


 
Don't jump up and down, that ice you're on doesn't look too thick to me...

Be mindful of who you are talking to on this site. Sir.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Feb 17, 2013)

Roger that.


----------



## Teufel (Feb 18, 2013)

Marauder06 said:


> I think it's because you've been wounded so many times, you've been awarded an honorary medic MOS.


 
I've certainly helped a lot of guys get some real life practice.


----------



## Salt USMC (Feb 18, 2013)

Teufel said:


> I've certainly helped a lot of guys get some real life practice.


With budget cuts on the way, the live tissue course is out. In its place is a deployment with Teufel's platoon, as a corpsman


----------



## Teufel (Feb 19, 2013)

Deathy McDeath said:


> With budget cuts on the way, the live tissue course is out. In its place is a deployment with Teufel's platoon, as a corpsman


 
I've gotten better at dodge, dip, dive, duck, dodge....I've never been wounded in Afghanistan.  I've had a couple of vehicles totaled under my feet though...


----------



## Salt USMC (Feb 19, 2013)

Its a travesty that they don't require the 5 D's as part of PTP!!


----------



## Loki (Mar 12, 2013)

So much money and time wasted on such an issue.  DOD and the Pentagon need to pull their collective heads out of the asses. ACU is another Army fuck up beyond repair. It is sickening the amount of body armor, uniforms and gear that is multiple colors in storage and issue points. Then all this crap that every service has to have their own distinctive cool guy camo... Sounds like there is allot of adult supervision absent as well as fiscal oversight with regard to tax payers dollars. During my career spanning 1978-2011 I had over 50 work / fatigue uniforms of 6 different types. Not including boots and additional matching junk / crap.


----------

