Congress Proposes Ground Combat Uniform

[Buffa1oso1di3r]

Congress Proposes Common Ground Combat Uniform
In the 2010 House Defense Authorization bill there is a section that would require standard ground combat uniforms.

“Section 352—

Requirements for Standard Ground Combat Uniform This section would require the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Defense Logistics Agency, to require that future ground combat uniforms be standardized in order to ensure increased interoperability of ground combat forces and reduce tactical risks encountered when military personnel wear a different uniform from their counterparts in the other military services in a combat area.

The committee notes that, previously all the military services used the same desert camouflage uniform or the standard battle dress uniform, both in the temperate and enhanced weather versions. However, the Defense Supply Center Philadelphia of the Defense Logistics Agency, which is responsible for the manufacture of all U.S. military uniforms, now procures unique camouflage utility uniforms for each of the military services: the Army combat uniform, the Airman battle uniform, the Navy working uniform, and the Marine Corps combat utility uniform.

The committee is concerned that the recent move toward unique service camouflage uniforms has resulted in increased costs and production inefficiencies. For example, problems with consistency in fabric shading have required remanufacture of some uniforms. In addition, the costs for the unique uniforms are substantially more than for the standard battle dress uniform because of the differences in design, camouflage pattern, and type of fabric.

Most importantly, the committee is concerned that this uniqueness poses a tactical risk in theater, especially for those assigned to combatant commands or as individual augmentees who may be wearing a different uniform from those they are serving with in combat.

The committee also notes that service-specific battle dress uniforms magnify the challenges and costs associated with procuring personal protective gear and body armor that conform to the design and coloration of the basic uniform”



Well, Congress pretty much hit the nail on the head, just six years too late. This horse has been out of the barn for awhile but it does seem that the hoopla over the Army’s use of UCP in Afghanistan has attracted some thoughtful analysis. Interestingly, these are essentially the same arguments made by Robert Strange McNamara when he was Secretary of Defense during the Kennedy administration. At his direction, in the early 1960s the services moved to a standard uniform including boots and at one point, even T-shirts. However, this proposed legislation also references an issue that has been a major concern in the field and that is fratricide and OPSEC.

The services rely heavily on their individual uniforms for branding purposes so it is unclear how the departments may react to such a directive. Although, according to the document, there is some wiggle room including a reference to “future ground combat uniforms” which might allow the services to delay any changes to coincide with the fielding of future individual equipment ensembles. Another issue is that the bill references both utility uniforms as well as combat uniforms. Interestingly, Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps have all adopted FR combat uniforms that closely resemble one another except in the area of camouflage. The real differences come to play in the utility uniform realm. Such distinctions might make implementation difficult.

There have been calls within industry for some time for the services to adopt a single color scheme in order to simplify production and realize cost savings. While the implications of such legislation are very deep for the military as well as industry, it is important to note that this is still just a bill and not yet law. In fact, it may not even make it out of committee.

Thanks to ADS Ventures for alerting us to this legislation. It will be interesting to find out who is promoting this particular measure.

So... what do you servicemen and women think about this?

[AirPower3P0X1]

*Does the happy dance at the thought of never having to see the Airman Battle Uniform again*
Miserable uniform. I'm sick of messing up a pair every time I go out into the field.
"Battle" wasn't a key functionality when that uniform was designed.
If this were to pass, I'd fear we'd get stuck in ACU's though... Largest service, so theoretically the uniform would be the easiest to transition to.
Not an ACU fan, either, though. Don't like hook and loop fasteners or the zipper and the light pattern seems just as prone to getting jacked up in the same way the ABU does.
The light material is pretty cool though.

[mtnsldr]

Originally Posted by army_grunt_11B

I think its stupid, City Police Officers and City Fire Fighters don't wear the same Uniforms, even though they both protect the City. So why should we as Service Memebers look the same when we protect our Country? I take pride in looking "Different" its why I joined my Respective Service, I think wearing the same Combat Uniform would be a waste of money better spent somewhere else right now. Yes, I would rather them spend the probable Billions this would/will take and spend it on new Weapons or improve on whats not working right now.

Dude. This one comment has made it incredibly evident that your rank also reflects your current knowledge level. There is a reason why Privates (to include PFCs) keep their traps shut.

For those of us who have spent a few years living in the tactical mindset, anytime you have Friendly Force Identification requriments, you know that even the slightest differences invite the opportunity for a mis-indentification on the battlefield. Especially if we were to go back to the old school tactical combat that we've practiced for years, everytime you see a different color in the woodline you'll have to be questioning your reactions. Bad juju. Even worse when joe has been humping his ruck for 30 hours and has just pulled first shift in his patrol base and has to find some way to stay up for another hour.

I've had this conversation with a few influential people who have mentioned it a few times over. Its just too bad that we couldn't figure out that tactical requirements should have overridden inter-service rivalry. We have dress uniforms for a reason, and that is the time for service independence, not on the battlefield. I'd be embarrassed if a Congressmen had to remind me of that.

[DaveIn3D]

I might be a little biased but I would say go with the Marine uniforms. They are the most comfortable and the enemy already knows to run when you see them. The USAF has crappy uniforms and the Army has zippers and velcro and all kinds of uncomfortable useless crap on their uniforms. Keep it comfortable and simple.

In the end the uniforms will look distinct anyways. The Zoomies will have their uniforms starched and pressed with the wing/unit patches on them. The Marines will still probably consider it wash and wear but will still keep it looking pressed without any annoying patches. The Hooas will have 37 patches on the uniform like they always do. Oh yeah..dont forget that silly beret the Army has also...

-3D

[Woody]

Not sure it will prevent any friendly fire .Even when we wore red coats people still managed to shoot one another .
Dont really see the point of putting bright patches on a camoflage outfits
but hey what do I know .

[SGM]

Originally Posted by Woody

Not sure it will prevent any friendly fire .Even when we wore red coats people still managed to shoot one another .
Dont really see the point of putting bright patches on a camoflage outfits
but hey what do I know .

Anytime you got war, there will be blue on blue incedents, but everything we can do to eliminate them will help. Also on our combat uniforms, we also have patches to match - not brightly colored.

[PaulR]

I do agree with all branches having the same field uniform, because of the immense cost of having five different field uniforms. These uniforms serve the same purpose.

If I were to pick a design, I would go with the Marine Corps style. I feel that the Army and Air Force versions are crap and low quality. I do not like velcro on the uniforms. The strips either come off or stop functions within a very short span of time.

[RLM10_2_06]

I have a few points, but first and foremost; I am no authority. I've only worn two combat uniforms, and never worn either into combat.

1) I love the idea of a universal ground uniform (I would encourage it for the air and sea too, but that's a matter of uniformity, not practicality). There's a reason it's called a "uniform", and especially with so much inter-service operation nowadays, I see no reason whatsoever for all ground forces to NOT have a universal uniform. A few patches tells us everything we need to know about each other (service, unit, rank, etc.), and there's no need for the rest of the world to be able to tell our services apart. We have dress uniforms for a reason.

2) It seems like the Army had the right idea with the IR square; it seems to me like this, if applied to all U.S. forces in general, could be highly effective. That said, I obviously don't have combat experience; I simply have heard no criticism on the IR squares. This is also an idea that could be built on as technology advances (make them harder to replicate by the enemy, add identification aspects to them, etc.).

3) I agree with previous posts that the Marine Corps seems to have gotten it right; I can say that the ACU doesn't feel too great, and isn't too terribly practical, and from what I've seen of the ABU, it seems to have many of the flaws of the ACU, and maybe some other problems.

[Sandbagger]

I agree wholly with the concept of standarizing the uniforms. As I've mentioned before, when you're working at a forward supply point issuing these things out, it helps to be able to give the same uniforms out to 2 or 3 different branches without compatibility issues.

I believe that the legit ACUs I've been issued are good kit minus the choice in colors for the UCP. Velcro has effectively made it so that I can run one set of cammies into the ground (holes, stains, torn stitching etc), tear the patches off, DX the uniform and put the patches on another uniform without spending a dime on alterations or waiting more than the few moments it takes me to line them up.

In addition, now being in the Simultaneous Membership Program, I am given another advantage. The National Guard gives me 4 uniforms, ROTC gives me 2 uniforms but because I can change the patches at a moment's notice, it's easy for me to switch between MS II (ROTC Land) mode and CDT E-5 (ARNG) mode.