• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

US Marines to receive new camoflage uniforms

A

AndrewR

Lifer
Well, at some point. Read the story here. They are still testing the new design.

One thing that struck me, however, is the drive to keep this uniform unique to the Corps. So, it's ok if troops from the other services are more visible on the battlefield? Let them die because Marines need to look distinctive! That's asinine to me. Talk about taking interservice rivalry to a bizarre extreme.

Interesting nevertheless.
 
The most interesting thing of all....

<< The &quot;spit and polish&quot; of Marine black boots may also be about to go by the wayside. The new uniform for the first time has high-topped brown suede lace-up boots. They can be cleaned with a typical suede brush. >>

 


<< One thing that struck me, however, is the drive to keep this uniform unique to the Corps. So, it's ok if troops from the other services are more visible on the battlefield? >>



Airborne Rangers and Green Berets wear Berets . . . is that considered a problem, too? Most branches of the service have distinctive uniforms.
 
Another question....is the Army still going ahead with their idea to have every soldier wear the black berets? Back in my day 😀 the beret was a badge of honor reserved for the Rangers.
 
Emos: Rangers still wear the Red beret. At least they did I when I was in back in the early 90's. I agree, the beret should be kept for use only by the special forces.

AndrewR: In summer the Marine BDU's are unique to the Corps. They roll their sleeves up exposing the inside of the sleeve, while the Army rolls up the sleeves leaving only the outside of the sleeve exposed.
 
Xerox, there's quite a HUGE difference between ceremonial/dress uniform items (berets) and BATTLE Dress Uniforms. These fatigues are meant for actual combat. No Spec Ops soldier is going to wear his colored beret into battle (ditto for rolling sleeve inside out).

Philosopher, I saw that part, too. I wonder if they took into consideration ballistics protection? Of course, many soldiers already wear lighter boots (jungle boots) in place of the all leather combat boots.

Emos, as far as I know, that's still going forward.

Frenchie: Rangers=black, Special Forces=green, Airborne=red.
 
I want to know who sits around and decides things like this... Is there a guy in the pentagon with a cat walk in his office to have the uni's modeled?
 
Tiger Stripe BDU's rule...I always pick up pair when I'm in the States......speaking of which, I'm about due for a new pair...anyone around Marietta GA? The best ones are from Rothco in Marietta.
 
Yes, the beret is distinctive. Wore the maroon one for a while. Also wore tan and light blue while on peacekeeping missions.

Yep, the entire Army is going to the black one. All the REMFs finally get their day.

I'd think the USMC would save money on procurement costs by sticking with the current pattern which the other services use also. But, maybe they are weary of hand me downs.

I remember transfering a bunch of M60 machineguns with the barrels shot out to the USMC. Those things were in terrible shape. We were coding them out. The NCO from the USMC who signed for them was very happy.




 
i'm sorry, it might be just me but the new BDU's don't seem to be working to well. Check this picture out...can you spot the 2 marines? Picture

i see them, do you? 😉
 
AndrewR

It seems apparent that you have never been in any faction of military service in America. Every branch of the military has its own unique uniform, that is until the Army switched from their basic green uniform to the current cammie uniform that the Marines have worn for 20+ yrs.

This statement

the drive to keep this uniform unique to the Corps

and these statements

So, it's ok if troops from the other services are more visible on the battlefield? Let them die because Marines need to look distinctive

have nothing to with each other and only someone that has never been a part of something like the Marine Corps would even equate such a thing.

And this statement

Talk about taking interservice rivalry to a bizarre extreme

only goes to show that you believe the different branches of military service are no more than extra curricular clubs at some high school!

Lets look at how unique the Marine Corps actually is.

The Corps has 13 weeks of the hardest, toughest, and yes best training in the art of making killers out of everyday men and women. When those Army recruits are drinking beer after 8 weeks of training the Corps recruits still have 5 weeks left before they even get the taste of a soda. If you don't think it's the toughest ask any other military branch personnel if they want to go through it.

The Officers of the Corps carry a sword earned on the shores of Tripoli for their courage and victory. Do you see any other branch of services officers with that distinction?

The Corps has 230+ yrs of loyal and faithful service to this United States, what other branch has that?

What branch of service stands guard at the White House? The Corps.

What branch of services band plays at every presidential function? The Corps.

So you see AndrewR I've just scratched the surface and I've showed you many ways the Corps is unique among the branches of service and these uniforms are nothing more than a continuation of that uniqueness and not a desire for our fellow brethren to die in battle as you assert!

burnedout

Are you asserting that the Corps current uniform is a hand-me-down from another branch of service? Saying this makes it seem you are,

But, maybe they are weary of hand me downs.

And by saying this

I remember transfering a bunch of M60 machineguns with the barrels shot out to the USMC. Those things were in terrible shape. We were coding them out. The NCO from the USMC who signed for them was very happy.

you seem to be implying that the Corps could do better than taking what the Army considered in terrible shape weapons but in reality the Corps saw it as a waste of a perfectly good weapon in the hands of someone that knew how to repair it and a weapon that Marines could use to continue defending this country without having to charge the taxpayers for new weapons!

Oh and BiggieN,

Marines are like Velociraptors, it's not the two you see in front of you that gets you it's the one to the side you don't see that puts the bullet in you.😉

Every branch of service in America has their uniqueness and I don't think that this country could defend itself or help defend our allies as efficiently and decisevly as we do if one or the other was missing.

But don't sh!t on any of them and especially not The Corps!

And I hope I don't offend anyone with my rant.
 
Are you asserting that the Corps current uniform is a hand-me-down from another branch of service? Saying this makes it seem you are, But, maybe they are weary of hand me downs.

I'm not knocking USMC one bit, although their enlisted promotions lagged behind ours. I admire their espirit de corps. I wish all the other US Army units aside from 82nd, SF and RGR had their espirit de corps. I've fought with and against them. Awesome group and an awesome service. I'd say they are indeed weary of hand-me-downs.

The uniform comment by me was out of context, by my own admission.😱 Yes, they had cammies before we did. We got ours beginning in '82. Some units earlier.

I'm questioning the costs. Soldier's purchasing berets is one thing. Marines purchasing 4 new sets of uniforms is another. Sort of the McNamara philosophy. One size fits all. i.e. Navy and USAF using F4s when each service wanted their own fighter.

you seem to be implying that the Corps could do better than taking what the Army considered in terrible shape weapons but in reality the Corps saw it as a waste of a perfectly good weapon in the hands of someone that knew how to repair it and a weapon that Marines could use to continue defending this country without having to charge the taxpayers for new weapons!

The masters of recycled war material. I got stories about the &quot;mules&quot; we owned and 2-1/2 ton trucks also. Yes, they have also been issued new weapons prior to US Army procurement for our new ones. For example, the SAW, the M16A2, to name a few. They received those two weapons before US Army.

The situation wasn't that we didn't know how to repair the M60s. We did. They were 20 years old and had reached the end of their specified service life. A few were used in 'Nam. It was time to code them out.

Yes, certainly, the USMC is able to accomplish their missions with less resources than the US Army. You'll rarely, if ever, see me in a hotly contested discussion regarding USMC attributes.

Lot's of respect here for the leathernecks.


 
Having been out with or dated someone from every branch of the military (except for the coastguard ). I know that all the branches have their differences, and each has them for a reason. Why shouldn't each military have their own uniforms, it helps to distinguish them when in battle. Or in times of peace. Marines are not perfect (dated enough of them to learn this first hand) but the bust their a$$es to keep this country safe.
 
burnedout

I apologize for sounding aholish to you but you were at the bottom of the thread and I was on a roll when I read it. My bad.:frown:
 
CliffC: Your assumptions are amazing and somewhat amusing. Despite your protestations to the contrary, the fact remains that Marine Corps troops have worn the same BDU camoflage pattern as all the other services for at least the last ten years, probably more close to the twenty mentioned in that article. Every Marine I've met and every Marine I've seen has worn the same woodland camoflage pattern that every Army and every Air Force member wears, too (and some Naval personnel, too I would imagine -- don't think they wear it a tremendous amount though).

What's amazing to me is that people insist that interservice rivalry is a good thing. One of the most effective armies in the world is distinctly not separated into different brances that war for money, prestige and influence. It's also one of the most veteran armies in the world and happens to be in a little beseiged country called Israel. Think they know something about military matters perhaps?

The history of the Marine Corps or any other branch does not in any manner impact the statement that trademarking this particular camoflage pattern so that only the Marine Corps can use it is a disservice to the other branches should it be shown that this uniform's camoflage pattern is truly superior for combat use. That's like the Army developing a form of combat armor which is particularly effective in preventing penetration by standard Soviet 7.62mm rounds and then DENYING that to the other branches because it should be uniquely Army. That's asinine and takes interservice differences to a point where they potentially reduce the tactical advantages of their brethren under arms.

For fluff and circumstance, differentiation between services is fine. Promoting rivalry is fine. Taking technological advantages that give combat advantage and using them to the exclusion of the rest of the UNITED STATES MILITARY (of which the US Marine Corps is a part, mind you) is myopic and idiotic.
 
I have a cousin who is a tank platoon commander in the Corp and he was telling me about this over Christmas. There are major reasons for doing this:

1. The material the unis are going to be made of reflect radar and absorb body heat. Making it harder to see a mass of men moving across the battlefield by both radar(yes men do show up if there's enough of them.) and infared.

2. The design of the camo brakes up their silhoutte better, again making them harder to see.

3. The Marines have always been big on being different from the rest of the military. The new unis serve this purpose and help them tell each other apart during mas excercises.

There were more but I can't remember....#'s 1 and 2 were the driving forces behind this change.
 
if they are indeed better BDU's then it should be shared across all the branches. as AndrewR said, why should they deny the other branches this pattern simply becuase they want to be unique? i have no problems with marines. My ANSI (Assistant Naval Science Instructor) was a marine before he switched to the Navy...(better money, easier job he says😉) I respect all branches of the armed forces because they are willing to put their lives on the line. But if the uniform is a &quot;better&quot; uniform it should be shared across all branches.
 
Wow, kudos to the Marines for upgrading!! Anything to make the Marines even more powerful and deadlier is fine with me! lol.
 
BiggieN:

You're ANSI may have been a Jarhead before he became a Squid; but he was always U.S. Navy Property - The USMC is a branch of the USN.

BTW - Virtually ALL camo patterns developed these days (for the military or civilian markets) are patented and trademarked. They are also highly terrain-specific for their respective usage.
 
shinerburke: That's basically what the article says (though it doesn't mention the radiation absorption abilities, which doesn't surprise me at all). The &quot;differentiation&quot; part is just stupid to me, and who cares if they need to tell each other apart on the battlefield -- a US soldier is a US soldier. Plus, if the Marines look substantially different from Army troops, and they are operating in the same theater, it significantly increases the chances of friendly fire incidents. Not busting on you (nor the Marines, really) -- just pointing out some things.

If they want to trademark it, fine -- but allow the other services to use it. Frankly, it should be a military wide change, not just a USMC one. Are the Marines going to start using different ammunition, too?

Hell, they have the Osprey -- I guess I should feel sorry for them. They are beta testing an experimental aircraft from the sounds of it. Some people should hang if Marines are dying needlessly. :|
 
One last point: I highly respect the Marine Corps. I went to school with a bunch of jarheads (Virginia Military Institute, Class of '94), and those guys were high speed, low drag. Like burnedout says, they have amazing esprit de corps and some hellacious training (their officer training is by far the hardest), and I am thankful that there is a Marine Corps (and am thankful that I don't have to be in it!). If I had to pick a branch to cover my ass, it would be USMC (for SpecOps, maybe something else 😉 ).

NEVERTHELESS, I think the trademarking thing is a bad idea for the military as a whole. If it were USAF, USA, or USN doing it, my arguements would be exactly the same.
 
NEVERTHELESS, I think the trademarking thing is a bad idea for the military as a whole.

AndrewR: I'll strongly agree with you.

Even though it promotes some distinction, it also promotes animosity. And oh, the interoperability nightmares from that animosity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top