{"id":30575,"date":"2012-06-29T17:16:39","date_gmt":"2012-06-29T21:16:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/valorguardians.com\/blog\/?p=30575"},"modified":"2012-06-29T17:16:39","modified_gmt":"2012-06-29T21:16:39","slug":"big-armys-duh-moment-on-uniforms","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/?p=30575","title":{"rendered":"Big Army’s “Duh” moment on uniforms"},"content":{"rendered":"

I’m finally getting to my email from the last two days, so if you haven’t seen your tip yet, hang on, I’ll get to it. But Jason sent us a link to a Military.com<\/a> article which reports that Big Army has decided that they’ll just stick with Multicam uniforms for the time being;<\/p>\n

After years of testing, Army uniform officials are planning to recommend that MultiCam should replace today’s pixilated design as the official camouflage pattern the service issues to all soldiers, Military.com has learned.<\/p>\n

Made by Crye Precision LLC of Brooklyn, N.Y., MultiCam is the pattern that outperformed the service’s Universal Camouflage Pattern, or UCP, to become the Army’s pattern for soldiers deploying to Afghanistan. UCP was nonetheless adopted in 2004, but came under congressional scrutiny when soldiers complained about its poor performance in Afghanistan.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

So, let me see if I got this right; the Army is going to decide to keep the uniform pattern they bought about two years ago and after spending $5 billion looking for a new pattern? And they can’t find waste to cut in the Defense Department that doesn’t involve raising Tricare fees? But, wait there are two options in the recommendation. One is just job security for the weenies at Natick;<\/p>\n

But officials running the camouflage effort are now looking at two options to recommend to the service’s senior leadership this fall.<\/p>\n

One option would be to make MultiCam the Army’s official camouflage pattern, sources tell Military.com.<\/p>\n

The second option would be to make MultiCam the service’s pattern for garrison and general deployment use, but also to have a family of approved camouflage patterns that could be issued for specific areas of the world.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Does anyone envision any scenario in which Option 2 won’t be the choice? Yeah, no, me either.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I’m finally getting to my email from the last two days, so if you haven’t seen … Big Army’s “Duh” moment on uniforms<\/span>Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[198],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-30575","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-big-army"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30575","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=30575"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30575\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=30575"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=30575"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=30575"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}