So it’s possible that UCP might have proven less disappointing had additional time and resources been allocated to its testing.)Ī good example of an environment-specific pattern family is CONCAMO.
A better version was developed later and is known as the AOR-Universal camouflage pattern. (To be fair, UCP was fielded without the benefit of proper testing. Perhaps this was a good thing because it allowed the makers of modern camouflage to recognise that pan-environment effectiveness was unattainable and that what was needed instead to achieve better performance in widely different landscapes was more specialized versions. However, UCP did not live up to its promise. Army’s 2004-19 Operational Camouflage pattern. What emerged was CADPAT/MARPAT, America’s UCP, which you might know as the U.S. This, they hoped, would result in an effective all-in one pattern. The Americans had the idea that they would take the colour scheme that performed best in each scenario and combine them into a single pattern. A total of four camouflage patterns were selected for testing in the three scenarios-woodland, desert, and urban-under day and night conditions. That year and continuing until 2004, the Americans investigated potential replacements for their then-active Woodland and Desert camouflage uniforms. military’s Universal Camouflage Pattern (UCP, for short). There’s more to this dance than meets the eye.įor proof, let’s step back in time to the year 2002 and look at the effort to develop the U.S. Spoiler alert: you would be wrong to think that. So you might think that creating a new pattern variation is a “fire and forget” deal where you take the geometry, slap on a new colour scheme, and-voila-a new MultiCam variant is born. It so happens that the base geometry of MultiCam does this quite well. In the case of camouflage, geometrical design serves the purpose of breaking the wearer’s outline at closer distances. MultiCam’s variations weren’t easily createdĪ pattern's geometrical design is like the foundation of a building. And, indeed, they are-despite sharing the original MultiCam’s shortcoming of effective blending at longer distances. Given how well it performs, you’d naturally expect the newer MultiCam versions to be just as versatile. That’s why it’s called the “80-percent solution” for most environments. The original MultiCam pattern is known for its versatility. But all are united around a common theme, and that is to make the MultiCam family appealing as an overall solution. However, each variation is designed for maximum effectiveness in a specific environment.ĭifferent versions, yes. All are based on an identical geometrical design.
There currently are five versions of MultiCam.
Breakdown of MultiCam’s four added versions.MultiCam’s variations weren’t easily created.
0 kommentar(er)
