OceanBonfire
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 390
- Points
- 1,080
French Army chooses new camouflage for 2024
- Thread starter OceanBonfire
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 20,671
- Points
- 1,260
Not just you.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,077
- Points
- 1,160
Eventual if everyone uses the same metrics, it will lead to one best choice.
- Reaction score
- 7,018
- Points
- 1,310
Good thing DLR doesn't, so we're stuck with the CADPAT (MT) abomination, while almost every one of our allies adopts Multicam in some variation.
- Reaction score
- 17,349
- Points
- 1,280
Cam-multi.
- Reaction score
- 1,624
- Points
- 1,260
Just wondering why you think CADPAT (MT) is an abomination. from what I have heard the troops in 3 RCR that are trialling it are liking the pattern. Only talking about the CADPAT pattern not the design of the combats as that is a separate issue.
- Reaction score
- 17,349
- Points
- 1,280
The Australians just recently developed (well, modified) their own as well.
- Reaction score
- 7,018
- Points
- 1,310
The pattern itself is not at issue; Its functional, does what's asked of it, and will work both in Arid and Temperate climates.
The issue I see is licensing. Once again this will be a pattern that is only used by the CAF, only authorized for production by "Peerless Garments" or whoever wins the contract, and will cause us to manufacture a wide array of kit in CADPAT(MT); where Multicam and its spin-offs are being made, used, and supplied by all major manufacturers around the world. We will run into the same problems we saw with CTS: this is not a program to ensure our soldiers get kit, its a stimulus project.
- Reaction score
- 17,349
- Points
- 1,280
so...like every other project?
- Reaction score
- 7,018
- Points
- 1,310
Just because its the way we've always done it, doesn't mean it should be the way we keep doing it.so...like every other project?
- Reaction score
- 17,349
- Points
- 1,280
I agree. I'm not justifying it, or even saying it's a good idea (it isn't).
Fabius
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 1,021
- Points
- 810
Remember that the origin of the CADPAT(MT) program was a Commander of the Canadian Army saying he wanted to adopt Multicam. Result is CADPAT (MT), a Canadian only, orphan design with no wide industry support so no one can purchase gear or kit in that pattern or something close nor can the Army purchase off the shelf anything in a pattern close.
Success!
Success!
So a Commander says…
“I want multi-cam. It’s in use by various allies, there is all kinds of personal kit already commercially available. It looks sharp. And we could potentially streamline our clothing supply system because we then don’t have to issue every single new recruit a bedroom full or CADPAT stuff they’ll never use.”
And the good idea fairy in Ottawa said… “That’s a great idea! I’ll make some tweaks and get this rolling…”
And TA-DA! An orphan camo not commercially available, limited industry support, probably all kinds of contracts to prevent its use commercially, and no wide spread pouches/packs/bags/kit available that wouldn’t be stand out!
You’re welcome
- Reaction score
- 7,018
- Points
- 1,310
I am only angry that you're right. It's embarrassing.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 30,668
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 17,349
- Points
- 1,280
It's all an evil RCR plot to make sure that no one can use non-issued kit
OceanBonfire
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 390
- Points
- 1,080
New helmet:
And adaptive camouflage by 2028:
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 14,770
- Points
- 1,140
Except the PPCLI will totally ignore anything to do with "uniformity"It's all an evil RCR plot to make sure that no one can use non-issued kit
- Reaction score
- 21,138
- Points
- 1,360
One could argue that there’s uniformity in their non-conformity…Except the PPCLI will totally ignore anything to do with "uniformity"
Similar threads
