From: Jim Breneman (jimbre_7@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Dec 21 2004 - 11:12:35 PST
I actually consider the CCU to be a better uniform
than the ACU. My impression of the ACU is that it is a
uniform that looks really good on paper, but its
functionality is a lacking. While I am not as offended
by the camo pattern as I was at first, the Velcro
patches still drive me crazy. I guarantee that anyone
who has ever crawled through/under barbed wire or any
kind of thick brush would not want patches that aren’t
sewn on. That and even in the picture on the Army's
webpage, the patches look like crap, and those are
brand new. Imagine what they would look like after a
couple months or even a couple years. The idea of
having certain patches with Velcro isn’t that bad of
an idea. When I was with KFOR me and a few others from
my unit put Velcro backing on all of our full color
American flag patches, in case we ever got in to an
escape & evade situation. Which would have been most
situations considering we didn’t have bullets (but
that’s another topic all together.)
I look at the ACU like I look at the FMTV. They are
equipment designed for an Army that is mostly at
peace. Yet they are being fielded at a time when the
Army is going to be in combat operations for the next
few years at least. And their functionality in a
combat zone just isn’t adding up. I realize this will
never happen, but the Army needs to say "hey...we
screwed up." Then they need to ask the Marines "Can we
please use the MTVR too?"
Sorry, I realize this post was a little long, and
didn’t talk much about MVs, but it’s a subject that,
as a former ground pounder, and someone who is going
to be one again, is really important to me.
ACU:http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/read.php?story_id_key=6042
MTVR:http://www.oshkoshtruck.co.uk/Products/MTVR.cfm
--- Steve Grammont <islander@midmaine.com> wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> >Actually I believe its called the Army Combat
> Uniform
>
> Actually, we are both correct :-) The original
> designation was "Advanced
> Combat Uniform" back when I first got wind of it
> (Winter of 2003). But
> as you point out, this was changed at some point in
> 2004 and I forgot all
> about it. Oddly enough a LTC associated with the
> program recently
> emailed me and he still calls it "Advanced Combat
> Uniform". Conflicting
> nomenclature is pretty common so I'm not surprised.
>
> As a piece of trivia, the Army started out calling
> the new uniform "CCU"
> (Close Combat Uniform) way back during the initial
> trials period. These
> were produced in a variety of different patterns and
> physical designs.
> Some CCUs were sent over to the Stryker Brigade in
> Iraq for field trials.
> However, the latter used the standard DCU (Desert
> Combat Uniform) 3
> color camo cloth and not the digital pattern used
> for the ACU.
>
> Steve
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to:
> <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to
> <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:38:55 PDT