darkchild130 Posted November 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 Except that the plates are ceramic, and not steel. EDIT: what i mean is, apart from that one (rather large) difference, the concept is very similar! Darkchild Link to post Share on other sites
Shriven Posted November 5, 2009 Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 I take it the camo scheme on the carrier is the new "MultiDPM"? If so, jesus christ... New helmet and the "Halo" looks good, appears to be based on the OPS Core accessory rails, quite swish. Link to post Share on other sites
darkchild130 Posted November 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 No it isnt. I i have said in this thread and the DPM thread, the camo in my pics is HYBRID 6, one of the camos that was rejected. Crye DPM doesnt exist yet. I will post information about Crye DPM when i get it. Darkchild Link to post Share on other sites
kodiak22 Posted November 5, 2009 Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 Wow, i feel bad for you guys, why don't they just get it , its the exact same thing with our government with equipment. anyways thank you for review this gear, i always love see what other nations are doing. Link to post Share on other sites
RSM Posted November 5, 2009 Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 Would it not be better to say take something like the US RAV style vest (which from what I can see uses a zippered, velcro'd and molle'd cummerbund to do the same job and take place of those tie straps) and mod it to make a hyrbid of the trial vest and the RAV design? From a civvy's point of view it just seems daft to not look at a design that works and adapt it to your needs/take it apart and rebuild it into something else. At least there is time to get the design right before rolling it out. Link to post Share on other sites
darkchild130 Posted November 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 believe me, it seems daft from the my point of view too. I took in my RICAS compact and showed them the closure system, just as an example. They wont use RAVs because they dont have the required coverage to keep the medical board happy (ive asked) Speaking to the team that are producing this stuff is like banging your head against the wall, trust me Ive tried. I just hope they fix it in the time they have. Darkchild Link to post Share on other sites
Shriven Posted November 5, 2009 Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 Wait, haven't the SAS been pictured using RAVs? As well as Army CP teams? Megakudos to you for trying to make them see that there's stuff out there they can copy/use though. Link to post Share on other sites
mattmanic Posted November 5, 2009 Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 Speaking to the team that are producing this stuff is like banging your head against the wall, trust me Ive tried. Do they have any reasons for not listening? Link to post Share on other sites
Skarclaw Posted November 6, 2009 Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 I saw in a local paper an article about some top dudes looking at future kit etc etc, the picture was of some sort of big optical doodah, but in another picture there was a manican in the helmet pictured on the other page, in camo that wasn't dpm, it may of been the new stuff but I couldn't really tell cause it wasn't a great picture. It was also holding an m4 with a SIR which was probably airsoft so I have no idea how accurate it is. Link to post Share on other sites
DarkLite Posted November 6, 2009 Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 Do they have any reasons for not listening? Apart from being completely pants-on-head retarded? Possibly not. They certainly don't have any valid reasons for not listening. But then again, this is the British Army! Can't be seen making good decisions or being clever, would never hear the end of it, don't you know. Link to post Share on other sites
Azubi Posted November 6, 2009 Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 Do they have any reasons for not listening? Not sure what it's like for this project but my experience with development engineers is that they live in their own little computer generated world where in theory it is the best thing since sliced bread and everything in real life entirely reflects what is shown on that little screen. Doesn't matter that those who actually have to use it/fit it/fix it/etc. say it's a load of ######. I had one lead me to his computer when I was having a problem with a mod we were trying to implement on a fast jet a couple of year ago and he showed me on the screen how perfect it was and how there is no way it couldn't work. He led me to his computer screen, I pretty much dragged him down to the jet and when he saw it, it was as if his world had been smashed to pieces the poor bloke. He'd come out of uni and had no experience with what he was designing other than theory and a couple of placements doing exactly what he was doing as his job now. Wouldn't surprise me if it was the same for the lads and lasses designing this PECOC stuff. Link to post Share on other sites
darkchild130 Posted November 6, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 Not sure what it's like for this project but my experience with development engineers is that they live in their own little computer generated world where in theory it is the best thing since sliced bread and everything in real life entirely reflects what is shown on that little screen. Doesn't matter that those who actually have to use it/fit it/fix it/etc. say it's a load of ######. QFT. They dont listen because the army personnel on their team acting as advisors havent deployed since Kosovo and tell them that all their ideas are good. They live in a protected little bubble. SF have their own procurement chain seperate from the green army (as i keep saying over and over) and therefore different requirements thats why they have RAVs. Army CP dont get RAVs, they are ust allowed to buy their own kit as their job isnt "green" either and it is recognised that they are usually under a lot less threat than normal troops. Darkchild Link to post Share on other sites
sandstorm Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 Hey Darkchild, any idea if the new helmet has been tested with regards to brain damage protection caused by blast waves? Link to research Must be a pain to work in the field to design working protection for the squishy meatbags that we humans are. Fix one cause and expose two new ones... Link to post Share on other sites
tom lawson Posted November 19, 2009 Report Share Posted November 19, 2009 Is this the new Crye DPM pattern Darkchild? Was posted on ARRSE.. Link to post Share on other sites
RSM Posted November 19, 2009 Report Share Posted November 19, 2009 Apparently not if you check the most recent posts in that thread. Can't help thinking that pattern above looks a bit like someone came up with a good design for somewhere a bit sandy and leafy then gave it to some painters for use as overalls Link to post Share on other sites
spetsnazdave87 Posted November 19, 2009 Report Share Posted November 19, 2009 Can't help thinking that pattern above looks a bit like someone came up with a good design for somewhere a bit sandy and leafy then gave it to some painters for use as overalls That could be applied to multicam tbh Link to post Share on other sites
kodiak22 Posted November 22, 2009 Report Share Posted November 22, 2009 If thats a real rendering of it, looks cool. I dont like Multicam, or really any "universal" pattern( Except D-AOB, and i like both Desert and Woodland in that), but i think i can get into this pattern. Link to post Share on other sites
darkchild130 Posted November 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2009 That was a quickly knocked up sample sent to us to show people what it roughly looks like. The finished article will be better, apparently. Havent been online as ive been on exercise for 3 weeks, testing the new respirator. Will take a pic of it when i post about the PECOC webbing. Darkchild Link to post Share on other sites
kodiak22 Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Someone posted something about this( the pattern) on Militaryphotos.com, here's what he said: UK Armed Forces will be issued with combat clothing in a new camouflage optimised for operations in Afghanistan and across a wide range of environments. • It will be issued to all personnel deploying on Op HERRICK from March 2010 then issued more widely to the UK Armed Forces from 2011. • This is the first time the Armed Forces have changed to a new camouflage pattern in 40 years, operational effectiveness being the driver for change. • The camouflage is a multi-terrain pattern that, following extensive scientific trials, performs consistently well across a wide range of environments encountered both on current operations and worldwide. MTP provides the best possible camouflage A wide range of camouflage colours were trialled in UK, Cyprus, Kenya and Afghanistan by Infantry Trials and Development Unit (ITDU) with Dstl support. The trials consisted of Defence Clothing Team and Dstl generated camouflages compared with in-service and commercially available camouflages. The trials included visual comparisons, objective assessments of the time to detect the different camouflages against different backgrounds, and subjective user opinions on the efficacy of the performance. Crye’s Multicam® technology was found to be the best performing across the widest range of environments by a significant margin and was selected as the new UK Camouflage, based upon the UK DPM pattern. The new camouflage is to be known as Multi-Terrain Pattern (MTP). Here's another (updated i guess, but not sure) photo of the new pattern. Link to post Share on other sites
darkchild130 Posted December 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 im getting some sets of the new stuff after christmas leave. when it comes in it will only be for ops, troops wont be allowed to wear it in the uk Darkchild Link to post Share on other sites
Grim Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 is that a deffinite or is that its only for ops troops untill enough is produced for the rest of the forces? Make sure to get plenty of pictures of it. Grim Link to post Share on other sites
apmaman Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Looks cool. I'll hold judgement until I see some of the kit in the flesh, or decent pics of it online. Link to post Share on other sites
farrasdevell Posted December 20, 2009 Report Share Posted December 20, 2009 shame they havent put some more thought into the cut of garments. as a combat uniform i despise s95 and 89 was still made on female cuts taken in ww2. Come on fells get witht he program. Link to post Share on other sites
doc_newstead Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Interesting stuff I will probably end up seeing some of this stuff as my unit has delusions of militarism far above it's station. We apparently get a standard out-of-area kitting that doesn't differentiate between lads who actually go outside the wire and REMF support types like my good self. I had a PS3 in my room for God's sake. Link to post Share on other sites
apmaman Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 The new kit was shown on BBC news yesterday. It looks very much the same as Multi-cam but with larger black/brown streaks you get from DPM. The people showing it off said it was made specifically with Helmand province in mind. Going from green areas to desert. They also showed another guy in DPM and the new camo standing beside a bush. The new camo didnt really blend in as well as the older DPM did. From what was said though is that this new pattern is not a complete replacement of DPM but for use in Afghanistan, and probably Iran and Pakistan when *suitcase* hits the fan. Edit: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8422942.stm Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.