Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Uniform and Accessories

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • apod
    replied
    Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Calm down Sir. I'm playing devils advocate here.
    I know mate but it really is defending the indefensible.

    Leave a comment:


  • na grohmiti
    replied
    Calm down Sir. I'm playing devils advocate here.

    Leave a comment:


  • apod
    replied
    The NS GOT a lighter uniform for the Med. It just wasn't NSV DPM. Are you going to accept,at all,the fact that I am on record here of saying that I agreed with the point that the Navy needed an updated cut of operational uniform.In FR Material and lighter and more breathable??And that I am on record for saying that my only issue is that the NSV pattern is a vanity project that serves no practical military purpose other than corporate branding?Than you give me that?? No? Yes?

    The navy combats were well flagged because the NS had to conduct a campaign to justify the money needed to buy them.Simple as.
    Has it occurred to you that sometimes,just sometimes, Military folk might decide to keep things quiet regarding future developments for various reasons?? Even if they know why something is justified??And why the hell would you make a submission to CODF on what colour uniform we wear? That's not exactly their remit is it?

    Yes I agree it has come out of nowhere as far as the public domain goes but this has been brewing for well over 12 Months mow inside the wider DF and I remember as far back as 2014 being told by a buddy in a dark green beret that his crowd were going Multicam within 5 Years and the rest of the DF would follow soon after. So far he has been on the money.

    Leave a comment:


  • na grohmiti
    replied
    And I'll respond with ask anyone who had to wear Navy Combats in an engine room last summer (or any summer) if a lighter pattern was a priority or not.
    My point is, while RACO are complaining that the military college is short 30 captains, this is waay down the priority list. It has not even featured in discussion on any of the social media where military folk communicate, including here. However the Navy Combats was well flagged. Saw zero mention of it as a priority in any CoDF submission, Though I did not read all of them.

    It just seems to have come out of nowhere and now people are on the defensive saying it is more important than next weeks dinner!

    Leave a comment:


  • apod
    replied
    Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post

    You know i could take out the words Multicam and replace it with NS Camo and it would be just as convincing.
    1/ Transitional pattern.Works fairly well in both upper and lower deck .Not 100% but just enough in each environment.
    2/ Lighter colour. Retains less heat.
    3/ Not widely available and patent restricted if they go with an Irish developed pattern which aids security
    4/ IFF. No more will they be condused with Customs/Fire Brigade/any factory or warehouse using Snickers navy 2 piece workwear
    5/ Cost effective in that you only need one uniform for different A.O's. (Lads out in the med and trips to asia and south Atlantic struggled with the heavy dark Navy operational uniform). Old operational uniform when used by those in certain overseas mission HQ was the same as what the janitor wore.

    It just doesn't strike me as high priority at a time when the Army no longer have the numbers to deploy full units overseas.
    Oh Jesus Christ. Really?? Those are the justifications for developing an unneeded pattern?? Seriously?? So we are comparing the issue of a new pattern optimised to work both on Island and in Hot and dusty climes with a view to better concealing our troops within those environments as required with a pattern that serves no purpose only than to look different from the Civis. Does the NS inferiority complex really extend that far?? Come on. Oh and BTW I am on th record here as saying that I agreed with the need to modernise the NS operational uniform and bring it into the 21st Century. It's the NSV pattern I have a problem with.It's a waste of money that serves no practical purpose. The new DF Camo pattern will.

    As for priorities. Ask anybody who has worn the current DPM in a Lebanese summer,Liberian Wet season or currently Mali if they think a lighter pattern should be a priority or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • na grohmiti
    replied
    Obviously don't agree with the above but.. you know...

    Leave a comment:


  • na grohmiti
    replied
    Originally posted by apod View Post

    That's because it WAS a vanity project. The NS Camo scheme serves no purpose.It blends with nothing. Purely corporate branding and NS members have gone on record in print admitting same.
    The proposed Multi terrain pattern is being brought in for practical reasons.
    1/ Transitional pattern.Works fairly well in both wooded and arid regions.Not 100% but just enough in each environment.
    2/ Lighter colour. Retains less heat.
    3/ Not widely available and patent restricted if they go with an Irish developed pattern which aids security
    4/ IFF.
    5/ Cost effective in that you only need one uniform for different A.O's. (Look at the ECAT/NEO Mission the Wing went on recently. They deployed in the Multicams they already had. No need to issue special one off uniforms)
    You know i could take out the words Multicam and replace it with NS Camo and it would be just as convincing.
    1/ Transitional pattern.Works fairly well in both upper and lower deck .Not 100% but just enough in each environment.
    2/ Lighter colour. Retains less heat.
    3/ Not widely available and patent restricted if they go with an Irish developed pattern which aids security
    4/ IFF. No more will they be condused with Customs/Fire Brigade/any factory or warehouse using Snickers navy 2 piece workwear
    5/ Cost effective in that you only need one uniform for different A.O's. (Lads out in the med and trips to asia and south Atlantic struggled with the heavy dark Navy operational uniform). Old operational uniform when used by those in certain overseas mission HQ was the same as what the janitor wore.

    It just doesn't strike me as high priority at a time when the Army no longer have the numbers to deploy full units overseas.

    Leave a comment:


  • DeV
    replied
    Originally posted by trellheim View Post
    Whats the patent got to do with anything its already illegal to copy the uniform ? (Defence Act )

    My sole care here apart from I think its not needed , its out of my control . My people get a decent initial issue is all I really care about - nothing else really matters.
    It’s only illegal in Ireland and that doesn’t stop companies doing so

    Leave a comment:


  • trellheim
    replied
    Whats the patent got to do with anything its already illegal to copy the uniform ? (Defence Act )

    My sole care here apart from I think its not needed , its out of my control . My people get a decent initial issue is all I really care about - nothing else really matters.

    Leave a comment:


  • apod
    replied
    Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Just going to stick my oar in here to say that for all the weeping and wailing when the NS decided to do the exact same thing as the Army, it was dismissed as a vanity project.
    The same arguments now are being used to justify (quite correctly) the introduction of IP-Multicam.
    That's because it WAS a vanity project. The NS Camo scheme serves no purpose.It blends with nothing. Purely corporate branding and NS members have gone on record in print admitting same.
    The proposed Multi terrain pattern is being brought in for practical reasons.
    1/ Transitional pattern.Works fairly well in both wooded and arid regions.Not 100% but just enough in each environment.
    2/ Lighter colour. Retains less heat.
    3/ Not widely available and patent restricted if they go with an Irish developed pattern which aids security
    4/ IFF.
    5/ Cost effective in that you only need one uniform for different A.O's. (Look at the ECAT/NEO Mission the Wing went on recently. They deployed in the Multicams they already had. No need to issue special one off uniforms)

    Leave a comment:


  • GoneToTheCanner
    replied
    The downside of changing our DPM now is primarily cost as we have not had DPM in service for very long,compared to it's predecessor. I'm sure someone will tell me exactly. Now, if we do go ahead and buy a new camo,does this mean that we will start changing vehicle schemes too, as we have vehicles in 3-cplour, plain OG and UN white and possibly desert in the fleet,not to mention what ever colours we have on hard kit like tents/containers/boxes/cans/boots/hats and the million other things an Army uses. Big shake-ups like a complete Army wide camo change is a big deal and has a disruptive effect as it invariably takes time and a lot of effort to roll out. Invariably, if a new style is bought, it's going to look like an American uniform if it's in Multicam and to an ignorant terrorist/rebel/freedom fighter/self-exploder, it's all the same. As for the concept of updates, our Army updates constantly as the provision of equipment and it's upkeep is not a static thing. I'm not advocating that DPM stay in service for ever but such projects have a long and expensive lead-in and have to be considered carefully. The law of unintended consequences applies to clothing as much as it does to buying capital equipment like aircraft and ships.

    Leave a comment:


  • na grohmiti
    replied
    Just going to stick my oar in here to say that for all the weeping and wailing when the NS decided to do the exact same thing as the Army, it was dismissed as a vanity project.
    The same arguments now are being used to justify (quite correctly) the introduction of IP-Multicam.

    Leave a comment:


  • apod
    replied
    Originally posted by trellheim View Post

    I agree wholeheartedly with this, as the folks who tend to be last on the distribution list. To my mind we've spent 20 years fine tuning the Irish DPM soldier clothing and its more or less the best it can be from my viewpoint. So its time to chuck it in the bin.
    And it has had it's day. Time to move on. Also the patent is running out on the current pattern so it is also a security issue.

    PS: I love our current pattern and will hate to see it go but it's too dark for hot and sandy regions.Retains heat in those climates and has become to easy to get hold of by all and sundry. Time for a change.But if we MUST change they need to do what the Brits and Kiwis did.Not just buy off the shelf as that stuff is too common to guarantee IFF in the field and Security at Home stations.

    Leave a comment:


  • apod
    replied
    I'd have no problem with the DF retaining our camouflage because we have already soaked costs into it and probably have shelves/tons/yards of the stuff and our Stores system is coping with that.
    Stock of the existing DPM is being ran down deliberartely with the only purchases of same being in the event of "stock outs" of certain items.And yes.we have spent money on it but is that not true of so many Military items .You pump money into it but eventually it reaches the end of it's useful life and need replacing.Like the Steyr will etc etc. The current DPM is unsuitable in the likes of Mali and some of the other places they are talking about sending us.And having a Multi terrain pattern instead of a Woodlnad Pattern only suited to North west Europe and a Desert pattern that has to be wadied after a six month trip to somewhere sand and dusty is more cost effective.
    You throw in a new camo system that is exclusive to us and you end up squirting more money away,while trying to get it out to the field units and simultaneously stripping out the old one.
    Strongly disagree.We did it before with the change from OG to DPM. This will be no different.
    With regard to looking like everybody else, well, that's a consequence of the domination of American camouflage/helmets/AR weapon systems globally. You can't move for ARs and Brownings and Humvees,especially in SF. If you want us to be camouflaged yet not look like an ISAF clone, then retain the IP-DPM the same way the Belgians retain their Paracommando colour scheme.
    Fixed that for you. We had enough of the Brits labelling us "Paddys" while they were here.Let's not keep that BS going. Oh and BTW the Belgians are getting rid of their current pattern (New Belgian defence Clothing system)and talking about going to???????
    Multicam.

    Anyway. This is my take on your argument in summary.
    Don't update because updates cost money and if we do update just buy the same pattern as every other nation so there is nothing to identify/distinguish/set us apart from every other nation.That about it?? No thanks. No Irish soldier should be put at risk of getting Lit up at home or abroad because the bad guys cant tell us apart from nations they might just hate more than us.

    Leave a comment:


  • ODIN
    replied
    Assuming that this is still more than 12 months out, but good to see that options are being investigated already. I'd hope that the roll out on this will be a big bang event so that the new uniform goes EOL on one day and the new comes into service the following day.

    One big issue that they will have is every "hobbyist" and airsofter in the country has at least one set of Multicam in the wardrobe, a military ID being issued to everybody, including all ranks of RDF will be needed.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X