The Army?s $5 billion waste

[brassmonkey]

In 2004, the Army decided to scrap the two traditional camouflage uniforms that had long been used by the military?one meant for woodland environments, another for the desert?and claimed to have come up with a universal pattern that could be worn anywhere and blend in with any environment. The $5 billion dollar experiment with the universal pattern is over as the Army is phasing out the uniform after less than a decade of use. But many soldiers and observers are wondering why it took this long and cost this much to replace an item that performed poorly from the start during a period when the money could have been spent on other critical needs, like potentially life saving improvements to military vehicles and body armor.

Less than a decade after the so-called Universal Camouflage Pattern, or UCP, was introduced the Army is back to the drawing board, set to announce a new camouflage pattern and standard uniform to be worn by the more than million members of the active duty and reserve forces.

Evidence of the UCPs inadequacy as a combat uniform is easy to find?just look at pictures of soldiers currently serving in Afghanistan, they?re not wearing the UCP, which was deemed unsuitable for operations there, but a different uniform known as the MultiCam. In 2009, Congress responded to soldiers? ?concerns about the current combat uniform which they indicated provides ineffective camouflage given the environment in Afghanistan,? by passing a bill in the appropriations act requiring that the DOD ?take immediate action to provide combat uniforms to personnel deployed to Afghanistan with a camouflage pattern that is suited to the environment of Afghanistan.? The result was the MultiCam. But that uniform, while it is currently worn in Afghanistan, was not a replacement but an interim substitution for the UCP, which is still the Army?s official uniform and the one worn by all soldiers not overseas.

Only 5 years after it was introduced the UCP?s failures had already become glaring enough to compel congressional intervention but despite the moratorium on its use in Afghanistan, it will have taken another 5 years for the Army to field its replacement.

Eventually, after mounting criticism and reports of the uniforms problems, the Army started looking for something better. This time, instead of hoping for a universal, one-size-fits-all design, an Army source who wished to remain unnamed explained that the Army solicited designs from companies for patterns with three variations, one for the desert, another for woodlands and jungles and a third, traditional semi-wooded pattern similar to the one currently used by soldiers in Afghanistan. After several rounds of testing, four patterns with three variations for each, from companies in New York, Virginia and Alaska were submitted to the Army to choose a winner.

Critics say this has been a huge waste of money.

Last year, the Government Accountability Office, a federal watchdog agency, issued a report taking the Army to task for spending $5 billion on UCP-covered uniforms and field equipment, only to spend an estimated $4 billion replacing them with whatever design it picks next. The Natick Army Soldier Systems Center, which does research and development on things like food, clothing, shelter for the military, conducted two studies on the Universal Camouflage Pattern, once in 2006 and again in 2009, both times finding that the UCP?s performance came up short when compared to other, more popular camouflages, like the Marine Corps desert pattern or the MultiCam. Natick scientists also went on record alleging that the Army had already selected the UCP before testing on it was completed and a full evaluation could be made of its performance compared to other designs.

Representatives from Natick did not return requests for comment on this story and the Government Accountability Office is currently closed due to the government shutdown.

But these reports only reinforce the views expressed by, arguably the most important critics of the Army?s near-decade long quest for the perfect uniform: the soldiers who have to wear them.

During former Army Officer Matt Gallagher?s 15-month deployment to Iraq from 2007-2009, he became well acquainted with the shortfalls of the universal camouflage pattern. In an attempt to blend in with all kinds of environments, the pattern instead wound up sticking out everywhere, its grey, gravel design that only a help to soldiers hoping to blend in with a parking lot. Gallagher said his soldiers would call the uniform pajamas, ?both a testament to its comfort and its inability to look right on anyone, no matter their build.? But Gallagher found that the biggest concern with the UCP in Iraq was shoddy velcro.

?On a night raid, if it gets caught on a wire or something, it would make a crunchy sound that might alert insurgents to a soldier?s location,? he said. ?That wouldn?t happen with just cloth.?

Army Sergeant Matt Pelak laughs at the mention of the universal camouflage pattern.

?It is one of the things that drives me craziest about the army I have to admit,? he told The Daily Beast. We started rolling it out in ?05 and everyone was baffled by it.?

While Pelak admits there were some upsides to the design, such as easy-to-access pockets, his complaints outweighed the positives.

?Even currently, in my unit that I?m in now, we wear the normal uniform, the UCP when we?re back on base, but when we go in the field we wear MultiCam,? he said. ?We have to carry two uniforms around, one that functions properly and one that?s merely administrative.?

Pelak points out this is hardly the first time the Army has spent billions of dollars on insufficient equipment just to spend more money to replace it, recalling the $20 billion Future Combat Systems program that launched in 2003 to develop a fleet of universally used lightweight armored vehicles and was canceled in 2009, ultimately considered a failure.

?It?s as ridiculous as buying 20 million humvees to go to war in that weren?t armored and then when the war started they had to build all new humvees that were bullet proof,? he said. ?It?s that absurd.?

Pelak is not hesitant to admit that, within the ranks, the seemingly unnecessary and wasteful uniform program smells like ?a giant conspiracy.?

?People in the military associate certain projects with nepotism, a Good Old Boy network,? Pelak said. ?Maybe someone?s brother owns the company that designs the uniforms, or he?s on the Defense Appropriations Committee. No one knows exactly, but there are a lot of theories that all involve some sort of cronyism or backhand deal.?

If it were up to Gallagher, the billions that have been spent on two rounds of designing, testing, issuing new uniforms would instead go to finishing a water treatment plant that was started when he was in Iraq. ?The local citizens need that treatment plant far more than we need a new batch of uniforms,? he said.

Neither Gallagher nor Pelak are sure that the ambitious goal of designing a universally functional pattern is realistic, but they both agree that the MultiCam design or the Desert Camouflage Uniform, are the best options they?ve been given so far.

For his part, Pelak would like to see less money spent designing uniforms and more money spent on better quality field equipment, such as more durable boots and lighter backpacks.

?It took 12 years to develop body armor for women,? he said. ?I thought that was a joke when they announced body armor for women at the end of both wars and that?s absolutely needed. Not a lower budget version of a backpack you can?t even jump out of an airplane with.?

Unfortunately, Gallagher said, ?What?s best for soldiers in the field is usually not a primary decision-maker. This is all about defense industry contracts, and just one example of the labyrinth that is that messy, nepotistic world.?

The Army, however, downplays the conspiracy theory. ?It?s not like someone pulled the UCP out of their posterior and said let?s use it,? said the unnamed Army source. ?They actually did a test and it performed pretty well, but as you can imagine, anything that?s universal doesn?t work that well in all situations.?

The Army source?s claim that the UCP tested well is contradicted by two different studies conducted by Natick showing that the MultiCam outperformed the UCP in various environments and the statements made by Natick scientists accusing the military of selecting the UCP before the full testing on it was complete.

The same source also insists the fuss over wasted money is overblown. ?It?s like if you spent $5 billion on Hanes t-shirts and then 5 years later decided you should have bought Under Armor,? he said. ?It?s not like you wasted money on those shirts because you got use out of them. We used those uniforms for their lifespan.?

The criticism made by many soldiers and Army watchdogs is that clothing that costs $5 billion dollars and is made for Soldiers going into combat ought to be of higher quality and last longer than a Hanes t-shirt. Despite the Army?s initial claims about fielding a universal uniform of the future, the UCPs nine-year lifespan is less than half the length of its considerably less expensive predecessor, the BDU uniform, which lasted for two decades. What?s more, the UCP wasn?t even worn by soldiers in Afghanistan during the last four years of its duration.

Over the past decade the Army has utilized four different uniforms, with each representing a considerable expenditure and investment of time and resources that could have been applied to other commonly cited needs, like upgrades to field equipment and improvements to tactical vehicles.



full article...

[L-Pink]

Should just give each soldier a Cabela's gift card.

http://www.cabelas.com/custserv/cust...3Bcat104748480

[theking]

The Army works in strange ways...like when they decided to provide the Army with black Berets...which were a big source of pride for the Army Rangers...and provide the Army Rangers with tan Berets. In addition the Berets used to only be worn by elite forces and not ordinary soldiers.

[Rochard]

I'm sorry, how was this a waste?

Was our entire Army walking around naked this entire time? Of course not. It was wearing the uniform. Lots of 'em.

This article makes it sound like they spent $5 billion on a handful of uniforms that failed. That's not true. This money was spent on uniforms over a ten year period, 2003-2013. If you start playing around with numbers... Let's just say the US Army (alone) has one million people, and each one of them has seven camo uniforms per person. That's seven million uniforms per year for just the army. Multiple that times ten years and that's seventy million uniforms over a ten year period - just for the US Army.

[Harmon]

I am not a person of lasting worries. O thank you for permission that is great. Do I get loved me someone as you should too? There is the grand of all greats in a smile. Is there a opening in the room for a quiet lasting peek. Yes you get what to why and who is where there going to be when is, that all happen. You could make it easy on you self not so sleepy when your on top of your self. I could get closer but there is already a kiss in the department. Pick up the phone you have a peruse did you ever look and see god dam it you hurt me do you see i hurt you to be. Run on definitely good nights wolds of plenty theirs rooms well look like to many. Real truth is you drag it in oblivion. I am lost hows you map doing you get better connection on here. I did not hear your last laugh is it treats you meet the past just repeats. Did you not finger out that did not work last time. Can I help leave me here call old friends put a gang leash back out side go home bitch. I still can not be leave it is not planed. You can do a better job at are love ha right what am i talking about you have the love just do not care to share it with you love. Take your time it is not really that hard but before when you were still being a friend. Now your best est matural hard wood top shelf randy candy. Smile bob you on the hand sextet to pate up some last dam it choirs. I had roll over and go to the nice guys pick up cats. At lease you had a hand at it and or a go. Did you turn the page last week because my poem smells like the past week pepperoni rolls. Go a way leave me alone right lol. JK {P

[PornoMonster]

Originally Posted by Rochard

I'm sorry, how was this a waste?

Was our entire Army walking around naked this entire time? Of course not. It was wearing the uniform. Lots of 'em.

This article makes it sound like they spent $5 billion on a handful of uniforms that failed. That's not true. This money was spent on uniforms over a ten year period, 2003-2013. If you start playing around with numbers... Let's just say the US Army (alone) has one million people, and each one of them has seven camo uniforms per person. That's seven million uniforms per year for just the army. Multiple that times ten years and that's seventy million uniforms over a ten year period - just for the US Army.

The ARMY's 5 Billion waste.. Guess it was JUST the Army.

When I was in 1989-90's we were only GIVEN 4 uniforms in Basic 2 Warm weather and 2 cold weather. We were then given a Yearly Clothing allowance to Purchase whatever we needed from the Base Store. The Clothing Allowance barely covered one set a year, those things were expensive.....

So it would only be the NEW soldiers for the time listed, also maybe if when implemented they gave all active soldiers a set.

I would Love to invent something that didn't work besides being clothing and sell to the gov for 10 years... HAHA 70 million into 5 billion is what $70 for shirt and pants?? (math could be way off, just a guess)

[DWB]

Originally Posted by theking

The Army works in strange ways...like when they decided to provide the Army with black Berets...which were a big source of pride for the Army Rangers...and provide the Army Rangers with tan Berets. In addition the Berets used to only be worn by elite forces and not ordinary soldiers.

That really isn't strange. Such a thing begins in kindergarten when we're given gold stars for answering the right questions, and continues throughout a worker bee's entire life. Humans, for whatever reason, respond well to silly rewards like stars, badges, awards, or in this case, berets. It makes them feel special and is motivating. Proud (and elite) soldiers are probably going to be the first to run into harms way, so it makes perfect sense the Army does this, along with everything else they do. They are a well oiled, highly researched and thought out, machine. They have to be. Even their logos, fonts, and designs have to be a certain way to relay a certain message. If you want to have your mind boggled, look up the US ARMY design manual.

[Joshua G]

sounds like the creator of UCP had friends in the right places. Military remains an industrial complex & all facets are up for sale to the best connected people. Who cares if UCP was any good? a friend of cheney got rich. Thats the important thing.

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by PornoMonster

The ARMY's 5 Billion waste.. Guess it was JUST the Army.

When I was in 1989-90's we were only GIVEN 4 uniforms in Basic 2 Warm weather and 2 cold weather. We were then given a Yearly Clothing allowance to Purchase whatever we needed from the Base Store. The Clothing Allowance barely covered one set a year, those things were expensive.....

So it would only be the NEW soldiers for the time listed, also maybe if when implemented they gave all active soldiers a set.

I would Love to invent something that didn't work besides being clothing and sell to the gov for 10 years... HAHA 70 million into 5 billion is what $70 for shirt and pants?? (math could be way off, just a guess)

I honestly don't remember what our clothing allowance was, but I am sure the military subsidized everything.

I know that when it came to cammies, you never had enough. I always had five or six for use in the field, five or six for general use, and two or three brand new ones for what dumb duty was assigned to me and ceremonies. I also most likely had more in a state of utter dis-repair.

Yeah, that would boil down to about $35 for pants, and $35 for a blouse. Then don't forget the cover.

I'm just saying.... The $5 billion wasn't "wasted". It was used to clothe our military for a ten year period.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by Rochard

I honestly don't remember what our clothing allowance was, but I am sure the military subsidized everything.

I know that when it came to cammies, you never had enough. I always had five or six for use in the field, five or six for general use, and two or three brand new ones for what dumb duty was assigned to me and ceremonies. I also most likely had more in a state of utter dis-repair.

Yeah, that would boil down to about $35 for pants, and $35 for a blouse. Then don't forget the cover.

I'm just saying.... The $5 billion wasn't "wasted". It was used to clothe our military for a ten year period.

But they aren't using that camp type. So they spent a lot of money on uniforms that can't be used in combat.. Hence useless and a waste of money.. They had to use different uniforms in Iraq and Afghan.

[Fat Panda]

just another radical right wing fascist redistribution of wealth from the amerikan people and future generations to plutocrats and corporations

happens everyday

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by Rochard

I'm sorry, how was this a waste?

Was our entire Army walking around naked this entire time? Of course not. It was wearing the uniform. Lots of 'em.

This article makes it sound like they spent $5 billion on a handful of uniforms that failed. That's not true. This money was spent on uniforms over a ten year period, 2003-2013. If you start playing around with numbers... Let's just say the US Army (alone) has one million people, and each one of them has seven camo uniforms per person. That's seven million uniforms per year for just the army. Multiple that times ten years and that's seventy million uniforms over a ten year period - just for the US Army.

seriously? they spent that money on uniforms that can't be used in the only major theater of war they have

you.. don't see a problem with that?

[L-Pink]

Common sense would have you think uniforms would vary greatly from deployment to deployment based on weather and terrain. Dress for success ……..

[theking]

Originally Posted by PornoMonster

The ARMY's 5 Billion waste.. Guess it was JUST the Army.

When I was in 1989-90's we were only GIVEN 4 uniforms in Basic 2 Warm weather and 2 cold weather. We were then given a Yearly Clothing allowance to Purchase whatever we needed from the Base Store. The Clothing Allowance barely covered one set a year, those things were expensive.....

So it would only be the NEW soldiers for the time listed, also maybe if when implemented they gave all active soldiers a set.

I would Love to invent something that didn't work besides being clothing and sell to the gov for 10 years... HAHA 70 million into 5 billion is what $70 for shirt and pants?? (math could be way off, just a guess)

I assume you are speaking about Class A uniforms because the initial clothing allowance is far greater than four uniforms.

[DWB]

Originally Posted by L-Pink

Dress for success ??..

Forcefully share "American freedom" in style.

[DamianJ]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

seriously? they spent that money on uniforms that can't be used in the only major theater of war they have

you.. don't see a problem with that?

Clearly not.

[theking]

Originally Posted by DWB

That really isn't strange. Such a thing begins in kindergarten when we're given gold stars for answering the right questions, and continues throughout a worker bee's entire life. Humans, for whatever reason, respond well to silly rewards like stars, badges, awards, or in this case, berets. It makes them feel special and is motivating. Proud (and elite) soldiers are probably going to be the first to run into harms way, so it makes perfect sense the Army does this, along with everything else they do. They are a well oiled, highly researched and thought out, machine. They have to be. Even their logos, fonts, and designs have to be a certain way to relay a certain message. If you want to have your mind boggled, look up the US ARMY design manual.

If the Army wanted to provide regular soldiers with Berets...why wouldn't it be logical to provide them with tan Berets...instead of removing a well known source of pride...the Black Beret...from the Rangers...which caused them to be highly pissed off at the time...so pissed off that a few quit the Rangers.

[tobe87]

Originally Posted by PornoMonster

The ARMY's 5 Billion waste.. Guess it was JUST the Army.

When I was in 1989-90's we were only GIVEN 4 uniforms in Basic 2 Warm weather and 2 cold weather. We were then given a Yearly Clothing allowance to Purchase whatever we needed from the Base Store. The Clothing Allowance barely covered one set a year, those things were expensive.....

So it would only be the NEW soldiers for the time listed, also maybe if when implemented they gave all active soldiers a set.

I would Love to invent something that didn't work besides being clothing and sell to the gov for 10 years... HAHA 70 million into 5 billion is what $70 for shirt and pants?? (math could be way off, just a guess)

When the army went over to the grey digi's they completely changed everything so no part of the uniform stayed the same - covers, socks, boots, tee-shirts, blouse, trousers. Not only did they change these but OEF and OIF battlefield required a durable but light weight flame retarded material because soldiers and Marines were getting burned while being trapped inside trucks after IED blast. A lot of the budget was faced toward the development of the "NEW" materials to create the uniform that protected us in combat.

Factor in issuing that out to Active, Reserve, National Guard and I think it's quite cheap. Oh and I forgot the Gortex materials as well, pants and jacket for each soldier cost about $3-400 bones.

[tobe87]

Originally Posted by Rochard

I honestly don't remember what our clothing allowance was, but I am sure the military subsidized everything.

I know that when it came to cammies, you never had enough. I always had five or six for use in the field, five or six for general use, and two or three brand new ones for what dumb duty was assigned to me and ceremonies. I also most likely had more in a state of utter dis-repair.

Yeah, that would boil down to about $35 for pants, and $35 for a blouse. Then don't forget the cover.

I'm just saying.... The $5 billion wasn't "wasted". It was used to clothe our military for a ten year period.

The clothing allowance is granted once a year on your military anniversary. The higher your rank the more you get because that shit gets expensive. For Marines if your an E3 on your 1 yr mark you'll get about $250-300.