Indian Special Forces

[bloo]

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

What kind of camo do you think he should be wearing?

Something tht works for you guys... the ACU sticks out like a sore thumb even in afghanistans rocky terrain... there is a reason they prematurely cancelled it and are spending billions on a new camo..

 

[Gessler]

Something tht works for you guys... the ACU sticks out like a sore thumb even in afghanistans rocky terrain... there is a reason they prematurely cancelled it and are spending billions on a new camo..

Afghanistan is mostly desert & rocks.

Kashmir AO is mostly urban, with vegetation & a few desert/rocky spots. The
digital camo worn by that commando suits this area fine.

I think you are referring to MultiCam. MultiCam certainly doesn't suit the area where that
MARCO is standing.

Imagine someone with a MultiCam taking cover by building blocks &
cement roads. That will certainly stick out like a sore thumb.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Afghanistan is mostly desert & rocks.

Kashmir AO is mostly urban, with vegetation & a few desert/rocky spots. The
digital camo worn by that commando suits this area fine.

I think you are referring to MultiCam. MultiCam certainly doesn't suit the area where that
MARCO is standing.

Imagine someone with a MultiCam taking cover by building blocks &
cement roads. That will certainly stick out like a sore thumb.

Do you think militants hide in cities? and the operations take place in cities? most of the articles posted here mostly talk abt operations in the forested regions..

ACU in forestation and even the rocky terrain of afghanistan proved to be a failure... I had posted the links to articles in this thread ...replying to abingdon...


See how easy it is to spot:

Indian sf:

P.S: In CQB camo (unless its black or dark) doesnt much matter... do you think a guy in ACU would blend in with the environment in a building or complex?

 

[Gessler]

Do you think militants hide in cities? and the operations take place in cities? most of the articles posted here mostly talk abt operations in the forested regions..

Militants can hide anywhere. That said, the environment in Kashmir is the same
as in Afghanistan? That's a nope.

ACU in forestation and even the rocky terrain of afghanistan proved to be a failure... I had posted the links to articles in this thread ...replying to abingdon...


See how easy it is to spot:

View attachment 10652

It's easy to find a contradicting image, but that doesn't prove your point
in all situations. Look at this -

Blending enough?

Indian sf:

View attachment 10653

This is not Kashmir, and Kashmir is not like this.

This was from an exercise with Russian Army and the camo isn't being issued, but
just one of the many types of new camo that is being "trialed out" in combat
exercises by the Paras.

I think I already showed you another camo of Para -

Now you have seem Indian SFs use 2 distinct types of new camo. One is UCP/ACP
type digital camo, the other is similar to MultiCam and/or MARPAT, ideal for jungle
ops where is a lot of trees & stuff. There are likely to be more types of uniforms
under trials in different locations & environment.

Our COBRAs have already adopted MARPAT and it seems it is showing results in
their ops against Naxals deep in the jungles.

P.S: In CQB camo (unless its black or dark) doesnt much matter... do you think a guy in ACU would blend in with the environment in a building or complex?

Haha, very funny. I think it would be nice if you would...

1) Don't draw conclusions while the camos are still be trialed and none of the new
types are in active circulation as yet. We don't know what camo will make it to the
final orders either.

2) Don't take Indian SFs for stupids, nor take American forces' Afghan experience
as the deciding factor for all SFs & militaries in the world, in all types of situations
and environments, some of which are distinctly different from Afghan.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Militants can hide anywhere. That said, the environment in Kashmir is the same
as in Afghanistan? That's a nope.

Sure... but tell me abt ACU being used in a vegetated region..

It's easy to find a contradicting image, but that doesn't prove your point
in all situations. Look at this -

Blending enough?

You tell me:

Stephanie Himango/NBC, via Getty
UNIFORM FAILURE
The Army’s $5 billion New Uniform Already Being Replaced
OCT 14, 2013 5:45 AM - BY CAITLIN DICKSON
Eight years after spending $5 billion on a heavily-criticized universal camouflage pattern, the Army is back at the drawing board looking for a new design that’s estimated to cost another $4 billion.

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 studiesconducted 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.

Whether the current quest for the consummate camouflage will prove time and money well spent or yet another waste remains to be seen. In the meantime, Pelak said, “We’re stuck with a uniform we can’t wear in the field.”

...........


The Army is changing clothes.

Over the next year, America’s largest fighting force is swapping its camouflage pattern. The move is a quiet admission that the last uniform — a pixelated design that debuted in 2004 at a cost of $5 billion — was a colossal mistake.


Soldiers have roundly criticized the gray-green uniform for standing out almost everywhere it’s been worn. Industry insiders have called the financial mess surrounding the pattern a “fiasco.”

As Army researchers work furiously on a newer, better camouflage, it’s natural to ask what went wrong and how they’ll avoid the same missteps this time around. In a candid interview with The Daily, several of those researchers said Army brass interfered in the selection process during the last round, letting looks and politics get in the way of science.

“It got into political hands before the soldiers ever got the uniforms,” said Cheryl Stewardson, a textile technologist at the Army research center in Natick, Mass., where most of the armed forces camouflage patterns are made.

The researchers say that science is carrying the day this time, as they run four patterns through a rigorous battery of tests. The goal is to give soldiers different patterns suitable for different environments, plus a single neutral pattern — matching the whole family — to be used on more expensive body armor and other gear. The selection will involve hundreds of computer trials as well on-the-ground testing at half a dozen locations around the world.

But until the new pattern is put in the field — a move that’s still a year or more away — soldiers in Afghanistan have been given a temporary fix: a greenish, blended replacement called MultiCam. The changeover came only after several non-commissioned officers complained to late Pennsylvania Rep. John Murtha, and he took up the cause in 2009. Outside of Afghanistan, the rest of the Army is still stuck with the gray Universal Camouflage Pattern, or UCP. And some soldiers truly hate it.

“Essentially, the Army designed a universal uniform that universally failed in every environment,” said an Army specialist who served two tours in Iraq, wearing UCP in Baghdad and the deserts outside Basra. “The only time I have ever seen it work well was in a gravel pit.” [The Daily via the Stars & Stripes]

You can read more at the link but it has been known for a long time that the Army screwed up their selection of a new universal uniform by selecting the ACU. I remember getting issued the ACU at Ft. Lewis, Washington and while out in the field it was clear that the ACU did not blend into a woodland environment, which left everyone thinking who thought this would be a good idea? Well The Daily article does provide a name and why he chose the ACU:

For a decision that could ultimately affect more than a million soldiers in the Army, reserves and National Guard, the sudden shift from Program Executive Office Soldier was a head-scratcher. The consensus among the researchers was the Army brass had watched the Marine Corps don their new uniforms and caught a case of pixilated camouflage envy.

“It was trendy,” Stewardson said. “If it’s good enough for the Marines, why shouldn’t the Army have that same cool new look?”

The brigadier general ultimately responsible for the decision, James Moran, who retired from the Army after leaving Program Executive Office Soldier, has not responded to messages seeking comment.

To be fair I don’t think you can blame this on one guy; a decision this important that impacts the entire force would have to have approval from senior leaders in the Army. There is no way BG Moran was solely responsible for this decision.

Despite trying to copy the Marines the ACU comes no where close to being as effective as the MARPAT. In an urban environment the ACU is actually pretty good and in the desert it is not too bad, but the MARPAT is better in my opinion. Also the ACU falls apart when deployed and the velcro pockets were a disasterous idea. This all just makes me wonder why someone in Congress doesn’t investigate such a failed acquisition decision especially when we now know that $5 billion was wasted?

The decision to use this uniform was as much as a head scratcher back then as the decision to wear the black beret. I always figured that once the people responsible for the decisions were long retired that common sense would eventually prevail. It took 8-10 years and sure enough common sense did prevail on both issues. Here is another prediction for everyone, after 8-10 years the latest dress uniform for the Army that makes us look like shopping mall security guards will change as well.

- See more at: US Army Wasted $5 Billion With Failed Army Combat Uniform | ROK Drop​

............................

Army Drops Universal Camouflage After Spending Billions
By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. on June 25, 2012 at 5:00 PM

After eight years and billions of dollars, the Army has given up on an ambitious effort to clothe its soldiers in a “universal camouflage pattern.” The grey uniform, widely issued and widely loathed, was supposed to blend in equally well in all environments, from desert sand to green forest to city streets. It just didn’t. Now the Army’s going back to the old, obvious approach of having different designs for different places.

“It definitely makes a difference in Afghanistan, because Afghanistan is primarily brown, and there’s no brown in the universal pattern,” said one Army officer who’s deployed wearing the universal camouflage, also called the Advanced Combat Uniform (ACU). Under pressure from unhappy soldiers and the late Rep. John Murtha, the Army had already given up on the universal pattern for troops in Afghanistan, who now wear a “multi-cam” design better suited to the terrain.

Soldiers elsewhere around the world, though, still have to make do with the universal-pattern ACU — or work around it by finding unofficial sources of uniforms. “The ACU does fine in the urban environment,” the officer said, where its grey shades blend in with concrete (see the picture). But elsewhere, he went on, “guys use the old woodland pattern” — a discontinued US uniform — “when they’re out in Thailand or the Philippines…. or they’ll trade their ACUs out with the locals.”

An article yesterday in the website The Daily called the universal camouflage a “$5 billion fiasco,” but a spokesman for the Army’s Soldier Systems Center in Natick, Mass. defended the design, given what it had attempted to achieve. “I wouldn’t characterize it as a ‘fiasco,’” David Acetta told Breaking Defense. “The UCP did have fairly good results in a number of different environments… It’s not the best for all, but it is effective to a different degree in all different climates, environments, day and night light levels.” But that jack-of-all-trades approach didn’t pan out in practice. As the Army evaluates replacements for the universal pattern, a process that should produce recommendations sometime this fall, Acetta said, “we’re looking at a family of patterns rather than just one pattern for all the uniforms.”

So the problem isn’t that the Army tried to do something simple and messed it up. It’s that the Army tried something impossibly difficult. Short of some kind of sci-fi cloaking device or invisibility field a la Predator or Star Trek — which some people are actually working on— there’s no way to come up with a single color scheme or camo pattern that blends in equally well in all environments. “In this case the desire for standardization seems to have transcended common sense,” said Loren Thompson, a defense industry consultant and analyst who often writes for Breaking Defense. “It’s obvious that a pattern working well in a jungle would not work well in most deserts.”

But when the Universal Camouflage Pattern was developed in 2003-2004, the Army was at a high point of high-tech hubris, after steamrollering the Taliban and Saddam Hussein but before realizing it was enmired in counterinsurgency. Another, far more costly Army product of the same period was the Future Combat System, which was supposed to develop a universal family of lightweight armored vehicles equally suitable for all scenarios, an ambitious and ultimately unreachable goal. The Army spent almost $20 billion on FCS before then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates canceled it in 2009, and the only tangible product was a small remote-controlled robot; at least the universal camo project produced something people could wear.

Today, by contrast, the Army is focusing its investments on more modest programs tailored to specific problems, like a more heavily armored Ground Combat Vehicle to carry infantry into urban battle zones or specific camouflage patterns for different environments. That approach still hardly guarantees the chronically troubled military acquisition system will produce quality, affordable results, but it at least sets a bar that is possible to reach.
.................

In short REPLACED.

This is not Kashmir, and Kashmir is not like this.

I know... wearing ACU in Kashmir is like a bulleyes for the militants...

This was from an exercise with Russian Army and the camo isn't being issued, but
just one of the many types of new camo that is being "trialed out" in combat
exercises by the Paras.

I think I already showed you another camo of Para -

Now you have seem Indian SFs use 2 distinct types of new camo. One is UCP/ACP
type digital camo, the other is similar to MultiCam and/or MARPAT, ideal for jungle
ops where is a lot of trees & stuff. There are likely to be more types of uniforms
under trials in different locations & environment.

Our COBRAs have already adopted MARPAT and it seems it is showing results in
their ops against Naxals deep in the jungles.

lol okay..

Haha, very funny. I think it would be nice if you would...

1) Don't draw conclusions while the camos are still be trialed and none of the new
types are in active circulation as yet. We don't know what camo will make it to the
final orders either.

2) Don't take Indian SFs for stupids, nor take American forces' Afghan experience
as the deciding factor for all SFs & militaries in the world, in all types of situations
and environments, some of which are distinctly different from Afghan.

... do you even know what the universal camo was meant for?

 

[Gessler]

^^ @DESERT FIGHTER

You keep repeating the US experience blah blah blah blah.

I have already told that -

> Kashmir is different from Afghanistan & Indian AOs are different from US AOs.

> UCP is not being issued as standard, but merely being given to certain units to
test it's effectiveness in combat situations.

> UCP is only one of the many different new camos being tested.

> No one knows which camo will finally make it to the standard gear.

But remember, if Indian SFs do select UCP after the trial period is over, it will be
for a reason, and, it's not likely all SFs or all units of each SF organization wear the
same uniform. Most of the time the uniform could be operation or Area-specific.

 

[akand bharat]

^^ @DESERT FIGHTER

You keep repeating the US experience blah blah blah blah.

I have already told that -

> Kashmir is different from Afghanistan & Indian AOs are different from US AOs.

> UCP is not being issued as standard, but merely being given to certain units to
test it's effectiveness in combat situations.

> UCP is only one of the many different new camos being tested.

> No one knows which camo will finally make it to the standard gear.

But remember, if Indian SFs do select UCP after the trial period is over, it will be
for a reason, and, it's not likely all SFs or all units of each SF organization wear the
same uniform. Most of the time the uniform could be operation or Area-specific.

Were was US experience in Vietnam fishers and villagers kicked butts of One of worlds best professional army

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Were was US experience in Vietnam fishers and villagers kicked butts of One of worlds best professional army

Chest thumping aside.. do you know how many viets were killed in tht conflict?viets were also supported by russkies n chinese... other advanges like terrain etc cant be counted out aswell... No country today can occupy other country forever...

 

[Unknowncommando]

 

[Unknowncommando]

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Offtopic and all, but it doesnt take a genius to realize the new camo is way better.

then this

This camo doesnt suit Indian scenario in Thar or Kashmir.

The new camo consistently blends better than the old ones. Just look at all the new pics coming out.

 

[Rockshot]

GARUD

 

[hkdas]

Robotic Critters For Indian Air Force Commandos - AA Me, IN

The Indian Air Force [IAF] to test the use of highly portable reconnaissance robots for its Special Forces [SF].
The IAF recently issued a Request For Proposal [RFP] seeking to acquire surveillance robots, which they have additionally/optionally

​

identified as Recon Scout XT®. The RFP, released on IAF's behalf, by the Garud Regimental Training Centre [GRTC], seeks to acquire, initially, 2 such robots & 1 control console.

The relatively recently raised Garud Commando Force operates with the primary mandate of undertaking exfiltration operations of pilots, downed behind enemy lines. Through the course of its existence, its been progressively kitting itself with better hardware. Starting off with the OFB-made INSAS, they transitioned to the Soviet-origin Kalashnikov assault rifles, & have now standardised themselves on the Israeli TAR21 [or its license-manufactured, OFB variant, the Zittara], the firearm of choice of all well-funded SF outfits in the country. The 2 robots it seeks to purchase might suggest that they would like to evaluate its usage & decide how best to incorporate it into their operational methodology.

Given that they've actually named the kind of system they're eyeing by its trade name, it might have an upper hand in this particular contract. It needs to be a Titanium-encased, low noise, hand-hurled device, that can be conveniently carried in an oversized pocket, weighing no more than 600 grams. This video, below, shows how the Recon Scout XT operates. Nifty device to have in your pocket when you're out saving valuable lives.

 

[Unknowncommando]