You might by now be wondering how the effectiveness of camouflage patterns in general is determined.Ĭertainly the U.S. It was then given the official Army codename of “Operation Enduring Freedom Camouflage Pattern”-OEF-CP, for short. In 2010, just a year after the Conference Committee’s report, MultiCam was chosen to supersede UCP. This was enough to allow MultiCam to take the spotlight at the very time that there arose from the Pentagon intensified pressure for the Army to come up with an effective camouflage pattern. The majority of soldiers participating in the testing offered feedback in which they ascribed superior performance characteristics to both MultiCam and UCP-Delta, but said MultiCam exhibited a slight edge over its rival. The Army also conducted a photo assessment of the four other patterns (AOR II, UCP, Desert Brush, and Mirage) in a total of eight Operation Enduring Freedom zones. The second phase consisted of gathering feedback from deployed troops kitted out with one or the other of the two candidate patterns: MultiCam or UCP-Delta. The Army initiated Phase II testing shortly after the completion of Phase I. Side-by-side comparison of UCP (left) and UCP-Delta (right). Also note how the macro image of the BDU becomes a shade darker with UCP-Delta, but how, on the flip side, MultiCam seems as though it would be more than adequate in arid settings. Note how the coyote-tan elements blend with the grey. In the photograph above, you can see the two in direct comparison. Up against it in these tests was a seven-colour MultiCam pattern. UCP-Delta presented as a coyote-tan addition to the universal pattern. One was UCP-Delta the other was MultiCam. Army-with the help of 2,000 of its soldiers-completed Phase I testing of two rival patterns. Inducting MultiCam as OCP for Operation Enduring Freedomīetween May and November 2009, the U.S. That request proved to be a turning point in the history of MultiCam. Department of Defense to quickly request a replacement pattern for UCP, one capable of providing its operatives suitable cloaking in the environments of the Middle East.

Conference Committee that found UCP highly ineffective when used in Afghanistan.

MultiCam’s fortunes rose in 2009 with the issuance of a report by the U.S. They also discovered that this is where MultiCam excelled, for these types of terrain were the very ones MultiCam was designed to “cover”. in these hotspots offers us today insight regarding the need for a specific combination of colours so that a camouflage pattern can be considered effective in such environments.Īmerican soldiers operating in the Middle East discovered that, within the span of a single mission, they could be confronted by landscapes of multiple earth-tones-from green trees to tan sands to bright rocks. Iraq (2003–11, “Operation Iraqi Freedom”)

military operations in the Middle East was such that America found itself in need of a camouflage developed specifically for use in these theatres:Īfghanistan (2001–14, “Operation Enduring Freedom”) It so happened that the expanding scope of U.S. In 2004, the company’s hopes for its Scorpion MultiCam pattern suffered a setback when word came down that MultiCam had lost out to UCP (Universal Camouflage Pattern) in a bid to replace the American military’s standard-issue three-colour desert and woodland patterns.īut that was not the end for MultiCam. armed forces.Ĭrye Precision invented MultiCam. Since then, the pattern has enjoyed ever-increasing popularity, thanks in large part to its adoption by the U.S. Comparison of effectiveness in different environments.Inducting MultiCam as OCP for Operation Enduring Freedom.

Multicam camo