| The Aliens Legacy http://forum.alienslegacy.com/ |
|
| What Happened To Digicam? http://forum.alienslegacy.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=13028 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | companyman [ Sun May 05, 2013 8:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | What Happened To Digicam? |
Well, we all know the real reason that the current trend for digital camo did not last into the 2170's is that it hadn't existed when the movie was made. But can we come up with an in-universe reason for this? I can imagine that perhaps advanced optics over the next century or so could detect the pattern of squares, rendering digital camo useless. Maybe it was more difficult to make digital camo IR resistant? Or, could it be that the military just changed their mind? Deciding after decades to go back to basics? |
|
| Author: | SGM Baldwin [ Sun May 05, 2013 9:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What Happened To Digicam? |
Well, I think that the development of Multicam kind of shows that digital disruptive camouflage is not the end all of camouflage. I'm also a strong believer that the Colonial Marines would wear camouflage based on operational requirements, such as the right-handed amino acids planet.  
|
|
| Author: | demoncase [ Sun May 05, 2013 9:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
My explanation would based on simple objective evidence: There are cyclic fashions within military thinking- and ideas that were old suddenly become new again*....Things like one universal camo for all situations come and go. Digital camo was first trialed by the Soviets in the 80s then binned in favour of a more organic camo. The same is happening now with ACU/ARPat Digicam being phased out for Multicam....We keep having to relearn old lessons, and old ideas keep getting reissued as 'revolutions' when they are merely evolutionary. Likewise- your uniform serves to identify you to allies and differentiate you from your foes. If your foes are wearing plain colours or digital camo, it makes sense to go for something still practical but obviously different- hence the USCM's reversion to the compressed ERDL. (This happened with the British Army's desert camo- several Arab nations obtained the prints for what would have been 4-colour British desert. Realising we'd end up fighting one of these nations, the MOD had to remove two colours and reverse the pattern to produce a workable desert camo rapidly) *Case in point is the 1990s idea of the PDW that spawned the P90 and MP7- a lighter, handier weapon for artillerymen, truck drivers and similar....Identical in concept to the carbines created for the same types of troops during the Napoleanic period....and identical to the reason for the cut-down M16s of the Vietnam War. |
|
| Author: | SGT KITTEN [ Sun May 05, 2013 10:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Demoncase has it right; these things always go in cycles. Digicam got big because the USCM started with it and the Army followed suit. 10 years and 5 billion dollars later, the Army is going to Multicam cause the ACU digi just didn't work well. If you look at some of the new ATAC camos, then you can see a return to German WWII "splatter pattern." It comes and goes in waves. Frankly, I never liked the digital camo and I'm glad to see it go. Charlie |
|
| Author: | companyman [ Sun May 05, 2013 10:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What Happened To Digicam? |
Yeah, it does tend to swing one way then another. Before the Vietnam War, the US military didn't like the idea of camouflage as it may encourage troops to hide - short sightedness like assuming the next war would be against Warsaw Pact forces, so as everyone will be in APCs, a butt pack is enough. Flecktarn was introduced in the 1990's and is similar to WWII SS camo of 45 years previously, simply because it was effective. The USCM probably has a few patterns in use, like the yellow above, for specific environments. Digicam never struck me as "looking right", but thought it was just me not accepting the likes of these upstarts with their new-fangled ways, and technogrunggarage music, kids today..... |
|
| Author: | AaronHorrocks [ Mon May 06, 2013 12:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
demoncase wrote: My explanation would based on simple objective evidence: There are cyclic fashions within military thinking- and ideas that were old suddenly become new again*....Things like one universal camo for all situations come and go. Digital camo was first trialed by the Soviets in the 80s then binned in favour of a more organic camo. If you are referring to KLMK, which I think you are, since it saw extensive use in the Soviet-Afghan war, you should know that it was actually developed in 1968, and fielded in 1969. It is often referred to as "computer pattern" and infact is still used today, but in a much more limited fashion... Like last weekend at the airshow.  
|
|
| Author: | 88reaper88 [ Mon May 06, 2013 2:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
What is that kickass looking vehicle behind you?!? |
|
| Author: | AaronHorrocks [ Mon May 06, 2013 4:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What Happened To Digicam? |
It's the JLTV prototype. We have a couple over at the museum. They're built by BAE Systems, a local defense contractor. |
|
| Author: | retrogarde [ Mon May 06, 2013 11:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Dom: is that a scan from the Technical Manual? I swear I've looked at the yellow dropship page before and never seen all that added info. "Moose Harker: Greek Cowboy" Is amazing! What the hell is a "Tokagawa geneboss"?? Awesome stuff. |
|
| Author: | SGM Baldwin [ Mon May 06, 2013 12:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What Happened To Digicam? |
They're scans of pages that didn't make it into the USCMTM. http://www.pbase.com/sharpuscm/uscm_tech_manual |
|
| Author: | retrogarde [ Mon May 06, 2013 1:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Fantastic stuff Dom! I have a few of those pages from the British Aliens magazines as well, but nearly all of this stuff is new to me. |
|
| Author: | SSgt Burton [ Mon May 06, 2013 1:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What Happened To Digicam? |
Considering the date those "Technical Readout" pages were created (late 90s?) it looks as if the smartgunner here is wearing Multicam! Attachment: SmG_lg.jpg [ 347.93 KiB | Viewed 7293 times ] Kevin |
|
| Author: | SGT KITTEN [ Mon May 06, 2013 1:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Reminds me a bit more of fleck tarn, but I feel better about my multicam BDUs now.  Charlie |
|
| Author: | ilovethecorps [ Mon May 06, 2013 2:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
As a bit of an aside... Any pattern will repeat but going back to WW2 and the British Denison Smock... I've heard stories that the camouflage pattern applied to the cotton for the smock was actually hand applied by women in the factories... I'm not exactly sure how true this is, but it makes a pattern truly 'organic' because, no matter how automatic the application process became by individuals, each application would be slightly different to the next... All a bit of an aside... and hardly a deliberate effort by the British, more of a matter of production style governed by what was available at the time (and the smocks weren't standard issue to all British troops so although they were mass produced, they weren't kitting out the entire Army)... |
|
| Author: | demoncase [ Mon May 06, 2013 4:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What Happened To Digicam? |
SSgt Burton wrote: Considering the date those "Technical Readout" pages were created (late 90s?) it looks as if the smartgunner here is wearing Multicam! Attachment: SmG_lg.jpg Kevin That's much more like the old 6 Color Desert- 'Chocolate Chip'. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert_Bat ... ss_Uniform |
|
| Author: | AaronHorrocks [ Tue May 07, 2013 12:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What Happened To Digicam? |
I would concur that the pattern looks more like 6-color U.S. Desert "Chocolate Chip". The distinct characteristic of this camo is the white spots that have a black "shadow" next to them. |
|
| Author: | MattRendar [ Tue May 07, 2013 1:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ssgt Burton I've seen that drawing of the smart gunner before. Where is it from ? |
|
| Author: | SSgt Burton [ Tue May 07, 2013 2:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What Happened To Digicam? |
My computer. To be honest, I'm not 100% sure. What I know is that there was an Aliens comic/magazine available in the UK around the same time as the Technical Manual was first released (1996). This magazine had a few pages that were called "USCM Technical Readouts." A while ago someone scanned the pages and posted them here. I saved a few: Attachment: 33870498_DSPilot.jpg [ 392.43 KiB | Viewed 7232 times ] Attachment: USColonialMarinePage.jpg [ 842.04 KiB | Viewed 7232 times ] Attachment: DshipInFlight.jpg [ 462.87 KiB | Viewed 7232 times ] Attachment: M41AStrip_lg.jpg [ 301.85 KiB | Viewed 7232 times ] Kevin |
|
| Author: | MattRendar [ Tue May 07, 2013 4:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Very cool . I wonder if they were cut from the original tech manuel |
|
| Author: | 88reaper88 [ Tue May 07, 2013 9:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The smartgunner also appears to have a penis instead of an eye piece on his headset... I love these type of pics, they remind me of the Osprey guides
|
|
| Author: | demoncase [ Tue May 07, 2013 9:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What Happened To Digicam? |
companyman wrote: Yeah, it does tend to swing one way then another. Before the Vietnam War, the US military didn't like the idea of camouflage as it may encourage troops to hide - short sightedness like assuming the next war would be against Warsaw Pact forces, so as everyone will be in APCs, a butt pack is enough. Indeed: and to expand on this, to illustrate my previous points about the military 'relearning things every so often': The ERDL Camo pattern was first developed in 1948- clearly in time for Korea- but was never officially issued until 1967, and then only on a limited basis for troops with the most urgent requirements....Indeed, it wasn't fully issued across the board by the withdrawl of US ground troops from Vietnam in 1972. The reason it was shelved was the aforementioned concern about encouraging a 'lack of agression', a general concern that the USSR would be relying entirely on IR searchlights in any prospective Cold War-Gone-Hot war (rendering normal camo pointless) and because some genius in the US DOD pointed out that at 75m and further, the colours all blended into a uniform single shade of green- meaning camoflage for general ground troops was worthless- and ERDL was shelved.  .....hence Olive Drab being the 'issue' colouration for US uniforms from the end of WW2 until after the involvement in Vietnam.The recall of of ERDL into urgent production in the 1960s was as a direct result of combat reports demonstrating that infantry engaugements in Vietnam rarely exceeded 75m, and were typically 30m and under.....So, instead of benefiting from 20 years of development, the ERDL pattern was dusted off and mustered into use. Problems were highlighted almost immediately: the poplin uniforms were fragile in the extreme in normal use- resulting in units issues with it looking like a hobo convention after a short time in the field. |
|
| Author: | Prophet-KGB [ Tue May 07, 2013 10:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
ilovethecorps wrote: Any pattern will repeat but going back to WW2 and the British Denison Smock... I've heard stories that the camouflage pattern applied to the cotton for the smock was actually hand applied by women in the factories... I'm not exactly sure how true this is Tis indeed true. Large rolls of fabric were laid out on the factory floors and the pattern was painted on with mops/brushes. So, like you say, no two original denison smocks are the same (hence the price !) |
|
| Author: | Russ Krook III [ Tue May 07, 2013 7:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: What Happened To Digicam? |
SSgt Burton wrote: My computer. To be honest, I'm not 100% sure. What I know is that there was an Aliens comic/magazine available in the UK around the same time as the Technical Manual was first released (1996). This magazine had a few pages that were called "USCM Technical Readouts." A while ago someone scanned the pages and posted them here. I saved a few: Those were scanned by Alex "USCMCorps" Ko and cleaned up a bit as well. Russ |
|
| Author: | demoncase [ Fri May 10, 2013 11:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Re: |
AaronHorrocks wrote: demoncase wrote: My explanation would based on simple objective evidence: There are cyclic fashions within military thinking- and ideas that were old suddenly become new again*....Things like one universal camo for all situations come and go. Digital camo was first trialed by the Soviets in the 80s then binned in favour of a more organic camo. If you are referring to KLMK, which I think you are, since it saw extensive use in the Soviet-Afghan war, you should know that it was actually developed in 1968, and fielded in 1969. It is often referred to as "computer pattern" and infact is still used today, but in a much more limited fashion... Like last weekend at the airshow. I wasn't refering to KLMK- there was a much more pixellated experimental digicam that was trialed breifly in the 1980s and is highly sought after by collectors. There was also a 'pixellated' MOUT camo trailed in the late 1980s/early 1990s by the US army which didn't derive from the 'digicam stable'- the squares of colour where about 2" rather than about 2cm!...This was trailed with the T-Pat MOUT uniform- both of which are collectors items also. Additionally there are a number of Soviet camoflague patterns, including the KLMK type, that feature that 'stepped' edge but with a more traditional background or basis- as you say, going back to the 1960s.....This was done deliberately to make printing more reliable long term- the thin 'feathered' shapes of traditional camo wear out quickly. The fact that the actual purpose and result looks similar just goes to show that there's little new under the sun. My feeling is that-yup- the USSR got there first from a different direction- but from a different perspective to the current 'digicam' wave that's finally subsiding. |
|
| Author: | Matsuo [ Sun May 19, 2013 5:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Surprised no one brought up this...  M |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|