AUSTRALIAN MULTICAM CAMOUFLAGE UNIFORM TRIAL

AUSTRALIAN MULTICAM CAMOUFLAGE UNIFORM TRIAL

The Chief of the Army had earlier in May 2010 announced that there would be trial of a new uniform: the Disruptive Pattern Mid-Point Uniform (DPMP). The DPDU was found to be too light and was improved by subsequent five-colour second and third iterations of the colour palette.

The initial DPDU pattern was a three-colour design which was urgently developed in six weeks and was produced with three days to spare. The DPDU had been designed by the Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO) in 2001 for the Afghan terrain. An urgent order for uniforms was placed with the United States manufacturer Crye Precision. In November 2010, the Minister for Defence Materiel announced that the CPCU would be issued to the Mentoring Task Force close-combatant elements to wear on patrols for a one year trial. The SOTG trial found the uniform provided better concealment in urban, desert and alpine Afghan terrains over the current issue Disrupted Pattern Desert Uniform (DPDU) and was superior in terms of functionality and ergonomics. That also lead to a search for green dyes that soldiers would not be allergic to, and to a preferred variety of cotton being grown in north-west NSW and other locations.In December 2009, the Special Operations Task Group (SOTG) serving in Afghanistan as part of Operation Slipper, after trialling the Multicam pattern uniform worn by United States and British special forces, recommended adopting the Crye Precision Combat Uniform (CPCU) as their operational uniform. The Australian Government, says van Mosseveld, was 'quick to seek out designs for uniforms appropriate in offshore Pacific and south-east Asian climates as well as in its own territories in northern Queensland and on Thursday Island and instigated the search for better cotton drill fabrics'. 'All these activities spring from a nation's defence requirements as they evolve over time.' 'To produce and deliver uniforms suitable for different climates and types of operation, in the correct numbers and sizes, requires a substantial mechanism of research and development, pattern design, national intellectual property protection, Department of Defence planning, mass production and logistics,' says academic Anneke van Mosseveld, who last year published research about the Australian Government Clothing Factory and army uniform.

This became clear in World War II when, following a ferocious battle between Australian and Japanese forces at Goodenough Island in the Solomon Sea, expert camoufleurs were called in after it was revealed regulation army khaki stood out against jungle vegetation.Ī hand-picked team of artists, designers, architects and scientists were invited by then Prime Minister Robert Menzies to join a top secret organisation headed by the brilliant Australian zoologist Professor William Dakin.ĭakin was appointed technical director of camouflage, Department of Home Security, and he called on the skills of more than 100 artists and designers including William Dobell, Louis McCubbin, Eric Thompson and Frank Hinder.Ĭoming up with the right style and colour of a uniform isn't always easy. The style and colour of a uniform can make all the difference, he says. 'It was manlier to wear khaki, even though it stood out ridiculously, ' says Sydney academic Ann Elias, author of Camouflage Australia.įletcher agrees: 'The special forces always like to have their own uniform – they are very conscious of their reputation and appearance.' For example, when defence scientists recommended SAS units sent to Afghanistan wear desert camouflage colours of pink and mauve the army said no.

Australian multicam camouflage uniform