What was worse, CADPAT or UCP? I couldn't find it in the article. Instinct is that CADPAT was worse, but UCP was just that style without the contrast thus negating one of it's features (disrupting the human shape with high contrast).
Thanks. Is MARPAT what the Canadian soldiers showed up to Afghanistan in?
Edit: looks like the wore the forest green stuff to Afghanistan. The only articles I can find suggests they did it on purpose, to stand out for peace keeping reasons, but that could easily be damage control. Anyone know the real story? GP suggests they just didn't have an arid design at the time (which I would believe).
I can't comment on Canadian forces, but I can, with some reasonable level of confidence, say that some number of U.S. forces arrived with old forest green BDU pattern (despite the existence and previous use of the "chocolate chip" pattern) simply because that's what we had.
Can't speak to exactly why they didn't have it, but it was not a deliberate decision ("It's my uniform," said Master Cpl. Perry Morrow. "I'd rather wear this than no clothes at all.") from a relevant CBC article at the time about it(1))
For years afterwards whenever there was a discussion about equipment and supporting troops, it was brought up as an argument in favour of more purchases.
CADPAT is the Canadian camo. MARPAT is the American USMC camo. The difference is that MARPAT has a lot of browns and tans in it, while CADPAT is mostly green; the pattern is the same otherwise.
