Is army camouflage uniforms obsolete?

Betonhaus

Betonhaus

Irrefutable Rationality
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Mar 30, 2023
camo was effective in gurella warfare where it kept the soldiers hidden, but now with thermal imaging and other technologies it's not as effective in keeping soldiers hidden. Additionally, with peer-wars like in Ukraine there are increased cases of accidental friendly fire - to the point that some troops wear brightly colored armbands to identify themselves.

Therefore, I believe that camouflage is no longer an effective tactic and it would be better to return to distinctive uniforms with bright colors.
cb0f45a5926e53ee3fa69b10e7f8bb9b.jpg
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: Dockside Extortionist, Fireman Sam and Breadbassket
Breadbassket said:
Counter-argument: Wearing camouflaged uniforms slightly lower your chance of being spotted and shot with highly accurate weapons, wearing bright colorful uniforms all but guarantee you will be spotted and shot with highly accurate weapons.
Click to expand...
highly accurate weapons have thermal imaging.
 
Betonhaus said:
Therefore, I believe that camouflage is no longer an effective tactic and it would be better to return to distinctive uniforms with bright colors.
Click to expand...
Whatever the technological capabilities available, most ground troops will continue to rely on their naked eyes to find the enemy when in combat. Camouflage patterns may not be appropriate for a given terrain or in urban fighting, but earth colors such as gray or brown or olive drab don't pop like the bright hues used in former times. Trust me, you don't want your colors to pop in combat.

The French were famously big on their traditional bright red trousers--pantalon rouge--at the start of WWI. They quickly realized what a very bad idea bright red trousers are on a then-modern battlefield--you know, because they were fucking killed in droves wearing them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Overwritten Tapes and Breadbassket
We'll retvrn to trvdition as soon as we go back to marching up to each other and stabbing each other in the face as the primary method of warfare.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Overwritten Tapes
Just because a technology exists doesn't mean infantry has it. Lots of countries have thermal optics but fuck all (if any) have it issued to every troop. My country has it and uses it. In my service I never even saw any being used. You can hide from thermal optics too. It isn't that hard.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Mr.Miyagi, Jewthulhu and m1ddl3m4rch
As in the other thread, most modern uniforms do strive to mitigate your visibility on thermals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: m1ddl3m4rch
Breadbassket said:
wearing bright colorful uniforms all but guarantee you will be spotted and shot with highly accurate weapons.
Click to expand...
Not even accurate weapons. During the Anglo-Boer war the Boers we're firing on them with canons from miles away because their red uniforms (which also wasn't a great choice in the heat) stood out in the brown landscape and the glint off of their medals were visible even further off.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Agamemnon Busmalis, Overwritten Tapes and Breadbassket
I (Don't) Have A Gun said:
Not even accurate weapons. During the Anglo-Boer war the Boers we're firing on them with canons from miles away because their red uniforms (which also wasn't a great choice in the heat) stood out in the brown landscape and the glint off of their medals were visible even further off.
Click to expand...
The Confederates had an advantage at times during the Civil War because the gray (and butternut) uniforms blended in better when infantry were maneuvering in a heavily wooded area.
 
I (Don't) Have A Gun said:
Not even accurate weapons. During the Anglo-Boer war the Boers we're firing on them with canons from miles away because their red uniforms (which also wasn't a great choice in the heat) stood out in the brown landscape and the glint off of their medals were visible even further off.
Click to expand...
That war happened in 1899-1902. I'm arguing that against a peer power in modern times camo is basically irrelevant. Either soldiers will never be within eyesight of each other, will have alternate means of camouflage or hiding, or will be in a frontal attack where distinctive unforms would prevent friendly fire.
 
Betonhaus said:
That war happened in 1899-1902. I'm arguing that against a peer power in modern times camo is basically irrelevant. Either soldiers will never be within eyesight of each other, will have alternate means of camouflage or hiding, or will be in a frontal attack where distinctive unforms would prevent friendly fire.
Click to expand...
If you're dressed like a giant neon light up dildo in a modern battle you'll get shot at. That has not and still hasn't changed and we've had the technology you mention for some time now. It's already been said several times in this thread but most soldiers don't have fancy thermals, most will use their eyes to spot and fire upon the enemy.

There seems to be too much of an all or nothing mindset in your argument. Conventional camouflage will always have its role, at best you can argue that the role has become less impactful but it will never go away. Being harder to spot and shoot at will always be to soldier's advantage, being able to conceal troop movement before and during combat will always be an advantage. No matter how effective alternative means of camouflage are, if someone can just take off their fancy military hardware and see you prancing about with their naked eye then it becomes meaningless.
 
I'd say no for at least two reasons:

  1. Even now thermal optics aren't exactly wide spread throughout the military. More common is just gonna be a magnified optic like an ACOG.
  2. Thanks to magnified optics firefights are taking place at longer ranges then ever before. While these optics make it easier to farther away, they're not the primary way people are acquiring targets initially. So like if someone has a 6x optic, they're not looking through that constantly since it really narrows their field of view, they'll be looking with their regular ole eyes and then "zooming in" with their optic when they see something suspicious. So camoflauge helps prevent the enemy from initially aquiring a target.
 
Betonhaus said:
highly accurate weapons have thermal imaging.
Click to expand...
Do you know how expensive thermals are? Not to mention ITAR controlled, meaning only a few countries basically horde all the advanced tech for themselves? Modern soldiers today are lucky to get a ACOG or red dot.

Thermals are mostly for armored vehicles anyway. So I guess if a Chinese Type 99 tank is coming after you with that 125mm gun firing some HE-Frag you're fucked, otherwise camo still has plenty of uses.
 
Jewthulhu said:
>implying the chinese infantry has thermal imaging
>implying the russian infantry has thermal imaging
>implying the iranians have thermal imaging
>implying backwater terrorists have thermal imaging
Click to expand...
> tell me you never heard of Infiray without telling me you never heard of Infiray
*laughs in MH25*

Current day Chinese thermals beat the shit out of overpriced American garbage that is stuck in the 2010s. Even in Iran you can get a thermal red dot for under $1.5k USD if you know the right Turkish smuggler crew.

Camo still has a purpose, looking cool when you're at the flat range with your LARPer buddies.
ATACS iX master race here

Edit: Just in case y'all think it's still 2010. These things cost like $1.5k retail, much less in bulk.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back