Top 10 Inaccuracies in UCP Camouflage Reporting

The media has recently jumped on the UCP-hate bandwagon with predictably hyperbolic, inaccurate and misleading results. Few sources appear to be able to be differentiate between transitioning to a new camouflage pattern and just looking at a new camouflage pattern. The Predator Intelligence Blog has compiled ten of the most inaccurate headlines they could find and addressed each one. It's definitely worth reading if you follow the ongoing uniform/camouflage drama:

Top Ten Inaccuracies in UCP Camouflage Reporting

We have taken great strides to cover the US Army Camouflage Improvement Effort with complete accuracy to the facts presented by PEO Soldier, Natick Soldier Systems, associated departments, and reputable media outlets with solid sources. However, the mainstream media outside the defense industry has taken the story and ran with it presenting a vast array of misleading headlines and blatant inaccuracies similar to what you would see in some goofy forum post that has gone off the rails.

Still in UCP in Afghanistan Photo by US Army Spc. Garibay

While the history of the Universal Camouflage Pattern is murky from the omission of certain key factors leading to its adoption by the Army as the central means of concealment, there are plenty of facts on record to get the story straight and not turn assumptions into absolute policy. These articles are already being quoted in Wikipedia, which is always suspect as an information resource, but is also at the top of any search results given the legitimacy heaped on it by the masses.

We have taken a total of ten headlines or claims that we found lacking in accuracy or substance given the actual information that is available and explain why we feel it is misleading or downright wrong in respect to the overall conversation as to what the US Army did or is trying to do in regard to their camouflage improvement efforts.