[sphinx]

I heard a mini-lecture recently on the art of camouflage. It raised a number of interesting points that I’d never considered — not surprisingly, because few of us not in the business have ever given this much thought. The bottom line is that there is no simple right and wrong answer; if there were, this would have been settled long ago. Apparently a lot depends on the range at which you need camouflage to be effective, and of course, local ground cover and terrain, which requires judgments about the tactical environment of some indeterminate future engagement. The “right” answer also depends on the balance you strike between day and night operations. The Army and Marines are always guessing about their next war.

[IronJack]

As I understand it, the purpose of camouflage is not to make the wearer invisible; that would be impossible. It's purpose is to blur the lines between the wearer and his surroundings enough to make the enemy take a second look, or to shoot inaccurately.

Obviously, the best camouflage would be complete invisibility, but I suspect the Romulans are the only ones capable of that.

[redfreedom]

What you said makes perfect sense. It’s so easy to see that the current work uniform simply does not fit all cammo requirements.

A particular pet peeve of mine, is our local Army recruiters all wear this disgusting cammo crap (you guessed it, I don’t like it). They used to wear Class A’s, which I thought made them look quite professional. I asked a recruiter one day why they abandoned the Class A at the recruiting stations, he said: “because they intimidate potential recruits”.