CCU - Revision history

Admin1 at 01:33, 30 January 2025

2025-01-30T01:33:37Z

Admin1 at 01:33, 30 January 2025

2025-01-30T01:33:12Z

Admin1 at 01:13, 30 January 2025

2025-01-30T01:13:01Z

Admin1 at 01:10, 30 January 2025

2025-01-30T01:10:23Z

Admin1 at 01:07, 30 January 2025

2025-01-30T01:07:47Z

Admin1 at 01:03, 30 January 2025

2025-01-30T01:03:22Z

Admin1 at 00:59, 30 January 2025

2025-01-30T00:59:53Z

Admin1 at 00:58, 30 January 2025

2025-01-30T00:58:28Z

Admin1 at 00:55, 30 January 2025

2025-01-30T00:55:50Z

Admin1 at 00:55, 30 January 2025

2025-01-30T00:55:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:33, 30 January 2025
Line 105:		Line 105:


−	Link to PDF Version of this article ~~[[CCU]]~~ on the Close Combat Uniform	+	Link to PDF Version of this article on the Close Combat Uniform

	[http://camopedia.org/image/pdf/CCU_Mk2.pdf CCU]		[http://camopedia.org/image/pdf/CCU_Mk2.pdf CCU]

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:33, 30 January 2025
Line 105:		Line 105:


−	* PDF ~~Article on the development~~ of ~~the~~ [[CCU]] (Close Combat Uniform~~) by Eric H. Larson:~~	+	Link to PDF Version of this article [[CCU]] on the Close Combat Uniform

	[http://camopedia.org/image/pdf/CCU_Mk2.pdf CCU]		[http://camopedia.org/image/pdf/CCU_Mk2.pdf CCU]

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:13, 30 January 2025
Line 37:		Line 37:

	Figure 2		Figure 2
		+
		+	[[File:pocket.png\|200px]]
		+
		+	Pocket comparison

	[[File:ccu-3.png\|200px]]		[[File:ccu-3.png\|200px]]

@@ Line 72: / Line 72: @@
 [[File:pantpocket.png|200px]]
-Figure 7
+Pants pockets comparison
 FOAM PADS
 A feature often overlooked were the removable foam pads issued with each set of the CCU/CU. The pads were sized for either Short, Regular or Long uniforms and could not be easily interchanged as the pockets on each jacket or trousers were specifically sized to contain only that version. The issue pads were made of a high-density close-celled foam, slate grey in color. Unfortunately, the type of foam chosen was prone to tearing and the pads themselves are rumored to have been universally disliked as cumbersome, being generally discarded by troops on operational deployment.
-Figure 10
+[[File:padpocket.png|200px]]
-Figure 11
 HEAD DRESS

@@ Line 52: / Line 52: @@
 The CU (second contract run) jacket (see Figure 5) is essentially of the same construction as the first, with several minor alterations. These include a reinforced area running around the collar and down the front zipper line of the jacket, a slightly wider flap opening (running the full length) on the chest pockets, a lengthening of the Velcro to the full length of the sleeve pockets, and a slight modification to the size and structure of the foam pad pockets.
-[[File:cu-2.png|600px]]
+[[File:cu-2.png|200px]]
 Figure 6
-[[File:cu-3.png|600px]]
+[[File:cu-3.png|200px]]
 Figure 7
-[[File:cu-4.png|600px]]
+[[File:cu-4.png|200px]]
 Figure 8
@@ Line 69: / Line 69: @@
 The CU (second contract run) trousers are essentially of the same construction as the first, with only a single alteration. This was a more liberal usage of Velcro on the calf pockets.
 Figure 7

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 Figure 4
-The CU (second contract run) jacket is essentially of the same construction as the first, with several minor alterations. These include a reinforced area running around the collar and down the front zipper line of the jacket, a slightly wider flap opening (running the full length) on the chest pockets, a lengthening of the Velcro to the full length of the sleeve pockets, and a slight modification to the size and structure of the foam pad pockets.
+[[File:cu-1.png|600px]]
 TROUSERS

@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 The CCU (first contract run) jacket features a full zipper frontal closure (with narrow Velcro patches to secure a flap over the zipper), a Mandarin-type collar secured with a Velcro tab, cuffs with 2" Velcro securing straps instead of buttons, two chest pockets (with Velcro-closing flaps aligned vertically), and forward-angled upper sleeve bellows pockets (covered by "loop" Velcro in desert tan). The elbow region is designed to accept pad inserts (made from grey close-celled foam), that are secured in Velcro-closing "pockets," although in practice these foam pads were generally considered restricting and were usually removed and discarded. Velcro-backed insignia are worn on the sleeve pockets (including unit sleeve patches, reflective or non-reflective USA flag patches, and any qualification tabs such as RANGER or SAPPER). Name and US ARMY tapes are in practice sewn directly above the pockets, with both NCO and officer rank insignia being centered over the right chest name tape (limited use of metal pin-on ranks in this position have also been observed). Qualification and combat awards (Parachutist, Air Assault & Combat Infantryman Badge) have been observed on some jackets, sewn over the US ARMY tape at the left chest – this practice was, however, by no means universal. Another uncommon modification was the adding of 1” wide Velcro strips above the chest pockets, for attachment and easy removal of the name & US ARMY tapes.
-[[File:ccu-2.png|600px]]
+[[File:ccu-2.png|200px]]
 Figure 2
-Figure 6
+[[File:ccu-3.png|200px]]
 The CU (second contract run) jacket is essentially of the same construction as the first, with several minor alterations. These include a reinforced area running around the collar and down the front zipper line of the jacket, a slightly wider flap opening (running the full length) on the chest pockets, a lengthening of the Velcro to the full length of the sleeve pockets, and a slight modification to the size and structure of the foam pad pockets.

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 Natick developers also worked on improvements to the combat uniform design itself, addressing the needs of a modern infantry soldier carrying a combat load and equipment significantly different from that of his predecessor 20-30 years ago. By phase four of the evaluation process, the results of preliminary tests resulted in what eventually came to be known as the “Close Combat Uniform” (or CCU), referred to by designers at the US Army Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center as a “concept uniform.” The first CCU (Prototype 1) was produced in January 2003 and evaluated by a test team of Stryker soldiers at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, California. The comments, suggestions, and observations of the training team were then incorporated into the development of a second uniform (Prototype 2) that was evaluated by a different team of Stryker soldiers at the Joint Training and Readiness Center in Fort Polk, Louisiana.
 By the third stage of testing, the concept uniform had been officially named the Close Combat Uniform (CCU), and was produced in larger numbers for evaluation at the unit level using at least four different camouflage patterns: standard US m/81 woodland, standard US tri-colour desert, the Urban Tracks pattern (developed by Natick), and the aforementioned Scorpion multi-terrain camouflage (developed in conjunction with Crye Industries). (NB: the Scorpion camouflage pattern was later modified, and is now commercially produced as “Multicam.” Although not adopted, it was universally popular during evaluations and has seen limited use as private purchase combat clothing by US Special Operations personnel in both Afghanistan and the Iraqi theaters of operation.)
@@ Line 31: / Line 29: @@
 Contrary to rumors and misinformation floating around certain internet circles, the CCU/CU was never employed by units in Afghanistan (Operation Enduring Freedom), nor were the uniforms utilized on any large scale by US Special Operations Forces.
 JACKET
 The CCU (first contract run) jacket features a full zipper frontal closure (with narrow Velcro patches to secure a flap over the zipper), a Mandarin-type collar secured with a Velcro tab, cuffs with 2" Velcro securing straps instead of buttons, two chest pockets (with Velcro-closing flaps aligned vertically), and forward-angled upper sleeve bellows pockets (covered by "loop" Velcro in desert tan). The elbow region is designed to accept pad inserts (made from grey close-celled foam), that are secured in Velcro-closing "pockets," although in practice these foam pads were generally considered restricting and were usually removed and discarded. Velcro-backed insignia are worn on the sleeve pockets (including unit sleeve patches, reflective or non-reflective USA flag patches, and any qualification tabs such as RANGER or SAPPER). Name and US ARMY tapes are in practice sewn directly above the pockets, with both NCO and officer rank insignia being centered over the right chest name tape (limited use of metal pin-on ranks in this position have also been observed). Qualification and combat awards (Parachutist, Air Assault & Combat Infantryman Badge) have been observed on some jackets, sewn over the US ARMY tape at the left chest – this practice was, however, by no means universal. Another uncommon modification was the adding of 1” wide Velcro strips above the chest pockets, for attachment and easy removal of the name & US ARMY tapes.
 Figure 6

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 The Army’s search for a new combat uniform began as part of the Objective Force Warrior Program (later Future Force Warrior) at Natick Laboratories, an effort to bring the US Army combat soldier into greater combat readiness for the 21st century. Following a period of theoretical and developmental analysis, during which six different camouflage patterns were evaluated, developers at Natick focused on three primary patterns: All Over Brush, Shadow Line, and Track. Four different colors schemes were developed for each primary pattern, appropriate to woodland, desert, urban and a combination urban/desert environment. A multi-environment pattern (originally known as Scorpion pattern) was also considered, making for a total of 13 different prototype camouflage schemes being examined during the preliminary stages of evaluation in May of 2002. (See Fig. 2)
-[[File:trialpatterns.png|400px]]
+[[File:trialpatterns.png|200px]]
 Figure 2