US ERDL & Woodland Camouflage Patterns 1948-1981

 

Initial Development

Circa 1948, Captain Adolph Henry Humphreys, Chief of Camouflage for the 1621st Reserve Training Unit (Research), United States Army Engineer Research & Development Laboratories (USAERDL) alongside John Hopkins and a team of engineers and artists developed a four-colour camouflage pattern for verdant terrain. [1]

This pattern, referred to as the "M-1948 Pattern", "1948 Pattern", "ERDL Pattern", or simply, "4-Color Pattern" in government documents, was originally intended for use by U.S. forces in temperate climates. However, it was later adopted by the Vietnamese Army for use in the tropics of Southeast Asia and served as the foundation for a lineage of future camouflage designs used by U.S. troops in a broader spectrum of environments. It was composed of four colours, Yellow Green Army shade 354, Dark Green Army shade 355, Brown Army shade 356, and Black Army shade 357. [2]

Soon after the development of the M-1948 pattern, the concept of a general service camouflage uniform was shelved in favour of OG-107 which remained the uniform standard throughout the 1950s and 1960s.

 Above: A group photograph including (then) Lt. Col. Adolph H. Humphreys (2nd to last, top row) alongside his peers at the Army Science Conference, 1966. [1]

Stateside Experiments

With rising boots-on-the-ground support by US advisors in Vietnam, the M-1948 pattern re-emerged during a controlled domestic test in 1962 titled ‘User Review of Camouflage For The Individual Combat Soldier In The Field’. The pattern was trialled alongside other camouflages and flat colours including; Marine Corps Mitchell Camouflage, OG-107, British Green and Khaki No.1. [3]

Despite performing favourably in some tests, the ERDL pattern was again disregarded as a potential general-service camouflage. This decision was primarily due to factors such as unsuitable environmental conditions and human biases. By the end of these trials, the results found camouflage patterns to be generally unfavourable compared to flat colours and OG-107 remained as the Army's standard-issue uniform. [4]

“Unfortunately, extremely hot and dry weather seared the grass that comprised most of the viewing background and, therefore, the contrast with the terrain for these five uniforms was high” [4]

“As the test progressed, the observers became familiar with the test area. This may have biased the results.” [4]

 

Above: Four graphs showing the performance of ERDL (blue) against OG-107 (red) and USMC Mitchell camouflage - Note the overall lower detection rate of ERDL compared to OG-107 [3]

Above left: A photograph taken during the 1962 controlled camouflage tests shows men wearing the six camouflage patterns and flat colours that were tested (ERDL, 4th from left). [3]

Above right: A photograph taken during the 1962 controlled camouflage tests shows observers in booths overlooking the test area. Note the mostly flat, open terrain. [3]

 

In-Country Combat Trials

Later in the same year, The Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) Field Unit introduced a concept for a reversible combat uniform designed for use by Vietnamese forces. It featured an M-1948 ERDL print on one side and a monotone black colour on the reverse. The black side was intended to disguise the wearer as a Vietnamese peasant farmer, whose common dress was often a black linen outfit. 

The field tests were conducted for only four months between November 1962 and February 1963 by the ARVN’s 10th Ranger Battalion alongside a handful of US advisors. Limited to only 140 units, these uniforms were the first introduction of the ERDL pattern to a combat setting and validated the necessity of a camouflage uniform for Special Forces. [5]

The second rendition of the uniform was made with a 5 oz. poplin, similar to the fabric used for the Tropical Combat Uniform. They featured button-adjustable cuffs, two lower open patch pockets, and two button-secured chest pockets. [7]

These trials were also advantageous for the indigenous forces that participated in them. The Biệt Động Quân (BDQ / ARVN Rangers) and the ARVN Airborne Division adopted two versions of the ERDL pattern as their standard-issue uniforms. Rolls of surplus M-1948 (Invisible ERDL) fabric from the original stateside trials were shipped to Vietnam and fabricated into uniforms for indigenous forces. Secondly, a locally developed variation of the ERDL pattern, known as ‘BDQ ERDL,’ was produced and used for the domestic manufacture of uniforms. 

Above left: An ARVN BDQ ERDL uniform set made with a 100% cotton sateen fabric. The shirt is faded while the trousers are lightly worn. (Author's collection)

Above right: A later pattern ARVN BDQ ERDL shirt made with a 100% cotton poplin fabric. Later models addressed the issue of fast fading colours. (Author's collection)

Following the initial in-country camouflage trials, in November 1965, the Tropical Combat Uniform Board was organised to discuss the prospects of adopting a standardised camouflage uniform. The proposition was again met with some resistance and the decision to retain OG-107 as a uniform standard remained. Despite positive feedback regarding concealment, the conclusion was made based on two overriding factors; firstly, identification of friendly troops wearing camouflage proved to be more difficult by low-flying aircraft, and secondly, individuals wearing camouflage patterns were more easily noticed when in motion due to pattern changes between the camouflage pattern and the environment. [8]

While USARV maintained the notion that camouflage patterns were not to be issued on a wide scale, as a result of the 1962-63 trials, the necessity for better concealment of special forces troops was realised. On the 10th of December, 1965, ‘United States Army, Vietnam’ (USARV) requested Natick Labs to send 300 ERDL camouflage Tropical Combat Uniforms (TCU) for field trials by reconnaissance platoons from the 173rd Airborne Brigade and 101st Airborne Division. The uniforms were delivered on the 23rd December, and were evaluated based on the following variables: concealment effectiveness, ability to withstand general wear, and resistance to fading and sun bleaching. 

In 1966, the US Navy also conducted field trials with a Nomex flight suit printed with ERDL camouflage. 40 suits were issued to Marines of Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 261 (HMM-261). [9]

 

Prior to the standardization of ERDL, reconnaissance teams, Special Forces, and other special personnel acquired several kinds of camouflage uniforms by various means.

Above left: Two Jr. NCOs wear Beogam (left) and Tigerstripe (right) uniforms, both CISO-procured. Circa 1964-1965. (Photo courtesy of Paul W. Miraldi)

Above right: A US Advisor wears a privately-purchased commercial Kamo brand 'Duck Hunter' camouflage suit circa July, 1962

 

Fielding

Following the success of ERDL in the 1962-1965 field trials, in February 1967, USARV filed an order for 18,373 uniforms for issue to pathfinders, LRRPs, and scout recon personnel in Vietnam. The Army approved the order in March 1967, by June of that year, camouflage TCUs became the standard issue uniform for Special Forces-based and reconnaissance units, with their use restricted to these units only.

The Army Materiel Command received orders from USARV to expedite shipments of ERDL uniforms, however the roll-out was slow, with the first deliveries made in December. [10]

Additionally, some units reported receiving only a fraction of the uniforms they had anticipated by the end of the year and most pathfinder and reconnaissance units were not issued the uniforms until 1968. [11]

All uniforms in this order were made from the same non-ripstop poplin fabric used for the OG-107 TCU. They were made in a '3rd Pattern' cut with bellow cuffs and a back yoke. 

Early batches of these uniforms contained two clearly definable variations of the adapted M-1948 pattern. The first variation, seen on most pre-production experimental models, had sharp, defined shapes and a more subdued colour palette when compared with the second type.

The second variation had slightly brighter, more saturated colours with feathered (blurred) edges. This feature is believed to have been an intentional printing method that ensured complete dye coverage, mitigating the effects of occasional roller slippage which could cause blank spots and disrupt the efficacy of the camouflage. This feature was maintained throughout future production of the M-1948 and NLABS-1 patterns.

Above left: A non-ripstop poplin coat from the 1967 order. It is printed with the earlier 'hard-edge' variant Adapted M-1948 pattern.

Above Centre: A SEAL Team 1 member wears a tropical combat coat printed with the earlier 'hard-edge' variant Adapted M-1948 pattern and a beret printed with the later 'blurred-edge' variant.

Above right : A second non-ripstop poplin coat from the 1967 order. It is printed with the later 'blurred-edge' variant Adapted M-1948 pattern.

Throughout the initial fielding of ERDL camouflage, the pattern continued to be studied and Natick Labs continued work on improving it. Combat experience in Vietnam proved that the adapted M-1948 pattern was slightly too bright for the Vietnamese landscape. [12]

Additionally, results from the 1966 Navy trials indicated that the ERDL-printed flight suits provided improved camouflage in a green leafy environment, but in a predominantly brown environment, both ERDL and OG-107 suits contrasted sharply. [9]

Accordingly, an updated version of the pattern, known as NLABS-1 (Brown-Dominant ERDL), was introduced at some point between late 1967 and early 1968. This new iteration slightly muted the colour palette, and light brown shapes replaced the lime green ones from the previous design.

There is a misconception that NLABS-1 was developed for use in more mountainous, rocky, or muddy regions where the Adapted M-1948 pattern would be less effective. However, there is no known evidence to support this theory and it is unlikely because providing two separate camouflage patterns for specific areas within the same theatre of operations would be logistically impractical.

A small quantity of non-ripstop poplin uniforms printed with the NLABS-1 pattern were produced under 1967 contacts. These uniforms were likely manufactured just prior to the advent of ripstop fabric and the vast majority of NLABS-1 uniforms were made under post-1967 contracts using ripstop fabric.

 

Some uniforms contained a mixture of M-1948 and NLABS-1 fabrics. For example, a coat may be comprised mostly of Brown-Dominant ERDL fabric with a few sporadic panels of Green-Dominant ERDL fabric. It is speculated that this was due to manufacturers using up old bolts of M-1948 fabric alongside newly produced NLABS-1. These types of uniform items are sometimes referred to by collectors as ‘Clown Camo’ for their unusual appearance.

Left: A ripstop TCU coat with mismatched ERDL fabrics. The right arm, both breast pockets, and lower left pocket are made with adapted M-1948 ERDL fabric while the rest of the jacket is made with NLABS-1 fabric. (Author's collection)

 

 

 

 

Due to poorly defined colourist standards and loose printing tolerances, wartime ERDL patterns often suffered from colour inconsistencies and printing flaws that are sometimes mistaken as unique pattern types. Colours varied in shade and tone, and dyes were sometimes applied unevenly, causing noticeable imperfections. The introduction of the NLABS-2 pattern in 1979 addressed these errors, incorporating stricter standards and improved manufacturing processes to ensure greater consistency in colour and quality.

 Above: A Tropical Combat Coat printed with NLABS-1 displays poorly printed black shapes which appear speckled and overly faded. (Author's collection)

By late 1968, the abundance of camouflage uniforms within Vietnam prompted the Marine Corps to adopt them as standard. Simultaneously, Navy Special Operations personnel began to utilise ERDL uniforms when they were able to acquire them. SEALs also began issuing an experimental floatation jacket (Commonly referred to as a 'Float Coat’) printed with the adapted M-1948 and NLABS-1 patterns. Several regular Army units also began to issue ERDL uniforms as well, however, due to the gradual winding down of the War, the Army never had the opportunity to fully adopt the pattern as standard.

Above left: Marines of the 4th Marine Rgt., 3rd Marine Div. wear a mixture of adapted M-1948 & NLABS-1 uniforms circa 30th September 1969. (Photo by David Turnley)

Above right: A Navy SEAL wears an experimental 'Floatation Coat'. Other ERDL uniform components are also worn. (photo Credit: National Archives)

By the end of 1970, every branch of the US Military operating in Vietnam had begun distributing ERDL uniforms and other personal equipment to regular line infantry and other non-’special’ units. In the final five years of the conflict, ERDL started to supplant other colours and camouflage patterns on items such as helmet covers (USMC), and ponchos.

Above left: An ERDL lightweight poncho is used as a makeshift shelter. D co. 3rd Bn. 21st Inf. 196th Bde. US Army, circa 1971-1972. (Photo by Jim Comer)

Above right: Joseph F. Arata, a US Marine wears an ERDL helmet cover circa 29th April 1975. (Photo by Stuart Herrington)

 

1975 MASSTER Phase II Camouflage Test

During the final years of the Vietnam War, further stateside camouflage tests were being conducted that experimented with various camouflage patterns including variations of the existing 4-colour ERDL patterns. The MASSTER Camouflage Tests began in 1973, starting with phase one, which examined broader concepts of camouflage and concealment. Subsequently, in 1975, phase two concentrated on personal uniforms and equipment. It was during phase two that scaled-up versions of the ERDL pattern were first considered and would contribute to the conception of the 1981 Woodland pattern. 

Known as the ‘Expansion Series’, four uniform models featuring scaled-up versions of the ERDL pattern were trialled. Models A, B, C, and D were made from a nylon/cotton sateen and fabricated into an experimental Tropical Combat Uniform (TCU) design that would later evolve into the Hot Weather Uniform (HWU). Model A was 100% scale and acted as a control, Model B was expanded by +30% scale, Model C was +60% scale, and finally model D was +100% scale. This set of uniforms was tested against other flat colours and camouflage prints, notably, OG-107, an ERDL uniform with black vertical tigerstripes printed over the top (Model E), and an experimental tigerstripe pattern (Model F). [4]

“The smallest pattern size is the same as the standard US Army 1948 4-color verdant pattern; the others are of the same geometry and color but linearly expanded by 30, 60 and 100 per cent. Area expansions are therefore, approximately 70, 250 and 400 per cent, respectively.” [4]

Ultimately, the 60 % expanded version of ERDL was the most successful and this pattern set the premise for the 1981 Woodland pattern. Between the end of the MASSTER trials and Woodland’s official introduction in 1981, the pattern would be further tweaked, tested and improved upon until a final iteration was approved for its introduction into widespread use. [13]

“In order to extend the range of camouflage effectiveness as far toward 350 meters as possible the decision was made to expand the 1948 pattern by 60 per cent… Beyond such range the pattern blends into a monotone shade.” [13]

 

Above left: ERDL expansion series - Left to right: Model A (0% control), Model B (70%), Model C (250%), Model D (400%). [14]

Above right: Experimental camouflage prints - Model E ‘Experimental disruptive Camouflage for verdant Terrains’ (left). Model F ‘Experimental “Tiger” pattern oriented horizontally’ [1]. [14]

 

NLABS-2

After US involvement in Vietnam ended in 1975, the Army returned to OG-107 as a uniform standard. Meanwhile, Natick labs continued research into a +60% scale ERDL camouflage pattern and old stocks of Vietnam-era OG-107 and ERDL Tropical Combat Uniforms were being issued on a limited basis to certain units such as the Army Rangers and the 82nd Airborne Division. As stocks of TCUs were slowly being used up, in 1977, the ‘Hot Weather Uniform’ (HWU) was introduced. The HWU began production with surplus bolts of OG-107, M-1948, and NLABS-1 ripstop poplin fabrics until they were effectively depleted in 1979.

Subsequently, an updated version of NLABS-1, known as NLABS-2, was introduced to replace the wartime patterns. While the new pattern closely resembled its predecessor, it addressed the aforementioned issues of printing flaws and colour inconsistencies. Colourists standards were more clearly defined, and improved printing techniques resulted in shapes with sharper outlines. The colourway was also slightly muted reducing the contrast between the colours, further improving effectiveness. 

The HWU was worn primarily by a new multi-branch mobile strike force known as the ‘Rapid Deployment Force’ (RDF) which is how NLABS-2 earned its collector’s title ‘RDF ERDL’. Between 1979-1981, Camouflage Hot Weather Uniforms were manufactured exclusively with the NLABS-2 pattern until their replacement by the Woodland camouflage pattern and the Battle Dress Uniform. Despite being officially replaced in 1981, HWUs saw a fairly lengthy phasing-out period and were sporadically worn by all branches throughout the 1980s alongside Vietnam-era TCUs and BDUs. [12]

Left: A Combat Control Team Member wears a Hot Weather Uniform printed with NLABS-2 camouflage during Exercise Reforger, 1980 (Photo credit: National Archives)

 

 

Woodland

The M-1948 pattern and its derivatives were subject to over three decades of development, trials, and field use before a final iteration was realised in 1981. Following the 1975 MASSTER trials, the +60% scale ERDL pattern was subject to rigorous testing and further development to ensure its longevity in service. Various dyeing practices and other advancements such as improved IR treatments were implemented, further enhancing the combat effectiveness of the pattern. 

 

Above left: A photograph taken by Natick Labs showing two men standing in a wooded area using infrared-sensitive film. The man on the left is wearing an IR-treated uniform, and the man on the right is wearing a standard, untreated OG-107 TCU. (Image source: Natick Soldier Systems Photographic Collection)

Above right: Four swatches of Woodland BDU fabric displaying various stages of fading when exposed to UV light. (Image source: Natick Soldier Systems Photographic Collection)

Notably, the Woodland pattern is darker than the former NLABS-2. As considerations were made regarding the extended use of uniforms, it was decided that the colourway should be printed slightly darker than the optimum shade, therefore, when the uniform is subject to fading by sun-bleaching and laundering, the target shade is achieved and camouflage effectiveness is maintained for a longer period of use. [13]

“Large-scale production often results in fabrics somewhat lighter than the colorist's standard; lighter shades cost less. Secondly, colored fabrics fade in use, both from sunlight and laundering. Therefore, if the colors on a new garment are somewhat darker than the optimum target colors, they will tend to fade toward rather than away from the real target colors and thereby prolong useful life of the garment.” [13]

Uniform fabrics were produced to specifications MIL-C-44031 (Temperate), and MIL-C-43468G (Hot Weather), and the camouflage pattern was either screen or roller printed with dyes "Dark Green 355", "Brown 356", and "Black 357" on a dyed cloth with a background colour of "Light Green 354". [15]

Despite a lengthy testing process between 1975-1981, the first uniforms produced under FY1981 contracts were prone to irregular fading patterns and were often reported to display a variety of hues after periods of wear and laundering. These issues were especially noted on uniforms that were used by troops deployed to Lebanon and Grenada where they were subject to heavy wear. These loose manufacturing tolerances were quickly resolved with later contracts.

Woodland BDUs saw a few minor design changes until manufacturing ceased in 2007. There were three identifiable patterns with various unique design features and fittings as well as three separate uniform types for temperate climates and hot weather.

Initially, uniforms were made exclusively from a 50/50 NyCo (nylon/cotton) twill fabric designed for temperate environments. In 1984, a 100% cotton ripstop poplin uniform was introduced specifically for hot weather conditions. This uniform was later upgraded in 1993 to an enhanced version made from 50/50 NyCo ripstop poplin, offering improved durability and comfort in tropical climates. These uniforms were produced in three distinct cuts, each featuring unique design elements: the first pattern introduced in 1981, the second in 1984, and the third in 1989. 

Above: A timeline showing the evolutionary development of the Battle Dress Uniform. (Image credit: Camaro69427, US Militaria Forum)

A true testament to the effectiveness of the 1981 Woodland pattern is its long service life which spanned over three decades and saw use in Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, and Afghanistan to name just a few theatres of operations. Additionally, countless other countries have copied the pattern for use in their militaries as well as innumerable commercial companies and aftermarket brands who have adopted variations of the Woodland pattern for their clothing lines. Due to such an extensive service life, popularity among troops, and prolific appearances in film and media, it has seamlessly integrated itself into pop culture and the fashion scene.

Above left: US Marines wearing Woodland BDUs with Mitchell and ERDL Helmet covers in Beirut circa 1st April 1983

Above right: International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) Special Operations Forces (SOF) soldiers wear modified Woodland BDUs in Afghanistan circa 2010

 

Development Timeline

 

Pre-1975 Experimental Models

Prior to the MASSTER trials in 1975 that experimented with scaled-up versions of NLABS-1, the US Army and Marine Corps experimented with a few different types of uniforms printed with four iterations of ERDL camouflage. Not much is known about these uniforms as they were produced in very limited quantities and trialled for short periods. There are no publicly accessible records that reference these items, therefore their provenance is currently speculative until further resources are found.

 

Article 1: COAT, COMBAT TROPICAL COMOUFLAGE PATTERN
DPSC Contract Number: 5925

This is the only known surviving US Military contracted uniform item to exist that is printed with the original M-1948 (invisible ERDL) pattern. Unfortunately, the labels do not display a date, so it is unclear when or for what purpose this coat was made, but judging by the uniform cut and labels, it is safe to assume that it was made sometime around the mid 1960s. It has a 2nd Pattern Tropical Combat Uniform (TCU) cut with epaulettes and waist adjustment tabs. Note the misspelled title on the contract label.

(Photographs courtesy of Jakob Poline)

    

 

Article 2: COAT, MEN’S COMBAT TROPICAL CAMOUFLAGE POPLIN
DPSC Contract Number: 8905

The cut of this uniform is entirely different to the later standardised Tropical Combat Uniform. It has four pockets and is made from 5.5oz wind-resistant non-ripstop cotton poplin, printed with ‘Adpated’ M-1948 ERDL.

(Photo source unknown)

  

 

Articles 3 & 4: No Title

A 1st pattern Tropical Combat Uniform set printed with ‘Adpated’ M-1948 ERDL. The cut of this uniform is identical to the standard OG-107 counterpart. Notably, the thread used to construct the uniform is black which would be changed to green in later models. Both the coat and trousers only display a size/stock label and were not made with contract labels. It is assumed that this uniform appeared around the same time as the standard OG-107 1st pattern TCU circa 1962-1964.

(Photo credit: Coat - vintageproductions, USMF, Trousers - Photos courtesy of Jack Ewing)

    

 

Article 5: SHIRT, MAN’S CAMOUFLAGE
DPSC Contract Number: 7241

An Army 2nd pattern (P63) utility shirt made with the same 100% cotton sateen fabric as the OG-107 counterpart, printed with the ‘Adpated’ M-1948 ERDL pattern. It is assumed that this uniform appeared in the same year as the standard OG-107 P63 uniform circa 1963.

(Photo source unknown)

 

Article 6: COAT, Man’s, Combat, Tropical
Date: 30 January 1964

Another 1st-pattern TCU cut uniform. This example is made with a reversible cloth with black on the inside and the ‘Adapted’ M-1948 ERDL print on the outside however, the jacket does not appear to be reversible in its design.

(Photo source unknown)

 

Article 7: COAT, Man’s, Combat, Tropical, Camouflage, Clo(th), Ctn (Cotton), Poplin, 4.5 oz., camouflage
Date: 11 October 1965

This uniform set could have been part of the December 1965 USARV in-country field trials as the manufacture date on the label predates the trials by only two months. It appears to be made in a 2nd Pattern Tropical Combat Uniform (TCU) cut with epaulettes.

(Photographs courtesy of Stephen Cheng Mao Shiao)

 

Article 8: COAT, MAN’S COTTON WR POPLIN, CAMOUFLAGE
DPSC Contract Number: 7913

Another coat made in a 2nd Pattern TCU cut with epaulettes and waist adjustment tabs. Likely circa 1965.

(Photo credit: Copran, USMF)

Article 9 & 10: ‘COAT, COMBAT TROPICAL (MC)’
DPSC Contract Number: 7910

An experimental USMC TCU, the shirt is based on the P56 utility uniform and the trousers are more similar to the Army-developed TCU. Interestingly, the cargo pockets on the trousers appear to have been replaced by the chest pockets from a P58 utility shirt. 

(Photographs courtesy of Zdenek Horak)

 

Articles 11 & 12: ‘SHIRT UTILITY CAMOUFLAGE’, and ‘TROUSERS UTILITY CAMOUFLAGE’
DPSC Contract Number 6915-72

Circa 1972, this uniform set has an identical cut to the 3rd Pattern (P64) Utility Uniform. It is made from an 8.5oz cotton sateen and is printed with NLABS-1 

(Photo credit: Cpl HARLAN, USMF & Otter42, USMF)

     

 

Article 13: US Army ‘SHIRT UTILITY CAMOUFLAGE’, and ‘TROUSERS UTILITY CAMOUFLAGE’
DPSC Contract Number 7901-73

Circa 1973, a similar uniform as above, however, the fabric is a 50/50 Nylon Cotton blend. 

(Photo credit: @jiro441016, Instagram)

  

 

Post-1975 Experimental Models

Below are examples of uniforms that were produced for and after the 1975 MASSTER Phase II tests. While a prospective camouflage pattern had been selected, a uniform cut, colourists standards and specified dying practices had not yet been realised. 

Starting around 1979, testing expanded beyond the initial MASSTER test models. Natick Labs experimented with various colour schemes, dyeing techniques, printing methods, camouflage pattern orientations, and uniform designs. This iterative process was crucial to ensure that the eventual standard-issue uniform met the required performance standards.

 

Article 1: ‘COAT, HOT WEATHER, COMBAT, CAMOUFLAGE, MODEL B’

DPSC Contract Number: 9904-75

A ‘Model B’ coat from the MASSTER Phase II tests. Made from a 50/50 NyCo blend sateen, printed with 70% expanded ERDL.

(Photo credit: @jiro-amd-3, Instagram)

Article 2: ‘TROUSERS, HOT WEATHER, COMBAT, CAMOUFLAGE, MODEL C’

DPSC Contract Number: 9905-75

A pair of ‘Model C’ trousers from the MASSTER Phase II tests. Made from a 50/50 NyCo blend sateen, printed with 250% expanded ERDL.

(Photo source unknown)

 

Article 3 & 4: ‘COAT, HOT WEATHER, COMBAT, CAMOUFLAGE, MODEL D’ and 'TROUSERS, HOT WEATHER, COMBAT CAMOUFLAGE, MODEL D'

DPSC Contract Number: 9904-75 (Coat)
DPSC Contract Number: 9905-75 (Trousers)

A ‘Model D’ coat and trousers from the MASSTER Phase II tests. Made from a 50/50 NyCo blend sateen, printed with 400% expanded ERDL.

(Photo credit: Coat - Thrifter_01, USMF, Trousers - Author's collection)

 

 

Articles 5 & 6: ‘COAT, HOT WEATHER, COMBAT, CAMOUFLAGE, MODEL E’, and ‘TROUSERS HOT WEATHER, COMBAT, CAMOUFLAGE, MODEL E’

DPSC Contract Number: 9904-75 (Coat)
DPSC Contract Number: 9905-75 (Trousers)

A ‘Model E’ coat and trousers from the MASSTER Phase II tests. Made from a 50/50 NyCo blend sateen, printed with NLABS-1 with overlaid vertical black tigerstripes.

(Photographs courtesy of Zdenek Horak)

 

Article 7: ‘COAT, COMBAT, CAMOUFLAGE (MC)’

DPSC Contract Number: 9908-75

Circa. 1975, a Marine Corps experimental coat printed with 400% ERDL. It is speculated that once the Army MASSTER Phase II trials had concluded (or perhaps concurrently), the Marine Corps also conducted trials with the expanded ERDL print on a NyCo twill fabric.

What is also notable is the unusual uniform cut which features only two slanted inverted pleated pockets. Additionally, this example lacks the 'Dura-Press' text on the label that appears on every other known example and is the only one seen with the 'USMC', EGA and name stamps.

(Author's Collection)

Article 8: "Battle Dress Uniform, 34 view, Warm Weather, CEMEL"

Dated 16 February 1978

A pre-production experimental BDU with inverted pleated pockets. Likely a Model C uniform from the MASSTER tests.

(Photo Credit: Natick Soldier Systems Photographic Collection [14])

Article 9: No Title

Circa. 1979

A pre-production experimental BDU coat. The camouflage pattern print has been reversed vertically.

(Photographs courtesy of Tarokichi O’Brien)

 

Article 10: "Battle Dress"

Dated 17 July 1979

A pre-production experimental BDU.

(Photo Credit: Natick Soldier Systems Photographic Collection [14])

Article 11: "CEMEL Battle Dress Uniform"

Dated 13 December 1979

A pre-production experimental BDU coat. The camouflage pattern print has been reversed horizontally.

(Photo Credit: Natick Soldier Systems Photographic Collection [14])

Article 12: ‘COVER, HELMET, WOODLAND CAMOUFLAGE’

DPSC Contract Number: 9927-79

 

Article 13: "Men's and Women's Uniforms"

Circa 1980

A pre-production experimental BDU.

(Photo Credit: Natick Soldier Systems Photographic Collection [14])

 

 

Other Articles

Article 1: Thai Tailor-Made Flight Suit

A privately-purchased flight suit worn by a US Airman. It is made with a locally-produced ERDL print on a ripstop poplin fabric. It displays hand-embroidered Command Pilot Wings over the left breast pocket. Made by 'O.K. Tailors' in UBOL, Thailand.

 

 

Article 2: Custom-Modified Kamo Brand flight Suit

Originally a set of hunting coveralls, this suit has been heavily modified to resemble a flight suit. It has added zips, Velcro, pockets, etc. It's origin is unknown, but it was likely worn by a military pilot in the 1970s. Under the collar is a cut-down contract label from a camouflage TCU coat.

 

References

1. Headquarters, Department of the Army. Army Research and Development Monthly Newsmagazine of the Office of the Chief, Research and Development, Vol. 7, No. 7. July-August 1966. 

2. Military Specification MIL-C-43468B, 11 March 1968; Military Specification MIL-C-43468C, 12 June 1972

3. Humphreys, Adolph H.; Gee, David L. Results of User Review of Camouflage for the Individual Combat Soldier in the Field, 9 September 1965

4. Rizzo, F.J.; Ramsley, Alvin O.; Campbell, A.M.; Bushnell, W.B.; Natsios, B.A.; Merola, A.; Kidder, G. Support to MASSTER Phase II Camouflage Test. April 1976

5. Dr. S. J. Kennedy; Preliminary Evaluation of the Individual Clothing and Equipment of Vietnamese Military Forces, Natick Laboratories, 15 July 1963

6. Advanced Research Projects Agency Research and Development, Field Unit Report: Proj 2K-453, 2 January 1965

7. RVN Ministry of Defense, Annual Inspection Report #3263: TTM/TTQL/NCCT/KH, 29 August 1970

8. Summary of Proceedings of the United States Army, Vietnam, Tropical Uniform Board. 31 December 1965

9. Chianta, Maria A.; Camouflage Printing of Nomex Summer Flying Coveralls. 30 September 1966

10. Defense Supply Agency, ACSFOR DS Status Report, 31 August 1967

11. 9th Infantry Division, Operational Report, 25 December 1967

12. Ramsley, Alvin O.; Yeomans, Walter G. Psychophysics of Modern Camouflage. June 1982

13. Ramsley, Alvin O.; Buchnell, William B. Development of the U.S. Woodland Battledress Uniform. January 1981

14. Natick Soldier Systems Photographic Collection: https://www.digitalcommonwealth.org/collections/commonwealth:cz30ps65n

15. Military Specification MIL-C-44031, 26 September 1980, Military Specification MIL-C-43468F, 26 July 1988; Military Specification MIL-C-43468G, 17 July 1990; Military Specification MIL-C-43468H, 31 March 1992

 

Further Reading

• Ramsley, Alvin O. Camouflage Patterns - Effects of Size and Color. NATICK/TR-79/030, (CEMEL-202). July 1979
• Natsios, B.A.; Ramsley, Alvin O.; Merola, A. Recoloring Formulations For Special Camouflage Applications. January 1977
• Dobbins, D.A.; Kindick, C.M. Jungle Vision VI: A Comparison Between the Detectability of Human Targets and Standard Visibility Objects in an Evergreen Rainforest. February 1966.
• Performance and Protective Properties of Combat Clothing - STANAG 2333. 16 November 1977
• Ramsley, Alvin O.; Bushnell, William B; Corgan, Joe L. Design and Fabrication of a Textured Helmet Cover. August 1979
• Kelly, Warren T.; Laboratory Shrinkage Evaluation of Nomex Summer Flight Suits. 19 April 1967

ARPA - Advanced Research Projects Agency

ARVN - Army of the Republic of Vietnam

BDU - Battle Dress Uniform

CEMEL - Clothing, Equipment and Materials Engineering Laboratory

CISO - Counter Insurgency Support Office
DPSC - Defense Personnel Support Centre

ERDL - Engineer Research & Development Laboratories

FY - Fiscal Year

HWU - Hot Weather Uniform

LRRP - Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol
MACV-SOG - Military Assistance Command, Vietnam - Studies and Observations Group

MASSTER - Modern Army Selected Systems Test, Evaluation, and Review

MERADCOM - US Army Mobility Equipment Research and Development Command

NARADCOM - US Army Natick Research and Development Command

NLABS - Natick Labs

NyCo - Nylon/cotton blend

OG-107 - Olive Green Shade-107

RDF - Rapid Deployment Force

TCU - Tropical Combat Uniform

USAERDL - United States Army Engineer Research & Development Laboratories

USMC - United States Marine Corps

 

My gratitude is owed to everyone who has contributed to this article:

• Brett - www.vietnamgear.com
• Jack Ewing - Paladin Patches
• Jakob Poline
• Paul Miraldi - Author of ‘Uniforms and Equipment of U.S. Military Advisors in Vietnam: 1957-1972’, ‘Uniforms and Equipment of U.S Army Infantry, LRRPs, and Rangers in Vietnam 1965-1971’
• Ryu - @uscamoguy (Instagram)
• Stephen Cheng Mao Shiao
• Susan Dittman - Daughter of Adolph H. Humphreys (Chief of Camouflage, 1621st Reserve Training Unit, ERDL)
• Tarokichi O’Brien
• Tung Nguyen Tan
• Zdenek Horak - www.px-monkey.com/

 

For access to the documents listed in the References and Further Reading sections or for copies of high-resolution images, please follow the 'Contact Us' link at the bottom of this page.

All images and content on our website is the property of Omega Militaria unless otherwise stated. All rights are reserved. The unauthorized use of any material from www.omegamilitaria.com without express and written permission from the owner is strictly prohibited. You may not reproduce, modify, distribute, or republish any content from this page or any other on our website without obtaining permission. If you would like to use any of the materials for non-commercial or commercial purposes, please contact us for permission so we can provide full-resolution files. By accessing and using our website, you agree to abide by the copyright terms and conditions outlined in this disclaimer.