British DPM Camouflage

[reneblacky]

Here's a NZ made DPM jacket from 1986. The shade of green in the 1980's differed from what was used in the 1990's and 2000's, (which was closer to Olive drab), but the camera doesn't give the true shade which is a bit darker in reality.

Attachment 1587157Attachment 1587158Attachment 1587159Attachment 1587160Attachment 1587161

Again a wow from me! bet it's made well too.

[Simonk]

I recently bought a DPM woodland leightweight shirt from eBay.

I was pleased to find an unissued shirt in my size that fits really well.

It looks like it could be one of the last to be produced. It came in the original packaging with maker as Cooneen Watts & Stone Ltd. dated 2011.

It has the standard Union Jack on one sleeve.

There’s no standard NATO stock label inside. Curiously, a white label next to the hanging strap reads “This garment is intended for training purposes only”.

Is this because the newer MTP was in use and they didn’t want anyone using the older DPM on active duty at the same time? So they were for barrack/training duties only?

[Anderson]

Nice to see some life breathed into this damaged thread.

[Anderson]

I recently picked up a pair of NZ DPM 1st Generation trousers made 1984 by Tracey Manufacturing Company for $25. It's a perfect match even in side (Size 1) for the jacket I've got, made 1986 by Tracey, see Post #348. These trousers are very hard to find as most were worn out years ago.

[Anderson]

Christmas present would you believe, to me from one of my sons. This NZ Army contract vest from 2009 was never issued and from the inspection tag on the back may have been a sample from a subcontractor to Yakka who had an Army contract at that time. Compare it to the earlier vest in post #285.

[brickie501]

I recently bought a DPM woodland leightweight shirt from eBay.

I was pleased to find an unissued shirt in my size that fits really well.

It looks like it could be one of the last to be produced. It came in the original packaging with maker as Cooneen Watts & Stone Ltd. dated 2011.

It has the standard Union Jack on one sleeve.

There’s no standard NATO stock label inside. Curiously, a white label next to the hanging strap reads “This garment is intended for training purposes only”.

Is this because the newer MTP was in use and they didn’t want anyone using the older DPM on active duty at the same time? So they were for barrack/training duties only?

That doesn't seem like something that would be needed, as MTP was rolled out to whole formations / units, so everyone therein would start wearing the new uniform, on orders, from date X...

Unless the label was added at the request of somebody in procurement who wasn't military & oblivious to what would be normal procedure

I have not seen this before & don't know for certain, but have seen a similar label in camouflage "coveralls" that weren't sufficiently fireproof (deliberately so - produced as a supposedly cheaper option for training) for operations. The DPM Field Jacket was obviously used on operations in its day, but it is perhaps more likely that increasing protection standards (by the time that item was made) meant it didn't offer enough protection (again, probably from flame) & so acquired the label? MTP was the operational attire by that time, so it could readily be restricted as such.