Impressionist groups/teams

[Guest pierce09]

What impressionist teams are there in the UK outside of E27? does impressionism have any popular standing in UK milsim? if so, what groups replicate which units/timeframes etc.

[Druid799]

Haven’t come across any (I’ve been playing for yrs) but to be honest I’m glad it’s not a ‘British thing’ either . Freely admit I’m a Geardo ! I love putting different loadouts together and trying to get it as accurate as I reasonably can  BUT when the kit authenticity takes the Primary role then too me that’s a bit sad and even borderline a bit creepy ?  Don’t get me wrong as I said I try my damnedest to get it right , but when its done to the ‘it has to be the correct bootlaces’ level then that’s just to far for me !  

[Prisce]

Don’t Hate! Bigger slower targets are the only way some people get kills!

[L3wisD]

Although originating in France, impressionism had great influence overseas. Core British impressionists included Walter Richard Sickert and Wilson Steer.

 

Impressionism was developed by Claude Monet and other Paris-based artists from the early 1860s. (Though the process of painting on the spot can be said to have been pioneered in Britain by John Constable in around 1813–17 through his desire to paint nature in a realistic way).

 

The term Post-Impressionism is usually confined to the four major figures who developed and extended impressionism in distinctly different directions – Paul Cezanne, Paul Gauguin, Georges Seurat and Vincent van Gogh.

 

I hope that helps clear the matter up.

[Lozart]

@pierce09 There's DevTSix, but you could do worse than have a look through here: https://thereptilehouseblog.com/category/teams/

Pretty sure there's quite a few milsim focused teams that do impression loadouts but they do tend to hang around the more milsim type places (ie not really here)!

[Rogerborg]

All I can think of is...

 

 

[Guest pierce09]

4 hours ago, Lozart said:

@pierce09 There's DevTSix, but you could do worse than have a look through here: https://thereptilehouseblog.com/category/teams/

Pretty sure there's quite a few milsim focused teams that do impression loadouts but they do tend to hang around the more milsim type places (ie not really here)!

 

Yeah I met a few DevT6 guys from Silver Team in Arizona several times over the years and I love their attention to detail. I've been a fan of the reptile house for many years. 

 

It's definitely a different vibe over here to elsewhere with this kind of stuff. 

[jcheeseright]

In the UK you've got Gray Fox (90% SEAL stuff, some very good kits), Cobalt (2 guys do CAG, 3 MARSOC, 1 DEVGRU).  Neither team really does strict 'impression' kits anymore as generally it's not all that practical!

[Guest pierce09]

I think most of the guys that I know who enjoy building impression kits do so mainly for the enjoyment of researching, sourcing and building a specific loadout rather than actually using it at an event or on the field. most guys seem to have separate kit for events and skirmishes that's tailored to their needs. 

 

I suppose cost plays an important part too. In the UK, it appears to expensive to buy multiple kits and guns to specific loadouts!

[Iceni]

I think it is more an individual/group thing than a site thing.

The level of attention to detail is the separator.

It is only expensive if you pick a rare/old period of time, There are countless 30 -50 year old styles that can be classed as budget. Provided the level of detail needed is the bare essentials. Shirt, Trousers, Webbing/vest, Pouches, Hat.

Some common themes that would be budget themes would be:

West German (Olive drab)
German reunification (flecktarn)
Austrian (olive drab)
UK (DPM)
Czech M85 (olive drab)
American (several patterns)

The expensive part comes when you pick a pattern that uses Plate carriers, Special pouches, Helmets, and comms.

I just built a basic German kit for myself, Trousers, Shirt, Parka, Webbing, 2 hats, 4 extra mag pouches was all less than £70 delivered. On a similar budget I could have done a full kit to the same level for the others listed above.


Modern kit is generally more expensive than the older kit. The shirt and trousers might be cheap, but the rest won't be, There is more demand, and less market saturation. You are also buying against civilian units like the TA, Army cadets, Air cadets ect. So demand means the prices can be higher. The gear is also more complicated, with less attention to simple design as modern soldiers need more kit.

The last factor is modern non military kits. These come in many guises. There are the clones of existing patterns new and old, Radical new patterns, And patterns that are inspired rather than based on world use. These styles of kit are probably the most expensive, And the least functional. There are countless companies selling military inspired clothing and kit that is eclipsed both in price and function by it's real world equivalent. The difference, The clones can be purchased new and are generally held in stock in most airsoft shops, Military surplus on the other hand is sold by strange men who may or may not be hiding nazi memorabilia under their beds.



My advice to anyone looking is to actually look. Don't think because it's new and in an airsoft shop it is correct and going to work.

If you want to cheap out, do it with older real kit. You will look the part, the clothes will be durable and function correctly, and the webbing will have been tried by thousands of soldiers, abused to a level you can't imagine, and still function... your once a month, I don't want to get dirty, Skirmish isn't going to hurt it in the slightest.


So it falls back to the original question.

"does impressionism have any popular standing in UK milsim? if so, what groups replicate which units/timeframes etc."

You have to look at the sites you want to play at. Any kit should be safe, It'll either be a NATO force, or not. The site will have more NATO kit than anything else regardless. Provided it looks right, And fits the general theme of the day no one will care. Safest bet is DPM as it covers a huge time frame. 1966-2010. And the SAS have access to just about every gun you can think of.


 

[Guest pierce09]

11 minutes ago, Iceni said:

The level of attention to detail is the separator.

I just built a basic German kit for myself

 

I totally agree the level of detail is what sets impression apart from an 'inspired by' loadout. 

 

a basic kit in my view, is very rarely an impression due to the generic nature of it and lacking the small details that make an impression. and although you list several simple and cheap basic loadouts, are they classed as impressions or are they a generic loadout utilising a certain pattern? a British infantry loadout for the 1990s might be simple and cheap but its the details that make it an impression in my view so finding the correct pattern webbing, the correct smock and helmet, flak vest or CBA etc make it the challenge. 

 

its all subjective but I thought I'd ask about impression stuff here as I've not seen much of it on Instagram from the UK. Thanks for the replies

[Iceni]

4 hours ago, pierce09 said:

a basic kit in my view, is very rarely an impression due to the generic nature of it and lacking the small details that make an impression

I can agree with that statement as much as I can disagree with it.

Basic kit, Trousers, shirt, webbing, hat. Is representative of active service. It's going to depend on the war as to what you see. An awful lot of them are not going to be wearing much more than basic kit, Because they drop everything into the bergen and leave it on a vehicle that is going to follow up. Or they have hit base set up camp, and are moving out on light gear.

Existing units would also be on older gear, so provided you don't go younger then your time period, anything older that might still be in service could still be issued. I have a young friend who's just finished his army training, His training rifle, L85A1. And that was a recent issue.

Falklands for instance Bergens and full packs are on, Vietnam webbing and an open shirt with a tin hat. Korea Webbing and a Parka/smok. The general rule seems to be if you have somewhere to stow your gear, then you do it. So light kit is relevant.


Training, now that's where things get interesting, because a unit in training would have full field equipment, 3 day load, Tents, Water treatment, The full shebang, as no training unit would be allowed to load light. The Soldier look comes from training images. It's not what they look like in battle. Under training conditions uniform will be worn correctly, in full, and inspected. Not so much in battle.

 

[Guest pierce09]

4 minutes ago, Iceni said:

It's not what they look like in battle. Under training conditions uniform will be worn correctly, in full, and inspected. Not so much in battle.

 

we'll probably have to agree to disagree on this one! 

 

I understand your point but whereas there doesn't seem to be as many impression groups, teams or individuals here as overseas, the US has an enormous amount of impression groups. Most of these choose reference pictures to replicate exactly and most of the pictures are of individuals on tour. For example, have a read of DevTSix Silver team's interview on The Reptile House and they include a small selection of the reference pictures to replicate in their own kit. 

 

But it all comes down to what you want to focus on and what you use as your inspiration. So whether it be the British Army line infantry or USMC grunts to DEVGRU or UKSF, once you've found the basis for your impression and researched reference pictures and kit lists, it's all down to how detailed you're willing to go.

[Druid799]

5 hours ago, Iceni said:

The Soldier look comes from training images. It's not what they look like in battle. Under training conditions uniform will be worn correctly, in full, and inspected. Not so much in battle.

 

Nope sorry mate you got it wrong , you dress in training as you would in combat .

[Tommikka]

1 hour ago, Druid799 said:

Nope sorry mate you got it wrong , you dress in training as you would in combat .

“Train as you fight” - yes .... train in accordance with doctrine, which is based on the last fight

 

When it it becomes real things change rapidly, and in an operational situation becomes “fight light” - discard the unnecessary, whether that is leaving things at base camp and carrying only what’s needed on patrol, or dumping things along the way (the Americans are known for dumping more kit then the British carry)

 

Then when returning to the UK “fight light”’gets forgotten, especially when lessons learned feed into lighter equipment design which turns into loading the soldier with more equipment and ammunition

The British Army have a project underway to prove and embed the lessons learned which are already fed into doctrine but disregarded by commanders loading on more weight to compensate for weight saved

 

No commander wants to be held to account for his patrol running out of ammunition or wearing lighter body armour options to enable mobility but getting shot 

[Tommikka]

But you do get more reference photos from training then on operation.

Training gets recorded and publicised, operations do get more cover nowadays but are still limited 

[Druid799]

Just speaking from personal experience (9yrs in the army) we trained in what we would and did fight in , only thing that was ‘droppable’ would be our bergens, and they would have already been dropped at our harbour area , everything else stayed with you AT ALL times only time it left you was when it was taken off you and you wern’t in a fit state to stop them !