M7 Army combat Service Gas Mask

[jonesy1275]

Gents, I've had this gas mask bag offered to me. I am right in thinking it's an M7 assault mask bag.

 

I'm just wondering as there seems to be different variations and wanted to be sure I was buying an M7 bag.

 

[jonesy1275]

[jonesy1275]

[rambob]

Here is what I have heard is the correct, originally D Day issued bag that went with the M5 invasion gas mask. Same general construction as yours, but with blackened snaps and different markings. The correct bag is marked ARMY ASSAULT GAS MASK. I actually got this exact bag along with a mint M5 mask from a vet a few years ago at a garage sale which to me, meant they were originally issued together.

 

Bob

[glenm]

The one being offered is also an Assault Gasmask Bag, but this has been remarked with the later terminology (i.e. post June '44) for the mask in question (the original stamping is under the thick green stripe). You can carefully return it to the original stamping if you have the patience.

 

Cheers,

Glen.

[med-dept]

Does anyone have a definitive answer regarding the "UL" marking? I've heard that those are early bags, when it was planned to produce the Masks with the filter positions on both the left and right of the face piece. Supposedly the marking represents "Universal Left", but since the plans were scrapped, the Bags were mothballed, and hence turn up later July '44 dated lots. Can anyone confirm?

 

Cheers,

Ben.

[NPerry]

It looks like you have a completely un-messed with, uncleaned assault bag that been re-stencilled. There is NO reason to remove the paint over the orig lettering. That's part of its WWII history. There is great patina on that bag. There are already plenty of collector-messed-with examples. IMHO I would leave as found.

[oldabewla]

Does anyone have a definitive answer regarding the "UL" marking? I've heard that those are early bags, when it was planned to produce the Masks with the filter positions on both the left and right of the face piece. Supposedly the marking represents "Universal Left", but since the plans were scrapped, the Bags were mothballed, and hence turn up later July '44 dated lots. Can anyone confirm?

 

Cheers,

Ben.

 

Ben,

 

It's been posted here before on what the bag markings mean and that it's the bag size (Universal Large).

 

Craig

 

[med-dept]

Thanks, Craig.

 

Any idea where that topic is, as I did a search but couldn't find it. Also, any evidence as to why there are none marked "US" (Universal Small), etc?

 

Cheers,

Ben.

[one50]

Face pieces of that time period basically fell into 4 sizes.

Size one fit 5%

Size two fit 50%

Size three fit 35%

Size four fit 10%

 

Universal fit 2-4 size heads.

Only 5% had small heads or size one.

Hence you see, UL for Universal Large, which covers 3 size heads.

I don't think you'll see US for Universal Small, because it does not cover a range of sizes.

You should only see S marked for this carrier.

Some carriers have SS, for "Super Small", but I do not believe it applies to this carrier.

 

They did not start marking location of filters until the M9 mask as far as I'm aware.

 

Hope that helps.

[NPerry]

A bunch of these came out of Long Island in the 70's. They were around $5 each. II wish I had bought all of them. I have one marked to an HQ officer in the 101st. The snaps that were originally used, not the later Lift-a-Dots, were not originally military snaps. They were purchased by the military from a company which supplied chrome snaps for boat covers. Some of the snaps were sold separately a few years ago.

[med-dept]

Great info, one50. Thanks for sharing.

 

Regards,

Ben.

[oldabewla]

Ben,

 

Here is what I've found

If you look at the Jan 44 time period they increased the bag size also on the Wehrmacht-awards they also discussed the (UL) as large I've also read it also stands for left?

 

Link:
www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t1715.html

The main article:

------------------------------------

"I've had this conversation before, and most of my comments below are lifted from a thread on the US Re-enactors Forum.

4-press-stud flapped "Army Assault Gasmask" bags: used at D-Day and in Holland.
(Some come with OD3 ("tan") strapping, most come with OD7 ("green") strapping - no real difference in production dates (the tan ones could be from the 1943 batch I suppose - see production schedule below - but there's no way of telling).

3-LTD flapped "Army Combat Service Gasmask" Bags: I've never seen any yet in a WWII combat photo.

The following timeline info came from the Chemical Corps historian and is repeated courtesy of the thread on the US Re-enactors forum. NOTE: I'm not sure if these are his original words or if they've been added to by the re-enactor who posted this information:

------
Chronology of the M7 Combat Carrier

The experimental E7 version of the carrier had the four ball and socket type fasteners. The standardized M7 version had the three lift-the-dot (LTD) fasteners.

Here is an approximate chronology of the M7 carrier:

23 Jun 43: military characteristics for an Assault Gas Mask and waterproof carrier established

To satisfy the requirement, the E4R3-E1R6-E1R3 mask was designed; the E1R3 carrier was made of waterproof rubberized fabric and had the four ball and socket type fasteners.

July-September 1943: field testing of the experimental assault mask indicated the need for minor improvements

15 Oct 43: E4R3-E1R6-E1R3 Assault Mask standardized and limited procurement of 250,000 ordered

October 1943-April 1944: additional testing of the mask

December 1943: 1,282 masks produced for testing

21 Jan 44: E4R3-E1R6-E1R3 mask redesignated E6-3-7 Assault Mask

Sometime shortly after January 1944: during the additional testing of the E6-3-7 Assault Mask, a recommendation was made to place three lift-the-dot type fasteners on the carrier, increase the width and length of the carrier by 1/2" and 1-1/2" respectively, and make the carrier with a non-reflecting surface finish.

These changes resulted in the E6R1-3-7R1 Assault Mask

February 1944: large scale production of the masks started; a total of 398,462 E6-3-7 Assault Masks were produced during 1944

Spring 1944: procurement of M7 (E7R1) Combat Carrier started

26 May 44: E6R1-3-7R1 Assault Mask recommended for standardization as the M5-11-7 Combat Mask

June 1944: mask used during Normandy invasion

7 Jun 44: standardization of the M5-11-7 Combat Mask approved after production had already started; E6-3-7 Assault Mask remained as a limited procurement item

 

[Red Devil]

Great information!

[one50]

Sometime shortly after January 1944: during the additional testing of the E6-3-7 Assault Mask, a recommendation was made to place three lift-the-dot type fasteners on the carrier, increase the width and length of the carrier by 1/2" and 1-1/2" respectively, and make the carrier with a non-reflecting surface finish.

These changes resulted in the E6R1-3-7R1 Assault Mask

 

26 May 44: E6R1-3-7R1 Assault Mask recommended for standardization as the M5-11-7 Combat Mask

 

June 1944: mask used during Normandy invasion.

 

So I copied your copy

I deleted items of non interest to better understand the whole page.

We end up with the info above in my post here.

 

It's saying the E6R1-3-7R1 = M5-11-7

 

Am I reading that right?

 

But the three lift-the-dot type carrier was not used June 1944 during Normandy.

This info is saying it was standardized on may 26th 44 and then used june 44.

 

Something is not right here?

What am I missing?

[glenm]

No, the E6-3-7 Assault Mask was the one used in Normandy, as that was in the stocks at that time. The E6R1-3-7R1 = M5-11-7 mask was being produced at that time, but it didn't get to Normandy. Nor Holland.

[one50]

So "everyone" says the M5 was used at Normandy....that is incorrect then?

 

What is the revision on face mask E6 that makes it an E6R1?

What was that revision?

I didn't seem to see it in the info provided above.

 

The revision for the carrier 7 to 7R1 is explained well.

 

Thanks

Dan

[glenm]

I think that the term M5 is used because people aren't as "anal" as this Chemical Corps historian I originally quoted in the other thread above.

 

I'm sorry, but I don't have any further info on why the mask changes from E6 to E6R1 - you're quite correct, the info above doesn't say why, does it?

 

The only person who can answer this is the Chemical Corps historian - I have fogotten who he is in the years since he posted on that other forum, sorry.

[doyler]

Marines on Iwo.

 

Found this on line and appears a assault or service mask bag of rubber is being used as a pack.

 

[conn]

a little off subject, this is a great photo

 the marine in subject has an etool on his left,  is the etool cover stretched out ? could this be an improvised  cammo one ? and marine on his left, what the world is he carrying on his left hanging at his waist.   interesting group of marines

[Marchville1918]

I think he has a cleaning rod web case hanging from his belt. that may be a metal mg ammo can he has in a pack on his left side.