UNIS P5 Canteen cover

[PeleliuMarine1944]

Don't think I have seen these on the forum before, but I have a nice and rare USMC P5 canteen cover, that has two UNIS stamps, and is named to a Marine who was WIA on Iwo Jima on D Day +1. It was to my understanding that they took existing P2 stocks and put a hole at the bottom of it similar to the P4 to drain and filter water. I would love to hear other opinions on this!

[ParanormalTrooper]

Very nice cover, and great Id!

[Blacksmith]

Hi Peleliu - What additional info are you looking for? Ron and I gave a pretty detailed review in your other post on this same cover - including that there is no such thing as a "P4", "P5", etc, WWII USMC cover.

 

There are three patterns of WWII USMC canteen covers:

 

P1 = dome / "glove" snaps and high mounted belt hook

P2 = lift-the-dot fasteners and high mounted belt hook

P3 = cross flaps to better secure the canteen so they could move the belt hook lower. While lowering the hook addressed comfort issues resulting from the canteen bouncing around while moving, it also tended to push the canteen from the cover. This is why cross flaps were incorporated, to hold the canteen more firmly.

 

Any style variations were just that, and not another pattern. The same is the case for field modifications - often made during repairs. It is well documented that P3 covers were made both with and without the funnel hole on the bottom. The belief is that all the P3s with funnel holes were Marine Corps Depot ("DQP") made, and not via contract.

 

So, not impossible that your P2 was made either in transition in 1943 with a funnel hole added; or, as a modification later - possibly when it received the repair that's visible on the front bottom.

 

Hope this helps.

[Cap Camouflage Pattern I]

Outstanding!

[PeleliuMarine1944]

Hi Peleliu - What additional info are you looking for? Ron and I gave a pretty detailed review in your other post on this same cover - including that there is no such thing as a "P4", "P5", etc, WWII USMC cover.

 

There are three patterns of WWII USMC canteen covers:

 

P1 = dome / "glove" snaps and high mounted belt hook

P2 = lift-the-dot fasteners and high mounted belt hook

P3 = cross flaps to better secure the canteen so they could move the belt hook lower. While lowering the hook addressed comfort issues resulting from the canteen bouncing around while moving, it also tended to push the canteen from the cover. This is why cross flaps were incorporated, to hold the canteen more firmly.

 

Any style variations were just that, and not another pattern. The same is the case for field modifications - often made during repairs. It is well documented that P3 covers were made both with and without the funnel hole on the bottom. The belief is that all the P3s with funnel holes were Marine Corps Depot ("DQP") made, and not via contract.

 

So, not impossible that your P2 was made either in transition in 1943 with a funnel hole added; or, as a modification later - possibly when it received the repair that's visible on the front bottom.

 

Hope this helps.

Blacksmith i'm going to have to disagree with what you were saying, the P4s were made at the Depot facility at Philadelphia, and I do not believe that they were modifications. But I do know that the P5s are a modification, they were not produced this way.

[Blacksmith]

Respectfully, I'm not sure we are disagreeing, other than you calling style variants undocumented patterns of cover. There are only three patterns of USMC canteen cover, as approved by the Marine Corps Equipment Board (also, "MCEB") between September of 1941 and July of 1943 - the third marking the end of canteen cover development for the USMC in WWII. These are the patterns I've described above. I don't think it's semantics to want to stay faithful to pattern conventions, to keep budding collectors from getting misinformed. You have a P2 cover with a funnel hole, nothing more or less, and a nice one at that.

 

If you do have documentation supporting other patterns of covers, I would love to see it and learn.

 

Thanks.

[WWII_GI]

Respectfully, I'm not sure we are disagreeing, other than you calling style variants undocumented patterns of cover. There are only three patterns of USMC canteen cover, as approved by the Marine Corps Equipment Board (also, "MCEB") between September of 1941 and July of 1943 - the third marking the end of canteen cover development for the USMC in WWII. These are the patterns I've described above. I don't think it's semantics to want to stay faithful to pattern conventions, to keep budding collectors from getting misinformed. You have a P2 cover with a funnel hole, nothing more or less, and a nice one at that.

 

If you do have documentation supporting other patterns of covers, I would love to see it and learn.

 

Thanks.

In the book 782 gear by Harlen Glenn he states that the P2 covers with the funnel holes are modified P2 covers and he calls them P5 Canteen covers made after the P3 and P4 covers.

 

Very nice canteen cover by the way! I've only seen a couple of those P5 covers, they're definitely rare!

 

-Steven

[doyler]

Harlan appears to have designations for items that are more his terminology and not sure if he really researched the topic.

He also applies a lot of insight to the photos he uses as to what is happening in a photo which to me is his opinion on who is doing what etc.

[Blacksmith]

I think the operative passage is "he calls them".

 

With utmost respect, you could call a canteen cover a pogo stick I suppose. Authors contriving their own terminology and injecting assumption is not an uncommon phenomenon.

 

I think that's how we come up with a bunch of snazzy unofficial names for camo patterns, which are solely collector jargon. Admittedly handy as community shorthand, as long as it doesn't try to alter reality (of sorts).

 

At the expense of being a stick-in-the-mud, I feel an obligation to stick to what's documented from official sources when known.

 

Thanks for the thought-provoking and gentlemanly dialogue, it's what I enjoy about this community.

 

 

 

 

In the book 782 gear by Harlen Glenn he states that the P2 covers with the funnel holes are modified P2 covers and he calls them P5 Canteen covers made after the P3 and P4 covers.

 

Very nice canteen cover by the way! I've only seen a couple of those P5 covers, they're definitely rare!

 

-Steven

[doyler]

I think the operative passage is "he calls them".

 

With utmost respect, you could call a canteen cover a pogo stick I suppose. Authors contriving their own terminology and injecting assumption is not an uncommon phenomenon.

 

I think that's how we come up with a bunch of snazzy unofficial names for camo patterns, which are solely collector jargon. Admittedly handy as community shorthand, as long as it doesn't try to alter reality (of sorts).

 

At the expense of being a stick-in-the-mud, I feel an obligation to stick to what's documented from official sources when known.

 

Thanks for the thought-provoking and gentlemanly dialogue, it's what I enjoy about this community.

 

 

 

 

 

 

+1

 

Look what (Johnson) did with tiger stripes.

 

A lot of the terminology used still evades me as Im not an expert on them.I know light weight,Vietnamese Marine,Gold, etc but the early cut verses late,American verses Viet cut,etc still is hard for me personally to sift through.Then(JOHNSON) came out with "John Wayne" Pattern,Tadpole Sparse,Sea Weed or what ever it was just to sell books and I had never heard these terms till people started referencing the "book".

 

I was given my first tiger shirt in 1968 time frame by a relative and it was pretty small.I wore it.I recall the pattern,its what people call Silver.To him it was just Tiger Stripe/Tiger Suit.I wore it till the sleeves were shot and then cut them off and my mom eventually tossed it.I may have another he gave me someplace.

 

The author of Grunt Gear is a member here and had wrote of the canteen covers in the book as well as the enamel canteens which were an Army item again picked up for use by the Marines but concerns existed due to internal chipping of the inner coating which could be problematic.What I found interesting is Alec wrote the enamel canteens were to be used stateside.Alec would post dates and excerpts from original documents as well as cite the MCEB.

 

Harlan has a nice book with great color photos and wartime photos but to me tends to write as he "sees" the war from his personal view.I never bought the book but had the opportunity to look it over at length and just quit reading the text as it was to "dramatic" for me plus all the posed shots and puppy dog eyes was to much for me to spend that kind of coin for a picture book.

[doyler]

My point is anyone can put a title or name a pattern/assign a model number to make the item "fit" into collector theory or categorize something.

 

An original Tiger for example....

 

BARNYARD DENSE PATTERN...JAYNE WAYNE PRINT

 

At times known as BAD KITTY (BACK ALLEY DISRUPTIVE)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GOT STRIPES??

 

['Flage Guy]

Ah, the elusive BAD Pattern...

 

The Special-Ops Surplus Tigers here on the Left Coast utilize this 'flage as well.

Note the concealment capability...

[doyler]

'Flage

 

Thats a good pattern and fits well with the West coast frog skins.

 

Rare to have the night vision model ANPVS-1601C (CAT) eyes as well.

['Flage Guy]

HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!

No Fighting Tiger can do his/her job without 'em!!

[doyler]

HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!

No Fighting Tiger can do his/her job without 'em!!

LOL...Looks like the Spec Ops Tiger is in relaxed stealth mode....scanning the next target area.

[Cap Camouflage Pattern I]

Ah, the elusive BAD Pattern...

 

The Special-Ops Surplus Tigers here on the Left Coast utilize this 'flage as well.

Note the concealment capability...

I stopped letting my cats in my room with all my military gear after he ripped the stitching out of a few pouches, luckily that were modern mint ones so nothing was lost.

['Flage Guy]

LOL...Looks like the Spec Ops Tiger is in relaxed stealth mode....scanning the next target area.

 

You got it: next target was a good rub-down, for which she was watching and waiting

 

[doyler]

 

You got it: next target was a good rub-down, for which she was watching and waiting

 

 

Roger that!!

 

Nothing llke a good rub down before going on night patrol in the "Flage Jungle"

['Flage Guy]

I stopped letting my cats in my room with all my military gear after he ripped the stitching out of a few pouches, luckily that were modern mint ones so nothing was lost.

 

She was a neighbor cat who would drop by for a visit regularly, make an internal inspection, and get a good rub.

I wouldn't keep pets of my own here, due to the townhome's yard being way too small, and the reasons you enumerated.

['Flage Guy]

 

Roger that!!

 

Nothing llke a good rub down before going on night patrol in the "Flage Jungle"

 

And that's exactly what she did after the rub- continue her explorations outside!

 

Haven't seen her in some years; hope she's OK, as there are a lot of Enemy Coyotes around here...

[doyler]

 

And that's exactly what she did after the rub- continue her explorations outside!

 

Haven't seen her in some years; hope she's OK, as there are a lot of Enemy Coyotes around here...

 

THat dont sound good.

 

Coyotes are only good for stopping bullets but are crafty.

 

The one I posted came from a farm.I knew the owner.They always had nice kittens but they started to disappear.Lived close to drainage ditch and the Coyotes are re populating here.I brought this one to town as she had been bitten in the back foot by a male cat that showed up when it got cold.Caught him haued him off but he showed back up.He didnt get a second chsnce.He was bothing the young kittens.

 

Wish I would have brought her twin sister home too.Super nice cat.She disappeared a day or two after I got this one home and taken to the vet.