Navy M1 Helmets in Training

[Burning Hazard]

Came across this interesting site with photos taken during training at Great Lakes Naval Training Center:

 

http://archive.defense.gov/specials/basic_training1/navy.html

http://archive.defense.gov/specials/basic_training1/battle.html

 

Not sure when these photos were taken, but they're using M1 helmets with Navy paint and numbers. the helmets have the T1 type chinstraps and I can see at least one shell is a WWII front seam.

 

Pretty neat to see these in use, any idea what year this could be?

 

Pat

[Burning Hazard]

More pics

[ArchangelDM]

Great pics

[Burning Hazard]

pics

[Burning Hazard]

Note helmet 318 is a front seam

[Burning Hazard]

Close up

[644td]

This is proof of what I have always said about wear on a helmet, most will be on top and not as we always see on medic helmets wear ALL OVER The Geneva cross. Great pictures!!!!

Marty

[Cap Camouflage Pattern I]

Look like LC-1 or LC-2 belts so mid 70s onwards

[Burning Hazard]

Look like LC-1 or LC-2 belts so mid 70s onwards

 

It's later than that, looks like late 80's or maybe the 90's since one of the helmet has the final model chinstraps. Appears they're also wearing Dungarees(?), I'm not a Navy expert but didn't those get discontinued in the 1990's?

 

Pat

[bellasilva]

My wife wore a steel pot in boot camp in 2000

[RustyCanteen]

The photos look like 1990s. They are wearing the reintroduced dungarees, but the photos look post-1980s to me. They appear to be wearing the A4 OBA too.

[KRIS FORD]

Late 90's, MAYBE early 2000's..as the names are embroidered on tapes..in 1992, we were still using stencil cards to mark our uniforms.

[Cap Camouflage Pattern I]

 

It's later than that, looks like late 80's or maybe the 90's since one of the helmet has the final model chinstraps. Appears they're also wearing Dungarees(?), I'm not a Navy expert but didn't those get discontinued in the 1990's?

 

Pat

I thought those were introduced in 1973?

[svt40]

Late 90's, MAYBE early 2000's..as the names are embroidered on tapes..in 1992, we were still using stencil cards to mark our uniforms.

 

San Diego RTC was still issuing dungarees with embroidered nametapes in the early 90's.

 

It's before 1998 which IIRC was around the time we got rid of the dungarees. They are also wearing the MCU2P gas masks.

 

I know I went through every single helmet on the USS Normandy (1991). A lot of WWII issue helmets, no fixed bales and most had no straps and the few that did had the modern ones. Most were green (70%) with a lot of red ones for the DC teams. I found maybe 2-3 that were gray on the entire ship. Most had no liners and the ones that did were the snap in webbing type. My next deployment (1993) all the M1's were gone and racks were filled with PASGTs.

 

As an aside we were still carrying M1 Garands in boot camp in 1989. Most of them were in WWII configuration with lockbar sights and single slot plugs!

[m1ashooter]

The glasses look mid 80 issue.

[hink441]

It is early to mid 1990s in my opinion because of the dungarees.

 

Chris

[Bugme]

The glasses look mid 80 issue.

Someone always has to notice the BCG's

[sigsaye]

I pushed boots in Great Lakes from November 1985 to January 1990. This sort of training had not come on line by the time I left. The embroidered name tapes were also not in use until later in the 1990s, with dungarees phasing out around 1998. My sister graduated from Great Lakes in November 98, was issued dungarees with embroidered name tapes and went through battle stations. She complained about how much she hated the helmets.

 

You can see the beating these things take. I would guess that with the ships getting the Fritz helmets, these were getting dumped back into the system, so had lots available for Boot Camp. I remember when I was up there pushing boots, there were crates of M-1 bayonets and brand ne w slings. We replaced slings, all the time as they got worn out. We used the bayonets to hold the windows open in the old buildings.

[cerick1450]

To touch back on the wear discussion, started by 644td. I have a medic helmet that has very similar wear to the top of the helmet, and not near as much on the cross area. I think these pictures, highlight the wear thanks to the white overpaint.

 

[king802]

Please bear in mind this is a training establishment so these helmets are being used by lots of different people. Wear to the top of the helmet is by no means a good indicator of a certain helmet has been used in combat or training.

I have helmets that have definitely been worn in combat and dont show extreme wear. Please bear in mind that a net on the helmet will protect it to a certain extent and not every soldier, Sailor or Airman abused their equipment.

I served for 9 years in the Infantry in the British Army and never once did I receive a brand new helmet. My helmet cover showed lots of wear when I was issued it and got lots more mud on it over the years. Same applies to my web gear - it got covered in mud every time I was out in the field and occasionally we would be told to scrub the mud off if excessive.

We all like to fantasise that the items in our collections must have been worn here or there but the reality is an IDd combat piece can look in better condition than another piece covered in mud and worn thats never been out of a training establishment.

 

Rich

[KRIS FORD]

Great Lakes didn't have name embroidered tapes OR Battle Stations when I was there in '92..nor did I hear about it from any of the new guys that came aboard until I got out in '96..and their uniforms were stenciled as well...so I know for a fact EARLY 90's is out..(there were no new buildings either, same as the 1959 renovation LOL..everything was identical when my uncle went thru in '77..(I have his KEEL, the yearbook, only thing different was the uniforms, and we didn't have tables in the compartments) We were in DIVISIONS (24th for me), our buildings weren't named after ships, old galley and drill halls as well) Maybe the main induction building was newer though..

 

In fact, I never even saw a embroidered taped until I got to the fleet...and those were usually career 2nd and 1st classes that had them done privately..(same with SW/AW quals) '92' thru 96, I stenciled everything! (fortunately, FORD was an easy one..center the O and the R between the button..it always looked tight..I sure felt bad for Matzenbacher, Schollenberger and Fitzsimmons!! )

 

So if we find out when Battle Stations came on line, we could narrow it down. Dungarees actually went away '72-'80, and came back by '81ish. '73-80 was the blue utility uniform. (though in the fleet, you could even see a miss-mash of both being used) BCGs ALWAYS looked like that..

 

We also had a blue utility jacket that was far different than the one shown..(ours were a lighter blue with a different cut)

 

 

 

 

My "Battle Stations" was getting cycled 5-9 times a day and screaming AYE AYE SIR at the top of my lungs..right Sigs??

[Cap Camouflage Pattern I]

Please bear in mind this is a training establishment so these helmets are being used by lots of different people. Wear to the top of the helmet is by no means a good indicator of a certain helmet has been used in combat or training.

I have helmets that have definitely been worn in combat and dont show extreme wear. Please bear in mind that a net on the helmet will protect it to a certain extent and not every soldier, Sailor or Airman abused their equipment.

I served for 9 years in the Infantry in the British Army and never once did I receive a brand new helmet. My helmet cover showed lots of wear when I was issued it and got lots more mud on it over the years. Same applies to my web gear - it got covered in mud every time I was out in the field and occasionally we would be told to scrub the mud off if excessive.

We all like to fantasise that the items in our collections must have been worn here or there but the reality is an IDd combat piece can look in better condition than another piece covered in mud and worn thats never been out of a training establishment.

 

Rich

I agree that wear is not a definitive indicator of combat use, but I think the discussion about the wear to the top of the helmet was that a helmet should have more wear to the top than the sides, so a helmet that has more wear over the markings on the sides than to the top is likely faked.

[king802]

I agree that wear is not a definitive indicator of combat use, but I think the discussion about the wear to the top of the helmet was that a helmet should have more wear to the top than the sides, so a helmet that has more wear over the markings on the sides than to the top is likely faked.

Not if a nets been present. Wear will be uniform.

[stealthytyler]

Ive owned combat helmets in mint condition and terrible condition. Provenance is key.

[sigsaye]

Please bear in mind this is a training establishment so these helmets are being used by lots of different people. Wear to the top of the helmet is by no means a good indicator of a certain helmet has been used in combat or training.

I have helmets that have definitely been worn in combat and dont show extreme wear. Please bear in mind that a net on the helmet will protect it to a certain extent and not every soldier, Sailor or Airman abused their equipment.

I served for 9 years in the Infantry in the British Army and never once did I receive a brand new helmet. My helmet cover showed lots of wear when I was issued it and got lots more mud on it over the years. Same applies to my web gear - it got covered in mud every time I was out in the field and occasionally we would be told to scrub the mud off if excessive.

We all like to fantasise that the items in our collections must have been worn here or there but the reality is an IDd combat piece can look in better condition than another piece covered in mud and worn thats never been out of a training establishment.

 

Rich

. Rich, in the USN, helmets are not issued to individuals, at training sights, or aboard ships. They are kept ( mostly) in racks, stacked one on top of the other. For most helmets, these racks are out on deck. Rarely do you get the same helmet twice. They get dropped from one deck to another, used as anvils when you need something quick to pound on, used as paint buckets, something to stand on for a bit more height to reach something. But, yeah, these look like just about every helmet I ever saw aboard ships in 26 years. Actually, these are better than a lot! The other thing to remember is to not compare Army and Navy (US anyway). Army issued an individual his/her equipment. They sign for it and are responsible for turning it in when they leave the unit. In the USN, aboard ship, equipment is assigned to a battle station. For example, if this station has 11 Sailors assigned, then there will be that many helmets, life jackets, gas masks, canteens, what ever. And that gear stays there for years