Jump to content


Mitchell Cover Contract List

Started by kklinejr , Jun 26 2010 05:53 AM

  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1 kklinejr

kklinejr
  • Members
    • Member ID: 99
  • 2,839 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, USA

Posted 26 June 2010 - 05:53 AM

Okay, I guess there is rejuvenated interest in Vietnam era Mitchell covers (as my PM box fills up). This is a list I compiled for my book on Nam rigs a few years back. I want to direct your attention to the list of date PROXIMITIES. The dates are approximate as many are based on fiscal year contracts. Now, before anyone says well "I've heard differently" or "there must be an error because an old collector told me this" - I offer this list for what it is- research of close to 2300 covers and over 45 original contract order forms. Will there be errors? Probably, time will tell- there will most certainly be more contracts than these as they seem to come out of the woodwork. I am not professing to be an expert - no one is, these are just the results I have found. Use it as you will, and if you have any photographic evidnece of other contract numbers, I'd love to see them to add them to the list - it is always a work in progress (especially as new twill contracts come out).

Ken

From 'Nam Steel page 44:

Mitchell Pattern Contract Numbers: Below is a listing of all cover varieties found by searching through nearly 2000 covers. The list is fairly complete, but there are always more covers yet to be discovered. Findings are charted by chronological order and date proximities are given based on contract date ranges.

Contract Number Manufacturer Date Proximity

USMC Project Number 5501 DC & TSC DIR. MFG. 4 February 1959
USMC Project Number 5850 DC & TSC DIR. MFG. 10 December 1959
P.O. No. 5002-62 1962
DSA 1-811-C-62 1962
DSA 1-1940-63-C 1963
DSA 1-3839-64-C 1964
DSA 1-4540-64-C 1964
DSA 1-6600-65-C Late 1964 1965
DSA 1-6680-65-C Late 1964 - 1965
Contract No. 5432 1964*
Contract No. 5626 1964*
Contract No. 5654 1964*
Contract No. 5656 1964*
Contract No. 5858 1964*
Contract No. 7005 Late 1964-Early 1965*
Contract No. 7057 Late 1964-Early 1965*
Contract No. 7219 Late 1964-Early 1965*
Contract No. 7332 Late 1964-Early 1965*
Contract No. 7882 (this could be a 1-7332 printing error, but the number exists) Late1964-Early 1965*
Contract No. 8027 Late 1964-Early 1965*
Contract No. 8056 (Twill & Cotton Patterns) Late 1964-Early 1965*
Contract No. 8116 (Twill) Early 1965*
Contract No. 8133 Early 1965*
Contract No. 8189 (Twill) Early 1965*
Contract No. 9005 (Twill & Cotton Patterns) Mid 1965*
Contract No. 9085 Mid 1965*
Contract No. 9196 Mid 1965*
DSA 100-2157 Late 1965-Early 1966
DSA 100-3937 (Twill & Cotton Patterns) Early 1966
DSA 100-67-C-0713 (Twill) Capitol Fur 1967
DSA 100-67-C-3697 1967
DSA 100-68-C-2168 1968
DSA 100-68-C-2188 1968
DSA 100-69-C-0944 1969
DSA 100-69-C-1921 1969
DSA 100-69-F-U992 Mnpls Soc f/t Blind 1969
DSA 100-70-C-0822 1970
DSA 100-70-C-0823 1970
DSA 100-70-F-V075 Mnpls Soc f/t Blind 1970
DSA 100-73-F-U289 Mnpls Soc f/t Blind 1973
DSA 100-74F-U060 (Real Train) Mnpls Soc f/t Blind 1974
DSA 100-74-F-U524 Mnpls Soc f/t Blind 1974
DSA 100-74-F-U919 Mnpls Soc f/t Blind 1974
DSA 100-75-F-V289 Mnpls Soc f/t Blind 1975
DSA 100-77-F-U393 Mnpls Soc f/t Blind 1977

*Current discussion exists on the true date of these covers. Although the contract number dates these pieces to the mid 1960s, several of these models have the deep flap cuts suggesting they are of 1969 or slightly later production.

Edited by Bugme, 06 July 2010 - 07:11 AM.
Ken asked that a revision be made to this thread to make it easier to read and also to draw attention to the discussion based on the "Contract No." patterns. The edit posted here is actually his own revision.


#2 Justin

Justin
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,305
  • 9,098 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 June 2010 - 12:51 PM

Can I just say, there are a lot of helmet covers posted that are Long Flap type, that do not have "DSA" but an FSN and Contract number, to my understanding, from my research, and other main focus Vietnam collectors, the Long Flap type helmet cover, didn't show up till 1969.

Follow this topic, where a member is told his cover dates from 1965 era: http://www.usmilitar...showtopic=79868 However it is a long flap type.

Look at the contract, there's no 'DSA' I don't believe his cover to be dated 1965 era, but 1969 on...

Edited by Justin, 26 June 2010 - 12:53 PM.


#3 kklinejr

kklinejr
  • Members
    • Member ID: 99
  • 2,839 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, USA

Posted 26 June 2010 - 02:08 PM

Can I just say, there are a lot of helmet covers posted that are Long Flap type, that do not have "DSA" but an FSN and Contract number, to my understanding, from my research, and other main focus Vietnam collectors, the Long Flap type helmet cover, didn't show up till 1969.

Follow this topic, where a member is told his cover dates from 1965 era: http://www.usmilitar...showtopic=79868 However it is a long flap type.

Look at the contract, there's no 'DSA' I don't believe his cover to be dated 1965 era, but 1969 on...



With the FSN, I guess I don't understand what you are asking...each of the covers from 1959 all the way to 1977 on that list are marked with FSN 8415-261-6833 (even though most 1977 models were marked with the ERDL pattern FSN of 8415-00-105-0605). Because the FSN (federal stock number) was a designation for the Mitchell Camouflage Pattern cover, I did not list it on every entry simply because it was a common point on all covers. Furthermore, yes, as for the "DSA 1-" marking on my list, I put it there following Mark Reynosa's technique of labeling contracts with "DSA 1-" so that the numbers would create a regular pattern of reference and not become all jumbled up in my mind. When I compiled the list, I did it for my own "making sense of things" so it does have some quirks- my objective was to simply find out what/how many numbered contracts were out there. And finally, yes, the deepened middle flap pattern was made standard specification for all covers in 1969, however according to some this practice seems to have been done by the government going back to 1964/65. According to Reynosa's text and several other collectors I have spoken with, the long flap was an experimentation and not a requirement in the mid 60s (again, the specification in pattern occurred in 1969). To give an example, one of the most common contracts, its full nomenclature being "COVER,HELMET CAMOUFLAGE/CONTRACT NO. 8027/FSN 8415-261-6833/100% Cotton/DPSC DIR OF MFG," has been found with standard cut (quite scarce) and deep cut flaps. One collector has told me he even has a twill version of this contract as well, but I have not seen it. Now, what drove me crazy when I first started checking covers out was knowing that deep cuts were made pattern in 1969, but the contract number specifically dates the 8027 piece to roughly January-February of 1965. When it came down to it, I trusted the contract numbers to give bearing on the dates and figured that Reynosa and others were correct on their thought that a few years before the long flap was made standard practice, it was "played around with" beforehand.

Again, I mean no confusion in this list. It gave me a good approximation of what contracts were actually out there and allowed me to make a little chronological sense out of them.

Take care,

Ken

#4 DiGilio

DiGilio
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,102
  • 910 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, United States

Posted 27 June 2010 - 05:20 PM

There is a whole lot of confusion with the long flaps. Lots of people seem to think the undated ones are mid-60s or even earlier. I personally dont believe any were produced in the mid 60s. I dont want to go into it, but that scenario makes absolutly zero sense to me. Maybe adding DSA-1 to the numbers just dont work. As for the HELMET CAMOUFLAGE/CONTRACT NO. 8027/FSN 8415-261-6833/100% Cotton/DPSC DIR OF MFG, it sounds to me just like a 69/70 cover. Short flaps were still in production during this period along with the start of long flaps and after 1971 DPSC items were starting to be dated after the contract number.

Something interesting I noticed from collecting and looking at ID'd VN used helmets & covers is that a whole lot were recently manufactured when issued to soldiers for use in VN. Examples of what Im talking about are (remember they are dated using fiscal years): 1965 dated cover - late 1966-67 tour, 1968 dated cover - 1969-71 tour, 1969 dated cover - late 1968-69 tour, 1967 dated cover - late 67-68 tour.

#5 Guest_tomskeroo_*

Guest_tomskeroo_*
  • Guests
    • Member ID: 5,102

Posted 11 January 2011 - 06:53 AM

There is a whole lot of confusion with the long flaps. Lots of people seem to think the undated ones are mid-60s or even earlier. I personally dont believe any were produced in the mid 60s. I dont want to go into it, but that scenario makes absolutly zero sense to me. Maybe adding DSA-1 to the numbers just dont work. As for the HELMET CAMOUFLAGE/CONTRACT NO. 8027/FSN 8415-261-6833/100% Cotton/DPSC DIR OF MFG, it sounds to me just like a 69/70 cover. Short flaps were still in production during this period along with the start of long flaps and after 1971 DPSC items were starting to be dated after the contract number.


I think mid-60s production makes sense as the US had just gone into Vietnam in a big way and I think they are mid-60s contracts but possibly with a manufacturing span of some years, even, quite plausibly, into the late 60s.

Let me explain...A case in point is the 9005 contract. I own a short and long flap version. The long flap version has a double row of stitching at the join of the two halves, the short flap version has a join that makes only one row of stitching visible. I suggest such variation might be indicative of a long production span, possibly because the contracts were so big. This span may have crossed the spec change that saw the long flap introduced.
If you look at Reynosa's book in the contract list for steel helmet shells there are often 3 or more separate orders listed under the same contract number, I suppose meaning the government went back and uppped the number. Why not with helmet covers?

Also, critically, I don't think 1969 or 70 contract numbers went as high as 9005, ie; the contract DSA 100-69-C-9005 wouldn't make sense because there weren't that many contracts in 69. the highest I've seen are in the 2000s. the same goes for 70 and 71.

#6 DiGilio

DiGilio
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,102
  • 910 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, United States

Posted 11 January 2011 - 12:37 PM

I think mid-60s production makes sense as the US had just gone into Vietnam in a big way and I think they are mid-60s contracts but possibly with a manufacturing span of some years, even, quite plausibly, into the late 60s.

Let me explain...A case in point is the 9005 contract. I own a short and long flap version. The long flap version has a double row of stitching at the join of the two halves, the short flap version has a join that makes only one row of stitching visible. I suggest such variation might be indicative of a long production span, possibly because the contracts were so big. This span may have crossed the spec change that saw the long flap introduced.
If you look at Reynosa's book in the contract list for steel helmet shells there are often 3 or more separate orders listed under the same contract number, I suppose meaning the government went back and uppped the number. Why not with helmet covers?

Also, critically, I don't think 1969 or 70 contract numbers went as high as 9005, ie; the contract DSA 100-69-C-9005 wouldn't make sense because there weren't that many contracts in 69. the highest I've seen are in the 2000s. the same goes for 70 and 71.


Hello

I wrote that a while ago but Ive looked into it since. Heres my observations

Ive noticed just about all these covers Ive seen with soldiers writing on them (such as ETS dates, years served, etc.) dated from about 69/70/71. Covers issued to soldiers at this time were generally pretty new. Usually only a few months to maybe a 1 1/2 years old. Covers were a pretty disposable item. I have not seen any of these covers with writing from the mid-1960s.

These covers were deffinetly around in 1968 and Ive found some picture evidence of what looks like earlier/1967 use, but not much. If all these thousands of undated covers were made in 1964 and 1965, I would expect them to be easily seen in use by 1966 (probably outnumber the short flap ones), to find some with soldier writing from that period, and see some of these covers with provenance showing early use. I have not seen any of these undated covers with 100% provenance that says they were issued before 1967. I have seen helmets with these on them that were used well into the 70s though.

Basicly, Ive seen a good lack of evidence for use of these covers before 1967 but a whole lot for the 68-70s range. If they were all, or the majority, made in 64/65 Id expect it to be the other way around. Seems probable they got the contracts at that time but production of the majority of the covers took place later on.

For something like this, Id really like to try and find the original government paperwork and such.

#7 DiGilio

DiGilio
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,700
  • 910 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, United States

Posted 12 January 2011 - 06:48 AM

Heres the best two I found. I had a computer problem and lost a lot of pictures, but this was basiclly the only good ones I had found. I skimmed through thousands of pre-68 photos when looking and a great deal of them could be easily identified as short flap ones with the rest I couldnt tell either way. They still arent the best photos but it only makes sense some production would take place around when they got the contract and you should see some in use shortly after. But the evidence Ive seen shows the great majority were made, or at least used, later on.

Due to the militarys use of fiscal years, 1969 dated covers (the year you first see dated long flap ones), were first issued in late 1968.

Eventually Id like to find the actual specifications and paperwork about the covers.

Couldnt find a date for this photo but I would guess 1967 by what they are using. No later than 1968. The two guys he is standing with have 2nd pattern jungle jackets on. He has a 3rd pattern on.
http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae232/JFDIGILIO/IMG_6279-1.jpg

November 1967. Looks like this could deffinetly be a long flap cover.
http://i975.photobucket.com/albums/ae232/JFDIGILIO/untitledhc22.jpg

#8 silmar65

silmar65
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,910
  • 360 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:France

Posted 29 April 2012 - 10:07 PM

A new Mitchell dated 1976. Never seen before, maybe a very little production.

dsc3210y.jpg
dsc3212z.jpg

#9 usmc grunt

usmc grunt
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,910
  • 223 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:El Cajon, CA.

Posted 02 September 2013 - 10:46 AM

Okay, I guess there is rejuvenated interest in Vietnam era Mitchell covers (as my PM box fills up). This is a list I compiled for my book on Nam rigs a few years back. I want to direct your attention to the list of date PROXIMITIES. The dates are approximate as many are based on fiscal year contracts. Now, before anyone says well "I've heard differently" or "there must be an error because an old collector told me this" - I offer this list for what it is- research of close to 2300 covers and over 45 original contract order forms. Will there be errors? Probably, time will tell- there will most certainly be more contracts than these as they seem to come out of the woodwork. I am not professing to be an expert - no one is, these are just the results I have found. Use it as you will, and if you have any photographic evidnece of other contract numbers, I'd love to see them to add them to the list - it is always a work in progress (especially as new twill contracts come out).

Ken

From 'Nam Steel page 44:

Mitchell Pattern Contract Numbers: Below is a listing of all cover varieties found by searching through nearly 2000 covers. The list is fairly complete, but there are always more covers yet to be discovered. Findings are charted by chronological order and date proximities are given based on contract date ranges.

Contract Number Manufacturer Date Proximity

Contract No. 5858 1964*
Contract No. 7005 Late 1964-Early 1965*
Contract No. 7332 Late 1964-Early 1965*
Contract No. 7882 (this could be a 1-7332 printing error, but the number exists) Late1964-Early 1965*
DSA 100-68-C-2168 1968
DSA 100-68-C-2188 1968

******************************
 

 

Given the fact that the contract numbers on quite a few helmet covers can be difficult to ascertain, due to the small size and the fact that some have blurred print, I believe that four contract numbers on this list are erroneous.

It appears that the digits "6" and "8" have been mistaken for one another on at least three contract numbers while the digits "3" and "8" were mistaken on one. Also, contract number DSA 100-76-F-U363 does not appear on the list.

I suspect that the following 5 contract numbers are erroneously listed:

1.) Contract No. 5626?: While Contract No. 5626, a contract number that I've never seen, appears on the list above, Contract No. 5826, a valid contract number, is not listed. Therefore, I suspect that the "8" in 5826 has been mistakenly read as a "6". See attached photo.

2.) Contract No. 5858?: While Contract 5656 is a valid contract number, I've never seen Contract No. 5858. Again, I suspect that the two sixes in "5656" were mistakenly read as two eights and listed as "5858", which is easy to do as the print is very small on this particular stamp.

 

3.) Contract No. 7882?: While the listing states that "this could be a 1-7332 printing error", I've never seen a Contract No. 7882 nor have I seen Contract No. 1-7332". The actual number is "Contract No. 7332". I believe that the two threes in "Contract No. 7332" were mistakenly read as two eights and listed as "7882". See attached photo.

 

4.) Contract No. 7005?: The actual contract number is "DSA-1-7005". See attached photo.

5.) DSA 100-68-C-2168?: While DSA 100-68-C-2188 is a valid contract, I believe the third digit "8" in 2188 was mistakenly read as a "6" and listed as "DSA 100-68-C-2168".

If anyone has a clear photo of Contract Nos. 5626, 5858, 7882, 1-7332 and/or 7005 (without the prefix "1") along with DSA 100-68-C-2168, I'd like to see those photos.

On a final note, while this list contains an FY 1975 and FY 1977 contract number, FY 1976 Contract No. DSA 100-76-C-U363 is not listed. I'd also like to see a photo of Contract No. 5654 as I suspect that it may also be a case of mistaken digits.

Attached Images

  • Contract No. 5826 (2) Small.jpg
  • Contract No. 7332 Small.jpg
  • DSA 1-7005 (2) Small.jpg

Edited by usmc grunt, 02 September 2013 - 11:07 AM.


#10 usmc grunt

usmc grunt
  • Members
    • Member ID: 24,355
  • 223 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:El Cajon, CA.

Posted 02 September 2013 - 03:22 PM

"...from my research, and other main focus Vietnam collectors, the Long Flap type helmet cover, didn't show up till 1969."

Every argument that has been made in support of the theory that deep flap helmet covers were not manufactured until 1969 is purely speculative.

 



#11 RustyCanteen

RustyCanteen

    ADMINISTRATOR

  • Administrators
    • Member ID: 2,910
  • 10,936 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Earth

Posted 02 September 2013 - 03:59 PM

These are the covers that I have in a list, this includes Mitchell, ERDL 69 & ERDL post 75. It's possible that a few are duplicates with a badly stamped number, such is likely the case with two of the 1976 covers listed below. BY NO MEANS IS THIS A COMPLETE LIST, expect errors and omissions.

 

CONTRACT NO. 5432 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

CONTRACT NO. 7219 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

CONTRACT NO. 8133 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

CONTRACT NO. 8198 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

CONTRACT NO. 9005 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

CONTRACT NO. 9196 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

 

 

DSA-1-811-C-62 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA-1-4540-64-C (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-69-C-0944 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-69-C-1701 (COVER, HELMET, CAM. CTN DUCK W/ERDL PATTERN)

DSA 100-69-C-1921 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-69-F-U992 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-70-C-0822 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-73-F-U289 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-74-F-U060 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-74-F-U-919 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-75-F-V289 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-76-F-U353 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-76-F-U363 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-76-F-U973 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)



#12 usmc grunt

usmc grunt
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,910
  • 223 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:El Cajon, CA.

Posted 02 September 2013 - 04:48 PM

"I think mid-60s production makes sense as the US had just gone into Vietnam in a big way and I think they are mid-60s contracts but possibly with a manufacturing span of some years, even, quite plausibly, into the late 60s.

Let me explain...A case in point is the 9005 contract. I own a short and long flap version. The long flap version has a double row of stitching at the join of the two halves, the short flap version has a join that makes only one row of stitching visible. I suggest such variation might be indicative of a long production span, possibly because the contracts were so big. This span may have crossed the spec change that saw the long flap introduced."

************************

I have four shallow flap covers, made of twill, that are stamped "Contract No. 9005" and five deep flap covers that are stamped "Contract No. 9005". The stitches that join the two halves, on both the shallow and deep covers, are identical.

Both versions are sewn together with a double row stitch that includes a single stitch and a ladder stitch.

All of my short flap, twill covers, that have a 4-digit contract stamp, which I believe were manufactured in FY 1964-1965, have this exact same stitch pattern. These contract numbers include: 8056, 8116, 8189 and 9005.

It is interesting to note that none of my short flap, twill covers, that bear a DSA contract stamp, to include DSA 100-3937 (FY 1966) and the two FY 1967 contracts, DSA 100-67-C-01713 (Capitol Fur) and DSA 100-67-C-3937, have this stitch pattern.

All of my DSA contract short flap, twill covers, have a double row of single stitching. There is a noticeable difference in the stitch patterns on the 4-digit contract stamped twill covers and the DSA contract stamped twill covers.

This raises an interesting theory:

The fact that the deep flap 9005 contract bears the exact same stitching as the 4-digit shallow flap contract covers 8056, 8116, 8189 and 9005, suggests that the deep flap cover may have been produced by the exact same manufacturer - during the exact same period - as the 4-digit, short flap, twill contracts 8056, 8116, 8189 and 9005.


Edited by usmc grunt, 02 September 2013 - 04:52 PM.


#13 usmc grunt

usmc grunt
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,910
  • 223 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:El Cajon, CA.

Posted 02 September 2013 - 07:32 PM

These are the covers that I have in a list, this includes Mitchell, ERDL 69 & ERDL post 75. It's possible that a few are duplicates with a badly stamped number, such is likely the case with two of the 1976 covers listed below. BY NO MEANS IS THIS A COMPLETE LIST, expect errors and omissions.

 

CONTRACT NO. 5432 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

CONTRACT NO. 7219 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

CONTRACT NO. 8133 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

CONTRACT NO. 8198 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE) This is "Contract No. 8189". See attached photo and check your stamp.

CONTRACT NO. 9005 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

CONTRACT NO. 9196 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

 

 

DSA-1-811-C-62 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA-1-4540-64-C (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-69-C-0944 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-69-C-1701 (COVER, HELMET, CAM. CTN DUCK W/ERDL PATTERN)

DSA 100-69-C-1921 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-69-F-U992 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-70-C-0822 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-73-F-U289 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-74-F-U060 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-74-F-U-919 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-75-F-V289 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

DSA 100-76-F-U353 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE) This is actually DSA 100-76-F-U363.

DSA 100-76-F-U363 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE) This is the correct contract. Note that the "5" in "U353" above is actually a "6".

DSA 100-76-F-U973 (COVER, HELMET, CAMOUFLAGE)

 

There are only two errors that I've noticed. (See the strikethroughs). It is interesting to note that contract number DSA 100-76-F-U363 appears on both the Mitchell pattern and the light green side of the ERDL pattern. Also note that the 13 digit National Stock Number (NSN) 8415-00-105-0605 that appears on this particular Mitchell cover is the exact same NSN that appears on the ERDL cover. See attached photos.

 

 

Attached Images

  • Contract No. 8189.jpg
  • DSA 100-76-F-U363 (2) Small.jpg
  • DSA 100-76-F-U363.jpg

Edited by usmc grunt, 02 September 2013 - 07:45 PM.


#14 usmc grunt

usmc grunt
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,910
  • 223 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:El Cajon, CA.

Posted 03 September 2013 - 09:59 AM

Couldnt find a date for this photo but I would guess 1967 by what they are using. No later than 1968. The two guys he is standing with have 2nd pattern jungle jackets on. He has a 3rd pattern on.

*********************************************************************

This photo was taken by Tim Page in March 1969. The only thing this photo shows is that a deep flap Mitchell pattern helmet cover was worn by a 1st ID soldier in Vietnam in March 1969. The photo does not provide any information relative to the contract number on the cover nor the date of manufacture. 

Attached Images

  • 1st ID.jpg


#15 usmc grunt

usmc grunt
  • Members
    • Member ID: 29,885
  • 223 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:El Cajon, CA.

Posted 09 September 2013 - 09:49 AM

The original post contains what I consider to be errors relative to the actual contract numbers and dates stamped on the covers listed. Most of the errors consist of misreading the numbers in a contract. The contracts that I consider to be erroneous have been struck out and followed by a correction. If anyone has any clear photos of the contract numbers I believe to be in error, please post them here. 

USMC Project Number 5501 DC & TSC DIR. MFG. 4 February 1959 - Project Number 5501, Marine Corps Supply Activity, 2 April 1959

USMC Project Number 5850 DC & TSC DIR. MFG. 10 December 1959 - Project Number 5850, Marine Corps Supply Activity, 10 December 1959

P.O. No. 5002-62
DSA 1-811-C-62
DSA 1-1940-63-C
DSA 1-3839-64-C
DSA 1-4540-64-C
DSA 1-6600-65-C
DSA 1-6680-65-C Correction: DSA 1-6600-65-C has been misread as "DSA 1-6680-65-C".

Contract No. 5432
Contract No. 5626
Contract No. 5654 Correction: Contract No. 5656 has been misread as "Contract No. 5654". 
Contract No. 5656

Contract No. 5858 Correction: Contract No. 5656 has been misread as "Contract No. 5858". 
Contract No. 7005 Correction: This is DSA-1-7005
Contract No. 7057
Contract No. 7219
Contract No. 7332
Contract No. 7882 Correction: Contract No. 7332 has been misread as "Contract No. 7882". 
Contract No. 8027
Contract No. 8056 (Twill & Cotton Patterns)
Contract No. 8116 (Twill)
Contract No. 8133
Contract No. 8189 (Twill)
Contract No. 9005 (Twill & Cotton Patterns)
Contract No. 9085
Contract No. 9196
DSA 100-2157
DSA 100-3937 (Twill & Cotton Patterns)
DSA 100-67-C-0713 (Twill) Capitol Fur
DSA 100-67-C-3697

DSA 100-68-C-2168 Correction: DSA 100-68-C-2188 has been misread as "DSA 100-60-C-2168".
DSA 100-68-C-2188
DSA 100-69-C-0944
DSA 100-69-C-1921
DSA 100-69-F-U992
DSA 100-70-C-0822
DSA 100-70-C-0823 1970
DSA 100-70-F-V075 MPLS SOC F/T Blind
DSA 100-73-F-U289 MPLS SOC F/T Blind
DSA 100-74F-U060 MPLS SOC F/T Blind
DSA 100-74-F-U524 MPLS SOC F/T Blind
DSA 100-74-F-U919 MPLS SOC F/T Blind
DSA 100-75-F-V289 MPLS SOC F/T Blind

DSA 100-76-F-U363 MPLS SOC F/T Blind (This contract is stamped on both the Mitchell and ERDL pattern covers)

DSA 100-77-F-U393 MPLS SOC F/T Blind (This contract is also stamped on both the Mitchell and ERDL pattern covers.)

 

 

Attached Images

  • DSA 100-76-F-U363 (2) Small.jpg
  • DSA 100-76-F-U363.jpg
  • DSA 100-77-F-U393.jpg


#16 MasonK

MasonK
  • Members
    • Member ID: 29,885
  • 3,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hatboro, PA

Posted 09 September 2013 - 10:20 AM

I have a file of photos of most contract dates (adding them as I find them). Here are the ones you updated:

 

USMC Project Number 5501 DC & TSC DIR. MFG. 4 February 1959 - Project Number 5501, Marine Corps Supply Activity, 2 April 1959

 

5501(2).jpg

 

USMC Project Number 5850 DC & TSC DIR. MFG. 10 December 1959 - Project Number 5850, Marine Corps Supply Activity, 10 December 1959

 

5850(2).jpg

 

 

 



#17 MasonK

MasonK
  • Members
    • Member ID: 29,885
  • 3,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hatboro, PA

Posted 09 September 2013 - 10:25 AM

DSA 1-6680-65-C Correction: DSA 1-6600-65-C has been misread as "DSA 1-6680-65-C".

 

DSA 1-6600-65-C(2).jpg

 

DSA 100-68-C-2168 Correction: DSA 100-68-C-2188 has been misread as "DSA 100-60-C-2168".

 

DSA 100-68-C-2188(2).jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



#18 MasonK

MasonK
  • Members
    • Member ID: 29,885
  • 3,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hatboro, PA

Posted 09 September 2013 - 10:26 AM

Not clear, but the only example I've run across

 

Contract No. 5654 Correction: Contract No. 5656 has been misread as "Contract No. 5654".

 

Contract No. 5654(2).jpg


Edited by MasonK, 09 September 2013 - 10:34 AM.


#19 MasonK

MasonK
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,910
  • 3,008 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hatboro, PA

Posted 09 September 2013 - 10:27 AM

Photos for the following I don't have:

 

Contract No. 5858 Correction: Contract No. 5656 has been misread as "Contract No. 5858".
Contract No. 7005 Correction: This is DSA-1-7005

Contract No. 7882 Correction: Contract No. 7332 has been misread as "Contract No. 7882".



#20 usmc grunt

usmc grunt
  • Members
  • 223 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:El Cajon, CA.

Posted 09 September 2013 - 10:44 AM

Photos for the following I don't have:

 

Contract No. 5858 Correction: Contract No. 5656 has been misread as "Contract No. 5858".
Contract No. 7005 Correction: This is DSA-1-7005

Contract No. 7882 Correction: Contract No. 7332 has been misread as "Contract No. 7882".

**********************************************************************
Mason, Thanks for posting the photos of the valid contracts. I'm looking for photos of those that I've identified as erroneous contracts from the first post. Those numbers are:

DSA 1-6680-65-C


Contract No. 5654

Contract No. 5858

Contract No. 5654
Contract No. 7005

DSA 100-68-C-2168

I don't believe that any of the ones I've listed above are valid contract numbers. I believe that they are the result of misreading / mistaking the numbers listed in an actual contract.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


In Memory of Co-Founder GREG MILLS ROBINSON, a.k.a. "Marine-KaBar"
(February 17, 1949 - March 5, 2011)