Jump to content

TAMU97

Members
  • Content Count

    67
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Location
    Texas
  1. Good ideas. Based on the construction of the pouch, we know that 1) it's for something relatively flat, 2) it's something that came in at least 2 parts that needed to be stored separately (or two of the same item that needed to be kept separate for ease of extraction, like clips in a M1910 cartridge belt), and/or 3) it's something that the Army didn't use...or had a completely different way of carrying. But I don't think it's for ammunition or other bulky part. The steel links are an interesting idea, but I don't think you could fit many in the pouch (again, it's pretty flat). I still think
  2. I was going to say the same! Also, I wanted to point something out - Dennis, you mentioned your hanger and hardware are brass, indicating pre-war/early war production. All of the hardware on mine is steel. I'm not sure if that guarantees that it's WW2 wartime production or not. Is it possible that it's WW1 or earlier with steel hardware? Reason I ask is that in the link to the shovel covers in my initial post there is a photo of what I believe to be a pre-WW1 cover with a steel hook. I'm fairly certain the shovel cover with steel hardware is pre-1917 because it has the "tube" that the ho
  3. By all means - let's see what your pouch looks like!
  4. I picked up one of these custom Ike jackets this past week. Jacket itself is pretty ratty and has been stripped of metal insignia (DUI ghosts look like ATC), but I thought the bullion patches were pretty cool. There was a small wing on the lower right cuff that I couldn't ID but then I found this thread. For those who know AAF insignia better than I do, could someone confirm that these are same AAF flight instructor wings that were in the postings above? Just curious to know how/when/where they were used as I'd never seen them on a jacket before. Thanks! Mike
  5. Picked up this pouch earlier this week. Its construction reminds me of the very early USMC M1910 shovel covers, so I figured I'd take a chance on it. It's about 12" long and 7" wide. Inside is a divider. Note the USMC style wire hook and that the chape for the wire hook is made of cloth, rather than heavy webbing. Looks to be depot made. No markings that I can see. Any idea what it was for or time period? A friend says it reminds him of the WW1 Army artillery slide rule pouches.
  6. For what it’s worth, the label in the coat shows it’s from Zubik’s, a uniform tailor in College Station, Texas, that supplied uniforms to the students/cadets at the State A&M College of Texas (Now Texas A&M University). I would therefore conclude that this Lt. Machemehl was in the Corps of Cadets at Texas A&M. RustyCanteen’s three links to various Machemehls who served in WW2 show that all three were from the Bellville, Texas, area. So that fits the Texas A&M angle. I did find that William P. Machemehl attended Texas A&M (class of 1933, which fits his birth date, making
  7. Thanks, Tim. Based on what you wrote above, I searched online for that publication and believe I found it: "The Quartermaster Corps: Organization, Supply, and Services, Volume 1", which was published in 1953 by the Dept of the Army's military history group. Relevant information can be found on pp 126-127 of that publication and while I'm not going to copy it here, the entire publication can be viewed online as a PDF. So this suggests that HQ, AGF was already experimenting with a "divisible" pack system similar to what they had seen in the PTO with the USMC before they went to QM. A
  8. Just to add to the thread, here are some pics of a pouch from my collection. Based on what I read from the thread, the side seam and lack of markings would put it in the "rigger made", rather than USAAF contract, category - correct? I included some details on construction and stitching for documentation purposes. I don't believe it to be a reproduction as it came from an estate and was the only military item amongst a bunch of firearm/hunting items (i.e., "the bottom drawer of a gun cabinet"). Plus it just smells old!
  9. Does yours have the circle on the front or the rear? Seems all of the others have it on the front.
  10. And finally, differences in the quick release strap construction and hardware. On the "prototype", note the use of a metal ring connecting two separate pieces of webbing and a locking buckle like that used on the back straps of M1936 suspenders. On the production model, a single piece of webbing is sewn directly to the body of the pack and a ladder buckle is used for adjustment. Thus, the production version is simplified by using fewer parts and less metal. Appreciate any feedback or information anyone has on this piece. It's baffled me for years! Mike
  11. Here are some shots comparing the "prototype" to the standardized version. In the first photo, note that there is a difference in the way the D rings are secured to the body of the pack. The second photo highlights a construction difference in the flap. On the production model, there is a crease or seam sewn into the top front of the flap. This seam is flat on the "prototype" flap.
  12. Comparing the construction of the quick release tabs and carry handle. Packs are essentially identical in this respect. The second photo shows the interior of the "prototype" pack. Note the original, un-faded OD3 is obvious. Also note there is an extra thickness of duck material sewn to the flap to provide reinforcement for the female portion of the LTD fasteners (this is not present in the production pack and lends further evidence to the fact that this was not a pack where the straps were removed and LTD fasteners were fitted after the fact) and there is no evidence of a rubberized throa
  13. I've had this for about 15 years, purchased in the Killeen/Ft Hood area (although that may have nothing to do with its development or use). Most people's first impression of it when I show a photo is that of a lightweight service gas mask bag, but about the only thing it has in common with the gas mask bag is the method of securing the flap. The dimensions of the pack to the standard M1944 cargo pack are essentially the same, as is the construction (in general) and function. I can't find any evidence of markings or evidence where flap straps were once sewn to the bag, but were later removed
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.