Rifle Platoon Leader 3/D/2-5 'CAV 1970

[Apache26]

Please forgive the cheesy mirror self portrait. I got access to this website and was looking forward to posting my "impression" for my unit's next Vietnam event in two weeks.

 

I'll post more photos of the event when we get photos sometime in the last two weeks of July.

 

Let me know your thoughts!

 

 

 

[kjones5452]

Looks OK. You might want to move the canteens a little more to the rear, in case you have to hit the dirt fast.

[Apache26]

I know what you are saying, but it's a tough option. I've got a period Cattaraugus knife on one side and a .45 on the other. Any further back on the belt, and you bump into the LW ruck frame. Typically I'd prefer to have the canteens on the hips, but if I put the knife and holster up front further, they jam into your legs when kneeling and bang on your junk. This has been a more consistent problem than stuff on the front of the belt interfering when going for cover. Besides, having the canteens up front wouldn't be much different when diving for cover than a pair of loaded ammo pouches.

 

I'll play around with it some more. I had the .45 on a leather pistol belt. But I am trying to break the suspenders/ammo pouches mold (as either were seldom worn in 1970). The leather pistol belt, bandoleer and M-65 belt were all too much weight being carried on the waist without support.

[cco23i]

They still need to move back. Tighten the shoulder straps on your ruck and sometimes us small body lenth people have that problem. Or just take the frame out.

 

Scott

[redjoshman]

Why don't you just put the canteens on the ruck a la this:

http://www.history.army.mil/art/a&i/vietnam/cc44262.jpg

 

-Josh

[aips]

hi

 

your canteens look fine were they are dont get lured into the standard text book look

with the canteens at the back and the ammo pouches at the front its stupid

i have seen and loads of photos and footage of them wereing there canteens at the front

especially if your carring a heavy ruck

only thing i would say is maybe lose the colour lt bar

if you wanna wear it get a subdued one

looks good

[Apache26]

There is definitely precedent for canteens up front. I admit that it isn't my favorite, but as stated I am trying to break the typical reenactor field gear mold and tying it into the late war look. It has taken years for me to get used to the idea that the two ammo pouches/two canteens and suspenders (i.e., basic training SOP) was increasingly rare post '67.

 

The PNWHG takes great pride that we don't follow the buttpack and full LBE mold for our events. Nevertheless, it is hard to get used to the way things were, as opposed to the way you think they should be. One grows up watching "Platoon" and they grow accustomed to that look, even if it wasn't representative for the unit you portray, or even most units at various points in the war.

 

As for adjusting the LW ruck, that's a non-starter. I can't wear a LW ruck bag without the frame. In this case, I have a tropical ruck attached to the frame. I'll send a photo of that later. Clearly I can wear it alone, but it was very typical for 'Cav troopers to put the Tropical ruck on the LW frame, and I am keeping it there.

 

I'll keep messing with the belt, though. I am not entirely satisfied with access to the knife and pistol, especially vis a vis the bandoleer around the waist. I may have to go with two bandoleers on the chest, although that is less sexy.

[Apache26]

Center Man...

[Apache26]

Man on left...

[Apache26]

As for canteens on the ruck, I have 9 quarts (2x 1 Qt., 1x 2 Qt., 1x 5 Qt.). Admittedly, many grunts carried ALL their water on the ruck. I've interviewed several officers who were company grade leaders in Vietnam who were critical of this. It worked for humping, but in an extended firefight, the men were SOL as they dropped rucks and all their water was out of reach.

 

I'm coming at this from my own active duty experience as an infantry officer training in Georgia and Texas and in combat in Iraq. I'll never go without at least two quarts on my belt.

 

As for the full-color rank, I know it is a little out of place. I had the subdued brown rank, but I had a couple pairs of the original gold rank and wanted to use it. Given the time period, I didn't think it was too far out that a 2LT would have a gold bar as his only available option. I think it will look less stark once it gets dirtier.

 

Thanks for the support AIPS. Speaking of which is the AIPS still functioning? I remembered looking at your website a decade ago when I first got into reenacting than it seemed that you suddenly disappeared.

[cco23i]

I was talking about the canteens NOT as a reenactor BUT as someone who had to wear the damn things. Just trying to help ya' get "lower" when the crap hits the fan and your trying to get lower than a worms a** the canteens will be in the road.

 

scott

[aips]

hi apache26

 

yer will stay goin on 20 something years know the groups being goin

bit more quiter these days thought hopefully we will be doing some more living history weekends in woods

again soon

and will be at the war and peace show in the uk this month

the early 70s look is one of my favorites though over looked by a lot of people

if you look at this documentry the tv did on us http://www.veoh.com/watch/v196766042MCpXkJz

theres bits of footage of one of are 70s weekends

hope your one goes well,and there isnt to many combat refuels,pot smoking,and fraggin the LT

jack

[Apache26]

Jack, PM Sent.

[Niner Alpha]

One suggestion. Hanging your compass by a pocket button is not the way to do it if you want to keep the compass long term. Back in the day when I was an acting FO for a 9th Division company in Vietnam, I would run a boot string through the metal wire loop on the compass and tie the string ends together and wear the compass around my neck and stick the compass itself in the top pocket when not in use.

 

I'll attach a photo...although you have to imagine the string more than see it.

[Apache26]

Thanks for the heads up.

 

What you can't see in the photo is that the compass has a dummy cord around my neck already. In the past, I usually kept it in my compass pouch, but it's a pain to take it out and unwrap the cord every 100 meters or so. I can see why you guys wore them around your neck.

 

Nevertheless, I have seen them dangling from pockets in photos. I assumed that the metal portion was hanging from the button. Is this the way they were secured to the breast pocket? I don't really want it hanging around my neck like a necklace, and that's why it has taken me so long to break from the habit of keeping it in the pouch.

[mpguy80/08]

M-56 Suspenders... or M67 suspenders... The "H" kind... That will help support the weight of your belt. Another thing you might want to pick up is a brown towel.... Wash it use it and break it in really good... Lots of troops wore them around the neck to stop the chafing of the ruck straps and also to soak with water to keep cool... or just kept it at hand looped through the belt to have it at hand. at night, it worked well as a hood against mosquitoes... My two cents hope it helps

 

Wayne

[redjoshman]

M-56 Suspenders... or M67 suspenders... The "H" kind... That will help support the weight of your belt. Another thing you might want to pick up is a brown towel.... Wash it use it and break it in really good... Lots of troops wore them around the neck to stop the chafing of the ruck straps and also to soak with water to keep cool... or just kept it at hand looped through the belt to have it at hand. at night, it worked well as a hood against mosquitoes... My two cents hope it helps

 

Wayne

 

Wayne,

Just a little FYI, the towel was green:

http://www.vietnamgear.com/kit.aspx?kit=117

 

The brown towels, like the brown t-shirts, are way post-war and would be incorrect to use.

 

-Josh

[bootsandbooks]

What you can't see in the photo is that the compass has a dummy cord around my neck already. In the past, I usually kept it in my compass pouch, but it's a pain to take it out and unwrap the cord every 100 meters or so. I can see why you guys wore them around your neck.

 

Nevertheless, I have seen them dangling from pockets in photos. I assumed that the metal portion was hanging from the button. Is this the way they were secured to the breast pocket? I don't really want it hanging around my neck like a necklace, and that's why it has taken me so long to break from the habit of keeping it in the pouch.

 

 

My personal experience as a Rifle Company Commander (B 3/22 - 25th Div) in 1970 was to secure to compass with a bootlace around the neck as noted and carry the compass in the inverted pouch near shoulder high on the suspenders. That way it would drop quickly and easily into hand with just a downward brush without having to separately open the pouch and dig the compass out from the belt which would be particularly difficult after you hit the dirt.

 

Hanging it from the pocket flap button it would be almost as difficult to access and be subject to loss from snagging in the bush without the cord and with the cord it would be tugging / choking your neck.

 

The bootlace ends were not tied evenly but one was short and the other about 6-8 inches dangled outside the pouch. It was knotted every 100 meters to keep track of distance traveled. My ARTY FO was always nearby and used the same preocedure but we tracked our locations separately them compared and called for marking rounds if necessary for confirmation. My platoon leaders did pretty much the same to set the general course for the point man.

 

I can tell you our compasses were more often in hand than in the pouch as being precise was very important in case of contact to call for supporting fires / medevac / resupply. We would also both have several smoke grenades distributed on the belt and suspenders and extras in the ruck pockets.

 

Re the canteens, two 1 qts on the belt and the 5 qt bladder in the ruck was most common though some troops would carry extra of each. I carried the frameless medium ruck fairly high on my back. I can't recall for sure re the locations of the canteens and magazine pouches on the belt but my sense is that the canteens would be to the side slightly back and ammo to the front of the canteens but still more to the side than full front.

 

The use of the cloth bandoleers was secondary to the canvas magazine pouches and the bandoleers would more often be carried in the ruck. Stringing then around the waist or over the shoulder subjects them to tearing and constant exposure to dirt and water somteimes rendering the ammo useless. Despite that some troops woud carry several bandoleers and extra M-60 belts over their shoulders.

 

Any colored insignia that might be on the uniform from an earlier era it would be immediately blackened or removed.

 

M C Toyer

[bootsandbooks]

A couple of additional thoughts about the sidearms:

 

I never carried the 45 and don't recall any of my platoon leaders did either. M-79 gunners and my medics usually did.

 

A few troops carried fighting knives and other personal weapons but more for show than utility.

 

I carried a snub nose .38 revolver in my trouser pocket more for personal protection and a CAR-15 which I seldom had ocassion to use. My weapons of chocie were artillery, gunships and air strikes.

 

I tired to emphasize fire discipline and semi-automatic rather than full auto by the troops but inevitably in the initial moments of contact almost all would be ripping off full magazies and M-60 belts as quickly as possible in all directions. The fire team, squad, and platoon leaders were usually able to bring it under control fairly quickly.

 

By 1970 our tactical operations were highly mobile recon and patrol rather than the hardened fire bases of the earlier years. We did not have the air asests of the CAV or 101st so packing light and tight was essential for 3-5 days in the field without resupply.

 

I did not deploy my mortars in the field. They were left behind in base camp for security as we were generally operating well beyond thier range. I did take my mortar FOs and RTOs to the field for additional radios and manpower when we split into reinforced squad sized patrols and night ambushes.

 

 

M C

[Apache26]

MC,

 

Great info!

 

I'll reply and/or seek more guidance shortly.

 

Thanks,

Travis

[Apache26]

MC,

 

Did you have any exposure to 'CAV troops in Tay Ninh during your tour? Did it look like they followed many of the same SOP's of the 25th line units? I am trying to get to the bottom of this.

 

The reason I ask this is that I don't have much photographic evidence of 'CAV troopers wearing full LBE post 1968. Very few seem to be using ammo pouches and I suspect that many of the ones who were used them as utlity pouches. Most are carrying magazines in Claymore bags or bandoliers. Our "advisor" and close friend was an RTO and '60 gunner in the company we portray. He made some tapes for us describing all the little things he remembered (like church keys on carabiners on belt loops and leech straps tied below the knees of the trousers). He made it sound like the man with the H-harness was the exception.

 

Likewise, photos and documentaries from the 'CAV show widespread use of the tropical ruck on the lightweight frame. I own an original bag and frame that was used in such a manner and hasn't been changed since Vietnam. I tried this the first time and liked the weight distribution, so I can see why they did it.

 

Nevertheless, this is all a bit frustrating for me. Allow me to explain:

 

I attended the Infantry Officer's Basic Course (IOBC) in 2002. The Ft. Benning way with LBE back then was a full LC-2 harness (belt and Y-suspenders). The compass pouch went on the belt front right and the 1st aid pouch went front left (next to the buckle). Adjacent to them on either side were two 30-rnd mag pouches. Then came the canteens on the hips. A buttpack and a "Leader's Pouch" were optional. The latter was typically a 200-rnd. SAW drum pouch to carry pens, notebooks, etc.

 

I trained with a full LBE since I was a new cadet in 1998. I wore one in combat before I received my MOLLE issue. I MUCH prefer the load distribution of a full harness, especially since H-harnesses are better than the Y-harnesses. I don't know how these grunts humped the way they did with nothing holding up their belt (hence the reenactment!). But like the WWII GI's before them, many seemed to ditch the suspenders.

 

The purpose of this impression was to break the Ft. Benning mold so often seen in Vietnam reenactments. As stated, I rarely see even company grade officers using full LBE in 1970. The enclosed pic is a photo of a command group in 1971. The man at the far right is a friend. By this time, 30 rnd magazines were issued en-masse, but they didn't get the pouches for them. The CO is carrying his in a Claymore bag he tied to his belt. Prior to being issued the 30 rnd mags he said he used bandoliers.

 

One of the problems I have, though, is that I there are plenty of photos of enlisted grunts during this period. I see very few of line officers in the field.

[Apache26]

A photo of myself and some of my boys during last year's event. The timeframe on this one was mid-1968 Operation Pegasus.

[bootsandbooks]

Travis -

 

I like your photos. It is refreshing to see the plain uniform and not so much of the cammo and tiger stripes that seem so popular to collect and portray now but which I seldom saw in 1970.

 

My memory is a bit vague on specifics of the field gear. I am away from home right now but when I get back I've got some photos I can sort thru.

 

Re Tay Ninh, we were billieted across the road from a Cav Bn, can't recall which, but were there so seldom don't recall seeing too many of them except the rear personnel without any field gear.

 

We relieved a Cav Bn at FSB X-Ray in Cambodia in June 1970 and my impression from the amount of material they used to build the temporary fire base and equipment they left behind was that, once again, the superior air assets the Cav had over the 25th allowed them to carry heavier individual loads to the field as they had more frequent helicopter movements.

 

Of course I felt the same about the mechanized units and troops who could be seen in the field with refrigerators, fans and boom boxes from the PX, and cots but never their rucks which were always stowed aboard the APCs.

 

As far as SOPs if there were any for field gear in 1970 I was not aware of it. The selection of the gear was pretty much the choice of the individual troop based on his own experience and stamina and what he had he acquired from various sources. That's not to say the team, squad and platoon leaders didn't make sure they had adequate ammo, water, rations and dry socks and a distribution of squad equipment. Our missions necessitated stealth and rapid redployment, often requiring we hump several klicks in a day, so any excesses were left in base camp.

 

I acquired the gear I carried from my predecessor and I presume he from his and it served its purpose. The only "luxury" I carried was an NVA hammock which allowed me to sleep a few inches off the ground and could be carried in my trouser pocket.

 

I trained at Benning in 1967 and was stationed in Panama (3/5th Inf) in 1968/69. There were many changes from what I was taught at OCS in 67 and what I experienced in Nam in 1970.

 

In Panama I had a mix of green troops, recent veterans of Vietnam, and a few who had fought in Korea. In garrison and field training there was pretty strict uniformity and we were often tasked to field test uniforms and equipment. When I attended Jungle School I started to lighten my load based on "lessons learned" from those veterans.

 

You said your advisor was an RTO. Mine in Nam (I had 2 in my command group and my Arty FO had one) used the pack frame with the PRC 25/77 mounted high and the ruck below and it was quite a load. We were required to carry the KY 38 for the Bn net and it was piggy backed on or below the PRC in addition to the RTO's ruck and gear. I had one soldier who had humped six months in the field then applied for Conscientious Objector status and no longer carried a weapon or ammo. I don't know of he was sincere or just thinking he would get "off line" (i.e., out of the field) pending approval. My 1st Sgt, wtih the infinite wisdom of the old soldier he was, decided this young troop was the perfect candidate to carry both radios. He continued to hump with the rest of us and, unarmed, earned a BSM for Valor.

 

I had a couple of more thoughts about sidearms. Most of my field medics were also Conscientious Objectors but I recall one, who despite his status, carried both an M-16 and a 45. He pulled perimeter watch and humped along side his brothers carrying all his own gear plus the medcal.

 

I had one young buck sergeant who somehow acquired a shoulder holster rig for the 45. He hadn't quite figured out how to wear it but settled on over his harness and under the ruck straps. The first time he dropped his ruck to take a break it got tangled, the 45 discharged, and he shot himself in the rump, luckily only a graze. He promptly traded away the shoulder rig to some other "gung-ho" wannabe.

 

M C

[Niner Alpha]

The reason I ask this is that I don't have much photographic evidence of 'CAV troopers wearing full LBE post 1968. Very few seem to be using ammo pouches and I suspect that many of the ones who were used them as utlity pouches. Most are carrying magazines in Claymore bags or bandoliers.

 

Ammo pouches were used as ammo pouches in my experience....although if you were in the delta and crossed a lot of streams they tended to collect water and empty slowly and be a literal drag while the ammo slings with the loaded magazines worked out better. Some used ammo pouches and some didn't. Having tried it both ways I liked to use the cloth slings that the ammo came in. The cloth slings, with the magazines loaded with the feed end down, emptied water faster and were more dependable and more comfortable to carry around. The cloth also filtered the muddy water while the ammo pouch didn't filter much of anything. Consider being on ambush in a flooded rice field and needing to go to your ammo reserve while still mostly under water. I used the suspenders with the y on the back to balance my belt load...some didn't. Unlike your group photo....guys, as a general rule, didn't use both ammo pouches and cloth bandoliers.

 

 

One thing you have to keep in mind is that different troops used different equipment depending on their AO and the experience of the troops as passed on to replacements. Troops that operated in thick triple canopy areas for extended periods of time....like the 101st....carried as much stuff as they could lift because of extended operations. In the 9th, in the delta where because of the water and mud nobody carried much more than they would need for a day or two most of the time.

 

You say you have an advisor. His memory of his experience will probably be your best bet. Maybe try to contact some of the guys who served in the same outfit. There probably is a website or association that can put you in touch with some of them.

[bootsandbooks]

One thing you have to keep in mind is that different troops used different equipment depending on their AO and the experience of the troops as passed on to replacements.

 

 

Good points Niner Alpha.

 

The 3/22 opeated in varied terrain and through both the rainy and dry seasons during my tour and I'm sure adjustments were made for all.

 

I'm glad not to have spent any time down in the Delta and most of the rice paddies west of Tay Ninh to the Cambodian border had long been abandoned then obliterated by B-52 strikes so were pretty dry.

 

We did pull a couple of operations securing the barge mounted artillery batteries on the river near Saigon and soon discovered the fighting positions dug in along the banks would fill with water when the tides came in.

 

M C