WWII gear setups...whats appropriate?

[OD MAN]

Ok, here is a little pet peeve of mine...

 

Just because things are dated 1944 and 1945 does not mean that they are then more appropriate for those years than earlier stuff. Usually its just the opposite. If you want to be correct earlier gear is going to be more appropriate. When new gear was available throughout the war such as buckle boots, m-43 jackets, etc they would be supplied when available and mixed in with currently issued gear.

 

For example: I would expect a GI or Marine in late WWII to be using all types of gear... from WWI stocks, to early OD 3, transitional, and the occasional OD 7 gear. He wouldn't be issued all brand new OD 7 gear.

 

I find it kind of funny when members post displays of so called "late war" setups where every single item is OD 7 from the first aid pouch to the belt and pack! Same goes for "early war" setups where everything is dated 1941 and 1942. The GI would have been issued a lot of WWI gear as well...

 

What are your thoughts on this?

 

 

 

Justin

[RustyCanteen]

I think you have to realize that the "late war setups" are representative of the ideal, "if someone had been issued all the same it would look like this". And it does look pretty nice, of course gear would be mixed in 99% of what happened. At least with most equipment collectors that's how it's usually understood.

 

Of course the same thing bugs when it's all "khaki" D-Day displays..probably moreso since it's not just an "ideal display for fun" but a supposedly "Historical" display, I am not disputing that original photos taken around June 1944 show large quantities of "khaki" webbing, just that not everyone would have the exact same equipment throughout the rest of the war.

 

"Transitional" naw..didn't exist before D-Day, same goes for WWI gear. I know because I saw some "Historical" displays that proved it was all repro "khaki" and everyone in WWII used M1910 "T" handle shovels..swivel bails were not used in WWII and the 03A3 never saw use. Oh and everyone was either in the 29th or 101st. PTO? You gettin' mixed up with 'Nam or Korean War?

[Johan Willaert]

And another thing which would is incorrect is that too many collectors just put all kinds of equipment on a mannequin because they like it or it looks cool....

 

GIs couldn't choose what they were issued and the equipment given to them was what was required to do their job as it was prescribed in the TO&Es (Table of Organisation and Equipment) of the era.

 

Sure there were some exceptions and like any good soldier GIs completed their gear with whatever they could lay their hands on or what seemed practical to them, but for most of them they wore wht they were issued...

[THAT GUY]

Like everyone above me has already said, it all has to do with collector preferences Justin. Some like everything to be all the same date, color, etc. while some dont care what it looks like or what date it is made as long as it is accurate.

 

In my opinion, if a collector wants his gear to be similar in color then he should be allowed to without the scrutiny of fellow members. Same goes for someone who doesn't care for his G.I. to be looking perfectly color coordinated. There is no "perfect" field gear combination. Soldiers could have been issued all the same color or in most cases not at all. The Mixed Color Collectors and the Same Color Collectors are both right in there own way. There is no black/white answer.. just a whole lot of o.d. shades in the middle. :thumbsup:

 

Sam

[artu44]

Collecting gears to equip a mannequin is very different from fill drawers with stuff from your favorite period. We are lucky trhat there are zillions of period pics around so choose the GI who suit your taste and let your mannequin copy exactly his equipment piece by piece. Nobody will tell it's uncorrect.

[bheskett]

When I set up a manniquin that is froma particular period I do it as if he was issued new gear and set it up as the manual shows. The reason I do this is because there are so many variations out there in what and how gear was worn. I know that rarely did a soldier have all new gear. Even today the gear is a mish-mash of gear from private purchaes to DCU to woodland. I understand what you are saying that it was unlikely that a soldier or Marine would be issued an entire set of gear in the same shade. I also think it gives your display a neater apearance for the public to look at. Just my 2 cents

Bob

[RustyCanteen]

And another thing which would is incorrect is that too many collectors just put all kinds of equipment on a mannequin because they like it or it looks cool....

 

GIs couldn't choose what they were issued and the equipment given to them was what was required to do their job as it was prescribed in the TO&Es (Table of Organisation and Equipment) of the era.

 

Sure there were some exceptions and like any good soldier GIs completed their gear with whatever they could lay their hands on or what seemed practical to them, but for most of them they wore wht they were issued...

 

Agree 100%.

 

RC

[mpguy80/08]

Anyone who has served any time in the Army knows how CIF (Clothing Issue Facility) works. You go through, and they dump some of the worst looking gear in your bag. You go back and try to exchange anything and they tell you its not dirty, just old, and to take what you were issued, it's serviceable. go back three days later with that same gear, unused, still in the same duffle bag you loaded it in when it was issued, and all the sudden the "not dirty" gear becomes filthy, and they won't take it. I've been on several posts where CIF got investigated by CID for defrauding soldiers out of brand new gear that way. The civilians working the turn in look at a piece of gear and see a darkened spot on a web belt where the brass has leeched into the nylon of the belt and they claim it's dirt. No matter how much simple green you use, its not coming out. Troops are on a tight time table when clearing to go to a new post, and can't really spend a whole lot of time to fight it so they truck on over to Clothing sales, buy a brand new item, and turn it in, saving the CIF a lot of time and effort weeding out old and unserviceable gear... and also taking advantage of the Soldiers they are there to support.

 

I would imagine in WWII, when you still had a lot of WWI gear still in the system, a soldier could wind up with just about anything as long as it was serviceable. 1910 mess kits were pretty prevalent I would imagine, as was a lot of the canvas gear.

[Marchville1918]

You can tell even from photos in the basic training manuals that the gear was a mixed bag of colors. Some "khaki" and some OD. I suspect that the only time you got all the same color was when you had moved beyond the 1910 gear into the 56 gear which was all OD from the beginning. You still see khaki WW1 45 clip pouches in Korean War photos