1915 ifak opinions

[world war I nerd]

A Navy MG crew in Vera Cruz Mexico, 1914. Note that the sailor on the far right has tied his first aid packet onto the cartridge belt ... photos courtesy of the John Adams-Graf collection.

[Pep]

When I first opened up this thread and looked at the packet in question, I can see what gives you pause to think it may not be original. There is something that just isn't giving me a good feeling, especially the paint job and where there is bare metal. It's almost too nice. That said, I also noticed that on the packet in question the font size on the last line "Patent Applied For" is the same size as the other small size font. On all the known to be originals shown, it is a smaller font than all the rest and can be noticed when all the packets are shown together. Also take a look at the "&" between the packets. Just some Christmas food for thought.

Thanks Jon,

I was waiting for your input.

 

 

I think we have determined by consensus that this packet is a repro.

 

 

I have contacted the dealer and informed them of this.

I will report the reply.

 

Thank you to all.

Pep

[world war I nerd]

Robinb,

 

I was under the impression that the early first aid packets all had two belt hooks, but yours looks as if it was only manufactured with one. Did one hook & eyelet break off or was it intentionally made with only one hook?

 

Can you please post a photo showing the belt hook side of your 1907 dated Navy first aid packet?

 

Also, Jon, thanks for noticing the different font sizes on the alleged reproduction & the original packets, while the rest of us all neglected to notice that very obvious difference!

[robinb]

One hook has broken off of my packet.

[world war I nerd]

Since this thread had strayed somewhat into Army first aid packets, for what it's worth, I'll add this montage of early Army examples ...

 

Clockwise from upper left: 1908 dated packet with two belt hooks and a lip where the two halves were joined; 1909 dated packet; 1915 dated packet manufactured by Johnson & Johnson as opposed to Bauer & black; and another 1916 dated packet.

 

I don't have photos of the reverse side of these packets and I unfortunately do not recall the source from which they came.

 

 

 

Okay ... thanks Robin

[Keystone]

Close ups of the three first aid packets and what looks to be a Navy issued swivel holster whose flap may have been embossed with the initials "USN" ... Photos courtesy of the John Adams-Graf collection

 

I always assumed when I saw one of the "hook" style packets that were missing one of the hooks that it was just a poor design, now when I look at this picture I wonder if the sailors removed one of the hooks on purpose? I think it's odd that two of the three in the photo show this. Just to add more information here, i'm posting my Navy 1914 packet and my Army 1915 packet made by Johnson and Johnson. Yes, the Navy packet is quite a bit larger than the Army packet.

Tim

[Keystone]

Rear of packets

[Keystone]

Detail of rings

[world war I nerd]

Keystone, thanks for posting your early Army & Navy first aid packets. I had no idea that the Navy's packet was larger in size. I wonder what, or if there was a reason for the Navy opting for the bigger packet?

[Dr_rambow]

My USN packet is also missing one hook, but it is the same size as the Army packets (at least in 1912).

[Ronnie]

Pep your ifak has so much wear on it I wonder if someone intentionally aged it to mislead. I guess we will never know the answer to that.

Ronnie

[world war I nerd]

Dr-Rambow how about a shot of the reverse of your first aid packets? I'm curious if the 1910 or 1912 packets have the indentation for the pull-ring or not. A great selection by the way!

[world war I nerd]

This information is probably posted somewhere else on the forum, but here's the evolution of the U.S. Army & U.S. Navy first aid packets as I understand it.

 

1900 First Help For Wounds Packet (left)

The notion that individual soldiers should carry a personal first aid packet first began in 1900 with the adoption of the "First Help For Wounds" Packet". This packet contained two Compresses of sublimated gauze and one triangular, antiseptic bandage made from sublimated cambric, on which instructions were printed, all packed into a rubber sheeting cover.

 

No provision was made for carrying this packet. Therefore, it was carried in any convenient location by the soldiers. Period photographs reveal that it was frequently tied on the back of the looped cartridge belt. Due to the rubber sheeting's lack of durability a pouch to carry the packet was proposed in 1901. A pouch was designed and successful trials were held in the Philippines, However, that pouch was never adopted because it was thought that the packet could be squeezed into one of the pockets of the Army's new 1903 Rifle Cartridge Belt. The content of the 1900 First Aid Packet remained unchanged until 1907, but a number of modifications were made to the cover in which it was packed between 1900 and 1906.

 

1906 First Aid packet (right)

In 1905 a joint board of Army & Navy medical officers had determined that a brass case would be superior to that of the rubber sheeting currently in use. Thus the 1906 First Aid packet was adopted on May 5, 1906. Its contents was comprised of two compresses, each of which was sewn to a bandage. The two bandages were housed in a rimmed, two piece sealed brass case that was suspended by two hooks, which passed through the packet's rim, from the grommets placed along the lower edge of the pistol or cartridge belt. A pull ring was located on the opposing side from the hooks. When pulled the rim was removed, thus allowing access to the packets contents.

 

With the adoption of a sturdier brass case, it was thought that a separate pouch in which to carry and protect the packet was not necessary. As it turned out the Army's initial assumption was wrong, as the exposed brass packets took a substantial beating when worn in the field, which often resulted in the packet's premature opening and the contamination of the contents.

[world war I nerd]

1907 First Aid Packet (left)

In 1907 a new metal case was adopted to replace the previous case that had been sealed by means of a clamping rim. The rim was removed and the seam of the new case was instead hermetically sealed with solder. The pull ring used to open the packet was folded against the bottom edge and the packet's reverse was completely smooth. The 1907 First Aid Packet also contained two compresses that were each sewn onto a gauze bandage. However, two large safety pins were included to secure the bandage in place.

 

1914 First Aid Packet (right)

In 1914 a depression was added to the reverse side of the first aid packet into which the pull ring was folded. Apparently, the pull ring on the 1907 pattern packet had a tenancy to snag on the interior of the first aid pouch. This frequently resulted in either damage to the pouch or the hermetic seal of the packet being broken. The contents of the 1914 First Aid Packet remained unchanged.

 

PS, the proper way in which the packet was to be inserted into the pouch was with the pull ring down and to the back.

[world war I nerd]

Reverse of the 1907 First Aid Packet without a ring depression and the 1914 First Aid Packet with a ring depression.

 

I'm pretty sure, but not positive that the 1914 First Aid packets remained in use until it was replaced by the Carlisle packet in 1922.

[world war I nerd]

All of the following regarding U.S. Navy first aid packets is theoretical based on some confirmed information, some speculation and the observation of a number of period photos, as well as the images of U.S. Navy first aid packets posted here and from my research files.

 

At the time of posting it is not known what type of first aid packet was used by the Navy, or if a first aid packet was even issued between 1900 and 1907.

 

U.S. Navy 1907 First Aid Packet

Based on the fact that a board composed of Army and Navy officers designed the Army's 1907 First Aid Packet and the similarity between the Army 1907 dated packet and the Navy 1907 dated packet, it's probably safe to assume that the Navy also adopted an almost identical packet in 1907. The major difference being that the Navy packets were still intended to be suspended from the cartridge belt by means of hooks. This would indicate that the Navy did not adopt a first aid pouch in which to house the packet.

 

Period photos indicate that as late as 1916, Navy first aid packets were still being hung by hooks from the cartridge belt. In addition, to my knowledge, the only first aid pouch issued by the U.S. Navy was the 1916 First Aid Pouch, which was used well into WW II.

 

Based on above observance and the fact that Navy packets bearing hooks have contract dates that range from 1907 through to 1914 (as depicted in the photo) indicate that the belt hook pattern of first aid packet was likely in use until the Navy adopted a first aid pouch of its own in 1916.

[world war I nerd]

Period photos circa 1912 to 1916 showing early Navy first aid packets suspended from the belt or otherwise attached to it without the benefit of a first aid pouch.

 

Photos courtesy of the John Adams-Graf collection

[world war I nerd]

U.S. Navy 1916 First Aid Pouch

Based on my as yet undocumented theory, after the Navy adopted a first aid pouch in 1916, it also presumably adopted an updated version of the 1907 First Aid Packet ... One that eliminated the belt hooks and included a pull ring depression on the reverse of the packet. In other words a packet that was identical to the Army's 1914 pattern first aid packet, except that it was inscribed with the legend "U,S. Navy" rather than "U.S. Army".

 

In order to further prove or disprove this theory we need to see whether the reverse side of a U.S. Navy first aid packet dated 1915 and 1916 have or do not have a ring depression.

[world war I nerd]

Just for the record, there was also a civilian version of the first aid packet that was available from the manufacturer Bauer & Black as noted by this 1918 dated ad found in the "Red Cross" magazine.

[Dr_rambow]

Dr-Rambow how about a shot of the reverse of your first aid packets? I'm curious if the 1910 or 1912 packets have the indentation for the pull-ring or not. A great selection by the way!

 

I have a photo somewhere, but not on my work device. Suffice to say that the 1910 Army and 1912 USN contract packets have flat backs with no indent for the pull ring.

[Dr_rambow]

Also, since you mention the civilian version above, I have seen Bauer & Black made packets with no contract date but were otherwise the same as the Army packets even down to the brown paint. I'll have to see if I can dredge a picture up for that.

[Pep]

From the packets I have (1906, 1907, 1908, 1913, 1914, 1916 &1918) the indentation did not start until 1915 or around then.

Here are a couple of packets that were easy to get to and not in one of my displays:

[world war I nerd]

I was able to find only two reference sources for when the pull ring recess on the back of the packets, neither of which provided any documentation or footnotes. One merely stated that "early packets" had the indentation and the other specifically stated (but provided no proof) that they began in 1914. They may have been adopted late in 1914, and maybe the change didn't actually begin until early to mid-1915?

 

Anyway, I think we've at least narrowed it down to either 1914 or 1915.

[jprostak]

This is in a friends collection and I thought that I would post it.

[jprostak]

And the back side