Johan Willaert Posted January 13, 2017 Share #26 Posted January 13, 2017 Wow! Great topic! Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
268th C.A. Posted January 13, 2017 Share #27 Posted January 13, 2017 Great post with a ton of information, As I have often wondered about this one myself. Excellent job! Very informative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BERLIN RED Posted January 14, 2017 Share #28 Posted January 14, 2017 Great article! I always wondered if the grommets on the squad pouch lined up with the grommets securing the meat can pouch to the haversack body? Possibly it was intended to secure it to the inside of a first pattern 1910 haversack so the frog could still be utilized for the trench shovels and such. Also it would be easily accessible yet out of the elements. If anyone has a first pattern 1910 haversack and a squad pouch I would like to know if there is a common hole pattern. I have neither of the two. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
world war I nerd Posted January 14, 2017 Author Share #29 Posted January 14, 2017 Thanks to all who've read and commented on this big post for a small pouch. Berlin Red, astute observation ... I posted a similar comment in one of the older threads devoted to the Pouch for Small Articles. Other thoughts regarding the four grommets were that they may have been made for either ventilation or drainage. One poster rightly claimed that if the grommets were for drainage they would have been placed on the bottom of the pouch, which likely would have require just one grommet, not four. Likewise for ventilation. Why four grommets when one or two would suffice? Of the two million pouches made, using one grommet instead of four to ventilate would have saved seven million grommets at a time when supplies of all types of metal were becoming increasingly scarce. In 1918, the Army was doing its best to not waste anything; four grommets for ventilation would have been overkill. A thought that never occurred to me while writing that was brought to my attention in an email yesterday is that the 500 pouches fabricated by the Rock Island Arsenal in 1916 for field trials were likely made with eagle snaps rather than lift-the-dot fasteners. Does anyone know the precise date the Army switched from eagle snaps to lift-the-dots? I always thought it was in 1917 because mud prevented the snaps from closing properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acadien359 Posted January 14, 2017 Share #30 Posted January 14, 2017 Great article, indeed. I remember reading production figures in "America's Munitions 1917-1918" and there was a reference to "pouches for small articles", which I thought was a catch-all for any odd pouch not widely used...now we know for sure! Regarding the question as to when eagle snaps gave way to lift-the-dots, over the years I have seen several M1910 canteen covers dated 1916 that had the lift-dot snaps. Might have been a result of Punitive Expedition experience, since sand [as well as mud] would cause the eagle snaps to lock up. Regarding the eyelets on back, what about being used for a leg tie-down cord? Given the way the pouch hung down, and the weight of the items to be carried, it would be somewhat annoying to have the thing flopping around on your leg while walking, running, etc. Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
world war I nerd Posted January 15, 2017 Author Share #31 Posted January 15, 2017 Alan thanks for reading this post. A number of gaps still remain in the information regarding the small articles. Hopefully, over time we will be able to locate the missing pieces of the puzzle, like ... Where the pouches were field tested When the pouches were adopted and issued by the Army What was the purpose of the four grommets on the reverse of the pouch Why there are so few photos of the pouch in use (after issue it may have been discontinued for whatever reason) What does a squad housewife actually look like, and so on. Speaking of the grommets, the leg tie is a viable possibility. However, in order for the grommets to have been for a leg tie, we'd first have to find out if the pouch was ever officially prescribed to be worn suspended from a pistol or cartridge belt. It may have been that the web hanger just happened to be the perfect length to allow the pouch to hang beneath the first aid pouch. It would, once again, also seem like four grommets would be wasteful, when two grommets placed near the bottom of the pouch would work fine. Forum member Jprostak informed me yesterday that the Carr, military Lift-the Dot fasteners were field tested on some canteen covers in September of 1915, and that it was likely adopted by the Army (according to the date on its drawing) on or around July of 1916. After its adoption, the lift-the-dot fastener was not immediately used on every article of equipment. I also enlarged images of the reverse of an early 1910 Meat Can Pouch & a Pouch for Small Articles until the grommets on both were approximately the same diameter. When the left hand grommet of the small articles pouch was overlaid on top of the meat can pouch's left hand grommet, the dotted line with arrows points out where the corresponding right hand grommet would have been ... Not exactly an exact match. The two insets show that the meat can grommet (left) and the small article pouch grommet (right) were roughly the same size and design. Left hand photo courtesy of Bay State Militaria.com Right hand photo courtesy of the manayunkman collection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jprostak Posted January 15, 2017 Share #32 Posted January 15, 2017 The trial 500 Pouches may have had "Carr Fastener" as used on the First Aid Pouch or they may have had lift the dots which were being trialed at the time. Since we do not know what the Housewife looked like, the 4 grommet holes may have something to do with keeping the housewife or other items in the pouch. The pouch was designed around the items that were going in it. Please remember, the Army in this time period was designing items to go in a specific place. If all the documents in 1916 say it goes on the 1910 haversack, that's where it is designed to go. It was not being designed to be tied or strapped to some place that the Army didn't want it to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Posted January 15, 2017 Share #33 Posted January 15, 2017 Hi Brian Nice post again ! Here a photo taken in august, 29, 1918 at Ville sur terre (144th Inf. regt ) We can see a pouch on the havresack Aurel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
world war I nerd Posted January 15, 2017 Author Share #34 Posted January 15, 2017 Aurel. Thanks! What a wonderful photo. You've managed to find something that I've been searching for for years ... well done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solcarlus Posted January 17, 2017 Share #35 Posted January 17, 2017 Bonjour world war I ned. Excellent post. I have a question. Is there an official document designating this pouch? solcarlus. An another barrack bag in my possession: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
world war I nerd Posted January 19, 2017 Author Share #36 Posted January 19, 2017 Solcarlus, There probably is an Ordnance Department drawing of the pouch somewhere, but I've never seen it. I've only seen the pouch officially mentioned in the Chief Ordnance Officer's Annual Report for 1916 (about field trials) and then again in the two 1918 dated manuals regarding how the pouches were to be distributed. I also found a date for this photo. According to its caption in the book "Forward March", the image is of troops from the 90th Division and the photo was taken on October 14, 1918. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustin Posted January 19, 2017 Share #37 Posted January 19, 2017 This ordnance photograph labels it as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robinb Posted January 19, 2017 Share #38 Posted January 19, 2017 Here's one of mine that's unit marked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jprostak Posted January 19, 2017 Share #39 Posted January 19, 2017 Here is a portion the drawing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
world war I nerd Posted January 19, 2017 Author Share #40 Posted January 19, 2017 Thanks Dustin & Robin, for materially adding to the content of this thread, every little bit helps. Jon, thanks also for adding the blueprint. I was wondering if you had that one. Is there a date on it? Oh, wait ... it looks like the drawing is dated October 23 or 25, 1916 ... is that correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solcarlus Posted January 19, 2017 Share #41 Posted January 19, 2017 Here's that answer the question. Merci. solcarlus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
world war I nerd Posted January 20, 2017 Author Share #42 Posted January 20, 2017 Here's a closer view of the drawing Jon posted ... Note the R.I.A. 1916 date on the inside of the pouch's flap. Photo courtesy of the Jprostak collection Jon do the drawings mention anything at all about the purpose of the four grommets on the back of the pouch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikie Posted January 26, 2017 Share #43 Posted January 26, 2017 Sorry I'm late for the party here. I don't actively collect WWI, just stuff I happen to come across if it catches my eye. But I love how these posts can take a piece of equipment that I am not familiar with and keep me fascinated by it through the whole thread. Mikie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
world war I nerd Posted January 27, 2017 Author Share #44 Posted January 27, 2017 Mikie, thanks for reading the post and commenting on it. The only reason why I was able to put this post together is because I had done some research on the different shoes worn by the U.S. Army in the early 20th century. While doing that I learned about the 1908 Army Shoe Board, and the Army's quest to solve its sore feet problem. That combined with what I already knew about the conditions of service in Mexico, told much of the above story. The only thing I really had to research was the squad housewife, of which I didn't really find a great deal of useful information. One point of interest that I failed to mention, was that the engagement between the men of the 13th Cavalry Regiment, Punitive Expedition and Mexican citizens and soldiers, which took place in Parral, Mexico, occurred primarily because the cavalry troopers badly needed new shoes. When the regiment entered Parral, the southern most point that the Punitive Expedition reached in Mexico, they were told to leave by the garrison commander and were then fired upon by a hostile mob and by Mexican regulars. Needless to say, no shoes were purchased! General Pershing, wanted to commandeer the Mexican railroad system and use it to speed up the resupply of his men and continue the search for Villa. The War Department, however, feared that if the expedition moved any further south, Mexico would perceive it as an invasion of their country. Not wanting an out and out war with Mexico, Pershing was ordered to begin moving all of his men north, rather than south. Thus the active pursuit of Pancho Villa was called off as a result of a impromptu shopping trip for shoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluehawk Posted January 27, 2017 Share #45 Posted January 27, 2017 I really enjoyed this thread. Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now