Red square on fixed bail helmet

[Nickman983]

last pics

[Pbaczuk]

Yay! I hope you are pleased.

[Bob Hudson]

These red squares are for Marine Beach Parties. It started because some beach party members would decide they wanted to follow the infantry inland rather than stay on the water's edge. Or, over-zealous officers would grab guys on the beach and order them inland. The red squares told everyone an individual stays on the beach.

 

There's a lot of older threads about them: site:usmilitariaforum.com red square beach party

[Nickman983]

Yay! I hope you are pleased.

Very! I've always liked these shore party helmets and while this one is rough they say the time to buy it is when you see it. It still displays well and I'm very happy to see it's a Schlueter FB as I've been wanting to add one to my collection for a while now! I'm glad we were able to come together on this one!

[cerick1450]

Here are a few pictures of my red Square Swivel bail.

 

[cerick1450]

More...

 

[cerick1450]

Here is the square on the rear..

 

[Pbaczuk]

That is another great helmet. Thanks for showing these helmets.

[Cap Camouflage Pattern I]

maybe this is one?

[jpstout]

Ok, some very muddled comments and wag's above , but here is why you do the research:

 

 

Did you know when you see a 1 inch RED SQUARE on a helmet or uniform, it is a USMC engineer? Of course, everybody knows that!! Well, did ya' know that in WWII, the RED SQUARE may well have been worn largely by US Army personnel???

For me the RED SQUARE has always been a point of contention due to the absence of supporting data from WWII and the propensity of internet forums or helmet books to commonly refer to them as USMC beach master or engineer or shore party without further qualification. Of course, any red marking identified from WWII, no matter what the shape or size, has become ingrained in our minds as USMC related for several reasons. Today, we are acutely aware of the RED PATCH and its use in todays USMC Transport Support Battalions and much of this information is used to account for WWII distinctive markings without further thought. And, unfortunately, the history that goes along with the red patch and its origin is incomplete and does not tell the whole story. Based on the current articles on the web, and much like the old MARINE movies, they give the impression that the Marines were the only fighting force in the PTO and won the pacific! We keep perpetuating erroneous opinions and speculations to the point we do a disservice to the WWII collecting community, and ultimately, to a subpopulation of veterans who were there in the shore party who were not marines.

With the advent of new information, witness the BOAT POOL and the distinctive RED BALL marking, we can challenge some of the USMC related notions of RED. And, adding to the confusion, researching WWII veterans who brought home their helmet with the RED painted square, that he wore and used in the Pacific, we scratch our heads and wonder why he is US Army. Or a member of JASCO. We then began to wonder if the RED SQUARE might represent a new and different tactical mark for another Infantry Division, Artillery, or USN entity. IMVHO, there is much more work to be done regarding these distinctive markings...

Here is copy of an order for SHORE PARTY personnel to include ARMY & USMC. This is found in the Operation orders associated with OPERATION FLINTLOCK (Marshal Islands) OPPLAN A6-43. This is the beginning of several more posts with further explanation of the complex shore party, photo of helmets for archive, discussion of NCB, EBS, Pioneer, USMC replacement Drafts and JASCO and their role in Shore Party personnel.

[jpstout]

Ok, I want to further elaborate on the SHORE PARTY concept. A good source ( and there are several) is "US World War II Amphibious Tactics: Army & Marine Corps, Pacific Theater" By Gordon Rottman.

"The concept of an fully integrated shore party, including Army, USMC and USN, was central to success. It was also the least developed during the early war and its evolution was continuous. Once a landing was completed, shore party support was essential and manpower requirements immense."

This particular statement is extremely important. The point here is that to fight, you needed a lot of men. To support them, you needed a lot more men, maybe 10 support personnel to 1 combat soldier. The Marines, I believe, had 25,000 prewar. As the war progressed, every battle had different logistical requirements and availability of troops, necessitating organizational changes in each amphibious landing. Not to mention the wants and needs of the various USN and US ARMY leaders (read "MacArthur"). By the end of the Pacific war in 1945, there were many changes and you have to review each battle to see what was actually done.

The "shore party" was a Marine or Army organization, under the control of the Landing Force Commander, responsible for the selection and marking of routes inland, assignment of bivouac areas and dumps, movement of units and supplies from the beach to fighting front, and control of stragglers and prisoners.

The structure of each organization was not specified; it was task-organized from available assets as the mission required. In theory, the beach party (USN) controlled activities on the beach while the shore party was responsible for the rest of the beachhead beyond the dune line. A major flaw revealed by the pre-war landing exercises was the independent operation of each party, leading to predictable problems of communications, coordination, and demarcation of responsibilities. In August 1941, MajGen Holland Smith recommended that the two organizations be consolidated into the Shore Party, responsible to the Landing Force Commander - since its mission was to support troops ashore. Dedicated work details were to be established in order to prevent drawing from the landing force's fighting strength. The Navy Beachmaster was designated as an assistant to the Marine/Army Shore Party Commander. The concept was approved on August 1, 1942, just in time for implementation in the Guadalcanal landing.
The Marines and the Army solved the need for manpower to unload landing craft differently. The Marines organized divisional pioneer battalions in early 1942. Other elements included detachments from engineer, supply and service, motor transport, medical, signal, joint assault signal, and military police units. The Marines also made heavy use of Seabee battalions in the shore party, and formed depot and ammunition companies to serve as stevedores. The Army had shore battalions as a component of the EAC boat and shore regiments, and when these were unavailable (as in the Central Pacific and Okinawa) employed combat engineer battalions in this role. The Army also employed detachments drawn from similar units as the Marines, plus Transportation Corps port companies, who were essentially stevedores.
All Marine and Army shore elements and the Navy beach party were consolidated under provisional corps and divisional shore party groups usually commanded by senior logistics or engineer officers and tailored for each operation. The Shore Party for a division was broken down into RCT and BLT shore parties. A BLT shore party was built around a pioneer platoon in the Marines, and in the Army either a shore company (when boat and shore regiments were available) or a combat engineer company. Both had joint assault signal company detachments. Functionally the Shore Party was organized into "platoons" and "sections", though these were larger in size than those terms suggest. The headquarters platoon - provided by the pioneer, shore or combat engineer company, augmented by elements from service units - included command, reconnaissance, map, and liaison parties and supply, mess, and medical sections. The service platoon was provided by the bulk of the pioneer, shore or combat engineer company, and was broken into a beach labor "section" with stevedore platoons, and a dump labor and records section. The communication platoon operated radio and telephone nets, a message center, and visual signals. The shore platoon had weapons, engineer, military police, and motor transport and repair sections, to direct traffic, control stragglers and prisoners, make emergency vehicle repairs, provide local defense, and fulfill engineer tasks such as making beach-to-dump roads, clearing dump sites, removing mines and obstacles, and demolitions.

This excerpt from Rottmans book demonstrates the inherent complexity and potential disorder in the Amphibious landings. However,understanding the complexity and appropriate military terminology helps us to interpret the distinctive markings that were instituted for the PTO island hopping combat operations and some of the helmets in our collections.

[usoverlord]

Well stated "jpstout"! ! !.......I for one am guilty of of this assumption. Red badge = USMC Shore party.

But, that's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

There were also lots of Marines in the ETO.

[Burning Hazard]

I kinda wondered what these were in footage, looks like red or orange squares? possibly related?

[Pbaczuk]

Oh no I miss my helmet now.

[The Rooster]

This is Vietnam Era.... But is this or could this be a beach party helmet?

Its dark green blue paint and an upside down Red triangle. I posted it a while back but could not get much

info. Its also a low dome.

Beach Party?

[The Rooster]

2

[The Rooster]

The liner that came with it. The shell has black hardware on the chinstarps. Vietnam era.

[Nickman983]

I kinda wondered what these were in footage, looks like red or orange squares? possibly related?

 

I would think it's very likely. Though I find the individual in the foreground of the second photo interesting since his helmet is marked with a white(?) square rather than red/orange. Also looks to me like his jacket has a white disc on it. I wonder would what the significance of the white vs red markings might be?

 

This is Vietnam Era.... But is this or could this be a beach party helmet?

Its dark green blue paint and an upside down Red triangle. I posted it a while back but could not get much

info. Its also a low dome.

Beach Party?

 

I would think yours is probably not related to the red square markings but I'm not certain.

[GITom1944]

jpstout himself has an enviable collection of amphibious force-related helmets and has done considerable research on the topic. Keep in mind that Army units participated in many, many amphibious landings in the Pacific theater. Task Forces for landings established their own beach parties and helmet-marking systems. They tended to be similar but not always identical. In late 1944, an overall amphibious doctrine was established that defined beach party helmet markings but by then many of the major combat landings had already occurred. However, the doctrine was informed by practices that had already been used some of the time. I made this chart to show some of the markings as described in orders for some of the landings. It is not meant to show every variation that might have been used.

 

 

Tom

[Nickman983]

Awesome information Tom, thank you for putting together that chart!

[usoverlord]

Great info!

[Phineaus]

Great chart Tom! Thanks for making and posting that.

[sgtdorango]

Nice work on that chart!??....mike