Application of insignia for typical uniforms

[2ad82recon]

I have noticed over my 30 odd years of collecting the trend of "double patched" service coats and Ike jackets, IE: division shoulder patches on both sleeves. Various explanations have been given for this, but what I would like to throw open to the floor is:

 

What is the "official" explanation for this practice?

[Bob Hudson]

The one on the right shoulder is sometimes called the "combat patch" and is officially known as SSI-FWTS "Shoulder Sleeve Insignia-Former Wartime Service". One website showing WWII insignia placement calls the patch the "Former Overseas Wartime Parent Unit."

 

The latest Army order concerning these said:

 

"Shoulder Sleeve Insignia for Former Wartime Service"

 

The shoulder sleeve insignia for former wartime service (SSI-FWTS) and overseas service bars are approved for wear by Soldiers who have been assigned to units that have participated in ground operations during Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) effective date 19 September 2001 and / or Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) effective date 19 March 2003."

[2ad82recon]

So this was a post war practice right? NEVER correct for a WW2 serving GI?So how many of the uniforms on EPay displaying 2 patches are correct?

[Bob Hudson]

I have read in several places words to the effect of "The history of the combat patch dates back to the end of World War II." Some sources say "after" WWII, but I have not been able to find any definitive starting date for this practice.

[craig_pickrall]

This might be a case of the reg's being changed to accomodate what the troops were doing. I have seen period pics of many men with patches on both shoulders. I have seen one pic of a FSSF vet that actually had 3 patches. Two were on the right sleeve, one at the shoulder and the other at the cuff.

[craig_pickrall]

Army Regulation AR 670-1 WEAR AND APPEARANCE OF ARMY UNIFORMS AND INSIGNIA is the manual that covers this. I have them going back to pre-WW2. I will need to do a backward search to find the first time they were authorized. However the 1979 reg states all of the time periods that are authorized until that time. It is a s follows:

 

1. 12/7/41 - 9/2/46 WW2

2. 6/27/50 - 7/27/54 plus 4/1/68 - 8/31/73 Korea

3. 7/1/58 - 3/28/73 Vietnam

4. Those returning to CONUS after 4/29/65 Dominican Republic. This one is a bit complicated. If anyone is interested I can give more detail.

 

Let me know if you need more detail and I'll try to do the backward search.

[easystreet]

I don't have it in front of me, but in Shelby Stanton's book on WW2 uniforms he lists the reg and the date. I believe the wearing of the "Combat patch" on the right shoulder, was authorized in either January or February of 1945. So YES it was started during the war, however, towards the end of the war. I think that is why you find a lot of Ikes and 4 pockets with two patches, as the GI would have added the combat patch before being discharged after the war was over, BUT that is also why you don't see a lot of wartime photos of it, as it was a late war change.

[2ad82recon]

That was what I needed, so it was a VERY late to Post WW2 "thing". I appreciate the help and information that cleared up my confusion a treat.

[2ad82recon]

A friend of mine has just purchased a White M-16 Anti aircraft halftrack. He will be marking this up as 195th AAAW of the 2nd armored Division circa 1944-45.

 

My question is what would the Class A tunic look like for this unit? IE: 2nd Armor Div SSI or AA command? Armor collar brass or coast artillery collar brass? Which piping for the garrison cap? What do the 195th AAAW DIs look like?

[BEAR]

If you go to this site you should get some information about the 195ths role with the XIX Corps and 2nd AD.

 

http://members.home.nl/alasoe/xix_corps_non_divisional.htm

 

Just in my quick web search I found out that the 195th was NOT a 2nd AD assigned unit. They were attached as a XIX Corps non-divisional asset. They would probably wear the XIX Corps SSI since this was their parent unit. They are shown as a Coastal Artillery unit so would wear that brass and their piping would be Artillery red.

 

Here's a photo of a more modern 195th DUI.

 

 

[2ad82recon]

Thanks, so to summarise, Coast Artillery Collar Brass and Artillery Piping? Didn't coast artillery have its own seperate branch of service piping? Who wore the AA command patch?

[craig_pickrall]

http://www.angelfire.com/md2/patches/other...anchcolors.html

 

Follow this link for who used what color cap piping. AA, CA and FA all use scarlet piping.

 

The AA patch was for the ANTIAIRCRAFT COMMAND. This command was responsible for all training of Coast ARTY and AA ARTY in the US. The command was discontinued at Ft Bliss, Texas in OCT, 1945. As far as I know it was never deployed overseas. It was a training command only.

[QED4]

Now just to muddy the waters on this, many men in the Kiska Task Forse wore the Kiska Task Force patch on their right shoulder and their unit patch on there left. I am not sure if this was the prescribed thing to do or they just realized this was a temporary patch and did not want to bother removing their unit patch just to replace it later. There are many pictures showing this and if I am not mistaken I think I have seen one of a guy with the Kiska patch on both shoulders. These patches will never appear on a Class A uniform or at least correctly.

[CNY Militaria]

Also of note is the fact that many WWII vets serving stateside during the war also double patched their jackets. I am not sure why, but on AAF uniforms for example, they sometimes placed their unit (such as 4th AAF for example) on their right shoulder, and a standard AAF patch on the left. It might have been done to spice up their uniforms a bit. I would not at all be surprised.

 

Here is an example of what I am talking about.

[BEAST]

I will add another variation. My neighbor served with 9th AF. When he showed me his coat, he only had he 9th on the right sleeve. No SSI on the left. When I asked him about it, he said that He was proud of his overseas service and didn't want to wear any other.

[CNY Militaria]

Thats true Beast, I have seen that as well. I have a uniform in my collection like that somewhere, but I can't find it right now.

[2ad82recon]

Yet in my fathers collection of AAF uniforms a lot of the veterans unifoms he has have the 8th patch on one side and 9th on the other. Does this mean that the vet served with the 8th then when the 8th went "home" in 1945 they stayed on in England or France and served with the 9th AF?

[CNY Militaria]

It's possible, or perhaps they transferred after serving with the 8th for a while.

[Jeeper704]

Adding to the confusion: A Veteran of the 704th TD Battalion told me he wore the 4th Armored Division triangle on his right shoulder and the Tank Destroyer patch on the left. His explanation for doing this was that his unit, the 704th TD, was part of the 4th Armored. It is my believe he did wear it from late 1944 onwards (until discharged).

[2ad82recon]

Justin so perhaps it was done but not technically "CORRECT" to do this, especially late war. See Erwins last post ?

[duarte1223]

My grandpa has an 8th AAF patch on the right shoulder, and the 9th AAF on the left shoulder, and he was discharged December 1945. A lot of the 35th Division was transferred to the 5th Division after V-E day, so there are a lot of 35th/5th patched jackets out there.

[CNY Militaria]

You can wear any patch of a unit you saw combat with. Even now, the officers I see in the Battalion change their right shoulder patches every once in a while because of the velcro now. They choose their favorite unit and wear it. Also, sometimes you can see on uniforms where patches of all shapes and sizes have been removed, to take the place of another patch. Many soldiers place their most recent combat unit to their right shoulder however. Then, going further, sometimes soldiers place the same patch on each shoulder if they saw combat with and are still serving in that unit. That is very evident today by looking at guys in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

I have an ike jacket with a current unit as the 9th AAF, and former Unit 12th AAF, but he had specially made DI's at some point, so he continued to wear them, even though they correspond to their former unit.

 

One thing you must always remember about WWII uniforms is this. Many GI's either did not care or know about regulations concerning insignia, so they applied it as they saw fit (hence the reason for so many problems when looking at ribbons on uniforms nowadays), and many more put as much "stuff" on their uniform as possible in order to impress everyone back home. Some even added a star to their WWII Victory ribbon if they saw combat with an enemy after the war "officially" ended or if they felt they deserved one for being in combat. You will sometimes even see a period photo of soldiers wearing uniforms that we, as collectors, today might rule out as a put-together or impossible.

[Allan H.]

The regs for the newly authorized "Former Wartime Service" SSI were printed in an article in "Yank" magazine in the VE edition. There was also an article about the new Combat Medic Badge in the same issue. The provisions for the wearing of a former wartime service SSI were to allow a veteran to wear the insignia of a unit that he had seen combat with. The regulation stated specifically that the patch was to be a FORMER and NOT a current unit insignia.

 

As for some anomalies like the Kiska Task force patch, yes, there is plenty of photo documentation that the men of the FSSF wore the Kiska patch along with their force arrowheads. You'll find photos of these patches worn above the speahead, below the spearhead and even on the right shoulder. The actual wear of the Kiska patch was a short-lived. This is why I believe that so many of the patches are out there, manufactured and never worn.

 

There are a number of other instances where patches were worn on the right shoulder well prior to the end of the war. Two examples would be the 1st Allied Airborne Army SSI which was directed to be worn on the right shoulder of uniforms worn by men who served in subordinate units to the 1st AA/BA in September of 1944 (a regulation that was NOT enforced or even encouraged until after the end of hostilities) and the use wear of the CBI SSI by soldiers in that theater of operations. This patch was widely worn on both the left and the right shoulder as early as 1943 and worn in conjunction with other SSI's esp. AAF units like the 10th and 14th Air Forces.

 

Finally, there are a number of documented photos of men who served in anti-tank batteries wearing the TD SSI on the right shoulder and their current unit patches on the left even before the cessation of hostilities.

[bayonetman]

Let me start by saying that I am in no way trying to minimize the service of this veteran to his country. He served in two wars, and attained enough rank to show that his service was both distinguished and honorable. To prevent possible embarrassment to his family (the veteran is deceased) I will not name him.

I bought this uniform (and other items from the vet) several years ago. Recently I was able to view paperwork connected to the veteran, and the uniform and paperwork do not agree well. The uniform had been in storage since the mid- 1950s when he stored it in the family attic, so the "additions" were done between May of 1952 when he obtained the rank of Master Sergeant and the time it was stored.


Lets look at the jacket carefully and compare it with what I found on his paperwork.

Left Shoulder: 1092nd Combat Engineers Tab over 8th Arms SSI (both in woven bullion private purchase). The unit tab never officially existed and was not authorized to be worn. The unit of course did serve under the 8th Army but officially wore the I Corps SSI.

Right Shoulder: HQ ETO 1945. This one has nothing to do with his prior service. In WW2 he was in the Navy on a DE. They did convoy duty and patrols in the Atlantic, Mediterranean and near the end of the war in the Pacific.

Collar discs are proper for the unit.

Combat Leader tabs on the shoulders. I have found nothing to indicate whether he was authorized to wear those or not. The unit DI was added later by me, given to me by another member of the unit but they were not authorized until after the uniform was placed in storage.

Over Right Pocket: Korean Presidential Unit Citation. Awarded to the unit during his time of service, but not authorized until he had returned home and was in the inactive reserve. However, he would have been entitled to wear it.

Service Ribbons:

Note from his Navy discharge that his American Theater was given a star (the DE participated in the sinking of a German UBoat) and the others were not. So he has two unauthorized stars on the EAME. He shows a star on the Philippine Liberation Ribbon (the DE as far as I can see was never in the Philippines) and neither he nor the ship was authorized the ribbon. He was given the Pacific Theater ribbon which he is not wearing. The Victory Medal is OK and another document shows that he did earn the Navy Good Conduct so that is OK also. The third row - Army Good Conduct, Korean Service with two stars and UN ribbon for Korean Service is all OK.

Left Sleeve: 5 bars representing 6 months overseas service each. A bit of a stretch as he served about one year on the DE and slightly less than a year in Korea.

I know for a fact that this uniform went into storage in 1955 and was not touched again until I got it about 1990. Other than the DI set that I added, the rest of it was just as worn from the time he made Master Sergeant (18 May 1952) till he was discharged 20 February 1954 from the Inactive National Guard. He went on Inactive Status 27 May 1952 so really probably never wore the uniform officially.

So we really should not take anything we find at full face value. The idea of "spicing up" a uniform is certainly not new, but should remind us all that just because the uniform or whatever was had directly from the vet or their family does not mean that it is absolutely a factual record of the service.

[2ad82recon]

Thank you Gary, that just goes to show that to me on first impressions that uniform group looks as right as rain. This is backed up with everything just "looking" right. I suppose that just leads us even more down the slope of "CAVEAT EMPTOR" doesnt it?