Vietnam gear

[PvtTamura]

Hello everyone,

I've been going back and forth trying to figure out how the LBE should be organized.

I typically wear this with an Airborne Jungle Jacket (post war insignia, since I haven't bought a more appropriate example.)

I've heard that the Etool shouldn't be carried, should be carried on the left, the right, the buttpack and even on the m56 suspenders.

I've heard the same for canteens as well, so this leaves one question.

Does it even matter? :think:

 

Reason for Edit: Picture didn't display

 

[Sabrejet]

Hi. I've never been in the military myself, but from what I've read, there's the REGULATION way of carrying stuff...and the PRACTICAL way, as devized by the "Grunts" who had to hump it! Obviously, some items eg., ammo pouches, have a pre-determined position on the belt for purposes of quick accessibility, but other items could be distributed around the harness depending on the load being carried and general weight distribution...and the all-important comfort factor! I'm sure when serving, or ex-servicemen read your query they'll share their first-hand experiences!

 

Sabrejet :thumbsup:

[PvtTamura]

Hi. I've never been in the military myself, but from what I've read, there's the REGULATION way of carrying stuff...and the PRACTICAL way, as devized by the "Grunts" who had to hump it! Obviously, some items eg., ammo pouches, have a pre-determined position on the belt for purposes of quick accessibility, but other items could be distributed around the harness depending on the load being carried and general weight distribution...and the all-important comfort factor! I'm sure when serving, or ex-servicemen read your query they'll share their first-hand experiences!

 

Sabrejet :thumbsup:

 

 

Sabrejet,

 

I own a 64 dated manual with the Regulation way and it doesn't match up to anything I've ever heard.

Of course, who reads the directions! I fear I may have asked this question to everyone before, but

I do hope someone, either knowledgeable collector or retired Army can educate me,

 

Thanks

 

Tamura

[craig_pickrall]

Why not try setting it up according to the manual and then as you wear it in re-enacting you can modify it as needed for your portrayal. In other words get used to the standard and then with usage you can customize it to your own needs.

 

I would lose the holster and mag pouch or if you want to keep that then lose the M56 pouch. You have to much stuff on the belt. If you keep the holster then put the mag pouch on the left side. I think that pouch has the slide keepers but if not then secure it so it doesn't slide off. 550 cord will fix that problem.

 

Since you have the holster who are you trying to recreate, a crew served weapon man, a NCO or an Officer? Pick the one that fits your needs and then find some pics of that type GI and see how they wear their gear.

[Rakkasan187]

Each unit had a SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) for the wearing of field gear. The regulation was a guide, but it was the Commanders discretion as to how he wanted his Soldiers to carry their gear. For example, when I first entered the service and got to my first duty station we were only issued one canteen, and that was placed on the left hip. When we were issued a second canteen that one went on the right hip. First Aid pouches were placed on the right LBE strap, near the right shoulder, bayonets placed on the right hip, in front of the right side canteen, etc. Crew served weapons members carried the .45 holster on the right hip and on the left front of the pistol belt, on the left side of the M-16 ammo pouch, we carried the .45 magazine pouch. The same went for the protective mask. Some units preferred the use of the shoulder strap, while others wore the waist strap and small leg strap. In other units we attached the protective mask to the pistol belt by extending the waist strap and securing it to the top of the LBE on the back side. When I was stationed in Berlin, we had a specific SOP for how we packed our rucksacks. Our Battalion had the larger "Ranger Rucksacks" with three large outer pockets on the back side of the ruck. According to the BN SOP the middle pocket carried a poncho, the right pocket carried extra socks, t-shirt and underwear, and the left pocket carried a weapons cleaning kit. Every Soldiers rucksack was the same. I think I have some old Battalion SOPs that specifically detail the location of equipment and field gear. When I get a chance I will dig them out and check. I still have some of my rigs set up, and I will take some pictures to show the different field modifications.

 

 

It basically boiled down to comfort.

 

 

Leigh...

[PvtTamura]

Why not try setting it up according to the manual and then as you wear it in re-enacting you can modify it as needed for your portrayal. In other words get used to the standard and then with usage you can customize it to your own needs.

 

I would lose the holster and mag pouch or if you want to keep that then lose the M56 pouch. You have to much stuff on the belt. If you keep the holster then put the mag pouch on the left side. I think that pouch has the slide keepers but if not then secure it so it doesn't slide off. 550 cord will fix that problem.

 

Since you have the holster who are you trying to recreate, a crew served weapon man, a NCO or an Officer? Pick the one that fits your needs and then find some pics of that type GI and see how they wear their gear.

 

Craig,

 

I'll go ahead and try setting it up according to the manual and go from there.

I do Vietnam impressions walking around shows and similar events,

so I'll customize based on period pictures I suppose. I'm going for NCO,

the research begins.

[PvtTamura]

Each unit had a SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) for the wearing of field gear. The regulation was a guide, but it was the Commanders discretion as to how he wanted his Soldiers to carry their gear. For example, when I first entered the service and got to my first duty station we were only issued one canteen, and that was placed on the left hip. When we were issued a second canteen that one went on the right hip. First Aid pouches were placed on the right LBE strap, near the right shoulder, bayonets placed on the right hip, in front of the right side canteen, etc. Crew served weapons members carried the .45 holster on the right hip and on the left front of the pistol belt, on the left side of the M-16 ammo pouch, we carried the .45 magazine pouch. The same went for the protective mask. Some units preferred the use of the shoulder strap, while others wore the waist strap and small leg strap. In other units we attached the protective mask to the pistol belt by extending the waist strap and securing it to the top of the LBE on the back side. When I was stationed in Berlin, we had a specific SOP for how we packed our rucksacks. Our Battalion had the larger "Ranger Rucksacks" with three large outer pockets on the back side of the ruck. According to the BN SOP the middle pocket carried a poncho, the right pocket carried extra socks, t-shirt and underwear, and the left pocket carried a weapons cleaning kit. Every Soldiers rucksack was the same. I think I have some old Battalion SOPs that specifically detail the location of equipment and field gear. When I get a chance I will dig them out and check. I still have some of my rigs set up, and I will take some pictures to show the different field modifications.

It basically boiled down to comfort.

Leigh...

 

 

Leigh,

 

Thanks for the help. I'm starting to think my best bet is to get in touch

with some Vietnam veterans my dad used to know and see if they can help me out.

It would be great if you could post some pictures though, you'd probably get to that before I find the vets. :thumbsup:

 

-Tamura

[Justin]

Hear are two early examples from my collection, both are set up by "Heavy Hints for Light Packs" booklet. Which if I am not mistaken dates late 50's early 60's. Often the shovel was not worn on the m56 gear, and carried on the rucksack, or not at all, same goes for the butt pack, and more canteens or m56 pouches were added.

[PvtTamura]

Hear are two early examples from my collection, both are set up by "Heavy Hints for Light Packs" booklet. Which if I am not mistaken dates late 50's early 60's. Often the shovel was not worn on the m56 gear, and carried on the rucksack, or not at all, same goes for the butt pack, and more canteens or m56 pouches were added.

 

 

Hey thanks Justin, quick question if you don't mind me asking.

Those are "short" m56 pouches on your kits right? Were those

used more often than these longer ones?

 

Thanks

 

 

Tamura.

[craig_pickrall]

The original long M56 pouch is way more common than the short pouch.

[Justin]

Hey thanks Justin, quick question if you don't mind me asking.

Those are "short" m56 pouches on your kits right? Were those

used more often than these longer ones?

 

Thanks

Tamura.

No, those are not short, the short type were only made in 1968 and not as common as the longer ones I have on mine.

[PvtTamura]

Sorry got confused for a second there. :pinch:

Revised, based on Justin's examples and the ever trusty army manuals.

:thumbsup:

 

 

[craig_pickrall]

Maybe my eyes are playing tricks on me but it looks like you attached the gear to the inside of the belt rather than the outside.

[Justin]

Maybe my eyes are playing tricks on me but it looks like you attached the gear to the inside of the belt rather than the outside.

Yep, I was going to say the same thing.

[PvtTamura]

Yep, I was going to say the same thing.

 

 

#@^##!!!!

 

Boy I need to get more sleep. :thumbdown: :thumbdown:

 

Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't even bother checking when I took everything off.

[hotlead]

That's a nice lookin' set, thanks for showing :thumbsup:

 

The next time you find a good ammo case you should pick it up, if you don't already have another one, the one you have is missing the web tab that secures the top closed.

[PvtTamura]

That's a nice lookin' set, thanks for showing :thumbsup:

 

The next time you find a good ammo case you should pick it up, if you don't already have another one, the one you have is missing the web tab that secures the top closed.

 

Thanks!, I'm really getting annoyed by that missing web tab there's no way to keep it closed! :pinch:

I was talking with a forum member about purchasing a couple, but the parents said no more militaria for the month :pinch:

 

 

Tamura

[Lt.]

I have seen the E-tool attached to the buttpack (full metal jacket).

[DiGilio]

I have seen the E-tool attached to the buttpack (full metal jacket).

 

I have a few pics of guys in VN doing this. It wasnt just only done in the movie.

[Mashsig]

Hear are two early examples from my collection, both are set up by "Heavy Hints for Light Packs" booklet. Which if I am not mistaken dates late 50's early 60's. Often the shovel was not worn on the m56 gear, and carried on the rucksack, or not at all, same goes for the butt pack, and more canteens or m56 pouches were added.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There were references made to "short" vs "long" ammo cases.

 

The bottom photo in this post has the 1st Pattern M1956: "POUCH, SMALL ARMS, AMMUNITION, UNIVERSAL" (The "long" pouch) which was made for the M-14 magazines that fire the 7.62 NATO round. This pouch holds 2 M-14 mags like [=].

 

The top photo has the 2nd Pattern M1956: "CASE SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION" (The "short" pouch) which was also made for the M-14 magazine. The second patten case would hold 3 M-14 magazines.

 

These cases if marked as I indicated - were originally the same size. The apparent size difference was caused by 3 M-14 mags being carried in the 2nd Pattern M1956 case - front to back - like so: [|||] and the cotton shrank around the mags over time. This was possible because the plastic stiffeners were removed from the 2nd Pattern case.

 

The cotton canvas M1956 ammo case for the M-16 was marked: "CASE SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION, M16A1 RIFLE" and it is much shorter than than the "short" case shown.

 

There was even an M1967 nylon magazine case for the M-14.

[Mashsig]

The 1st Pattern M1956 "POUCH, SMALL ARMS, AMMUNITION, UNIVERSAL" had very stiff plastic plates to maintain the "look" of the ammo case. These were removed in the 2nd Pattern M1956 pouch.

[hotlead]

I have to disagree with a few things here......

 

On 9/1/2013 at 6:41 PM, Mashsig said:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There were references made to "short" vs "long" ammo cases.

 

The bottom photo in this post has the 1st Pattern M1956: "POUCH, SMALL ARMS, AMMUNITION, UNIVERSAL" (The "long" pouch) which was made for the M-14 magazines that fire the 7.62 NATO round. This pouch holds 2 M-14 mags like [=].

 

The top photo has the 2nd Pattern M1956: "CASE SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION" (The "short" pouch) which was also made for the M-14 magazine. The second patten case would hold 3 M-14 magazines.

 

These cases if marked as I indicated - were originally the same size. The apparent size difference was caused by 3 M-14 mags being carried in the 2nd Pattern M1956 case - front to back - like so: [|||] and the cotton shrank around the mags over time. This was possible because the plastic stiffeners were removed from the 2nd Pattern case.

 

The cotton canvas M1956 ammo case for the M-16 was marked: "CASE SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION, M16A1 RIFLE" and it is much shorter than than the "short" case shown.

 

There was even an M1967 nylon magazine case for the M-14.

Hotlead- Both websets that Justin posted have "long" M-1956 ammo cases, as you stated one is the first model, and one is the second model. None of these pouches were designed for the M-14, as far as I know, this web gear was standardized almost 3 years before anyone was issued an M-14. These started out as "universal" ammo pouches, ala British P-37, P-44, and P-58 web gear, and earlier ones are marked as such. They were designed to carry; 2 BAR mags, 7 M1 Rifle clips, 5 30rd M1 Carbine mags, 8 15rd M1 Carbine mags, 50rd M-1919 linked belt, and either a 48rd or 60rd .30M2 rifle bandoleer. I find it impossible to get three M-14 mags in an M-1956 pouch and get the flap secured. Even when I was able to cram them in, I had to stagger them and they'd be very difficult to get back out, I had to push them up from the bottom, and that was with clean dry hands and materials in the peaceful comfort of my house.

 

There was a purpose made M-1956 style case made for the 20rd M-16 mags, as well as a nylon pouch for 2 M-14 mags.

 

On 9/1/2013 at 6:47 PM, Mashsig said:

The 1st Pattern M1956 "POUCH, SMALL ARMS, AMMUNITION, UNIVERSAL" had very stiff plastic plates to maintain the "look" of the ammo case. These were removed in the 2nd Pattern M1956 pouch.

Hotlead- The plate in the front of the first model M-1956 pouch was to keep it's shape for easier handling of the contents, withdrawing fresh ammo or inserting expended magazines.

 

 

[Mashsig]

Hothead, I can see that I was not precise enough in my previous posts on this topic.

 

I agree that the Universal Ammo case was "designed" to replace many of the various ammo cases that were issued by the Army in 1955 for the M-1 Garand, M-1 and M-2 Carbines and BAR magazines.

 

The Army requirement was for a "simple" ammo case that would replace the BAR Belt, Cartridge Belt, M-1 and M-2 Carbine mag pouches and be able to hold 3 grenades. There is no mention of either the 30 cal or 7.62 machine gun belts. The Army also wanted this "simple" case to replace the pouch for the M-3 grease gun magazines - but this was left out of the Universal Ammo case requirement - because the case would have had to be the size of the British small arms case that you mentioned (which does except Sten gun 30 round magazines). If you had a Thompson, M-3 or MP-40 in Vietnam - you would have used the mag cases for either the Thompson or the M-3.

 

As you know the M-14 was being tested by the Army at this time. The Army wanted the M-14 (badly) and so the requirement for the Universal Ammo pouch did not have to be altered since it was "designed" to hold two (2) BAR Magazines. BTW - have you ever tried to put two BAR mags into a first pattern 1956 Ammo case?

 

Which brings me to the 2nd pattern 1956 Ammo case - a new unissued 2nd pattern case does hold 3 M-14 magazines and the case top will close so that the pull tab can be latched. A new unissued first pattern case does not. It does not take much moisture to shrink these cases and if they were improperly stored - a 2nd pattern case does not accept 3 M-14 magazines.

 

The requirement for the 1956 Ammo case was changed shortly after the Army adopted the M-14 rifle. By removing the plastic panels from the case - one more M-14 magazine could be inserted - for a total of three magazines.

 

By 1957 in Vietnam the BAR was no longer available to American "Advisers". The M-60 had replaced it.

 

I have the requirements for the Universal Ammo case in one of my old resource books or Army publications. I will try and hunt it down and post it.

[hotlead]

Hothead

I see what you did there. From your grammar, sentence structure, writing style, that there are no other spelling errors in your post, and that the "h" and "l" have two keys between them, I don't believe this to be a mistake.

 

You were precise enough in your previous post, my reading comprehension is just fine, I just disagree with what you said. I'd like to see those design requirements, if you don't mind posting them here. I'd hate to think that I've been living by, and spreading false information.

 

I have put two BAR mags in the first and second model ammo case, they fit just fine. A friend of mine carried a BAR as a Marine in Vietnam from 1965 to 1966, until he was promoted to squad leader and issued an M-14, a week later they turned in BARs for M-60s. His time, his unit, his area of operations, his war, it was different for everybody. He was issued, and allowed to carry, just one canteen. He said he carried his BAR mags in an M-1941 cargo pack with a trouser belt for a shoulder strap.

 

The second pattern ammo case in my pic with the M-14 mags is unissued, and it only holds two mags, just like the salty ones I have, and neither will hold three. Maybe all my pouches are out of spec, new and old?

[Mashsig]

Hothead, I do not know or see what you are talking about in the following sentence: "I see what you did there. From your grammar, sentence structure, writing style, that there are no other spelling errors in your post, and that the "h" and "l" have two keys between them, I don't believe this to be a mistake."

 

I do not see an "h" and "l" with two "keys" (spaces?) between them. If I made a typo that offended you - I will apologize. It was not my intention - at the moment I do not see it.

 

I did not join this forum to argue with members or to insult them. I joined this Forum to learn and to share.

 

I do not claim to be an expert in all things US Web gear. However I have been using, collecting and studying US Military Web gear - especially Vietnam field gear - for over 50 years.

 

And if my post came across as a lecture or a talk down - I will apologize to everyone because that was not my intention either.

 

I knew that you disagreed with my statements and I was disagreeing with some of yours - not all of yours - just some of them.

 

I will look for the 1956 web gear requirements that I have.