|
|
Post by Étienne on Jun 14, 2015 19:14:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by lew on Jun 14, 2015 19:45:56 GMT -5
I had one of those aluminum Mle. 52 canteen and cup knockoffs. The quality was good and the pouch looked a lot better than that trash. The prominent extrusion rings around the neck and the lack of a French (or any, I believe) maker's mark on the bottom were the only giveaways.
I wonder what the unit price is if one can find this stuff individually. Mle. 52 canteens and mess kits are pretty easy to find.
Also, the war-time Mle. 52 canteen covers had only one set of snaps and the M1910 wire hanger. Both the second set of snaps and the belt loop were post-war additions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Étienne on Jun 15, 2015 10:07:28 GMT -5
Looks like the complete canteen/cup/pouch set is around $4 to $5 U.S., and I'm presuming that's sans shipping. There is however, a qty 3000 minimum order!
|
|
|
|
Post by lew on Jun 15, 2015 13:39:34 GMT -5
NOS originals can still be had for reasonable prices on eBay.fr, so I see little reason to muck with a copy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Étienne on Jun 15, 2015 22:16:19 GMT -5
Exactly...maybe like 20 years into the future when even all the 1980s nylon US field gear is collectable and overpriced
|
|
|
|
Post by lew on Jun 16, 2015 8:24:58 GMT -5
That's what I thought when I was getting rid of all my ALICE equipment: "this shyte'll be worth something someday, but I'm not gonna wait. Right now, it's occupying space and tickin' me off."
|
|
|
|
Post by Étienne on Jun 16, 2015 17:15:54 GMT -5
Oh, I often think about all the crap that wasn't worth a thing about 15-20 years ago that now has become harder to find and worth $. Especially now that I've been selling stuff on eBay again. Brit stuff was generally worthless back then unless it was pre or very early war and in mint condition, but now it's starting to get pricey. On the flip side, however, things like US WWII canteens and mess kits can actually be bought on eBay for the same price or even less than they could be bought 20 years ago.
There are several things I wish I had stashed in quantity!
|
|
|
|
Post by lew on Jun 16, 2015 19:41:53 GMT -5
The surplus/repro market is a strange beast.
What's yer eBay handle? PM meif you don't want it out here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kenneth on Jun 26, 2015 5:27:18 GMT -5
There are a lot of funny things with regard to military equipment but you all probably know that already.
Sometimes there are inferior copies of things being sold when the "original" or "genuine issue" stuff is actually still being issued. When I visited the Army Museum (not the Imperial War Museum) in London a few years ago, they had rectangular British mess tins for sale. But they weren't as thick as the real thing but were otherwise perfectly fine for what they were, that is, as a mess tin. Mostly, though, second rate imitations are usually only available at the same time the issue items are actually still in use. I think there have been such things for a long time, as far back as the 1950s. It was available at your local Army-Navy store, which is apparently an obsolete business model, along with five and dime stores and general stores. Actual surplus stores have always been relatively rare and have tended to be located near military bases.
I wonder how much "custom" or private purchase uniforms and equipment was both available and actually used, here of course limiting the question to the French army in the 1940s and 1950s. In a way, most uniforms used by officers and to an extent, warrant officers, fits that definition but I'm referring to the other ranks. I used to think that such stuff was a relatively recent phenomenon but I discovered that sometimes certain pieces of uniform or equipment were frequently private purchase. When I was in the service, some officers apparently had a source for better quality baseball caps than the issue item. Another item was the Corcoran jump boot. In like fashion, the canvas and rubber boots popular with French soldiers overseas seem to have often been privately purchased.
I was surprised to discover that private purchase leggings were available in the 1920s and 1930s in the US Army and that non-regulation leggings, anklets and puttees were used by the French, though I imagine such things were scarce after the war, as well as being out of fashion.
|
|
|
|
Post by hvd5677 on Jun 26, 2015 8:21:08 GMT -5
There are a lot of funny things with regard to military equipment but you all probably know that already. When I visited the Army Museum (not the Imperial War Museum) in London a few years ago, they had rectangular British mess tins for sale. The Army Museum is really good. It was a favorite stop of mine when I visited London. It was closed for an extended period of time for renovation. Do you know if it has reopened ? |
|
|
|
Post by lew on Jun 26, 2015 9:01:21 GMT -5
I wonder how much "custom" or private purchase uniforms and equipment was both available and actually used, here of course limiting the question to the French army in the 1940s and 1950s. In a way, most uniforms used by officers and to an extent, warrant officers, fits that definition but I'm referring to the other ranks. I used to think that such stuff was a relatively recent phenomenon but I discovered that sometimes certain pieces of uniform or equipment were frequently private purchase. When I was in the service, some officers apparently had a source for better quality baseball caps than the issue item. Another item was the Corcoran jump boot. In like fashion, the canvas and rubber boots popular with French soldiers overseas seem to have often been privately purchased. Issue gear could be the greatest thing ever and someone will still want something "better" (relative to their eyes). Custom gear makers have been hanging around armies since the Roman times. Followers' camps sprang up outside of Roman forts before the forts themselves were even completed. If you really want to go for a ride, start researching and collecting locally-sourced and made Vietnam War clothing. In addition to their own textile traditions, the Vietnamese readily adapted to the customization drive of many French soldiers. Add to that the fact that Indochina was on the other side of the Earth from the Métropole both geographically and politically, this local industry helped to substantially augment the usually inadequate French logistics system. Even in well-supplied and well-networked Algeria, tailors, cobblers, and custom gear makers did a healthy trade with the uniformed services. Most soldier's are young and view their income as disposable to a great extent, so it's not hard to have that as a factor as well. No period in time compares to the explosion of custom and off-the-shelf alternatives to issued gear a soldier has available today, however. While just a lowly civilian, I have a bunch of military-style gear- nylon gear, body armor, packs, clothing, etc...- and only a couple pieces are military issue in their original as-issued state. The options are mind-boggling. |
|
|
|
Post by Étienne on Jul 3, 2015 17:03:53 GMT -5
I wonder if the mess tins sold at the museum were Danish versions? They are very similar, and the Danes actually used Brit ones for quite some time.
Heck, I have some private purchase leggings from the SpanAm War period! I myself utilized some private purchase items while I was in the US Army, and even wore older previously issued items (mainly M-1956) of kit on my webbing (I even used half of a Pattern 58 Iraqi kidney pouch!) until I went to a unit that required us to all be standardized in everything we had, even in its placement on one's self (it was the unit we were attached to's fault, as it was their TOE or SOP or whatever the dang acronym was).
Not to always attempt to change the subject to British Pattern 44 gear, but I hear Silverman's was king of "gucci" gear in the 1980s Perhaps they started it all more recently?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kenneth on Jul 3, 2015 18:11:49 GMT -5
I didn't buy one of the mess tins since I already had two. They seemed thinner than the ones I had.
I also visited Silverman's when we were in London. Really a small shop but they'd run and find anything you wanted if they had it. There's another place in Aldershot, the name of which I have forgotten, but I bought a lot of stuff from them about 30 years ago. They even sent me a typed size conversion chart when I asked for it. I've just about exhausted my interest in British stuff, in spite of how easy it is to find things that actually fit. DPM stuff is quite reasonable these days. Oh, and I actually talked to Mr. Silverman for a while.
|
|
|
|
Post by craigtx on Jul 4, 2015 9:59:30 GMT -5
Kenneth, would you be willing to share the size conversion chart? I've been lookin' for a good one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kenneth on Jul 4, 2015 12:18:45 GMT -5
I would if I still had it. But that was 30 years ago at least. And they use different sizing now anyway. The wartime clothing regulations, of which I have some changes to, has a fairly good description of the sizes for different garments on issue at the time. Where it is right now, though, I haven't a clue. It probably won't turn up until we move.
A few of the on-line and eBay vendors do list sizes properly, unlike Sportsman's Guide, which only divides sizes into small, medium and large, and sometimes the American sizes XL and XXL. In all honestly, however, I'm not the same size I was when I got out of the army in 1968. My fatigues were too short then, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by craigtx on Jul 5, 2015 12:24:08 GMT -5
What?? The Army issuing uniforms that don't fit?? Shocking!!
I feel your pain though. Finding uniforms etc. that'll fit the tall are difficult at best.
|
|
|
|
Post by Étienne on Jul 5, 2015 18:44:05 GMT -5
No kidding! Of the several bases I was refitted at, Ft. Benning was the absolute worst. Of course, one time while overseas I had to get desert uniforms and gear from a USAF base and of course they fit perfect and were the latest style!
|
|
|
|
Post by Kenneth on Jul 6, 2015 6:01:24 GMT -5
"The latest style." That's the difference between real life and reenacting. When you are actually in the service, at least on active duty, you tend to be more interested in having the latest stuff than in anything else. There are exceptions, of course. For instance, I never saw a so-called Ridgeway cap while I was in the service, yet it had been replace by the baseball cap barely two years before I went in. And I didn't care for the baseball cap (and try to find either one today!). The beret was decades into the future. Naturally, my son didn't like the beret, either.
There is an illustration in one of Martin Windrow's books on the Foreign Legion of a man in Algeria wearing the olive green fatigue suit, with the quilted liner and shirt underneath. The sleeve on his jacket stops about four inches from the wrist and both of mine (I have two) are almost that short. So his illustrations are spot on as regards fit.
I saw a camouflage French jump jacket (old style) for sale on eBay that had been heavily modified with both the hem shortened to the middle of the lower pockets and one of the upper pockets also shortened. It is a surprising thing to see done but I suppose it met with someone's idea of a current fad. The seller "SWAT shop," who has several French items, also has some heavily modified uniform items, usually something to do with the pockets. Although tailoring fatigues for fit was common, I don't recall any real alterations, like shoulder straps or extra pockets. I remember seeing a poncho that had had a issue blanket sewn inside, which I thought was a good idea, mostly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Étienne on Jul 6, 2015 11:48:32 GMT -5
Yeah, most modern uniforms (particularly during wartime) have become disposable it seems, and American field uniforms have always been a bit baggier than other countries' perhaps. With BDUs, by the time they faded to an unnacceptable level (according to the regs), they were scrap anyway. About the only mods we ever did was some velcro here or there or some added pockets for our field uniforms (but not for our garrison uniforms, as we wouldn't have gotten away with it for long). It just didn't seem worth it to take time or pay money to have a uniform altered (excepting the Class A uniform, of course!). Ugh...don't even get me started on berets...
After having "re-allocation skills" passed down to me by some Vietnam SF vets, it almost became an obsession of mine to find the newest and coolest things. I always loved to act towards other soldiers like "What? Oh, you weren't issued one of these?" or "Ohhh...yeah, your unit probably hasn't gotten any of these yet" and let them think I was so cool that I had been issued something so early. Before going over to the desert to play one time, I was obsessed with obtaining some of the tan equipment suspenders, as I had read accounts of Brits in WWII wearing the khaki suspenders over dark uniforms and it making a perfect target square for the Germans to shoot into. Of course, we had it opposite, with desert tan/camo uniforms and green web gear. Anyway, I ended up trading for a pair of the tan suspenders as only the USAF had them -- I also obtained a lightweight ripstop three-color USAF uniform, as we were still being issued the heavyweight chocolate chips at the time.
Anyway, I could go on and on! I actually wish now that I had grabbed more of some of the gear I found "just sitting there" in various supply rooms, as I've since discovered that some of it was/is rather rare experimental stuff. Oh well!
I always wonder if the short sleeves "thing" was a common European contractor mistake and/or it was from shrinkage. Awhile back I read the book about Banana Republic's beginnings, and they started out by selling some Spanish paratrooper shirts that had 3/4 length sleeves. I think they said that they made up some story about Franco only letting short-armed men become paras so they wouldn't be able to throw a coup as easy or something!
|
|
|
|
Post by Kenneth on Jul 6, 2015 13:24:08 GMT -5
Obsessions do enter into it, I suppose. And I loved Banana Republic's early days when it was basically a high-class surplus store, which didn't last long. There's only so much surplus stuff anyway.
At long last, I believe just about every country (but not every armed force--US Marines, for instance) now have berets in their paquetage. And they all wear them a little differently, some scarcely recognizable as a beret. Some are very handsome, others less so. I believe only the French mountain troops wear them in their original form and judging from both videos and in-person images of French mountain troops, they appear to have a lot of latitude in how they wear their own beret and that goes back a long ways.
|
|
|
|
Post by lew on Jul 6, 2015 19:18:26 GMT -5
The Spanish have had some strange uniform ideas, specifically the getup of the Spanish Foreign Legion. Not sure what the deal was with short sleeves.
"Re-allocation"? Five finger discount, scrounging, foraging, sticky fingers- whatever ya call it, it's a great skill to have.
While we're on the topic of berets, when did US forces start wearing them as they currently do- plastered to the side of the head? I always thought the French three-piece and "baggy" one-piece berets worn during Indo/Algérie looked the best.
|
|
|
|
Post by craigtx on Jul 6, 2015 21:59:12 GMT -5
Windrow mentions in the Osprey on Foreign Legion Paras that the style became more tailored, and shortening the pockets/hem on the veste. Who knows what brought that on.
I've always preferred the combat togs (BDUs, battledress, fatigues, whatever you want to call them...) to be of a looser fit, or baggy. Plenty of room for stretching, squatting, etc....
I agree with Steve the Indo/Algerie berets looked the best. The current US fashion of wearin' the beret is just plain silly, IMO.
Speaking of the three piece berets, it looks like Doursoux has stopped carryin' the three piece berets.
|
|
|
|
Post by lew on Jul 7, 2015 7:56:21 GMT -5
Well crap, I needed one more béret rouge de trois parties. The closely-tailored approach favored by French paras in the from the late '60's onward was supposed to be about displaying their elite status (maybe some other bits if they went too far  ). I'm not sure exactly how it conveys that image, as I just think it ups the chance of a blow out and reduces mobility slightly. I think someone just preferred it that way and a bunch of others hopped on the wagon. I prefer a baggy, relaxed fit as well. |
|
|
|
Post by Étienne on Jul 7, 2015 15:57:34 GMT -5
I think the US military standardized regs on wearing the beret in the 1970s when the beret was first issued to other than SF (and Ranger?) units. I still remember someone telling me that berets were cold in the winter and hot in the summer...boy, they sure weren't kidding! I liked it better than the c*nt cap when in Class A's though.
|
|
). I'm not sure exactly how it conveys that image, as I just think it ups the chance of a blow out and reduces mobility slightly. I think someone just preferred it that way and a bunch of others hopped on the wagon. I prefer a baggy, relaxed fit as well.