View Single Post
  #37  
Old 07-03-10, 03:02
Lang Lang is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 1,651
Default

I suppose I should keep my mouth shut but can't resist.

The 37 pattern webbing was probably the most uncomfortable, ill-fitting carrying system of any army of the 20th century. Those who have worn it will say without a shadow of a doubt, it could not be carried for any length of time done up like the pictures in the manual.

The buckles were terrible - difficult to adjust, they slipped and anything requiring very tight straps meant you had to work on a loop out of half the buckle. The canvas was too thick and inflexible and had numerous seams which cut into your back and shoulders.

Look at any picture and you will see fellows with them high, low, pouches close at front or almost on their hips all trying to achieve the impossible goal of comfort.

I am quite sure if you trolled through photos of any British Commonwealth soldiers of the 30's-60's period you will see pouches (the Australian Army called them nothing but "basic pouches" or maybe "bren magazine basic pouches") being worn in every conceivable position, front, back, strapped to packs or hung off belts like cowboy six-shooters, some people with only one others with four.

I don't know about the Canadian Army but I spent a bit of time in the Australian Army and NOBODY called equipment by it's "correct" name. In fact the correct stocktake or Q-Store names are a source of endless juvenile jokes in the military ie Cover, Rubber or equiv, 6 inch, protection, penis, soldier for the use of.

Some of these posts remind me of the "experts" who come up during airshows and tell you the 1942 Stearman did not get a brown throttle knob until 3 serial numbers after your aircraft. They know a real lot about aeroplanes but they know Nothing about flying.

Soldiers are people, they don't talk like in the movies with sergeants and officers ordering people around in authoritative tones using military abbreviations and jargon as their main form of speech. As someone noted most soldiers from privates to generals (excluding Ordnance Corps and Q-Store people) would have no idea what the official book name is for half the equipment they use.

Let's lighten up.

Lang
Reply With Quote