133.R Posted 25 December , 2010 Share Posted 25 December , 2010 Does anybody have an original groundsheet or images where i can see how it looks?? Are there a difference between ww 1 and ww2 groundsheet ? Regards Sven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sweeney Posted 2 January , 2011 Share Posted 2 January , 2011 Sven, Sorry I could not locate any better photos of my MKVII ground sheet, but this may help. This is my Groundsheet. It is dated 1918 and made by Victoria Rubber of Edinburgh Scotland. This is SS705 document issued in 1917 when the these things started to be issued. Joe Sweeney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centurion Posted 2 January , 2011 Share Posted 2 January , 2011 I've read a WW2 account that said that in heavy rain the water would drip off the brim of a Brodie , catch the edge of the collar and run down a sentry's neck and back. [Especially in the case of air sentries who had to watch the sky and therefore tilt their head back more]. I don't know if this design feature also applied to WW1 variants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
133.R Posted 2 January , 2011 Author Share Posted 2 January , 2011 Thank you Joe. Nice to see. How big is the chance to get an original ground sheet from ww1? Regards Sven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sweeney Posted 2 January , 2011 Share Posted 2 January , 2011 Sven, The MKVII is the most common (relatively). The earlier plan MKV and MKVI are nearly impossible to find. Joe Sweeney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovetown Posted 3 January , 2011 Share Posted 3 January , 2011 Herewith an anachronistic groundsheet that doesn't conform to the V or VI Patterns, but is obviously as right as rain. It is 58" long (4'10"); and 44 ½" inches wide (3'8"). It has six grommets, one in each corner and one either side in the centre. Earlier than MkV perhaps, or a commercial item pressed into service in the early days? Few more pix to follow. Any ideas as to what it is? Cheers, GT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovetown Posted 3 January , 2011 Share Posted 3 January , 2011 Images of a corner, and a centre eyelet... GT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovetown Posted 3 January , 2011 Share Posted 3 January , 2011 Thanks TM - the cover thought had never occurred to me; although it seems very 'groundsheety' in the flesh. Maker is Victoria Rubber, a la Joe's MK VII. Cheers, GT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 3 January , 2011 Share Posted 3 January , 2011 Herewith an anachronistic groundsheet that doesn't conform to the V or VI Patterns, but is obviously as right as rain. It is 58" long (4'10"); and 44 ½" inches wide (3'8"). It would have to a be a short and horizontally challenged soldier... possibly a Ration Assasin, Slop Jockey, Cabbage Mechanic etc etc How big should an original plain groundsheet be TM? I have a reproduction one from Steve Kiddle, and although the material he uses is very good one of the main complaints against them is they are smaller than the originals, but having never owned an original I have never been able to work out how much by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovetown Posted 3 January , 2011 Share Posted 3 January , 2011 The MkV was 6'6" by 3'. Cheers, GT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 3 January , 2011 Share Posted 3 January , 2011 The MkV was 6'6" by 3'. Cheers, GT. Thanks GT, just dug mine out, 6'2" by 2'3" - not too bad on the length, but you get a bit of a wet @rse when wearing it over the shoulders in the rain! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sweeney Posted 3 January , 2011 Share Posted 3 January , 2011 GT, I think that you may have a "Cover, saddle, Mk III". Not 100% for sure as the dimensions are not given in PV of stores but it had 6 eyelets--there are no less than 4 LoC numbers against this cover; 2129, 3078, 8857, and 11414. Described as a waterproof sheet. If any one has actual access to the LoC they can look-up the dimensions. I'm assuming the LoC actually followed something similiar to the Groundsheets. The first ones being white and the final Khaki. The Groundsheet MKIV was actualy white same number of grommets and dimensions as the MKV. Andrew--FYIO all the ground sheets should be 6'6"X3'. Joe Sweeney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 3 January , 2011 Share Posted 3 January , 2011 Andrew--FYIO all the ground sheets should be 6'6"X3'. Joe Sweeney Thanks again Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sweeney Posted 3 January , 2011 Share Posted 3 January , 2011 TM, Look forward to the LoC look-up to see how far off my guess is. Here are the Groundsheet LoC as kindly sent to me by an Australian forum member (Many thanks) In order MKV, MKVI and MKVII--- Joe Sweeney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
133.R Posted 4 January , 2011 Author Share Posted 4 January , 2011 Many thanks in all for the lot of informations and images. How must i pay ( if i get one ) for a real ground shett in usefull condition? Regards Sven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovetown Posted 4 January , 2011 Share Posted 4 January , 2011 Joe and GT, I think you might have nailed that one. One sold on ebay about 18 months ago I seem to remember. I filed the photos from the listing somewhere. I'll have a look. I also have the LoC for the item, unless someone beats me to it! TM Great photos and info on this thread. It's a bit of a neglected subject. Well done Sven for kicking it off! Thanks Joe - nice to know if so. TM - LoC would be greatly appreciated, as I only hold Skennerton's abridged editions. Cheers, GT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Henschke Posted 6 January , 2011 Share Posted 6 January , 2011 To answer specifically the original question from Sven regarding differences: Sheets, Ground, Mk VIII were introduced in 1930. The weight was reduced from 3 ½-lb. to 3-lb., the proofing was “lighter in weight and purer” and the number of eyelets was reduced from 36 (as in the Sheet, Ground, Mk. VII) to 17. Another way to identify the Mk VIII groundsheet is that the hem was 1 inch instead of 2 inches. Although, I have seen Great War dated groundsheets with a narrower hem. At the same time, Sheets, Ground, Mk. VII were declared obsolescent. A number of unmarked groundsheets that had 17 eyelets, weighed 3 lb and had a 1 inch hem were passed off as Great War vintage on ebay from a seller in the UK last year - I think he stated they were found in a barn in France. Chris Henschke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovetown Posted 6 January , 2011 Share Posted 6 January , 2011 To answer specifically the original question from Sven regarding differences: Sheets, Ground, Mk VIII were introduced in 1930. The weight was reduced from 3 ½-lb. to 3-lb., the proofing was “lighter in weight and purer” and the number of eyelets was reduced from 36 (as in the Sheet, Ground, Mk. VII) to 17. Another way to identify the Mk VIII groundsheet is that the hem was 1 inch instead of 2 inches. Although, I have seen Great War dated groundsheets with a narrower hem. At the same time, Sheets, Ground, Mk. VII were declared obsolescent. A number of unmarked groundsheets that had 17 eyelets, weighed 3 lb and had a 1 inch hem were passed off as Great War vintage on ebay from a seller in the UK last year - I think he stated they were found in a barn in France. Chris Henschke Sorry Chris - deeply confused by this. According to Joe's diagram and the LoC above, the Sheet, Ground, MK VII had 17 eyelets; not 36 - so there was no reduction between it and the MKVIII. I also have a note from Joe somewhere saying that the MKVII was rendered obsolete in the "early 1920s" but reintroduced within a year.... Similarly appreciate the hem thing, but I have a Great War (or early 20s) example with a 1" hem (actually 1 1/8"), and a six figure service number - and always thought a better indicator was the presence of mitred corners on the WW1 types. Cheers, GT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Henschke Posted 6 January , 2011 Share Posted 6 January , 2011 I think the wording/description from 1930 may incorrectly have used the 36 eyelet quote from the Mark VI description. When the Mark VI, VII and VIII descriptions regarding eyelets are compared you can see; LOC 19147, dated 6 June 1915 for the Mark VI states It differs from the Mark V. ground sheet (§ 16266) in having 18 instead of 36 brass eyelets. For the introduction of the Mark VII in 1917 it states The number of brass eyelets has been reduced from 18 to 17. Here is the 1930 description in full: A 5012 SHEETS, GROUND, MK. VIII 6-ft. 6-in. x 3-ft., with 17 eyelets ; also waterproof cape 1. Introduction. SHEETS, GROUND, MK. VII 6-ft. 6-in. x 3-ft., with 36 eyelets ; also waterproof cape 2. Obsolescent. 1. A pattern of the above-mentioned Sheet, ground has been sealed to govern future manufacture. It differs from Sheets, ground, Mk. VII (§ 19148) as follows :- The weight is reduced from 3 ½-lb. to 3-lb., the proofing is lighter in weight and purer, and the hem is 1-in. instead of 2-in. 2. In consequence of 1 above, Sheets, ground, Mk. VII (§ 19148) are hereby declared obsolescent. Existing stocks will be used up. Amendment to V.A.O.S. Page 12 Insert SHEETS, GROUND, MK. VIII … … … … each A 5012 6-ft. 6-in. x 3-ft., with 17 eyelets ; also waterproof cape Underline SHEETS, GROUND, MK. VII and detail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sweeney Posted 6 January , 2011 Share Posted 6 January , 2011 GT, The item that was declared obsolete then re sealed in the eraly 20's was the Mackintosh Cape, not the groundsheets. joe sweeney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grovetown Posted 6 January , 2011 Share Posted 6 January , 2011 GT, The item that was declared obsolete then re sealed in the eraly 20's was the Mackintosh Cape, not the groundsheets. joe sweeney Thanks - my bad. GT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief_Chum Posted 8 January , 2011 Share Posted 8 January , 2011 "...One thing I did just notice that was in the dim recesses of my mind, the 1917 dated Mk VII has been converted from a Mk VI which was presumably on the stocks. The triangular front panel is in completely different material and assembled with different thread. I had forgotten that and did not notice it when I was photographing it earlier on. TM" According to 'Notes on Salvage Work' issued by the QMG Branch, GHQ, in January 1918, the "old pattern ground sheets are used for manufacture of the new pattern cape ground sheets." Cheers, Taff . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief_Chum Posted 8 January , 2011 Share Posted 8 January , 2011 My pleasure TM. The Salvage Notes are fascinating. When I get round to it I will scan the whole thing and start a thread of its own. The amount of kit which was re-used was phenominal. For instance, Mess Tins: "...no matter how they look, nearly all are repairable and can be made fit for reissue." It goes on to say, "At one base Depot 2,600 mess tins per day are being dealt with at a cost of 3 1/4d each, which is all the expenditure necessary to render fit for reissue an article costing about 2s 4d when new." Cheers, Taff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog watch Posted 27 January , 2011 Share Posted 27 January , 2011 Hello out there i'm not that often on the forum, just lack of time. I'm working to determine abouth the age and tipe of ground sheet/poncho I have. It's a khaki collar(lithel pale by age), 4 buttons ad front + 1 in the collar, the are greenish/khaki same soort of plastic/rubber material. There are 17 small hols(no metal rings in them). Maker marker stamp is faded out. Well hope the photos are clear? Cheers and hope that m'n English is not to bad? Hans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog watch Posted 27 January , 2011 Share Posted 27 January , 2011 Sorry, better pictures... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now