Pattern 14 Equipment

[RMAMarshall]

Andrew,

The collection is at home; I am at university so photo's will have to wait I'm afraid.

Have tried to describe the cradles as best I can, but it does seem rather complicated without diagrams. I have examples of all of them, will send some pics after finals.

Water bottle variations:

1st type: Similar to the cradle you mention above for pre-1914 P08, but has the plain tabs of the earlies equipment and long strap at the rear for the loop / buckle of the small pack. Also the female part of a press-stud on one the rear vertical strap to engage with a male part on the front of the earfliest small pack, idea being that the waterbottle was anchored top and bottom: less bumping). This type was discontinued in 1909 I think (my LOCs are at home), and the press stud idea was done away with for good.

2nd type: again for wear on the small pack with the long strap at the rear, but the retaining strap at the top of the cradle to keep the bottle in place was replaced by a thin strap of webbing sewn in a V shape, with the securing press-stud at the apex; the neck of the bottle sits between the arms of the V.

3rd type: most commonly produced before the start of hostilities - resembles the standard war pattern but the strap at the back is longer to allow attachment to the small pack, is not secured to the horizontal strap.

4th type: not to be worn on small pack: the extra length of strap done away with and sewn to horizontal strap at top. (produced in 1914 for some months before the outbreak of war, continued to be the issue pattern for the remainder).

5th type: retaining strap altered to fasten over the top of the bottle; may have been a wartime measure to stop accidental snagging, but the vast majority of examples were produced / converted after the war.

The above necessitate 3 different types of small pack of course (not to mention the early patterns converted from other equipments), but I am pretty sure no other item of P08 (excepting the ammo pouches) went through so many changes.

Richard.

[RMAMarshall]

Carl,

Lovely bits of equipment; in 10 years of collecting I have never seen an actual pair and the only picture of them I knew about is the photo above. Is there an LOC reference for their introduction? If so I have never come across it. (speaking of which, does anyone know where I might get hold of a complete LOC set? I have the recently re-printed abridged versions, but would rather like the whole run to 1919).

Anyone have any more bits of unusual P14? Would love to see some pictures of the 20 round SMLE magazine pouches, though do not know if they can be classed as P14 or not - have never seen the back of one.

Richard

[picardowoods]

Richard

I'm not sure of an LoC for their introduction, I'll have a look, they dont appear in either the 1914 or 15 specifications for the P'14 Equipment, though they could be later.

The 20rnd SMLE mag carrier certainly isn't part of the set. I presume that the one you have seen is pictured in Skennerton's 'Lee Enfield Story' for some bizzar reason Ian thought that was mine! I have found one since at Beltring, pretending to be a bike pouch, luckily it was priced accordingly. I will dig a pic out for you.

I do have one of the J Pattern frogs on a British issued bayonet.

Carl

[Andrew Upton]

Richard:

I only understood about half of that - I'll wait until you post pictures, then I'll probably understand it better.

I recently finished putting together my P-08 set for the pistol rig - unfortunately, I had to use reproduction itmes for several of the components to finish it.

[picardowoods]

Which bits are you lacking?

Carl

[Andrew Upton]

Carl:

Seeing as I use the set for reenacting, use of reproduction pieces is probably best - but the bits that I lack originals of are the correct pattern of belt (with the different tabs on the back, and smaller buckles inside - the one I have on my set was converted to the correct specification from a 1916 dated belt that was made with none of the tabs what-so-ever), brace adaptors (purely repro on my set) and a pair of cross-straps. The belt and braces are very rare, and would be prohibitively costly to buy (unless I get lucky, fingers crossed).

All the rest (holster, pouch, water-bottle cradle, small pack) is original.

[RMAMarshall]

Andrew,

Do remember that in some circumstances troops equiped with brace-attachments did wear entrenching tools; the haft was carried in the bayonet frog. While the attachments are hard to find (mine came from Australia: a friend found three pairs at three different car boot sales!), I found my belt on ebay for £22 - study poor quality photo's very closely! What else do you wear by way of equipment at re-enactments - any lewis gun webbing or tool pouches on the belt?

Richard

[picardowoods]

You could do with out the brace attachments if you did it this way. If you don't mind blancoed braces I know a dealer that has them still (I think)

Carl

[Andrew Upton]

Andrew,

Do remember that in some circumstances troops equiped with brace-attachments did wear entrenching tools; the haft was carried in the bayonet frog. While the attachments are hard to find (mine came from Australia: a friend found three pairs at three different car boot sales!), I found my belt on ebay for £22 - study poor quality photo's very closely! What else do you wear by way of equipment at re-enactments - any lewis gun webbing or tool pouches on the belt?

Richard

Ahh, I knew I'd forgotten something - I do have an entrenching tool on my pistol rig, a reproduction head holder and an original frog without the rear tab where I keep the handle.

You're friend is very lucky indeed, as you are also! Original matched pairs of the braces easily sell for £3-400+ due to their rarity, and the last belt I saw made a couple of hundred pounds. However, you do have to be aware that there are a number of reproductions available for both belt and braces - my reenactment group leader marks the braces he makes ME Co 1916, but makes them deliberately slightly "wrong", so that someone who knows what to look for can tell them apart, and keeps a similar "error" with any conversions of original belts, like mine.

I currently posess two sets of webbing - one set up as standard infantry to use with the Lee-Enfield, the other as pistol rig to use with my Webley MkVI. When I get the time and money, I hope to get a P-08 Lewis set together (and a P-14 pistol and infantry set, although I'll use reproductions for those). I'm currently looking for a WW1 dated holder for the folding wire cutters which I can add to my pistol set, but I have no other tool pouches on my webbing at the moment.

You could do with out the brace attachments if you did it this way. If you don't mind blancoed braces I know a dealer that has them still (I think)

Carl

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The problem if you do it that way is you don't have the benefit of the smaller 1 inch straps coming off the braces to help spread the weight of the small pack when it's worn on the back (remembering I actually wear the set!).

As to the braces, seeing as the converted belt is unblancoed, the brace adaptors (new) are unblancoed, the frog was blancoed but has faded back to khaki, the e-tool head holder is unblancoed (new) and the cross-straps are unblancoed (new again), it all looks like my set is brand new, as issued (as it would have appeared), whic is in direct contrast to my original infantry set (more colours of green than you can count on one hand ), so I'll stick with repro on the braces.

[Grovetown]

Hi Carl

Welcome to the forum - seems like you have some interesting stuff, and I look forward to your contributions.

Andrew

However, you do have to be aware that there are a number of reproductions available for both belt and braces - my reenactment group leader marks the braces he makes ME Co 1916, but makes them deliberately slightly "wrong", so that someone who knows what to look for can tell them apart, and keeps a similar "error" with any conversions of original belts, like mine.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It would be great if you could let us all know how to tell Richard's brace attachments/ belts from the real things. Thanks in anticipation.

Best wishes,

Grovetown.

[picardowoods]

Hi Grovetown

Thanks for the welcome, When I said a dealer I know had some braces, I meant just the braces not the brace attachments! I think I have only seen a couple of prs in 25 years of collecting, in fact finding pics is a lot easier. As for telling the fakes, hmm look at the brass does it look old? was it stamped out rather than cast? Does it look anything like the Chappel illustration (Wessex Publication I think)? Because thats wrong, its closer to the Canadian P'37 style IE no swinging middle leg! Lastly do you trust the source?

I was aware of the attachments being copied but I hadn't heard of the belts being done. One last point to spotting copies etc, look at the thread compare with a known item if possible for comparison.

I will post a pic soon of my pair

RMA here is the pic of the rear of the 20rnd LE pouch you mentioned - mag is a bonus, just wish the latter was mine!

Carl

[john in minnesota]

Just a chance to show off my rig...

Both pieces came from ebay 2-3 years ago

[Grovetown]

Does it look anything like the Chappel illustration (Wessex Publication I think)? Because thats wrong, its closer to the Canadian P'37 style IE no swinging middle leg! Lastly do you trust the source?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Carl

Hope I can spot a wrong 'un, but the subject pops up here and again about when does repro veer into fake? Richard laudably differentiates his pieces - and yet it would be nice to know how.

Chappel: reasonable books, but with errors as you suggest. That one has got a 14 ptn howler in it.

JTP

Nice set indeed. Here's a pic of my left side assembled.

Best wishes,

Grovetown.

[picardowoods]

John - Thats a nice pair! of brace attachments, from memory there in better shape than my set.

As for the difference if any, between repro and fake it is purely motive in my opinion, if something is made with repro stamed on it and is for running around a muddy field (Please no offence to reinactors - I used to be one!) then fine. If its manufacturer is purely to fleece someone, then thats a fake IMO.

I assume that's the concensous?

Grovetown - Which of his books has the error? I must admit while on the subject of his artwork I was always amazed at how ugly some of his 'creations' were till I found a postcard of one of his models!

Here's a poser for you all;

Many moons ago I visited the RM museum at Eastney, where I was dismayed to see a dummy set up with P'08 but with the pouches worn the wrong way round! It stuck in my mind for years and I put it down to museum imagination until I found a pic of them actually worn in this fashion - Any ideas?

Carl

[Grovetown]

Which has the error?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Carl

Personal Equipment p.14. Check out earlier posts from myself and Wainfleet on the two closure pouches....

It also looks like he's done the swing arm, just visible, again on P. 16 of Service Dress.

In one of the Ospreys, there's a slip on one of the patch schemes. Ironically, a faker copied it and it came to light when a friend contacted the regimental museum...Will look it up later.

Shouldn't complain too much: for years he was the only half-decent reference available, short of camping in the NA for months on end.

Regards,

Grovetown.

[RMAMarshall]

Carl,

Thanks for the pic of the magazine pouch; have you ever seen a photo' of one actually in use? I have seen a couple in France in old collections which suggests that they did make their way to the front at some point. I have also seen a few pairs of ammo pouches worn the wrong way around (see the begining of Blackadder!). Perhaps it was simply a mistake on the part of the men in the photo? While we might have the benefit of ten years experience in putting this stuff together and pulling it apart again, any troops that salvaged P08 from the battlefield or who had just handed in their P14 wouldn't have had a clue (nor would most of their officers until told).

John,

Nice rig! My special belt has been bleached at some point but the braces are unblancoed (nicely marked H.G.R. Ltd 1918 on the 2" web strap below the triangular brass fitting), looks a bit daft but beggars can't be choosers.

Now, has anyone ever seen the cross-strap with extra length of 2" web sewn on to be buckled around the belt (leaves a length hanging down for the sidepack etc.)? I have only ever seen one, officially made up (not a botched job by a batman), while I have come across perhaps 4 pairs of brace attachments for sale over the years. Sadly did not make its way home with me.

[picardowoods]

Hi Andrew

Sorry there I missed your name from the your earlier welcome. I'm not sure where all my wessex pubs are, I can only find the one for the post 1945, what was the jist of the error? I will hunt down the earlier posts.

As you say he filled a gap but thankfully there are a lot more books out there now with more on the way although were still waiting for the 'Kipling & King' of definitve texts. Saying that even K&K isn't complete!

As for the extra loops sewn onto P'08 braces, are you sure they weren't converted stretcher straps?

I have never seen a pic of them being worn or any reference to the use of the 20rnd mag - but if the pouches are out there and used then so are the mags! Do you know of any mags?

I agree its possible that the average squadie would need to be instructed in assembling P'08, but the pic I have is an RM NCO taking an inspection! the landing party are correct. It would be interesting to see how they cope with the large pack? More seriously the thought had crossed my mind that with the two 1" diagonally heading for the groin, it was possible that some one had come up with an improvised piece of body armour that attached to the straps? just a thought!

But we have moved from P'14 to P'08 with ease so I'm starting a new thread for the next bit, hope to see you there.

Carl

[Andrew Upton]

Grovetown:

It would be great if you could let us all know how to tell Richard's brace attachments/ belts from the real things. Thanks in anticipation.

Best wishes,

Grovetown.

See http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...pic=20125&st=20 for pics of the brace attachments, I haven't got a pic of the belt yet.

The trick to tell the brace adaptors is to look at the metal piece that is in the middle of the brace (between the triangular top one and the lower one that goes over the belt itself) - on originals (as on the pic by John in Minnesota), this is a very narrow gap, just big enough to get the strap through - Richard makes this much wider.

As to the belts, there is essentially one thing to look at - the webbing holding the two inch buckles on the back. Original pistol belts differ from the normal belt in that there is only enough webbing around the buckle to hold it to the belt - no tabs!

If a normal, original belt with the tabs is used, the tabs either have to be cut down, or removed and replaced with the correct arrangement. Or, like me, you can use a belt made with no buckles whatsoever. Richard doesn't replicate the rivets holding the tabs in this case - he just stitches them in place. Hence, if you see a belt with obviously cut down tabs, missing rivets or replaced/altered stitching around the rear buckles, think twice if it's being sold as original.

Richard also stamps them ME Co 1916 on the webbing between the lower and middle metal pieces - I don't know if this is another "tell", and ME Co should be stamped on the strap like Johns.

Hope I can spot a wrong 'un, but the subject pops up here and again about when does repro veer into fake? Richard laudably differentiates his pieces - and yet it would be nice to know how.

Repro veers into fake when someone knowingly sells a repro as original - Richard's are clearly not fakes, as no faker in their right mind would deliberately make a fairly obvious error in their work. The logic in putting a genuine looking marking on brace adaptors is that if the public spots something obviously marked "repro", they will inevitably comment on how inauthentic this is - putting in small tells that only the most avid collector would think to detract from the display gets around this issue.

RMAMarshall and Picardowoods:

Now, has anyone ever seen the cross-strap with extra length of 2" web sewn on to be buckled around the belt (leaves a length hanging down for the sidepack etc.)? I have only ever seen one, officially made up (not a botched job by a batman), while I have come across perhaps 4 pairs of brace attachments for sale over the years. Sadly did not make its way home with me.

As for the extra loops sewn onto P'08 braces, are you sure they weren't converted stretcher straps?

The extra web sounds reasonable to me - as is, my set up for pistol rig uses up all the available straps on water bottle cradle and entrenching tool when wearing the small pack on the back, as the whole point of the webbing was to recognize the fact that the pistol men needed to have the speed and flexibility to move around quickly, and not be encumbered with extra equipment, but I can easily see the problem of a pistol man picking up his large pack to march, and wondering where he was going to put his small pack when he'd swapped its place with the large pack.

[grantsmil]

Carl

Personal Equipment p.14. Check out earlier posts from myself and Wainfleet on the two closure pouches....

Shouldn't complain too much: for years he was the only half-decent reference available, short of camping in the NA for months on end.

Grovetown.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Grovetown,

I am not sure what you mean regarding Chappell's mistake on page 14 of "The British Soldier in the 20th Century 7 - Personal Equipment 1903-1937" The lower photograph on the page is of two 1941 dated Pattern '14 pouches (Canadian made I think), which are described as "... the front and rear of the latter 1914 pattern pouches." While not specifically mentioning that the pouches were of a WW2 vintage, I would think that the description was fair. If I have misunderstood your posting I am sorry.

[Joe Sweeney]

Grovetown,

I am not sure what you mean regarding Chappell's mistake on page 14 of "The British Soldier in the 20th Century 7 - Personal Equipment 1903-1937"  The lower photograph on the page is of two 1941 dated Pattern '14 pouches (Canadian made I think), which are described as "... the front and rear of the latter 1914 pattern pouches."  While not specifically mentioning that the pouches were of a WW2 vintage, I would think that the description was fair.  If I have misunderstood your posting I am sorry.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Grant,

How do you know that they are 1941 dated pouches? Did I miss a post or can you make out a date on the pouches? My copies I cannot make out a date.

Joe Sweeney

[Grovetown]

Hi Andrew

Thanks for that - appreciated, and now apparent when comparing the two.

Hi Grant

I can see what you mean, given the title of the book. To my mind, the positioning of the picture and the caption, gave me the impression that it was intended to be illustrative of a WW1 item, when it appears to be one of the WWII 'linesman' pouches referred to by Wainfleet. That far at least, it is unintentially misleading.

Best wishes,

Grovetown.

[grantsmil]

Grant,

How do you know that they are 1941 dated pouches? Did I miss a post or can you make out a date on the pouches? My copies I cannot make out a date.

Joe Sweeney

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Joe,

I was fortunate enough to see these pouches in the flesh some time ago, so I am working off memory, (could have been dated 1942).

Grovetown,

Yes, I agree, it could have been better worded, maybe Chappell could have included some details about the era of the pouches shown. I am sure that we would have all been interested to know that the pattern persisted until early 1940s, or at least was re-introduced.

[picardowoods]

Carl,

Lovely bits of equipment; in 10 years of collecting I have never seen an actual pair and  the only picture of them I knew about is the photo above. Is there an LOC reference for their introduction?

Richard

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Richard - I found the LoC you were looking for its 17698 (1915)

Carl

[RMAMarshall]

Carl,

Thanks for the info. Is the reference in the reprinted LOCs or from the monthly originals?

Richard

[picardowoods]

Richard

You can find it in the IDS reprints of the LoCs Vol IV 1910 - 18. PM me if you can't find it!

While on P'14 do you know what the 'Belts, waist, universal size' are?

Carl