Andrew Upton Posted 20 December , 2006 Share Posted 20 December , 2006 Pic: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 20 December , 2006 Share Posted 20 December , 2006 Pic: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 20 December , 2006 Share Posted 20 December , 2006 Pic: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 20 December , 2006 Share Posted 20 December , 2006 Pic: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 20 December , 2006 Share Posted 20 December , 2006 Pic: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 20 December , 2006 Share Posted 20 December , 2006 These show how I currently have my pistol rig set up for attack order (ie with small pack on my back). Now, there is some debate over how the webbing should be set up. Dickie Knight says the small buckles inside the belt are only designed to hold the 1-inch straps from the braces when the small pack isn't worn, to stop them flapping about, and when the small pack it worn, the straps are simply passed under the arm and connected to the 1-inch buckles at the base of the small pack. However, this seems to create a problem in that when the small pack is fixed, these form a couple of loops which it is quite difficult to get your arms through. I don't know whether it is a combination of me being fairly short and slim, but I have set my rig up so that the 1-inch straps from the braces both pass through the inner buckles on the belt, are bent around the outside of the belt, and thus connect to the buckles at the base of the small pack when it is as low as possible (actually the most comfortable place to where it, the higher it is, the more awkward it is), and has the advantage of both distributing the weight very nicely and keeping the shoulder straps free so the whole rig can be quickly slipped on or off as necessary without catching. I would be interested to know if anyone has the definite answer for how the pistol set is supposed to be connected, as pictures of the sets in use (and not posed as we have seen so far, and when the small pack is generally not worn!) are suprisingly rare. Who can spot the two deliberate errors by Dickie in the braces, and the single error in my converted belt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 20 December , 2006 Share Posted 20 December , 2006 As an aside, you will note that there is no bayonet on my webbing, the helve for the entrenching tool being carried in the bayonet frog (with the tab on the reverse often being removed, as may be the case here). However, when the remains of a British soldier were discovered some years ago, he was found with all his equipment still intact, including his .455 Webley Mk. VI still in its holster, his ammunition pouch - but also a 1907 bayonet as well, still in its scabbard and hanging from his belt. The rifle is always a better weapon than the revolver, and it would seem that pistol troops would occasionally upgrade their equipment accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle bill Posted 20 December , 2006 Author Share Posted 20 December , 2006 wow. Thanks for all that Andrew. I must have worn Dickie's real set then. If I'd known I'd have done a runner ! I have a webbing pistol rig where the straps are sewn to the belt. I'll post some pics tomorrow. What date is your Webley ? Here is a picture of meself in MG configuration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 21 December , 2006 Share Posted 21 December , 2006 wow. Thanks for all that Andrew. I must have worn Dickie's real set then. If I'd known I'd have done a runner ! I have a webbing pistol rig where the straps are sewn to the belt. I'll post some pics tomorrow. What date is your Webley ? Here is a picture of meself in MG configuration. I saw a similar set to what you describe on ebay some time ago. It might have been done for officers, disguising themselves as OR's - it's about the only explanation, as an ordinary OR should have got in a lot of trouble if he'd been found to have done that! My Webley just missed the war, being 1919 dated - I got it through Sabre Sales, a Portsmouth military dealer, as a Christmas present a number of years ago, for the then princely sum of £240! All the serial numbers match still, but it's got what looks like some Arabic writing on one side, so it's clearly been all over the world at some point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle bill Posted 22 December , 2006 Author Share Posted 22 December , 2006 Andrew. Here are some pics of two pistol rigs that I have. They are incomplete but I add the other bits from my webbing set. The first set is the one I mentioned, the buckles have been stitched to the belt. All straps and the belt are 18 dated. The other set is from an officers uniform I picked up that belonged to a 7th Yorkshire Regiment lieutenant. THe holster is lined with leather and appears to be a 'homemade' item. The whistle strap is interesting, I'd never seen that before. The Webley is 16 dated with matching numbers and came from a collection in Amiens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle bill Posted 22 December , 2006 Author Share Posted 22 December , 2006 the stitching behind the buckle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle bill Posted 22 December , 2006 Author Share Posted 22 December , 2006 webley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle bill Posted 22 December , 2006 Author Share Posted 22 December , 2006 officer's webbing holster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle bill Posted 22 December , 2006 Author Share Posted 22 December , 2006 whistle strap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 22 December , 2006 Share Posted 22 December , 2006 Very interesting - with regards to the first set, I've been reminded that this is in fact the third set I've seen stitched together now - one of which came from an ex-film costumer. This now leaves me with the doubt as to whether the stitching was a war time thing or a post-war costumer thing to either compensate for the fact that they didn't have the brace adaptors, with the added benefit that there was less chance of bits of the set going AWOL. The second set is particualrly interesting - how does the holster attache on the reverse? Is it a single or double leather loops as on a standard officers holster, or is it the OR's style brass loops? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle bill Posted 22 December , 2006 Author Share Posted 22 December , 2006 The holster straps are two pieces of thin webbing. Possibly cut from the closure flap of a small pack. Regarding the other set, many period photos show MG men or men with pistol rigs without brace adaptors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 22 December , 2006 Share Posted 22 December , 2006 The holster straps are two pieces of thin webbing. Possibly cut from the closure flap of a small pack. Regarding the other set, many period photos show MG men or men with pistol rigs without brace adaptors. Curious, I would be interested in seeing one of those photos, as the only other substitute I've seen in pictures has been to loop a length of cross strap around the front of the belt and use a pair of the 2-inch buckles to hold it all in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle bill Posted 22 December , 2006 Author Share Posted 22 December , 2006 That's what I meant Andrew. It does not mean, however, that this might not have been a war time practice. The definitive expert is someone I've yet to meet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sweeney Posted 24 December , 2006 Share Posted 24 December , 2006 This is s pair of repro brace adaptors. Has anyone ever seen an original pair with that type of belt slide? I've seen an illustration in Chappel's works and in "Tangled web" but never an original. Of the originals I've seen, or own, they have all been like John's and Grantsmil. This includes photos of originals in some manuals that clearly show the slide and its configuration. Are there originals in this configuration? Joe Sweeney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tocemma Posted 25 December , 2006 Share Posted 25 December , 2006 Joe, I've had three sets of originals and all have been identical. The type of buckle shown on your repro set is a typical fantasy 'lash up' and bears no relation to any original. Unfortunately I no longer have an original set as I sold a lovely set earlier this year through Regimentals. (I've bought a WW2 British Armoured Car!) I supplied some photos to Mike Chappel about 15 years ago of a set I then owned. If I recall two were MW&S and the third pair marked HG&R, but I could be mistaken as I've had rather a lot of 08 over the years. I have several weird and wonderful sets of customised webbing over the years and also many examples of converted 14 pattern for use by officers. I will post some when I can as my work currently means that I don't have much access to the collection at present. One of the most common conversions as has been mentioned in several replies, is the simple loop of webbing done using the brace itself ie looped over the waistbelt and secured with a 2 inch buckle, or a properly made belt loop made of a section of shoulder brace with an integral buckle. I think that makes sense!! The latter type is quite common and I have seen many sets of these over the years they were probably quite common at the time. There are inevitably going to be the more elaborate types made for Great War 'kit monsters', and I have a set owned by an Officer in the Leinster's where a set of leather Sam Browne kit has been carefully covered in khaki drill cloth. Very time consuming in labour but the ultimate in 'gucci' sets! I also still have a complete 1917 set of the Mill's Officers set with a very upmarket khaki velvet covered waterbottle! Although theoretically there should be quite a lot of these sets surviving, there seem to be few around these days. I will post some photos if anyone is interested. Can others post examples of these sets too and get a reference thread going? Although I no longer actively collect Great War militaria, I have retained both my collection and interest in the subject. Seasons greetings to you and all regards Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sweeney Posted 25 December , 2006 Share Posted 25 December , 2006 Joe, I've had three sets of originals and all have been identical. The type of buckle shown on your repro set is a typical fantasy 'lash up' and bears no relation to any original. Paul, Season's Greetings to you too and your reply is much appreciated. Thanks for confirming what I had thought about these. Luckily I don't own this piece. I do have a nice pair from HGR 1918--which look identical to the ones John posted. I had thought this type wasn't good but since variuos illustrations show it I wanted to see if by chance they were actually based on original examples. I would like to see a diffenative work on WWI Web equipment. In light of John Thornes querry on Canteen harnesses the variation from commercial to issue sets and different issue sets across the commonwealth is mind boggling. Take Care, Joe Sweeney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 26 December , 2006 Share Posted 26 December , 2006 This is s pair of repro brace adaptors. ... Are there originals in this configuration? These would seem to copy the WW2 style brace adaptors - possibly an an error on a replicators part, who did not have an original to hand to copy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john in minnesota Posted 26 December , 2006 Share Posted 26 December , 2006 ...."Can others post examples of these sets too and get a reference thread going? Paul, I borrowed this set of officer P08 from a friend - I don't think he'll mind me sharing the images: Merry Christmas everybody! John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncle bill Posted 26 December , 2006 Author Share Posted 26 December , 2006 Great set John. I'd love one of those ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark holden Posted 26 December , 2006 Share Posted 26 December , 2006 Now that is a rare set!! Great set John. I'd love one of those ! 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