_GOTOBOTTOM
Figures
Military figures of all shapes and sizes.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
LRRP Vietnam Question
Stefan1580
Visit this Community
Berlin, Germany
Joined: November 20, 2006
KitMaker: 360 posts
Armorama: 354 posts
Posted: Monday, May 23, 2011 - 11:03 PM UTC
Hi at all,

i am in the process of building a Figure like the one on the Photo below.
My question is what are the items i have marked with the blue color question mark. I think for an Standard ammo case itīs too large. What do you think about these two items.




Thanks for help

Stefan
hogarth
Visit this Community
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 - 02:11 AM UTC
The left ? is a two quart canteen cover (later pattern) being used to hold 20 rd magazines for the M16 (I think it could hold 7 mags). Heck, you can see the outline of one under the fabric.

Not sure about the item on the pack.

Rob
SdAufKla
Visit this Community
South Carolina, United States
Joined: May 07, 2010
KitMaker: 2,238 posts
Armorama: 2,158 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 - 02:13 AM UTC
Hi Stefan,

If you don't get a good answer here, you might try this forum:

US Militaria Forum

HTH,
hogarth
Visit this Community
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 - 03:50 AM UTC
No, that front pouch is definitely a two quart canteen pouch used to hold magazines. The material it is made from would show off a magazine under the fabric like that, whereas the M1956 pouch was rigid in design and would not show off the outline of the mag like that.

Canteen pouches were often used by LRRPS/Rangers and Sog personnel to hold mags. Usually, you see the one quart canteen carrier used, but I do have a few pics (on my home computer....at work right now) of two quart canteen pouches being used for the same purpose.
hogarth
Visit this Community
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 - 05:02 AM UTC

Quoted Text

that's true, the m1956 usually have corners. Is the canteen pouch that much bigger though?


The M1956 pouch was designed for an assortment of weapon mags (hence it's name, "universal pouch"). It could hold 2 M14 mags or 4 M16 mags....some guys put a field dressing in the bottom so the shorter (compared with M14 mags) M16 mags would sit up higher, allowing easier access. Later, they came out with a shorter pouch of otherwise the same design specifically for the M16 mags. I have read that you could cut a bit of the edging off the upper inside of the original M1956 pouch and then lay a fifth M16 mag across the top of the other four.

Anyway, the one qt canteen cover could hold 6 M16 mags, and I'm pretty sure the 2 qt canteen pouch could hold 7. So, compared with the original 4, that's a pretty good increase of mags (though, of course, the pouch did take up more space on the belt, and did no provide for the safe carrying of grenades, so there's always a trade-off).
hogarth
Visit this Community
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 - 12:34 PM UTC

Quoted Text

so the space is better oriented. 3 more clips for same amount of room on the belt is pretty good. Learn something every day...

BTW, you talking about the 20rd waffle sided magazine right?



Negative, just the standard 20 rd mag. The "waffle" mag was removed from service almost as soon as it was introduced, as it was unreliable. The US Army even had a cartoon series for training purposes (I guess a comic book would be more appropriate term) when the changeover to the M16 happened.....there was a page that showed both mags and how, if by some chance "you" came across a "waffle" mag, you were NOT to use it.

The "standard" 20 rd mag just had vertical grooves running down the sides...no horizontal lines. Basically, just a straight-edged, shorter version of today's 30 rd mags (30 rd mags first appeared for the M16 in late 1967, usually in the hands of Seals, MACV/SOG, etc.). You'll see the occasional photo of one in a "regular" infantryman's rilfe, but only rarely, and usually later in the war. Heck, John Plaster of MACV/SOG wrote in one of his books that he ordered his from stateside (Sears, maybe?) and had them shipped to 'nam, enough for one for each of his team members. They'd keep that one loaded in the rifles and then have all 20's for spares.
hogarth
Visit this Community
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 - 12:47 PM UTC
Reference Pics:

1. Notice on his right (our left) front side of his belt, a 2 qt canteen cover used to hold mags. On his left (our right), is a 1 qt canteen cover used for mags.


jshep36unkcammo by biggsgalassi, on Flickr

2. Here, look at the belt layout....2 1 qt canteen covers loaded with grenades (5 each), 2 2 qt canteen covers for mags, and then, at the back, 2 2 qt canteen covers with the actual canteens in them.


car15ruck by biggsgalassi, on Flickr

3. Guy on far left of pic has a 2 qt canteen cover used for mags (his right front of belt, next to buckle), and he and the guy next to him have some 1 qt canteen covers used for the same purpose.


blkteam2 by biggsgalassi, on Flickr

Let me know if there is other photo reference stuff you need.

Rob
hogarth
Visit this Community
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 - 12:52 PM UTC

Quoted Text

here's another question if you don't mind.
Were the very first 30 rd magazine with metal or plastic followers?
Of the photos I could be sure of date, I think earliest I saw use of the 30 rd was 1971, so your date is 4 years earlier. And like you said, seemed only the one in the gun, else were still 20s.


Not sure on the followers...might be better of checking out that militaria forum or even a site like AR15.com. The earliest photo I have of a 30 rd mag was in use by Seals during Operation Crimson Tide, which was I believe in November of 1967. Seals tend to be seen with them more than anyone else, including entire custom made vests that held five across the chest......SOG got some, as I mentioned, and you do see some in Ranger/LRRP hands (background of Pic #1 above!) and regular line infantry, occasionally, around the time of the Cambodian incursion in 1970.
hogarth
Visit this Community
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 - 01:01 PM UTC
More....30 rd mag related:

1. Seal Team Two, 1967....30 rd mag present.


billlangleymi6 by biggsgalassi, on Flickr

2. Navy Seal 30 rd mag vest (same one that comes in the Dragon Seal Team set II)


seal3 by biggsgalassi, on Flickr

3. Special made-for-Seals FIFTY round mag...try shooting from the prone with that! (I have a few pics of these).


VN-canal by biggsgalassi, on Flickr
Stefan1580
Visit this Community
Berlin, Germany
Joined: November 20, 2006
KitMaker: 360 posts
Armorama: 354 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 - 10:00 PM UTC
Thanks a lot guys,

so fast and so much Information is awsome. Really great Pictures and Interesting Details about the used Equipment. Never knew they used a 50 round Mag. But these must be very late in the war and in short supply and rarly seen. I think they were also really happy to get their hands on an XM177 from what i have read in some books. Ok i have such canteens from Hobby Fan, CMK and old Dragon NAM sets. So now i know
how to use/modify them for my Figure build.

Many thanks to all of you and wish you nice day

Greetings

Stefan
thomokiwi
Visit this Community
Christchurch, New Zealand
Joined: January 11, 2006
KitMaker: 438 posts
Armorama: 359 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 - 10:16 PM UTC
Hi All

Just out of pure interest, was the using of canteen covers as a magazine pouch a fad. Also did it make a difference
hogarth
Visit this Community
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 - 11:53 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Never seen those 50 rd mag before actually, only knew there were 40s.
a modified mag well on that CAR-15, and maybe some kind of rail system (side rail) or modified handguards.
If the 203 is the short version, that's gotta be earliest example of those I've seen.


Modified mag well? Rail system? Nah, this is 'nam era stuff.

The Car 15 is just a standard one...the long mag is basically just two 30 rounders welded together with an extra long spring....I can't imagine it was overly reliable. I can try posting more pics of them later today....DEFINITELY not common. As for the grenade launcher, it's the XM-148, the predecessor to the 203....though officially removed from service about 9 months after introduction (late 67, I believe), SEALS kept using them to the end of the war, often mounted on XM-177/CAR-15s. MANY pics of those. Also, read Gary Smith's 3 autobiographies and he explains that he preferred the 148 to the 203 (once the 203 was introduced)....I think he liked the trigger placement (just forward of the rifle trigger guard) better. By the time of his 3rd tour, he was using one with a VERY early Aimpoint red dot scope, believe it or not. Such sights were also used by the many of the Special Forces troops who did the Son Tay Raid in 1970.
hogarth
Visit this Community
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 - 12:03 AM UTC
Real Quick:

1. Extra long mag on CAR/148 (maybe I'm wrong and it is 40 rds as opposed to 50?)


seal by biggsgalassi, on Flickr

2. 30 rd vest, CAR 15 w/148:


Obr4 by biggsgalassi, on Flickr

3. Long mag on CAR/148:


Namseal3 by biggsgalassi, on Flickr

4. SOG team...notice the weird curved mag in the one CAR:


387561464ysgilcph3jb by biggsgalassi, on Flickr

5. CAR with 148 closeup:


148 by biggsgalassi, on Flickr
hogarth
Visit this Community
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 - 04:31 AM UTC

Quoted Text

oh, that's a XM148! Didn't even come across my mind. Rare stuff.
I didn't notice this before either, that there's a modified section on those CAR for mounting the grenade launcher, like how the M4 outer has a milled down section for 203. The modern XM177 variants use a M4A1 barrel. The one in your photo must of been specifically manufactured for mounting the XM148. Very rare stuff!


I assume you are referring to what modern AR fans call the "step" in the barrel, up near the flash hider? If so, then yes, that was added to the XM177E2 model (as opposed to the E1) so the 203 could be added. The 148 just mounted to the barrel under the handguards, and so didn't really require the step. Once the decision was made to lengthen the barrel by an inch or two on the XM177E2 over the earlier E1 (done to improve reliability and give the powder more time to burn behind the bullet), they added the "step" for mounting the grenade launcher.

In case you can't tell, I've got a lot of reference photos and material on such things, so let me know (via PM, if need be) about other info you might need.

Rob
hogarth
Visit this Community
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 - 04:37 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Hi All

Just out of pure interest, was the using of canteen covers as a magazine pouch a fad. Also did it make a difference


Fad? I guess to an extent. It was probably taught at the Recondo school in Nha Trang, and then soldiers who trained there brought the idea around with them to their individual units. It also provided a handy way to carry 30 rd M16 mags, once they were introduced...I've got a photo of a guy with a canteen pouch with 3 30 rd mags sticking up through the top, and then you can tell he's got a 20 on each side of those....so five mags total, 3 of which are 30s and 2 are 20s. There was no "official" 30 round pouch introduced until the ALICE gear started to appear after the war. So there was a certain utility to using the canteen pouches.

So I'd say fad, yes, to a degree, but it also made some sense.
hogarth
Visit this Community
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 - 10:59 AM UTC
That hook is the trigger! One of the safety issues with the weapon was that a branch could catch it and set it off. The little foregrip on the grenade launcher itself had a little switch on it that allowed it to slide forward to be reloaded. Many people think that was the trigger, but it is not. The trigger was that hook. What Gary Smith, who I mentioned earlier, liked about the 148 compared with the 203 was that his hands didn't have to change places from shooting the rifle compared with the grenade launcher, whereas with the 203, they do. On the 148, just extend your trigger finger forward and pull the trigger for the launcher, and voila!
hogarth
Visit this Community
Maryland, United States
Joined: June 02, 2006
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 592 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 - 02:54 PM UTC

Quoted Text

OH! Did not know that. That makes perfect sense, since the 148 probably wasn't loaded unless it was being used.
So would they then put their index finger between the triggers when using the gun? Or does that 148 trigger come further back so it's not in the way?


If memory serves, the 148 trigger could get about as far back as you see it in that pic...it could be oriented up or down (when down, it was sort of at the back side of the magazine). Back then, you didn't see as much of the soldiers with their fingers outside the trigger guard the way you do now....all kinds of crazy trigger discipline, or lack thereof. So it probably wasn't much of an issue.

In essence, if you wanted to shoot your rifle, you just did so in the usual way, but if you wanted to shoot the 148, you just extended your trigger finger forward (the same trigger finger you were using for the rifle), and pulled the trigger for that.

For the 203, you have to either reach your "strong" arm forward and use the rifle mag as a handgrip to shoot the 203, or else use your weak hand to pull the trigger on the 203.

The 203 is definitely more rugged and has better safety features, but you can, I guess, understand why some old school guys liked the 148 a little more.
 _GOTOTOP