As a combat engineer Vietnam '69, I carried a mix of equipment. On the standard belt I carried two 37 pattern pouches to the side over my hips (8 x M16 mags in one, canned rations in the other), two water bottles hung by their hooks, and the bum pack with small items, (small towel, toilet gear, cigs etc ). I had an ARVN pack which was miles better than the 37 pattern pack, and I carried this on an aluminum 'L' frame. I loaded this with two more water bottles, couple of smoke grenades all hung on the outside. In the pack itself were spare greens and socks, more rations, six slabs of C4 explosive, and 20m of det cord and some fuse hung on the frame with my entrenching tool........the detonators I carried in a compass pouch well away from the C4.....LOL
Did you ever do the old gun cotton "fishing" trick? I knew a sapper who claimed to do this whenever possible but stopped after a bit of a lucky near miss.
@@RiflemanMoore Sorry about the 10 month delay, I don't go here too often......the ARVN packs were available on the black market in Baria for a carton of Rothmans....LOL
@@74KU Yes... whenever we were ferrying grunts up or down rivers in our assault boats, we would push a det with a short length of fuse into half slab of C4, and toss it overboard. On the way back we would pick up anything floating that looked eatable.....LOL
The basic webbing with the bum pack were always used together with the backpack; at least while I served 1977-85. 3 SLR mags in left basic pouch, cleaning kit in right one. Grenades were never carried via the straps on the side but in the pouch, smoke might be affixed to the harness straps. Compass pouch on left strap unless left-handed. We then had the machete on the right and bayonet on the left, then the water bottles with cups canteen steel in one (most of us had two cups). The bum pack had your housewife, shaving kit and rations. The pack had 24 hour ration packs in the side pockets, sleeping gear in the bottom and spare dry clothes in the top... unless you had the PRC77 set to carry in which case that filled the top section with spare battery in one side pocket and antenna bag strapped across the top. The dixies did fit in the side pouches with room to spare but we always carried tehm in the bum pack so you had your mess kit on you at all times as you always wore your basic webbing. I used to keep my mattress carrier in the bum pack with the three blowup sections slit open so I could climb in like a bivy bag if we had a chance when on patrol or ambush and we'd left our big packs in the harbour. Entrenching tool on the back as you have it. Sleeping gear was a nylon outer and wool 'horse blanket', with a nylon mattress cover and three black blow-ups which I used once to do the flotation exercise at Canungra then left in my locker. Made far too much noise when being inflated. We had a hootchie and later a sleeping bag. Plus weapon, ammo, more ammo, link belt for the section Gun, maybe more water and more ammo. The pack quick release worked well and the preferred way of putting the pack on was to grab the straps with the outsideof the pack facing you, toss it up above your head, thrust your arms through the straps and let it fall down your back. Hope this memoir was interesting for your viewers. Love your work.
The use of the US M-1956 kit by New Zealand troops in Vietnam, deviated immensely from the intended US design. In many respects, it also differed from the Aussies. For instance, the "Bum-pack" was ditched as completely useless; in favour of carrying either extra water bottles, 44-Pattern or British 58-Pattern kidney pouches attached by webbing loops. The forward magazine pouches carrying the SLR or M-16 magazines, were pushed to the side-hip position; thus making shooting in the prone position, much lower to the ground. This made the belt order sit lower, thus making it more comfortable when carrying the large back pack on standard "Kiwi" infantry patrols (LRRP in Yankee jargon.) All of the standard NZ Infantry kit practices in Vietnam, were adaptations of NZSAS practice including the carrying of Bergen packs. Metal on metal attachments such as snap hooks and D-rings, were generally frowned upon by the Kiwi's in favour of noiseless webbing. This made the Kiwi infantry, the most customised soldier among the Western forces in Vietnam. With the adaptaion of the US ALICE system following Vietnam, the NZ Army maintained its Malayan and Vietnam practice of favouring low slung loop attachments to its belt order.
Bulk of the NZ soldiers serviced approx 6 months in Malaysia or Singapore with the 28th British Commonwealth Brigade before being sent to Vietnam.So their was access to British equipment including the British khaki shirts was worn also.
Pro tip: If you're having trouble sourcing authentic belt hangers, there is a simple solution involving another sort of hanger. Get yourself a decent clothes hanger and cut a section of wire twice the length of the distance between the belt grommets. Thread that through your pouch's belt hanger loop and fold the wire at the 25% and 75% positions.
Need to correct you on saying that it was unusual for us Aussies to use the pack and bum pack at the same time. It was standard practise to use both at the same time. It was standard practise to put rations, spare mags and other needed items in the bum pack even when using the back pack. If a contact happened the back pack would be dropped on the spot by pulling the quick release. Having the bum pack meant that your rations and such came with you rather than stayed with the back pack.
+My Day Thanks for the comment, what you say makes perfect sense but my statement was based on the recollections of several veteran Diggers on a facebook group relating to ANZAC involvement in Vietnam all of whom stated it was unusual to wear the pack and bum pack together. Did the practice perhaps vary from person to person or even battalion to battalion or depending on the duration of a patrol?
Perhaps. But I joined the Australian army in the early 80's and used that gear right to the issue of DPCU in the late 80's early 90's. The bum pack being a constant on the webbing regardless of the wearing of the back pack. That's what we were taught on our recruit course, a lot of the instructors being Vietnam veterans, and I don't know of anyone who did it differently. The habit of the constant bum back carried over as standard procedure with the later equipment as well. www.platatac.com/naked-army-royal-australian-regiment-vietnam-1969-polyresin-kit.html
+My Day I think the difference in time period gives ample explanation then, thanks for the clarification, that is given the amount of freedom chaps had in Vietnam regarding their personal equipment and how it was set up. Period photos show the back of the belt often given over to multiple water bottles or extra pouches.
As a 1966-67 vintage ground pounder, I can verify that the bum bag was always carried (in my case along with a 37 pattern rucksack). Long patrols/operations with food, ammo and water resupplies every 4 or 5 days were common and both packs were definitely needed. We also swapped the little basic pouches for 37 pattern Bren Gun pouches, as the former could not fit both ammo and M26 grenades, in which case the grenades had to be carried on the outside of the pouches, with the striker arms held by loops - a very dangerous practice when travelling through thick pin snagging undergrowth! BTW, in my time we carried 2 canteens on our belts and 2 in our packs, which wasn't really enough (later units were issued with 6 bottle per man).
Thanks. In fact, the first two Australian combat unit deaths in Vietnam (both 1RAR in 1965) were due to a grenade pin snagging when some diggers were jumping off a truck. As a result, all soldiers were ordered to carry grenades in pouches. Sadly, US troops continued this dangerous practice and similar deaths continued to occur.
Hi, great clip and it brought back memories as this is what I was issued when I joined in the early 1980's, literally the same gear, as if I'd given you my gear to make the clip with, etc. Ref the "Bum-Pack" (B-P, or "Pack - Small"), yes as per your's and another persons comments below, there seems to be a difference between how it was worn in Vietnam and later Post-Vietnam serving members. Apart from perhaps being removed if vehicle mounted (like in a Landrover manning a radio, or being a driver) the "B-P" was always worn by default. Another reason why it was removed (in Vietnam and on other occasions) maybe that when also wearing the "Pack-Large" ("P-L"), it pushed down on the "B-P" and / or the pack wouldn't properly sit on the back, as the "B-P" would be in the way. Taller / lankier build people might not have had this issue, but shorter people would. I personally kept mine on, however being in Artillery I rarely had to carry the "L-P" for long periods. Also ALICE type private purchase packs become popular and they would likely sit better if the "B-P" was removed; etc. Ref the webbing / pack gear worn before the M-1956, this link to the Aust. War Memorial has an interesting mannequin of a soldier in Vietnam leaving a helicopter: www.awm.gov.au/visit/visitor-information/galleries/post-1945-galleries/iroquois/ kind regards.
Very interesting information, thank you! Great photo, nice to see a goof representation of the real mixed bag of kit worn in Vietnam. I've seen some very interesting methods of dealing with upper packs pressing down on the bum pack in photos taken during the Vietnam War, one showed a Digger with both the bum pack and the old '08 pack strapped onto a US pack frame, real mish-mash of kit. Were you in long enough to see the later 1988 set come into service?
Hi yes, I had the M-1956 all green webbing until I was issued the DPCU (Disruptive Pattern Combat Uniform) webbing to go with our then new 1st Gen DPCU uniforms. They still retained the "Bum-Pack" ("B-P") with this webbing, so it consisted of small (smaller than the M-1956 ammo pouches) F88 AUSTEYR (Austrian STEYR AUG) ammo pouches x 2, known as the "STEYR Pouch" - they has a folding insert which would hold the F88 30 x round magazines, they could be folded via a velcro tab, very fiddly, 2 x water bottles, a "B-P", and a "DAYPACK" which was a soft "DPCU zip bag", the top of which fitted over the "H" of the harness going down the back, with a loose loop at the bottom which went under the rear of the back harness, resting on top of the "B-P" - it could only be fitted when assembling the webbing, so it stayed there permanently; many didn't fit it or removed it altogether. There were also 2 x large "MINIMI" Pouches" which in theory were meant to only be worn by the Minimi LSW gunners (x 2 per Section). However, the small "STEYR" pouches got removed or not fitted, with the "MINIMI " pouches replacing them, as they were larger and easier to remove / access for Magazines, the "B-P" got removed (never to be seen again), it was replaced by one or two MINIMI pouches, as per various images at: www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&biw=1680&bih=953&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=1e9LWumuL4Gc8QWJgZPICg&q=australian+dpcu+webbing&oq=australian+dpcu+webbing&gs_l=psy-ab.3...40802.53964.0.54518.36.26.4.0.0.0.311.4096.0j18j3j1.22.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..15.15.2035...0j0i67k1j0i8i30k1j0i24k1j0i10i24k1j0i30k1.0.Rd5uQ0ITt68#imgrc=_ .
Very strong American influence as they fought with us Yanks during Vietnam. Very much respect to the fine Australians who did serve with my Uncles back then in that era. It only made sense to use equipment from the Americans to what worked. Even the Romans adopted the short sword from the Iberians. Use equipment and weapons from your allies or enemies that will work for you. That is the bottom line. I am happy that the Australians are on our side. They are indeed fine Infantrymen and hate to be their enemy...
each side pocket on the pack field large was designed for a 24 hour ration pack, bottom part for sleeping bag, top part pullover, smaller items & the AN/PRC 25 radio set will also fit inside. Many Diggers used their 2nd web belt as extra hanger space for canteens etc as they'd wrap it around the pack tightly.
That camouflage pattern under the lid was used to line a great deal of various pouches over the years. You can still find unused rolls of it in various rigger lofts around the country.
Feel quite lucky that my version of the pack, had webbing stitched around the front of the pack, and over the side pockets, just above the section separator midway down the pack. I’ve hung water bottles from the webbing on many hikes since the 90s. One shoulder strap broke on my last hike. I now must say goodbye to my companion. My reliable bag.
This is what I carry on my daily bushwalks. H-harness, bum pack, water bottle and a couple of pouches. Most off the weight is on the hips. Back is left clear to sweat. Prefer it to backpack.
I was issued a full set of this in 1986. The metal clips and buckles on the belt for holding the water bottles and ammo pouches etc were murder on long marches/patrols due to rubbing the hips and low back. Unlike the US Army and UK a field jacket of some description wasn’t usually worn all year round as it is too hot in Australia so the metal clips were in contact with a cotton shirt and trousers, not a cotton sateen or gabardine field jacket. On a long route march with a full load those clips hurt and hurt badly. I met one bloke at Singleton Infantry Centre who was being medically discharged as his ulcers were so bad. Switched on diggers used privately made or purchased padded belts on the issued pistol belt and saved themselves a lot of misery. In the mid 90’s the Army made padded belts standard issue with the Auscam webbing system.
The author of Dear Mom, A Sniper in Vietnam used that backpack. There's an illustration of it and his load out. I'd never seen one anyplace else. He was USMC Scout Sniper in the KheSahn area. Name escapes me, but its a pretty good read.
That two colour camouflage was found as a liner in many pouches and other bits for years. The wet weather smock and a wet weather hat were the only garment made from this pattern. We still have a roll of it in my work place.
Thanks for the video, and the walk down memory lane, mate :-) I joined in the RAN from 1986, and we still used the M56 pattern webbing there. I think the army very quickly adopted the M88 pattern, but I can say that I still used the M56 pattern when on active service in 2001 - though we'd finally caught up with the "AJ's" regarding weapons - I used the "over and under" M16/M203 in the field. It's probably just nostalgia but I still love the 56 pattern webbing, and still use mine when camping/hiking.....
This was a great video, very well done. I'm from ColdWarCollectors, I saw your comment on my Canadian Pattern 64 webbing video, thats how I found your channel. You have some great videos. Its truly interesting to see that the UK, Canada, and the Australians all used the same webbing, Pattern 37, in WW2 but then all went there own way by the 60s, the Australians with this american style webbing, the Canadians with Pattern 64, and the British with the Pattern 58 webbing. Once again very well done and I look forward to more videos from you.
+SovietVictory1989 Thanks very much chap! Is ColdWarCollectors ongoing? I too look forward to seeing more videos on your own channel and over there if it is. As you say the webbing developments post-war are interesting, South Africa had a version of '58 Pattern too and then '70 Pattern. I'm also interested by the countries outside the commonwealth who were inspired by British practice and '58 Pattern.
Yeah ColdWarCollectors is still ongoing, we have had a real lack of videos lately as many of us have been busy but we have been planning to start being more active there. Ah yes South Africa's Pattern 70, I had forgotten all about that. Also I too find pattern 58 clones to be rather interesting as well, such as the Bulgarian copies and the East German UTV which was influenced by Pattern 58, and all of the copies from the middle east.
Steve Wiles interesting. I’m used to seeing people dump all over the web gear featured on this channel. The 58 pattern webbing gets the worst of it. So it’s surprising to see someone who actually liked their specific type of web gear.
I heard that it was not uncommon for the Australian soldier issued with these pack to remove the shine from the plastic/transparent name covers or remove them completely. Especially those who'd seen some action in the field. It's not a bad rig for moving through bushland, fording and some climbing. The quick release tabs made quick removal of the pack upon contact a no fuss affair. The only problem I thought it had was the apparent ad-hoc approach to it's overall composition..a bit from here and a bit from there... Once they'd decided what aspects they were going to include in the rig they should have made the effort to make it at least look like it wasn't a hodge-podge... I guess that's what happens when your equipment is provided by the lowest bidder... Aquiantances of mine ended up dyeing all of their rig a dark drab green, almost field Gray. They replaced the plastic canteens with metal ones for when they'd need to use the bottles to heat water in and they added a couple of small pouches on the front of the webbing bracers for a small pair of binoculars, a field compass and filtered torch. Any way, a good video... Thankyou.
I've seen heaps in surplus stores and q-stores where the window was removed, now I know why. I always thought it was just damaged as they're never in good condition
The side pouches on the Auspack were to carry a whole ration pack each!! Aussies usually went out on 3 day patrols so carried 3 days worth of rations. For longer ones they put their rations in sandbags and hung them from the pack.
Nothing was ever hung from the backpack in my unit (1 Field Engineer Regiment) except the entrenching tool. I'm sure on operations in a war zone they may have relaxed some rules but during the Cold War they were pretty strict on these details. We did carry ration packs in sandbags but usually tossed in the Land Rover or MkV along with sandbags full of hexie tabs, toilet paper and what have you and brought up for resup, can't ever recall patrolling with them. We did carry extra ammo, pyrotechnics and such in sand bags but again, no recollection of them 'hung' from a pack. Of course other units could have done that. Yes the side pockets could hold a 24 hour ration pack ech but we generally broke them down before we left harbour and just took the bits we liked, After a few days on them you tended to not eat everything, just swap for your favourites.
I used this stuff as a cadet in the early 80s. We got issued 37 pattern with WW2 dates on it and then this stuff. Walking with pouches, bum pack and water bottles with the H harness was a lot more comfortable than 37 which keeps falling out of shape and slips off the shoulders. But the pack was uncomfortable. I later bought a british NI patrol pack and it really shat on this TBH.
The initial stocks of M1956 pattern webbing were purchased from the US in 1961 and were issued from late 1961, these initial lots were manufactured with the Australian "D arrow D" printed on the items in place of the "US" normally found on them, later batches reverted to having the "US" printed on them - these items with the "DD" are now very highly sought after by collectors here in Australia
I'm hoping, at some point in the far future to collect some of the D^D marked M-1956. I'm kicking myself as I just missed out on a pair of the pouches on eBay.
@@terrybarrett2368 - i joined the ARA in Feb 71 and at Kapooka we used the 56 pattern webbing but no pack was issued, we had to use the blanket roll straps on the harness, when I arrived at Infantry Centre (Ingleburn) we were again issued the 56 pattern webbing and the Aust pack, then on arrival in 8 RAR we were issued the 56 pattern webbing except we were given 37 pattern bren pouches and a 08 pattern large pack, the bren pouches were fitted to the belt simply by cutting slots in the rear and sliding them on, in 8 RAR I did use a bum pack but carried 4 water bottles
I have also seen US printed on Australian issued webbing were soldiers have used a pen to add A before the U and a T after the S so it spells out AUST :)
And they were never worn there..always on the top of the shoulder straps....also..you could..and we did..get another 2 water bottles..1 each side...and you could still lie down flat..
You are describing 2 very different types of gear...What you call a "Bum Pack" we used to call "Basic Webbing" Ammo and food in the bum bit...2 days out..no worries!....Backpack was a Patrol Kit....3 to 40 days..
+peter feeney It's consistently referred to as a 'bum pack' by Aussie Vietnam veterans on the Vietnam ANZAC facebook group where I've garnered much of the information regarding this equipment, it's an anglicisation of the us term 'butt pack' which is what the component was known as in US service.
+peter feeney I have multiple photos of the compass pouch being worn on the side on the ammunition pouches or on the front of the belt by Aussie troops in Vietnam.
Now that I have watched the video there is one item that you have omitted from your description and that is the first pattern "Cover Entrenching Tool" this was a direct pattern copy of the US made one and differed only in the materials used in its manufacture, it is made in the same materials as the demonstrated one but has the bayonet fittings sewn on the front the same as the "US" one, the ones that I have seen are all dated 1965, the details of the item are printed in white on the rear and are enclosed in a white printed rectangle/box, there is also another one the same style as the demonstrated cover but using the finer weave canvas as used in the manufacture of the water bottle covers.
Brings back hilariously bad memories of this shitty gear the Australian Army issued us until the late 8Os! Yes all of this exact gear was still being handed to regular army infantry units until 1990! As soon as I got to my unit I gave all my gear to my young cousin for cadets (as even the quartermaster didn't want it back) , bought an Alice Pack and a set of Wilderness Equipment webbing and never used any of this crap again. Thanks for the laugh. Legend.
I'm quite new to this , and I'm wanting to do an impression on nz during the late 60s to mid 80s, am I able to use 1937 pattern pouches for my NZ infantryman impression?
weird, i would swear my schools' (in sydney australia) cadet unit, circa 87-92 had british p58 gear when on camp etc, with the us style water bottles, not what you are showing. i wonder why they had p58? for formal parades it was black gloss painted p37 belts. the all drum marching band wore white painted p37 belts and gaiters.
I honestly couldn't tell you why 1958 Pattern was in use. I only know of it having been trialled in Australia. Perhaps one of my viewers might be able to answer!
The reason is, as you said "schools' cadet unit, circa 87-92" Cadet Units, bless 'em, never really had current kit. The rest of 'the Army' never painted webbing for Formal Parades, except a belt and bayonet frog.
Generally when wearing webbing you would not wear a separate web belt through the trousers as it was not very comfortable. Some people did however insert the male and female front part of the webbing through the front two loops on the trousers to keep the webbing from riding up at the front. Some people also wore a light thin belt with the trousers under the webbing.
There would be a toggle on one end, usually wood, and a loop on the other. Multiple ropes could then be hooked together as needed. Handy for getting up hills when loaded down with gear. Or climbing things. Because, you know, rope.😊
LOL nasty old povvo spec DP1 setup. Absolute junk, in every aspect. Carried it for 6 years 78-84. Never again.The Malays made a superior copy of the pack as well. Heavier padding, straps included and in malay cammo pattern, with a waterproof coating. Ironically, the DPCU pack that came out after it was even worse (especially if you were short). Would have been better with the ALICE pack. I use and Eberlestock Warhammer pack these days. Which actually uses an ALICE frame :)
Interesting, thanks for the info! I was surprised on seeing one of the Malaysian packs on eBay a little while ago, resulted in a bit of research to find out just what it was.
Rifleman Moore How do the P37/44 large pouches attach to the M56 belt? Do they just slide on? Do you insert the brass fittings into the eyelets on the belt?
+BAR Gunner In the field they were either attached using the c clips on the back and supported by the yoke, sometimes with the end hooks cut off and the straps threaded through the buckles in normal '37 pattern style. Sometimes they were modified by cutting slits in the back or using wire etc. to hang them low on the belt.
I know it's farby but on my "just tooling around and shooting stuff" kit, I use the Canadian versions. They have belt loops already sewn on to them both high and low, and if you fade em out plenty, they look P44 from 10 ft away
I've always assumed it was a holdover from the 1944 Pattern carriers. One advantage was with the bottles slung low there's less chance of a pack interfering with them.
made for easier access when you had your pack on. The down side on the 56 pattern pack was no Lumbar support which means it applied a lot of pressure on your lower lumbar vertabrae contributing to back issues in your forties onwards, Former grunt and mortarman here
