Category Archives: Uncategorized

US Facts

The unexpected controversy over the “US” markings has been a total surprise to me. Even photos of piles of original gear, showing a wide range of variations of the markings, has simply prompted more questions. Why this year (2023) has seen a sudden fixation on them is a mystery.

So, here are more photos as well as WWII documents to show and explain how and why they really were.

The photo: These are some of our originals. Most of the gear shown above is in unissued condition- therefore the markings are not faded nor redone, retouched or enhanced. This is how it looked when it was new and handed to the soldiers.

Points of interest:

-There are hardly any two fonts that are truly identical. Fonts with serifs are most common, but several without are present.

-Some are bold, some are not. Letter spacing, thickness and shape varies. Note the “S” on the pistol belt that looks like a “Z”.

-Maybe half are truly black and solid, others not, and it’s not terribly uncommon for part of the marking to darker than the others.

-Some aren’t perfectly centered and a few might even be crooked.

-Note that two are upside down, and one was forgotten entirely. (The pistol belt isn’t upside down, the stencil is.)

-In other words, perfection is not the rule.

All of the above original characteristics have prompted the following comments:

“This cannot be to “spec”! How could this have been allowed to happen?”

“I would expect more from American made!”

“Too light/ dark/ thin/ thick/ uneven (insert adjective)!”

“The military is all about precision!” (Yup. Lowest bidder.)

Ultimately, just about everything enthusiasts claim to be wrong about the U.S. markings- isn’t. At least not historically speaking.

“Specs”

Much is often bandied about “original specs” for this or that. Luckily, the QMC specifications for most items of WWII gear are available.

Here are a few examples from the US Army Quartermaster Corps specifications from the early 1940’s regarding the markings applied to the field gear issued to American soldiers.

The specification sheets vary a bit, but follow the same general format. Typically, one will find this information in a paragraph titled “Marking for Identification” which covers the “U. S.” marking as well as that for the manufacturer’s information.

However, on a few items, it’s not addressed at all- yet the items still have markings.

In contrast to today’s rigidly formatted “gubmant speak”, the wording and amount of detail in the WWII specs varies widely. Here are a few examples.

First up, least pleasing for regulation maniacs, we have the paragraph used on M1 Carbine Pouches, spec 98, dated April 3, 1942. (The identical paragraph appears in the spec for the M1923 Cartridge Belts as well.) Not exactly detailed is it?

The next example is for Canteen covers, Spec. 1B, January 23, 1942. At least they give the size of the letters this time- but the color of the ink or paint is no longer mentioned…

The final example is for M1943 Intrenching Shovels (folding shovels) and this one is on the more detailed end of the spectrum. In addition to the height of the letters, it also specifies that they be in “solid” face. (Sheets for some items say “bold face”.) This is about as fancy as it gets, even though again, they forgot to tell us that the markings should be black.

This is a typical drawing attached to the spec sheets. It does helpfully gives the location, size and color of the letters. Some drawings simply show the letters but have no other details about them. Most of the drawings do show them in a font with serifs, but the font style is never mentioned in any of the specs.

Proofreader needed! The first spec I looked at was for the Musette Bag- imagine if we followed this spec to the letter- or shall I say the lack of the second period. But there it is, in black and white from Spec. No. 20A, March 1944.

The Facts are thus:

Fonts were not specified: As stated, the letter style is never mentioned in any of these specs. Although most drawings show letters with serifs, a quick look at originals will show that there was a lot of flexibility. At no point are is any mention made of the spacing of the characters either.

Saturation was not specified: The closest one comes to finding out how thick or dark the marking should be is some of the sheets specifying “bold” or “solid” face letters.

At no point do any specs describe how thick, dark, light or evenly distributed the ink should be. Simply “waterproof ink or stencil paint.”

Many don’t even mention the color.

The Specs weren’t always adhered to: Outrageous as it may be, it’s not difficult to find originals with letters not sized or located in accordance with the drawings in the specs. The horror!

Defective: Nowhere does it state that an imperfect marking is grounds for declaring an item ineligible for combat duty.

Ultimately, the obvious fact is that military simply wasn’t that worried about how pretty or perfect the two letters stenciled on their backpacks and shovel carriers were. They had other priorities.

This stuff has marks all over it!

From time to time we do get some fussing about marks, spots or other unwanted “blemishes”, typically on US fieldgear. This post is to show that many of these markings are necessary and intentional as they are part of the production process, not a flaw or error.

Nearly all gear and garments are marked after they’re cut to show the workers exactly where to place pockets, make folds, straps, sew button and eyelet holes, or to indicate layers and shades. Others appear to be lot or inspector numbers so any flaws can be traced back to their origin and fixed.

The markings are applied in a number of ways. Chalk, colored pencil, ink stamps or stencils may be used to apply them. Many of these marks, particularly the first two, will fade or rub off after the item has been used for a time. Others are more resilient and may survive for the life of the item.

Blue and red pencil marks on original MP40 pouches.
These marked the sew lines to close the cells for each magazine.

Colored pencil marks: This is one of the most common means that WWII gear and clothing were marked for assembly. One can often find traces of them on German field gear, some uniforms, and occasionally on US uniforms. The Germans seemed to have an affinity for green, blue and pink colored pencils.

Original smock with chalk marks…how can they be wrong?

Chalk marks: At times the workers used chalk rather than colored pencils. This specific thing has caused us grief from outraged customers a number of times.

All those squares, U’s, tick marks, dots, dashes and other blemishes were applied at the factory in WWII to show the workers where to sew the parts- not offend the tender sensitivities of those keeping history alive 80 years later.

Stencil marks: US fieldgear is the most common place these are found. They were applied at the same time as the “US” and other markings as this is far faster and more efficient than laying a template over each piece and tracing the design with a pencil or chalk. Being printed with the same ink as the rest of the stencils, these tend to survive even on well-worn examples. We do this too and it’s one that creates the most complaints of “there’s black chit all over my pack”.

Various stamps on the parts of original MP44 pouches.

Number/ letter stamps: These are commonly found on German gear and uniforms. When present, they’re typically 1-3 digits or a letter plus numbers “R26”. Their exact purpose is unknown, but an educated guess is that they indicate the worker or group of workers who made the parts. Others may be inspector numbers.

On a few Waffen-SS items, the manufacturer was identified by number codes, such as “933” on some smocks. This will typically only be found once, such as under a pocket flap.

Shade marks (“226”) were stamped in black ink on all the wool parts of this original WSS M41 Feldbluse to indicate the layer of fabric they were cut from. The cloth wouldn’t have been stacked 200+ layers deep- but there were likely multiple cuts on the same table being done that day, so this might represent 2nd cut, layer 26 or something similar.

Shade marks: Some German wool uniforms are shade marked which is an alternative to shade tags. Garment fabric is stacked and cut many layers deep, and several rolls of fabric may be used to make the spread, making it likely that different shades will be in the same cut.

To avoid garments being assembled with mixed shades, all parts in each layer are stamped with the number of the layer. All the pieces on completed garments should then have all matching numbers which will indicate that they all came from the same layer of cloth in the cut, and should therefore match in shade and color.

Shade tag on a original jump jacket. 09 is likely the layer, 36R the size, and the other two numbers could be any number of things. The info on the tags varies from factory to factory.

Shade Tags: Commonly called “cutter tags”, these serve the same purpose as the shade stamps above. But, in this case, a small paper tag is printed from some sort of gizmo (we’ve never found out what it was) and stapled (occasionally glued) to each part. These often have more information- such as the size of the item, the cut layer, batch number, and some others we are unsure of their meaning.

Typically found on US uniforms, they can be found on some gear. Years ago, I saw a German M44 tunic with them- they almost looked like tiny punch cards and were affixed with glue rather than staples.

Inside flap of original MP44 pouches. We assume the “CON” is the first part of “Continental” (a major rubber and tire maker) as that’s what these flap sides are made from.

Manufacturer marks: One sometimes finds the name, logo, or address of the firm that made the material. These areas are typically on the inside of garments or gear and are considered a very cool plus by collectors.

Guide marks on our cartridge belts.

Our reproductions: We do stencil the location points on our US gear as they make things so much simpler during production. We do not offer “mark free gear”. (A few have really gone ballistic over these.) Some of our German gear does have chalk or pencil marks, and we dooccasionally add some numbers to uniform parts or MP pouches just for giggles.

On a few items, such as Texled slings, I use the month and year (such as “223”) on a small stamp as my own inspection mark to ensure that all steps have been completed. This mimics those found on many original slings.

As for shade tags, I have looked around over the years to see if whatever contraption made them turns up. Wise me (the minority part of my brain) knows those would cause little but trouble due to the “huge holes” the staples would put in the uniforms…but it’d still be cool to do on some level.

The ATF Blog

Welcome to the At the Front Blog. Despite over 20 years of being on the internet, this is our first official “blog”. Personally, I rarely read anyone else’s blogs, and have procrastinated about setting this thing up for several years. So here we go…

The topics will generally be related to WWII uniforms & gear, WWII reenacting, plus a few random, unrelated things that strike me as worthy of writing about at a given moment. The primary goal will be to provide accurate information about the actual wartime uniforms & equipment, as well as the reproductions and what it sometimes takes to make them. To me, a “correct” product is one that is as close to the actual period item as possible.

As with many other hobbies, there are as many opinions as there are enthusiasts. When recreating items from the past, what people demand, or assume to be “correct” is often wrong. My standards are based on historical realities, not modern misconceptions or video game screen shots. Field jackets were not actually khaki, M1 bayonets do not fit on M1 Carbines, and shirts and trousers rarely match in color.

Just about everything we offer, we create ourselves or have made specifically for us. The process is, on the surface, quite simple. I obtain one or more original examples of “it” and set about having “it” duplicated. After nearly 40 years of owning, wearing, handling, and sometimes disassembling authentic items, I may not know it all, but I have a pretty good idea of what’s right and wrong when it comes to WWII stuff.

I call it as I see it and that’s that. No matter how much lipstick you smear on the pig, it’s still a pig and I refuse to refer to it as anything else no matter how many tender sensibilities it might rankle. Honesty may not be pretty but neither was WWII.

If you are involved in reenacting/ living history and intend to truly honor veterans and save history for our descendants, you owe it to the real soldiers that fought, froze, bled and died in the War to represent them as accurately possible. If this is just prancing around at a fruitcake convention dressed as a “Feel Marshal”, by all means, go with the polyester uniform and rubber boots. Or, if you just like vintage gear, just know I do my best to get it right- and enjoy the show.

-Rollin Curtis