Canadian 1951 Pattern Web Equipment Part I

The first part in a series looking at the Canadian 1951 Pattern Web Equipment.
/ riflemanmoore
/ riflemanmoore

[@piobmhor8529]

My Dad was in the Canadian Army in the 1950s through to the 70s. He had a second set of 1951 pattern webbing that we kids could use for playing soldier with or taking on Scout hikes. We really didn’t think of it at the time, but it was incredible how adjustable it was for body size. An 8 year old boy could wear it, albeit it at the shortest settings. You could fit a lot of peanut butter sandwiches in the haversack, and I’ll never forget the tinny tasting kool-aid we would drink from the metal canteen.

[@waynemcgee9633]

I joined the Canadian Militia in 1971, was issued 51 pattern webbing which, with guidance from section comd, was quickly modified to add a shell dressing to the left shoulder strap, a tightly rolled neoprene poncho/shelter half held with blanket straps to the center back of the web belt. Much later, I removed the ammo pouches, added "officer keepers", and added a pair of M14 mag pouches in their place. I kept a single 51 pattern pouch threaded through the upper loops on the right side between the M14 pouch and water bottle. This rig-up served me well till we were issued brand new 82 pattern in the spring of 1985. This sent CSM's into a "by the book" frenzy to make sure that no deviation could occur, therefore it was some time before I could sneak a 51 pattern ammo pouch on to my belt and a large pack on my back (for extra ammo in my role as a Pl2ic)....good times

[@RiflemanMoore]

Many thanks for all the information. Kit customisation is always a fascinating topic.

[@richardhummell2497]

There is one piece of equipment missing which is the poncho. We were issued (1969) four of the strap, blanket, one each (what you call support strap) two to use on the large pack and two to wrap your blanket (2 for late fall and early spring) inside the poncho and attached to the web belt.

[@gunnerjames1056]

Update after quite a bit of searching. Post WWII Belgian entrenching tool cover. There is one presently available on ebay.

[@gunnerjames1056]

Love the seldom seen Canadian kit. This is very well explained with a very complete set of 51' pattern web equipment. I had to grab my entrenching tool cover which does not look like your example. Mine is of the same material, light green, same shape, but with a few differences. I don't know what this is. The rivets are very brass covered. Snap for closure does not look the same, and the back has a stitched on belt loop with short strap above that. the short strap and buckle is an exact copy of what is on the side of the canteen cover. Maybe you have an idea? Looking forward to parts two and three! Thanks Rifleman Moore.

[@RiflemanMoore]

Thanks James, glad you found this interesting. Also interesting to hear about your entrenching tool carrier, glad you managed to find out what it was!

[@pdxyyz]

Joined the reserves in 1980, this was the webbing we were issued. Never even got the 64 pattern.

[@gunnerjames1056]

@@pdxyyz I joined in January 1984. The 82' pattern was all I ever saw as well. The 82' pattern is a much better design for sure. Thanks pdxyyz!

[@sergeant1725]

I've got an almost complete set of 51 patt for my post war Canadian impression, and I can confirm that 51 equipment was used until the 70's in the reserves partially because the 64 pattern equipment was the worst equipment since the oliver and that the reserves get outfitted after the regulars and usually by that time it's up to 10 years later.

[@RiflemanMoore]

Indeed so, I plan to talk about same when I cover the 1964 Pattern.

[@joeydepalmer4457]

the 1951 pattern web gear was still issued up to the mid 1980s and used up to the mid 1990s, and some of us still have our 51 pattern webbing

[@Michael-wc8xl]

@@joeydepalmer4457 Yes. My Unit wore it until conversion to the '82 pattern....in 1984. When I was on Flyover '83, I had to draw '64 pattern and return it once I got back from FRG.

[@reddevilparatrooper]

Outstanding presentation!!

[@RiflemanMoore]

Many thanks!

[@ZvZd]

Great job as always!

[@willtheww2collector742]

i agree ( :

[@RiflemanMoore]

Many thanks!

[@MichaelR58]

Thanks for sharing, always great content, atb 👍

[@RiflemanMoore]

Many thanks, glad you enjoyed!

[@rpm1796]

The Canadian Guards at Horse Guards....that would have been a sight.

[@RiflemanMoore]

It would indeed.

[@willtheww2collector742]

nice video, found this realy intresting

[@RiflemanMoore]

Glad to hear it, thanks for commenting!

[@wmsollenberger8706]

Enjoyed this very much, nicely done! I do wonder if you might consider looking into the differences in WWI & II Canadian side arms and the somewhat confusing mix of web and leather holsters and associated gear? Again, very nice work and I look forward to more!

[@RiflemanMoore]

I'm afraid I am a little limited to looking at kit I have and that which friends have but I will see what I can do!

[@award3007]

@@RiflemanMoore What about doing a Side by Side comparison of the 1951 and the 1964?

[@willtheww2collector742]

also could you do a video on ww2 british knitted items and where to buy them for good prices

[@RiflemanMoore]

At some point, possibly!

[@joeydepalmer4457]

are you talking about socks, sweaters and such?

[@willtheww2collector742]

@@joeydepalmer4457 yes

[@wardoge5969]

Got a very weird 51 pattern ammo pouch. It’s interestingly dated 1982 and has a weird adjustable shoulder strap and is even bigger then the normal ones

[@waynemcgee9633]

Sounds like the 82 pattern nuc bag. Wonderful piece of kit!

[@timmy2173]

Do you know any possible cheaper substitutes for a British ww2 anti gas cape?

[@RiflemanMoore]

When you say cheaper substitute what exactly do you mean? Are you looking for something cheaper than available reproductions?

[@timmy2173]

Rifleman Moore yes I was wondering something cheaper than the what price glory reproduction which stands at 75 USD. I dont means to be a burden but I just want to know if it is worth looking for a cheaper option

[@RiflemanMoore]

I'm not aware of any cheaper alternatives I'm afraid.

[@samuelparsons7080]

Would it be possible for a video on the British forage cap.

[@RiflemanMoore]

Do you mean the peaked forage cap or are you thinking of the Field Service Cap?

[@samuelparsons7080]

@@RiflemanMoore field service cap

[@althepal6818]

Are-you the hat was not a CWAC (Canadian Women Army Corps) headress?

[@RiflemanMoore]

Yep, I'm sure. The CWAC cap is somewhat similar but quite distinct.

[@althepal6818]

Yes, you are right. My mistake. According to what I found, it’s the cold weather hat though.

[@TheLoachman]

I wore that stuff in the mid-seventies and hated it. It combined the worst aspects of 37 Pattern and the worst aspects of US web equipment. It was difficult and time-consuming to adjust and uncomfortable. The hanger hooks were stupid. I modified a set with 64 Pattern velcro attachments in place of the hanger hooks for field use. Much quicker to adjust, and no bites from the brass hanger hooks. The ends of the braces should be attached to the buckles on the mess tin and water bottle carriers. If not, one got shouted at plus, when running, the carriers bounced around too much and the hanger hooks would eventually tear off.

[@RiflemanMoore]

Thanks for the user experience and the advice on attaching the braces to the bottle carrier and mess tin pouch. As I said in the video I have seen them attached without in period photographs, using just the hooks but I can imagine they would bounce around a lot, as you've described. The kit you modified, did you simply add your own velcro belt loops in the same position as on 1964 Pattern?

[@TheLoachman]

@@RiflemanMoore My pleasure. Just to clarify a little, I hated it, but we also had one (only) fellow who loved it. I don't know why. My "1957.5" Pattern is buried away in a box somewhere, else I'd send you photographs. I took 1964 Pattern attachments off of junked pieces - there was a lot of both types available in surplus shops in the 1970s. I had them stitched on in the same positions as per the 1964 Pattern. Do you have a set of our 1982 Pattern webbing? That was also garbage, but at least it could be adjusted quickly and easily. I've also got a set, less water bottle carrier but including rucksack, of trial stuff from the mid-seventies.

[@joeydepalmer4457]

and you thought the 1964 pattern web gear was better?

[@TheLoachman]

@@joeydepalmer4457 For comfort and adjustability, yes. For load-carrying capability and staying-togetherness, no. My hybrid webbing was better than either.

[@joeydepalmer4457]

@@TheLoachman i was wondering. the only ones I had heard that liked it was kids playing soldier. I always liked the p82 webbing with metal clips and gun tape reinforcement attachments the best but still liked the p51 webbing. I never seen he shovel that is in the video for the 51 webbing. it looks like 1 from the 64 webbing. for our 51 webbing we had the full sized shovel stuffed behind the haversack. and we never put a compass on the web belt; that is what a breast pocket is for. someone needs to mention to the guy who did the video about wire cutters (and pouches) and the cross straps on the haversack was used to hold the coat when not warn

[@althepal6818]

Are you sure the hat...