Doc

I agree with Chris. Doesn't look American to me, though of course I could be wrong. It just has the wrong feel. It appears oriental in origin to me. Doc

I seem to have been a bit incorrect in my comment. I was right as of the time the new uniform was implemented, but I found out today that the correct location for the "combat patch" is now on the right pocket, as the General is wearing it. Today, I was told by an officer wearing this uniform that most personnel really dislike it, since "It makes us look like bus drivers rather than soldiers". Doc

Ah, That is the new Army duty uniform-- just like the old "dress blues". No patches allowed. The "combat patch" is now in the form of an enameled version of the patch, worn below the right pocket, over the liver. I think it looks ridiculous in that location, and perhaps the General agrees with me. By regulation, his location for that "patch" is not correct, but who ever corrects a General about uniform violations? I am assuming that is his "combat patch", but I can't see the number on it to really check it on Google. Dave and I seem to have been typing at the same time. Doc

No photo attached, so can't comment on the photo. However, if you are talking about US Army Armor triangles, I have seen them worn on the pocket in the 1960s--- not as unit insignia, but as various types of awards (distinguished tank gunner, etc) and by instructors from the Armor school. Doc

The only problem with the thought that surgical technician was his previous Navy training is that MOS 861 is an ARMY MOS. I bet they would not have used this for previous Navy training. I still cannot explain this, but suspect it has something to do with his Army service. He may have been an 861 and then transferred to Infantry. But the form is not very clear on this issue. Doc

Note Block 4-- It says he was Infantry. Looks like he may have had Surgical Tech training and then later transferred to the Infantry. It's also a bit confusing, as it says he was discharged for Convenience of the Government for the purposes of enlistment in the Regular Army. Maybe he got the second MOS at that time. Doc

I don't believe that "wound badge" is anything official. That is one which was issued by a fraternal/social group for wounded veterans (mutilated combattants). It was not authorised for attachment to the CdG officially. Thus, I agree with you that it was added later. There actually are several monthly reviews (magazines) published by the Union des mutilés, which are available (in French) on the Bibliotheque Nationale site. I have not looked at them, but you might find out more about the badge if you did. Doc

Many of the Congressional medals of Honor given for Civil War actions were later reviewed and revoked. From: http://ngeorgia.com/history/mohm.html "Three medals, awarded to Daniel Sickles, Henry Tremain, and Daniel Butterworth (the so-called "Sickles' Circle) forced the review of the process in 1897 .Because these high-ranking individuals had gained medals in questionable ways, and because of other abuses of the Civil War era medal nominations, the process of applying for a Medal of Honor was revised. In addition to standardizing the nomination process, eyewitness testimony was required so that the committee could reduce the number of inappropriate medals awarded. The Purge of 1917 Perhaps the single most famous event associated with the Medal of Honor is the Purge of 1917. Originally convened in 1916 by Nelson Miles, himself a MOH awardee, the commission reviewed each of the Army medals awarded. Their report, presented in February, 1917, revoked the medals presented to 911 people including 864 medals awarded to the 27th Maine for re-enlisting and President Lincoln's funeral guard. Six medals awarded to civilians were revoked as well. Included in this group were Mary Walker, the only female awardee, and Buffalo Bill Cody, a scout and technically not a soldier during the Indian Wars. For sixty years the revocation of the medals stood. Dr. Walker, who refused to return the medal as requested by the U. S. Army, proudly wearing it every day until she died. In 1977 President Jimmy Carter re-instated the award to Walker. It would be another 13 years before President George Bush re-instated the medals for Cody and five other scouts." I have heard of several other US medals being revoked, when it was determined that they had not really been appropriately earned (or that the medal was only granted through political influence). Doc

Dave Danner is correct. There is no US policy, law, or regulation which permits revocation of military medals as a result of subsequent acts. They can be revoked only if investigation reveals they were not justified or correctly awarded in the first place. Doc

Thanks, Gentlemen. That helps. Doc

Good morning, all. I'm looking for some information to support a museum display. Does anyone know (and have the old regulations available to support the position) of what color shirt was worn with the US Army Officer's Green (Service) Uniform during the early 1960S? I know about the green shirts which were worn in the 70s and 80s, but can't remember what shirt was worn in the early days of this uniform. Was it a tan one, like that worn with the previous "Pinks and Greens"? The uniform in question is the one which looks like a green business suit, with notched lapels and a black stripe down the outside of the leg and around each wrist. Thanks in advance for any help. Doc

Watch out-- These are still being made. I was at a militaria show for reenactors last year, at which one dealer had original dog tag machines of several different periods and would make you anything you wanted, on what appeared to be original (or more likely, good reproduction) blanks. I would guess that the WW2 tags he could make on that WW2 machine would be totally indistinguishable from originals, without chemical analysis of the metal. He even had a few references as to how the tags should be set up in various periods. Doc

If the background to the chevrons is green, as it appears, these would date from about 1955 to the 1990s or later. Basically, during the period of the use of the Army Green Uniform. They were originally used with a blue background in the 1948-51 period. They appear to be cut edge rather than merrowed, so I would guess them dating to the earlier part of that period, say up until the early 1960s. I have no idea about the hat. Doc

At least at the present time, there is no VFW medal with any title like "Medal of Honor". See http://vfw1679.tripod.com/vfwaward.htm Doc

Nice One! Thanks. Doc

The best book on the subject of US enlisted pilots in my opinion is "They also flew". http://www.amazon.com/THEY-ALSO-FLEW-Enlisted-1912-1942/dp/1560988371 It addresses in some detail the reasons the US stopped using enlisted pilots. Doc

There is a photo at http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=30213 which looks a lot like your shell (even to the driving bands on the projectile), and which is labeled as a French 37mm. Posting #10, middle shell. However, I am confused as, if it is a 37mm, the diameter across the open mouth of the shell should be about 1.5", not 1.75" as you have it noted. Like I said, not my area. I hope one of the artillery experts will weigh in. You may want to post this request on the Great War Forum, as there are some artillery experts there. http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/ Good luck.

Not my area of expertise, but that looks like a variation of the US Ordnance Corps "bomb" marking at the 1:00 position, though it could be a French marking. It is not typical for the US ones I have seen, but..... I wonder if the 37-85 at the 10:00 position doesn't signify 37mm, 85mm long case. I bet the 1.17 and the 8.17 at the 3:00 positions are the month and date of production. However, the other lettering and markings are unknown to me, and don't look like typical US markings. Therefore, my guess is a 37mm shell, possibly French. I'm just guessing and have no real knowledge in this area. It would still be helpful to have the measurements, as Michael asked for. Need size across the mouth of the shell, and height of the shell. But, I could be totally wrong, and it could be Romulan or Klingon..... Doc

Army EOD Training starts at the Ordnance School (OMEMS) at Redstone Arsenal. Someone there may recognise your patch. See: http://omems.redstone.army.mil/contact/ Doc

I haven't seen it before, but it does not look officially military. The red bomb at upper left is explosive ordnance disposal (US Army), and I guess the dog is a military working dog. SEA might be referring to Vietnam, but doubtful-- I know many of the patches for operations since the VN war, and that just doesn't look like it. I would bet it is not an official patch-- may be for an exercise. Only guessing. Doc

Here is what I have on those wings. "Aerial Gunner (Established 29 April 1943. Discontinued 26 July 1949) - Upon authorization by his Commanding Officer, a regularly assigned aerial gunner member of an aircrew, who had demonstrated his proficiency as such, could wear the badge during such time that he was assigned to such duties. Graduates of an AAF flexible gunnery school, or of an AAF instructor's school (flexible gunnery) could wear the badge during such time as they were assigned as a regular gunner member of an aircrew, or were awaiting assignment to such duties, or were performing duties as an instructor in flexible gunnery. Individuals authorized to wear the Aerial Gunner or Aircrew Member badges could continue to wear such badges, when no longer so assigned, if they met one of the following three requirements: 150 hours flying duty as regularly assigned aerial gunners or aircrew members Participation as regularly assigned aerial gunner or aircrew member in 10 combat missions during which time exposure to enemy fire was probable and expected. Physically incapacitated through enemy action or while discharging duties as a member of an aircrew." Information from http://www.303rdbg.com/badges.html Doc

Both, but I currently have a 1928. Just from a "coolness" factor, it looks neater than an M1A1-- vertical foregrip, Cutts Compensator, and drum magazine.

It sort of depends on how you define "better". The military chose the M1A1 because it was easier to machine and cheaper to make than the 1928. Thus, better as a mass-produced military arm. However, the 1928 was more finely finished, better machined, and more accurate. Both do their jobs well, at the normal ranges for a submachine gun, are acceptably accurate, and are reliable.

There is lots more to this story, and it is well-documented. Bottom line is that after full investigation of his medical condition by the military laser eye injury experts, they apparently decided that it was unlikely that his eye complaints were in fact due to a laser exposure-- a decision he did not accept. The actual injuries were very untypical of a laser eye injury, especially in the red light ranges which were reported. He was, as far as I know, diagnosed as having had a possible laser exposure, but probably not a laser injury. I do not know what happened to his VA claim or his Purple Heart claim. After the incident, the Russian ship was boarded for inspection, and no laser device was found on board.

Many of those "name" rectangles were actually separate patches, not part of the actual unit patch, especially in the WW2 and Korean War eras. Thus, it is not uncommon to see the basic patch without the rectangle. Bob, I can't tell from the picture-- is that "1" an arabic or a roman numeral? If Roman "I", then it would be First Armored Corps, not First Armored Division. Doc