New Zealand Army Berets 1938-1999

Leave a comment May 10, 2023 Robert McKie

NZ Army Berets -1938-1999

The beret is a type of cloth cap with a rich military history that originated in the Basque district of France. Since its adoption by the Royal Tank Regiment in 1924, the beret has become a symbol of military service across the globe. New Zealand is no exception, having adopted its first berets in 1938. The New Zealand military has a long and varied history of using this iconic headdress. In this article, we will explore the history of berets in New Zealand’s military and their significance in various corps and regiments of the New Zealand army.

The Royal Tank Regiment adopted this headdress on 5 May 1924. The decision to choose the beret was made during a dinner in 1917 when officers of the Tank Corps discussed the end of the war and what kind of uniform the corps would wear in peacetime. One of the officers suggested that the corps adopt a headdress of our allies, following the tradition of the British Army adopting some form of headdress belonging to its enemies after most wars.

Initially, the choice was between the Breton beret worn by the Tirailleurs Alpins and the Basque beret worn by the Chars d’ Assault, but neither of these patterns met with favour from the Tank Corps officers. After further consideration, they decided upon the pattern popular among English girls’ schools. Many girls were sent a letter explaining the situation, and many berets of various colours were received in reply. Eventually, the black beret was authorised after a stern contest with the War Office.

Berets were first used as a headdress in New Zealand in 1938 when new uniforms for the Territorial forces were introduced, including a black beret for motorcyclists of the Light Machine Gun Platoons and dispatch riders.[1]

Motorcyclists discontinued the black beret in February 1942 when the NZ Tank Brigade was granted permission to use it as its official headdress.[2]

On 17 February 1942, 2 NZ Tank Battalion Routine Orders posted the following notice, “H.M the King as Colonel in Chief, Royal Tank Regiment, has signified his informal approval to an alliance between this Bde and the Royal Tank Regiment”. The ONLY personnel now authorised to wear black berets and tank patch are Army Tank Bn personnel with the sole exception of AFV School instructors only.[3]

Within the 2^nd New Zealand Expeditionary Force (2NZEF), The Divisional Cavalry in Egypt was the first to adopt the black beret. Later on, black berets were issued to most of the 4th New Zealand Armoured Brigade personnel in November 1942. A year later, soldiers serving in the 22 Battalion in Italy were issued a khaki beret to replace their field service cap.

4th NZ NZ Armoured Brigade Black Beret. Lee Hawkes Collection.

22 Battalion Khaki Beret. Lee Hawkes Collection

In the years following World War II, the New Zealand Army expanded the use of berets to various units. The Royal New Zealand Army Nursing Service (RNZANS) was authorised to wear a light grey beret in 1946, and the Women’s Auxiliary Army Corps (WAAC) was permitted to wear the khaki beret. However, the reintroduction of the traditional lemon squeezer as the official headdress of the New Zealand Army in February 1949 marked the end of the widespread use of berets by the NZ Army, with only the RNZAC, NZWRAC, and RNZANS authorised to use the beret as their headdress.

RNZAC Black Beret. Lee Hawkes Collection

RNZANS Grey Beret. Lee Hawkes Collection

When Kayforce, the New Zealand military contribution to the Korean War, was mobilised, the khaki beret was reintroduced as the standard headdress for all of Kayforce. However, RNZAC personnel on secondment to British armoured units in Korea continued to wear the black beret. The khaki beret remained the headdress for Kayforce personnel until their withdrawal from Korea in 1955. Initial issues to Kayforce were from existing New Zealand Stocks, with an additional 10000 to provide adequate stocks for replacement and issue to Kayforce and NZWAC purchased from the United Kingdom in 1952.[4]

Kayforce Khaki Beret. Lee Hawkes Collection

In 1954, the New Zealand Army Board decided to replace the existing khaki uniform of the New Zealand Women’s Royal Army Corps (NZWRAC) with a new uniform of tartan green with black accessories. The new NZWRAC uniform included a tartan green beret, which was authorised for wear on informal occasions. This change in uniform and the beret helped distinguish the NZWRAC from other units and symbolised their unique role within the army. The tartan green beret became an iconic part of the NZWRAC uniform and was worn with pride by its members.

In 1954, the Cap Battledress (Cap BD), known as the Ski Cap, was introduced as the official army headdress in New Zealand to replace the lemon squeezer hat.[5] However, this type of hat was not popular among the troops, particularly those in tropical climates. Despite the dissatisfaction, the Ski Cap remained the standard headdress until it was withdrawn from service in 1965.

In 1955, the New Zealand Special Air Service was formed, and they adopted the British airborne maroon beret as their official headgear. The adoption of the maroon beret by the NZSAS was a significant moment in the history of the New Zealand military. It reflected not only the elite status of the NZSAS but also the close relationship between New Zealand and the United Kingdom. In May 1955, an initial purchase was made to cover the issue of the maroon berets to selected personnel, as well as wastage and turnover, with the possibility of an increase in the size of the NZSAS. The purchase included 600 maroon berets, 500 anodised aluminium SAS badges, 60 embroidered SAS badges, and 60 sets of SAS collar badges. This move signalled a new era within the New Zealand military, and the maroon beret symbolised the high standards and specialised training of the NZSAS.[6] Despite the British SAS adopting a beige sand-coloured beret in 1956 and several opportunities to change, the NZSAS retained the maroon beret until 1986.

NZSAS Narron Beret. Lee Hawkes Collection

In 1958, a review of beret stock in the New Zealand Army revealed that 3000 new and partially worn khaki berets were sitting idle in Ordnance stocks. The idea of utilising them as part of the No2 Other Ranks Service dress was considered. However, after some discussion by the Army Dress Committee, it was decided that the khaki beret did not match the No2 Other Ranks Service dress, and a Cap Service Dress was provided instead.[7]

Following the reactivation of 16 Field Regiment (16 Fd Regt) after its service in Kayforce, there was a desire to acknowledge the regiment’s service in Korea. In 1960, it was proposed by the headquarters of the regiment to adopt the stock of 3000 khaki berets to maintain the traditions of the original regiment and for their suitability in appearance.[8] However, the Chief of General Staff (CGS), Major General C.E. Weir, was focused on standardising and simplifying army dress and did not support the proposal. He wanted to eliminate multifarious kit and keep the headdress for the army as the Cap BD for walking out and a jungle hat for field service, with no other variations permitted. As a result, the application to wear khaki berets by 16 Fd Regt was declined, and they were asked to propose another way to commemorate their association with Korea.[9]

In Malaya, the 2nd New Zealand Regiment (2NZ Regt) surveyed the suitability of the Cap BD as a headdress for the tropics and found that berets would be more suitable. In October 1960, 2 NZ Regt requested 50 berets of different sizes and styles to test their suitability as a tropical headdress.[10] Concurrently, the Army Dress Committee agreed in principle that berets would replace the Cap BD as the army’s everyday headdress. In March 1961, it was suggested that a scarlet beret would be a suitable colour for the Infantry beret.[11]

The Army Dress Committee reopened the discussion on berets in its 16 June 1961 meeting and recommended that Khaki berets be issued to all corps without berets to replace Caps BD. However, at the 15 June 1961 Infantry Conference, it was pointed out that if berets were to be introduced, the Infantry colour should not be scarlet but a Dark Green.[12]

The Director of the Royal New Zealand Artillery (DRNZA) joined the conversation on 3 July 1961, stating that if the NZ Army adopted berets, the RNZA should adopt the distinctive style of headdress worn by other members of the Royal Regiment, such as the Royal Artillery (RS), Royal Canadian Artillery (RCA), and Royal Australian Artillery (RAA), and adopt a blue beret.[13]

Up to this stage, the colours of berets, if adopted, had not formally been discussed as it was assumed that existing stocks of khaki berets would be utilised alongside the existing berets worn by them.

RNZAC – Black
NZSAS – Maroon
RNZNC – Grey
NZWRAC- Dark Green
At some stage, the following were granted coloured berets
- Royal New Zealand Dental Corps – Dark Green
- Trentham PT Instructors – Blue[14]

The QMG was concerned about the shortage of khaki berets in stock, as only 6000 were available. As a result, there were not enough berets to equip the entire army or even to dye some to meet the needs of coloured berets for the Infantry and Artillery. In response to the Infantry’s desire for a dark green beret, the QMG expressed confusion and suggested that red was the traditional Infantry colour. The QMG also commented that they could not understand why the Infantry would want to adopt a dark green beret, making them appear like members of the Women’s Royal Army Corps (WRAC) or the Dental Corps.[15]

The Director of Infantry quickly replied that although red was the traditional Infantry colour, it was not traditional for Infantry to wear red berets. British Infantry, for example, wore an assortment of berets (of different colours) and bonnets, with the majority of British infantry regiments wearing berets of dark blue. Although Dark Green had been decided as the preferred Infantry colour, members of the Royal New Zealand Infantry did not wish to be confused with the NZWRAC or Dental Corps and the rifle green beret, as worn by the 3^rd Green Jackets with whom the NZ Regt was in an alliance, was the preferred colour for the Infantry beret.[16]

On 17 August 1961, the Dress Committee reconvened and approved using coloured berets to represent Corps distinctions. The committee instructed the secretary to consult with the Corps’ Directors to determine their preferred colours based on the British Colour Council Dictionary of Standards. The type of headband, whether it was to be black or brown, was also to be specified.[17]

Reconvening on 14 November 1961, the Army Dress Committee examined the Corp’s preferences, but due to the DGMG dissenting on the proposed Rifle Green for the NZ Regt failed to reach an agreement. However, after further discussion with the Director Infantry on 16 November, the committee agreed to recommend the adopting of the following colours per the preferences of the various corps.[18]

Corps	Colour (BCC designation)	Headband
RNZA	Blue (Purple Navy – BCC192)	Black
RNZE	Blue (Purple Navy – BCC192)	Black
RNZ Sigs	Blue (Purple Navy – BCC192)	Black
RNZASC	Blue (Purple Navy – BCC192)	Black
RNZAOC	Blue (Purple Navy – BCC192)	Black
RNZEME	Blue (Purple Navy – BCC192)	Black
RNZDC	Blue (Purple Navy – BCC192)	Black
RF CADETS	Blue (Purple Navy – BCC192)	Black
RNZChD	Blue (Purple Navy – BCC192)	Black
RNZAC	Black (Jet Black – BCC 220)	Black
NZ Regt	Green (Rifle Green – BCC 27)	Black
NZSAS	Maroon (Maroon – BCC 39)	Black
RNZAMC	Dull Cherry (Ruby – BCC 38)	Black
RNZ Pro	Blue (Royal Blue – BCC 197)	Black
NZAEC	Khaki (Khaki – BCC 72)	Brown
RNZNC	Grey (Grebe – BCC 82)	Black
NZWRAC	Green (Tartan Green – BCC 26)	Black

NZ Regt/ RNZIR Rifle Green Beret (2/1 Badge and backing). Lee Hawkes Collection

In September 1962, the Army Dress Committee met again and agreed that the recommendations made for coloured berets on 16 November 1961 should be cancelled and that the NZ Army should adopt a standard green beret for all corps except those whom Dress Regs already authorise to wear berets in other colours, i.e., Black (RNZAC), Maroon (NZSAS), Grey (RNZNC)and Green (NZWRAC). In support of this proposal, the justification was.

The requirement for Corps distinctions in the form of headdress has diminished considerably with the introduction of shoulder titles.
Green tones well with current and proposed Army uniforms and is ideal for training activities.
Introducing berets in all the colours previously agreed upon would create an unnecessary provisioning problem.[19][20]

The discussion on berets continued into 1963 with the decision made to retain the existing Black (RNZAC), Maroon (NZSAS), Grey (RNZNC)and Green (NZWRAC) but introduce blue berets for all other corps, including the Royal New Zealand Army Medic Corps (RNZAMC), NZ Provost and the New Zealand Army Education Corps (NZAEC) who initially requested Ruby, Royal Blue and Khaki berets.

By October 1964, sufficient stock was received, the policy surrounding the issue of Berets and the withdrawal of the Cap BD was finalised, and the Instruction for the distribution of Berets was released in February 1965.[21]

New Zealand Army Air Corps

In 1963, the New Zealand Army Air Corps (NZAAC) was established, and it became affiliated with the UK Army Air Corps on 6 March 1964. Major General J.H. Mogg, the Colonel Commandant of the Army Air Corps, granted permission for the NZAAC to don the Army Air Corps Light Blue beret and AAC badges.[22]

NZACC Light Blue Beret. Lee Hawkes Collection

Regular Force Cadets

In July 1972, a submission was made to the Army Dress Committee to introduce scarlet Berets (BCC 209 – Post Office red) as the authorised headdress for Regular Force Cadets instead of the blue berets worn since 1965. The proposal represented an extension of the present colour distinction of RF Cadets as evidenced in lanyards, chevrons, badges of rank and shoulder titles. [23]

Redesign of Beret

As a result of questions raised at the 29 November 1983 Army Dress Committee meeting on the design of berets, a study was initiated to be undertaken by the Deputy Director of Ordnance Services and by Army R&D to examine standard samples of berets produced by Hills Hats for the Australian and Singaporean Armies to see if one was of a better design with less cloth in the crown than currently on issue in the NZ Army.[24] This study resulted in introducing a redesigned beret with less cloth in the crown and a cloth headband instead of the traditional leather headband.

Royal New Zealand Military Police

Following the 1981 rebranding of the Royal NZ Provost Corps to the Corps of Royal New Zealand Military Police (RNZMP), a request for a distinctive RNZMP beret in the corps colour of Royal Blue was submitted to the Army Dress Committee in November 1983.[25] This submission was approved, and by the end of 1984, all RF and most TF members of the RNZMP were wearing the new royal Blue beret.[26] As a result of a 1986 CGS directive for the RNZMP to replace their blue regimental belt because of its similarity with the NZSAS belt, the RNZMP director raised a submission to introduce a red belt and beret. Opinion on introducing a red belt and beret for the RNZMP was evenly divided, principally because of the clash with the RF Cadet school belt and beret.[27] This submission for the RNZMP to wear a red beret and belt was rejected by CGS, and the use of the royal blue beret remained extant.[28]

Royal New Zealand Chaplains Department

The Army Dress Committee received a proposal on 31 August 1984 regarding the possibility of Royal New Zealand Chaplains Department (RNZChD) personnel wearing a Royal Purple beret. At that time, Chaplains and fourteen other Corps wore the blue beret, and there was a desire to establish a distinctive beret that would readily identify the Chaplains and align with the colours associated with the Chaplaincy. The proposal suggested using Royal Purple (BCC219), the traditional colour of the Chaplains’ Department. It was proposed that the black leather rim of the beret would remain unchanged. This initiative aimed to complete the rebranding of the RNZChD, which had already commenced with the approval and production of the specifically designed NZ Cap Badge.[29]

However, on 27 November 1984, the recommendation to change the beret colour for the RNZChD was not approved. This decision was made due to the recent approval of a uniquely distinctive badge for the RNZChD, which was considered sufficient for identifying the Chaplains.[30]

Royal Regiment of New Zealand Artillery

On St Barbara’s Day, 4 December 1984, the Royal Regiment of New Zealand Artillery significantly changed by exchanging their blue berets for khaki ones. A departure from the tradition followed by gunners throughout the Commonwealth, who still wore blue berets. The decision to change the beret came from a feeling among gunners that, as the senior corps, they should have a distinctive headdress.

The Royal New Zealand Artillery believed that the khaki beret had already established a singular tradition since 1940 when 2NZEF wore it during World War II and by Kayforce in the Korean War. 16 Fd Reg, RNZA, was the principal army element of Kayforce, and the modern New Zealand gunners claimed the exclusive right to wear the khaki beret due to their association with this regiment.[31]

New Zealand Special Air Service

Following at least two ‘show of hands’ votes by all available members of 1 NZSAS Group, with some resistance to change on historical principles by some unit members, a submission to change the colour of the beret to ‘sand’ was forwarded to the Army Dress Committee 24 May 1985 by the CO 1 NZSAS Group. Supported by the NZ SAS Colonel Commandant, Colonel Frank Rennie, the proposal was to remain consistent with the Australian SASR and UK 22 SAS and change the NZSAS beret colour from maroon to sand. While generally supported by the Army Dress Committee, there were reservations over the possible similarity in colour (should they change) with the new RNZA beret and over the fact that NZSAS, since its formation in the 1950s, had always had a maroon beret and it now considered a uniquely NZ item of dress. The chairman recommended the colour change to the CGS, noting the committee’s reservations.[32]

Concurring with the committee’s reservations, the CGS Major General John Mace did not initially support the change proposal. An original troop commander in 1955 and a squadron commander in 1960-62 and 1965-66. CGS counted that the proposed beret was too similar to the new RNZA beret and that while “the change might serve a purpose overseas, the Gp are permanently NZ based. There is historical and traditional significance in the red beret for NZSAS. The only development that would change my mind would be the finalisation of an airborne element for the NZ Army or a request signed by all serving members of the Gp.”

Taking the proposal back to the unit, the CO 1 NZSAS GP asked the unit members to vote in writing on whether or not they supported the change of beret colour. Cognisant that there were those within the unit who supported the change and those that favoured the traditional status quo. The CO asked the unit to consider the change based on the following considerations.

All para, quasi-para or airborne forces, including the Australian female parachute packers, appear to wear the maroon beret.
CGS had requested the preparation of a proposal to discuss the formation of an NZ airborne/para-trained force. This proposal would issue them a maroon beret once para qualified.
3 RAR had recently been issued the maroon beret.
The sand beret and RNZA beret are similar in colour but easily distinguishable. The badge would be the current embroidered badge which would distinguish the NS SAS from the SASR, which used a metal badge.[33]

In a vote undertaken by all badged serving members of the unit in which they indicated if they previously supported the change and if they now supported the change, the vote was unanimous in support of the change of beret colour. Eleven personnel who had previously not supported the change now supported the proposal.[34] On 24 January 1986, CGS authorised the NZSAS to wear the sand-coloured beret.[35]

Royal New Zealand Corps of Signals

At the Royal New Zealand Corps of Signals (RNZSigs) September 1986 Triennial Conference at Hopuhopu Camp, seventy RNZ Sigs Officers and Warrant Officers displayed enthusiasm for a change of beret colour and indicated that the new colour they preferred was Rifle Green. The reasoning for this choice of beret colour was based on the RNZSigs corps colours, representing the three media of communications of air, land and sea as represented on the Corps stable belt,

Dark Blue (the sea) – Royal Blue (BCC 197) (worn by RNZMP).
Green (the land) – Rifle Green (BCC 27)
Light Blue (the air) – Spectrum Blue (BCC 86)

A proposal requesting authority for RNZ Sigs pers to wear a Rifle Green beret was submitted to the Army Dress Committee on 29 September 1986.[36]

The recommendation was that the RNZSigs wear a rifle green beret because:

it would be a distinctive corps headdress
all other ‘teeth’ arms less RNZE have a distinctive beret
the colour is traditionally a ‘Signals’ colour

Although D Inf & SAS considered the colour too similar to that worn by RNZIR, most of the Dress Committee supported the change at the 3 November meeting of the Army Dress Committee.[37] Notification of the CGS approval of the RNZSigs beret was noted in the 12 May 1987 minutes of the Army Dress Committee.[38]

New Zealand Intelligence Corps

The New Zealand Intelligence Corps (NZIC) was initially formed as part of the Territorial Force in January 1942 but was disbanded in 1947 as part of the post-war reorganisation. On 15 March 1987, it was re-established as a Regular Force Corps and named the New Zealand Army Intelligence Corps, which later reverted to its original title. Prior to the formation of the NZIC, individuals posted to intelligence positions unofficially wore the British Army Intelligence Corps Cypress Green Beret. When the NZIC was re-established in 1987, the beret was adopted as the official headdress of the NZIC.

One Army Beret

The New Zealand Army boldly moved on 16 August 1999 when CGS Major General Maurice Dodson issued a directive to adopt a “one army” beret. The directive aimed to create a sense of unity and pride among all soldiers and to simplify the number of coloured berets in the NZ Army. This resulted in the rifle green beret, previously reserved for the RNZSigs, becoming the standard beret for all officers and soldiers, except for the NZSAS, who retained their sand beret.

However, the transition to the “one army” beret was met with resistance, with many officers, soldiers, and veterans opposing the change. They were attached to their former beret colours and saw the change as unnecessary. This dissatisfaction was mirrored in 2001 when the United States Army moved to a “one army” beret for all soldiers, highlighting the powerful effect that symbols such as coloured berets can have on morale and unit pride. The NZ Army “one army” beret has endured despite the initial resistance. The New Zealand Cadet Coprs continued to wear the Blue Beret.

One Army Beret with QAMR Badge. Lee Hawkes Collection

Notes

[1] “New Army Uniforms and Modern Military Vehicles for Dominion Forces,” New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 23033, 10 May 1938.

[2] “New Zealand Army Instruction 164/1942,”(1942).

[3] “Wearing of Black Beret & Tank Patch,” 2 NZ Tank Battalion R.O. 26/1943 (1942).

[4] Application for Financial Authority, Khaki Berets 14 November 1952. “Clothing – Head Dress – Berets: Povision,” Archives New Zealand No R17187783 (1952 -1965).

[5] Malcolm Thomas and Cliff Lord, New Zealand Army Distinguishing Patches, 1911-1991 (Wellington, N.Z.: M. Thomas and C. Lord, 1995, 1995), Bibliographies, Non-fiction, 128-29.

[6] Army 213/6/7/Q Application for Financial Authority, Berets for Special Air Squadron 31 May 1955.Ibid.

[7] Minutes of the 17th meeting of the Army Dress Committee held at Army HQ on 9 October 1958.Ibid.

[8] Army 213/6/7/Arty Headdress – 16 Fd Regt 30 March 1960. Ibid.

[9] 213/6/7/Arty Headdress – 16 Fd Regt 26 April 1960. Ibid.

[10] Q209 Copy from 213/7/40 HQ NZ Army Force GHQ FARELF Tropical Type Headdress 11 October 1960.Ibid.

[11] 219/7/A4 Headdress: Berets 17 March 1960. Ibid.

[12] Minutes of the 28^th meeting of the Army Dress Committee at Army HQ on 16 June 1961. Ibid.

[13] Army 213/6/7 Dress Committee Meeting – 16 June 1961 Berets. Ibid.

[14] Army 213/6/7/A4 Berets 4 July 1961.Ibid.

[15] 213/6/7/DQ Berets 6 July 1961ibid.

[16] D Inf Reply to 213/6/7/DQ Berets. Ibid.

[17] Minutes of the 29^th meeting of the Army Dress Committee held at Army HQ on 17 August 1961. Ibid.

[18] Minutes of the 32nd meeting of the Army Dress Committee held at Army HQ on 16 November 1961. Ibid.

[19] Minutes of the 37^th meeting of the Army Dress Committee at Army HQ on 12 Sept 1962. “Conferences – New Zealand Army Dress Committee,” Archives New Zealand No R17188110 (1962-67).

[20] Minutes of the 37^th meeting of the Army Dress Committee held at Army HQ on13 September 1962. “Clothing – Head Dress – Berets: Provision.”

[21] Army 213/6/7/Q(A) Army HQ 9 Feb 1965. Ibid.

[22] NZACC Submission 9/84 to Army Dress Committee 7 August 1984. “Conferences – Policy and General – NZ Army Dress Committee 1984,” Archives New Zealand No R17311893 (1984).

[23] NC 8/2/2/ADC HQ Home Command Amendment to Army Clothing Scales Scarlet Berets: RF Cadets 21 July 1972. “Conferences – New Zealand Army Dress Committee,” Archives New Zealand No R9753141 (1970-73).

[24] Minutes of the Army Dress Committee, 29 November 1983. “Conferences – Policy and General – NZ Army Dress Committee 1985-86,” Archives New Zealand No R17311895 (1985 – 1986).

[25] Minutes of the Army Dress Committee, 29 November 1983. Ibid.

[26] RNZMP Submission 3/87 to Army Dress Committee 30 September 1986. “Conferences – Policy and General – NZ Army Dress Committee 1986-87,” Archives New Zealand No R17311897 (1986 – 1987).

[27] Minutes of the Army Dress Committee 3 November 1986. Ibid.

[28] RNZMP submission 3/87 to Army Dress Committee 30 September 1986.Ibid.

[29] RNZChD submission 11/84 to Army Dress Committee 31 August 1984. “Conferences – Policy and General – NZ Army Dress Committee 1984.”

[30] Minutes of the Army Dress Committee 27 November 1984. Ibid.

[31] “St Barbaras Day,” The Press, 5 December 1984.

[32] Minutes of the Army Dress Committee, 24 May 1985. “Conferences – Policy and General – NZ Army Dress Committee 1985-86.”

[33] NZSAS 5252 Change of Colour for NZSAS Beret 27 September 1985. Ibid.

[34] Correspondence CO SAS to DInf &SAS 15 December 1985.Ibid.

[35] Army 220/5/103 DRESS-NZSAS PERS 24 January 1986. Ibid.

[36] Signals Directorate 1000/1 Submission to Army Dress Committee 29 September 1986. “Conferences – Policy and General – NZ Army Dress Committee 1986-87.”

[37] Minutes of the Army Dress Committee 3 November 1986. Ibid.

[38] Minutes of the Army Dress Committee, 12 May 1987. Ibid.

NZ Army Camouflage 1949-1979

Leave a comment Apr 29, 2023 Robert McKie

In the 1960s, the New Zealand Army introduced a distinct camouflage pattern for its lightweight individual shelters. The pattern was a unique blend of blotches and brushstrokes, featuring dark green and olive-green blotches, russet brushstrokes, and a lime green background. This design remained in use for over two decades and piqued the interest of camouflage enthusiasts. This article will delve into the history of this camouflage pattern.

During the Second World War and through the 1950s, the standard combat uniform of the New Zealand Army was the khaki drill, which proved to be largely ineffective as camouflage in a jungle environment. In response, modifications were made to the standard khaki drill uniforms in 1942 at three different camouflage sections in Auckland, Christchurch, and Wellington by manually applying a camouflage pattern using spray equipment. This resulted in a mottled scheme with little recognisable design, which functioned more effectively than the plain khaki drill in the jungle combat zones of the Pacific theatre. Several thousand of these uniforms were in service by 1943 and saw action with the 3rd Division/2nd New Zealand Expeditionary Force in the Pacific, specifically in the battle of the Treasury Islands and the action of Vella Lavella in the Solomon Islands.

Following the disbandment of the 3rd Division in 1944, no further use was made of these expedient combat suits. In the post-war era, as the New Zealand Army was reorganised and equipped into a Divisional structure supported by a Compulsory Military Training (CMT) scheme, advice was sought from Australia and the United Kingdom on using camouflage clothing for field craft and battle drills in peace and war.

Australia was waiting for the United Kingdom to decide on camouflage clothing before formulating an Australian policy. In October 1949, the United Kingdom clarified their position on camouflage clothing, stating that the new combat clothing for temperate areas would be coloured ‘Olive Drab’ (SCC15). Troop trials of the combat suit in SCC15 were underway in the UK, BAOR and MELF to be completed by 31 March 1950. It was, however, thought that disruptive camouflage may be better than plain SCC15, but no further decision on this point would be taken until the reports of the troop trials had been studied.

As this reply from the United Kingdom was indefinite, New Zealand took the position in November 1949 that dying suits of Khaki Drill uniforms Olive drab would provide a suitable camouflage uniform for New Zealand infantry units undertaking field craft and battle drills. Trials of bulk dying of Khaki Drill uniforms were undertaken by Taylor Drycleaning of Wellington in January 1950, with 2397 camouflage (Olive Drab) jackets and 2393 trousers distributed to the three Military Districts in May 1950, and a further batch of 1488 jackets distributed in February 1952. With the adoption of Drill Green uniforms in December 1955, the requirement for the dyed camouflage suits passed, and they were progressively wasted out of service.

By 1962 the New Zealand Army was embarking on a program of modernisation of its clothing and equipment. Enquiries with industry indicated to the Quartermaster General (QMG) that it was technically possible to manufacture Parkas, Overtrousers, Shelters Lightweight and Bedrolls with a camouflage effect if required.

The advice provided to the QMG from the Directors of Infantry and Training indicated that as Parkas and Overtrousers were primarily used only for training within New Zealand, Olive Green or some other inauspicious shade be used. Although a Recommendation was made that there was no requirement to have a camouflaged bedroll and they too should be Olive Green, there was merit in having camouflaged shelters.

The green New Zealand lightweight Shelter had been developed from the Australian shelter with an initial purchase of 5910 commencing in late 1965 to selected Field Force and District training pools. The New Zealand lightweight shelter was fitted with the same fittings allowing two shelters with the addition of poles and flaps to be joined to form a two-person tent.

It was recommended that a camouflage pattern of irregular shapes about 12 inches in diameter, 12 inches apart, should be printed against the Olive green base colour to break up the outline of the green shelters. Dark Brown was suggested as the camouflage colour. However, further trials were required to determine the best size and colour.

SME Trials

With the requirement to camouflage personal shelters with the suggested pattern of irregular patches of dark brown patches against an Olive Green background, the New Zealand School of Military Engineering (SME) was tasked on 28 March 1963 to investigate the problem to determine the best size and colour for the personal shelters. SME was given until 30 April 1963 to report on their progress. However, to allow the required resources to be purchased and comprehensive trials conducted, SME submitted their report in December 1963.

SME produced samples using a mixture of commercial off-the-shelf paints and paints mixed to meet US Army specifications, the commercial colours of the Interlux brand were.

Matt Manilla (Yellow Brown)
Matt Venetian Red
Matt Almond Green
Matt Copper Mist
High Gloss Black
Blackboard Black

The Interlux colours were hand and spray painted on shelters in the following patterns

Disruptive painting using French curves to join adjacent colours
Disruptive painting of straight lines to join adjacent colours to produce a triangle effect.
Painting by dabbing with a 2-inch paintbrush

The paints to US Army specifications were chosen from US Manual FM5-22 Camouflage Materials and mixed by the International Paint Company Laboratory to obtain the best match possible. The colours were

No 6 Earth Brown
No 7 Forest Green
No 8 Olive Drab
No 9 Field Drab
No 11 Light Green
No 12 Light Stone

The US Colours were hand and spray painted using the following patterns,

Three colour overlays by dabbing with a paintbrush
Three-colour cam net effect with 7-inch diamonds and 2-inch stripes
Two-colour cam net effect with 4-inch diamonds and 1-inch stripes.
Two colour disruptive painting.

Each scheme was tested over a month to determine weathering, flexibility and ease of application.

It was found that both types of paint weathered well and remained flexible. The US Colours were found easier to apply with the schemes in the US Colours that had been dabbed with a paintbrush, produced a good camouflage effect.

Each painted shelter was then photographed without regard to the background from a distance of 20 feet which provided an accurate indication of the colour schemes and design, leading to the selection of six schemes for a final test.

In the final series of tests, the six selected schemes were arranged against as many backgrounds as possible and then photographed from different distances. The No1 Scheme (Interlux Black and Copper Mist Disruptive Pattern) was found to have the best concealment against foliage. The No 3 Scheme (US Colours of Earth Brown, Olive Drab, Light Green, Light Stone in a Dabbed pattern) provided the best concealment against light backgrounds.

Overall, the SME trial found no colour or pattern suitable for all backgrounds. Although all the types of paints trailed were easy to apply, did not fade and were flexible, it was found that the paints specifically mixed to the US Colour specifications were superior to the commercial types. The results of this trial and the practicality of hand painting individual shelters and developments in industrial cloth printing methods did not encourage further development of this idea.

Seeking advice on Australian camouflage developments, it was found that although the Australian Army was developing a camouflage material for use on their Smock Tropical Lightweight and sub-unit command post shelters, there was no intent or Australian requirement for a camouflaged lightweight shelter.

1960’s Australian Army Smock Tropical Lightweight and sub-unit command post shelter Camouflage pattern. Robert McKie Collection

However, the New Zealand Army’s requirement for lightweight camouflaged shelters remained with further development aimed at procuring printed material that could be manufactured into shelters. Based on the SME trial, the desired colours were to be based on a dabbed pattern, including the US colours of Earth Brown, Olive Drab, Light Green, Light Stone Forest Green and Field Drab.

Type A, B C and D Trials

New Zealand industry was approached to provide a polyester cloth printed with a camouflage pattern coated with polythene for durability. In August 1964 agreement was reached between the New Zealand Army and textile agents Read & Gibson Limited and their Japanese principles, the Marubeni-Iida Company Limited, to provide fifty-yard lengths of six different screen-printed designs with the option to roller print the designs in the future if the technical difficulties in roller printing were resolved.

At least four samples of the new cloth and patterns were received in December 1964, from which samples for trial were selected in February 1965. with the two preferred items manufactured for trial as,

Type A – Even pattern
Type B -Streaky Pattern

The two samples that were rejected and not preferred were also manufactured into shelters for trial as

Type C, and
Type D.

In addition to the shelters, two designs of capes were manufactured from the same batch of material and labelled as

A1 and A2
B1 and B2

The A1 and B1 capes were fitted with Velcro fastenings, while the A2 and B2 capes had dome fittings. There is no record of the trials for the cape, and it is assumed that the concept did not progress past the prototype phase.

1RNZIR were then tasked to determine the best camouflage pattern for use in Southeast, with the brief to test the shelters under varying conditions of terrain, light and climate with the report to indicate,

Acceptance of one or other patterns
Any alterations required to the shade or shape

By August 1965, 1RNZIR had completed their initial trials on the A, B, C and D types. All four samples were field tested in the primary jungle, secondary growth, padi, rubber and low scrub under a variety of light conditions in Malaya and Sarawak. Sufficient variations in climate, vegetation and light were experienced to allow a thorough test of all the camouflage patterns to be completed. The same two pers trialled all patterns to allow comparisons to be made on the spot.

The most notable point about all patterns was that the primary colour was too dark. This darkness caused the actual pattern to become almost invisible from about 40 yds distance wherever any overhead cover existed, this distance increasing to about 60 yds in open country. This made the whole shelter appear much darker than the surroundings by day, even in the primary jungle, and consequently, the value of any pattern was lost. Viewed from distances less than those stated, the shelters looked like a piece of waterproof material that someone had tried in vain to camouflage instead of blending in with the background. This fault applied equally to all patterns.

Type A. Apart from the dark primary colour, this pattern was found to be overly intense. The shapes should be slightly larger, and more spread out. Shadows, which these patterns are doubtless intended to represent, are not found as close as is depicted in this pattern.
Type B. As with Type A, allowing for the dark primary colour, the pattern was a little too intense, although not to the same extent as Type A. If this design were more distinct, it would blend in with the surroundings better than any of the other trial designs.
Type C. This design failed to blend in well under very few conditions for the reasons mentioned with Type A, and B. Shadows do not form this close together. It must be appreciated that it was not easy to make a fair comparison with a small square of material as opposed to a full-sized shelter, but the comments apply as near as possible.
Type D. Same as Type C, but more suited than Type C as the intensity is modified.

It was summarised that all the patterns were printed on a background that was too dark and did not make for good camouflaging by day. All patterns were too intense, and any attempt to merge the shelters into shadows or leaves on the ground was lost from relatively short distances. The whole shelter merely became a dark shape which, while more challenging to identify than the Australian equivalent, did not achieve the aim.

The recommendations were to adopt Pattern B with reduced intensity (not so much mosaic per sq. yd) and to make the basic colouring lighter.

Type E, F and G Trials

Taking on board 1RNZIR trial feedback, in October 1965, three other camouflage cloth samples were received from the manufacturer for 1 RNZIR to conduct further trials on. Labelled as E, F and G, insufficient material was available to manufacture shelters suitable for trial. It was considered that local ‘ad hoc’ arrangements could reasonably assess that camouflage effect by 1 RNZIR

Despite the limitations placed on 1RNZIR by the small samples of the material provided, a trial report was submitted in December 1965, with testing carried out for one month in the areas adjacent to Terendak Camp at Malacca.

Type E. This pattern failed to achieve a sufficient contrast within itself and consequently contrasted too much with the surrounding foliage. Although the colours were natural, there was insufficient variety. The proportion of camouflage colour to primary colour was good, however.
Type F. A good pattern incorporating a suitable balance of light and dark natural colours blended into jungle surroundings well and broke up its outline. The uneven and irregular patches of colour assisted in this, and the proportion of coverage was satisfactory.
Type G. This pattern was too vivid and tended to attract attention rather than remain inconspicuous. The shapes and proportions of colours were suitable, but the choice of colours prevented acceptance.

Sample F was recommended as the most satisfactory pattern produced so far, and it was felt that if adopted, it could be suitable for ponchos and shelters and clothing and equipment.

The issue of Camouflaged Combat Clothing was discussed in 1965. However, the general feeling in Army Headquarters was that the Army could not produce camouflaged combat clothing of pattern satisfactory as a walking-out dress. Until then, Jungle Greens and Battle Dress were to remain the standard uniforms. However, any items designed for use in the field, such as parkas, bedrolls and shelters, should be camouflaged with principal development focused on developing suitable camouflage patterns and colours.

Type F Pattern Trials

With the sample pattern Type F accepted by 1 RNZIR, it was proposed to manufacture 12 shelters in the pattern and material for further trials in Malaysia, Borneo, Vietnam and possibly Thailand and 80 yards of material ordered from the manufacturer. By May 1966, the order of 80 yards had been received. However, it was in two parts, 15.5 yards, that had been Auto printed (labelled as A from a material using a cheaper automatic printing process, resulting in a slight difference in the depth of colour but no difference in the pattern. A Proto-type process was utilised to manufacture the remainder of the consignment (labelled as B). For the trial, the current green Lightweight Shelters manufacturer, the National Mortgage & Agency Limited, Jute and Bag Section in Dunedin, manufactured two ‘A’ shelters and six ‘B’ shelters. These were dispatched by the Director of Ordnance Services (DOS) by ait to the following units overseas for trials.

1RNZIR
- 1 Shelter Lightweight Camouflaged ( Labelled A)
- 3 Shelter Lightweight Camouflaged ( Labelled B)
- 4 Shelter lightweight (NZ Current Issue)
161 Battery
- 1 Shelter Lightweight Camouflaged ( Labelled A)
- 3 Shelter Lightweight Camouflaged ( Labelled B)
- 4 Shelter lightweight (NZ Current Issue)

All shelters were dispatched complete with end pieces but did not include poles and pins.

The trial by 1RNZIR and 161 Battery were to address the following questions

were the individual colours suitable under all light and background conditions?
Was the size and shape of the pattern satisfactory?
Did the camouflaged shelter shine under certain weather conditions?
Did the camouflage pattern marry up along the join in the material of each shelter?
Did the camouflage pattern marry along the join when constructing a two-person shelter?
Was there any loss in efficiency due to the ‘Auto-printing’ on the shelter labelled ‘ A’?
How did the camouflaged shelter compare to the Australian and current New Zealand green shelters?

The conclusion of the report was to include one of the two following statements,

A camouflaged shelter is required for SE Asian combat conditions, and the proto-type camouflaged shelter fully meets this requirement.
A camouflaged shelter is required for SE Asian combat conditions, and the proto-type camouflaged pattern and colours need to change in the following ways, stating the required changes.
A camouflaged shelter is NOT required for SE Asian combat conditions, as the current New Zealand green shelter fully meets the requirements.
A camouflaged shelter is NOT required for SE Asian combat conditions, as the current Australian shelter fully meets the requirements.

1RNZIR and 161 Battery conducted their trials and submitted their trial reports by the end of 1966, with both units stating that a camouflaged shelter was required. 1RNZIR recommended that the yellow base colour was too light and that ends were not required. 161 Battey proposed a dark green colour to replace the yellow base and wanted to retain the ends but of a different design.

Type H and J Trials

As both 1 RNZIR and 161 Battery considered the background colour of both the Type F pattern shelters inadequate, two new patterns were produced using a darker background colour. In June 1967, two shelters, Type H and J, were issued to 1 RNZIR and 161 Battery for further evaluation. This trial aimed to determine which colour combinations were the most acceptable under operational conditions in SE Asia and whether further minor changes were necessary. The trial conducted was to test the camouflage colours only and not the shelter design, as some non-standard fittings had been included .in the new shelters to ensure the shelters could be produced in the shortest possible time. The reverse side of the material was not as matt as were the previous shelters, but this was to be corrected in the final production of the accepted material.

Trials of the H and J-type shelters were completed by February 1968, with reports from both units inconclusive. However, both units agreed that despite the time limitations of the trial, Type H was the most suitable. In March 1968, satisfied that no further trials were required, Army HQ directed that all trial shelters from 1 RNZIR and V Force be returned to New Zealand.

On 21 March 1968, camouflage material in the type H Pattern was catalogued in the supply systems as 8305-98-102-3124 Cloth, Polyester Coated 2-3oz sq yd, 36in, Camouflage Pattern

In 1971, an initial order was placed for 132,000 yards of new camouflaged material, which was intended to be used to manufacture 10,000 shelters for the New Zealand Forces in Southeast Asia. This order also allowed for the establishment of maintenance and manufacturing reserves, reducing reliance on the Australian supply chain.

The 6,700 green shelters purchased by the New Zealand Forces since 1963 had an annual wastage rate of 270, meaning that they were gradually being depleted. The large-scale distribution of the new camouflage shelters did not occur until 1979 due to a reduction in operational and training commitments after the Vietnam War ended and National Service ceased in 1972.

With the introduction of combat uniforms in British DPM in December 1975, the shelter camouflage material was only extended to two-person tents, bedrolls and mittens. With more modern materials in DPM progressively introduced for field equipment, the New Zealand camouflage material and pattern were wasted out of service from the mid-1990s.

Development of NZ Army Combat Clothing, 1955 – 1980

Leave a comment Feb 11, 2023 Robert McKie

The New Zealand (NZ) Army entered the 1950s with combat clothing based on the World War Two Battle Dress (BD) and Khaki Drill (KD) uniforms. Both these uniform types had limitations, such as the BDs being too heavy for wear in summer, tropical and jungle climates but too lightweight for the temperate NZ Climate. Combat operations in Southeast Asia from 1955 had further highlighted the inadequacy of NZ combat clothing, leading to NZ soldiers equipped with an eclectic range of United Kingdom (UK), Australian and NZ-manufactured variants throughout the 1950s and 60s. To achieve a measure of sustainability and self-sufficiency when purchasing uniforms, NZ undertook extensive research and development on tropical combat uniforms during the 1960s. However, by the early 1970s, the requirement for temperate climate uniform became a priority leading to the adoption of the UK 1968 Pattern Disruptive Pattern Material (DPM) combat uniform. As the NZ Army transitioned from its World War Two legacy combat clothing to the most modern combat uniforms available, the transition was never complete, with elements of the older combat clothing remaining in service to be mixed and matched with the latest items as they were introduced. This article provides an overview of the NZ Army’s combat clothing transition from 1955 to the 1980s and how the requirements and types of combat clothing evolved.

A soldier hands out uniforms and bags to the first batch of 18-year-old army trainees. Photograph taken 29 June 1950 by an Evening Post staff photographer.Ref: 114/164/31-F. Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand. /records/23010004

Following World War Two, with Ordnance Stores well stocked and NZ industry well positioned to support any surge in demand, the NZ army retained the familiar combination of woollen serge Battle Dress (BD) and KD and Demin range of uniforms that had served it well during the war years. However, by 1955 the high tempo of training required to maintain a division supported by Compulsory Military Training (CMT), operations in Korea, and a likely commitment to ongoing operations in Southeast Asia highlighted deficiencies of the current ranger of uniforms. While the BD uniforms remained suitable for use in temperate and colder climates, the Army Clothing Committee identified a requirement to develop a summer training dress for use in NZ that would also be satisfactory for jungle operations. In response to the Army Dress Committee, Captain J.A Dixie of the Defence Scientific Corps of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR) provided a comprehensive report on Tropical Clothing. Reviewing World War Two and post-war scientific research on the problem of tropical clothing by the United States and Commonwealth, Dixie’s report provided the principles that guided the selection of a suitable NZ Army range of tropical uniforms and equipment.[1]

Following the deployment of the NZ Special Air Service (NZSAS) Squadron to Malaya in November 1955, NZ felt obliged to prepare NZ’s forces for service in Southeast Asia. Based on the equipping of the NZSAS from British theatre stocks, the assumption was that initial stocks of tropical clothing for any future deployment would be available from British theatre stocks, with NZ-manufactured tropical uniforms providing long-term sustainment. Therefore, in December 1955, the Army Board approved the transition of uniforms with BDs retained as winter dress in NZ, and KDs phased out in favour of uniforms manufactured in Drill Green (DG) for summer and working dress. The 1955 orders of dress were.

The transition to the new range of DG clothing was in the following sequence:

Waste out stock of KD garments by CMT issues, with the first issue to CMT recruits by 1959, with the process completed by 1960.
For other uses, convert stocks of KD material (not yet made up into uniforms) and waste out.
Undertake all further uniform manufacture (except BD and Greatcoats) in DG.
Build up a working reserve sufficient to equip 10,000 soldiers.[2]

NZ’s DG uniform pattern was the 1950 Pattern British Jungle Green (JG) uniform. The 1950 pattern uniform consisted of shirt and trousers made from a green-coloured cotton drill material. Fitted with a cross waist belt fastened by adjustable buckles on each side designed to account for the wearer losing weight in hot climates, the trouser style was known as ‘Gurkha pants.’ The trousers included a twin pleated front, pockets on each hip, twin rear pockets and a map pocket on the left leg.[3]

Jungle greens and Jungle boots as worn by New Zealand Forces in Malaya from 1955. NZ National Library Ref: EP/1956/0031-F

Due to the financial outlay required to provide a measure of fiscal control over future uniform changes, on 9 April 1956, Cabinet decided that “No new items in uniform scales of officers and other ranks are to be introduced or material changes therein made without the prior approval of the Minister of Defence in concurrence with the Minister of Finance to the finance involved.”[4]

Granted approval on 2 August 1958 and deployed to Malaya in October 1957, the 1st Battalion, The NZ Regiment (1 NZ Regt), was NZ’s first regular Infantry battalion and NZ’s land commitment to the Commonwealth’s Far East Land Forces (FARELF). The initial scaling of 1 NZ Regt was from NZ stocks with equipment, including clothing (four sets of NZ DGs), weapons and eighty-nine vehicles and trailers. However, with the approval of the Ministers of Defence and Finance, £59000 (NZD 3,359,047.60 in 2022) was expended to procure additional theatre-specific items not held in the NZ inventory from British theatre stocks in Malaya.[5] Given the distance involved and the complications of holding sufficient clothing stocks to cover all size ranges, it was decided in September 1957 that NZ-specific uniform items would be maintained from NZ, with the UK supplying and maintaining items on the FARELF clothing scales, managed under a capitation system where NZ reimbursed the UK for the equipment provided.[6] This arrangement was extended to include Australian equipment provided to the NZ Forces and remained in place until 1974. The initial items maintained by NZ with 1 NZ Regt provided with stock to allow 100% replacement were:

Still, a novel item under development as part of the NZ Army inventory, the evaluation and development of the NZ DG uniforms was ongoing. One of the first large-scale user trials in NZ was on Jungle Course No1 at Burnham Camp from 8 September to 31 October 1958. Feedback from Course participants was positive, with observations that DG items were satisfactory for NZ’s temperate conditions.[7] Instructions for distributing DG Uniforms were issued in October 1958, with three sets of KD approved for exchange with three sets of DGs for Regular Force (RF) Officers and Other Ranks.[8]

As the introduction of the DG uniform continued, limitations with the current material and cut of the DG Uniforms were highlighted. Although suitable for training for most conditions found in NZ, it was not suitable for operations in the tropical conditions of Malaya. Under an existing Commonwealth agreement, Australia took the lead in researching a range of tropical clothing and equipment. As Australian research and development continued, NZ continued to rely on the UK and Australia to provide tropical clothing while remaining focused on developing a range of clothing suitable for NZ’s temperate climate and conditions.[9]

The NZ Army Chief of General Staff (CGS) Clothing Conference in February 1960 prompted significant work in developing revised uniform scales and dress orders. A policy statement was issued in November 1960 to remove misunderstandings regarding the proposals under consideration and the obligatory and optional dress orders, with the 1960 orders of dress within NZ being:

The 1960 policy statement on orders of dress was aspirational in that it had identified additions to the winter and summer clothing scales. Driven by the realisation that harsh weather and inadequate clothing led to considerable loss of training time, investigations had identified that lighter materials with water-repellent and quick-drying qualities were available, leading to a proposed new line of uniforms and equipment superior to the current BDs and greatcoats. The proposed uniform and equipment were based on winter and summer uniforms.

The winter training uniform for RF and Territorial Force (TF) all ranks was to consist of Battledress supplemented by added items for introduction from 1962, including

Woollen shirt
Pullover with drawstring neck
Parka
Waterproof over trousers.
Gaiters

The summer training uniform for all RF and TF all ranks was to consist of the following:

Replacement of existing stocks of Summer Drill trousers with a new trouser pattern based on the UK 1960 Pattern Jungle Green trousers. The 1960 pattern trousers were identical to the 1952 Patten but had the addition of belt loops.
Replace the DG Shirt with the woollen shirt used in the winter dress.[10]

Troops posted to FARELF were issued in NZ with the standard scales supplemented by items needed for operational training in NZ. Before embarkation, NZ issue items not needed in the FARELF theatre were withdrawn and placed into base kit storage until the soldiers returned from overseas. On arrival in the FARELF theatre, additional items, including lightweight tropical and combat clothing, were issued from UK Stocks.[11]

In addition to clothing items, boots and bivouac equipment designed to provide soldiers with maximum protection against the weather during field training were included in the initial trials from July 1961.[12] The July 1961 trial provided a proof of concept that led to 1962 approval by the Ministers of Defence and Finance of a new range of basic clothing and clothing scales for the army to meet existing requirements with new scales approved for inclusion in NZ Army Routine and Standing Orders (R&SO) Volume 1 on 13 July 1962.[13][14] The formalisation of this scale was concurrent with the Ministers of Defence and Finance jointly approving the expenditure of £38,657.14.0 (NZD 1,948,037.31 in 2022) to enable payment to be made to GHQ FARELF for items of clothing issued by the UK to the NZ battalions in Malaya since 1957. Approval of further updates of the NZ clothing scales, including the NZ FARELF scale, followed in September 1963.[15]

By July 1964, with a continuing commitment to the Commonwealth FARELF in Malaysia and a growing commitment to the conflict in South Vietnam, the NZ Army convened a special committee to:

Define the policy governing all items of clothing and personal equipment for male members of the NZ Army in peace and war, in NZ and overseas.
Calculate the immediate and long-term requirements to equip the army and provide for maintenance.
Prioritise and select essential and suitable items for use in Southeast Asia and under conditions found in NZ.
Acknowledge that clothing and equipment needed to be specifically developed for both NZ and Southeast Asia.
Review the NZ Army’s present holdings to determine what was suitable for either permanent or interim use in SE Asia.
Base future scales on those already used within NZ and by 1 RNZIR in Malaysia.
Recommend maintenance stock levels based on current usage rates experienced by 1 RNZIR in Malaysia.

The clothing and personal equipment policy statement was comprehensive and logical, with sound recommendations that identified items of clothing and equipment for use by the NZ Army at home and overseas, with recommendations for new scales, stock and maintenance levels. Approved in principle by Army Headquarters, the clothing and personal equipment policy statement was submitted to the Ministry of Defence for approval in November 1964.[16] Following further analysis by the Ministry of Defence, it was recommended on 15 June 1965 that The Minister of Defence and Minster of Finance approve the new scales of clothing and personnel equipment for the NZ Army based on the expenditure of £1,425,00 ($6,698,087.41 in 2022) over the financial years 1965/66, 1966/67 and 1967/68.[17]

Despite the considerable financial commitment required, following the joint approval of the Ministers of Defence and Finance, on 21 March 1966, Cabinet approved in principle expenditure to allow the provision of clothing and personal equipment for the NZ Army’s future requirements over the next three fiscal years:

£1,425,00 ($66,980,874.05 in 2022) over the budget year 1965/66,
£430,000 ($19,569,115.53 in 2022) for the budget year 1966/67.
£430,000 (18,385,342.62 in 2022) for the budget year 1967/68.[18]

Approved by Cabinet, the clothing and personal equipment programme was a three-year programme to issue to troops and build up stocks over the years 1967 -1969 and was to:

Provide an initial issue to the Field Force of ten thousand soldiers, plus a three-month reserve stock at war wastage rates for immediate maintenance in the overseas theatre.
Hold sufficient materials and components to allow manufacturers six months of supply at war rates.
Additional stock of training clothing to meet needs in NZ.

With the 1961 trials identifying items for training in NZ, experience gained in Malaysia and later South Vietnam saw additional items of tropical combat clothing added to the clothing scales.

The Pullover with a drawstring neck was trialled in 1961 and, although undergoing minor modifications, was ready for introduction into service by March 1964.[19] Based on the British 1960 Pattern tropical shirt and trousers, the NZ-manufactured variants were the base of NZ’s summer and tropical dress orders. Although suitable for summer use, a shirt more suited to NZ’s temperate climate was desired, and from the three types trialled in 1961 with two types selected for further trials:

Type A 100% wool.
Type B was a wool/nylon mixture.

Introduced into servicer for a year-long trial from April 1965. 3703 type A shirts were Issued to RF personnel, excluding those posted to FARELF. The scale was one Type A Shirt Training per Officer and Soldier in exchange for one Shirt DG.[20] Thirteen Hundred of the marginally more expensive Type B Training shirt introduced for concurrent troop trials in October 1965. A revised Trial instruction was issued in December 1965, detailing the requirements for the trial, for completion by 31 August 1966, with trial reports submitted to Army HQ by 30 September 1966.[21]

The trial reports on both training shirts revealed faults related to the materials used, with the Type B shirt identified as an acceptable item in its current form. With a sufficient stock of the Type B shirt in circulation, trials were extended until 31 October 1966, with the Type B shirt included in the clothing scale by 1967.

As NZ’s commitment to the conflict in South Vietnam increased from mid-1964, the lack of suitable materials or shirts for use in tropical conditions became an issue. To meet the immediate needs of NZ’s overseas forces, continued reliance on the UK with additional items provided by Australia was necessary.

An early contribution to developing an NZ tropical combat shirt was in November 1964 when ten shirts made from a new acrylic fabric (trade name “Cashmillon”) were issued to the First Battalion of the Royal NZ Infantry Regiment (1RNZIR) in Malaysia for initial troop trials.[22] The trial NZ shirt was Intended to be rot-resistant, more robust, quicker drying and less chilling to the body when wet while providing warmth in cooler weather. T 1RNZIR trials were favourable, with the trial shirts preferred to the current British combat shirts and strongly recommended as a future combat shirt.[23]

New Zealand gunners in Saigon, Vietnam, being presented a garland of flowers by a woman from the Vietnamese Army, during an official welcome ceremony for the artillery unit. circa 5 August 1965. Ref: EP-Defence-NZ Army, Vietnam-01. Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand. /records/22829325

By August 1965, adverse media coverage on the quality of Australian Combat Clothing of the type issued to NZ’s Vietnam Force (V Force) prompted NZ Army Headquarters to approach the United States for samples and specifications of combat clothing used by United States Forces in South Vietnam, with feedback also obtained by HQ NZ V Force from United States Forces in South Vietnam on their satisfaction with their tropical combat uniforms.[24] Feedback from the United States Military Assistance Command Vietnam (MACV) and two United States advisors with the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN) identified that United States Army personnel in Vietnam were issued with two sets of Tropical Combat fatigues. The United States uniform was light, comfortable and quick-drying, resistant to rot under tropical conditions, with a combat life of about twelve days. Although having an apparent short operational life, this was comparable with the commonwealth experience with uniforms in jungle operations in Southeast Asia.[25]

The view of the NZ Army was that although the United States tropical uniform material was the best of those in use by allied armies and was supported by a continual improvement programme, prudence directed that based on the preliminary trials of the NZ acrylic cloth by 1RNZIR extended trials were required to be conducted.[26] With the NZ acrylic cloth being potentially superior to other cloths in use and likely to be suitable for NZ training conditions, the Army Development Section proposed that a further 300 yards of the cloth be purchased to enable further trials to be conducted.

However, feedback from the 9^th Commonwealth Defence Conference and the flammability risks of the acrylic material ceased meaningful development of this cloth. The UK and Australia both had large stocks of drill cloth, which, while not ideal, were still suitable for use as research to find a replacement material continued. Concurrent with NZ acrylic trials, Australia was in the preliminary stages of experimenting with a cotton/nylon mixture. However, the UK and Canada were concerned with the NZ trial as the cloth had little flame resistance. Based on this feedback, NZ reviewed its requirements and requested that the DSIR and industry undertake further development of the acrylic cloth to improve its fire resistance qualities. NZ’s requirements for tropical uniform material were satisfied by purchasing bulk stocks of the same material used by the UK for tropical clothing.[27]

1 Composite Ordnance Company Officers Ex Logploy Two Linton 6-9 March 1967 Left to Right: 2LT Telfer, 2Lt Watson, 2Lt Wootton, Lt McDonald, Capt Duggan, Maj Golightly, 2Lt Jones, Lt Reid, 2Lt Bowker. All wear 1960 Pattern DG Trousers with various KD, DG and Wollen Shirts. Robert.McKie Collection

By December 1967, the NZ clothing scales and the range of clothing supplied had become complicated. Each NZ soldier was issued clothing and equipment based on the NZ Training scale. Although the NZ Training scale was based on maintaining an integrated RF and TF Field Force, a 1967 study of the training clothing scales found disparities between the combat, training and walking out uniform scales of the RF and TF. To correct and align the RF and TF scales, a two-phase programme started in 1967 to correct the scales. Phase one, initiated in 1967, began the disposal of all wartime-style garments (items from World War One and Two were still in service) and rearranging the scale issue to the National Service Training Unit (NTSU). Beginning in December 1968, NTSU and TF recruits were to be issued the same combat clothing as the RF.[28]

On selection for deployment overseas, additional items were issued as part of the emplacement scale depending on the theatre. Items not required overseas were held in the soldier’s Base kit.

NZ Troops to HQ FARELF and 1 RNZIR. NZ Troops posted to HQ FARELF and 1 RNZIR issued from the NZ FARELF Scale with items drawn from stocks supplied by the UK and NZ. The solder retained items such as the UK tropical Shirts (Flannel or Cellular) and Trousers OG on return to NZ.
Victor and Whiskey Company troops, drawn from 1RNZIR and deployed to South Vietnam. Items of the FARELF scale not required in South Vietnam were placed into base kits. Additional Australian combat clothing was issued from Australian FARELF stocks, with maintenance provided by the Australian Logistic Support Group (ALSG) in South Vietnam.
HQ V Force, 161 Battery, Med Team and other troops deployed directly from NZ. In addition to NZ items, Australian combat clothing was issued, with maintenance provided by the Australian Logistic Support Group (ALSG) in South Vietnam.

The Australian combat clothing issued to NZ troops in Vietnam consisted of two types of uniforms: Shirts and Trousers Tropical Combat (JGs) and Coat and Trousers Mans Field Combat Tropical.

The Australian JGs were modelled after the British 1950 pattern tropical uniforms and made from lightweight green fabric. The shirt was long-sleeved with two chest pockets, and the trousers had the crossover “Gurkha” style closure with buckles on the sides and fitted with a single map pocket to the left thigh.
The Australian Coat and Trousers Mans Field Combat Tropical was inspired by the United States jungle fatigues and developed over 1965/66 with the Mark 1 version introduced into Australian service by January 1967. The coat (shirt) had pockets on the upper sleeves for shell dressings and slanted breast pockets. This new uniform was soon nicknamed “pixie greens.”

Australian Army jungle green tropical combat jacket.

Australian Army Jungle green cotton tropical combat trousers

In the interests of standardisation and leveraging from the operational experience gained by the Australians in Vietnam, the NZ Army considered adopting the Australian range of combat clothing for use in tropical combat conditions and as a replacement for DG items in NZ. Combat clothing trials were initiated in January 1967, with forty sets of the Australian prototype “Pixi Greens” issued to Waiouru Camp and the 1st Battalion Depot in Burnham.[29]

As a result of the NZ “Pixi Green” trial in September 1967, the Australian design, with modifications, was accepted for use in NZ as a training dress and as a combat dress in the tropics. The modifications required included using UK-sourced DG Cloth and a slight redesign of the trousers. The final acceptability trial report completed on 31 October 1967 established the acceptability of the UK Cloth and decided on a preference between the two slightly different trouser styles; one type had elastic cuffs and cargo pockets on the front of the legs; the other type had draw-cord cuffs and cargo pockets towards the sides of the legs.[30]

User trials established that the UK-type DG material was a satisfactory material for both shirts and trousers in tropical combat conditions and suitable as a replacement for the current heavier NZ DG for summer wear in NZ. A good design for the NZ version of the “pixie greens” shirt and trousers had been achieved, with the trousers having draw-cord cuffs and cargo pockets towards the sides of the legs.[31] Following sizing trials conducted in Vietnam and NZ in 1967, it was established that the Australian size range was compatible with NZ’s needs and was adopted with nine sizes of Shirts and trousers provided.[32]

NZ Purchase Description No 106 was issued on 4 January 1968, providing the minimum requirements for manufacturing Shirt, Man’s, Drill, Green, Field Combat, Tropical 1967 Pattern, the NZ version of the Australian Coat Mans Field Combat Tropical “pixie green”.[33]

The NZ purchase description providing the minimum requirements for manufacturing Trousers, Mens, Drill Green Field Combat, Tropical, (1967 Patt), the NZ version of the Australian Trousers Mans Field Combat Tropical (Pixie), was issued on 5 February 1968.[34]

Although the trouser design was agreed to and was ready for introduction into service, the initial design was a compromise. In some examples, Velcro replaced all buttons and buckles in the waist area. The trials of the Velcro fastenings were not exhaustive, with further trials to evaluate the practicability of using Velcro fastenings under all conditions of tropical combat required facilitated by the dispatch of six pairs of combat tropical trousers with Velcro fastenings to the Infantry elements of NZ’s V Force in March 1968 to allow further trials.[35] With negative feedback from V Force, further development of Velcro fastenings was not continued.

Australia’s development of its tropical combat uniform was ongoing. In August 1968, user dissatisfaction with the Mark 1 version led to the development of the Mark 2 version. Including some minor design improvements, the size range of the Mark 2 versions was increased from each type having nine sizes to twelve shirt sizes and eighteen trouser sizes.[36] Development of the Australian tropical combat uniform continued until its withdrawal from service in the late1980s. Taking note of the Australian developments of the Mark 2 pattern, NZ modified its specifications and introduced the Coat, Mans, Drill Green Field Combat – 1969 Pattern with twelve different sizes into service in October 1969.[37] It remains unknown if 1969 Pattern trousers were concurrently introduced.

Comparison of FARELF Combat Clothing 1965 Left to Right: Shirts Tropical Combat, Shirt OG (UK).Indonesian Camouflage, Shirt KF, HQ FARELF Joint Services Public Relations PR/A/372/4 NZ Archived R17187760 Clothing Tropical Clothing and Personal Equipment 1955-67

As the NZ clothing and personal equipment programme authorised in 1965 was nearing completion, the NZ FARELF Clothing scale was updated in late 1969, replacing most UK and Australian-sourced items with NZ-manufactured items. However, given the scale of the NZ scale changes, it was not envisaged that NZ would not be able to support the new scale until early 1970.[38] With the British intention to withdraw east of Suez by 1971 likely to become a reality, a revaluation of Australian and NZ reliance on British logistical support was undertaken. By October 1969, Australian planning for any future Australia and NZ (ANZ) Force clothing and personal equipment was underway, with Australia aiming to assume responsibility for the whole Australian component by mid-1971.[39] NZ now had a significant clothing and personal items catalogue, although initially unfavourable to NZ maintaining its stocks in the FARELF due to inadequate NZ resources. As NZ allocated adequate resources, Australia soon warmed up to NZ’s plans. Australia eventually had no difficulty supplying NZ troops in the ANZ Force with Australian pattern clothing and personal items if NZ items were not available. To ensure the Supply of NZ items, 5 Advanced Ordnance Depot (5AOD), Singapore, under the NZ items under specially allocated catalogue numbers alongside the equivalent Australian items.[40]

The UK’s east-of-Suez departure was delayed until 1974 when, along with Australia, both nations withdrew their Singapore garrisons, leaving NZ as the only foreign force in Singapore. By the time of the UK and Australian departure in 1974, the NZ supply system had evolved into a sustainable and autonomous system, with most clothing and personal items supplied direct from NZ. However, the NZ Advance Ordnance Depot (NZOAD) in Singapore had inherited British and Australian stock lines that took time to waste out, ensuring that the NZ Force in Southeast Asia (NZFORSEA) remained equipped with a mixture of British, Australian and NZ equipment.

Further review and refinement of the NZ Army clothing scales took place in 1971 with the announcement made to

Introduce a Dacron uniform as a summer walking out and, where appropriate, working dress to replace DGs.

Replace BDs with a temperate/winter combat working/training uniform.

The Secretary of Defence agreed to the proposal to upgrade DGs and BDs to a new Combat Dress. Authority to cease any further procurement of BD Jackets followed, with existing stocks progressively disposed of. To compensate for the loss of the BD Jacket, an additional Training Jersey was authorised to be issued as a BD jacket replacement. However, pending further justification, the replacement of DGs with Dacron’s as a summer walking out/working dress did not progress. As the winding down of NZ’s commitment to the Vietnam War precluded the widespread introduction of the 1967/69 Pattern Combat uniform, in 1971, a pilot scheme was conducted by units at Papakura camp to evaluate the adequacy of the 1967/69 Pattern Combat Uniform as combat working/training uniform for use in NZ Garrison and training conditions.[41]

The Combat Clothing pilot scheme utilised 1967/69 Pattern Combat uniforms but met with mixed results. Compared to the existing DGs, the 1967/69 Pattern Combat Uniform was unpopular, with variations in colour, texture and strength found. Although a minor redesign of the trousers and remedial work to correct the variation of colours followed, it became accepted that the attempt to follow Australia’s lead in developing a tropical combat uniform had failed. With large stocks of the 1967/69 Pattern Combat uniforms in the NZ Army supply system, the pilot scheme was abandoned, and future development and procurement of the 1967/69 Pattern Combat uniform ceased.

As no suitable alternative clothing item existed, the NZ DG Shirt and Trouser had, by default, been satisfactory as an “in lieu” item for warm weather and tropical training.[42] Although inappropriate and not intended for such use, the DG Shirt and Trousers would continue as NZ’s JGs for warm weather and tropical conditions until the late 1980s. However, the requirement for a modern temperate combat uniform still existed. To identify a temperate combat uniform, the Director of Infantry and SAS (D Inf) initiated formal trials of a combat uniform designed explicitly for temperate use in August 1974. Keen to evaluate a proven uniform pattern, the D Inf requested thirty sets of UK 1968 Pattern DMP temperate climate camouflage uniforms. Up to this period, the use of camouflage uniforms by the NZ Army was rare, with camouflage uniforms used by the 3^rd Division of the 2nd NZEF in the Pacific during 1943/44 and the NZSAS and the NZ Army Training Advisory Teams, who had utilised American ERDL and South Vietnamese tiger stripe pattern fatigues during the Vietnam war.

Twenty-Eight sets of UK 68 Pattern DPM uniforms consisting of smocks, liners, trousers, caps and hods were received in February 1975 and, following the development of evaluation criteria, were released by trial by the NZ School of Infantry and 2/1 RNZIR in March 1975.[43] The DPM uniforms issued to the School of Infantry were distributed to the School of Infantry, the TF Depot and the RF Cadet School. The sets issued to 2/1 RNZIR were issued to Alpha Company (A Coy)

As the D Inf was the sponsor for combat clothing and personal equipment, visits and feedback from units had made the incumbent D Inf aware of deficiencies in certain types and sizes of clothing. Aware that the NZ Army did not have a firm policy regarding combat clothing, D Inf sponsored a review to inform policy and guide future sponsors and provisioners of combat clothing and equipment in 1975. The review found that:

Supplies of Shirts DG were adequate, with stocks of trousers DG low, with deliveries of stocks on order slow.
With the withdrawal of the BD Blouse, the training Jersey remained a popular item of clothing.
Stocks of the Hat Utility were good, and the item remained popular.
Developing and introducing a new parka and over trousers remained an ongoing project.
An unpopular item of uniform, stocks of the 1967 and 1969 Pattern Combat Trousers were not at authorised levels, with procurement frozen until a firm policy on the future of combat clothing was determined.
Stocks of the wool/nylon training shirt were low. However, as an expensive item only scaled for RF issues, procurement was on hold until a firm policy on the future of combat clothing was determined.
BD trousers to remain as the Winter Working Dress for RF and TF and the winter walking out dress for the TF.[44]

The initial trials of the DPM uniforms concluded in August 1975 with positive results recommending the adoption of all items of the DPM uniform except for the DPM Cap. Typical feedback echoed in the evaluation reports was that the DPM uniforms were “well-designed, very comfortable uniforms far Superior to anything else in service”.[45]

In summarizing the trial reports and the suitability of the UK Temperate DPM uniform, the D Inf supported the uniform’s introduction, noting that the comparative trials were limited to the current range of unsatisfactory NZ combat clothing. Comparative trials were not possible against similar uniforms from ABCA (American, British, Canadian, Australian) Armies as the UK temperate climate DPM uniform was the only type available.

Australia had only accepted a DMP pattern for open eucalyptus terrain, with further studies pending for other terrains. The Australian policy was to provide ‘add-on ‘ garments for work in temperate climates.
Canada did not have a DPM Temperate climate uniform and had an ‘add on” policy for cold and article conditions.
The United States offered temperate combat uniforms to NZ at a competitive rate. However, these were of the Olive Green variety. The United States Forces did have tropical DPM uniforms, and if NZ considered introducing tropical DPM Uniforms in the future, these should also be included in the evaluation process.

The D Inf highlighted that no modifications to the UK DPM uniforms were required and recommended that they be introduced as is (less the DPM Cap) and that modifications should only be considered after extensive user experience.[46]

In recognition of the requirement’s urgency and dissatisfaction with current dress and clothing standards adversely affecting morale, approval to introduce the UK DPM uniforms into NZ service was granted in December 1975.[47] The procurement of the new range of temperate clothing consisting of Jackets, Hoods and Trousers made from a DMP material and quilted liners was to be implemented in three phases over five years commencing in 1977/78.

Phase 1 – 1977/78. The first phase would purchase 1000 Jackets and Hoods, 1800 Trousers and 840 Liners to provide sufficient stock for a reduced strength battalion plus two years of maintenance stocks. Phase One was also to purchase 123,974 meters of DMP material to allow the manufacture of DPM uniforms in subsequent phases.
Phase 2 – 1978/79 to 79/80. The NZ manufacture of DPM uniforms to allow.
- The issue of one set to the RF component of the Filed Force and Army Schools (Strength 2800).
- TF Depot Pool (800).
- Annual Camp Pool (4000).
Phase 3 – 1979/80 to 80/81. The NZ manufacturer of the UK Pattern temperate DPM uniforms to allow.
- The establishment of war reserve stocks (1800).
- The issue of a second set to all RF personnel involved in field training (3500).
- Increase the size of the Field Force training pool (1000).[48]

On introducing the temperate DPM uniform, phasing out through normal wastage of the following clothing items was planned.

Over trousers.
The current service parka and commercial lined parkas. On developing a rainproof DPM parka, the replacement of unlined parkas would follow.
BD Trousers on a diminishing basis estimated as beyond 1981[49]

The introduction of the first tranche of temperate DPM uniforms began in August 1977 with the initial purchase of made-up uniforms issued to 2/1 RNZIR and Army Schools, with additional sets manufactured In NZ using imported material. However, a change in clothing policy and delays in receiving DPM material from the UK delayed the planned distribution and establishment of loan pools.[50] By 1980, confusion over scales and entitlements and the resulting distribution stagnation was highly emotional, with formations command seeking resolution.[51]

As the temperate DPMs were progressively introduced to NZ-based units, NZ Forces in Singapore were still required to utilise the legacy JG uniforms. As both the Malaysian and Singapore Forces were introducing camouflage uniforms, the Commander of NZFORSEA considered that there would be immense psychological value in considering the issue of a tropical DPM uniform to NZFORSEA.[52] Since 1972 British Forces in Hong Kong and Brunei utilised the No.9: Tropical Combat Dress, which had replaced the 1950 pattern OG and JG tropical uniforms. In 1980 NZFORSEA submitted a proposal to purchase the UK lightweight DMP material by utilising the UK specification tailored locally to meet the tropical DPM uniform requirements of NZFORSEA.[53]

After considering the NZFORSEA proposal, the NZ Army decided not to approve the NZFORSEA proposal. NZ Forces were to continue using the current JG tropical uniforms range. In justifying the decision, the following reasons were provided.

ABCA studies demonstrated that faded JG drill provided the most effective negative response to IR sources.
The primary reason for introducing DMP clothing into NZ service was warmth, with the psychological value ensuring its acceptance.
The operational effectiveness of DPM uniforms remained questionable.[54]

The upgrading of NZ Army combat clothing from 1955 to 1980 was just one of several clothing and equipment projects intended to keep the army equipped with a high standard of modern equipment compatible with its peers. The practice of adopting off-the-shelf clothing and equipment from allied nations continued, with, where possible, NZ industry manufacturing the foreign patterns, thus providing a measure of self-sufficiency. From 1967 considerable effort was made to develop the Australian Pixie Greens into an NZ tropical combat uniform. The resulting items were unsatisfactory, and the project was considered a failure. JGs introduced in 1958 and upgraded in 1961, remained in service as tropical combat clothing until 1984, when lightweight DPM trousers and shirts began to be introduced. Not wishing to repeat the prolonged and unsuccessful tropical combat clothing experience, the UK DPM temperate combat uniform was introduced with no redesign of the UK uniform with further NZ manufacture based on the UK specifications. A significant improvement on the previous uniforms provided for training in NZ, the introduction was piecemeal, with selected RF field force units fitted out first, followed by issues to the remainder of the RF and TF as stocks were made available, resulting in BD trousers and other legacy combat clothing items remaining in use well into the mid-1980s. While this article provides an overview of NZ Army combat clothing from 1950 to 1980, it provides a starting point for further research.

Notes

[1] Army 213/1/92 DSIR Tropical Clothing Dated 3 October 1955. “Clothing – Tropical Clothing and Personal Equipment,” Archives NZ No R17187760 (1955 – 1967); “Clothing – Policy and General – Annual Clothing Review,” Archives NZ No R17311752 (1967-1975).

[2] Army 213/5/320 Provision of Jungle Green Uniforms dated 2 December 1955. “Clothing – Policy and General – Jungle Green Uniforms,” Archives NZ No R17311754 (1955 – 1988).

[3] Army 213/5/1/ORD 7 Trouser Green Drill 1952 5 January 1962.”Clothing – Khaki Dress – Green Drill, Manufacture,” Archives NZ No R17187768 (1962-1967).

[4] CM (56)16 dated 10 April 1956. “Clothing – NZ Army Force Farelf: Policy, Scales, Accounting,” Archives NZ No R17187816 (1968 – 1970).

[5] “H-19 Military Forces of NZ Annual Report of the General Officer Commanding, for Period 1 April 1957 to 31 March 1958,” Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives (1958).

[6] Army 213/7/40/Q(Org) Clothing replacement – NZ Army Force FARELF. “Clothing – NZ Army Force Farelf: Policy, Scales, Accounting,” Archives NZ No R17187813 (1957 – 1962).

[7] Report on equipment used: Jungle Training Course No1. “Cookers – Jungle Warfare Equipment: General,” Archives NZ No R17189107 (1945-1968).

[8] Cmd 8/2/Q Introduction of New Orders of Dress – RF (Males) Trousers and Shirts, Drill Green Dated 5 November 1958. “Clothing – NZ Regular Forces: Scale of Issue,” Archives NZ No R17187791 (1957-1964).

[9] Army 213/7/4/DQ Dress-NZ Army 16 October 1959. Ibid.

[10] Army 213/10/7/A4 Dress: Male Officers and Soldiers 25 November 1960.”Clothing – Dress: NZ Army Forces, Far East Land Forces,” Archives NZ No R17187820 (1957-1963).

[11] Army 209/3/218/Q(Org) NZ FARELF Clothing Scales 7 March 1960. “Cookers – Jungle Warfare Equipment: General.”

[12] Army 246/6/194/SD Trial Instructions Clothing and equipment designed for use in training 11 July 1961.”Clothing – Clothing and Equipment Trials in Training,” Archives NZ No R9753143 (1961 – 1966).

[13] Army 213/7/40/QMG Maintenance of NZ Army Forces in SEA in Clothing and Personal Equipment November 1968. “Clothing – NZ Army Force Farelf: Policy, Scales, Accounting.”

[14] Army 213/7/4/DQ Basic Clothing Range: RF Males Dated 11 September 1962. “Clothing – NZ Regular Forces: Scale of Issue.”

[15] Army 213/7/40/Q(A) Clothing issues – Male Personnel posted for duty in FARELF dated 8 March 1963.Ibid.

[16] Army 213/7/4/Adm NZ Army Clothing and Personal Equipment Policy Statement dated 10 November 1964. “Clothing – NZ Regular Forces: Scale of Issue,” Archives NZ No R17187792 (1964-1967).

[17] Ministry of Defence 41/3/3 Army Clothing and Equipment Programme Army Submission 213/7/4 of 4.4.65 Dated 16 June 1965. Ibid.

[18] Army 213/7/4 Army Clothing and Personal Equipment Programme Dated 27 May 1966. Ibid.

[19] Army 213/7/4/Q9C) Pullovers Dated 15 August 1963. “Clothing – NZ Regular Forces: Scale of Issue.”

[20] Army 213/5/42/Q(A) Introduction of Shirts Training (CCN 8405-NZ-101-0588/0596) 22 April 1965.”Clothing – Clothing and Equipment Trials in Training.”

[21] Army 213/5/42/Q(D) Trial Instructions – Training Shirts 13 December 1965. Ibid.

[22] Army 213/1/92/Q(D) Shirts, Tropical Combat 20 November 1964. “Clothing – Tropical Clothing and Personal Equipment.”

[23] 1 RNZIR Trial report 28 March 1965. Ibid.

[24] Army 213/1/92 Tropical Combat Clothing 5 August 1965. Ibid.

[25] HQ NZ V Force 213/1/92 Tropical Combat Clothing 17 August 1965. Ibid.

[26] Deputy Secretary of Defence (Army) 213/1/92/OS1 Purchase of cloth for trial combat clothing 15 September 1965. Ibid.

[27] Army 213/1/92/Q(D) Shirting Tropical Combat 10 December 1965. Ibid.

[28] Army 213/7/4 Study: Clothing Scales outer Garments Dated 2 August 1967. “Clothing – NZ Regular Forces: Scale of Issue,” Archives NZ No R17187793 (1967-1976).

[29] Army 246/78/5/Q(D) Trial Instructions Tropical Combat Dress (Aust) 11 January 1967. “Clothing – Clothing and Equipment Trials in Training,” Archives NZ No R9853144 (1966 – 1969).

[30] Army 213/1/106/Q(D) Tropical Combat Clothing Trial 11 September 1967. Ibid.

[31] Army 213/1/106/OS9 Trouser Combat Tropical Trial 4 January 1968.Ibid.

[32] Army 213/1/106/ORD6 Trousers Combat Tropical 18 September 1968.”Clothing – Introduction of Combat Clothing Project,” Archives NZ No R17187753 (1968-1976).

[33] NZ Army Purchase Description No 105 dated 4 January 1968. “Clothing – Men’s Drill Green Field Combat Tropical 1967 Pattern 1970-71,” Archives NZ No R24510756 (1970-71).

[34] NZ Army Purchase Description No 106 dated 5 February 1968. “Clothing – Trousers Men’s Drill Green Field Combat – Tropical 1967 Pattern,” Archives NZ No R24510754 (1968 -1968).

[35] Army 213/1/106/Q899 Trousers: Combat Tropical 28 March 1968

[36] Army 213/1/106/ord6 Trouser Combat Tropical 18 September 1968. “Clothing – Introduction of Combat Clothing Project.”

[37] NZ Army Purchase Description No 105A dated 23 October 1969. “Clothing – Men’s Drill Green Field Combat Tropical 1967 Pattern 1970-71.”

[38] Army 213/7/40/Q Ops Brief for QMG Clothing and Personal Equipment for NZ Army Forces in the Far East Dated 24 September 1969. “Clothing – NZ Army Force Farelf: Policy, Scales, Accounting.”

[39] Commonwealth of Australia 209/B/10 Malaysia and Singapore Planning Clothing and Personal Equipment dated 14 October 1969.

[40] Army 213/7/40/Q Ops Brief for QMG Clothing and Personal Equipment for NZ Army Forces in the Far East Dated 24 September 1969. “Clothing – NZ Army Force Farelf: Policy, Scales, Accounting.”

[41] DOS 106/9 10 Combat Clothing and Army Dress Rationalization, dated 10 September 1973. “Army 220/5/103/Aac Army Dress Committee Meeting 1 March 1971,” Archives NZ No R9753141 (1971).

[42] DEP 213/1/37 Adoption of Disruptive Pattern Uniform Dated 22 September 1975. “Clothing – Introduction of Combat Clothing Project.”

[43] Army 213/1/37/EP Sponsor Evaluation Disruptive Pattern Uniform for use in Temperate climates Date 4 March 1975. Ibid.

[44] Army 213/1/104/Inf Minutes of a meeting on a sponsor review of Combat Clothing sand equipment Dated 7 May 1975.”Clothing – Policy and General – Annual Clothing Review.”

[45] 2/1 RNZIR B5/12/2 Evaluation Report Disruptive Pattern (DPR) Uniforms Dated 15 September 1975. “Clothing – Introduction of Combat Clothing Project.”

[46] D Inf 213/1/37/EP Temperate Disruptive Pattern Uniform Dated 29 September 1975. Ibid.

[47] Army 213/1/37/EP Combat Clothing Dated 9 December 1975. Ibid.

[48] Army Staff Target 08 74/75 Temperate Zone Combat/Training Clothing Dated 16 July 1976. “Clothing – Policy and General – Intro of Combat Clothing Project,” Archives NZ No R17311750 (1977-81).

[49] ACDS (Spt) Minute SP 131/1977 Temperate Climate Combat/Training Clothing for NZ Army Dated 28 April 1977. Ibid.

[50] DEP 157 DPM Clothing Dated 28 May 1981.Ibid.

[51] NZLF 18415/Ord 1 Issue of DPM Smocks/Hoods/Liners Dated 15 July 1981.Ibid.

[52] Army 213/1/39/GS Tropical Weight Disruptive Pattern Material (DPM) Uniform Dated 8 October 1918. Ibid.

[53] NZFORSEA NZF 208.09 DPM Clothing Dated 23 September 1980. Ibid.

[54] NZDEF Army 213/1/39 For Comd from DCGS Dated 28 July 1980. Ibid.

New Zealand Army Combat Boots – 1945 -1980

1 Comment Dec 29, 2022 Robert McKie

Up to the Second World War, New Zealand Army boots generally had leather-soled ankle boots whose design had only undergone minor changes since 1912. Military boot development was catapulted during the Second World War with new designs and materials providing boots suitable for all terrains and climates found on Battlefields worldwide. As the post-war New Zealand Army was reorganised and reequipped to provide a division to fight in the Middle East, the decolonisation conflicts that swept Southeast Asia drew New Zealand into an unfamiliar type of warfare. New Zealand was not experienced or equipped to fight in harsh tropical environments but adapted quickly and became experienced practitioners of Jungle warfare. Initially equipped with British and Australian stocks of tropical equipment, it soon became apparent that New Zealand troops needed modern equipment. By 1959, the New Zealand Army undertook various research and development initiatives to improve its equipment in conjunction with scientific institutions and industry. This article provides an overview of the New Zealand Army’s post-war boot development, transitioning from a boot originating in the 19^th century to a modern mid-20^th century Combat boot.

Flush with wartime stocks of boots, the post-war New Zealand Army had no immediate need to upgrade its boots. However, by the mid-1950s, the limitations of the current range of leather-soled boots were becoming evident, especially in the jungles of Malaya, and the search for alternatives began for an improved boot design. To achieve this, the Quarter masters branch of the army called on the New Zealand Leather and Shoe Research Association for assistance in developing a boot with increased waterproof properties that could withstand prolonged wear without undue fatigue.[1]

In conjunction with footwear manufacturers and the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, the New Zealand Leather and Shoe Association developed four types of boots, which were trialled by the 2nd Battalion, New Zealand Regiment, in 1958. The latest type of ankle boot with a Directly Moulded Sole (DMS) from the United Kingdom was also tested alongside the four New Zealand samples.[2] From this initial user trial, feedback shaped an interim specification for two types with identical uppers but different soles, one of rubber and the other of leather. Thirty pairs of each type were made, and a further series of trials began with the 1st Battalion at Burnham Camp in early May 1960. Thirty trial subjects were chosen to wear each boot type for three days to see how easily they could be broken in. After that, they tested the boots for wear and comfort until February 1961.[3]

Sole of 1956 Ankle boots. Lee Hawkes Collection

The result of the trial was the adoption of the Ankle Boot Rubber Sole (Ankle Boot RS). An ankle boot similar in design to the current boot, the Ankle Boot RS was several ounces lighter than those currently in use, also included was rotproof terylene stitching and nylon laces. The nylon laces were so popular with the troops that all the boots returned after user trials came back without laces. The new design had a “Commando” style rubber sole. The Commando style rubber sole was developed in the 1930s by English rubber maker Itshide, who switched from producing toys and brushes to producing this new kind of rubber sole for use on army boots during WWII. The benefit of the Commando sole was the grip provided by the shape of the jagged cleats on the sole, which proved ideal for providing stability on the roughest terrain. The New Zealand version of the Commando sole had slightly shallower cleats with an angled edge to prevent mud or small stones from wedging between them and was marketed as the “Kiwi Army Boot”. Production of the New Zealand Ankle Boot RS began in August 1961; however, with large quantities of the previous type of boot still in the supply system, it would take until 1964 to waste out the old stock.[4]

As with the previous boot design, the Ankle Boot RS required wearing a gaiter to prevent mud and derbies from entering the boot. The type of gaiter then in use was the 37-pattern web gaiter. Concurrent with the boot trial, thirty pairs of Australian Army gaiters were also tested. The long dark green Australian gaiter was introduced into Australian service in 1945 and had a light metal stiffener up one side to prevent wrinkling and a strap passing under the boot’s instep. Finding favour with the troops, these were also planned to be adopted for the New Zealand Army. However, problems in adopting the Australian gaiter would drive the development of the next iteration of New Zealand’s Army Boot.[5]

A pair of Australian Army canvas gaiters painted black. https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C993356

Although the Australian gaiter could have probably been purchased off the shelf directly from Australian manufacturers, such items should have been manufactured in New Zealand. However, it was found that due to the exorbitant costs encountered in producing the Australian pattern gaiter in New Zealand, this project was abandoned, and the gaiter requirement was re-evaluated. Although no specific General Staff requirement was stated, it was decided to develop a calf-length boot to replace the Ankle Boot RS and 37-pattern gaiters with a calf-length combat boot.

New Zealand 37-pattern Gaiter. Lee Hawkes collection

Based on the new Ankle Boot Rubber Sole (Ankle Boot RS), two high boots, type A and B, were manufactured by experienced New Zealand footwear manufacturers Sargood, Son and Ewen.[6] The type A and B boots included hooks instead of eyelets and a strap and buckle arrangement similar to the American M-1943 Combat Boot.

United States Army M-43 composition sole combat service boot, or “double buckle boot”. https://www.usww2uniforms.com/BQD_114.html

As a result of the initial user trials in New Zealand and Malaysia using the Type A and B boot, the design of the boot was refined into the Type C boot. In May 1964, ten examples of the Type C Boot were manufactured, incorporating improvements suggested by the user trials:

The sole and foot portion to be exactly the same as the Ankle Boot RS.
The height from ground level to the top of the boot was to be 10^1/2 inches.
There were to be six eyelets on the lower portion of each side of the closure and six boot hooks on the higher portion of each side (similar to the green jungle boot issued in Malaya).
The boot tongue was to be of a thinner variety and should not be longer than the height of the boot.
There were to be no straps or buckles.
The measurement around the top of the boot was to be no greater than 12^1/2 inches from edge to edge.[7]

Successful feedback on the Type C boot saw a small number purchased and introduced into service in June 1966 to enable further trials to be carried out to determine if the new pattern boots were suitable for combat in tropical conditions. Further trials by New Zealand Forces in South Vietnam and selected units in New Zealand commenced in November 1967

With the New Zealand contingent in South Vietnam serving alongside the Australians, the length of the New Zealand contingent’s supply chain and its low requirements made it necessary to modify the clothing replenishment system and link into the Australian lines of supply, resulting in New Zealand troops in Vietnam receiving Australian tropical clothing and boots.[8] This was a modification of the system used in Malaysia since 1955, when New Zealand troops in Malaysia drew their tropical clothing requirements, including jungle boots, from British sources.

Concurrent with New Zealand’s combat boot development was an Australian programme to develop a modern combat boot. Initially utilising jungle boots left over from the Second World War, the Australians soon developed and trialled a new DMS boot design with leather uppers and a moulded sole. After some initial user trials, an initial order of 10,000 pairs of the new Australian DMS Combat boot was placed in July 1956 for delivery to Australian troops in Vietnam by December 1965.[9]

Australian Black leather general purpose (GP) boots. https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C1195209

By 1968, New Zealand troops in South Vietnam were officially utilising the trial New Zealand combat boot and the Australian DMS Combat boot. Unofficially many New Zealand troops also wore the America Jungle boot. A survey conducted at the start of the November 1967 trial showed that 108 New Zealand soldiers preferred the Australian boot and only 42 the New Zealand boot. A further survey conducted in March 1968 revealed that 121 New Zealand soldiers preferred the Australian boot. The most significant reasons given for the preference were that the Australian boot was:

Lighter and more robust than the NZ item.
Had a directly moulded sole.
It was made of better-quality leather.
Had a vastly superior appearance.
It had a very good and snug fit when broken in.

Private Wayne Lindsay, Whiskey One Company, inspects an RSA Christmas parcel from New Zealand circa 1968. Note that Private Lindsay is wearing the American Pattern Jungle boots, and there are Australian DMS Combat boots and New Zealand Combat boots under his bed. Image courtesy Noel Bell via https://vietnamwar.govt.nz/photo/private-wayne-lindsay-rsa-christmas-parcel

Feedback also included the increasingly evident requirement for a Jungle boot similar to the United States pattern to be provided to New Zealand Forces in tropical environments.[10]

After the November 1967 operational and training trials of the New Zealand combat boot, it was found that the recommendations of the various trial teams were not in agreement, and a Footwear Study Group was appointed to review the trial information.[11] In July 1969, the Footwear Study Group concluded that the New Zealand Combat boot, with certain modifications, was superior to the ankle Boot RS in meeting New Zealand training conditions. However, it was agreed that the New Zealand Combat Boot did not meet the tropical operational requirements, and further research was required to find a boot to meet New Zealand’s tropical requirements. US, Canadian, and UK policies supported this, concluding that one boot could not satisfy both a temperate and tropical requirement. It was noted that the Australians restricted their DMS combat boot to South Vietnam, with troops in other theatres outside Australia continuing to wear ordinary boots and gaiters; however, the US tropical combat boot was procured for issue in South Vietnam to the Australian SAS only. Overall, the New Zealand findings were that the main advantage of the New Zealand Combat Boot was that it could replace two items (Ankle boot RS and gaiter); it provided superior ankle and instep support and improved appearance, and it should be accepted as a replacement for the Ankle Boot RS. A tropical patrol boot was also recommended to be developed to meet the specific environmental conditions found in Southeast Asia.[12]

There was little doubt that the Australian DMS combat boot was more popular with New Zealand troops. It was accepted that the DMS production technique proved a superior product, but at the time, New Zealand’s footwear industry did not yet have the required technology to manufacture DMS boots, but there was no doubt that the New Zealand Combat boot would incorporate a DMS sole at a future date as New Zealand industry caught up. However, adopting the New Zealand Combat boot would be based on fiscal reasoning. Based on the 1969 production run of 2893 pairs for New Zealand Vietnam Force maintenance, the cost of a pair of New Zealand combat boots was $10.50 (2022 NZ $200.20), compared to $19.23 (2022 NZ $366.64) for the Australian DMS boots. With the Ankle Boot RS priced at $8.18 (2022 NZ $156.61) and Garters at $1 (2022 NZ $19.15), it was considered that a superior boot was replacing two items (Ankle boot RS and gaiter) with only a slight increase of the cost. [13]

On 3 December 1969, the New Zealand Combat Boot was renamed as the Boot GS (High) and formally introduced into service to progressively replace the Ankle boot RS and gaiter as existing stocks of those items wasted out and all period contracts for their manufacture terminated.[14]

With a stock of 19,120 Ankle Boots RS and 21,612 Web Anklets held in Ordnance Depots and Clothing Stores, the priority of issue for the introduction of the Boot GS (High)was to:

NZ Forces in Southeast Asia
Regular Force Recruits
Regular Force maintenance in New Zealand
The Territorial Force

The Boot GS (High) nomenclature had been changed to Boot Mans General Purpose (Boot Mans GP) by February 1971. With 12,126 pairs of Ankle Boot RS remaining in stock, it was anticipated that with issues to National Service intakes and the Territorial Force, stocks would be exhausted by the end of 1971.[15]

Boot Mans General Purpose (Boot Mans GP). Robert McKie Collection

During the New Zealand Combat Boot trial, it was identified that cooks of the Royal New Zealand Army Service Corps (RNZASC) required a boot with a flat sole for safety on wet surfaces. Fortunately, the Government Footwear Inspector had developed Cooks Galley Boots at Royal New Zealand Navy (RNZN) instigation in the mid-1960s. First adopted by the RNZN and then the Royal New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF), consideration to issuing RNZASC Cooks Galley boots were first made in 1968.[16] With a non-skid pattern rubber sole and a continuous leather front to stop spilt boiling fat and other liquids from entering the boot, RNZASC user trials were conducted from 1970 with initial issues to all RNZASC cooks from 1972.[17]

By February 1974, New Zealand’s Forces in South Vietnam had been withdrawn, and the tripartite Australia, New Zealand and United Kingdom (ANZUK) Force based in Singapore had been dissolved. The 1st Battalion Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment (1RNZIR) and its supporting units remained in Singapore as the New Zealand army components of the New Zealand Force Southeast Asia (NZFORSEA). Logistic arrangements in place since 1955, which allowed New Zealand to rely on the British for tropical clothing and equipment, had progressively been wound down from the late 1960s as New Zealand developed and grew its line of tropical clothing. Although the development of a tropical patrol boot had been recommended to be developed to meet the specific conditions found in Southeast Asia, the transition of New Zealand Army units in Singapore to a peacetime garrison and peacetime funding restrictions saw the requirement for a New Zealand jungle boot placed on the back burner. The Boot Man GP was found to be sufficient for most training in the tropics. Although many individuals purchased surplus American, British or Malaysian jungle boots and some small-scale unit trials did occur, the development of a New Zealand jungle boot ceased.

In 1980 the New Zealand footwear manufacturer John Bull won the contract for the supply of combat boots to the New Zealand Military. Already a manufacturer with a high reputation and experienced in producing military footwear, John Bull’s manufacturing processes were enhanced through a significant equipment and modernisation program. The John Bull-manufactured Boot Man GP was a DMS boot that retained the same style of leather uppers as the previous boot. New Zealand also supplemented stocks of the John Bull Boot GP with the Australian pattern DMS Combat Boot manufactured in New Zealand by King Leo. Both patterns of Boot GP were progressively introduced into service from 1980, with stocks of the previous Boot GP wasted out by 1985.

The New Zealand Army finished the Second World War with pretty much the same boot that had been issued to soldiers in 1912. However, the lessons of the Second World War and developments in boot technology had not gone unnoticed. With the assistance of the New Zealand Leather and Shoe Association, footwear manufacturers and the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, a New Zealand Combat boot was developed. Due to the limitations of the technology available to New Zealand’s footwear industry, New Zealand’s efforts would always be five to ten years behind those of Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States. However, a viable and cost-effective boot that met most of the training and operational requirements of the New Zealand army throughout the 1970s and 80s resulted from New Zealand’s limited resources. Although this article only provides an overview of New Zealand’s combat boot development, it provides a starting point for further research into this overlooked aspect of New Zealand’s military history.

New Zealand-made Australian pattern Boot GP. Robert McKie Collection

Notes

[1] “General News – Army Boots,” Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28883, 1 May 1959.

[2] Although the United Kingdom accepted and introduced it into service in 1961, the UK DMS boot was rejected by New Zealand because, at this stage, it could not be made in New Zealand. “Many Changes in Gear for Modern N.Z. Soldier,” Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28958, 28 July 1959.

[3] “New Army Boots Now in Production,” Press, Volume C, Issue 29594, 17 August 1961.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Army 213/19/69 Footwear for the NZ Army Dated 7 August 1969. “Boots and Shoes – Development of Combat Boots,” Archives New Zealand No R17187902 (1963-1969).

[6] 213/19/55/Q(D) Purchase of High Boots for user trials 26 May 1964. Ibid.

[7] 213/19/69 7 May 1964. Ibid.

[8] “New Combat Clothes Being Tested,” Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30802, 14 July 1965.

[9] “Boots Trouble Aust. Troops,” Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30801, 13 July 1965.

[10] HQ NZ V Force 212/19/69 Footwear Trials 9 April 1968. “Boots and Shoes – Development of Combat Boots.”

[11] Army 213/19/69/SD Footwear Study Group 23 October 1968. Ibid.

[12] Army 213/19/69 Footwear for the NZ Army 14 July 1969.Ibid.

[13] Army 213/19/69 Footwear for the NZ Army 7 August 1969. Ibid.

[14] Army 213/19/69DQ(M) dated 3 December 1969. Ibid.

[15] HQ Home Command HC 8/6/1/ORD 1 Introduction of Boots Mans GP 26 April 1971. Ibid.

[16] Army 213/19/69 Footwear for the NZ Army 7 August 1969. Ibid.

[17] HQ Home Command HC 8/6/1/ST Boots Galley Cooks 11 May 1972. Ibid.

New Zealand Military Load Carrying Equipment, 1945 – 1975

1 Comment Dec 21, 2022 Robert McKie

Military Personal Load Carrying Equipment, often referred to in the New Zealand vernacular as “webbing”, is the assortment of belts, straps, pouches and other accessories which, when assembled, allows an individual soldier to easily and comfortably carry the tools of their trade, such as ammunition, rations and water to sustain them for short periods. Many period photos of New Zealand soldiers on operations and training from the Vietnam War era to the 1990s provide the impression of an army equipped with an eclectic range of Australian, British and American equipment. This view of New Zealand’s army’s equipment was partly correct. To see how this view was shaped, this article provides an overview of New Zealand’s military load-carrying equipment evolution from 1945 to 1975.

Commander-in-chief, United States Army of the Pacific, General R.E Haines (right) watching weapon training at Waiouru. 2 May 1970 Evening Post

During World War Two, Operations in Malaya, Burma and the Pacific identified many shortfalls in the suitability of training, tactics and equipment, resulting in the Lethbridge Mission to the Far East during the late war. As a result of the report of the Lethbridge Mission, it was decided to modify the standard 37-pattern equipment to make it lighter in weight, rot-proof and more water-repellent and thus more suitable for use in tropical conditions. This development of the 37-pattern equipment led to the approval of a new pattern known as the 1944-pattern.[1] Post-war, further development of the 37 and 44-Pattern equipment led to troop trials of the Z2 experimental Load Carrying Equipment, which transitioned into the 1958-pattern equipment.[2]

Following World War Two, the Load Carrying Equipment in use by the New Zealand Army was the British 1937-pattern equipment. The 37-pattern equipment was introduced into New Zealand service in 1940, replacing the 1908-pattern equipment that had been in service since 1912. As 37-pattern equipment remained the standard web equipment of the New Zealand Army, the deployment of New Zealand troops to Malaya placed New Zealand in the position of deploying troops to a theatre with equipment that had long been identified as unsuitable. To maintain compatibility with other commonwealth forces in Malaya, 44-pattern equipment from British stocks in Malaya was issued to New Zealand troops in Malaya.

Example of 37-pattern equipment. Image: Simon Moore https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwnMIdynO8Y

. Given the environment that New Zealand troops could be expected to operate in and aware of the developments in load-carrying equipment, the New Zealand Chief of General Staff (CGS) requested and received one set of M1956 Web equipment from the United States for trials in 1959.[3] The American M1956 Load-Carrying Equipment (LCE) had been accepted for United States Army service, with distribution well underway by 1961.

In October 1960, the New Zealand Director of Infantry and Training demonstrated the following web equipment to CGS.

44-pattern Equipment
58-pattern Equipment
M1956-pattern Equipment

A report by a New Zealand Officer attached to the Australian Jungle Training Centre at Canungra supported this demonstration with a comprehensive report describing the research and development of Infantry clothing and equipment undertaken by the Australians. The New Zealand report described the Australian trials of the M1956 LCE alongside the 58-pattern equipment. The M1956 was chosen by the Australians, who intended to manufacture it in Australia.[4] However, it was considered unlikely that either the 1956 LCE or 58-pattern equipment would be available to New Zealand until at least 1965, when the initial distribution to the United States and British armies was expected to be completed. Aware that all 44-pattern equipment had been earmarked for use in Malaysia and that it was still in production, New Zealand’s CGS approved the purchase of 6000 sets of 44-pattern equipment to re-equip elements of the New Zealand Army.[5]

Example of 44 pattern equipment, British Corporal, Malaya, Early 1950s. Image Simon Moore https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=2346362332163840&set=a.421629590114595

Following advice from the UK, the 44-pattern equipment in use with the Fare East Land Forces (FARELF) was to be wasted out as the 58-pattern equipment was introduced, implying that the New Zealand Battalion would need to be equipped with the 58-pattern equipment before the ceasing of maintenance of the 44-pattern by FARELF. With this in mind, a recommendation was made to purchase 6000 sets of 58-pattern equipment instead of the 44-pattern equipment.[6]

Example of 58-pattern equipment. Image Simon Moore. https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=2080097568790319&set=pcb.2080098398790236

In a June 1961 memorandum to Cabinet, the Minister of Defence highlighted that the current 37-pattern equipment used by the New Zealand Army was not designed for Jungle operations and was unsuitable for carrying the extra equipment the soldier engaged in this type of warfare required. No longer used by the British Army in any part of the world, the stage had been reached where the replacement of the 37-pattern should be delayed no longer. As the 58-pattern could not be made available to New Zealand for some time and field trials had cast doubt on its suitability for use in the Southeast Asia theatre, it was considered that re-equipping of the New Zealand Army should proceed with the 44-pattern equipment. The 44-pattern equipment had proved itself and was known to be suitable in the theatre where New Zealand troops were most likely to be employed. It was assumed that by the time the 44-pattern equipment needed replacement, the full facts on the suitability of the 58-pattern and the M1956 web equipment would be available to make a more informed decision on its adoption by New Zealand. It was recommended that Cabinet approve £45645 plus freight to purchase 6000 sets of 1944 Pattern equipment. [7]

By October 1961, it became clear that the 58-pattern was to be the standard issue web equipment for all United Kingdom forces worldwide and that distribution to the forces in Malaya was to happen much earlier date than earlier expected. Because of this, the Army secretary desired further investigations on the suitability of 58-pattern web equipment and, if favourable, confirm costs and potential delivery dates. With the requirement for web equipment again in flux, the submission to purchase 6000 sets of 44-pattern equipment was withdrawn pending further research.[8]

By May 1962, plans for reorganising the New Zealand Army from a Divisional to Brigade Structure were under implementation.[9] With approximately 50000 complete sets of 37-pattern equipment distributed to units or held in stores, this was deemed suitable to equip the bulk of the Territorial Force and Training units. The 58-pattern equipment was now in serial production and was the standard issue for all United Kingdom troops, with distribution to operational units in Malaya and Germany underway. Information received earlier was that because of limited production, stocks of 58-pattern would not be available for release to New Zealand for some years had been revised. It was now possible that the release of 58-pattern equipment to meet New Zealand’s requirements could be achieved earlier than anticipated. Based on this revised information, New Zealand’s Cabinet approved funding of £58750 on 10 October 1961 for 6000 sets of 58-pattern Web Equipment. [10]

Before placing a firm order for New Zealand’s requirements of 58-pattern equipment, reports received from Malaya in late 1962 indicated that the 58-Pattern equipment was, in its present form, unsuitable for use in operational conditions in South-East Asia.[11] It was anticipated that modifying the 58-pattern equipment to suit the conditions would take two to three years, an unacceptable delay in procurement as far as New Zealand is concerned.[12]

As the decision on New Zealand’s web equipment remained in flux, the New Zealand Battalion in Malaysia continued to be equipped with the 44-pattern equipment maintained under a capitation agreement with the United Kingdom. At New Zealand’s expense, one hundred sets of 44-pattern equipment were also maintained at New Zealand Battalion Depot at Burnham Camp to support reinforcements.

M1956 Web Equipment

As the time factor involved in modifying the 58-pattern equipment was unacceptable, and New Zealand was receiving an increasing amount of American equipment, the American M1956 pattern web equipment was decided to trial. The M1956 equipment had already been introduced into the Australian army, so twenty sets were purchased from Australian stocks for New Zealand’s trials.[13]

Following user experience in Malaya revealing that the 58-pattern equipment was falling short of the requirements for jungle operations, a series of investigations and user trials established that the US M1956 pattern equipment was suitable for use by the New Zealand Army. The funding for 6000 sets of 58-pattern Web Equipment was requested to be reprioritised to purchase 10000 sets of M1956 equipment direct from the United States and 400 sets of 44-pattern equipment to equip the increment for the FARELF held in New Zealand.[14]

With funding endorsed by the Minster of Defence and approved by the Cabinet, orders were placed for 10000 sets of M1956 web equipment direct from the United States. The first consignment arrived in New Zealand in early 1964, with 289 sets immediately issued to the New Zealand Special Air Service (NZSAS) and 16 Field Regiment, Royal New Zealand Artillery.

Instructions for distributing the M1956 web equipment were issued in June 1964 by the Quartermaster General. The initial purchase of 10000 sets of M1956 web equipment was to be issued to the Combat Brigade Group (CBG) and Logistic Support Group (LSG) units. Units of the Combat Reserve Brigade Group (CRBG) and Static Support Force (SSF) were to continue to use the 37-patten webbing.

	NMD	CMD	MOD (for CMD Trentham Units	SMD	MOD Stock	Issued SAS/ 16 Fd Regiment
CBG & LSG	3122	3030	401	2028	310	289
1^st Reinforcement Reserve	316	260	6	198
School of Infantry		40
TOTAL	3438	3330	407	2226	310	289

As the issue of M1956 equipment progressed, units of the CBG and LSG were to hand back stocks of 37-pattern equipment to their supporting District Ordnance Depot except for

08-pattern packs and straps
37-pattern belt, waist web
Frogs bayonet No 5[15]

The 37 Pattern belt, waist web, was to be retained by all ranks as a personal issue authorised by NZP1 Scales 1, 5, 8 or 9. The belt and bayonet frog were to be worn with Nos 2A, 64, 6B, 7A and 7B orders of dress when other equipment items were not required to be worn.

Example of M-1956 equipment. Image Simon Moore https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=2113354722131270&set=pcb.2113363968797012

Equipment Maintenance Policy Statement (EMPS) 138/67 issued by Army Headquarters on 20 November 1964 detailed that except for the CBG and LSG, 16000 sets of 37-pattern equipment were to be maintained for use by remaining elements of the New Zealand Army.[16] EMPS 145/65 was issued on 12 February 1965, detailing the management of 44-pattern equipment in New Zealand. The First Battalion of the Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment (1RNZIR) in Malaysia was to remain equipped with the 44-pattern web equipment maintained by the UK under the existing capitation agreement. Other than 100 sets of 44 Pattern Web equipment maintained at the Battalion Depot in Burnham, there was no provision for equipping 1RNZIR Reinforcements and increments of 31 Medium Radio Sub Troop who could be expected to deploy to Malaysia at any time. EMPS 145/65 rectified this by establishing a stockholding of 400 sets of 44-pattern equipment at the Main Ordnance Depot (MOD) at Trentham

Approval was granted in November 1965 by Army HQ for the Royal New Zealand Armoured Corps (RNZAC) and NZSAS to blacken their M1956 web equipment. The Royal New Zealand Provost Corps (RNZ Pro) was also approved to whiten their M1956 web equipment. This approval only applied to unit holdings, not RNZAC, NZSAS or NZ Pro members attached or posted to other units.[17]

By April 1967, most of the New Zealand Army was equipped with the M1956 equipment. The exceptions were.

The New Zealand Forces in Malaysia and South Vietnam, who used both the M1956 and 44-pattern equipment
The SSF, National Service Training Unit (NTSU) and New Zeeland Cadet Corps (NZCC), who still retained the 37-pattern equipment

The manufacture of 37-pattern equipment had long been discontinued, and New Zealand stocks had reached the point where although having considerable holdings of individual items, based on the belts as the critical item, only 9500 sets of 37-pattern equipment could be assembled.

Based on the projected five-year supply to the NTSU, Army Schools, Camps and the NZCC plus 10% maintenance per annum, there was a requirement for 12000 sets of 37-pattern equipment. Arranging production to meet the shortfalls was deemed cost-prohibitive, and as continued maintenance could not be guaranteed, it was decided that additional sets of M1956 equipment were to be purchased. The additional sets were to be purchased on a phased program over several financial years, with 5000 sets of 37-pattern retained for the NZCC.

Disposal of the 37-pattern was to be phased over three years.

1967 all items surplus to 9500 sets
1968 3000 Complete sets
1969 all remaining 37 Pattern equipment less 5000 sets for the NZCC.[18]

M1967 Modernized Load-Carrying Equipment (MLCE)

In 1967 the New Zealand Army trialled three sets of the M1967 Modernized Load-Carrying Equipment (MLCE). Not specifically designed to replace the M1956 equipment, the M1967 equipment was designed for use in tropical environments and was introduced into the United States Army service in 1968.

The New Zealand trials found that the M1967 equipment was comfortable and weight-wise was similar to other web equipment in use. The pack worn on the belt was found to be heavy when fully loaded, and a pack similar in size to the 44 Pattern should be introduced, and the belt pack reduced in size by one-third.

It was identified that all the pouches required stiffening and that the plastic fasteners were not firmly attached to the pouches, although easy to operate. While using Velcro was found simple to operate, it was seen as a disadvantage due to noise and its inclination to pull apart when wet or under stress.[19]

Although the M1956 was still being introduced into the New Zealand Army, limited quantities of the M1967 equipment were introduced from 1969-72 with no plans for large-scale procurement. Nevertheless, the design of the M1972 All-Purpose Lightweight Individual Carrying Equipment (ALICE) incorporated many of the features of the M1967 equipment, and it was introduced into the New Zealand Army service in the 1980s.

Example of M-1967 MLCE. Image Simon Moore https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pwj59bifFMk

Although the 44-pattern web equipment continued to be used by New Zealand units in Southeast Asia, by October 1967, the decision had been made to standardise the M1956 equipment across the New Zealand Army, and no stocks of the 44-pattern equipment were to be retained in New Zealand. All stocks of 44-pattern web equipment held by the MOD in Trentham for 1RNZIR Reinforcements and increments of 31 Medium Radio Sub Troop were issued to 1 RNZIR based at Terendak camp in Malaysia. As this stock held by 1RNZIR was wasted out, it would be replaced by M1956 web equipment. [20]

Large Ammunition Pouches

The Australian experience had shown that although the L1A1 Self Loading Rifle (SLR) Magazines fitted inside the M1956 ammunition pouch, it was a tight fit, especially when the webbing was wet. The initial solution was to modify 37-pattern pouches and fit them to the M1956 equipment. By 1967 the Australians had developed an indigenous ammunition pouch for the M1956 equipment., The Australian Ammunition Pouch Large (8465-66-026-1864) was manufactured out of cotton duck material and measured 8^1/4inches high by 4 inches wide and 3 inches deep.

To ascertain the suitability of the Australian large ammunition pouch for New Zealand service, fifty Australian pouches were sourced as a standardisation loan in 1968.[21] Feedback for the troop trials identified a lack of stability in the closure of the lid, causing the loss of ammunition and magazines. Following an investigation by the R&D Section, the RNZAOC Textile Repair Sections (TRS) modified the Australian pouches by replacing the lid fasteners with the same fasteners found on the standard American M1956 pouch and stiffing the fastener tabs. The modifications proved satisfactory in further Army Trials, and a new specification (DRDS-ICE-1) was produced with four Standard Samples provided to 1 Base Ordnance Depot (1 BOD).[22] The modified New Zealand Pouch was codified in the New Zealand supply system as Pouch Ammunition Large (6746-98-103-4039).[23]

Detail of New Zealand Large Ammunition Pouch riveted lid fasteners

Although the R&D Section had ascertained that the manufacture of the pouches was possible in New Zealand using imported components, the initial production run of 20000 pouches was contracted through the Australian Department of Supply to be included in the current Australian production run.[24] By 1974 the first production run of 20000 had been completed and returned to 1 BOD for distribution, with 2/1 RNZIR in Burnham one of the first units to receive the new pouches. In May 1974, 2/1 RNZIR submitted defect reports stating that the pouches were poorly designed, with the canvas tongue used to secure the lid failing, pouches becoming insecure, and magazines dropping out.[25]

The investigation by the Directorate of Equipment Policy and the R&D Section found that the faults were not a design problem but a quality assurance issue in that the pouches had not been manufactured following the specification.[26] Comparing the Australian-manufactured pouches against the specification, the R&D Section identified the following visually detected defects.

Canvas used to manufacture strap-holding assembly instead of webbing.
Clip end strap is wrongly sized.
Release tab is of incorrect thickness.
Polypropylene stiffener not inserted in release tab.
The male fastener is not secured to the PVC stiffener.
The reinforcement piece behind the male fastener is not included (between the PVC stiffener and lining).
Additional smaller reinforcement piece inserted between the outer cover and the male fastener.
Broad arrow marked on the outer cover and not specified.

Of these defects, only serials 3 to 7 were directly considered to contribute to the deficiencies and the initial concerns raised by 2/1RNZIR and would require rectification, and a modification instruction was produced.[27] Modification of the pouches would take until September 1977 to be completed.[28]

Due to the Broad Arrow Mark included on the first batch of 20000 New Zealand Large Ammunition Pouches, collectors often misidentify these items as Australian pouches.

White Web

By 1973, 37-pattern belts, rifle slings and bayonet frogs remained in use as ceremonial items. Whitened using proprietary shoe cleaner and paint, these items were badly worn with the whitener flaking easily and were easily marked by weather, fingerprints and the rubbing of other equipment. The M1956 pattern web belt was not considered suitable as a replacement as it was operational equipment requiring the breaking up of complete web sets to provide items for ceremonial events. Following the British lead, the Army Dress Committee approved a polythene, four-ply woven fabric of similar appearance and texture to the 37-pattern equipment in October 1973 as a replacement for the whitened 37-pattern equipment. The sling and bayonet frog designed for the SLR would be purchased with chromed or brass fittings. The material for the belts was provided on rolls which could be cut to the required size. Buckles and keepers were 37-pattern buckles and keepers drawn from existing stocks that had been chromed and polished.[29]

Combat Pack

By 1974, one of the few pre-1945 items of load-carrying equipment remaining in New Zealand service was the 08-pattern pack. Long identified as an unsuitable item, several trials had been conducted since the mid-1960s to find a replacement combat pack. Although a few alternative items had been investigated as a replacement, the 08-pattern pack remained the principal combat pack of the New Zealand Army.

In 1969/70, the requirement for 15000 combat packs to replace the 08-pattern pack was identified. Following evaluation by the equipment sponsor, the Australian Army Combat Pack was selected as a basis for developing a New Zealand combat pack. The Australian pack was chosen from a wide range of military and civilian packs, with the design modified to meet the particular training requirements of New Zealand. The modifications to the Australian pack were limited to comply with the following:

The pack must be compatible with Australian Army equipment.
The pack must be compatible with M1956 equipment currently in New Zealand service.

Against the advice of the R&D section, the Australian pack was modified by the New Zealand Army without a proper study being conducted.[30] The decision to bypass the R&D process resulted in a prototype process that extended from 1972 to 1974.[31] By June 1974, trials on the prototypes resulted in the setting of a standard design for a production run of one hundred packs for further trials.[32]

The New Zealand version of the Australian combat pack was eventually accepted into service in 1975/76. Never a satisfactory pack, the R&D section began investigations to find a replacement in the early 1980s. Hoping to leverage the experience of New Zealand Mountaineers to produce a modern pack, Army R&D embarked on the Onward Pack project. Manufactured by Hallmark Industries of Hamilton, the Onward pack was an innovative modular design that allowed the main pack to be broken down into a patrol pack and a light belt order,

The Basic layout of the Onwards pack was a main compartment divided into a main compartment and a sleeping bag compartment divided by a zip-away divider. The upper compartment was divided into the main storage area and internal space for an AN/PPC-77 set. External access to the main compartment was via a large snow collar with outlets for the radio antenna and handset built into the lid. External access to the lower sleeping bag section was provided by a zip which allowed the bottom half of the compartment to drop down. Internal sleeping mat storage was included as part of the harness and backpack. Three external removal pouches were provided, one on each side attached by domes and a larger pouch mounted on the centre front of the pack by buckles body. Behind the Large centre pouch, securing straps were provided to secure an Entrenching Tool. These three external pouches were fitted with belt loops, which allowed them to be removed and fitted to either the pack’s waist belt or standard pistol belt as a light belt order.

A small patrol pack designed to hold an ANPRC-77 Set was also provided as part of the Onward pack., The patrol pack could be mounted to the top of the Onward Pack or by utilising the pack’s shoulder straps, worn as a standalone pack. The Patrol pack was also fitted with a fluorescent recognition panel in a zip-up compartment.

Despite the host of features and the additional space provided compared to the Australian pack, the Onward Pack was fraught with issues. The proprietary plastic clips were prone to failure, and the body-hugging ‘alpine’ design caused causing severe prickly heat on users in the tropics of Southeast Asia. These and other issues with the Onward Pack contributed to an extended development period as attempts were made to rectify them. As these and other minor faults were addressed to meet the immediate needs of users while the Onward Pack was perfected, the medium American ALICE pack was introduced as an interim replacement in 1984.[33] Eventually, attempts to rectify the Onward Pack were abandoned and the ALICE pack was formally adopted as the New Zealand Army pack.

Conclusion

Entering the Second World War with web equipment of the same pattern used since 1912, New Zealand’s Force soon began to be re-equipped with the most modern British web equipment, the 37-pattern from early 1940. Near the end of the war, New Zealand was kept abreast of the development of web equipment, and when New Zealand troops arrived in Malaya in the early 1950s, they were issued with the most modern type available for jungle warfare, the 44-pattern. As the New Zealand Army reorientated from providing a division to serve in the Middle East to providing a Brigade Group to serve in Southeast Asia, it could not wait for the British to develop their new 58-pattern for tropical conditions and examine other types. Following Australia’s lead, the American M1959 equipment was adopted in 1964, with components of this type serving thought to the early 2000s. With five types of web equipment either adopted or trialled between 1945 and 1974, it is no surprise that components got intermingled. This led to Kiwi soldiers’ preferences and experiences leading them to create webbing sets that they found practicable rather than options prescribed in SOPs or instruction books leading to the outside impression of the New Zealand army been one equipped with an eclectic range of Australian, British and American equipment.

Notes

[1] 86/Development/47 (SWV1) Report on the Development of Personnel Fighting and Load Carrying Equipment 1942-48 February 1949. “Cookers – Web Equipment: New Pattern,” Archives New Zealand No R17189098 (1944 -1966).

[2] 86/Dev/54 (SVW1) Instruction for troop trials of Z2 Experimental Load Carrying Equipment ibid.

[3] New Zealand Joint Services Mission Washington DC JSM 1/3/13 ARM US Army Load Carrying Equipment (Web) dated 23 September 1959ibid.

[4] Attachment to JTC – Canungra dated 21 October 1960 “Stores – New Infantry Equipment for New Zealand Army,” Archives New Zealand No R17189007 (1959-1970).

[5] Army 246/60/12/SD Web Equipment dated 20 December 1960 “Cookers – Web Equipment: New Pattern.”

[6] Army 246/60/12/SD Web Equipment dated 20 December 1960ibid.

[7] Memorandum Minister of Defence to Cabinet dated June 1961ibid.

[8] 246/60/12/adm Army Secretary to Minister of Defence 2 October 1961ibid.

[9] Damien Fenton, A False Sense of Security: The Force Structure of the New Zealand Army 1946-1978, Occasional Paper / Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand: No. 1 (Centre for Strategic Studies: New Zealand, Victoria University of Wellington, 1998), 111-20.

[10] Army 246/60/12/Q(E) Brigade Group Equipment Replacement Web Equipment dated 8 May 1962 “Cookers – Web Equipment: New Pattern.” -pattern equipment

[11] BM 2 to FE16002SD General HQ FELF to The War Office (Brig Q Eqpt) 1958 Pattern Web Equipment dated 4 October 1962: ibid.

[12] 57/62 NZ Army Liaison Staff, London to Army HQ dated 17 October 1962 ibid.

[13] Army 246/60/12Q(E) Sample US Pattern Web Equipment dated 12 December 1962 ibid.

[14] 246/60/12/SD Web Equipment for the Field Force dated 18 October 1963 ibid.

[15] Army Reqn 208/63/Q(E) dated 9 June 1964 -Distribution of M1956 Web Equipment “Cookers – Web Equipment: Pattern ’37,” Archives New Zealand No R17189095 (1940-1971).

[16] EMPS 138/64 of 20 Nov 1964 ibid.

[17] Army HQ Army246/60/12/PS3 of 19 Nov 1965 ibid.

[18] Defence (Army) 246/60/2 of 26 April 1967 ibid.

[19] 1 Ranger Squadron NZSAS, Trial Report US Lightweight Equipment dated 21 March 1968″Cookers – Web Equipment: New Pattern,” Archives New Zealand No R17189099 (1966 -1969).

[20] Army 246/60/12/Q(E) EMPS 145/65 Frist Revise dated 5 October 1967 ibid.

[21] “Cookers – Web Equipment: Slings, Bandoliers, Ammunition Pouches: Development,” Archives New Zealand No R17189101 (1968-1970).

[22] Def HQ/R&D Section 82/1974 dated 28 Jun 1974.”Equipment Administration: Research & Development – Projects Personal Load Carrying Equipment: Ammunition Pouches,” Archives New Zealand No R17231111 (1972-1977).

[23] 246/60/2 of 122055ZNOV70 NZDWN to 1BOD Trentham “Cookers – Web Equipment: Pattern ’37.”

[24] Army 246/60/70 dated 9 December 1971. “Equipment Administration: Research & Development – Projects Personal Load Carrying Equipment: Ammunition Pouches.”

[25] FF 65/38/18/SD Modification of Ammunition Pouch item 10 May 1974. “Cookers – Web Equipment: New Pattern.”

[26] Army 246/60/17/EP. “Equipment Administration: Research & Development – Projects Personal Load Carrying Equipment: Ammunition Pouches.”

[27] R&D Section Minute no 160/1975 dated 21 November 1975. “Cookers – Web Equipment: New Pattern.”

[28] Army 246/60/17/SP 22 Pouches Ammunition 22 September 1977. “Cookers – Web Equipment: New Pattern.”

[29] “Army Dress Committee Decision – White Web,” Archives New Zealand No R17188112 (1973).

[30] R&D Section 67/1974 Packs Combat date 13 June 1974. “Equipment Administration: Research & Development – Projects Personal Load Carrying Equipment: Waterproof Pack,” Archives New Zealand No R17231110 (1972-1974).

[31] Army 246/60/12/EP Sponsor Enquiry Field Pack Olive Green 2 July 1972. Ibid.

[32] Army 246/60/12/ EP Minutes of the final meeting on the acceptance of the Combat Pack held at Army General Staff on 8 June 1973. “Conferences – Policy and General – NZ Army Dress Committee 1984,” Archives New Zealand No R17311893 (1984).

[33] Inf 26.3 Minutes of a meeting to consider Project Foxhound developments held at Army General Staff 8 June 1984. Ibid.

Puggarees of New Zealand’s Logistic Corps

Leave a comment Jun 25, 2022 Robert McKie

From 1912 to 1958, the sight of New Zealand Soldiers in felt slouch hats was commonplace. In addition to providing a practical form of headdress, the use of a coloured headband known as a Puggaree allowed easy identification of the Regiment or Corps of the wearer.

Origins

The Puggaree origins lay in the Hindu word, ‘Pagri,’ which is used to describe a wide range of traditional headwear worn by men and women throughout the Indian Sub-Continent, one of the most recognisable being the Dustaar or Sikh turban.

Soldiers, by their nature, are creatures of innovation and British troops serving India soon found that by wrapping a thin scarf of muslin around their headdress, not only could additional protection from sword blows be provided, but the thin cloth scarf could also be unravelled to provide insulation from the heat of the sun. Like many Indian words, “Pagri” became anglicised into Puggaree.

By the 1870s, the practical use of the Puggaree had become secondary, and the Puggaree evolved into a decorative item on British Army headdress, which, when used with a combination of colours, could be used to distinguish regiments and corps. First used by New Zealanders in the South African war, the use of Puggaree on slouch hats was formalised in the New Zealand Army 1912 Dress Regulations. These regulations detailed the colours of the distinctive Puggaree used to indicate different service branches. Although not stated in the 1912 regulations, the design of New Zealand puggarees was based on three pleats of Khaki/Branch colour/Khaki. The exception was the Artillery puggaree. The puggaree colours detailed in the 1912 regulations were

Mounted Rifles – Khaki/Green/Khaki)
Artillery –Blue/Red/Blue
Infantry – Khaki/Red/Khaki
Engineers – Khaki/Blue/Khaki
Army Service Corps – Khaki/White/Khaki
Medical corps –Khaki/Dull-Cheery /Khaki
Veterinary Corps – Khaki/Maroon/Khaki[1]

When first New Zealand troops went overseas in 1914, the NZ Slouch hat was a headdress that had been first used in the South Africa War and had a crease running down the crown from front to rear. From 1914 the Wellington Battalion wore their hats with the crown peaked, and after a short period where cork helmets were also worn, General Godley issued a directive that all troops, other than the Mounted Rifles, would wear the slouch hat with the crown peaked, in what became known as the “Lemon Squeezer”.[2]

Worn with both the Mounted Rifles Slouch hat and the Lemon Squeezer, the Puggaree became a distinctive mark of the New Zealand soldier, identifying them as distinct from soldiers from other parts of the Empire, although Australian and Canada would both use coloured Puggaree on their respective headdress, it was not to the same extent as New Zealand.[3] From 1917 the New Zealand puggaree also proved helpful in distinguishing New Zealand troops from the Americans, who wore headwear similar to the New Zealand Lemon Squeezer hat.[4]

Following the First World War, Dress regulations published in 1923 detailed an increased range of puggarees available to identify the other corps added to the army establishment during the war.

Permanent Staff – Scarlet
Mounted Rifles – Khaki/Green/Khaki)
Artillery –Blue/Red/Blue
Engineers – Khaki/Blue/Khaki
Signal Corps – Khaki/Light blue/Khaki
Infantry – Khaki/Red/Khaki
Army Service Corps – Khaki/White/Khaki
Medical Corps –Khaki/Dull-Cheery /Khaki
Veterinary Corps – Khaki/Maroon/Khaki
Ordnance Corps – Red/Blue/Red
Pay Corps – Khaki/Yellow/Khaki
Cadets – Khaki
Chaplains – Black/khaki/Black[5]

A common feature of military dress embellishments was that often there was a high-quality version made for officers and a lesser quality version for the Rank and file, with puggarees also adhering to this practice. Requestions for puggarees from 1943 indicate that the following corps and regiments utilised officer puggarees.

Artillery
Engineers
Infantry
Army Service Corps
Medical Corps

Example of Infantry Officers Puggaree (Top) and Infantry Rank and File Puggaree (Bottom)

The felt slouch hat and Puggaree would remain a fixture of the New Zealand Army until 1958, when the Lemon Squeezer was withdrawn from services and replaced with a new and unpopular Battle Dress cap. The lemon squeezer style felt hat returned serviced in 1977 as a ceremonial item with a plain red puggaree. The Mounted Rifles style slouch hat returned to service with Queen Alexandra’s Mounted Rifles (QAMR) in 1993 with the traditional Mounted Rifles khaki/green/khaki puggaree.

The Mounted Rifles hat with the Mounted Rifles khaki/green/khaki puggaree was adopted as headwear across the New Zealand Army from 1998 to 2012. However, corps puggarees were not reintroduced, becoming the standard army puggaree, with some units utilising coloured patches affixed to the Puggaree as unit identifiers.

In the forty-six years from 1912 to 1958 that puggarees were utilised as a uniform item, each corps adopted different coloured combinations. However, this article focuses on the use and history of Puggarees by New Zealand’s Logistic Corps,

• The Royal New Zealand Army Service Corps

• The Royal New Zealand Army Ordnance Corps,

• The Royal New Zealand Electrical and Mechanical Engineers and

• The Royal New Zealand Army Logistic Regiment.

Puggarees of the Royal New Zealand Army Service Corps

The origins of the Royal New Zealand Army Service Corps (RNZASC) puggarees are established in the Regulations of 1912. The RNZASC wore the Khaki/White/Khaki puggarees through the First World War and into the interbellum period.

New Zealand Army Service Corps Puggaree. Robert McKie collection

On 1 June 1924, the NZASC was split into the New Zealand Permanent Army Service Corps, consisting of the Regular ASC NCOs and soldiers, and the NZASC consisting of the Territorial Officers, NCOs and Soldiers.[6] The only uniform difference between the NZPASC and NZASC were their respective brass shoulder titles, with both branches retaining the Khaki/White/Khaki Puggaree

During the Second World War, the NZASC Khaki/White/Khaki remained in use throughout the war

In late 1942, 2NZEF placed a requisition on New Zealand to manufacture 50,000 Officer and Rank and File hat bands (puggarees) for all the different units of the NZEF. As the 3rd Division was in the process of standing up in New Zealand, the Ministry of Supply increased the requestion to 60,100, including

10,000 NZASC Rank and File puggarees, and
1000 NZASC Officer puggarees. [7]

**NZASC Puggaree Size Ranges ordered 1943**

In early 1944 the decision was made by 2NZEF to replace the lemon squeezer hat with more practical forms of dress, and the requirement for puggarees was adjusted. Considering puggarees already manufactured and the requirement for puggarees by forces in New Zealand and the Pacific, 14590 puggarees from the original order of 61,100 were cancelled.[8] 760 Rank and files NZASC puggarees had already been manufactured, so based on revised calculations, the NZASC order was reduced to 6000 Rank and file and 300 Officer puggarees. [9]

The NZPASC and NZASC were reconstituted on 12 January 1947 and a combined regular and Territorial NZASC, retaining the use of the Khaki/White/Khaki puggaree.[10]

The NZASC was granted royal status on 12 July 1947, becoming the Royal New Zealand Army Service Corps.[11]

Puggarees of the Royal New Zealand Army Ordnance Corps

The New Zealand Army Ordnance Corps (NZAOC) was formed as a unit of the NZEF in early 1915 and established as a unit of the New Zealand Permanent Forces in 1917. It is assumed that as a new unit, a distinctive puggaree was adopted for the NZAOC, but the limited photographs of NZAOC personnel are black and white, making identification of colours difficult.

A Newspaper article from December 1918 does provide evidence that an Ordnance puggaree of red/blue/red existed. The article published in the Press on 5 December 1918 stated, “There are only two units in the New Zealand Division with red in the puggaree. They are the Artillery and Ordnance, and in both units, the colours are red and blue”. This sentence identifies that the Ordnance Puggaree was red and blue.[12]

Ordnance Puggaree, RNZAOC 1947-53 Badge. Robert McKie collection

The NZAOC red/blue/red Puggaree was formalised as the Puggaree of the NZAOC in 1923 when the New Zealand Army updated its Dress Regulations for the first time since 1912.[13]

By October 1939, the expansion of the NZAOC and formation of the New Zealand Ordnance Corps (NZOC) for service with the 2^nd NZEF created a requirement for NZAOC puggarees that could not be satisfied from stocks held by the Main Ordnance Depot. An urgent order was raised for 288 NZAOC puggarees

As part of the 2NZEF requestion of 1942, orders to manufacture 2200 NZAOC puggarees were raised.

**NZAOC Puggaree Size Ranges ordered 1943**

By 1944, 270 NZAOC puggarees had been manufactured and delivered, and despite the order quantities for other corps being reduced, some adjustment was made to the size range required, and the remaining 1930 NZAOC puggarees were manufactured.

Puggarees of the Royal New Zealand Electrical and Mechanical Engineers

The youngest of the three New Zealand logistic corps, the Royal New Zealand Electrical and Mechanical Engineers (RNZEME), progressively evolved into a corps from 1942 in three stages.

The New Zealand Electrical and Mechanical Engineers (NZEME) formed as a unit of the 2^nd NZEF in November 1942.[14]
The formation of the NZEME as a new unit of New Zealand’s Permanent Forces on 1 September 1946, amalgamating and co-ordinating ordnance workshops, mechanical transport workshops, and armourers’ workshops, which in the past have been under separate command.[15]
The granting of “Royal” status on 12 July 1947.[16]

As the RNZEME established itself as a Corps, it utilised three types of Puggaree.

Red/Blue/Red Puggaree

As a corps predominantly drawn from the NZAOC, on its establishment in 1946, the NZEME adopted the existing NZAOC Red/Blue/Red Puggaree and NZOC badge. This was a temporary measure until NZEME Puggaree and badges were manufactured.[17]

Red/Green/Red Puggaree

By 1948 a distinctive Red/Green/Red puggaree with its origins in the NZEME of 2NZEF had replaced the NZAOC Puggaree.

NZEME pattern Puggaree. Robert.McKie Collection

As part of the 2NZEF requestion of 1942, orders were raised for 3000 puggarees for the NZEME.[18]

As the NZEME puggaree was a new pattern, its design was described

Shades of red material as per Kaiapoi pattern range 7443x (as used in Artillery and Infantry bands).
Shades of green material as per Kaiapoi pattern range 18153B 9 (as used in NZMR bands).

The NZEME puggarees were not included in the reduction and cancellation of the 1943 order, and it can be assumed that the complete order of 3000 was manufactured and placed into storage at the Main Ordnance Depot. [19] A 1945 report places the cost of a dozen NZEME puggarees at £1.3.0 (2022 NZD $107.07).[20]

Blue/Yellow/ Red Puggaree

By 1948 the RNZEME decided to update their Puggaree with one that reflected their corps colours of blue, yellow and red, with an order for 4000 placed on the Kaiapoi Woollen Manufacturing Company. With competing manufacturing demands, the Kaiapoi Woollen Manufacturing Company could not satisfy this order but could provide the required materials. In June 1949, the War Asset Realisation Board District Officer in Auckland selected a Mrs V.I Banton of 117 Lynwood Road, New Lynn, to manufacture the RNZEME puggarees. At the cost of 1/6 each (2022 NZD $6.65). [21]

RNZEME Puggaree. Robert McKie collection

With the initial order for 4000 paced in June 1949, it was not until January 1950 that Mrs Banton provided suitable samples that met the required specifications to allow her to begin production, with the first batch of 704 provided in April 1950.

With the new RNZEME puggaree becoming available, the question of how to dispose of the 1800 red/green/red pattern NZEME puggarees in the Ordnance clothing stores was raised.

It would not be a case of a new pattern in, old pattern out, but one where the old pattern was to be progressively wasted out as stocks of the new pattern became available. The priority was to be RNZEME Territorials Force units first, then distributed to RNZEME Regular Forces units.[22] Photographic evidence suggests that the transition from the NZEME puggaree to the RNZEME Puggaree had been completed by 1951.

Farewell to the Puggaree

A 1947 survey of New Zealand Soldiers found that the Lemon Squeezer was the most popular form of headdress utilised by the New Zealand Army.[23] However, it was not the most suitable type of headdress, and for many of the same reasons 2NZEF discontinued its use during the war, the army began to look for a replacement.

In 1954 the Cap Battledress (Cap BD), commonly referred to as the Ski Cap, was introduced into service. The Cap BD progressively replaced the Lemon squeezer so that by 1960 except for its use by the New Zealand Artillery Band, the Lemon squeezer ceased to be an official uniform item of the New Zealand Army.[24]

NZ Army Cap Battledress (Cap BD), introduced in 1954, was withdrawn from service in 1964. Robert Mckie Collection

With several thousand unused puggarees sitting in Ordnance Depots as now dead stock, unlikely to ever be issued, Army HQ issued instructions that except for 150 RNZA Puggarees of a balanced size range, all other stocks were to be destroyed.[25] By August 1961, all stocks of puggarees had been destroyed.[26]

The Lemon Squeezer was reintroduced as a ceremonial headdress in 1977, utilising the red Puggaree utilised by the Staff Corps, Permanent Staff and 1953 Coronation Contingent.

Puggaree of the Royal New Zealand Army Logistic Regiment

The Royal New Zealand Army Logistic Regiment (RNZALR) was established in 1996 by amalgamating the Royal New Zealand Corps of Transport, RNZAOC and RNZEME while also absorbing all the All Arms Quartermaster Storekeepers from every corps of the New Zealand Army. A diverse regiment of officers and soldiers from across the army, a means to shape the regiment’s heritage and acknowledge the importance of its and predecessors’ role, was required. An opportunity to coalesce the RNZALR was provided in 1998.

In 1998, the RNZALR was presented with a banner providing a regimental focal point. Several unique dress items, including a puggaree, were introduced to provide the RNZALR Banner escort party with distinctive RNZALR dress embellishments. Missing the opportunity to adopt a new puggaree that reflected the role that the RNZALR’s predecessors had performed with courage and resilience in the past, the leadership of the RNZALR took the cautious and lazy option of adopting a Puggaree with no connection to the legacy corps. The Puggaree adopted was a blue puggaree, last been utilised by the NZ Provosts in the First World War.

Also, in 1998 the New Zealand Army reintroduced the Mounted Rifles Felt hat as an item of headdress across the army. Already in service with QAMR since 1993, the Mounted Rifles hat retained the Mounted Rifles Khaki/Green/Khaki puggaree. The reintroduction of the Mounted Rifles hat could also be considered a missed opportunity by the leadership of the RNZALR for not advocating the adoption of a unique RNZALR puggaree to be worn by RNZALR units. A compromise was provided through the adoption of a unit flashed affixed to the left side of the Puggaree. While retained by QAMR, the Mounted Rifles hat was withdrawn from general army use in 2012.

In conclusion, the demise of the coloured Puggaree in 1958 removed a valuable means of identifying soldiers and their units. It was an embellishment that by 1970 was missed, and to fill the gap, some corps lobbied for the introduction of corps lanyards while others introduced regimental stable belts. The opportunity was open to reintroducing regimental Puggarees between 1998 and 2022. However, this was missed. Today Puggarres are a reminder of a time of more colourful uniform embellishments and a curiosity for collectors of militaria.

Notes

[1] New Zealand Military Forces Dress Regulations, ed. New Zealand Military Forces (Wellington, 1912). https://rnzaoc.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/1923-nz-army-dress-regs.pdf; “Formation of New Unit and Corps, Constitution of Generals’ List and Colonels’ List, Amalgamation, Redesignation, and· Disbanding of Corps, New Zealand Military Forces,” New Zealand Gazette No 2, 11 January 1947, http://www.nzlii.org/nz/other/nz_gazette/1947/2.pdf.

[2] D. A. Corbett, The regimental badges of New Zealand: an illustrated history of the badges and insignia worn by the New Zealand Army (Auckland, NZ: Ray Richards, 1980 Revised enl. edition, 1980), Non-fiction, 47-48.

[3] “Local And General,” Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2610,, 4 November 1915, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19151104.2.38.

[4] “Visit to Paris,” North Otago Times, Volume CV, Issue 14001, 11 December 1917, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NOT19171211.2.58.

[5] New Zealand Military Forces Dress Regulations, ed. New Zealand Military Forces (Wellington, 1923). https://rnzaoc.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/1923-nz-army-dress-regs.pdf.

[6] “Formation of New Zealand Permanent Army Service Corps.,” New Zealand Gazette No 46, July 3 1924, http://www.nzlii.org/nz/other/nz_gazette/1924/46.pdf.

[7] Main Ordnance Depot O.S.56/40/1/2499 Dated 28 June 1943. “Clothing: Felt Hats, Bands: Provision,” Archives New Zealand No R17187892 (1939).

[8] Chief Ordnance Officer 56/40/1/439 Dated 14 April 1944 “Clothing: Felt Hats, Bands: Provision.”

[9] Chief Ordnance Officer 56/40/1/439 Dated 14 April 1944 “Clothing: Felt Hats, Bands: Provision.”

[10] “Formation of New Unit and Corps, Constitution of Generals’ List and Colonels’ List, Amalgamation, Redesignation, and· Disbanding of Corps, New Zealand Military Forces.”

[11] “Designation of Corps of New Zealand Military Forces altered and Title ” Royal ” added,” New Zealand Gazette No 39, 17 July 1947, http://www.nzlii.org/nz/other/nz_gazette/1947/39.pdf.

[12] “Soldiers and Dress – Ordnance Pugaree,” Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16387 (Christchurch), 5 December 1918, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19181205.2.6.1.

[13] New Zealand Military Forces Dress Regulations.

[14] Peter Cooke, Warrior Craftsmen, RNZEME 1942-1996 (Wellington: Defense of New Zealand Study Group, 2017).

[15];”Formation of Unit of the New Zealand Permanent Force,” New Zealand Gazette No 60, 29 August 1946, 1199, http://www.nzlii.org/nz/other/nz_gazette/1946/60.pdf.

[16] “Designation of Corps of New Zealand Military Forces altered and Title ” Royal ” added.”

[17] “New Unit of Permanent Forces,” Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24979 (Christchurch), 13 September 1946, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19460913.2.16.

[18] Main Ordnance Depot O.S.56/40/1/2499 Dated 28 June 1943. “Clothing: Felt Hats, Bands: Provision.”

[19] Chief Ordnance Officer 56/40/1/439 Dated 14 April 1944 “Clothing: Felt Hats, Bands: Provision.”

[20] Ministry of Supply 10/59/367 dated 13 September 1945 “Clothing: Felt Hats, Bands: Provision.”

[21] War Asset Realisation Board SCB.Q900 Dated 14 June 1949.”Clothing: Puggarees and Hat Bands RNZEME,” Archives New Zealand No R22496567 (1950).

[22] MOD 14/1/19 dated 22 Apr 1950.”Clothing: Puggarees and Hat Bands RNZEME.”

[23] “Lemon squeezer Most Popular NZ Army Hat,” Northern Advocate,, 22 December 1947, https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NA19471222.2.17.

[24] Malcolm Thomas and Cliff Lord, New Zealand Army distinguishing patches, 1911-1991 (Wellington, N.Z. : M. Thomas and C. Lord, 1995, 1995), Bibliographies, Non-fiction, 128-29.

[25] Army 213/15/1/OS3, dated 1 April 1961.”Clothing: Felt Hats, Bands: Provision.”

[26] SMD 5/20/1/ORD 13 July 1961, “Clothing: Felt Hats, Bands: Provision.”

RNZAOC Lanyard

1 Comment Jun 4, 2022 Robert McKie

New Zealand’s military usage of lanyards has been practical, with lanyards used for securing pistols, compasses and whistles to a person. Aside from the practical use of lanyards, there are also examples where lanyards have been adopted as a coloured uniform accoutrement by some New Zealand Regiments and Corps, some examples being:

The Regular Force Cadets’ red lanyard
The New Zealand Provost and Military Police white lanyard
The Royal New Zealand Corps of Transport blue and gold lanyard

Almost included in this short list of New Zealand Army regimental lanyards was the Royal New Zealand Army Ordnance Corps (RNZAOC), which applied for permission to adopt a regimental lanyard in the 1960s.

The word lanyard originates from the French word ‘lanière’, which means ‘strap’, with accounts from the late 15^th century French describing how soldiers and privateers utilised ropes and cords found on ships to keep their swords, cutlasses and pistols close at hand whilst working in ships’ rigging and during combat.

As with any functional military kit, lanyards evolved, with French Cuirassiers using a braided lanyard to hold their swords in place, with adoption by most militaries following. In British use, lanyards became common, used to attach pistols to uniforms, and Gunners used them to fire artillery. In widespread use for practical purposes, the adoption of lanyards as a decorative uniform item soon followed, with coloured lanyards denoting regiments and corps and gold lanyards used to identify senior officers.

In 1941 the British Army introduced coloured ‘Arms of Service’ (AoS) strips to be worn on both arms of the Battle Dress uniform with the primary colour facing forward. The Royal Army Ordnance Corps (RAOC), AoS strip was initially a Dark Blue AoS strip which was hard to see, and in early 1943 it was changed to a Red/Blue/Red strip, which remained in use for the rest of the war. The RAOC adopted the AoS colours for the RAOC lanyard, which was approved for wear by all ranks on 2 June 1950.[1] In 1960 the RAOC Lanyard was formalised for use with the 1960 Pattern No2 Dress, and within a short time, the RNZAOC applied for a similar dress distinction.

On 24 July 1962, the Colonel Commandant of the RNZAOC, Lieutenant Colonel Francis Reid, submitted a proposal to the New Zealand Army Dress Committee to adopt a unique dress embellishment for specific Regular Force RNZAOC personnel. The submission reads:

1.         R&SO Vol II paras 3359 refers

2.         I wish to refer the following proposal submitted by 4 Inf Bde Gp OFP, for consideration for the adoption of a special embellishment to the dress for specific Regular Force RNZAOC personnel.

3.       The proposal is that personnel posted to field force units, ie, 4 Inf Bde Gp OFP and 4 Inf Wksps Stores Sec be permitted to wear a lanyard on the left shoulder, with all orders of dress other than numbers 1, 4 and 5.

4.          The proposed lanyard has three cords, twisted, two scarlet and one blue, with a loop at each end. A suggested sample is enclosed.

5.         The reasons for this proposal are as follows:-

4 Inf Bde Gp OFP and 4 Inf Wksps Stores Sec are new RNZAOC RF units, in fact, it is the first time these types of units have been formed within the Regular Force in the NZ Army. The personnel have been drawn from the older District Ordnance Depots and many of them continue to think in District terms. It is considered that an embellishment such as the lanyard, would create a high unit feeling and help to raise and maintain high morale in these RNZAOC units within the field force.

It is anticipated that the employment of personnel in these units will occasionally be by assisting RNZAOC static depots. Under these circumstances the embellishment would maintain a unit feeling when the personnel are mixed with other RNZAOC units.

During Bde Gp concentrations, when summer dress is worn and thus corps shoulder titles are not worn, the lanyard would further foster unit spirit within the formation.

6.          The purchase of these lanyards, if approved, would be undertaken entirely from Unit resources, with Public Funds not being involved in any way.

7.         I strongly recommend this proposal and forward it for your favourable consideration.[1]

[1] RNZAOC Colonel Commandant, “Request to adopt special embellishment to dress,” Archives New Zealand No R17187826 (24 July 1962).

Replying to the RNZAOC Colonel Commandant on 10 October 1962, the Army Dress committed agreed to the desirability of having a unique dress embellishment to identify Regular Force Field Force Personnel. However, as a universal shoulder patch for all Field Force personnel was under consideration by the Army Clothing Development Section, approval was not granted for an RNZAOC-specific lanyard. However, the proviso was set that if shoulder patches were rejected as a dress embellishment, further consideration of lanyards was possible, and the Dress Committee welcomed the re-submission of the proposal for an RNZAOC lanyard. The Sample provided to Lt Col Reid was returned.[3]

It would take a few more years, but on 10 September 1964, approval was given for the wearing of Formation Patches by all ranks, other than 1 RNZIR and 1 Bn Depot, who continued to wear the red diamond. The approved patches were circular 1^1/2 inch in diameter and dived by operational grouping,

Combat Brigade Group – Black
Logistic Support Group, 3 NZEF and Base Units – Red
Combat Reserve Brigade Troops – Green
All others – Blue

The blue Formation patch for other units was discontinued on 3 December 1968. Approval for the wearing of the remaining patches was withdrawn on 6 August 1971.[4]

Regardless of this initial setback, the idea of an RNZAOC lanyard remained popular within the RNZAOC. In November 1969, the DADOS(D), on behalf of the RNZAOC, pitched to the Army Dress Committee the desire of the RNZAOC to have a lanyard as a distinctive dress distinction. By 1969 the corps had been reorganised and instead of a lanyard being an item of dress for those Regular Force personnel posted to Field Force units, it was intended to issue lanyards to all RNZAOC personnel. By 1969 Stable belts were starting to become a popular addition to the range of army dress accoutrements. However, wearing Stable belts was limited by the dress orders available, leading the RNZAOC to favour a lanyard as a dress distinction with broader utility. As in 1962, a sample was again provided.

The chairman of the Dress Committee was not in favour of lanyards as he wished to avoid a proliferation of dress embellishments. However, based on the argument put forward by the DADOS(A), he reserved his decision until a future meeting of the Army Dress Committee and invited the DOS to attend to support this item on the agenda.[5]

The next meeting of the Army Dress Committee with the discussion on an RNZAOC Lanyard was on 1 March 1971. In this meeting, the DOS again proposed an RNZAOC lanyard, mentioning that most other Corps of the NZ Army had adopted some form of distinctive dress, for example, Stable belts. However, the RNZAOC remained in favour of an RNZAOC lanyard.

The proposed lanyard was not to be purchased at public expense and was to be worn on the left shoulder of no 2,3,6 (except 6D) and 7 orders of dress. The majority approved the proposal of members of the Army Dress Committee. However, the chairman again reserved his decision until a clear policy directive on Corps Dress Distinctions was issued from Army HQ, as again, he felt that an introduction of an RNZAOC lanyard “might open the door form other corps submissions”.[6]

The proposal for an RNZAOC lanyard was not approved. In 1972 the RNZAOC reconsidered its position on Stable belts and, following a submission to the Army Dress Committee, was granted permission to adopt an RNZAOC specific Stable belt in April 1972.[7]

The sample lanyards were returned to the DOS and eventually found their way into the RNZAOC School memorabilia collection as a reminder of what could have been. Following the disestablishment of the RNZAOC in 1996, the RNZAOC School memorabilia collection was handed over to the Royal New Zealand Army Logistic Regiment (RNZALR) for safekeeping and future preservation. Unfortunately, as a nondescript item whose story had been forgotten and a lack of a robust management policy led these lanyards and many other RNZAOC items to find their way to the open market.

Notes

[1] Len Whittaker, “Lanyards,” The Military Historical Society (November 1985).

[2] RNZAOC Colonel Commandant, “Request to adopt special embellishment to dress,” Archives New Zealand No R17187826 (24 July 1962).

[3] “Army 220/5/103/AAC Army Dress Committee Meeting 1 March 1971,” Archives New Zealand No R9753141 (July 1971).

[4] “Clothing – Dress Embellishments: General 1960-1976,” Archives New Zealand No R17187826 (1960).

[5] “Army 220/5/103/AAC Army Dress Committee Meeting 1 March 1971.”

[6] “Army 220/5/103/AAC Army Dress Committee Meeting 1 March 1971.”

[7] “Army 220/5/103/AAC Army Dress Committee Meeting 1 March 1971.”

New Zealand Army Logistics Stable Belts

1 Comment Sep 6, 2021 Robert McKie

Worn by some New Zealand Army units since the mid-1960s, it was not until 1973 that the wearing of stable belts (commonly referred to as Corps or Regimental Belts in the New Zealand Army) was authorised across the New Zealand Army. In adopting a stable belt, a few units adopted belts of a unique design; however, most New Zealand corps, regiments, and infantry battalions choose designs based on the regimental colours of a parent or allied units of the British Army. The three Logistics Corps of the NZ Army adopted stable belts of a British design, and it was not until 1996 and the formation of the Royal New Zealand Army Logistic Regiment (RNZALR) that a unique New Zealand Logistic stable belt was be adopted.

Stable belts have their origins in the British Army. Cavalrymen (and ASC and AOC personnel from trades associated with horses) found that by modifying a Cavalry “Surcingle,” they had a belt that was particularly useful in providing lower back support when cleaning stables and tending horses. As British military uniforms became more utilitarian, lacking the colour and flair of earlier patterns, the wearing of coloured “stable belts” in regimental colours evolved, adding a splash of colour and individuality to the drab khaki working uniforms of the period.

The use of coloured stable belts in regimental colours spread to all branches of the British Army, becoming established as a uniform item following World War Two. Most commonwealth countries followed the example of the British Army and adopted the coloured stable belt of the Corps or Regiments to which they had links or alliances. The adoption of stable belts by the NZ Army was far from enthusiastic, and it was not until the mid-1960s that stable belts started to appear. It was not until 1973 that the Army Dress Committee officially approved the universal wearing of stable belts for all Regiments and Corps of the NZ Army.

Stable Belts are generally manufactured from a 2^1/2-to a 3-inch-wide belt of a heavily woven material with horizontal stripes in two or more colours. Buckle types vary with six main types used.

Single tongue leather buckle. In NZ only used by the 4th Otago and Southland Battalion
Multi tongue leather buckle. Consisting of two leather buckles
Single Locket
Triple Locket. In NZ only used on the 5^th Wellington West Coast Battalion Other Ranks Stable belt.
Rectangular plate (Matt colour or chromed) and Cap Badge design.
Web Belt clasp. Used on Interim RNZALR Stable belt.

RNZASC stable belt

Photographic evidence suggests that the Royal New Zealand Army Service Corps (RNZASC) adopted the British Army Royal Army Service Corps (RASC) stable belt sometime around 1970. However, the exact year is unknown. Until its disestablishment in1965, the RASC had worn a stable belt with a blue base with two central white stripes and two yellow stripes on the borders. A stable belt with a multi-tongue leather buckle, the RASC stable belt was worn with two leather buckles worn on the right hip. The Canadian ASC wore the same pattern stable belt up to 1968 and continues to be worn by the Malaysian Kor Perkhidmatan Diraja (Royal Logistics Corps).

In June 1973 the New Zealand Director of Supply and Transport requested from the Colonel Commandant of the Royal Corps of Transport (RCT) permission for the RNZASC to adopt the RCT stable belt. Adopted by the RCT in 1965, permission for the RNZASC to adopt the RCT pattern belt was granted by the Colonel Commandant of the RCT in September 1973. Concurrent with the adoption of the RCT stable belt by the RNZASC, was the adoption of the same belt by the Royal Australian Corps of Transport (RACT) in 1973.

RNZCT stable belt

On 12 May 1979, the RNZASC ceased to exist, as its Supply functions were transferred to the Royal New Zealand Army Ordnance Corps (RNZAOC), while the Transport, Movements and Catering functions were reformed into the Royal New Zealand Corps of Transport (RNZCT). The RCT pattern stable belt continued to serve as the stable belt of the RNZCT throughout the RNZCTs existence within the NZ Army. The only change to the belt throughout its life was some subtle changes to the design of the buckle.

Late Pattern RCT/RNZCT stable belt. Robert McKie collection

RNZAOC stable belt

There is much photographic evidence of RNZAOC officers and soldiers in Singapore unofficially wearing British (Single locket) and Malaysian (multi tongue leather buckle) Ordnance Corps stable belts during the 1970-72 period. The RNZAOC initially discussed introducing stable belts in 1969. However, at the time, the available orders of dress did not provide much opportunity to wear a Stable belt, and the preference of the RNZAOC was to adopt a coloured Lanyard. Approval for a Lanyard was not granted, so the Director of Ordnance Services submitted to the Amry Dress Committee on 4 April 1972 requesting authority for the RNZAOC to adopt a stable belt. Permission was granted due to the Army Dress Committee’s 4 April 1972 meeting. The RNZAOC Belt was to b the same pattern as the RAOC belt but had a rectangular chrome plate mounted with RNZAOC Badge.

RNZEME stable belt

With its distinctive dark blue background with red and yellow stripes, the stable belt of the Royal New Zealand Electrical and Mechanical Engineers (RNZEME)was introduced in 1967 and was based on the Royal and Electrical Mechanical Engineers (REME) stable belt. The upper portion of the right-hand buckle carried the Corps motto (Arte et Marte). The right-hand piece had the RNZEME badge.

RLC stable belt

In 1993, in the most significant reorganisation of its Logistic Support since 1965, the British Army formed the Royal Logistic Regiment (RLC) by combining the RCT, RAOC, Catering and Pioneer Corps into the new Regiment. Eager to retain the values and traditions of its foundation Corps and Regiments, the RLC retained many elements of its founding corps Regimental colours and the history they represented in the design of the RLC stable belt. The REME remained a separate Corps outside of the RLC.

RNZALR stable belt

In a similar initiative to the British Army’s formation of the RLC, the NZ Army also combined its logistic functions into a single Logistic Regiment. The significant difference between the British and New Zealand logistical changes was that the RNZEME was also disestablished and included in the NZ Logistic Regiment.

On 9 December 1996, the Officers and Soldiers of the RNZCT, RNZAOC and RNZEME marched onto parade grounds on each camp and base. Corps flags were lowered, headwear and stable belts exchanged, and the Officers and Soldiers marched off as members of the Royal New Zealand Army Logistic Regiment (RNZALR).

With the colourful stable belts of three RNZALR foundation corps and the collective history of service to New Zealand since 1840 that they represented retired, the RNZALR took a different approach to the RLC in selecting a new stable belt. While the RLC had embraced its foundation Corps’ values and traditions, the RNZALR divorced itself from the past and adopted a plain navy-blue stable belt.

As stock of the new RNZALR stable belt was not available on the formation of the New Regiment, a temporary belt was issued.

Consisting of a navy-blue belt with Web Belt clasps, the interim belt was retired within a year as new RNZALR Stable belts became available.

The only distinctive feature of the RNZALRs stable belt is locket style Chrome buckle, which includes the following features

The RNZALR Corps badge on the male side of the buckle
The RNZALR motto, “Ma Nga Hua Tu Tangata”, on the female side of the buckle.

RNZAOC 1 April 1959 to 31 March 1960

1 Comment Feb 10, 2021 Robert McKie

This would be a significant period for the RNZAOC. The RNZAOC School would be established, and challenges with officer recruitment identified. This period would also see the fruition of plans to re-shape the Army into a modern and well-equipped Army with the first tranches of new equipment arriving to replace much of the legacy wartime equipment.

Key Appointments

Director of Ordnance Services

Temporary Lieutenant Colonel H. McK. Reid

Chief Inspecting Ordnance Officer

Major JW Marriot

Officer Commanding Main Ordnance Depot

Major Harry White, from 1 May 1959

RNZAOC School

Chief Instructor – Major Harry White
Regimental Sergeant Major – Warrant Officer Class One Alfred Wesseldine

2nd Battalion, the New Zealand Regiment

Reformed at Waiouru in July 1959, the 2nd Battalion of the New Zealand Regiment would undertake workup and training that would see the Battalion deploy to Malaya in November 1959 to relieve the 1^st Battalion. To enable the 2^nd Battalion to conduct its training and work up the RNZAOC would equip the Battalion for the ground up with its necessary entitlement of equipment from existing holdings.

Establishment of RNZOAC School

Upper Hutt City Library (29th Jan 2020). Trentham Camp; Royal New Zealand Army Ordnance Corps School sign.. In Website Upper Hutt City Library. Retrieved 14th Jul 2020 11:51, from https://uhcl.recollect.co.nz/nodes/view/1335

Under discussion by the Army Board since 1956, the RNZAOC School was established in September 1959. Established within the Peacetime Establishment of the Main Ordnance Depot, the RNZAOC School would be under HQ Ordnance Services’ direct control and independent of the Army Schools.[1]

The initial school organisation would be.

A Headquarters,
- Chief Instructor – Major Harry White
- School Sergeant Major – Warrant Officer Class One Wesseldine
Ammunition Wing
Stores and Vehicle Wing

The function of the RNZAOC School would be to run courses and training for RF and TF personnel of the RNZAOC, including

Star Classification Courses – particularly for Storeman/Clerks RNZAOC and Ammunition Examiners.
Promotion courses for both officers and ORs.
Recruit training RNZAOC Personnel, including Recruit training for Group 2 personnel.
Advanced training for both officers and ORs, in all types of Ordnance activities.
Technical training in ordnance subjects, e.g. Inspecting Ordnance Officer courses.
Preservations and packing etc.
Refresher training for qualified personnel.
Other course notified in the annual Forecast of Courses.

Additionally, as directed by DOS, the RNZAOC School was required to.

Plan and hold conferences and training exercises.
Draft procedure instructions.
Test, or comment on new procedures, materials, or equipment.
Research various aspects of Ordnance activities.

The first course conducted by the RNZAOC School would be an Instructors Course conducted in late 1959.

First Instructors Course, 1959. Chief Instructor Major Harry White is seated 3rd from left. Officer in the front Centre id Makor K.G Cropp. Robert Mckie RNZAOC Collection

Officer Shortfall

A forecast of the planned retirement of RNZAOC Officers up to 1962 showed that Seventeen officers would be retiring. Up to this period, the principal means of filling RNZAOC officer posts had been thru the commissioning of Other Ranks with Quartermaster Commissions, with only three officers joining the RNZAOC as Officers since November 1956. When the planned Officer retirements had been balanced against the RNZAOC officer establishment, it was found that the RNZAOC was deficient six Officers with two significant problems identified.

The RNZAOC Officer Corps was becoming a Corps of old men, with 83% of Officers in the 39 to 54 age group
The RNZAOC Other Ranks Structure was denuded of the best SNCO’s and Warrant Officers.

To rectify the situation, the following recommendations were made.

The RNZAOC press for an increased intake from Duntroon and Portsea of graduates to the RNZAOC.
Suitable officers no older than 30 years of age, and in the two to four-year Lieutenant bracket, be encouraged to change Corps to the RNZAOC.
Further commissioning of QM officers be strongly resisted unless there was no other alternative.

Conferences

Over the period 1 -3 September 1959, DOS hosted a conference at Army HQ for the District DADOS, Officer Commanding MOD, and the Ordnance Directorate members. The general agenda of the meeting included.[2]

Local purchase of stores by DADOS
Training of group 2 Personnel
RNZAOC School
Provision Problems
Surplus Stores
Personnel – postings and promotions
- DADOS and OC MOD were required to provide in duplicate, personnel lists by unit containing.
  - Regimental No, rank, and name
  - Marital Status
  - Establishment statue, either PES, CSS or HSS
  - Present posting
Purchases for RF Brigade Group
District Problems

Small Arms Ammunition

The 7.62mm rifle introduction would require the Colonial Ammunitions Company to convert manufacture from the current 303 calibre to the new 7.62mm calibre. The CAC had been the supplier of Small Arms Ammunition to the Defence Force since 1888 and to maintain this long relationship had purchased and installed the required tools and machinery to allow the production of 7.62 ammunition, with the first production run completed during this period. Although the NZ Army had sufficient stocks of .303 ammunition for the foreseeable future, CAC would retain the capability to manufacture 303 ammunition if required.

Introduction of New Equipment

As new equipment was introduced, the RNZAOC would play an essential role in the acceptance processes. Upon delivery from the supplier, the equipment, accessories, and spares would be received into the Main Ordnance Depot. The equipment would be inspected and kitted out with all its accessories before distribution to units. Several examples may have been retained in RNZAOC Depots as War Reserve/Repair and Maintenance Stock depending on the equipment. Maintenance stocks of accessories and spares were maintained as operating stock in RNZAOC depots. If the new equipment contained a weapon system, ammunition specific to the equipment was managed by RNZAOC Ammunition Depots. During this period, the following equipment was introduced into service;[3]

110 Land Rover Series 2a 109.
144 Truck 3-Ton Bedford RL, 48 fitted with winch
3 Ferret Mark 1/1 Scout Car
270 Wireless Sets. C45 – VHF transceiver,
2000 9mm Sub Machine Gun Sterling Mk4 L2A3.
500 7.62 mm Self Loading Rifle, L1A1 (SLR).

Uniforms

The Clothing and Equipment Committee accepted as the basic training uniform for New Zealand soldiers in all conditions in NZ to be;

Boots (Fory types under trial and development)
Anklets (Australian pattern)
Shirt (light wool)
Trouser ( Green drill material cut to UK pattern)
Hat (Jungle Type)

Disposals

In August 1958 a new disposal organisation was established within the Army to manage the declaration and disposal of surplus and obsolete equipment. Since August 1959 over 9000 lines covering thousands of items had been declared to the Government Stores Board for Disposal through this new disposal’s organisation.

Ammunition Disposal

The disposal of dangerous or obsolete ammunition continued with over 900 tons of obsolete ammunition dumped at sea. An additional 130,000 rounds of dangerous artillery ammunition were destroyed by burning or detonation.

Where possible the maximum amount of recyclable metal was salvaged, with around £10000 (2020 NZ$243,276) received for the scrap and containers sold.[4]

Ration Packs

Following successful user trials, the Royal New Zealand Army Service Corps (RNZASC) assembled 24000 one-person 24-hour ration packs during 1959. Along with new solid fuel cookers, these new ration packs were extensively used by the 2^nd Battalion the NZ Regiment in the build-up Training for Malaya and the Territorial Force during the Annual Camp.

Shooting Competition

Staff Sergeant I.G Campbell, RNZAOC was selected by the National Rifle Association as a team member representing New Zealand at 91st Annual Prize Meeting at Bisley in the United Kingdom, 4- 20 July 1960.

Award of Army Sports Colours

In recognition of his contribution to Army Sport, Major D.E Roderick of Auckland was a recipient of the 1960 Army Sports Colours. Major Roderick has represented Army at cricket, hockey and badminton and was instrumental in developing the sports facilities at Trentham Camp. Within the RNZAOC Major Roderick had been a long-term member of the Upper Hutt Cricket Club and a player and administrator of the MOD Cricket team. [5]

Honours and Awards

British Empire Medal

Sergeant (Temporary Staff Sergeant) Maurice William Loveday, Royal New Zealand Army Ordnance Corps (Regular Force), of Trentham.[6]

Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, Resignations, and Retirements of Officers of the RNZAOC

Regular Force

Major Ronald Geoffrey Patrick O’Connor is transferred to the Reserve of Officers, General List, Royal NZ Army Ordnance, in Major’s rank, 4 May 1959.[7]
Major and Quartermaster K. A. Bailey, M.M., having reached retiring age for rank, is transferred to the Supernumerary list, and granted an extension of his engagement until 12 January 1960, 11 August 1959.[8]
Captain Frederick George Cross is transferred to the Reserve of Officers, General List, Royal NZAOC, in the rank of Captain, 1 September 1959. [9]
Captain L. C. King is re-engaged for a period of one year, as from 4 October 1959.[10]
Captain (temp. Major) J. Harvey relinquishes the temporary rank of Major, 6 March 1960.[11]

Regular Force (Supernumerary List)

Major and Quartermaster K. A. Bailey, MM., is granted an extension of his engagement for one year from 13 January 1960.[12]
Captain and Quartermaster S. H. E. Bryant is re-engaged for one year as from 28 October 1959.[13]
Captain and Quartermaster R. P. Kennedy, E.D., is re-engaged for a period of one year as from 13 April 1960.[14]
Lieutenant and Quartermaster George Witherman McCullough is posted to the Retired List, 12 February 1960.[15]
2nd Lieutenant J. T. Skedden to be Lieutenant, 12 December 1959.[16]
Lieutenant and Quartermaster R. H. Colwill to be temporary Captain and Quartermaster, 9 February 1960.[17]

Territorial Force

Captain Keith Stothard Brown relinquishes the appointment of OC, Technical Stores Platoon, 1st Divisional Ordnance Field Park, RNZAOC and is posted to the Retired List, 4 August 1959.[18]

Reserve of Officers

Captain Hugo Sarginsone posted to the Retired List, 10 July 1959.[19]
Captain Noel Lester Wallburton posted to the Retired List, 10 August 1959.[20]
Captain Sidney Paxton Stewart posted to the Retired List, I September 1959. [21]
Major Percival Nowell Erridge, MBE posted to the Retired List, 25 December 1959.[22]
Major Alexander Basil Owen Herd, from the British Regular Army Reserve· of Officers, to be Major, 3 October I 959.[23]
Major Frank Owen L’Estrange, from the British Regular Army Reserve of Officers, to be Major, 11 November 1959.[24]
Captain Cyril Peter Derbyshire, from the British Regular Army Reserve of Officers, to be Captain, 1 January 1960.[25]

Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, Resignations, and Retirements of Warrant Officers, Senior Non-Commissioned Officers, and men of the RNZAOC

Regular Force

H594833 Private David Orr NZ Regiment Transferred into the RNZAOC, November 1959.
B31685 Staff Sergeant Ian McDonald Russell promoted to Temporary Warrant Officer Class Two, 23 June 1959.

Notes

[1] “Charter for the Rnzaoc School,” in Organisation – Policy and General – RNZAOC (Archives New Zealand No R173115371960); Major J.S Bolton, A History of the Royal New Zealand Army Ordnance Corps (Trentham: RNZAOC, 1992), 176-77, 252.

[2] Conferences – Ordnance Officers, Item Id R17188101 (Wellington: Archives New Zealand, 1950).

[3] “H-19 Military Forces of New Zealand Annual Report of the General Officer Commanding, for Period 1 April 1959 to 31 March 1960,” Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives (1960).

[4] Ibid.

[5] “Army Sports Colours,” Upper Hutt Leader, Volume XVII, Number 11, 24 March 1960.

[6] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 35, 18 June 1959.

[7] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 31, 28 May 1959.

[8] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 56, 17 September 1959.

[9] Ibid.

[10] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 59, 1 October 1959.

[11] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 23, 7 April 1960.

[12] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 63, 22 October 1959.

[13] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 68, 4 November 1959.

[14] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 4, 21 January 1960.

[15] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 15, 3 March 1960.

[16] Ibid.

[17] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 41, 7 July 1960.

[18] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army.”

[19] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 51, 27 August 1959.

[20] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 53, 3 September 1959.

[21] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army.”

[22] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army.”

[23] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 70, 19 November 1959.

[24] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 78, 17 December 1959.

[25] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 8, 11 February 1960.

RNZAOC 1 April 1958 to 31 March 1959

Leave a comment Feb 9, 2021 Robert McKie

This period would see a significant shift in the focus of the Army’s effort. The Government had decided to retain the force structure to meet the requirements of a global war and transform the regular Army into a force capable of meeting the needs of limited War. This would see Compulsory Military Training end, and Territorial Training becoming Voluntary and the Regular Force’s operational framework modified, with recruiting initiated to build up the force and new equipment purchased within the limits of available finances.[1]

Key Appointments

Director of Ordnance Services

Lieutenant Colonel H. McK. Reid.

Commanding Officer Main Ordnance Depot

Major O.H Burn to 21 July 1958
Major G.J.H Atkinson from 21 July 1958

United Nations Posting

Major O.H Burn took up a posting as a United Nations military observer in the Middle East from July 1958 as a Temporary Lieutenant Colonel. Due to a typographical error, Major Burn was listed in the New Zealand gazette as promoted to Lieutenant General and New Zealand’s only peacetime Lieutenant General. Correction of the typographical error, demoting Lieutenant-General Burn to the correct rank of temporary lieutenant-colonel would be published in the Gazette. However in the meantime, many messages of congratulation were sent to Lt Col Burn by facetious friends, but they were likely to have puzzled him as he left New Zealand before the Gazette notice appeared.

Compulsory Military Training

During this period one CMT intakes marched in with the RNZAOC recruits posted to 1 (NZ) Division Ordnance Field Park on completion of initial training;[2]

27^th intake of 1542 recruits on 1 May 1958
28^th intake planned for August 1958 but not held

After 63,033 men were trained under the CMT Scheme, the Labour Government halted the CMT scheme and replaced the 1949 Military Training Act with the National Service Registration Act 1958 in early 1958.

Conferences

DOS Conference 27-29 May 1958

Hosted by the DOS at Army HQ, the agenda for this meeting included.[3]

DOS Instructions
- New format and reprint
- Drafts of instructions C/1 and C/2
Local Purchase
- Spares for post-war vehicles
- Officer Commanding Depots £25 authority (2020 NZ$1250)
- Purchase of stores by DADOS
Disposal of Stores
- Produce and items from Boards of Survey
- Survey of Stores – Army 246/37/1/Q(Org) of 6 October 57.
Accounting
- Clothing
Demands
- Identification of items
- Bright Steel nuts and bolts
- Trade names and trade equivalents
Finance
- Vapour proof packaging of stores
- Use of export cases
General
- District problems
- Further Army HQ problems if necessary

Uniforms

During this period, RNZAOC ordnance Depots and clothing stores would introduce the following new uniform types.[4]

Males Other Rank Service Dress – this uniform was issued to all-male soldiers of the Regular Force.
Jungle Green Drill – the issue of Jungle Green uniforms to replace uniforms previously produced in Khaki Drill also commenced.
NZWRAC Uniform – The issue of new summer dress consisting of a green short-sleeved frock commenced. Production of a new pattern green went into production.

Disposals

Vehicles

One hundred ninety-five vehicles from 5-ton trucks to motorcycles were declared surplus to the Government Stores Board.

Ammunition

By the end of December 1958, the Makomako, Waiouru and Belmont Ammunition areas had concluded the destruction of 317,440 items of ammunition ranging from detonators to 9.2in Cartridges; this included the detonation of 108 tons of Explosives with an additional 1217 tons of ammunition dumped at sea. Makomako was cleared of dangerous ammunition.

Move of Central Districts Vehicle Depot to Linton

As part of the Central Districts Vehicle Depot (CDVD) move to Linton during 1958, consideration was given to retaining some of the functions of the CDVD within the Main Ordnance Deport. To this end, the MOD Vehicle group was established. The MOD Vehicle group took over the existing CDVD compound at Trentham and had the following responsibilities:[5]

Receipt, processing, and issue of all new vehicles.
Custody of vehicles that were considered as part of the Army Reserve Stocks.
Custody and disposal of vehicles held by CDVD Trentham that were considered surplus or had or been declared for disposal.

This ensured that when the CDVD completed its move to Linton, only the vehicles and equipment needed to operate were transferred to Linton.

Army truck (CDVD Pool Vehicle) crossing the river at Otaki Forks 10 February 1959. Ref: EP/1959/0444-F. Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand. /records/23262911

Linton Camp Ordnance Depot Issues

Since its establishment in 1946, the Central Districts Ordnance Depots had occupied accommodation buildings in the North West corner of Linton Camp in what had initially been the wartime RNZAF Base Linton. Two additional warehouses had been assembled in 1949; however, storage space remained at a premium. Some example of the issues faced by the Ordnance Depot was; [6]

Block 1 Clothing Store – unable to be heated and uncomfortable for staff due to the risk of fire caused by the large quantity of clothing packaged with Naphthalene. This created a potential fire risk due to the Salamander heaters used for heating buildings.
S&T Block Tent Store – a multi-purpose building, used as a tent Store, repair shop and Traffic Centre. This building required repairs and was in such a state that it could not be secured against illegal entry. As the MOW estimated repairs to this building to cost at least £2000 (2020 NZ$49,882.32), the authority to repair would require approval from the DCRE. However, the DCRE had advised that this building was not worth repairing, with no alternative accommodation the Ordnance Depot was in a difficult position.

It was advised in December 1958 that because of the preliminary site investigation for a new Ordnance Depot conducted the previous year, a new building covering 125,000 sq. ft be constructed for the Ordnance Depot over the next three years.

Pending decision on the new Ordnance Depot building, the decision was made that the number of prefabricated buildings then been erected for the CDVD be increased from three to Four with the additional structure allocated to the Ordnance Depot as storage accommodation.

Central Districts Ordnance Depot, Linton Camp 1958

Ration Packs

Over the period of the1959 annual camp, the Royal New Zealand Army Service Corps (RNZASC) conducted trials of a four-person, 24-hour rations pack that had been specifically designed to simplify the feeding of Armoured units. Manufactured by items readily available on the commercial market, feedback from 1 and 4 Armoured Regiments was favourable.

Based on the NZ SAS’s and NZ Regiments experience Malaya, operations in the jungle required the individual soldier to carry and cook his rations. To meet this developing requirement, the RNZAOS was also developing a lightweight 24-hour ration pack.[7]

Cricket Tour

In February 1959 the RNZAOC would host a cricket tour to New Zealand by the Royal Australian Army Ordnance Corps (RAAOC). Major Derrick Roderick, a leading player for the RNZAOC tour to Australian in 1955, would act as the RNZAOC Liaison Officer for the RAAOC tour.[8]

Over a period of three weeks, the RAAOC Cricket team would tour New Zealand, playing matches at;

Devonport Oval vs Ordnance Northern Military District, NZ Lost by 20 Runs
Linton Camp vs Ordnance Central Military District, Draw
Trentham camp vs RNZAOC XI, NZ lost by 11 Runs
Burnham Camp vs Ordnance Southern Military District, NZ Lost
Trentham Camp vs Main Ordnance Depot, NZ lost

The tour was finalised on 19 February with a farewell Ball at the Trentham Camp Badminton Hall. The New Zealand Director of Ordnance Services, Lt-Col H. McK. Reid made presentations to all Australian tour members on behalf of the RNZAOC. The Australian team manager, Colonel C. V. Anderson, OBE, on behalf of the RAAOC team thanked the RNZAOC for the hospitality and entertainment provided throughout the tour, presenting magnificent silver salvers to the Trentham Officers and Sergeants messes. The visitors were farewelled the following day, returning to Australian on the MS Wanganella.[9]

Honours and Awards

Long Service and Good Conduct

31259 Warrant Officer Class One Maurice Sidney Phillips, 26 March 1959

Secondment to British Army

On 27 March 1958 Major Francis Anness Bishop RNZAOC began a secondment with the British Army. Attached to the 17th Gurkha Division/Overseas Commonwealth Land Forces (Malaya), Major Bishop would be the Divisions Deputy Assistant Quartermaster-General (DAQMG).[10]

Staff College, Camberley

Captain C.L Sanderson, RNZAOD represented the New Zealand Army on the 1959 Staff College Course at Camberley in the United Kingdom.[11]

Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, Resignations, and Retirements of Officers of the RNZAOC

Regular Force

Lieutenant and Quartermaster A.F James to be Captain and Quartermaster, 1 April 1958.[12]
[13]

Captain Ellis Charles Green MBE., is posted to the Retired List in the rank of Major, 12 May 1958.[14]
Lieutenant and Quartermaster J.E Hutchinson to be Captain and Quartermaster, 1 April 1958.[15]
Major 0.H Burn to be Temporary Lieutenant-Colonel, 26 July 1958.[16]
Captain G.J.H Atkinson, MBE., to be Temporary Major, 21 July 1958.[17]
Captain and Quartermaster S.H.E Bryant is transferred to the Supernumerary List on reaching retiring age for rank, 27 October 1958.[18]
Major Patrick William Rennison is transferred to the Reserve of Officers, General List, RNZAOC, with the rank of Major, 21 October 1958.[19]
Lieutenant and Quartermaster A. Fraser to be Temporary Captain and Quartermaster, 16 September 1958. [20]
Major (Temporary Lieutenant-Colonel) H McK Reid to be Lieutenant-Colonel, 30 October 1958.[21]
Lieutenant J.B Glasson to be Temporary Captain, 16 September 1958.[22]
Lieutenant (Temporary Captain) J.B Glasson to be Captain Dated 9 December 1958. [23]
Captain C.C Pipson is transferred to the Supernumerary List on reaching retiring age for rank and is re-engaged for a period of one year, 22 February 1959.[24]
Lieutenant and Quartermaster R.J Crossman to be Captain and Quartermaster, l 5 March 1959.[25]
Lieutenant and Quartermaster G.W Dudman to be Captain and Quartermaster, 15 March 1959.[26]
Lieutenant (Temporary Captain) and Quartermaster A Fraser to be Captain and Quartermaster, I 5 March 1959.[27]
Captain (Temporary Major) G.J.H. Atkinson, MBE., to be Major, 6 March 1959.[28]

Regular Force (Supernumerary List)

Captain and· Quartermaster G.A Perry, E.D., re-engaged for a period of one year, as from 1 April 1958.[29]
Captain and Quartermaster S.H.E Bryant re-engaged for a period of one year, 27 October 1958. [30]
Captain and Quartermaster Alfred Golian posted to the Retired List, 17 January l 959.[31]

RESERVE OF OFFICERS

Lieutenant J.H Mead relinquishes his commission, 1 July 1958.[32]
Major William Patrick Chester-Dixon, from the British Regular Army Reserve of Officers, to be Lieutenant-Colonel, 16 May 1958.[33]
Captain F.H Pike relinquishes his commission, 5 November 1958.[34]

The under-mentioned were posted from the General List to the Retired List:

2nd Lieutenant Francis Edwin Clark. [35]
2nd Lieutenant Ernest Ivan Meggett. [36]
2nd Lieutenant Henry Charles Foster.
Lieutenant Morris James Goodson.[37]
Lieutenant John· Clyde Graham.[38]
Lieutenant Frank Whittington Jull. [39]
Lieutenant Graham Wootton Clark.[40]
Lieutenant John Ivor Martin. [41]
Lieutenant Francis Thomas Thorpy. [42]
Lieutenant Albert William Buckley.[43]
Lieutenant Albert Arthur Burrows. [44]
Lieutenant James Stewart Jamieson. [45]
Captain William Arthur Pascoe.
Captain Austin Whitehead.
Captain William Mervyn Rowell.
Captain Stanley Copley Bracken.[46]

Territorial Force

Alan Ernest Osborne to be 2nd Lieutenant and is posted to the Technical Stores Platoon, 1st Divisional Ordnance Field Park, RNZAOC, 1 August 1958.[47]

Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, Resignations, and Retirements of Warrant Officers, Senior Non-Commissioned Officers, and men of the RNZAOC

A30054 Sergeant Bryan Nelson Jennings promoted to Staff Sergeant, 13 October 1958.[48]
31383 Staff Sergeant Hector Searle McLachlan promoted to Warrant Officer Class Two, 1 April 1958.[49]
31259 Warrant Officer Class Two Maurice Sidney Phillips promoted to Warrant Officer Class One, 14 October 1958.[50]
31246 Warrant Officer Class Two Douglas Keep Wilson promoted to Warrant Officer Class One, 13 October 1958.[51]

Notes

[1] “H-19 Military Forces of New Zealand Annual Report of the General Officer Commanding, for Period 1 April 1958 to 31 March 1959,” Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives (1959).

[2] Peter Cooke, Fit to Fight. Compulsory Military Training and National Service in New Zealand 1949-72 (Auckland: David Ling Publishing, 2013), 539.

[3] Conferences – Ordnance Officers, Item Id R17188101 (Wellington: Archives New Zealand, 1950).

[4] “H-19 Military Forces of New Zealand Annual Report of the General Officer Commanding, for Period 1 April 1958 to 31 March 1959.”

[5] “Organisation – Policy and General – Rnzaoc “, Archives New Zealand No R17311537 (1946 – 1984).

[6] Buildings, Linton Camp, Central Ordnance Depot, Item Id R9428308 (Wellington: New Zealand Archives, 1955 – 1968 ).

[7] “H-19 Military Forces of New Zealand Annual Report of the General Officer Commanding, for Period 1 April 1958 to 31 March 1959.”

[8] Major J.S Bolton, A History of the Royal New Zealand Army Ordnance Corps (Trentham: RNZAOC, 1992), 177-78.

[9] “Australian Ordnance Farwelled,” Upper Hutt Leader, Volume XVI, Number 7 26 February 1959 1959.

[10] “Recommendations for Honours or Awards,” The National Archives (UK) Ref WO 373/135/420 1960.

[11] “H-19 Military Forces of New Zealand Annual Report of the General Officer Commanding, for Period 1 April 1958 to 31 March 1959.”

[12] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 28, 8 April 1958.

[13] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 34, 5 june 1958.

[14] Ibid.

[15] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 36, 12 june 1958.

[16] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 52, 21 August 1958.;”Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 56, 11 September 1958.

[17] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army.”

[18] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 58, 25 September 1958.

[19] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 68, 6 November 1958.

[20] Ibid.

[21] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 76, 11 December 1958.

[22] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 8, 19 February 1959.

[23] Ibid.

[24] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 19, 25 March 1959.

[25] Ibid.

[26] Ibid.

[27] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 22, 16 April 1959.

[28] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 25, 30 April 1959.

[29] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 21, 2 April 1958.

[30] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army.”

[31] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 17, 19 March 1959.

[32] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 48, 7 August 1958.

[33] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 41, 3 July 1958.

[34] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 2, 15 January 1959.

[35] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 38, 26 June 1958.

[36] Ibid.

[37] Ibid.

[38] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 43, 10 July 1958.

[39] Ibid.

[40] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army.”

[41] Ibid.

[42] Ibid.

[43] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 64, 3 October 1958.

[44] Ibid.

[45] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army.”

[46] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 71, 20 November 1958.

[47] “Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, and Resignations, of Officers of the New Zealand Army,” New Zealand Gazette, No 7, 12 February 1959.

[48] Howard E. Chamberlain, Service Lives Remembered : The Meritorious Service Medal in New Zealand and Its Recipients, 1895-1994 ([Wellington, N.Z.]: H. Chamberlain, 1995), 242.

[49] Ibid., 289.

[50] Ibid., 367-68.

[51] Ibid., 512.

Uniforms

Notes

Share this:

Like this:

SME Trials

Type A, B C and D Trials

Type E, F and G Trials

Type F Pattern Trials

Type H and J Trials

Share this:

Like this:

Notes

Share this:

Like this:

Notes

Share this:

Like this:

M1956 Web Equipment

M1967 Modernized Load-Carrying Equipment (MLCE)

Large Ammunition Pouches

White Web

Combat Pack

Conclusion

Notes

Share this:

Like this:

Puggarees of the Royal New Zealand Army Service Corps

Puggarees of the Royal New Zealand Army Ordnance Corps

Puggarees of the Royal New Zealand Electrical and Mechanical Engineers

Red/Green/Red Puggaree

Blue/Yellow/ Red Puggaree

Farewell to the Puggaree

Puggaree of the Royal New Zealand Army Logistic Regiment

Notes

Share this:

Like this:

Notes

Share this:

Like this:

RNZASC stable belt

RNZCT stable belt

RNZAOC stable belt

RNZEME stable belt

RLC stable belt

RNZALR stable belt

Share this:

Like this:

Key Appointments

Director of Ordnance Services

Chief Inspecting Ordnance Officer

Officer Commanding Main Ordnance Depot

RNZAOC School

2nd Battalion, the New Zealand Regiment

Establishment of RNZOAC School

Officer Shortfall

Conferences

Small Arms Ammunition

Introduction of New Equipment

Uniforms

Disposals

Ammunition Disposal

Ration Packs

Shooting Competition

Award of Army Sports Colours

Honours and Awards

British Empire Medal

Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, Resignations, and Retirements of Officers of the RNZAOC

Regular Force

Regular Force (Supernumerary List)

Territorial Force

Reserve of Officers

Appointments, Promotions, Transfers, Resignations, and Retirements of Warrant Officers, Senior Non-Commissioned Officers, and men of the RNZAOC

Regular Force

Notes

Share this:

Like this:

Key Appointments

United Nations Posting

Compulsory Military Training

Conferences