Just won this uniform...

    Share
    avatar
    bond007a1
    ADMIN
    ADMIN

    Name : Steven
    Location : Kentucky, USA
    Registration date : 2009-02-12
    Number of posts : 2098

    Just won this uniform...

    Post by bond007a1 on Sun May 24, 2009 3:10 pm

    Guys...I screwed up and just WON an Italian camouflage uniform for $34.33...an accident on my part, but what is it? I am guessing it is an M29 Army pattern...I do have 1 of them already and the Marines pattern....

    THESE PHOTOS ARE OWNED BY THE SELLER "TIGERPATTERNS" (I am just showing them for identification purposes)









    Any help would be appreciated...

    Steven


    _________________
    always looking for combat-used desert uniforms
    www.theflatwoodsmuseum.com/index1
    avatar
    CollectinSteve
    ADMIN
    ADMIN

    Location : New England, US
    Registration date : 2009-03-08
    Number of posts : 5873

    Re: Just won this uniform...

    Post by CollectinSteve on Sun May 24, 2009 8:58 pm

    Yup, standard Italian Army camo uniform used starting in the 1960s. I'm pretty sure that it fell out of use sometime in the 1970s. Since this stuff is an oversuit the complementary combat uniform (olive drab in color) was simply worn without the camo oversuit. The OD uniform gave way to Woodland in the early 1990s (first model was the M90 IIRC, followed by M92?).

    These used to be so hard to find, now they're pretty common. I had a set up on eBay a few times and it didn't sell at all. IIRC my starting bid was set to $40.

    Steve

    oda196
    Guest

    Re: Just won this uniform...

    Post by oda196 on Mon May 25, 2009 11:37 am

    This Italian Army pattern originated in the 1950s and was worn well into the 1980s, particularly by Paracadutisti, Lagunari and Alpini troops. The San Marco Marine battalion (later Regiment) wore two different style uniforms in two or three different color schemes into the 1990s, until replaced by their current "airbrush" pattern.

    As to the Army uniform being intended as an oversuit, I do not believe that was its sole purpose, although it can certainly function as such. There are many photographs illustrating the uniform being worn without underclothing, particularly in the hotter southern regions of Italy.

    Regards,

    Eric
    avatar
    CollectinSteve
    ADMIN
    ADMIN

    Location : New England, US
    Registration date : 2009-03-08
    Number of posts : 5873

    Re: Just won this uniform...

    Post by CollectinSteve on Mon May 25, 2009 2:42 pm

    My comments were specifically about the uniform pictured, not any other type since that's a much larger discussion to have. But since the discussion has been broadened, for sure the airborne version was apparently worn pretty much right up until the changeover to Woodland. I have some examples that were manufactured in the 1980s, while the dated examples of the standard infantry version I've seen were 1960s and 1970s vintage. As for the infantry version being used longer for "elite" units, that wouldn't surprise me. However, I've seen quite a number of pics of regular Infantry wearing the OD uniform in the 1980s, so it appears to be transitioned out of general use prior to Woodland.

    I also have BSM uniforms manufactured in the 1980s, so I'm sure that was in use until the changeover to the airbrush pattern.

    As far as the infantry version being intended to be an oversuit, I have zero doubts that is exactly what it was originally supposed to be. The trousers have pass through hand pockets without any sort of fasteners or integrated pockets, which is the hallmark of an over garment. The integrated suspenders, instead of a belt, is also an indication of an over garment. The jacket is heavily bloused and has an elasticized lower hem, which can't be worn inside the trousers. This is, again, a common feature of over garments and not a common feature of a stand-alone field jacket.

    Now, what soldiers do with the uniforms they are issued is an entirely different matter. Oversuits tend to be a terribly impractical arrangement and that means soldiers will adapt them to be more useful. The Austrian dot camo was designed to be worn over a wool field uniform, but it rarely was because only a sadist would think that was a good idea Wink So I'd say the evidence suggests the uniform was intended to be an oversuit and that soldiers likely disregarded this when it was allowed.

    Note that the airborne version is very different than the set pictured here. Unfortunately, many resellers call the infantry version airborne because of the integrated padded knees and elbows. The airborne version does not appear to have been intended as an oversuit.

    Steve
    avatar
    sgtfcm
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Location : North Italy
    Registration date : 2012-05-23
    Number of posts : 71

    Re: Just won this uniform...

    Post by sgtfcm on Sat May 26, 2012 2:59 am

    it's an Army camo set from the 60's. Nice and not so common although as pointed out not much desirable for some reason.
    Variants exists but it's not the case of this one. I used to have (and sadly never found another one) a version made for amphibious troops (Lagunari) with bayonet/knife pouch on the leg.
    Later on it was developed the Roma 82, for paratroopers, which again, has a different cut, padded knees, etc etc.


    Sponsored content

    Re: Just won this uniform...

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Aug 18, 2017 4:03 am