Jump to content

Jerry B

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


0 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Cant help except to say the address is Boydfield Avenue
  2. hard to get the trousers in anything other than very small size 1
  3. I think I have the correct belt.....if it is the one you were after and still need one?
  4. I have but one, 75 dated bottle with 76 dated cup and a set of the webbing.
  5. the textured paint looks pretty good and compares quite well with this 50's repaint of a wartime shell.
  6. ST4B/9251 2003 8345-99-125-1126 National Flag UK & NI. An Op Telic bring back from 2004 by a member of 1st Bn the Black Watch (RHR).
  7. I can't help you with your question but I do also have one of these belts, came with some 58 pattern webbing I got recently.
  8. Perhaps of interest, an officers uniform jacket using the contract code 78/CLO/5929 without the A at the start of it.
  9. Pretty much as I expected, but always good to hear it from someone else. Does anyone know what did they replace this with in current service?
  10. This site suggest the prototypes were first seen in 76 and issue started in 1983, which seems about right. http://www.cascoscoleccion.com/granbret/gbdanda.html
  11. Had this one a while but the exact dating for these seems to be uncertain and the contract number does not appear on the comprehensive list on the forum as far as I could see. It came complete with headphones and mic and plug in jack lead and desert camo paint so I assume it saw service in the first gulf war. Thanks.
  12. Smock Army DPM 68 pattern J Compton Webb Sons & Webb marked as, I think it says; CW & Son LTD 1971 S78/CLO/33893/DCAP(1) Nato size 2
  13. Edward, I did buy it, mostly based on the sellers crappy pics and the price of £15, but I had some hopes that it was the version without the first aid pouch on the rear of the right sleeve as I thought it might be pre 84 from the contract code and the dates published online for that contract. It was cheap and if as it seems it is a post 84 version with the FA pouch, oh well, such is life, still a good smock para to have in my collection.
  14. the example with the number was one I showed as a comparison and is not mine. It was the other one I was interested in confirming its age. Thanks for the idea.
  • Create New...