R.H. wrote:
A new group of photos has just been posted, one of them is a little creepy
looking, so don't say that I didn't warn you.;-)
Rob


570. Mask making molds. Paint on air drying rubber compound, let it
dry (or bake) and peel it off-new you have a mask. Anybody remember
Creepy Crawlers?


--
Gary Brady
Austin, TX
www.powdercoatoven.4t.com

According to Sawney Beane :
"Norman D. Crow" wrote:


563 Can't definitely state M-1 ammo pouches, but somewhere in the thread
there was discussion about what they connected to, and that would definitely
be the standard military web-belt.

In the photo, one end has a buckle and the other has a loop for a
web belt to pass through. I've found a picture of an M1 rifle belt.
On each side it had a section with five pouches. They were
connected by a length of plain web in back. I've read that the M1
cartridge was about 3", so at 17", the piece in the picture looks
right for the right side of an M1 belt.

I wonder. If each piece with pouches was 17" and there was a
length of web behind, the belt must have been several inches longer
than 34. Wasn't it too big for a lot of soldiers?

I suspect that it was used with a plain web belt (which hooked
into the paired holes on the back), and things like bayonet scabbard and
canteen were slung from that half.

But also, the belt would go outside other garments for quick
access, so in cold weather, the belt would be adjusted significantly
larger.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

"DoN. Nichols" wrote:

According to Sawney Beane :
"Norman D. Crow" wrote:


563 Can't definitely state M-1 ammo pouches, but somewhere in the thread
there was discussion about what they connected to, and that would definitely
be the standard military web-belt.

In the photo, one end has a buckle and the other has a loop for a
web belt to pass through. I've found a picture of an M1 rifle belt.
On each side it had a section with five pouches. They were
connected by a length of plain web in back. I've read that the M1
cartridge was about 3", so at 17", the piece in the picture looks
right for the right side of an M1 belt.

I wonder. If each piece with pouches was 17" and there was a
length of web behind, the belt must have been several inches longer
than 34. Wasn't it too big for a lot of soldiers?

I suspect that it was used with a plain web belt (which hooked
into the paired holes on the back), and things like bayonet scabbard and
canteen were slung from that half.

But also, the belt would go outside other garments for quick
access, so in cold weather, the belt would be adjusted significantly
larger.

Enjoy,
DoN.

Dig a little bit of digging down in the attic and found I had the
W.W.II version for the M1 rifle which has two halves and a similar
flat webbing belt between for adjustment. A bit more digging found
a pic which shows that indeed #563 is only one half.
I've combined with #563 so a comparison can be made:

http://shopswarf.orcon.net.nz/M1917cartridgebelt.jpg

BTW LCC & Co. stands for L C Chase & Co.

Tom

"Brooks Moses" wrote in message
...
R.H. wrote:
It's listed in the FBI's Guide to Concealable Weapons:

http://datacenter.ap.org/wdc/fbiweapons.pdf

but the one they show is the older version that isn't disguised as a
wrench.
The original had just regular round holes where there are now hexes.
Even
though it's on the list, I would bet you could get it past 99% of
airport
security by casually saying it's a bicycle wrench.

I wouldn't count on it. My wife accidentally left my 9/16" wrench in
her backpack once, and they wouldn't let her take it on the plane;

Isn't that interesting that it took some "bin laden" to expose the stupidity
of some of the people "in charge" !



apparently tools of that sort are prohibited too. ("Disassembly of the
airplane in flight is NOT ALLOWED!")

- Brooks


--
The "bmoses-nospam" address is valid; no unmunging needed.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 22:01:06 GMT, Gary Brady wrote:

570. Mask making molds. Paint on air drying rubber compound, let it
dry (or bake) and peel it off-new you have a mask. Anybody remember
Creepy Crawlers?

Sort'a... I had a Thingmaker "Fright Factory" when I was a kid.
Different molds, same oven and stinky smell Thanks for the trip down
memory lane!
--
William

Dig a little bit of digging down in the attic and found I had the
W.W.II version for the M1 rifle which has two halves and a similar
flat webbing belt between for adjustment. A bit more digging found
a pic which shows that indeed #563 is only one half.
I've combined with #563 so a comparison can be made:

http://shopswarf.orcon.net.nz/M1917cartridgebelt.jpg

BTW LCC & Co. stands for L C Chase & Co.

Tom


Thanks for nailing this one for us.


Rob

In article ,
Brooks Moses wrote:

I wouldn't count on it. My wife accidentally left my 9/16" wrench in
her backpack once, and they wouldn't let her take it on the plane;
apparently tools of that sort are prohibited too. ("Disassembly of the
airplane in flight is NOT ALLOWED!")

Our masters have decreed that tools are allowed again. Anyway, the
"travel wrench" is plastic and thus can be brought through the metal
detector without examination.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:05:18 -0700, Mark & Juanita wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:49:52 GMT, "R.H." wrote:

I wonder if these things would get past airport screenings?

(I wouldn't try it but my guess is that others would)

It's listed in the FBI's Guide to Concealable Weapons:

http://datacenter.ap.org/wdc/fbiweapons.pdf

but the one they show is the older version that isn't disguised as a
wrench. The original had just regular round holes where there are now
hexes. Even though it's on the list, I would bet you could get it past
99% of airport security by casually saying it's a bicycle wrench.

It's not sharp or pointy, nor is it a gun or explosive. Those are
really
the things that fall into the category of banned items, thus one would be
hardpressed to have it rejected. Just about anything can be turned into a
weapon by someone sufficiently skilled.

I saw some guy on some talk show, who had just won an Emmy. He says,
"Here's this 20-pound chunk of metal, with sharp pointy things sticking
out the top, and they let you walk right on the airplane with it!" I
suppose they figure an actor isn't going to hijack a plane using his
Emmy award as a weapon. ;-)

Cheers!
RIch

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:55:19 -0500, Norman D. Crow wrote:



"charlie b" wrote in message
...
569 - bicycle or motor cycle wrench
Kool-Tool is more versatile

snippage

573 - grass lawn aereator or dethatcher

564 - saw set - used to set the teeth on
a saw blade

565 - food grinder or iice crusher
circa 1970's

564 - cane handle

563 - M-1 rifle ammo clips bolders


I'm still going with 573 being an aerator, as a de-thatcher is designed to
vigorously rake the lawn to break up the thatch.

I wanted to say a garden-sized harrow, for dried mud or clayey dirt.

563 Can't definitely state M-1 ammo pouches, but somewhere in the
thread there was discussion about what they connected to, and that would
definitely be the standard military web-belt.

Cheers!
Rich

"Rich Grise" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:05:18 -0700, Mark & Juanita wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 20:49:52 GMT, "R.H." wrote:

I wonder if these things would get past airport screenings?

(I wouldn't try it but my guess is that others would)

It's listed in the FBI's Guide to Concealable Weapons:

http://datacenter.ap.org/wdc/fbiweapons.pdf

but the one they show is the older version that isn't disguised as a
wrench. The original had just regular round holes where there are now
hexes. Even though it's on the list, I would bet you could get it past
99% of airport security by casually saying it's a bicycle wrench.

It's not sharp or pointy, nor is it a gun or explosive. Those are
really
the things that fall into the category of banned items, thus one would
be
hardpressed to have it rejected. Just about anything can be turned into
a
weapon by someone sufficiently skilled.

I saw some guy on some talk show, who had just won an Emmy. He says,
"Here's this 20-pound chunk of metal, with sharp pointy things sticking
out the top, and they let you walk right on the airplane with it!" I
suppose they figure an actor isn't going to hijack a plane using his
Emmy award as a weapon. ;-)


By that line of thinking, most people can be classified as "not likely to
hijack a plane".
And therefore one could argue that they should be able to carry anything in
an airplane, including sharp or dangerous objects.
But then, you could also argue that a hijacker can use someone else's object
to hijack the plane, but then, no planning is possible. Not even a hijacker
would start spending his money from flight to flight, in hope that some day
he will stumble on an object belonging to someone classified as safe, be
able to steal it, and use that object to hijack the plane.
But then, if other dangerous objects are allowed to be carried by safe
people, he doesn't know if someone else doesn't have a gun, that can be used
against him. Therefore I think it would be safer if anything was allowed to
be carried by people classified as safe.
Consequently, the safer they want airtravel to be, the more unsafe it
become.

Of course, the process of determining who is safe and who isn't will give
the ACLU a field day.