US Navy 1911 holster

[pony express]

What were the specifications for the holster used pre-WW1? Looking at this pic, hard to tell much:
http://www.thortrains.com/online/navyvera4.jpg

Brown or black?
Appears to be dropped down, like a 1912 Cavalry holster, but maybe without the swivel, like this one:
http://pics.gunbroker.com/GB/400258000/400258250/pix689335575.jpg
The Sailor with the shotgun appears to be carrying a 1911 also, can't see the holster but the tie down is visible, as well as the magazine pouch. I would expect only the Cavalry holster would have the tie down??? The officer doesn't have a tie down.

And it seems NOBODY makes a reproduction marked for US Navy, only US or USMC. Perhaps the landing parties "borrowed" Marine equipment?

[St. George]

It's built like the M1912 - but without the swivel and tie strap.

The hanger may have a stud - to correspond to the flap when opened.

The flap will have either a 'US' or 'USMC'.

It'll be russet in color.

Scouts Out!

[S. Quentin Quale, Esq.]

A while back an original, complete issue M1911 was up for auction.  It was originally consigned to the N.Y. naval militia (I'm not sure of their specific name) but the pistol was marked "U.S. Navy."  Date was '13 or '14, IIRC.

The holster issued with the pistol was of the "swivel" variety.  I don't remember the markings specifically, but I think it was a simple "U.S." on the flap.  The final auction price was very close to $20,000.

This photo clearly shows the "swivel" holster being carried by an officer or chief in Vera Cruz, 1914.



A couple of other photos on this site also show a "long drop" style holster.  It's my understanding the Marines opted for the "long drop" style without a swivel sometime after the Army abandoned the swivel design in 1916.  Just when the Marines did this I don't know.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?214952-U-S-Invasion-of-Vera-Cruz-Mexico-1914

I've put together a Naval Officer's impression for this year's National Cavalry Competition based upon this:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/library_of_congress/5579688328/

G.

[pony express]

Thanks for the replies! The holster described by St George sounds like the one I linked to above, the "1912 dismounted holster".

SQQ, I've seen that same picture on another site, but the one you showed is more clear, you can clearly see the disk of the swivel in this one. All the pics I have looked at, seems like either it's not clear, or something obstructs the swivel area.

[Pitspitr]

In U.S. Military Holsters And Pistol Cartridge Boxes by Edward Scott Meadows On page 265 there is a photo of an officer wearing the M-1912 dismounted holster. The caption reads, "U.S. Naval officer on the fire control bridge of the U.S. Cruiser DeKalb. He is wearing a Model 1912 Dismounted holster with extended hanger."
The text confirms that they were in russet leather. Several specimens are shown. 1 non-regulation specimen appears to not carry the US oval and 2 do not have the button to keep the flap open 2 do not have the drainage holes.

[S. Quentin Quale, Esq.]

IIRC much of the design of the M1911 and it's holster were to enhance its utility as a mounted weapon.  The originals had lanyard rings on the pistol and magazine.  A double-hook lanyard was designed and authorized but never produced.  Some examples of this lanyard exist; the consensus seems to be that they were either local production or personal procurement.  The long drop of the holster is there to enhance the mounted soldier's ability to draw and use the weapon.  The swivel holster was the only authorized holster at the time of issue.  The swivel permits the holster to easily align itself to the line of the trooper's leg (which can change some as he rides; the change isn't, or ought not to be, extreme if he's riding correctly).  The position on the leg, permitted by the longer drop from the belt, makes drawing and holstering the pistol easier.  Even the multiple safeties seem to have had the horse soldier in mind with an eye towards preventing ADs (and killing horses, something that happened with some regularity during the Age of Horsepower).

The field experience with the holster demonstrated that the swivel was a weak point and could fail.  In 1916 a new model holster was approved that rode higher (being directly attached to the pistol belt with a wire hanger).  I don't know when lanyard rings were eliminated on the magazines but they were gone by WWI.  IIRC the lanyard ring on the pistol was retained.

I'm sure the issuance to the Naval personnel of a weapon optimized for mounted use generated more than one joke.     Many photos from Vera Cruz show Naval and Marine Corps officers and chiefs carrying the M1911 in the issue holster.  Some are using the leg tie down (easily visible where officers are wearing whites) and some are not.  Some are carrying revolvers, but the photo detail is insufficient to see if they are M1889 Colts in .38 cal. or M1909 New Service Colts in .45 Colt.

I don't know when the extended drop was added to the 1916 holster or who did the first ones.  I've never seen a photo Cavalry troopers equipped with the long drop without a swivel holsters.  They've always been equipped with either the original 1911 holsters or the 1916 version.  I have a vague recollection of seeing mounted China Marines using the long drop 1916 version but I don't have the photo and could not find it on the Web.  And John Wayne used one in "Sands of Iwo Jima" (for what that's worth  ).

G.

[S. Quentin Quale, Esq.]

Regarding general equipment issue, Naval Regulations required ships to maintain a "landing force" of a size consistent with the size of the vessel.  A destroyer might be tasked with a short platoon where a battleship could be tasked to provide multiple companies.  The larger ships were also tasked to provide staff support (like medical, chaplain, supply, etc.).

The 1913 Navy and Marine Corps Uniform Regulations read like they were written by the same committee.  They presumed issue of the new equipment from 1912 that accompany the new M1911 pistol, but specifically permit the use of older equipment (the over the shoulder haversack and canteen; sword belt with or without sword; etc.).  Larger ships carried Marine Detachments but smaller ships did not.  The senior officer ashore could be either a Marine or Navy officer, but since Marine officers afloat were seldom more than Captains it's likely that the senior officer will be Navy.  Regulations required ships to have an officer tasked as the commander of the landing force and required that he ensure he properly trained his force IAW the Landing Force Manual (predecessor of the Landing Party Manual that is issued in the 1930s).  The Navy Instructions were written to be consistent with Army (not Marine) tactical doctrine of the day.  The first version was issued in 1893 (IIRC) and the 1913 version was in force during the occupation of Vera Cruz.

The Vera Cruz operation was the first large scale, offshore military operation by the U.S. after the Spanish-American War.  It shows how well the Navy learned the lessons of that earlier conflict.  When the Army relieved the Navy they, too, demonstrated that they had learned how to land and support a foreign operation. 

G.

[pony express]

Seems like the standard Russet leather, 1912 model holster with US on it should be acceptable, then. I was expecting the Navy would have had their own version, marked USN, but I guess that came later.

[S. Quentin Quale, Esq.]

Seems like the standard Russet leather, 1912 model holster with US on it should be acceptable, then. I was expecting the Navy would have had their own version, marked USN, but I guess that came later.

I think you're "spot on" with this.   

I'm not sure marking gear USN/USMC was as common as we might think.  Since the Navy and Marines got their 1911 holsters from the same stock as the Army they may have gotten them from the same makers.  I don't know if they were arsenal made or contractor made.

G.

[pony express]

Well, it's almost down to the wire, 10 days before I leave for the Grand Muster, the Russet 1912 swivel holster I ordered arrived today, only it's not russet, just undyed natural leather color. Since it's only 10 days, I guess that's the one I'm going to use, so question is, what dye to use on it? Or will just oiling it darken it to the right color? I'll probably just have to use it as it is, if I can't easily get some dye for it.

[River City John]

Try olive oil?

RCJ

[pony express]

I thought about just oiling it, not sure how much that would darken it. Then I'd have to clean the oil, I suppose, to dye it.

[Niederlander]

Supposedly they were originally issued in undyed leather.  Oiling and sun will naturally make them darken quite a bit, until a hundred year old holster will sometimes look almost black.  Since I don't want to wait fifty years for the color to occur naturally, I use Fiebing's British Tan dye, and then brown Kiwi shoe polish over that.  Make sure you buff the shoe polish off well or it will stain your uniform.  (Learned the hard way, of course.)  I'm told you can dissolve brown shoe polish in acetone and make a good dye as well.  By the way, I'm glad someone else is still working on uniform items, too!

[pony express]

  By the way, I'm glad someone else is still working on uniform items, too!

I've still got a bayonet, stripper clips, and couple extra 1911 magazines in the mail. One failed attempt at a Navy jumper in the sewing basket, still haven't tackled the pants yet.....gonna be a busy 10 days...Don't know if I have enough bullets for the '03 and still haven't started on ANYTHING for the Zoot match....

[U.S.M.R.]

Check out Pacific Canvas and Leather.

[Dalton Masterson]

Olive oil it lightly, then put it on the dash of our car for the day. Oil again when you bring it back in and its still warm. It will darken.
DM