Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So, I've got no idea about terminology for this, or I might have been able to look it up...

I've always thought that the aesthetic portrayed from the Vietnam war of soldiers having a huge amount of customization, improvisation, and personalization of gear- i.e. non-issued weapons, the black market, "signature" gear or other designs painted on, was really interesting, but have no more than an aesthetic recognition of it. Also, the only other place I've seen much like it is on nose art.

So, a few questions
-was/is this common in other wars?
-was this actually common in Vietnam (or was it yet another misconception/media "this looks cool" moment)?
-if it's fairly unique to some situations, is there much of a pattern/cause/etc. to it?
-is there a term for it (so I can look it up) or are there resources you'd suggest?

Thanks in advance

In the case of bomber Nose Art, I do know that it was never officially allowed, nor was it officially condoned. However, command realized that it was key to crew morale, and that a crew that had a piece of art on their nose took better care of their "girl" than crews who didnt, so they basically just turned a blind eye.

As to guys decorating their gear as in Full Metal Jacket, Apocalypse Now! and other 'Nam movies, I have no idea. I do know that there were actually a great number of weapons that were carried around (such as the Thumper, shotguns, and other less than standard issue)

Considering that in past armies around worst, as recently as WWII, some soldiers, the enlisted mostly were required to supply pieces of their uniform, rather than the government.

German enlisted men in WWII had to supply their own collar tabs, so range from being sewn pieces of fabric to embroidered.

As we load a soldier down with more and more gear, and the more they are actively fighting, I think the more lenience is given for customization.

If you had a squad of soldiers somewhere, and nearly everyday were being shot at, and shooting the enemy, if they started drawing on their gear for something to do, you going to stop em?

Here is a modern example.

But dont you see less of customization today? It might have had something to do with the fact that WW2 and Nam we still had the draft, so we brought in people who where not professional soldiers. So they more often for kicks and giggles would draw on their gear. But they also lacked some om the.......luxieries I suppose the word would be that soldiers today have, like a few of my 40k buddies where marines and got their models over to their deployment so they could paint.

yea I suspect the working and living conditions of the modern soldier are much nicer than in the past, and so you see less of it.

It still does happen though, I saw a picture awhile back where a squad marked their humvee "chupathingy"

Then there's the propaganda part, people like von Richthofen painting their planes red to taunt the enemy.

 Shadowseer_Kim wrote:
yea I suspect the working and living conditions of the modern soldier are much nicer than in the past, and so you see less of it.

It still does happen though, I saw a picture awhile back where a squad marked their humvee "chupathingy"

Haha Red vs Blue reference, awesome.

On topic, I've heard of guys over in Iraq and Afghanistan buying parts of their equipment, mostly tactical gear like mag pouches and the like. Not sure if that actually happens though.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
But dont you see less of customization today?

Broadly speaking yes. Modern military equipment is far better designed than it used to be some of the need for personalisation has gone. It still happens of course.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

On topic, I've heard of guys over in Iraq and Afghanistan buying parts of their equipment, mostly tactical gear like mag pouches and the like. Not sure if that actually happens though.

There is a market for it but, in the British army at least, there is no need for it at all (and you cant use most of it anyway due to dress regs etc). I get issued far more kit than I actually need and lots of it gets left at home when I deploy

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

On topic, I've heard of guys over in Iraq and Afghanistan buying parts of their equipment, mostly tactical gear like mag pouches and the like. Not sure if that actually happens though.

Yeah, you can definitely spend money on gear.. For instance, I don't wear the issued kneepads, due to the ones I had to buy (i had a pair ganked down range) being a bunch more comfortable. Also, if you use Pmags or something like that, you'd need to possibly get some different mag pouches.


Often times though, you can spot the "geardo" from a mile away... He'll have all the greatest military gear purchasable, however it will be extremely shiny and new looking, and he'll have been down range for a year... Basically, he's another version of the dreaded "fobbit"

Like Ensis and DJ mention. Mostly poaches and non issue gear but the same as issue gear. I just want to add can you clarify a bit more of on the "customization"? We talking "art" on vehicles? We talking individual soldiers making their gear more accessible on their body armor? Non regulation patches? I pretty much got away with the Achmed patch....

Often times though, you can spot the "geardo" from a mile away... He'll have all the greatest military gear purchasable, however it will be extremely shiny and new looking, and he'll have been down range for a year... Basically, he's another version of the dreaded "fobbit"

We had those in the fire service, we called them Batman.

Nose art went the way of the dodo when female service members started becoming more common. The only variant that's even kinda survived is the "teeth" on attack aircraft, but then nose art was always more of a bomber/attack thing, anyway.

People see that pilots/WSOs get their names stenciled beneath the cockpit on a lot of aircraft, and assume that that plane "belongs" to that aviator, and that it's the one they routinely fly. Nope. When you're up in the schedule, you fly what's available - i.e., not down for maintenance. I can't recall a specific instance of ever flying a Super Bug with my name on it. Plane captains, on the other hand (ironically often some of the most junior enlisted around) do have their names on the aircraft - usually on the front gear door - and are tied to it. They're always proud of that, as well they should be.

Patches, though? Depends on the unit, the command, the community, etc. Naval aviation has quite a lot of them, official and otherwise. The "Tailhook '91 Survivor" patch was pretty popular for awhile, despite not being officially sanctioned. It still shows up at Tailhook now and then.

Personally-owned weapons are always a no-go. My dad's generation got to carry them during Desert Storm, because nobody wanted the M-9 in the cockpit and so it was generally an issue of looking the other way, but now that the P228's issued, that's out the window.

The jets I worked on during the last gulf war had nose art.

1st of the 101st AVN Battalion uses Eddie from Iron Maiden as a Unit Mascot symbol

edit
AustinT wants o add

Nose and tail art still exist, but it's largely up to the unit commander to approve it. For my part most of what I see is on the birds we work with. These are both from 15 MI on Ft Hood ("Thundercats") At 224 we used to paint our BDE insignia on the tails when we were in 525. When we moved BDEs we started painting Waaagh! Runes but I don't have any pictures handy to post.

edit
and I can't seem to add pics....wait one

Sure, you can put anything you want on a helo, because A) it can't get any uglier, and B) it's not a real aircraft, anyway.

I haven't seen anything but the teeth on planes in a long, long time, and even that seems to have become much more rare.

Besides, you're never going to top this, so stop trying:

That pig had to be a nightmare to keep clean.

To my experience tail and nose art's pretty much limited to a squadron's "color bird" these days. For example, VFA-102 (Diamondbacks) bird on the deck at NAS Atsugi.

Yeah, double nuts planes get high vis paint, but I dunno if I'd call that nose art. Maybe I'm talking about something different from the rest of you guys - I'm thinking pin-ups, crazy cat characters, etc, separate and personalized from the usual squadron theme.

Google "tiger meet"

It's very common in the British army to replace most of your equipment privately, starting with the boots.

British field equipment is normally made by the lowest bidding contractor and fails to meet even the low standards promised. MoD won't care, most in government don't care. But at least they don't get in the way of soldiers equipping themselves.

 Seaward wrote:
Yeah, double nuts planes get high vis paint, but I dunno if I'd call that nose art. Maybe I'm talking about something different from the rest of you guys - I'm thinking pin-ups, crazy cat characters, etc, separate and personalized from the usual squadron theme.

No I'm right with you, I don't think that's been around on the jarhead side of the house for a long time outside of squadron theme flash paint on one bird.