British MK6 /MK6 A Helmet Covers

[Jack59]

Hello, might also pitch this Desert DP in, enjoy.

[James C]

Great posts shown so thanks for sharing your treasures Michtag and Jack ,the para lightweight has a superb camo finish

[Michtag]

Thank you again brickie501, I see there is an orange square that seems to be matching mine, but that unit (33RD PARACHUTE LIGHT REGIMENT RA) actually was redesignated as 7th Parachute Light Regiment, Royal Horse Artillery in 1961. Their current DZ flash is red and blue, and judging by images from the 1970s it was already in use then....so this must not be it.
The search goes on
All the best
Michele

[brickie501]

Based on your first hand description of it as "orange", I would still err towards it being a faded (and/or never properly colour matched) red square for 1 Para

[Michtag]

Hi all, I recently acquired this Mk6 (no label) which intrigues me as it surely is a well used one.
Apart from being quite dirty/dusty, it has all side hole plugs removed (maybe it once was fitted with a protective visor) and also the internal side strips for sizing/adjusting the back nape are missing.
Furthermore, the top cord in the suspension system has been removed and a foam pad added, making it look a bit like a Mk6a/Mk7 suspension system.
I've read that the old Mk6 was rather uncomfortable if worn for long hours as the top cord pressed on the top of the wearer's head in a reduced area and this would be the main reason for the adoption of the new suspension crdle net on the Mk6a.
This looks very much like a field modification to me (hence my interest was aroused)
Also, does anybody know what the extra black elasticated band's use is? It's tied to the cover's bands, but I don't know if it was worn at the back, front...above....under? This, again, looks like a field modification, but I don't know what it's for.

Lastly, there is an extra ring (key ring) attached to the chinstrap. Is this just to make it that little easier/quicker to fasten or unfasten the snap on button? Or does it have another purpose, like for hanging/securing the helmet to a pack, for example?

The cover seems to be a late 1980s contract. I have no history about this helmet, so I can only guess it may have been used in Afghanistan (early)...but that's just a guess as it could be from the 1990s and just used a lot

Here are the pics, hopefully someone can shed some light
Cheers

Michele

[brickie501]

I think both the split ring added to the chinstrap & the elasticated band are for a similar purpose, namely to allow the helmet to be secured on the wearer's head while wearing a respirator (gas mask) & related protective gear.

Either as a result of the NBC suit hood pushing the helmet up, or added depth on the chin from the mask (or both), the usual adjusted length of your chinstrap will no longer fit. Having to adjust the strap out, then back in once mask etc are no longer required, is a pain - alternative fastening options are therefore quite common.

An elasticated band is quick to use (which is a good thing when reacting to a nuclear, biological or chemical attack) but the helmet will be less secure than normal. This may explain the presence of two options (the split ring will give essentially the same fit as the original snap, but will take longer to fasten) or perhaps two different users have left their mark... personally, I was never happy with an elasticated band & took a similar approach to the split ring - but used a loop of cord/tape in the same place.

[brickie501]

Quote / link to a post of mine elsewhere - with the last pic showing what I am talking about...

I've posted a similar pic before but thought it might be relevant to add this one here to show UK 'regulation' (at least according to 16 Air Assault Brigade on HERRICK 13) positioning of Glint Tape on Mk6A / 7. Note two types of tape for differing parts of the electromagnetic spectrum:

Attachment 1469990

Those are kind of difficult to see in this other photo, but you can make out the googles & a US helmet band (with cats' eyes) that have been attached There's also a clip to attach helmet to Osprey body armour but its hidden away at the back - Osprey section can be seen though.

Attachment 1469991

By the way, alternatives / extensions to harness (for better fit when wearing CBRN gear etc) were missed off the initial list

Attachment 1469986

[Michtag]

Thank you so much for the explanation brickie501, now it all makes sense and it makes me believe this helmet was "operational" at some point.
As a matter of fact I have just encountered this image, which shows exactly the same extra strip.



When did zap numbers start to be used? From what I can read on the web the last 4 digits 7248 of the wearer's service number could make him a joiner in August 2001, around '98, late '92 to early '93, '88-'90 or even as early as 1981!

Cheers
Michele

[brickie501]

Michele,

Without wishing to 'burst your bubble', the requirement to cope with wearing NBC equipment is as applicable in a training environment (for many years, perhaps more so) as an operational one. To me, that does not make an item any less interesting - for the insight into service life etc these adaptations provide - but I do not think it proves anything, one way or the other, on 'active' use.

I'm afraid you're also not going to be able to find a definitive answer, as to when someone joined, just from the last four of a service number. At least not for the British Army.

These are an eight figure number (used to be six for officers, but they stopped issuing those some years back) allocated on an incremental basis... so the same last four will be allocated to another person every time another 10,000 numbers are issued. Of course, with some variation for changing recruitment volumes, it will be possible to estimate (very roughly indeed) each time that has happened. Hence, as you have identified, "ED7418" could have joined in "01, around '98, late '92 to early '93, '88-'90 or even as early as 1981" (I assume that's been worked out by something like the above process)... as well as date ranges for every other time "7418" rolled over with a different 10,000's integer!

Unfortunately, you would need to know the start of the service number to be able to put a specific period (& still only a period) on when someone joined.

The question of when Zap numbers started to be used is an interesting one in its own right. They certainly became more widely known about during the more recent Iraq & Afghanistan campaigns but I know they were employed in Northern Ireland before that. My perception was that they went back to the early days of "The Troubles". However, while a little online searching suggests this is true, the 'current' format of first two letters of family name, followed by the 'last four', seems to be an early 80's standardisation of a variety of local (regimental) systems before that. There only appear to be Social Media & individual recollections, so take that for what it is worth. But there might be some logic to adoption at that time - I wonder if perhaps the Falklands War necessitated it? That was a large scale operation, with several different Brigades deployed, but operating in relatively close proximity using Combat Net Radio rather than the slightly more 'localised' nets in Northern Ireland?

So, interesting & worth trying to pin down for 'posterity', as there doesn't seem to be anything definitive out there on the Internet - perhaps some Falklands veterans could confirm what was in use there?

However, I don't think the adoption date for Zap numbers helps with your fundamental question at all. They aren't designed to be completely unique. Just uncommon enough within the small teams for which their use is relevant (although, perhaps there must be some additional step for a Welsh regiment containing a plethora of Jones )...

For example, I had some 15 years service when I deployed to Afghanistan. But someone on the same deployment, even one who came out of training just a few months before, could quite conceivably have the same Zap number - they would 'just' need to have a family name starting with the same first two letters & the same last four (& increase the odds of the latter because I have an old six-figure officer number & said other person could have either).

Sorry for the long reply!

[Michtag]

Thank you so much for your reply, this is more than I could have hoped for!
And thank you also for explaining to me that those 2 "field" mods do not prove an operational/theatre use at all.
Regarding the Zap numbers, yes, I know they are not meant for overall identification and the lack of the first 4 is crucial; the periods I mentioned are worked out from a table I found online which could well be incorrect and incomplete, and even if I were able to work out the enlistment period, it would not necessarily help with any deployment info (as you have confirmed).
Still, hopefully someone can shed light on the first appearance of zap numbers as we know them today.

Cheers
Michele