Boots worn with field uniform m/27

In theory all other service arms besides Air Force were supposed to use brown "jackboot" type leather boots, while only Air Force used black boots of similar type. In similar manner laced shoes used by Air Force were to be black, while all other service arms used brown shoes of similar type. Shoes were normally to be worn with straight pants, while boots were worn with riding breeches. If shoes were worn with ridding breeches they needed to be worn with leather gaiters. In reality it seems likely that the earlier black leather boots may not have been replaced in such extent, that they would have been completely replaced with new brown boots. Hence while officers, military officials and senior non-commissioned officers likely had brown boots, it seems unlikely that boots of enlisted men would have been completely replaced.

 

Pekka Aarniaho: Kaluunat ja rähinäremmit. Itsenäisen Suomen virkapuvut ja arvomerkit 1918 – 1945 (Uniforms and Rank Markings of Independent Finland 1918 - 1945).

Petteri Leino: Asepuku M/36 vuosina 1936 – 1945 (Uniform m/36 in years 1936 - 1945).

Stig Roudasmaa: Suojeluskuntapuvut. Suojeluskuntajärjestön puvut 1918 – 1944 (Civil Guard Uniforms. Uniforms of Civil Guard in 1918 - 1944).

Juhani U.E. Lehtonen: Sotilaselämän perinnekirja (The Tradition Book of Military Life).

Puolustusvoimien huolto 1918 – 1986 (Supply of Defense Forces 1918 - 1986) by Huoltoupseeriyhdistys.

Suomalaisen sotilaan historia ristiretkistä rauhanturvaamiseen (History of Finnish Soldier from Crusades to Peacekeeping).

Marko Palokangas: Itsenäisen Suomen sotilasarvot ja –arvomerkit / Military Ranks and Rank Badges of Independent Finland.

Article: Marko Palokangas: Sotilasarvomerkkiemme taustaa ja taivalta (Background and Development of Our Military Rank Markings), (Ase-lehti magazine vol 5/1995).

Article: Tapio Saarni: Panssarijoukkojen univormuja IV osa (Uniforms of Tank Corps, part IV), in Panssari-lehti magazine vol. 3/1991.

Theses: Kristian Värri: Itsenäisen Suomen ratsuväen varusteiden kehitys talvisotaan mennessä (Development of Equipment in Cavalry of Independent Finland before Winter War).

Military manual: Valtakunnan puolustusvoimien virkapukusääntö, V.P.O. (Uniform Regulations for Armed Forces of the Nation) by Ministry of Defense (published year 1930).

Military manual: Suojeluskuntajäjestön virkapukuohjesäntö (Civil Guard's Uniform Regulations), published year 1930.

Special thanks to Finnish Military Museum (Sotamuseo), Helsinki.

Special thanks to Museum Militaria (Museo Militaria), Hämeenlinna.

Special thanks to Infantry Museum (Jalkaväkimuseo), Mikkeli.

Special thanks to Tank Museum (Panssarimuseo), Parola.

Special thanks to Armémuseum (Sweden)

Military Uniform M/36

 

Development work of military uniform m/36:

Military uniform m/36 was the standard issue Finnish military uniform during World War 2 and after the war remained in use all the way until 1960’s. It was designed by Field Equipment Board (Kenttävarustustoimikunta) lead by Colonel Aarne Heikinheimo (later Major-General and Inspector of Infantry until his accidental death in test-firing event of 47-mm mortar prototype in year 1938) and composed of jaeger officers (former Finnish volunteers of Prussian Jaeger Battalion 27 of World War 1). Composition of the board is a likely at least one of the reasons why it ended up developing military uniform, which was so heavily influenced by German Army uniforms of that time. In essence with military uniform m/36 Finnish military was replacing its existing standard issue uniforms the second time in time period of just 14 years – which was highly uncommon if compared to later Finnish uniform development. It is rather ironic that the official reason that the board noted for the development work of new standard military uniform was that they considered field uniform/27 to be poorly suited for combat use. In reality it seems more likely that the main reason was that the field uniform m/27 was considered not to be presentable enough for garrison and parade. In addition it would not be impossible for least some of the members of Field Equipment Committee may have also had other motives. Among them inter-service rivalry with Civil Guard or wishing to visually differentiate Finnish Armed Forces from Civil Guard, whose reputation had suffered a blow with Mäntsälä Rebellion (coup attempt of extreme right wing Lapuan Liike) in February – March of 1932).

The board did come up with some technical reasons why they considered field uniform m/27 to be so poorly suited combat use. In its critique towards field uniform m/27 it noted that possible use of chemical weapons had not been taken into consideration in its development process, which while true seems pretty poor excuse considering that other wool uniforms were unlikely to really do well in that regard. Yet one must be admit that it made some keen observations when it came in developing of soldier’s equipment and that field uniform m/27 did in fact have some problem points of its own. One of the matters that the board highlighted for a very valid reason was the weight of infantry soldier’s kit – the summertime kit weight about 33 kg and wintertime kit 37 kg. This was a lot of weight for soldiers marching on foot - hence the board put some effort in trying to reduce its weight, even if the results for its efforts were rather moderate.

Field Equipment Board put considerable effort in developing new military uniform. Year 1933 the board started its work by acquiring sample of complete (including shoes) military uniforms of the latest model from Germany and Great Britain. It is worth noting that this was not new or unique in a sense - Finnish military attachés had been ordered already in late 1920’s to acquire sample uniforms, samples of their fabric and certain other equipment issued by the military forces of the country where they were stationed to provide reference materials for developing new military clothing and equipment. Early on the board had also considered uniform made from cotton, but when tested none of the available cotton fabrics proved capable of surviving being washed repeatedly without losing its poise or its color fading. Due to this the cotton uniform option was abandoned and wool got confirmed as the only possible fabric for new military uniform.

PICTURE: Private (sotamies) of Finnish Army in typical military uniform m/36. Notice collar patches, which were not used in earlier Finnish military uniforms. Both green collar patches with white frame and brass badges of crossed rifles on epaulets indicate that the soldier's service branch is infantry. Trousers appear to be straight pants m/36. Rifle is infantry rifle m/27, belt is leather belt m/22 with ammunition pouch m/18 and bayonet. Hat is field cap m/36 and boots are black jackboot-type leather boots, which were the standard boot design for Finnish Army during use of military uniform m/36. Photo taken in Finnish Military Museum (Sotamuseo), Helsinki. CLICK THUMBNAIL TO SEE LARGER PIC (126 KB).

 

 

Experimental military uniform M/34 (kokeilupuku m/34):

As part of the development process of military uniform m/36 Field Equipment Board first developed prototypes and a field test series of uniforms in form of experimental military uniform m/34 (kokeilupuku m/34). The fabric of this experimental uniform was made from wool that was thinner, tighter and lighter than the fabric commonly used in field uniform m/27 – making it experimental military uniform m/34 lighter and easier to dry, but it still had better wind resistance qualities and was almost as warm as its predecessor.

 

Tunic of experimental uniform m/34 (kokeilupuvun m/34 takki):

Tunic of this experimental uniform was directly based on German Army (apparently M33) military tunic, but not a direct copy, since there had been some changes. The most notable of these changed was that while German m/33 was closed with four buttons, the tunic of Finnish experimental uniform m/34 is somewhat longer and closed with five buttons. In addition size-wise the tunic is bit more loosely fitted than the German one and has no slit in the back. Back of the tunic is flat, but had two fabric folds, which if needed can be opened to provide more room around the waist. The experimental tunic also has a low folded collar, which was intended to be worn open. There was more than one cuff design being tested with some tunics having cuffs that had buttons, while some tunics did not. As typical to Finnish uniforms tunics, tunic pockets had flaps which are closed with buttons featuring Finnish coat of arms lion and similar buttons were used to also for tapered epaulets. First some prototypes of this experimental uniform was acquired in variety of colors, but only two color versions were issued for field testing in military units – green-grey (as the German original uniform) and green-brown (in essence in same color as in standard-version of field uniform m/27). Due to open collar design not used in any other Finnish military tunics of that time besides light uniform m/27 tunic, this tunic was intended to be used with green scarf or neck warmer.

Finnish Armed Forces issued experimental military uniforms m/34 in limited numbers for field testing to nine of its military units. Most of these units were infantry units, but also field artillery, cavalry, coastal artillery and Air Force were included. Although these experimental uniforms were originally intended to be used only as field uniforms, in many if not all of the units to which they had been issued apparently allowed also their use as holiday uniforms. Grand majority (at least hundreds) of the uniforms issued to military units for field testing had been made from green-brown wool (resembling color of field uniform m/27), while only much smaller number (dozens) had been made from grey-green wool. There was also a grey version of this uniform, but apparently only few uniforms were made in that color and all of those in earlier prototype stage, hence none of them probably saw field testing.

For some reason (presumably mainly due uniform colors used with experimental uniform m/34) officially very little of the uniform items introduced with earlier uniforms were allowed to be used with it. Although it seems uncertain how much actual effort was placed in enforcing these orders particularly during the war.

 

Trousers of experimental uniform m/34 (kokeilupuvun m/34 housut):

As earlier Finnish military uniforms, also experimental military uniform m/34 had three types of trousers acquired for it – breeches, riding breeches and straight pants. Not bothering to re-invent the wheel, these trousers many in large degree similar to those used with earlier Finnish military uniforms. Namely the cut and design used in breeches and riding breeches was similar to the ones already earlier used with field uniform m/27, while straight pants were apparently somewhat different, but all pants still used the similar four-holed iron buttons as used with trousers of field uniform m/27. In fact one could argue that the main difference to field uniform m/27 trousers was material – which was the same lighter and tighter wool as the experimental uniform’s tunic. All three trouser models had burlap lining in their upper parts and internal slightly canted front pockets with small pocket on the left for pocket watch. As usual for Finnish military uniforms of the era, these trousers did not have belt loops, since they had been intended to be used with suspenders and have buttons in waist area for that purpose. Sides of trouser’s waist also have tighteners about 10 cm / 4 in long for adjusting waist. These tighteners are straps of fabric which can be adjusted to correct setting with a small metal buckle.

 

Field cap m/34 (kenttälakki m/34):

When it came to hat issued with experimental uniform m/34, the field cap design introduced with it was bit of "back to the roots" sort of choice. Namely the field cap m/34 introduced with it was directly based on "jaeger cap" (jääkärilakki) type field caps used by Finnish White Army in year 1918 and also used by Finnish Civil Guard (Suojeluskunta) ever since. The White Army’s "jaeger cap" had in turn been based on cap design used by Austrian and German World War 1 era mountain troops. Field cap m/34 was made from the same wool as tunic and trousers, visor with two layers of fabric and sides that could folded down. Although it is possible that the Finnish White Army year 1918 field caps were skipped when it came to design used for inspiration of field cap m/34. What is known suggests that Field Equipment Board used at least already existing Civil Guard field cap and cap of Austrian mountain troops as reference while planning the exact cap design. Field cap m/34 was intended for around the year use, due to which it had been equipped in internal removable liner locked in with snap fasteners. While field cap m/34 was soon replaced in production with field cap m/36 directly based to it, field cap m/34 had been manufactured in such a large scale (total production was about 20.000 hats), that they still remained in use at least until end of World War 2. While field cap m/34 had been originally intended to be used also as winter hat, apparently the liner-equipped field cap proved not warm enough for winter use. Due to this it was replaced with field cap m/36, which no longer had the liner and Finnish Army decided to introduce separate new winter hat design called fur hat m/39 (turkislakki m/39) just before Winter War.

 

 

⇐ Предыдущая1234567Следующая ⇒

Поделиться: