pioneer tools correct colors of tools

[Paul in Kempner, TX]

This thread has been very interesting, particularly some of the supplemental G503 links. First of all, as Tim knows, I am a bit older than many of the rest of you. I was 73 last Monday. In the Kempner Power Wagon Museum I have many tools displayed that are older than any military or civilian truck in the "Power Wagon" family. As Tim also knows, I retired after 20 years active duty in the "Cold War" era US Army. Among my Army duties were Motor Sergeant, Unit Maintenance Officer, and Property Book Officer. Then and now I have always relied on reading regulations and technical manuals as being better than "winging it" and perpetuating information based on speculation. Oh, yes, I also was stationed at McGuire AFB for three years and actually saw Strata Blue vehicles in the motor pool.

I am not challenging any of the content presented in this thread, but I submit the following observations as relevant.

Many military requirements that we lived with did not originate at Department of the Army (or Air Force) level. Actually, a majority of the lower echelon “how to” requirements were set by local commands. These were the ones that made little or no sense. Some larger commands covered an area that was large enough that weather conditions were significantly different. Typical of this was a subordinate command policy requiring snow chains to be issued to all vehicles after the 6th of September even though most of the command never experienced any snow. Other local requirements such as painting all surfaces of pioneer tools may have no basis beyond a young, junior officer instructing that they all be painted this way because he believed that his lack of technical knowledge would be concealed by “eye wash”.

Because this issue surfaced as I was preparing our unit for an IG back in 1981, I researched it. As I recall, the primary applicable reference was a medical bulletin that stated those wood surfaces of manual tools that came into contact with any ones hands in normal use should be left natural. Painting was not an option because the surface did not “breathe” and caused blisters. However, natural wood preservatives could be used. We were not able to obtain linseed oil, but we did pass by sanding off all sweat stains and applying a light coat of motor oil - and having the medical bulletin available for review. “Eye wash” only matters when you can show that it is not just a matter of opinion. (Yes, I know that many of today's tools have fibreglss handles. I also know those handles don't fit the hands of many younger folks today.)

Something I found very interesting was in the G503 link by CUZ concerning Alemite lubrication guns. Few of you younger folks remember lubrication guns that did not have the end that clutched the lube fitting by hydraulic pressure. Can you say, “zerk”? Way before WWII and the tools shown here, the gun had to be pushed tightly against the ball shaped lube fitting and that was the means to seal the gun against the lube fitting. This is an example of 40’s high tech that I have appreciated for many years.

Thanks for letting me ramble...

[cuz]

Paul,

Your ramblings are very much appreciated. It is interesting that you brought up the lower commands application/interpretation of the regs. For those who aren't familiar with the GI's plight in the military food chain , there are several basics involved, one- crap rolls down hill, two-there's the right way, the wrong way and the military way, three-it's not for us to reason why-but tis for us to do and die. Some of the dumbest higher authority decisions I have had to employ over those years were often the result of an IG inspection or in anticipation of an IG inspection.

Also as you indicated Hdqtrs Army, Navy, USAF all wrote their regs and subordinate commands all had the option to add to them so long as their addition didn't conflict with the intent of the original reg. Today, years after the fact we sometimes get our hands on a HQ reg and unknowingly accept it at it's stand alone face value. For example USAF Reg 35-10 addresses uniform issues and appearance and military bearing. But there are several supplements issued to it that would only be found at the supplementing command chain. IE AFR 35-10 SAC Supp 1, 8AF supp 1, 2BW supp 1. So if you want to know how a troop must dress, look and behave at SAC HQ's then AFR 35-10 SAC Sup 1 is all you need. But if that troop is in the 2nd Bomb Wing he needs the reg and all three supplements to be sure.

[Lifer]

I well know what you mean about all those supplements, Wes. I can also remember what a pain in the butt it was to keep them current with all the pen-and-ink changes between updated page changes. Once in a while you'd get a page change and a pen-and-ink change to it at the same time!

I also "fondly" remember IG inspections. "I" and "G," when used in combination, were the two most feared letters in the English alphabet! Every time they were uttered, Base Supply had an immediate run on paint, brushes, rollers, and roller pans!

[Joe]

I dug into the tool colors a while back and what I found was the tools were issued in the manufacturer's original color. For example the metal parts of the shovel were red and the wood was unpainted. However in most commands the first time the truck was painted or even touched up they usually painted the tools too. And they usually painted ALL of the tool including the wood. Some commanders even ordered that the tools be immediately painted as soon as they were issued. Sooo, I don't think there really is a single answer to how they should be painted. Every unit seems to have done things a bit differently. But I think that most units just painted everything green! You all know the old Army saying; if it moves, salute it; if it doesn't then paint it!