Emergency Flying ration pack Type 0.2 : Operation ration tin
|Title||Emergency Flying ration pack Type 0.2 : Operation ration tin|
|Object type||Personal Equipment|
|Date made||March 1945|
|Physical description||Aluminium Foodstuffs Paint|
Rectangular, green painted ration tin outer with crimped lid and base, containing three separate ration meals. A metal turnkey, similar to those found on sardine tins, is tack-welded to the lid and is designed to be removed and used with the pre-scored opening band and tab. Below the legend "TURN KEY < TO OPEN CAN" is an illustration depicting the opening method. Under this is "A.M.F. / OPERATION / RATION / 02. / D^D". The reverse is printed with the following statement: "This Ration is intended for use in circumstances where normal rations cannot be supplied. / This tin contains three complete meals separately wrapped in waterproof cartons. When one meal has been consumed, the remaining two meals can be carried on the person and the Tin discarded. / The contents form a completely balanced ration with ample protective (Vitamin) cover. / The complete ration in the tin will keep indefinitely, and can be submerged or buried." The manufacturer's name is printed under this; while the base is impressed with the date of manufacture "3 45". There are some very minor rubbing and handling marks on the tin.
Included with RAAF Emergency Flying Ration pack, item S1/2 E27/8. Evaluation of this ration, conducted in New Guinea in mid 1945 by the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) reported (p 102): "Battalion and company commanders whose units had recently used this ration described it as invaluable for forward troops and stated that, while at present its use is restricted to 4-day or longer patrols, it would be very useful for other types of work if larger supplies were made available. It is recommended that undue economy in the use of the 02 ration should be avoided. A more rapid turnover of present stocks is desirable to avoid deterioration in some components. Those who had used the ration agreed that it provided more than the minium needs for one man-day, but opinions differed as to whether the margin was excessive. The majority view is against any reduction in the ration. A few complaints were heard that the ration was too sweet, but this opinion was not generally supported by observers with recent experience of the ration. Alternating the 02 ration with the normal field ration was suggested by those who thought it too sweet."