Vietnam era flight boots - FWU-3/P

[viking73]

Hi,

 

I picked up these small size (6W) Vietnam-era flight boots recently to go along with my 1965 dated Fort Wolters K-2B flight suit. They have a nice 4-66 date on them.

 

-Derek

 

 

[viking73]

Here's a shot of the sole:

 

[viking73]

And a close-up of the zipper.

 

Thanks for looking!

 

-Derek

[FtrPlt]

Those look like FWU-3's. I'm not sure if Army pilots were issued flying boots during VN? In the mid-1980s, we wore standard black combat boots -- at least in helicopters.

[doyler]

Steel toe?

[viking73]

Thanks for the replies gents.

 

dolyer - they are not steel toe boots.

 

Chris - that's interesting. I just assumed army pilots during the 60s/70s wore USAF issue flight boots in addition to their USAF issue flight suits and gloves. I'll have to ask the guys I know who trained at Wolters what they wore and let you all know.

 

-Derek

[viking73]

Yep, seems the consensus is that I need to find a black leather pair of corcoran boots...

 

-Derek

[mohawkALSE]

Those boots are one of the exact type that my father had and still has till this day as an Army Aviator from the 1968 period. His just have laces though not the lace in zippers. Chris those are different boots than the FWU-3, the lace in zip is similar but the design of the boot is different. I have a early 60s dated pair of 3P boots and they look just as they still did up to a few years ago accept the soles were a flat type, not that zig zag jet fuel resistant type. Im actually visiting my family now so I can try and snap some pics of his 2 pairs of Nam flight boots as well as the FWU-3 boots from the early 60s I snagged a few years back when I was trying to put a SAC setup togther.

[Bob Hudson]

I just bought a pair ot 1965 flight boots thinking they were standard Vietnam era combat boots. I was confused as to why the size and date were stamped inside on a liner, not on the outside of the leather as is "always" the case for Vietnam era black boots? I also discovered the side details of my boot were different too from the standard issue boots.

 

The inside lining with date stamp is seen in the early original Air Force LeMay alert boots, Navy brown flight boots from all eras, and these mid-60's black boots I found (which have the same basic design as the older alert boots).

 

Here's the non-flight boot style on the left and flight boots on the right -

 

[doyler]

The combat boots are not lined and the lining is typical for a flight boot as are steel toes for the period.

[mohawkALSE]

Those look to be the early FWU-3 "alert" boots. I have a pair from either 1962 or 1963. What does the sole look like on those? Flat or a ripple pattern? My early ones are a flat sole and then at some point the USAF went to that "Jet Fuel Resistant" rippled sole that they used up til that boot was not long ago replaced by the Belleville 700 styles and so on.

[Bob Hudson]

Those look to be the early FWU-3 "alert" boots. I have a pair from either 1962 or 1963. What does the sole look like on those? Flat or a ripple pattern? My early ones are a flat sole and then at some point the USAF went to that "Jet Fuel Resistant" rippled sole that they used up til that boot was not long ago replaced by the Belleville 700 styles and so on.

 

These were driving shoes not hiking boots so the soles were flat to reduce the chance they could snag on a pedal or other control

 

 

As this thread shows it can be easy to confuse a Vietnam era combat boot for a flight boot and vice-versa.

[RustyCanteen]

Just me or is the OP's pair standard McNamara boots with the zip inserts added? Look unlined.

[Bob Hudson]

Just me or is the OP's pair standard McNamara boots with the zip inserts added? Look unlined.

 

Yes they are standard issue ground pounder boots.

[mohawkALSE]

They might be standard Army boots but that style boot was surely used by pilots. I have 2 pairs worn by my father as a Huey and Loach pilot between 1968-1973 time frame. Ill work on resizing them so I can post pics.

 

[RustyCanteen]

That's true. I went through "The United States Air Force in Southeast Asia 1961-1973" recently, and when it came to boots every from jungle boots to Army boots showed up. Many of the jet pilots (who you would expect to be wearing 'real' boots) only had their photo taken from the waist-up, or the flight suit covered the boots and made it impossible to tell what they were wearing with any degree of accuracy.

[USARV72]

Late war rotor wing crew wore all leather boots, not sure of official name. Issue was, DMS Jungle boots burned as well as the regular " ground pounder " DMS boots. Everybody tried to get a pair of leather boots to send home. Our unit had the Clothing Issue Facility (CIF) attached but those not on a flight crew could never find a pair in ones size.)~:

[Bob Hudson]

They might be standard Army boots but that style boot was surely used by pilots.

 

 

In my previous post I deleted a sentence where I mentioned that in practice, pilots wore everything, especially in helicopters operating with infantry.

 

 

Now as to what is an official flyer's boot: that's the so-called "FWU" boot. It apparently began with the Curtiss LeMay-requested "alert boot" for Air Force issue and at some point a variant of that became a general issue flight boot ).

 

Here's some short excerpts from a 1985 revision of a 1973 spec sheet for Milspec "MIL-B-27486B" "BOOT, FLYER'S FWU3/P"

 

The glove leather lining and zipper are part of the specs: zippers in non-FWU boots are typically PX purchases and the boots are not lined. The most obvious sign of a flyer's boot is the fairly straight seam on the side of the boots (I highlighted that with a yellow line in a photo below).

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bob Hudson]

There is not much out there on the Interweb in regards to these flight boots, so I hope those specs will be helpful. If you want to see the whole spec it's on http://everyspec.com/MIL-SPECS/MIL-SPECS-MIL-B/MIL-B-27486C_28408/

[Bob Hudson]

Does anyone have anything showing the "FWU" designation before 1973?

 

I mentioned the LeMay boot. Dahner makes what is apparently a copy of that. It has more eyelets than the "FWU boot" but has the same straight side seam:

 

 

[Bob Hudson]

Here's the Navy brown version: same side seam, same lining, but no zipper.

 

 

Ths was in the always interesting LJ Militaria catalog.

 

[RustyCanteen]

I found this from 1964

 

 

 

The specification as updated:

 

At least 3 updates dating from 1964 and prior

 

1 July 1966

 

14 February 1973

 

4 October 1985

[RustyCanteen]

Those look to be the early FWU-3 "alert" boots. I have a pair from either 1962 or 1963. What does the sole look like on those? Flat or a ripple pattern? My early ones are a flat sole and then at some point the USAF went to that "Jet Fuel Resistant" rippled sole that they used up til that boot was not long ago replaced by the Belleville 700 styles and so on.

 

 

I think (but have yet to confirm a date of adoption) the sole was changed no later than 1969, since I have seen a 1969 contract pair with the rippled sole you mention.

[Bob Hudson]

I found this from 1964

 

 

 

That's a nice find: we now have FWU specs from 1964, 73 and 85.

 

This FWU-3/P style is pretty enduring. This is from 2002:

 

"6.2.5. Flight Boots. The primary aircrew boots, as authorized in AS 016, are the FWU-3/P, FWU-8/P

and the lightweight model 700, 770, and 790 Belleville® Aircrew Boot. Lace-up zipper inserts may be used."

[RustyCanteen]

 

That's a nice find: we now have FWU specs from 1964, 73 and 85.

 

 

 

Found a 1 July 1966 spec update too, which I added to the post. I have also edited it to show the ones you found from 1973 and 1985.