cpatrick Posted September 14, 2007 Share #51 Posted September 14, 2007 ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CNY Militaria Posted September 14, 2007 Share #52 Posted September 14, 2007 Provenance is everything. To half many collectors, this would be disallowed in their collection. To others, its a great example of a jacket that COULD be something. It depends on what your collecting interests are--some collectors are happy wondering about items, others want to know for sure. Like I said, without any solid prevenance to show that this is how it was worn back in the day by the vet, its a sum of the parts piece. JMHO... Justin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy13 Posted September 14, 2007 Author Share #53 Posted September 14, 2007 I have been reviewing the threads and learning alot. My dad has been reading as a guest also. He took some more pics of the patches and sent them to me. He also took some of the inside of the sleeves. The ribbon bars, CIB and brass have been removed, but are being kept with the uniform. 82nd patch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy13 Posted September 14, 2007 Author Share #54 Posted September 14, 2007 101 patch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy13 Posted September 14, 2007 Author Share #55 Posted September 14, 2007 Little closer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy13 Posted September 14, 2007 Author Share #56 Posted September 14, 2007 Ruptured duck...looks to be hand sewn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy13 Posted September 14, 2007 Author Share #57 Posted September 14, 2007 Ghost of 3 yr hash mark. Inside of arm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy13 Posted September 14, 2007 Author Share #58 Posted September 14, 2007 Inside pics of arms and stitchings. Lft arm, where 82nd patch attached, but remains of 101 machine stitching? Rt arm, 101 hand stitching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy13 Posted September 14, 2007 Author Share #59 Posted September 14, 2007 Here is the 101 pin. The pics are the best the camera could do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpatrick Posted September 14, 2007 Share #60 Posted September 14, 2007 The stitching of the the possible 101st on the inside sleeve actually looks more like a 2nd ID, or similar shape.... Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy13 Posted September 14, 2007 Author Share #61 Posted September 14, 2007 Screw back of pin. Again, thanks to everyone for their comments and input. This is the reason I joined this forum. Everyday is a learning experience. Troy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy13 Posted September 14, 2007 Author Share #62 Posted September 14, 2007 The stitching of the the possible 101st on the inside sleeve actually looks more like a 2nd ID, or similar shape.... Chris The stitching is actually about 2 1/4 wide and 2 3/4 tall. I guess the angle and the white stitching makes it look larger than it actually is. It's too small for a 2nd, but the slight point in the middle is suspicious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
101combatvet Posted September 14, 2007 Share #63 Posted September 14, 2007 Hmmm, seems like even provenance doesn't allow the blind to see. Provenance is everything. To half many collectors, this would be disallowed in their collection. To others, its a great example of a jacket that COULD be something. It depends on what your collecting interests are--some collectors are happy wondering about items, others want to know for sure. Like I said, without any solid prevenance to show that this is how it was worn back in the day by the vet, its a sum of the parts piece. JMHO... Justin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmoore456 Posted September 15, 2007 Share #64 Posted September 15, 2007 About the ribons. I have a 2nd Armored Division uniform with all Pacific Theater ribbons on it, right from the vet. As said previously most unknowing collectors would remove the ribbons and probabaly replace them with the proper European Theater ones. But when seeing the discharges, yes he had two, the story unfolds. The first he was discharged in December 1945 at Luzon, Phillipine Islands as a draftee to enlist in the regular Army. The second he was discharged in November 1946 at Camp Hood Texas. Ray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Baker Posted September 15, 2007 Share #65 Posted September 15, 2007 The jacket itself is probably OK. Stripped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustin Posted September 15, 2007 Share #66 Posted September 15, 2007 this topic has been quite interesting so bottom line the uniform is questionable at best? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FW12 Posted September 15, 2007 Share #67 Posted September 15, 2007 this topic has been quite interesting so bottom line the uniform is questionable at best? In my opinion, yes. I think as far as debate on this uniform is concerned, the regs have been stretched too far and too many excuses (all the what ifs and "well it possible"s) have been made. As Justin said, this is a sum of the parts uniform, it just doesn't add up! Beau Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricardo Posted September 15, 2007 Share #68 Posted September 15, 2007 Hi All, For me ... Ike jacket, patches and o/s cap are OKAY!! Collars Brass AAF badges and wings add in pos-War (possible replaced for veteran, family or dealer) ... many veterans gived your badges to relatives and friend and used replaces ... is VERY normal. Best regards, Ricardo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GIKyle Posted September 15, 2007 Share #69 Posted September 15, 2007 I don't know, it seems hypocritcal of Justin and others to claim that they as collectors are out to preserve history, but when there is no "provenance" they have no problem stripping a jacket... even one with less questions than this, and divide it up to better serve their interests rather than keep it together as at least an example or selling it as is to someone that would appreciate it for the historical value it possesses. Kyle 1-502 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CNY Militaria Posted September 16, 2007 Share #70 Posted September 16, 2007 What historical value? It has more history without the ribbons, brass, and badges. I don't know why this thread continues, chances are, its a dealer or collector add on. You can give as many what if's and possibilities, but like I said earlier, in the end its a sum of the parts. The collectors who would keep this as is in their collection are too concerned with what-ifs. I should also note that I almost never keep put-together items to serve as an "example" in my collection. The reason being that if its messed with, its messed with. It is and always will be so, and can have no place among other legitimate items. Take this to a show and put it on a table...keep record of what passing collectors say about it. I don't think you will have too many, "Wow, thats a great historical jacket that I need for my collection!" responses. (no offense to anyone here, and this is not directed at anyone in particular). Also, this is just my $.02 as usual. Justin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GIKyle Posted September 16, 2007 Share #71 Posted September 16, 2007 Still so quick to judge this uniform by what is the norm. I had a couple of examples from reference books lined up of uniforms (A captain with air gunner wings, a bronze star, a WWI victory ribbon with stars but no overseas hash) and pictures of uniforms that are outside the norm (Wide ribbons on an army uniform... in the ETO! ... Airborne at that) and would be stripped by the naysayers but I remembered you saying in earlier threads you weren't one for reference books -- At anyrate, I have no proof this jacket has been messed with, nor do I have proof it hasn't been messed with. But I have come across enough goofy uniforms that are legit and pictures of soldiers wearing some wacky combos to know I haven't seen everything. And maybe unnamed things aren't your cup of tea... Buy them as a sum of whats on there, its the smart thing to do-- I do as well. no problem, but whats the difference between a collector who makes a silver star winning ike out of nothing and a collector who strips a legit jacket just because it doesnt have a name or discharge with it? Either way it can be argued you're doing a disservice to collecting. To Troy- If you sell this jacket as is, you probably won't hear "Wow, thats a great historical jacket that I need for my collection!" but not because its not a good piece- Its that usually buyers don't express their emotions like that letting you know they want it- or you're less likely to bend on the selling price. Kyle 1-502 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpatrick Posted September 16, 2007 Share #72 Posted September 16, 2007 Wide ribbon bars are generally considered to be Navy/USMC. But I think that you should also realize that wide bars were also made in England during the war for other branches. I've noticed that these were especially popular with the Army Air Force. The key in evaluating these bars, is to examine the back. Are the attachment devices the standard US type, or are they British in style??? Let it be known, if you find a set of US made wide bars on an Infantry uniform, it was probably put on afterwards. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FW12 Posted September 16, 2007 Share #73 Posted September 16, 2007 Wide ribbon bars are generally considered to be Navy/USMC. But I think that you should also realize that wide bars were also made in England during the war for other branches. I've noticed that these were especially popular with the Army Air Force. The key in evaluating these bars, is to examine the back. Are the attachment devices the standard US type, or are they British in style??? Let it be known, if you find a set of US made wide bars on an Infantry uniform, it was probably put on afterwards. Chris Why are we giving allowances to incorrect ribbons in the first place? Also, I have a CBI Ordnance NCO's ike jacket in my collection, and his uniform has the wide ribbon bar with the british-style hinge assembly. Just because it has that type of pin assembly and is wide is not necessarily indicative of theater. Beau Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricardo Posted September 16, 2007 Share #74 Posted September 16, 2007 Why are we giving allowances to incorrect ribbons in the first place? Also, I have a CBI Ordnance NCO's ike jacket in my collection, and his uniform has the wide ribbon bar with the british-style hinge assembly. Just because it has that type of pin assembly and is wide is not necessarily indicative of theater. Beau Hi, I have one 7th AAF Ike jacket with CIB on right flap pocket...and no Air Crew Wings or Air Medals ... maybe a ground personnel with some infantry combat experiences (transfer from Infantry or observation job). All is possible in the WAR... Best regards, Ricardo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Baker Posted September 16, 2007 Share #75 Posted September 16, 2007 Ricardo, All is possible with any uniform floating around for over 60 years. But that don't make it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now