Jump to content

PQD

New Members
  • Content Count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Interests
    Combat uniforms, helmets, clothing, gear, and weapons of WWII USAAF, USA, USN, USMC, RAF, Luftwaffe flight & FJ, Heer pz. and pz. grn., and W-SS

Recent Profile Visitors

101 profile views
  1. Phil, this example is fully inconsistent with any I know to be genuine. I have studied these arm flags for most of my long collecting years and am quite fascinated by them. Aside from a few versions made in Italy, what can be deemed genuine in the textile flags are the so-called gauze or cheesecloth style and poplin style; all are printed only on one side, as is the case with the example you posted. I am aware of two distinctly different sizes made in the gauze type and one in the poplin type. The smaller-size gauze version is most typically seen in photos, but both were used.
  2. That makes sense, and thank you for the correction. I am uncertain when the USMC first received Field Jackets, but Iceland Detachment could have gotten some in 1941, which would make the jacket depicted a Spec. 20A; however, I am of the belief that the first issue to the USMC was not until later in 1942. It is also possible this jacket seen in the photo was obtained from USA personnel that arrived in Iceland beginning in Aug. 1941.
  3. This photo is very interesting and the date highly suspected to be incorrect. The Marine (?) far left is wearing the U. S. Army Field Jacket, which would have been infinitely few in number in 1940 and not subject to USMC issue, as the USA was still far below its needs in receiving this item. If this man is indeed a Marine and a Field Jacket somehow found its way into the USMC, this version would also had to have had epaulets added, as the PQD Spec. 20A Field Jacket was the first version made with epaulets and it did not appear until the early summer of 1941. Some officers of the USA did add
  4. I have seen a couple of the USMC versions that had USMC contract labels intact (that's the only way I know for sure they were USMC) and also in a light greenish color with pale-colored collars. I have no idea if all the USMC versions were contracted for production and I am not surprised that both collar and shell colorings varied for such a specialized item used by men few in number.
  5. I believe it was one of those civilian models that was iconically worn by James Dean in "GIANT."
  6. I see the Ebay seller smoked some unsuspecting collector on this, but certainly not as bad as it could have been. If the seller had not added the name and number to the lining, the patch could have been removed and the A-2 would still have been a nice piece from a rare, desirable contract, but now it is just tarnished history of what I call "wearable" value only.
  7. It is yet another piece of foul-weather clothing worn by the USN and USCG, designated for officers, but NCO's certainly can be seen wearing them, and even a few slick-sleeve seamen. It was not specific to submariners or aviators, though some collectors erroneously consider them "balloonist" coats like the M-69 series. The version in brown, polished cotton seems more commonly encountered vs. the version in olive-green oilskin, but I have never seen production numbers for either or even a specific nomenclature reference, so I am not sure if there was a distinction between the two,
  8. Genuine! Guys, this makes no less than three posts of what amounts to really basic pieces of gear. I am sure we longtime collectors are mostly all happy to opine as to genuineness on these items, but I strongly encourage you to begin looking at things from a new perspective and making some comparisons to fine tune your diagnostic skills. I will repeat my post from yesterday in reply to a question about a Mills cartridge belt: Some salient points to keep in mind: 1) Batches of materials vary all of the time, but variation is all the more present and det
  9. Genuine! I shall repeat my reply post from this same question on a Mills cartridge belt yesterday: Some salient points to keep in mind: 1) Batches of materials vary all of the time, but variation is all the more present and detectable over the passage of decades. Even if you had access to the same machinery and production never ceased over some 80 years, you would still find noticeable differences in metals, finishes, fabrics, and assembly. For example, textiles will vary even just from differences in where raw materials were harvested from. All sorts of ti
  10. I am right with US Victory Museum on this: you have posted a genuine Mills cart. belt, not a fake. Please study the fine details and differences between good and bad: the best fakes still do not precisely duplicate what was made many decades ago. Some salient points to keep in mind: 1) Batches of materials vary all of the time, but variation is all the more present and detectable over the passage of decades. Even if you had access to the same machinery and production never ceased over some 80 years, you would still find noticeable differences in metals, finishes
  11. And this small 85th FS insignia of the size typical of many SSI is the only embroidered 85th I know of to be genuine; I cannot find any full-size 85th FS insignia in period photos or extant in collections that were anything but painted.
  12. Totally agree! I have bene discussing this patch and its attachment to the A-2 at length with several knowledgeable collectors and none of us believe it is WWII or genuine to the coat. Additionally, I have known the seller fairly well for many, many years and we have sold to each other several times, all transactions being good; however, I have observed the seller, who does most of his selling on Ebay, offer several items that were obviously played with and absent any disclosures to that end, so I take that into account heavily with this offering. Lastly, I actually sp
  13. That was my first reaction, which is juts to say there is some resemblance to Pakistani-made insignia, but this is not quite the typical stuff we see them producing. The background fabric appears totally bizarre and the overall style is unlike what would be expected for a unit such as the 85th: it does not have the appearance of what one would expect from insignia made in Italy or France. The insignia very much looks added to the coat postwar and my gut tells me it's origin is outside of where the 85th was operating, though I cannot indict with precision.
  14. Thanks for the input. I fully concur that there is something up with the background fabric. I also agree the roughed-up edge seems odd with the overall embroidery being without damage. I am wondering if someone attempted to age/wash the patch before applying it, which may be contributing to the weird appearance of the background fabric (wool???). I also see leather fade/wear going right up to the patch edge, which would also lead me to think it was added to the A-2 after the jacket was well worn, even if the patch itself were good. One last point is a
  15. I've been collecting artifacts and insignia of the AAF units that served in N. Africa and MTO for decades, especially 85th FS items, as my dad was briefly attached to that unit in N. Africa, and I ran into this 85th unit insignia on an A-2 jacket that is unlike any 85th insignia I have encountered before. Can anyone please help confirm this as genuine or not?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.