Jump to content
littlebuddy

advice needed on parachute harnesses

Recommended Posts

Hi all im currently very confused over a couple of harnesses !!! namely for the B8 back type PART NO 43G150001 and the harness assembly , seat type parachute part no 42G2012

 

going by the "class 13 " catlog 1943 They dont look the same but i have found the part no 42G2012 on a B8 rig !!

 

now i confused as to what bit is wrong ???? is it just a mismatched set up or , is it all ok ????

 

any help would be great

 

Carl


WANTED : RAF 1940 PATT FLYING BOOTS

WANTED : DINGHY TYPE K ,TYPE A

" ALWAYS WANTING USAAF ITEMS IN THEIR ORIGINAL PACKAGING "

"WOULD ALSO LIKE 487th FS AND 515TH BS RELATED ITEMS "

"Illegitmi non carborundum"

 



donation2013.gifdonation2014.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Carl,

 

Due the high demand for back type parachute during the 2 last years of the war I think the last B-8 parachutes manufactured in 1945 have been assembled with complete harnesses of seat type parachutes.

It is for the same reason that bayonet fasteners were used in place of hooks on the B-8 parachute products in 1944. This material was to come from old S-1 parachutes reformed.

 

Here a B-8 parachute manufactured in 1945 with a harness from a seat type parachute (part no 42G2012).

 

post-120900-0-16130100-1426863043.jpg

 

Mathieu

 

 

 

 


bandea10.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Mathieu! !now I know what to look for !

 

LB


WANTED : RAF 1940 PATT FLYING BOOTS

WANTED : DINGHY TYPE K ,TYPE A

" ALWAYS WANTING USAAF ITEMS IN THEIR ORIGINAL PACKAGING "

"WOULD ALSO LIKE 487th FS AND 515TH BS RELATED ITEMS "

"Illegitmi non carborundum"

 



donation2013.gifdonation2014.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in July 1943 contractors of the S-1, S-2 and B-7 were instructed to convert to the manufacture of the B-8. In turn conversions were being made overseas as well primarily the ETO. The 8th Air Force Command were establishing new requirements such as the pilot, co-pilot, bombardier and navigator positions for bombardment aircraft were to be issued B-8's with all other positions with the QAC. The B-8 was also preferred for fighter aircraft primarily a comfort issue. So the issue presented here is completely legitimate leaving only the question....was it factory or a repair facility?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matthew and Dustin are essentially correct. Already by mid-1943 there was a huge surplus of close to 40,000 seat assemblies with another 70,000 excess units in production. In 1944 many of these were modified into more suitable rigs. Canvas chest guards were added to the harnesses and mated with spare B-8 packs, while the square seat packs were converted into A-3 chest containers. Others were forwarded to the Navy and modified into the AN style QAS.
B-8s were actually specifically procured with bayonet hardware (separate drawing #), so most B-8’s seen with bayonet fittings are true B-8s, not modified versions. Keep in mind the bulk of S-1 & S-2 harnesses were at the end or nearing their ultimate lifespan by the time this conversion was taking place. Most of the modified chutes were AN6510s and a handful of the 6511s.
In terms of production, I think a better term, instead of converted, would be changed over or switched. Work in progress rigs were finished out, while those on contract yet to be manufactured were changed. Conversions were mainly accomplished by depots, not the manufacturers.

 


www.theriggerdepot.com - Replica WWII Parachute Gear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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