Jump to content

Collection from Italy: #1 F4U Pilot, late war.


BlueBookGuy
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...
BlueBookGuy

Fully realized shortly ago how the Nylon tropical USN Flight Suit of late wartime was, actually, a true identical M-668 summer suit but made in nylon.

Having still a M-668 in my collection it's easy to make some comparisons, at least for those details wich are not hidden by any equippments.

 

Here the much rounded collar:

post-151851-0-85156700-1405260585.jpg

post-151851-0-65791300-1405260647.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jumpin Jack

Good morning Franco,

I'm very impressed with your enthusiasm that is demonstrated in putting this mannequin together. Your attention to detail is very apparant. I look forward to more of your presentations. Keep up the good work! Jack Angolia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Added a very last item to this guy,

 

a civilian -marketed item wich was however, often carried on the person by Naval airmen in early 1945 (perhaps). The needleless variant of a Taylor-made compass, "Gydeway", wich apparently could be more correct if red-cased? I noticed in the past some pics of Gydeways specimens having their bakelite case in dark red color, a couple I spotted being tied to full-size maneqquins.

 

Not easy to tell from b/w pics of the period, whether a green-cased compass was the one we can see on Navy aviators. This I just have obtained was so cheap that seemed to me kind of crime not to get it, while it still lasted - much more available today is Gydeway's variant having the needle, but some experts in this field of collecting made clear the needleless variation was the correct one.

 

No problem should someday any sound documentation surface, in telling a green-cased compass is uncorrect for my Corsair pilot. Just a matter of removing it - currently it does add a bit more colour and one more piece hanging from the AN-6519 Vest.

 

post-151851-0-44071000-1410004906.jpg

post-151851-0-66758500-1410004917.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently the only (minimal) difference between the Red and Green-colored Gydeways (speaking of the floating dial variation) is a tiny "Taylor U.S.A." readable on dial's fixed portion of the green one - sort of a ring, surrounding the floating piece. The red-colored one has only "U.S.A."

However, both the sub-variations do have an even smaller "Taylor", and a "Gydeway" printed on the moving piece.

 

It could be safe that no particular reasons could tell for a correct display with the red-colored Gydeway, and uncorrect if having the green one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you sure are putting up a fight, until we find out the transition periods of markings I don't know. I would be careful about fully convincing yourself, the jury is still out.

I converted a couple of your photos to B&W, somewhere there has to be color photos of them being worn.

 

post-56-0-28690400-1410033169.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Dustin, the argument is interesting anyway.

 

Please there are any known period-photos showing what actually the very small markings are, on the inside fixed ring - "Taylor USA" (in the Green compass) vs. just "USA" (in the Red one)?

I think after all, that evidence if existing would be even better than searching for such a small detail like the transition timeframe between the two markings.

 

Following here is a Girl Scouts' officially issued Taylor compass. My researches indicate it was issued to the G.S. from 1937 to 1941, then from early 1945 to the early '60s. (BTW, this is the most a G.S.-issued Taylor compass could come close to a green Gydeway like mine, but very very different in many a feature, and anyway not a Gydeway compass).

Size and styling of the (partially visible) "Taylor USA" marking in this Girl Scout specimen are identical to those in my green compass, yet there is the unknown about what its mfg. year - could be a pre-war, or a 1945, or a post-war item? For this reason I believed an actual high definition, period-photo would be the ultimate answer, but can figure out this isn't an easy task.

 

And moreover (in my opinion), even a good period-photo showing the "U.S.A." marking instead of "Taylor U.S.A." could be a not ultimate one, if we do not know what of them replaced the other..

Franco.

 

post-151851-0-11231800-1410036279.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The newest arrival :rolleyes:

 

at last, the QAS harness now is being worn by this Navy guy. Could still be missing a F4U airplane, any suggestion is welcome if useful to steal one in some museums.. any ideas? :D

 

attachicon.gif002.JPG

attachicon.gif001.JPG

 

 

 

Fantastic display !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

A friend collector told me having read somewhere -doesn't remember what magazine or web article- about the trend started in 1944 toward nylon flight suits (sometimes matched by nylon helmets), that nylon was somehow fire-proof against sudden flashfire and flames, if not too long exposed to?

My choice for a late war, nylon-suited mannequinn started 'cause of many a reason, but I believed one looking this way would be a nice departure from the so much often seen (and copied) early to mid-war USN and Marines aviators, a true classic in this sense.

 

Do not know whether that about fire hazards could have been an argument favouring nylon, as a better one than more conventional materials from the period. If thinking well, K-1A suit of around mid-'50 (USAF) was of a light, dark blue nylon - I had one in the past. Given the period, clearly it couldn't be anything comparable to the subsequently true fire-proof, aramid fabric in CWU-27 style.

 

Does anyone have more infos on this subject? Thanks!!

Franco.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Franco,

From what I have read, while the cotton suits tended to burst into flame, the nylon suits did not...........but perhaps worse, they tended to melt. The melted nylon would fuse to the wearer's skin. Not much, if any, of an advantage. To avoid this risk, it was common practice to wear the nylon suit over a khaki shirt and trousers. I wasn't able to find it, but somewhere on the web, I have seen a wartime Navy film showing the comparative effects of fire on samples of the two fabrics and I believe there was also a short article in a vintage Naval Aviation News magazine on the subject. Hope this helps.

Regards, Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks so much Paul !!!

Still had several photocopied issues of Naval Aviation magazine (originals ones were only borrowed temporarily at the time) but unfortunately, article you do mention wasn't present there. I believe in effect something true about the relented process of nylon bursting into flame was, having in mind the K-1A pattern in USAF service about ten years later.

They wouldn't have made such a step in designing, standardizing and producing the nylon suit in case of totally negative reports?

 

At least, this in my opinion. Regards, Franco.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Franco,

I found the NANS issue. It was June 1, 1945. It states the Navy's official opinion and test results (see below), however, apparently the practical experience of some units in the fleet led them to arrive at a different conclusion. For example, this quote found in the war history of VF-47 under "Summary of Action", miscellaneous section. It was written April 21, 1945 and covers squadron operations from March 18 through April 17, 1945. Regards, Paul

 

post-9787-0-03044100-1413377758.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What to say Paul... exactly the thing we were looking for!!! :o:o

 

A huge thank you! A most interesting report indeed, results are impressive to say the least - so, nylon was really something of a "fireproof" material, as long as a not too fierce fire was involved.

Presume, this could be bettered by coupling with a complete, summer cloth flight suit wich was worn underneath? Who knows whether a two-suit set was contemplated for wearing at once by the aviator.. outermost nylon for immediate protection, and standard cloth for shielding the body against the possible fused nylon.

 

best regards, Franco.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Franco,

Always glad to be of help. Just to be clear, they would not have worn two flight suits. The nylon suit was intended to give fliers in the PTO a cooler option in the tropical climate areas. At first, as recommended, many chose to wear it with just skivvies underneath. After reports of the melting problem, many (but not all) then chose to wear it over their conventional everyday dress of a khaki shirt and trousers. In this case, you can usually see the shirt collar and / or the cuffs of their trousers protruding below the legs of the nylon suit. See examples below.

Regards, Paul

 

The two men at right, wear the suit over skivvies:

 

 

 

post-9787-0-52205200-1413405940.jpg

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...