BlueBookGuy Posted June 1, 2014 Author Share #51 Posted June 1, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted June 1, 2014 Author Share #52 Posted June 1, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted July 13, 2014 Author Share #53 Posted July 13, 2014 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: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted July 13, 2014 Author Share #54 Posted July 13, 2014 here the sleeve's pencils pocket Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted July 13, 2014 Author Share #55 Posted July 13, 2014 here the lower pockets on front leg: interesting in the end!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Jack Posted July 13, 2014 Share #56 Posted July 13, 2014 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 More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted July 13, 2014 Author Share #57 Posted July 13, 2014 thanks so much Jack!! Too much kind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted September 6, 2014 Author Share #58 Posted September 6, 2014 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted September 6, 2014 Author Share #59 Posted September 6, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted September 6, 2014 Author Share #60 Posted September 6, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted September 6, 2014 Author Share #61 Posted September 6, 2014 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 More sharing options...
dustin Posted September 6, 2014 Share #62 Posted September 6, 2014 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustin Posted September 6, 2014 Share #63 Posted September 6, 2014 another Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted September 6, 2014 Author Share #64 Posted September 6, 2014 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roller Posted September 18, 2014 Share #65 Posted September 18, 2014 The newest arrival 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? 002.JPG 001.JPG Fantastic display ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted September 18, 2014 Author Share #66 Posted September 18, 2014 Too much kind, roller!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted October 14, 2014 Author Share #67 Posted October 14, 2014 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 More sharing options...
pararaftanr2 Posted October 14, 2014 Share #68 Posted October 14, 2014 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 More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted October 15, 2014 Author Share #69 Posted October 15, 2014 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 More sharing options...
pararaftanr2 Posted October 15, 2014 Share #70 Posted October 15, 2014 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pararaftanr2 Posted October 15, 2014 Share #71 Posted October 15, 2014 6/1/45, first page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pararaftanr2 Posted October 15, 2014 Share #72 Posted October 15, 2014 6/1/45, 2nd page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueBookGuy Posted October 15, 2014 Author Share #73 Posted October 15, 2014 What to say Paul... exactly the thing we were looking for!!! 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 More sharing options...
pararaftanr2 Posted October 15, 2014 Share #74 Posted October 15, 2014 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: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pararaftanr2 Posted October 15, 2014 Share #75 Posted October 15, 2014 The suit over khakis: 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