Jeff TX Posted February 1, 2016 Share #1 Posted February 1, 2016 Folks, I acquired this Suit, Flying Anti-exposure Type R-1 still inside its protective zippered faded orange bag with multiple stamped inspection dates ranging from 1952 to 1956. I do not plan to take the suit out and the bag is brittle and I probably won't be able to fit it back inside. If anyone needs this article for their collection please send me a PM as my collecting days are over and I only got it to pass along to another forum member for what I paid for it ($50). regards to all, Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlebuddy Posted November 1, 2016 Share #2 Posted November 1, 2016 I have just picked up a pair of the Type F1 anti exposure gloves that compliment this type of suit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlebuddy Posted November 1, 2016 Share #3 Posted November 1, 2016 contd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustin Posted November 2, 2016 Share #4 Posted November 2, 2016 The gloves come packed with the suit. Two thigh pockets are provided for their stowage. In the case of the suit in the OP and the gloves recently pictured they are both post WWII contracted items as indicated by the contract number also the manufacture on the gloves are not an approved WWII era manufacturer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pararaftanr2 Posted November 2, 2016 Share #5 Posted November 2, 2016 Note that both have post-WW2 Navy contract numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustin Posted November 2, 2016 Share #6 Posted November 2, 2016 You know I'm not 100% conviced it is strictly a Navy contract prefix. Though you typically only see it on naval items. In 1946-47 there was a merger between the respective personal equipment sections of the Air Force and navy given purchasing powers. It was headed by the navy. It has been my opinion that this prefix has something to do with this joint committee and most of the purchases were for the navy but with some allocated for the Air Force. Now I can't prove it its just food for thought based of some readings I encountered. As an example the purchase for this exposure suit was executed through the this committee for the Air Force hence it retaining all theirnomenclature and stock numbers. I would expect to see differing references on the container if indeed it was for the Navy. Again just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlebuddy Posted November 2, 2016 Share #7 Posted November 2, 2016 So the gloves are not 100% AAF legitimate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustin Posted November 2, 2016 Share #8 Posted November 2, 2016 they are 100% not WWII if thats what your asking. The information on the gloves say they are Air Force but the contract says Navy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlebuddy Posted November 2, 2016 Share #9 Posted November 2, 2016 they are 100% not WWII if thats what your asking. The information on the gloves say they are Air Force but the contract says Navy Thank you Dustin , strange regarding the Airforce but navy contract :/ 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