manayunkman Posted January 5, 2021 Share #26 Posted January 5, 2021 Dmar, I couldn’t agree more with how you view the progression of the crusher. It could be that the 2 ply might have been what every aviator wanted until the 1 ply came in, since it had the flexible visor? Why would an Army Officer aviator even want to wear his visor on the plane? Are there other officers who wore a visor into combat? In the Navy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCrustyBosun Posted January 6, 2021 Share #27 Posted January 6, 2021 When I was in, my service cap/combination cover wasn’t something that I ever wanted to wear for too long. It always left a mark across my brow after standing four hours of quarterdeck watch. They’re just not that comfortable. I would imagine the same held true in WWII. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manayunkman Posted January 6, 2021 Share #28 Posted January 6, 2021 Didn’t Commander McHale wear one into combat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantomfixer Posted January 6, 2021 Share #29 Posted January 6, 2021 There are pics of C47 crews wearing them inflight...a few stateside training pics of caps worn inflight... not a common practice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nack Posted January 6, 2021 Share #30 Posted January 6, 2021 As an AAF collector, I like the OP’s cap - uniform wool (the name escapes me), nice eagle, and contrasting mohair band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattS Posted January 6, 2021 Share #31 Posted January 6, 2021 15 hours ago, Nack said: As an AAF collector, I like the OP’s cap - uniform wool (the name escapes me), nice eagle, and contrasting mohair band. Elastique wool as opposed to fur felt of the post-war caps. Brown fur felt was the only authorized material for winter service caps after 1 July 1952. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronald Posted January 6, 2021 Share #32 Posted January 6, 2021 mine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manayunkman Posted January 6, 2021 Share #33 Posted January 6, 2021 In all seriousness didn’t Naval officers ware visors with a crusher look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmar836 Posted January 6, 2021 Share #34 Posted January 6, 2021 Looks that way. Cutter's appears to have the soft-roll tubular spring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmar836 Posted January 6, 2021 Share #35 Posted January 6, 2021 This is likely a post war cap but the only example with the soft "spring". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nack Posted January 7, 2021 Share #36 Posted January 7, 2021 7 hours ago, MattS said: Elastique wool as opposed to fur felt of the post-war caps. Brown fur felt was the only authorized material for winter service caps after 1 July 1952. That’s it! Can’t believe I could not recall it. Here’s another example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZPhil Posted January 7, 2021 Share #37 Posted January 7, 2021 That's a nice one Hack. I would have put a "LIKE" on it, but I used all mine for today on this thread!!! Semper Fi Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattS Posted January 7, 2021 Share #38 Posted January 7, 2021 Nice selection of Flighters on this thread! Here's one of mine ID'd to a 15th AF B-17 navigator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattS Posted January 7, 2021 Share #39 Posted January 7, 2021 On 1/5/2021 at 8:04 PM, TheCrustyBosun said: When I was in, my service cap/combination cover wasn’t something that I ever wanted to wear for too long. It always left a mark across my brow after standing four hours of quarterdeck watch. They’re just not that comfortable. I would imagine the same held true in WWII. Wartime USAAF crusher caps, Flighters especially, aren’t built with heavy frames and stiff visors like USN caps. They are light and soft and sit on your head like a baseball cap. Anyone looking for one to wear should give Society Brand Hat Company a look. Great comfortable caps. My buddy and I are both wearing one of their caps in this photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manayunkman Posted January 7, 2021 Share #40 Posted January 7, 2021 It’s not the construction of the Navy visor that is in question but the crusher look the men gave it. Did the Navy adopt the look before AAF pilots? Where did the look originate? Imperial German U-boat officers? How did AAF Officers adopt this style and when they did what hats did they first use to do it? It obviously evolved into the one ply beaded edge but what is the progress of this evolution? Why was the 2 ply soft visor made? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCrustyBosun Posted January 7, 2021 Share #41 Posted January 7, 2021 2 hours ago, MattS said: Wartime USAAF crusher caps, Flighters especially, aren’t built with heavy frames and stiff visors like USN caps. They are light and soft and sit on your head like a baseball cap. Anyone looking for one to wear should give Society Brand Hat Company a look. Great comfortable caps. My buddy and I are both wearing one of their caps in this photo. I’m sure the flighters were more comfortable. The service caps were not. Society Brand makes a nice hat. They’re a bit pricey for me though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCrustyBosun Posted January 7, 2021 Share #42 Posted January 7, 2021 2 hours ago, manayunkman said: How did AAF Officers adopt this style and when they did what hats did they first use to do it? The AAF allowed pilots to remove the interior grommet/ring to accommodate for the wearing of headsets over the service cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronald Posted January 7, 2021 Share #43 Posted January 7, 2021 My pic 32 shows how the headset fit over a crusher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manayunkman Posted January 7, 2021 Share #44 Posted January 7, 2021 But why did pilots wear a visor in the cockpit? Was the 2 ply the first attempt at a crusher? Or did pilots prefer them? I know the 2 ply were available to every officer. Its interesting that a 2 ply was even made, why did they? Living in PA for 30 years I met scores of WW2 pilots and their descendants, the only 2 ply crusher I ever found was from a pilot who had been in the AAC in 1937 and was killed in 1943 as a B-17 group commander over Germany. His 2 ply was a crusher that had been kept with his pre war 4 pocket dress jacket and other items he didn’t take to Europe. He had been in the Transport Command, I think CBI, before going to Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattS Posted January 7, 2021 Share #45 Posted January 7, 2021 7 minutes ago, manayunkman said: But why did pilots wear a visor in the cockpit? I think you're assuming that every USAAF pilot was in combat at high altitude and you're neglecting the thousands of cargo transport, medevac, instructors, liason, artillery spotters, and rear area pilots that flew short hops from one base to another and had no need for a flight helmet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manayunkman Posted January 7, 2021 Share #46 Posted January 7, 2021 Why did pilots choose to wear their visor in any cockpit no matter how high. Seems like some other headgear is more suitable or practical. Why did pilots wear the visor and not something else? And what’s the story behind the 2 ply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmar836 Posted January 7, 2021 Share #47 Posted January 7, 2021 LOL I feel like this is a trap! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattS Posted January 7, 2021 Share #48 Posted January 7, 2021 28 minutes ago, manayunkman said: Why did pilots choose to wear their visor in any cockpit no matter how high. Seems like some other headgear is more suitable or practical. Why did pilots wear the visor and not something else? And what’s the story behind the 2 ply. Because it was part of the prescribed uniform? Without even getting into esprit-de-corps, morale, and the cool factor of wearing a crusher, it's still required that every officer in uniform wear a cap when not indoors. Plus a visor cap has a visor which is helpful in keeping the sun out of your eyes while flying. I've worn a crusher/service cap at events (as seen above) for a day or two. A well made broken-in cap is very comfortable, like a wool and leather baseball cap (as I previously stated). What other headgear options were there in WW2? I can think of the visor cap, overseas/garrison cap, flight helmet (summer or winter), and steel flak helmet. Only the service (visor) cap and garrison cap were part of the uniform when not flying. Army officer service caps progressed from very thick and stiff visors to 2-ply because they were more comfortable and easier to make. I think it's that simple. The patent for the single-ply flexible visor wasn't filed until 1943 and granted in 1945. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manayunkman Posted January 7, 2021 Share #49 Posted January 7, 2021 It seams an odd choice to wear your dress visor on combat missions. Can it be assumed that the low flying pilots started the trend, instructors and trainers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattS Posted January 7, 2021 Share #50 Posted January 7, 2021 3 minutes ago, manayunkman said: It seams an odd choice to wear your dress visor on combat missions. Can it be assumed that the low flying pilots started the trend, instructors and trainers? Most military flying is not in combat and I'm not sure what other headgear option you think is better. 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