Jump to content

Original USAAF Crusher?


SterlingArcher
 Share

Recommended Posts

TheCrustyBosun
2 hours ago, manayunkman said:

So very early on before 1942 it’s fair to assume that pilots were flying with hard visors with the stiffener removed?

 

So when did the term 50 mission crusher come up?

 

And why did “collectors” attach the term crusher to this specific visor and not all visors with the stiffener removed?

 

Do we need a clarification of terms or do new collectors need to find out on their own?

 

I remember trying to figure out the difference and paratrooper helmets too.

 

Before there was information all over, for me at least, I had to rely on knowing someone who could help me.
 

What needs to change 

 

1.- Yes. 
 

2.- I’d go so far as to ask when the first flight crews were completing 50 missions and use that time frame for an estimate of when the “crush” came in. 
 

3.- Warning! Opinion!..... I think we should call them what they all were- service caps. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But how do you differentiate between the ones that are clearly more sought after and bring the higher price?

 

After all proper identification would probably have avoided this thread that started because a buyer seems to have mistaken one type of crusher from another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheCrustyBosun
3 hours ago, manayunkman said:

But how do you differentiate between the ones that are clearly more sought after and bring the higher price?

 

After all proper identification would probably have avoided this thread that started because a buyer seems to have mistaken one type of crusher from another.

Proper identification indeed!  It doesn’t take much time and research to identify the more desirable caps.  Bancroft’s Flighter is a prime example. If I had one to sell, I’d list it in the following manner....  “For Sale- WWII Bancroft Flighter US Army Officer’s Service Cap”

 

I do not label it as a “crusher”.  Furthermore, I wouldn’t list it as a USAAF item unless I had proof that it was used by a veteran of that service. 
 

Confession- I do not, nor have I ever owned a Bancroft Flighter. I’m not a big fan of them.  GASP!  I know, right?  I personally like the Luxenberg. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You will never get everyone onboard with a single definition of the ambiguous term "crusher", therefore it's up to the buyer to not rely on the seller's claim or description and decide for themselves if what they are looking at fits their own definition of a "crusher". In other words, caveat emptor.

 

I own dozens of Army officer service caps, very few (even some that are identified to WW2 USAAF combat veterans) fall into my definition of "crusher". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The "crusher" cap was born of necessity, not regulation. The removal of the grommet and spring stiffening allow for the wearing of a headset over the cap, nothing more. As the trend developed, it became a sort of "badge of honor" for pilots in the AAF, on par with jump boots for paratroopers, or an unbuttoned top tunic button for RAF fighter pilots, for example. Something else not mentioned here is the wear by German fliers of caps with similar characteristics. Check your photos to see what I mean.

 

No doubt the manufacturers of headwear picked up on this trend pretty quickly and made a version of the officer's cap that conformed to this modification. My late father trained as a bomber pilot. After winning his wings in 1944, among the officer's uniform items he purchased when commissioned was a Bancroft "Flighter" cap, which I still have. He went on to fly for the Air Transport Command in England, but retained the cap throughout his time in the service, as seen below after his return to the States in late 1945. The term "50 mission crush" is probably, like many others, just a collector's invention, in my opinion.

Regards, Paul

 

 

dad.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did Luftwaffe pilots remove the stiffener to accommodate head phones or did the just like the look?

 

As far as the US crusher is concerned, has anyone ever found a documented one from a pilot with a hard visor?
 

After years of doing this I’ve never found one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Did Luftwaffe pilots remove the stiffener to accommodate head phones or did the just like the look?"

 

I can't answer that question, as I don't collect Luftwaffe, just US. Maybe someone else can give more information on that subject. Either way, it may have had an influence on those US fliers who liked the look, regardless of the practicality.

 

Below is German ace Gunter Rall and a September 1944 ad for Bancroft, featuring their "Flighter". Note that they distinguish the Flighter from the standard Army service cap.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gunther Rall.jpg

bancroft ad.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few of that hats posted here have the "crushed" look but stiff bills. The next level up, the bills are super flimsy, almost to where you can wade it up in your hand. I saw a cap in the initial opening posts of the thread, it has a two layer leather bill, I bet that is a a bit stiff. It has been my belief that collectors covet an all around "crusher" that includes that flimsy bill.

 

Pilot, 90th Photo Recon, Italy, Note: uniformed stiff type bill.

541618326_crusher(1).jpg.4c41e63fade0c74464e8f426d26fb13a.jpg

 

94th Fighter Squadron. Same deal here but cap has "crusher" look.

839668440_crusher(4).jpg.01cef603476e43c02e8dce13840f0628.jpg

 

Those flimsy bills can be easily distorted as seen by this pilot, his bill is a bit distorted having the all-around "crusher".

1626186372_crusher(3).jpg.301412e5f0a892d74c1770d323049a08.jpg

 

The origin of why the "crusher" appeared, for wearing of headsets. note the distortion of the bill. Flimsy type.

1882006849_crusher(2).jpg.75d4b373755f68ac4b99360e3ec8e1b4.jpg

 

This pilot, I believe, is wearing a stiffer type bill, no distortion and retains perfect form. 

324156108_crusher(5).jpg.73aeaa25d1e513f97050d0ab0352d1d3.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This khaki version of a service cap that has a "crusher" look has a stiff bill. Note the cup in the bill, these are often seen with a glazed plasticized exterior finish, though thin, are quite firm.

1859913898_crusher2(1).jpg.0eba922a3509a22bb04758f5f140a150.jpg

 

This service cap has a nice sheen on the top, the flimsy bills typically have a dull finish.

1507100421_crusher2(2).jpg.a88be72f2ff82f8530704ff045d7e1cb.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should have been more clear.

 

Other than the one ply and the two ply I have never met an Air Corps or AAF pilot who wore a  cap with a hard inflexible visor as a crusher.

 

Thats not to say it didn’t happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, manayunkman said:

I should have been more clear.

 

Other than the one ply and the two ply I have never met an Air Corps or AAF pilot who wore a  cap with a hard inflexible visor as a crusher.

 

Thats not to say it didn’t happen.

 

I’m sure it did but as soon as a softer visor was available it probably fell out of favor. Here’s one I have. Stiff visor, but no history on who wore it or where. 

AA84C865-0374-4922-8586-7082916EE6AC.jpeg

2BCAD3A1-B137-4C5D-85B8-87AFC115454C.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eaglerunner88
On 1/7/2021 at 3:51 PM, 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?

You have to remember too, most these guys flew in ties! As stated, lots of it it I think had to do with looks too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eaglerunner88

Here's my genuine crusher. Not a famous Flighter from Bancroft but an Airflow from Society Brand Hat Co.

 

What's cool is the discovery of multiple signatures on the inside of the sweatband, one being of Clarence E. "Bud" Anderson, the WWII triple fighter ace! 

20210118_145833.jpg.138400ed3a88585ba6eada14efb8a1e9.jpg20210118_150337.jpg.77dabcefa257e59898d82091e0335a3d.jpg20210118_150604.jpg.8173e6e3a336a12dd0f192f7774e1fc9.jpgBud.JPG.e7ecec3d5a05fdc1b3e1ad1ed495e02a.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's really cool. I would say the the term Airflow was common to bands and wasn't specific to aviation-focused caps. It referred more to the breathability of the sweat band.

If it was really Anderson's visor cap, that's really cool!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clarence "Bud" Anderson just turned 99 this month.

It would be an awesome photo op to have Him wearing that Airflow!!!!!!!

Just saying?????

 

Semper Fi

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eaglerunner88
32 minutes ago, phantomfixer said:

Anderson's cap or an airshow signature... both cool, but what are the chances of it being Anderson's cap..

 

My money is that it's an airshow signature. The visor came from the estate of a man who attended many an airshow, one being EEA in 2011 where Bud spoke...but like you said still cool! I've had the cap for a couple years and only now flipped over the sweatband. There are at least 10 other signatures of which I can only make out a Don Murray and Pete Mullwax?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably but still pretty cool.

Phil, To clarify, the cap is not an "Airflow". That's just a sweatband name/marking. I have seen those on stiff brimmed service caps - maybe even on different maker's caps. I'll have to check on that last one.

Dave

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...