Pops506th Posted January 12, 2021 Share #1 Posted January 12, 2021 I do believe that this jacket is an original issue item, but I am unsure of the manufacture date. The patches appear to be original WW2 vintage, but may have been put on a later jacket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kammo-man Posted January 12, 2021 Share #2 Posted January 12, 2021 There is a lot going on Appears to be a B-15 a with a replacement crown spring loaded zip but the pictures are horrible owen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops506th Posted January 12, 2021 Author Share #3 Posted January 12, 2021 I'll try and get better pics in a day or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmar836 Posted January 12, 2021 Share #4 Posted January 12, 2021 To me the patches and placement look unusual as does the zipper, lining, and tag. Just doesn’t look right to me but would need better pics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmar836 Posted January 13, 2021 Share #5 Posted January 13, 2021 Okay, my opinion is this is a civi jacket. Went to look at a couple and then Sweeting's book. The spec number of the B-15, B-15A, and B-15B was 3220. A B-15A, for example, is spec number 3220-A. Most spec drawings for AAF were in the 3000s. I can't recall but I think the order number 55 was for Army trousers - like khakis. Someone will have better info here but based on real examples I've seen none of these numbers mean anything. Is there a fold in the label hiding the maker - if not that is also strange? What is the word after "Army Air Forces"? Mine say U.S. Army Air Forces, have a contractor name, included the size, and were a different color and format. We have seen odd woven fantasy labels before - they look old and of complex construction to us by modern standards but this was standard construction of labels years back no matter how cheap or fancy. Those clones we've seen were also random technical sounding numbers with no foundation. Repros were not really intended to deceive or replace originals by deception as originals were $5-10 at surplus stores after the war. I've heard arguments of "Why would anyone go to such lengths to reproduce this - it must be authentic." The same study goes for B-9 and B-11 parkas. The post war civi variants - some maybe made by WWII contractors with old materials - usually got the labels much closer than this one shown IMO. The actual contracts no longer mattered and I would imagine they likely avoided using real govt contract info on labels as it could be perceived as selling surplus govt property. That last part is conjecture on my part. Nonetheless, as I mentioned earlier, the wrong zipper(appears a 1960s #10 size to me), the wrong lining, the very bad label, and finally and least important, the patch placement, are not WWII IMO. Can't even tell if the ATC patch is authentic. Even if so, none of the patches are rare. I confidently call fake. I would avoid it but if bought it could be difficult to move on unless trying to deceive a brand new collector of AAF. Or, if it's cheap and your size, remove the patches and wear it. They are pretty warm. JMO, Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmar836 Posted January 13, 2021 Share #6 Posted January 13, 2021 FYI, This is what the label every B-15 I have seen(other than later, nylon experimentals) looks like. Some earlier B-10s and flight trousers had a red on white woven label. There are many variations in WWII gear, for sure, but the numbers on them at a minimum would still have to mean something. Also notice the liner is a different color. That matters. I'll preemptively thwart the "maybe the contractor ran out of the correct material". I would like to see another fabric flight jacket, actually from the war, where the contractor ran out of material and, during the strict rationing, found privately sourced alternative materials. Did it happen? Sure. Do I have any proof of it? No. Let us know when better pics come in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huntssurplus Posted January 13, 2021 Share #7 Posted January 13, 2021 I ran into a pilot in a grocery store one time. He had on a jacket that either looked like an m41, or was one of non leather WW2 flight jackets. I noticed from the fact that he wore an army air corps patch on one side and an 8th air force patch on the other. Both looked like WW2 originals, the jacket was not. This was probably 2-3 years ago. the takeaway: not uncommon to see vets wear jackets like this. The left side breast pocket patch insignia looks embroidered and not like anything I have seen worn on a jacket before. Although it may be painted on, and in that case seems less strange. Better pics will help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nack Posted January 14, 2021 Share #8 Posted January 14, 2021 I think the tag says Army Air Forces Type, which is a giveaway for a repro if I recall correctly. Also, I believe the zipper should be offset a bit. That’s my recollection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nack Posted January 14, 2021 Share #9 Posted January 14, 2021 Here’s what I mean by offset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantomfixer Posted January 14, 2021 Share #10 Posted January 14, 2021 It is indeed a clone B-15... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P-59A Posted January 14, 2021 Share #11 Posted January 14, 2021 Agree its a repop. The originals as stated have off set zippers. Keep in mind Buzz copies have the things one should look for, but the makers tag is thing they can not copy exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmar836 Posted January 14, 2021 Share #12 Posted January 14, 2021 LOL. I didn't even notice the zipper angle... or lack thereof. All that diatribe! LOL Duh! Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmar836 Posted January 14, 2021 Share #13 Posted January 14, 2021 Nack, you could very well be right. Dead Giveaway. It looks almost photoshop-faded to black in that pic rather than unravelled or damaged. Also interesting that only that word is "scratched up" on that line. On the repros(more correctly - civilian) I've seen the "type" word is usually on the first line saying Jacket, Intermediate Flying Type or similar. The word "type" is often seen on the labels - "Type B-9", etc. but typically when at the end of the line it's a civi jacket. Understand this is referring only to the old 50s and 60s civi jackets. Reproducers of today, many who make excellent reproductions, have no qualms about spending the time and money to have a perfect label. Pops, did you ever receive better pics? Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops506th Posted January 14, 2021 Author Share #14 Posted January 14, 2021 Just now, dmar836 said: Nack, you could very well be right. Dead Giveaway. It looks almost photoshop-faded to black in that pic rather than unravelled or damaged. Also interesting that only that word is "scratched up" on that line. On the repros(more correctly - civilian) I've seen the "type" word is usually on the first line saying Jacket, Intermediate Flying Type or similar. The word "type" is often seen on the labels - "Type B-9", etc. but typically when at the end of the line it's a civi jacket. Understand this is referring only to the old 50s and 60s civi jackets. Reproducers of today, many who make excellent reproductions, have no qualms about spending the time and money to have a perfect label. Pops, did you ever receive better pics? Dave I haven't been able to get over to the building that it's stored in. I do have it in my possession, it was part of a huge lot of militaria items that were given to me by a very good friend of mine in Dec. I should be able to get over there on Saturday. The pics I originally posted I took, but the lighting was terrible. I have better lighting now, so I should be able to get much sharper images. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmar836 Posted January 14, 2021 Share #15 Posted January 14, 2021 Excellent. So not Photoshopped for sure. Will be interesting to see. I always say we are best to study only known period examples but this is a good one to look at. We can't unsee it! LOL. Thanks for the post, Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops506th Posted January 15, 2021 Author Share #16 Posted January 15, 2021 On 1/14/2021 at 9:22 AM, dmar836 said: Excellent. So not Photoshopped for sure. Will be interesting to see. I always say we are best to study only known period examples but this is a good one to look at. We can't unsee it! LOL. Thanks for the post, Dave No. Definitely not photoshopped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops506th Posted January 20, 2021 Author Share #17 Posted January 20, 2021 Hopefully, these pictures are better. It is definitely a commercial repop, but I'm pretty sure the patches are original WW2. The previous owner was involved with the CAF some years ago and was crew on the C-46 "China Doll". I suspect he did this jacket up for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmar836 Posted January 20, 2021 Share #18 Posted January 20, 2021 Thanks for following up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt-M Posted July 29, 2021 Share #19 Posted July 29, 2021 Just to clarify for others if not made clear.......there were period made commerical versions of jackets made for civilians, and the biggest giveaway for these B-15 commerical made ones, is the zipper being right in the middle of the front, as where the original USAAF issued jackets had the zipper offset to the wearer's right side so that unzipping the jacket with the left hand was easier. The tag also gives it away by stating at the bottom "ARMY AIR FORCES TYPE" (on this label, TYPE has been worn/scratched off) as where the original USAAF issue labels states "PROPERTY US ARMY AIR FORCES" in that area. 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