CWU-106 Goretex Flight Jacket?????

Discussion in 'Nylon' started by FtrPlt, Dec 5, 2012.

  1. FtrPlt

    FtrPlt Member

    Messages:
    230
    Location:
    NH, USA
    I've seen a few jackets up on eBay that are being listed as CWU-106/P flight jackets. Real issue item or fancy designation and hopes of being adopted by the military?

    Interesting that the manufacturer (Propper) dances around a bit with their wording --• Made of a breathable GORE-TEX® membrane between a flame-resistant Nomex® fabric and a Nomex® knit backer
    • Made in USA
    • Fabric is waterproof and breathable
    • NIR compliant
    • Type I designed for airmen and aircrews who operate rotary and fixed wing non-eject aircraft
    • Removable hood
    • Zippered exterior chest pocket
    • Two hook and loop chest patches
    • Internal chest pocket with hook and loop closure
    • Two hand-warmer pockets
    • Water-resistant zipper front with cloth pull
    • Reinforced elbows
    • Combination covered pen pocket/zippered pocket on the left sleeve
    • Adjustable hook and loop closure at sleeve cuffs
    • Approved Safe-To-Fly by the U.S. Air Force

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Rutger

    Rutger Active Member

    Messages:
    1,270
    Location:
    Hengelo, Netherlands
    Yes, if I remember correctly there's a version for ejection seat and for non-ejection seat pilots.
    I've seen images or text detailing the difference, but I don't remember where. Something with an oxygen hose connection?
    I guess the USAF safe-to-fly remark is likely to be the closest endorsement by the USAF without allowing Propper to claim they are the/a supplier for the USAF.
    The prices are coming down on ebay, they started out a couple of years ago at like $700.
    The jacket is one part of a whole clothing system.
    This thread provides info on actual use, somewhere on the 2nd page.

    I won't buy one, too ugly.

    viewtopic.php?f=9&t=8967
     
  3. FtrPlt

    FtrPlt Member

    Messages:
    230
    Location:
    NH, USA
    There's no military spec tag in them. The GSA has a listing which alludes to it being available to government agencies but that could mean FBI, DHS, etc.

    A Google search shows NSN's assigned to the garment and its various sizes but, again, no specific reference to the military.
    http://www.nsnlocator.com/nsnlocator/fsc-8415/1147.html

    Is this possibly some type of approved/acceptable local-purchase item such as OregonAero Zetaliners for flying helmets?

    Looks-wise? I don't think it looks all that bad. Not much fun from a patch-wearing/morale perspective. If you start adding velcro, you pretty much introduce leaks -- defeating the goretex. No more shoulder rank, apparently.
     
  4. watchmanjimg

    watchmanjimg Active Member

    Messages:
    2,098
    Location:
    Orlando, FL USA
  5. Monsoon

    Monsoon Member

    Messages:
    356
    Location:
    Harrisburg, PA
    Before I retired (July 2012), I saw one new guy (a Captain) rocking one of these.
     
  6. FtrPlt

    FtrPlt Member

    Messages:
    230
    Location:
    NH, USA
    Outershell, Jacket, Men's, Waterproof, Breathable doesn't exactly sound unique to aviation. I'm assuming this would be worn over a normal nomex flight suit and jacket -- i.e. a very expensive raincoat??

    [​IMG]
     
  7. Peter Graham

    Peter Graham Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    Location:
    Ireland
    I'm sure it's a fantastic jacket but I can't warm to it. Just looks totally bland to me, especially the tan one.
     
  8. FtrPlt

    FtrPlt Member

    Messages:
    230
    Location:
    NH, USA
    I guess I just have questions as to whether these are actually military-issue flying apparel; prototype flying apparel; tolerated non-military items, etc?

    Pretty much every piece of modern military flight gear I've seen has always, without fail, had a military label with designation, NSN, SPO codes, etc. The CWU-106 designation is touted but I'm curious why it's not on the actual garment?

    The thread referenced a few posts up is now 2 years old. If this was an issue item, I would have expected to see them in photos and at least a few offered for sale somewhere. The latest/greatest always gets a lot of buzz yet there's nothing online -- no reviews, no photos, etc.

    Maybe I'll be less skeptical if I see a few photos of military aircrew actually wearing these.
     
  9. rb3586

    rb3586 New Member

    Messages:
    19
  10. FtrPlt

    FtrPlt Member

    Messages:
    230
    Location:
    NH, USA
    The links are for small-unit purchases -- to me indicating these are a tolerated, non-issue item -- adding up to about 300 sets of goretex spread across 3-4 units. The first link looks like an info-type notice of an item still in the acquisition process (last line).

    These seem to fall into the same category as Zetaliners for flight helmets -- authorized for use but not an item within the military supply system.

    I don't doubt that somewhere, someone is wearing these. I just see no evidence that these are a contracted, stocked, supply item like a CWU-27 flight suit, CWU-36 flight jacket, or ABU/ACU.

    Whether or not these ultimately receive the CWU-106 thru 109 designations and become a contracted, stocked, item of issue? Unknown.
     
  11. MikeyB-17

    MikeyB-17 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,615
    Location:
    Cornwall, UK
    I don't think they look that bad, and let's not forget this is a military item, designed with practicality in mind and with little or no consideration given to what it looks like. I love the idea of a flight jacket that is properly waterproof-the only problem is that being designed for use with trousers, the jacket will be relatively short, and in heavy rain, with the jacket alone you're going to get, as we say down our way, 'A wet ass and no fish'.
     
  12. Rutger

    Rutger Active Member

    Messages:
    1,270
    Location:
    Hengelo, Netherlands
    Well, I agree the official use (and the name CWU-106?) is questionable alright; I've never seen them on regular USAF pics, which are CWU-36/45 all the time.
    I can understand the survival qualities of the MCPS jacket, I'm surprised that multi purpose/ multi functional hasn't been more an official goal as far as pilot's clothing is concerned. Let's face it, the CWU-36/45 are fire resistant (don't need that in my car) and avoid creating static electricity (great advantage in the car), but they suck as far as water resistance is concerned.
    Must be a private project of Propper trying to create the next generation of this type of jacket. Looks like they're good at it.
    Btw, just read the jet type version has a flap on the chest for a pressure suit tube.
     
  13. FtrPlt

    FtrPlt Member

    Messages:
    230
    Location:
    NH, USA
    Probably splitting hairs but I don't consider these to be military items. At least not yet. In my mind, a military item is something that is standard equipment, spec'd out and contracted through SPO or whatever they're calling themselves these days, and issued to joe/jane aircrew as part of their bag-o-stuff. I just don't see that with these jackets/pants. While probably a meaningful item to have, from what I see these are a purely civilian item being purchased at unit level and being used/subject to the whims of local commanders.

    While likely developed with the military in mind, there is nothing indicating this is a military-contracted, supply-chain item. The fact that small units are sending out RFQ's to purchase very small quantities clearly shows these as being procured outside the military supply chain.

    If a CWU-106 existed as a bonafide item of issue, it would bear the same spec tag as all other pieces of flight gear. To be honest, I'd expect to see something along the lines of the following on the label:
    Shell, Flyers, MCPS
    Type CWU-106/P
    Size: Medium (40-42)
    MIL-J-12345
    SPOX-12-abcde
    Propper International, Inc.

    Instead, all I've seen thus far is
    Outershell, Jacket, Men's, Waterproof, Breathable and what I presume to be a company item number. To me, all this says is, "I'm hoping to someday get a government contract and become an item of issue. In the meantime, I'll flog the CWU-106 name around and maybe it will stick"

    The most interesting tidbit, thus far, is that some of the RFQ's quote a per-unit cost of $115 per jacket. For that price, I'd probably buy one. Military or not, it probably makes an outstanding waterproof flight jacket.
     
  14. rb3586

    rb3586 New Member

    Messages:
    19
  15. FtrPlt

    FtrPlt Member

    Messages:
    230
    Location:
    NH, USA
    You can also go here:
    http://www.nsnlocator.com/nsnlocator/fsc-8415/1147.html

    There are scores of items in either database that never became military issue items.

    At best, these are potential USN items, not USAF, since all reference NAWC PD 4631-04-11. I don't know a whole lot about naval supply codes, etc.

    Visiting this link, if you look at the very last line it shows program status as being in the Navy Abbreviated Acquisition Program. Which, to me, means this is a pending military item.

    "USAF Safe-to-Fly" is likely meant to cover USN personnel assigned to USAF bases.

    Unless the procurement system has drastically changed (possible, I suppose), I'm pretty sure USN item still have a very similar spec tag to the other branches -- eg if this were an issue item, it would have a military spec tag in it. Case in point: a 3-second google search yields the label on the latest USN digi-camo cap:
    [​IMG]
     
  16. rb3586

    rb3586 New Member

    Messages:
    19
    Well, that went well. I gotta go, my Skeeter alarm is ringing. It was a short stay, Merry Christmas.
     
  17. FtrPlt

    FtrPlt Member

    Messages:
    230
    Location:
    NH, USA
    Question: In looking through the NSN numbers in the various links, has there been a format change with regards to the old MIL-X-12345 vs whatever the PD numbers are that I'm seeing?

    For example:
    http://www.parttarget.com/Naval-Air-Systems-Command_nsn-parts_3527AS101-5_3832AS170-6.html
    for info under NSN 8415015652028, it lists the following
    NAWC PD 4631-04-11, CWU-106/P

    NAWC is Naval Air Warfare Center.
    PD 4631-04-11 is on the Gortex Jacket. The same number shows on the Propper site as an item number.

    Is this a new variation to the old DSA, DLA, SPO codes? Speculation on my part but trying to figure out if 04-11 is April 2011, November 2004, or completely unrelated to a date?

    Still unable to reconcile the omission of CWU-106 part but I'm trying to give this a fair shot.

    ADDED: Did some digging on the goretex trousers and they come up with a different PD number. Since 2014 obviously isn't here yet and there is no 14th month, it pretty much puts my theory of 'PD replaced SPO' out the window. At the least, the numbers aren't readily correlated to month/year.
    8415-01-565-2167 TROUSERS,COLD WEATHER NAWC PD 4631-04-14
     
  18. FtrPlt

    FtrPlt Member

    Messages:
    230
    Location:
    NH, USA
    Apparently these items have been in development for a while. Multi Climate Protection System (MCPS) is a USN initiative going back to 2000.

    Here's a link referencing pattern dates of 11 Jan 2008. Pre-Solicitation notice for production back in 2009. Either these were sidelined or delayed. If this many were produced, where are they?
    https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportu...8595b7807059f443ac93903b86b&tab=core&_cview=0
     
  19. Willy McCoy

    Willy McCoy Member

    Messages:
    461
    Location:
    Seatown "Hustler" Washington
  20. FtrPlt

    FtrPlt Member

    Messages:
    230
    Location:
    NH, USA
    Still more questions than answers. After re-reading the pre-solicitation bid, it's clear the patterns for the jackets and trousers were intended for designation CWU-106 thru CWU-109.
    The PATTERN DATES for the jackets and trousers are as follows:
    Items 1 & 2: Men's (106/P), and Women's (107/P) Jackets: 7 June 2007
    Items 3 & 4: Men's (108/P), and Women's (109/P) Trousers: 8 March 2007

    Also in the same document, you see the terms Product Demostrator and Product Demostrator Model. I'm curious if the "PD 4631-04-11" code seen on the jackets means these are pre-production/test/evaluation models?

    Again I go back to the absence of these on large-scale issue combined with a glut of them for sale online. With no US budget for several years, are these on hold due to funding? Problem or change to the pattern?
     

Share This Page