• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

CWU 36 P Sizing by Maker? Breaking In? Bi Swing Backs'?

bn1966

Well-Known Member
Gentleman,

I have just recently decided to collect & wear nomex CWU 36 P flight jackets. Have just purchased 3 as a starting point. I am attracted to the CWU by design, function & cost..compared to original L2Bs for example...none of which would really fit me & can get very expensive. Lots of competition too.

As discussed in this forum in any given size CWU 36 jackets can vary somewhat in measurements. From recent purchases my Propper & Ashland contracts have been fairly generously cut compared for example to my Valley contract. In your experience, what are the contracts with the more generous measurements? Or can it vary widely even with the same manufacturer? I have very broad shoulders & am an XL generally. Do new CWU's 'break in' so to speak with wear? Do later jackets tend to be bigger in fit than earlier models?

I am looking to purchase my first 'Bi swing' early CWU, how are these for comfort & movement? It's the shoulders which tend to give me problems when wearing jackets. My leather M422A has this feature and is an extremely comfortable wear.

My recent purchases all have the elastic strap across the back. What is the technical term for this feature?

Any help in any of the above gratefully received.

Lee (bn1966)
 

Phantomfixer

New Member
Lee,

I have found, I like the color and material in the earlier 36/P's. The older jackets are softer, and have a darker color to the material..this I like...the older ones, late 70's early 80's with the bi swing seem to be more snug...BUT they have have good movement in the shoulders...makes up for the trim fit....the newer jackets are cut bigger and have a brighter shade to them....washing, I have found will make them less stiff.

I keep the biswing jackets when I find them locally...the newer ones, I pass on unless the price is right...
Have fun collecting
 

FlyingYankee

Active Member
Well fire retardant jackets never seem to really break in. The best way for any jacket to break in is to wear it in the rain and then leave it on your body as long as possible while it drys. I dont believe in harsh methods that cause premature wear to a quality leather. When I found my CWU-36 all soiled at a flea market I did have it dry cleaned.
 

Rutger

Well-Known Member
Well, collection wise you may want to find one that's fitted with the whole range of velcro (L & R shoulders and L & R chest) and rank insignia on the shoulders.
 

FlyingYankee

Active Member
I prefer to buy Repros because most jackets 30+ years old will likely have issues. However if you keep checking E-bay you should find something good.
 

Phantomfixer

New Member
Ebay is a great source for CWU 36 and 45s...you can get new issue brand new never worn, then slightly used, moderately used and the worn beaters...all depends on how much you want to pay...The Tan jackets ...for whatever reason are commanding a fair dollar...the greens nomex are relatively inexpensive for flight jackets..there are many to choose from...the market is flooded with em..

Good luck with the hunt...
 

Calderoni

New Member
So the secret to get Legit ones is to check the teg right? What are your suggestions on the code to read? Many thx guys
 

FtrPlt

Active Member
Lee,
I don't think there are any preferred makers for the CWU-series jackets. I think there are preferred patterns/contracts, though. I happen to prefer the earlier, bi-swing jackets since that's what I was issued back in the 1980s.

Jackets produced by Isratex were known for serious quality control issues.

The CWU-45 has been around for decades (~1973) and is currently under its 5th revision.
MIL-J-83388 (no CWU designation on labels. Possibly CWU-17?); MIL-J-83388A (early A labels do not have CWU-designation); MIL-J-83388B; MIL-J-83388C; MIL-J-83388D; and MIL-J-83388E

The CWU-36 has been around almost as long
MIL-J-83382; MIL-J-83382A; MIL-J-83382B; MIL-J-83382C

The early CWU-17/CWU-45 is discussed here:
http://vintageleatherjackets.org/viewto ... hilit=cwfs
 

Phantomfixer

New Member
Calderoni said:
So the secret to get Legit ones is to check the teg right? What are your suggestions on the code to read? Many thx guys


on newer issue flight jackets from the late 60s look for the NSN # it will begin with 8415-xxx-xxxx or 8415-01-xxx-xxxx
 

Rutger

Well-Known Member
Yeah, Isratex is to be avoided, though they won't all fall apart.
Quality issues alright :lol:

They frauded with flight jackets and chemical warfare suits; would make perfect samples for inspectors and the rest was crap.

Jail sentences and fines followed.

Google DCIS Isratex and the extend of the fraud will be obvious and stunning.
 

269sqnhudson

Active Member
I have a 2009 Valley and a 2000 Propper, both in XL and the fit is identical. I also have a 1990s Gibraltar and a 1990s Carter, both Large and again the fit is identical. There is, however, a big drop in size from an XL to an L, that's what I notice. The XLs are a 48 for sure while the larges fit more like a 42 than a 44. The Large jackets are also a bit short on me at 6'0". In all honesty I'm somewhere between the two sizes with a tendency to go to XL for the length.
 

GARY WELLS

Member
In looking at CWU-36/P Nomex Jackets on eBay these are the manufacturers and dates of issue I have seen:
Greenbrier Industries, Inc. 1979
Center Mfg. Co. 1980
Alpha Industries 1981, 1985
Creative Apparel Assoc. 1991, 1995, 1997
Carter Industries, Inc. 1993
Isratex, Inc. 1993 (Contract Revoked)
Gibralter PR, Inc. 1995
Propper International 2000
Valley Apparel LLC. 2005, 2010
Ashland Sales & Service 2005 (Desert Tan Jackets)
I am sure there are some more Pre-1979, but usually only in fair condition. Rips, loose seams, fabric stains, holes in the knit cuffs and or waist band.
I have noticed that US Air Force issued jackets have the velcro for US Air Force Patch on right chest, Name Tag rectangle on left chest, large square area for Squadron and Jet type patches on both shoulders.
US Navy issued jackets have the velcro Name Tag rectangle on the left chest only. Navy Fighter Pilots usually until recently stiched their F-14B or F-18A Squadron patches to right chest. Tomcat / Hornet Patch to left shoulder over the pen/pad pocket, F-14 Triangle or F-18 Coffin shape patch to right shoulder with Centurion Patches below. A few squadrons stiched large Cenurion patches to front pocket flaps. Various USS Aircraft cruise patches, Official USS Aircraft Carrier, Navy Airwing patches, Mig Kill patches, Shellback patches, Suez Ditch patches, etc... are stiched on the back.
 

GARY WELLS

Member
US Air Force jackets may have officer rank insignia on both shoulders. US Navy jackets do not. The Navy has rank on the Pilot Wing / NFO Name Tag before USN under name, for example: LTJG, LT, LT CMDR, CMDR, CPT etc... They could show Carrier Position, CAG (Commander Air Group) or XO (Executive Officer). On Squadron color embroidered Wing / Name Tags they will sometimes have Callsigns, like Maverick, Goose, Iceman, Slider, as in the movie Top Gun (1986).
 

GARY WELLS

Member
US Navy Regulations also require All G-1 Goatskin, CWU-36/P Nomex, CWU-45/P Nomex Flight Jackets to be worn with zipper at least 3/4 zipped up, never fully open.
 

Rutger

Well-Known Member
Cool. Ashland aren't the only desert tan manufacturers. There's another one. On my phone so can't search right now.
 

GARY WELLS

Member
I'm sure there are other CWU-36/P Desert Tan Jacket manufacturers. eBay seems mostly to have surplus Ashland Sales & Service dated 2005 right now. Somebody previously posted that the Ashland and Propper Intern'l. Jackets are fuller cut (baggy) with baggier sleeves. If you want a newer issue, trimmer fit jacket, maybe buy a Valley Apparel dated 2005 or 2010 or even more snug fitting, a 1990's or earlier dated jacket. Pretty much everything pre-2000 Propper issue was a heavier weave nomex material and fit tighter than later issues.
 
Top