Steerhide?

[arclight]

As far as A2s are concerned goatskin is more robust than horse hide, being less prone to abrasion.

Would someone please scientifically test all the surviving wartime A2s to prove one way or the other whether cowhide was actually used. Unless this is done or someone finds conclusive documentary evidence for the use of cowhide the debate will just go on and on without any resolution. :roll:

I concur and Andrew is right. Pure conjecture without the evidence. I enjoy robust discussions, debates and dialogues as much as any other but it's really time to put this post to bed.

arclight

P.S. Willie, your humor is well taken and the conjured up visuals are priceless!

 

[chancerider]

..."mostly cowhide was used"..I dunno.


...Now THAT is funny!

Que'? And actually, the more I think about it...in the light of no actual data, written records, or test results being available to shed some real light on the Great Hide Debate..one is left to ponder some other attendant questions...like, just where the heck did all those horses come from? Cows? Sure..plenty to go around to make a zillion wartime jackets. Horses? Not so much by 1940.
Back in 1931 with no WWII in sight, Army enlistment at a low, few aviators, and perhaps a sentimental attachment to the Cavalry days, spec-ing horsehide must have had some appeal to the Army, as well as being plentiful/affordable enough. Hide shortages, (Horse, of course...) surely must have been an issue once A2 production got cranked up. The Navy obviously didn't have that problem. Fewer aviators vs. available goats. If it's true that there is no way practical to distinguish between hides one tanning/processing takes place...then I'd say that coupled with the absence of any records, etc... the Equine Zealots don't really a hoof to stand on.

 

[watchmanjimg]

..."mostly cowhide was used"..I dunno.


...Now THAT is funny!

Como?

This whole thread has been about the fact that there appears to be no proof that cowhide or steerhide was used in the production of wartime A-2s. Your post suggests that you've ignored this altogether, hence Van's amusement.

 

[philip.ed]

It's probably a case of A-2 (repro) manufacturers selecting the best hide based on grain, fit, aesthetics, etc, and the buyers being sucked in and believing their every word with regards to authenticity etc

 

[chancerider]

..."mostly cowhide was used"..I dunno.


...Now THAT is funny!

Como?

This whole thread has been about the fact that there appears to be no proof that cowhide or steerhide was used in the production of wartime A-2s. Your post suggests that you've ignored this altogether, hence Van's amusement.

My opinion is that one could only infer that I ignored the theme of the thread by snipping what was snipped and presenting it out of context, without the text immediately preceding it. S'all. Hence my curiousosity about Mr. Van's amusement. No worries.

 

[watchmanjimg]

My opinion is that one could only infer that I ignored the theme of the thread by snipping what was snipped and presenting it out of context, without the text immediately preceding it. S'all. Hence my curiousosity about Mr. Van's amusement. No worries.

No offense was or is intended, but presumably what you've "read and been told" is the same unsubstantiated supposition we've spent three pages discussing. Your post appears below in all its glory. What did I take out of context?

Horsehide does rate higherer in abrasion resistance then cowhide is what I've read. Kangaroo and deer have the highest/best abrasion-resistant properties.

What I have read and been told - and this may only be receive wisdom - is that while the original A2 spec called for horsehide...by the time actual wartime production cranked up to churn out big #'s...mostly cowhide was used. I dunno.

 

[deeb7]

...one is left to ponder some other attendant questions...like, just where the heck did all those horses come from? Cows? Sure..plenty to go around to make a zillion wartime jackets. Horses? Not so much by 1940.

Legend has it that with the increasing popularity, and affordability of the automobile, and mechanical agricultural equipment, many horses were left redundant, standing about just eating grass, and looking for a new career.

By the time supplies were beginning to dwindle, goatskin was deemed to be an acceptable substitute .... goatskin incidentally was imported.

 

[Jaydee]

"looking for a new career" :lol:

 

[Dr H]

and looking for a new career.

Don't say that too loudly we have a caring and compassionate coalition government looking for ways of reducing rising unemployment stats...

 

[Geir]

The obvious thing would be for someone to go and look in the AAF archives. The A2 was in use for quite a few years and a lot of paperwork must have been produced, but the big question would be if any of this survives. As far as I can tell no one has ever done any real search for real documentary evidence, which is understandable as this kind of work can be both tedious and frustrating.
We know that cotton replaced silk as a material for lining simply because we can tell the difference. Likewise we know that quite a few jackets were made from goatskin, again because we can tell the difference simply by looking. Has anyone seen some form of paperwork from the AAF authorising these spec changes? If no one knows about any such documents, the argument that since we do not have any paper with a spec change authorising the use of steerhide consequently steerhide was never used does not hold water.
Personally I find it strange that manufacturers in wartime would import goatskin and not use domestic cows. What about mulehides? How important would abrasion resistance be for a flight jacket? MC jackets are made from cowhide so that is not a very good argument. Any smell left in the leather will most likely be a result of the chemicals used in the tanning. The stiffest leather in any of my A2s is an Aero goatskin A2.
Of course the absence of facts should never stand in the way of a good argument.

 

[Dr H]

I've posted before that Maldi-tof-Sims should be able to distinguish between these. It has been used to differentiate between different mammals after several thousands of years buried in Alpine ice. Anybody interested in giving it a try? I might be able to get some interest with a colleague with access to the kit, might be a short paper in it.

 

[deeb7]

We know that cotton replaced silk as a material for lining simply because we can tell the difference. Likewise we know that quite a few jackets were made from goatskin, again because we can tell the difference simply by looking. Has anyone seen some form of paperwork from the AAF authorising these spec changes?

There's some documentation for the lining change, this quoted from Marc Weinsheker's Acme Depot ...

• A-2 linings appear to have transitioned from silk in the early years, per original specification, to cotton later on. A letter from the Materiel Division of Wright Field, dated 7 January 1939, states that the use of silk in flying jackets had been discontinued "as its procurement was found not to be feasible." The letter does not say when this happened, but it makes it clear that the vast majority of vintage A-2 jackets we encounter will not have silk lining.

 

[Roughwear]

The obvious thing would be for someone to go and look in the AAF archives. The A2 was in use for quite a few years and a lot of paperwork must have been produced, but the big question would be if any of this survives. As far as I can tell no one has ever done any real search for real documentary evidence, which is understandable as this kind of work can be both tedious and frustrating.

This certainly needs to be done. Any change in leather is likely to be found in a technical order. Moreover if steer was used for part of a contract there would not necessarily be any paperwork on it as a manufacturer would simply want to complete the contract and get paid-no questions asked...

We know that cotton replaced silk as a material for lining simply because we can tell the difference. Likewise we know that quite a few jackets were made from goatskin, again because we can tell the difference simply by looking. Has anyone seen some form of paperwork from the AAF authorising these spec changes? If no one knows about any such documents, the argument that since we do not have any paper with a spec change authorising the use of steerhide consequently steerhide was never used does not hold water.

The querstion about cotton replacing silk as a lining material is interesting. How many original A2s do you see with a silk lining? I have seen none. Perhaps this indicates that silk was only used on a few early SAT A2s and found to be prone to damage and hard to produce in sufficient quantities and was repalced by cotton. I have not seen paper work authorising the use of cotton instead, and if it does exist it must pre-date David's 1939 date by several years.

Personally I find it strange that manufacturers in wartime would import goatskin and not use domestic cows. What about mulehides? How important would abrasion resistance be for a flight jacket? MC jackets are made from cowhide so that is not a very good argument. Any smell left in the leather will most likely be a result of the chemicals used in the tanning. The stiffest leather in any of my A2s is an Aero goatskin A2.

Large volumes of goatskin was certainly imported into the USA to make A2s from late 1941 onwards. Several large contracts were made exclusively from goatskin: RW 18091, Perry 23377, the no names 23383 and 29971(Doniger), Doniger 42-21539-P, Spiewak, 42-18776-P, Cable 42-10008-P, whilst the Dubow 27798 contract and the Bronco 29191 were made from predominantly horse but some were also made from goat. There is evidence to show that the USAAF procurement division arranged the supply leather and hardware for many A2 contractors so therefore would have exercised contral over the leather used.

Aero A2s were not made from goatskin-only repros by the Scottish firm!

 

[Geir]

Sorry! I am of course referring to a repro made by the Scottish firm.

 

[Geir]

That jacket also has a red silk lining which C.G. Sweeting said was used by aces in the 46th and 479th fighter groups. If one reads the footnote this bit information came from Hub Zemke in telephone conversation with Sweeting in 1980.
I have seen Marc Weinshenker's reference to this letter before and I have no doubt it is genuine, but being an historian by trade I find it frustrating that he does not give us any information as to where the letter can be found. In what archive is it? Is there any other interesting information there? I get the impression that all the information we have about the various contracts and makers of A2 jackets has been gathered by looking at jackets and the labels in the jackets. There is a need for someone to go and do some real digging in archives if this is going to move beyond this stage where all we have is people voicing their opinions.
When the steerhide/horsehide controversy appeared a few years ago I believe someone said that Grant had actually spoken to a lady who had worked at Aero (not the Scottish firm) during the war. She said (if I remember correctly) that they were not very particular about what kind of hides that were used. This source of information is rapidly disappearing as that generation is rapidly passing away.

 

[Roughwear]

I understand aces sometimes had their jackets relined in red silk. Yes research does need to be done in the archives. However the labels in surviving A2 are the best guide at present to A2 contracts.

 

[RCSignals]

Thanks. Good reading

I conclude that there is still no known, at least to those participating in this thread, evidence of use of steerhide for original jackets.

Lots of supposition, conjecture, assumption. That shouldn't be dismissed but isn't indicative of actual use.

When the steerhide/horsehide controversy appeared a few years ago I believe someone said that Grant had actually spoken to a lady who had worked at Aero (not the Scottish firm) during the war. She said (if I remember correctly) that they were not very particular about what kind of hides that were used. This source of information is rapidly disappearing as that generation is rapidly passing away.

This is also interesting, but not conclusive. What does it mean? 'not particular about what kind of hides were used' by species? by grade? Does it specifically apply to military contract clothing or to wartime production of civilian clothing?
I don't think it was (or even still is) that easy to deviate from a military specification.

Hopefully someone will take on some archival research.

 

[Jaguar46]

The answer to the question could be answered scientifically, if someone had acces to a DNA lab. It wouldn't be cheap be could be done if it was so important for someone to be absolutely sure, one way or the other. You would probably go through a lot of horse DNA, before you found any steer DNA (if at all).

 

[flightmac]

We know that cotton replaced silk as a material for lining simply because we can tell the difference. Likewise we know that quite a few jackets were made from goatskin, again because we can tell the difference simply by looking. Has anyone seen some form of paperwork from the AAF authorising these spec changes? If no one knows about any such documents, the argument that since we do not have any paper with a spec change authorising the use of steerhide consequently steerhide was never used does not hold water.

The querstion about cotton replacing silk as a lining material is interesting. How many original A2s do you see with a silk lining? I have seen none. Perhaps this indicates that silk was only used on a few early SAT A2s and found to be prone to damage and hard to produce in sufficient quantities and was repalced by cotton. I have not seen paper work authorising the use of cotton instead, and if it does exist it must pre-date David's 1939 date by several years./i]

I submit that while silk quite probably was hard to produce in large quantities, it is a superior lining material. Below is from http://ezinearticles.com/?Properties-and-Characteristics-of-Silk&id=488797:
...In addition, silk holds its structural integrity and will not rot. Silk is also more heat resistant than many other fabrics, including wool, for example, and is actually rather difficult to burn.

One remarkable property of silk is its high tensile strength and its fibers will not easily be torn or damaged. It is also an elastic material that can be stretched and then will recover to its original size unless stretched beyond 20-25% of its original length. It has been used in the past in making guy ropes to take advantage of this characteristic.

Silk clothing keeps one cool in the summer, and it provides surprising warmth in the winter and is often used as an insulation layer in different types of clothing or even in sleeping bags. Silk can absorb a fairly significant amount of moisture before it feels wet.

See also http://www.textilefurnishings.com/silk-properties.html

 

[colekwok]

The answer to the question could be answered scientifically, if someone had acces to a DNA lab. It wouldn't be cheap be could be done if it was so important for someone to be absolutely sure, one way or the other. You would probably go through a lot of horse DNA, before you found any steer DNA (if at all).

There may not be any DNA left in processed leather anymore. I think what we need is like what Dr H said, you need a mass-spec, to determine the actual composition of the leather sample. Porbably a MALDI-TOF, MS/MS or a GC-MS. I used to have access to these machines but I have changed a bit of my reserach, and I don't have the protocol to process these samples anyway. Maybe Dr H have a bit more idea? :!: