• 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.

Vintage WWII B15? Please help authenticate!

johnnyzhuang823

New Member
Hi all,

Greetings! This is my first post on this forum, and I hope y'all can take a look and help me authenticate this B15 jacket I purchased. Much appreciated, and thanks in advance!

I recently picked up this vintage B15 jacket from a reputable local surplus store. The store owner claimed it was a WWII original, and because it was a good fit, I dropped $600 without thinking too much. After I got back, I did some research and began to suspect whether this was the real deal or not.

Things that look right:

1. Off-center zipper
2. Talon zipper looks old to me
3. Color & texture of the fabric
4. Pocket snaps

Things that do not look right:

1. It does not have a tag (or perhaps it was taken off a long time ago?). I came across a couple of other threads that briefly discussed this issue. Some claim that virtually all B15s come with tags, while others seem to think that some of the very early ones do not.
2. The lining is green, in contrast to the grayish color that you usually see in a B15
3. Cuffs and waistbands seem too perfect to be true
4. The decal on the outer sleeve is almost faded out and does not quite match the overall great condition of the jacket. Perhaps exposed to sunlight? Bad dry washing?
5. There is no decal on the inner side of the jacket next to the zippers

Things that I don't know if it's a good/bad sign:

1. There's a heavily worn small white tag in one of the outer pockets that say "Lot Size 44"(see picture)
2. On the inside of the jacket, I found the following texts handwritten by someone. It has almost faded out, but I was able to identify some of it—"Maurice A. Garbell, 17[something] Lake Street, San Francisco [something], California, U.S.A." Intrigued, I did a little research online about Mr. Garbell and found the following:

"Maurice A. Garbell, 75, a pioneering aviation consultant who helped design major airports around the world. Garbell was one of the first to propose a plan that saw noisy jetliners climb steeply in order to avoid residential neighborhoods near airports. During World War II, he was a top aerodynamicist for Consolidated Vultee Aircraft, now General Dynamics in San Diego. There he designed aircraft wings and wrote the first book on tropical and equatorial meteorology. After the war, he moved to San Francisco and worked as an aviation consultant. On Feb. 24 in San Francisco after what was described as a short illness."

That's all the information I have for now. Assuming that the jacket indeed belonged to Mr. Maurice, together with the fact that (1) he was an aerodynamicist during the war, not a pilot, and (2) he moved to San Francisco post-war and that a San Francisco address was written inside of the jacket, I guess the most likely conclusion would be that it was a post-war civilian B15? But then it seems pretty rare to see a civilian version with the off-center zippers, pocket snaps, and the decal on the outer sleeve.

Let me know your thoughts!


tempImagezeZ4gV.jpg
tempImageZLhbaS.jpg
tempImageLtygqL.jpg
tempImageoNrgrg.jpg
tempImagekJMCSE.jpg
tempImage68YksN.jpg
tempImagev9zW8Z.jpg
tempImagePMzdLP.jpg



tempImageG9Rq4O.jpg
tempImageiZRtgL.jpg
 

Micawber

Well-Known Member
I had one very similar to that right down to the little white tag nearly 30 years ago. I never attributed as an issue item [but admit to not knowing and as it fit me I wore it fairly often.
 

johnnyzhuang823

New Member
Can you post close ups from the lining. Any evidence of being replaced? Extra Stitches??
Hi Jorge, thanks for chiming in! Here are a couple more close-ups of the lining and the collar. There's no apparent evidence of being replaced/out of place stitches to my eye. But maybe some one did a really nice job. I'm also wandering if there's any evidence indicating that they actually issued ones with green lining back in the day?
tempImageXLytmO.jpg
tempImagehjMbMB.jpg
tempImageJffoL0.jpg
tempImagejaYQjQ.jpg
tempImageXOUAcO.jpg
tempImageHVwoNw.jpg
tempImageW63MwM.jpg
tempImagevQOeEd.jpg
tempImagefAXsrz.jpg
 

johnnyzhuang823

New Member
I had one very similar to that right down to the little white tag nearly 30 years ago. I never attributed as an issue item [but admit to not knowing and as it fit me I wore it fairly often.
Interesting! Perhaps it ended up in my closet by coincidence? That beaten-up white tag is what convinced me that it's definitely not a recent replica. But then I'm not knowledgable enough to tell if it's an indication for a issued piece or a civilian one. Maybe someone with an issued WWII B15 in their collection can check theirs and let us know if they have it too.

Regardless, it fits me quite well so I expect to wear it often like you did. It's just my curiosity want to know the story behind it!
 

Micawber

Well-Known Member
Interesting! Perhaps it ended up in my closet by coincidence? That beaten-up white tag is what convinced me that it's definitely not a recent replica. But then I'm not knowledgable enough to tell if it's an indication for a issued piece or a civilian one. Maybe someone with an issued WWII B15 in their collection can check theirs and let us know if they have it too.

Regardless, it fits me quite well so I expect to wear it often like you did. It's just my curiosity want to know the story behind it!

I don't recall what happened to that one of mine what I do recall is that issued B-15's I have owned and still own have the usual labels.
 

Jorgeenriqueaguilera

Well-Known Member
Ok, first; the contract label missing is a very common thing, the lack of it doesn't indicate that is a civilian necessarily. Sometimes they were removed on purpose by veterans after war.
The little white tag is common on original jackets, but not all jackets come with it though. I have a nos example without that white tag and I have a mint example with it. (Attached pic). But that could be found on a private purchase as well, so it is not really a indicator of authenticity.
25DE26BF-1C16-4268-85E0-C8C0A27DE72F.jpeg

On the other side, those knits are something you don't see on originals, the material doesn't seem correct unless they were period replaced.
74A98CA0-E1D4-4AEA-9348-5A7C91947CE5.jpeg

The lining is probably the main indicator that this jacket is a private purchase. Originals have a gray shade alpaca fur that includes the sleeves. Unless this liner was a period replacement, which shows no evidence, I would assume this was a private purchase. A very nice one indeed.
911ABFA0-4729-4EE1-847F-D58BA710414A.jpeg

0662574C-7FF2-4462-B176-FB6A4B034EAB.jpeg

Another small detail is the loop on the collar, originals have a different made with the same outer shell material.
156C498D-A981-4D56-80AF-6F19F3F1D9F4.jpeg
C7DF692D-0566-49C0-9D02-DF0465E95334.jpeg
3241EA63-61C5-4173-B047-4009BFB6AFB3.jpeg
 

JonnyCrow

Well-Known Member
Ok, first; the contract label missing is a very common thing, the lack of it doesn't indicate that is a civilian necessarily. Sometimes they were removed on purpose by veterans after war.
The little white tag is common on original jackets, but not all jackets come with it though. I have a nos example without that white tag and I have a mint example with it. (Attached pic). But that could be found on a private purchase as well, so it is not really a indicator of authenticity.
View attachment 97843
On the other side, those knits are something you don't see on originals, the material doesn't seem correct unless they were period replaced.
View attachment 97847
The lining is probably the main indicator that this jacket is a private purchase. Originals have a gray shade alpaca fur that includes the sleeves. Unless this liner was a period replacement, which shows no evidence, I would assume this was a private purchase. A very nice one indeed.
View attachment 97851
View attachment 97849
Another small detail is the loop on the collar, originals have a different made with the same outer shell material. View attachment 97863View attachment 97855View attachment 97857
So it's not necessarily a bad one then Jorge
 

johnnyzhuang823

New Member
@johnnyzhuang823 I would be very confident saying that if you don't see any indicator that the liner and knits were replaced (ghost stitches), this jacket is a nice example of a private purchase but not an original. @JonnyCrow
Jorge,

Sorry for the late reply! It’s been a busy week for me. Also, thanks a lot for the detailed reply and reference images. I examined the jacket again closely and did not seem to spot any ghost stitches, so I guess it is indeed an old private purchase.

So what’s the deal with these private purchases back then? Did the manufacturers produced more jackets than needed so they simply sold the same ones to the civilian market after the war ended? Did they use the surplus materials for issued ones to make ones specifically for the civilians? Or did they simply copied the same style they made for the government contracts with new materials as commercial items?
 

ZuZu

Well-Known Member
After doing some obsessive googling I'd say this is either a very very early prototype (dubious but possible) or it's an "official" private purchase jacket sold at PXs etc. (Pure pure speculation). It's definitely a strange one but as has been pointed out- the knits and the alpaca seem off.

The quality of the sewing makes me think this is a knockoff jacket made at the same factory as milspec ones. The stitch count is too low and looks hurriedly sewn with loose stitches.

tempImage68YksN.jpg


The collar loop is also kind of a deal breaker as are the odd knits.
Another giveaway is the small windflap as shown in the photo above. It's missing a few rows of sewn lines and is narrower than the official version.

Also missing are the darts in the back;

tempImagePMzdLP.jpg


I thought the Talon straight puller was another "wrong" characteristic but I found an official B-15 with that same zipper so that's OK.

6311aacaba3d9.png


Notice how the stitching is much tighter on this genuine milspec.

Finally and most problematic is the pencil pocket- all of the genuine AAF jackets have a one pencil slot with 2 rows of stitching around it:


6311aac1b6f8f.png

The jacket in question here has 2 slots and is much looser in stitching:
tempImageZLhbaS.jpg


That all being said and shown- I think this is (as has already been determined by Jorge and others) a later 40s private purchase jacket. The roundel's lack of AAF or USAF also is strange. There are weird anamolies in the early versions of all types of jackets (buttons on A2s etc.) but I think the loop, the knits and the lining and especially the stitching make it a private purchase. It does however have an air of test jacket or something. I think a Talon zipper expert could end the dabate...
 

JonnyCrow

Well-Known Member
After doing some obsessive googling I'd say this is either a very very early prototype (dubious but possible) or it's an "official" private purchase jacket sold at PXs etc. (Pure pure speculation). It's definitely a strange one but as has been pointed out- the knits and the alpaca seem off.

The quality of the sewing makes me think this is a knockoff jacket made at the same factory as milspec ones. The stitch count is too low and looks hurriedly sewn with loose stitches.

View attachment 98731

The collar loop is also kind of a deal breaker as are the odd knits.
Another giveaway is the small windflap as shown in the photo above. It's missing a few rows of sewn lines and is narrower than the official version.

Also missing are the darts in the back;

View attachment 98733

I thought the Talon straight puller was another "wrong" characteristic but I found an official B-15 with that same zipper so that's OK.

View attachment 98735

Notice how the stitching is much tighter on this genuine milspec.

Finally and most problematic is the pencil pocket- all of the genuine AAF jackets have a one pencil slot with 2 rows of stitching around it:


View attachment 98737
The jacket in question here has 2 slots and is much looser in stitching:
View attachment 98739

That all being said and shown- I think this is (as has already been determined by Jorge and others) a later 40s private purchase jacket. The roundel's lack of AAF or USAF also is strange. There are weird anamolies in the early versions of all types of jackets (buttons on A2s etc.) but I think the loop, the knits and the lining and especially the stitching make it a private purchase. It does however have an air of test jacket or something. I think a Talon zipper expert could end the dabate...
From the Fedora lounge
zipperdatingSpencerStewarthorizontal.jpg
 

ZuZu

Well-Known Member
Wow! Ask and ye shall receive!. Thanks Johny! So I guess this pretty much proves the jacket is a mid to late 40s private purchase as evinced by the stopper. If the early test jacket scenario were true it would probably have an earlier stopper. Thanks for bearing with me as I discovered what was already known!:rolleyes:
 

JonnyCrow

Well-Known Member
After doing some obsessive googling I'd say this is either a very very early prototype (dubious but possible) or it's an "official" private purchase jacket sold at PXs etc. (Pure pure speculation). It's definitely a strange one but as has been pointed out- the knits and the alpaca seem off.

The quality of the sewing makes me think this is a knockoff jacket made at the same factory as milspec ones. The stitch count is too low and looks hurriedly sewn with loose stitches.

View attachment 98731

The collar loop is also kind of a deal breaker as are the odd knits.
Another giveaway is the small windflap as shown in the photo above. It's missing a few rows of sewn lines and is narrower than the official version.

Also missing are the darts in the back;

View attachment 98733

I thought the Talon straight puller was another "wrong" characteristic but I found an official B-15 with that same zipper so that's OK.

View attachment 98735

Notice how the stitching is much tighter on this genuine milspec.

Finally and most problematic is the pencil pocket- all of the genuine AAF jackets have a one pencil slot with 2 rows of stitching around it:


View attachment 98737
The jacket in question here has 2 slots and is much looser in stitching:
View attachment 98739

That all being said and shown- I think this is (as has already been determined by Jorge and others) a later 40s private purchase jacket. The roundel's lack of AAF or USAF also is strange. There are weird anamolies in the early versions of all types of jackets (buttons on A2s etc.) but I think the loop, the knits and the lining and especially the stitching make it a private purchase. It does however have an air of test jacket or something. I think a Talon zipper expert could end the dabate...
It looks like the 30's - 40's straight brass Talon
 

ZuZu

Well-Known Member
It looks like the 30's - 40's straight brass Talon
No senor- it has the late 40s puller. (Look at the hole at the end- big square) But then I looked at my example of a wartime authentic B-15 with this zipper and I realize this zipper has probably been replaced. So I was wrong about that- and this weakens the authenticity of this jacket as milspec even more.
 

JonnyCrow

Well-Known Member
No senor- it has the late 40s puller. (Look at the hole at the end- big square) But then I looked at my example of a wartime authentic B-15 with this zipper and I realize this zipper has probably been replaced. So I was wrong about that- and this weakens the authenticity of this jacket as milspec even more.
Yes totally correct, square hole and not rectangle
 
Top