A2 JACKET CONTRACTS AND THE SIZE OF JACKETS

[Roughwear]

When you look at the list of A2 contracts and orders in Full Gear three of the last contracts from the 1944 fiscal year, the Dubow W33-038 AC1755, the no name 1756 and the AC 1761 Bronco are apparently only found in the smaller sizes, 36-40. The contracts would have been assigned at around the same time judging by the sequence of numbers, probably in June 1944. Now I have been thinking about whether those in charge of procurement for the USAAF may have organised the contracts in such a way that the makers were told which size to produce and when. This is what John Chapman says:

I have a theory that contracts were let and made so that certain sizes would be done by each company on a schedule. So, each company would make all of their sizes one at a time, but if Rough Wear made their size 38s, then Aero their size 40s, and Perry their size 42s, and all were delivered to various bases at the same time, it would make delivery of a full assortment of sizes quite easy. I can't prove this, but I definitely know that all of one size in a contract was done at once (i.e. they wouldn't make different sizes at one time for delivery of all sizes per batch). If I were running the operation, I would want each base with new students to be full of the required sizes, so no one ran short of the right gear. Now, we'd also be assuming there was consistency in sizing from one company to another, but we know that was a mess.

Does anyone have any solid evidence to substantiate this theory, which I think makes good sense? If this is true it could explain the small size of the jackets made as part of the last three A2 contracts and why jackets from some earlier contracts are usually only found in a particular size. For example four of the five surviving (I can't remember the size of the jacket owned by Aero in Scotland) 1940 Aeros are all 44s. Surviving jackets from last Werber contract from 1941 are a size 42 or smaller (others may know of larger examples). Most Dubows from the large 27798 contract are a 42 or smaller (I have seen a 44 and a 46). Any thoughts?

 

[deeb7]

Does anyone have any solid evidence to substantiate this theory, which I think makes good sense? If this is true it could explain the small size of the jackets made as part of the last three A2 contracts and why jackets from some earlier contracts are usually only found in a particular size.

I can understand John's theory regarding the making of one size at a time, and the arrangement of delivery dates for each contract so that a full range of sizes was always in stock. Are you taking this a step further, and saying that perhaps some contacts were for only one, or a few sizes?

I understood that the last three contracts were for smaller sizes only, as stocks were low in these popular sizes. The Dubow 27798 contract seems to survive in all sizes ... the larger sizes being less common as fewer were made, but that is true of A-2s in general.

 

[JDAM]

This is what John Chapman says...

Occam's razor.

 

[Roughwear]

This is what John Chapman says...

Occam's razor.

Your point being what exactly as Occam's razor has several meanings?

 

[JDAM]

Several meanings? Anyway, meaning the best explanation of an event is the one that is the simplest, using the fewest assumptions or hypotheses.

 

[Roughwear]

Does anyone have any solid evidence to substantiate this theory, which I think makes good sense? If this is true it could explain the small size of the jackets made as part of the last three A2 contracts and why jackets from some earlier contracts are usually only found in a particular size.

I can understand John's theory regarding the making of one size at a time, and the arrangement of delivery dates for each contract so that a full range of sizes was always in stock. Are you taking this a step further, and saying that perhaps some contacts were for only one, or a few sizes?

I understood that the last three contracts were for smaller sizes only, as stocks were low in these popular sizes. The Dubow 27798 contract seems to survive in all sizes ... the larger sizes being less common as fewer were made, but that is true of A-2s in general.

David I'm sure you are right about the last three contracts being made in smaller sizes because of stock shortages. Some other contracts may have been targetted at particular sizes, such as a size 44 for the 1940. The original records may shed more light on this. Of course as most A2s were issued to men aged 18 to 24 there was inevitably a much higher demand for jackets from size 36-40. I believe the average chest size then was about 36".

 

[Roughwear]

Several meanings? Anyway, meaning the best explanation of an event is the one that is the simplest, using the fewest assumptions or hypotheses.

If only explanations for events were so simple, but this is rarely the case. :lol:

 

[Dr H]

“When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” Sherlock Holmes, The Blanched Soldier :ugeek:

 

 

[Clyde from Carolina]

This is the sort of thing I find utterly fascinating, but I am sure most people would see as crazy OCD. :lol:

I don't have anything to contribute other than the hope that you that do will continue gathering data and keep us posted.

I love this kind of stuff. I must admit I always wondered how the sizing would have been assigned to the contractors...given the smaller sizes of the gents in question, etc.

Fascinating.

 

[JDAM]

Several meanings? Anyway, meaning the best explanation of an event is the one that is the simplest, using the fewest assumptions or hypotheses.

If only explanations for events were so simple, but this is rarely the case. :lol:

True. For the uninformed, that is nearly always the case :lol:

 

[Robman]

Maybe we just look too much into this. The standard sizes back then were obviously much smaller which means smaller sizes on the whole but there are many larger examples mostly from the larger manufacturers of the A2 ... we have seen large examples of Dubows, Aeros, Roughwears, etc.

Paul Sanders' 52 Dubow comes to mind, he also had a 52 27753.

As to the 1756, I remember Ken Calder of Aero had an original in a size 44 1756 so nothing is definite.

 

[RCSignals]

Are there no original contracts that can be examined to determine the theory's validity?

I would think orders from manufacturers would be delivered to a central supply depot and sorted/distributed from there to specific local supply depots or Bases.

 

[airfrogusmc]

Maybe we just look too much into this. The standard sizes back then were obviously much smaller which means smaller sizes on the whole but there are many larger examples mostly from the larger manufacturers of the A2 ... we have seen large examples of Dubows, Aeros, Roughwears, etc.

Paul Sanders' 52 Dubow comes to mind, he also had a 52 27753.

As to the 1756, I remember Ken Calder of Aero had an original in a size 44 1756 so nothing is definite.

Hey Robman Paul has an original Dubow 27798 size 52 that JC made me almost an exact coffee of also made Paul one in russet goat from that jacket. His original is horse and kinda dark. JC had some photos of it compares to the one he made for me. He also had two very big 1756s 52 +. He also had a RW 1401 in a 48. Grant, Jerome, Jake all saw these jackets. Paul had an incredible collection at one time. I think the 33 Werber that Gary has was the one that Paul sold him. He had a mint size 50 B-7 the paints, the gloves and the official undies that all went with it. He had the Pearsall jackets thats in the Maguire book. He had every contract at one time even some of the real obscure ones and had 3 different Werbers.

 

[zoomer]

Hey Robman Paul has an original Dubow 27798 size 52 that JC made me almost an exact coffee of

Hey Frog, I know you gyrenes will drink anything, but how can you make coffee out of a jacket? :lol:

My hypothesis about later contracts/smaller sizes: Maybe good leather was running so low that they couldn't source enough hides for the bigger sizes and still do one-piece backs, 2pc sleeves, etc.

Sure, there was a 1756 in 52, but there might not have been many others. It probably survived because anyone that big probably wasn't wearing an A-2 into the air every day in a combat zone.

 

[Roughwear]

There are no absolutes in this hobby. Although very large jackets are known to exist, including from the later contracts, their rarity would suggest very few were made. How many young guys back then would have had a size 52 chest and been part of a bomber crew? I suspect that in the main the very large size surviving A2s were worn by people who never saw combat.

 

[airfrogusmc]

Hey Robman Paul has an original Dubow 27798 size 52 that JC made me almost an exact coffee of

Hey Frog, I know you gyrenes will drink anything, but how can you make coffee out of a jacket? :lol:

My hypothesis about later contracts/smaller sizes: Maybe good leather was running so low that they couldn't source enough hides for the bigger sizes and still do one-piece backs, 2pc sleeves, etc.

Sure, there was a 1756 in 52, but there might not have been many others. It probably survived because anyone that big probably wasn't wearing an A-2 into the air every day in a combat zone.

Probably a high ranking officers jacket?

 

[HackerF15E]

I find it difficult to believe that, during active combat operations, that the offices which supplied flying clothing were scheduling different manufacturers to build different sizes at the same time, with the intent that all of the sizes are delivered to the military logistics system at the same time.

It just doesn't make sense, regardless of if the currently-existing samples seem to fit into such a theory.

Certainly the scientific method says we have to build hypotheses, and then support them with evidence...but every scientist will tell you that you have to be careful to build your hypothesis backward from just looking at a portion of the evidence. The idea of "just in time logistics" did not exist in the 1940s. The transportation and logistical infrastructure to support those concepts also did not exist. There would have to be extremely close choreography of production schedules at varied factories, matched up with delivery schedules to merge the correct sizes at the right time and place, and then get those jackets re-distributed out to the DoD locations where the jackets would be issued.

Unfortunately the military's logistics train of the 1940s was a huge, unwieldy beast. Although logistical supply is the backbone to military success (and in WW2 it generally worked), in looking at the 40s process through the current prism of logistics philosophies, it was an archaic and inefficient beast. This proposed theory is one that would certainly be possible in the current-day logistics scheme; "over-night" delivery of raw materials is possible, close choreography between manufacturers is possible given current ways of tracking production schedules, on-hand completed inventory, and the ability to transmit that data to a single office that would be choreographing the production schedules.

This complicated process, if it had taken place in the 1940s, would have generated TONS of paperwork that would have reared it's head at some point before now. In the absence of such evidence, I just don't see it being likely.

To me, the "Occam's Razor" comment on the previous page means that this Rube Goldberg Machine theory of jacket production is a lot less practical, logical, and likely than the easier theory, which says that different manufacturers built many different sizes on their own production and delivery schedules.

It would certainly be interesting if this theory were true, but in the absen

 

[watchmanjimg]

There are no absolutes in this hobby. Although very large jackets are known to exist, including from the later contracts, their rarity would suggest very few were made. How many young guys back then would have had a size 52 chest and been part of a bomber crew? I suspect that in the main the very large size surviving A2s were worn by people who never saw combat.

Excellent points, although arguably many surviving A-2s in good condition regardless of size were likely worn by people who never saw combat--if they were worn during the war at all. I agree that the very large jackets would have been produced in much smaller quantities, commensurate with the lesser demand for them. For me this alone adequately explains their rarity.

 

[herk115]

One factor to consider is that by this time jackets were being manufactured as replacements only (if my information is correct). No new jackets were being issued at the time these contracts were let; these jackets were made to replace damaged or lost jackets that had been previously issued, not as new issues to new personnel.

Therefore, the AAF supply system by this time would have a good idea of how many of each different size it would need, and it could assign contracts accordingly. A previous post points out that it makes good sense for one manufacturer to tool up for one size during a production run, and I agree that this would be very efficient. If the AAF knew in 1944 that it would need X number of 36s, X-number of 40s, etc., it could just write a contract for each size with each different manufacturer specializing in size. Since they were for replacement only, there wouldn't be the hundreds of units and bases clamoring for jackets of all sizes, just a comparatively few requests for replacements. Therefore, some of the heat was off, and the jackets need not be delivered with lightning speed, coordinated grace. An interesting comparison would be to look at the B-15 production lines, which were the main source of flight jackets by 1944, and see if they were churning them out, all sizes at once and rushing them of to all bases and units.