AN-J-3

[ZuZu]

On a forum I understand that rampant speculation is part of the fun- but it runs the danger of becoming officialized BS... especially when coming from smart people who sound like they know what they're talking about... HAHAHA!

 

[mulceber]

No Army/Navy differences

I never said there were. I told you I agree with you on that point.

 

[ZuZu]

I never said there were. I told you I agree with you on that point.

I meant the "... we're pretty sure the Navy was hostile to snaps..." part.

You're in that first flush of jacketeering where it's all fun and every theory seems to make sense if you just think logically.

I am old and wizened- "just the facts ma'am".

 

[B-Man2]

Yes yes. A very interesting chapter. Actually the corrosion he talks about is in refernce to zippers and those made out of substitute (for brass) materials. No Army/Navy differences and no mention of snaps. Sweeting is actually very informative and in the back of the book you can find REFERENCES to all the information in the chapters. We really need to do that here

I would have to ask ..is it really necessary to include footnotes,references and source information for material that is discussed on this informal little forum, which simply likes to exchange ideas and thoughts on jackets that are in excess of 80 years old? For me...if I have to do that type of research and documentation I might as well write a thesis on the subject matter. I dont think anyone here is going to scurtinize the information presented in such a focused and precise manner, other than one or two makers of jackets who are striving for the ultimate reproduction of a specfic jacket. I think that when the bar is set so high as to challenge every little quote or statement, then the easy going exchange and commentary on that information increases the pressure to be exact and diminshes all enjoyment of posting here.

 

[mulceber]

Note the "pretty sure" was meant to indicate that we don't have hard evidence here. But I've never heard another explanation for why the Navy never switched to snaps on the light, intermediate or winter weight flight jackets during the war. And it's pretty clear that the same would hold true for zips. If corrosion prevents zippers from functioning, then snaps made of the same material would be subject to the same problems. That's a high enough bar of evidence to meet for my purposes. If someone else comes along and provides evidence that that's not the case, I'll adjust my position, but until then, I'll flag it as not totally verified with the comments like "pretty sure," and move on.

I am old and wizened- "just the facts ma'am".

Keep telling yourself that. If you started digging into some of your "facts," you might learn that the very people you're citing for your "fact" are engaging in some of their own speculation. Which doesn't make them wrong. It just means that your burden of proof is so extreme that nobody lives up to it.

the easy going exchange and commentary on that exchange information increases the pressure to be exact and diminshes all enjoyment of posting here.

Some might say that's already happened.

 

[ZuZu]

I would have to ask ..is it really necessary to include footnotes,references and source information for material that is discussed on this informal little forum, which simply likes to exchange ideas and thoughts on jackets that are in excess of 80 years old? For me...if I have to do that type of research and documentation I might as well write a thesis on the subject matter. I dont think anyone here is going to scurtinize the information presented in such a focused and precise manner, other than one or two makers of jackets who are striving for the ultimate reproduction of a specfic jacket. I think that when the bar is set so high as to challenge every little quote or statement, then the easy going exchange and commentary on that exchange information increases the pressure to be exact and diminshes all enjoyment of posting here.

I don't mean to come across that way. As I said it's the fun part of a forum. What bothers me is when casual BS becomes a fact on the forum. Like 55J14 red rot ( Can't let that one go sorry)
or the seal/russet dichotomy or WW2 fit being tight etc. etc.

I don't mean to challenge every little nugget but I want to feel free to challenge BS that's threatens to become "truth"!

Finally- who am I? Who cares what I think? Please don't let me inhibit anyone- I don't have that power! I have fun being a pain but I know it's all just silly stuff!

 

[mulceber]

Jeff, you get pretty hostile. Also, a lot of what you cited above as "BS" isn't really BS:

• red rot on the 55J14 - well, the Aviator's Clothing Co. 55J14 contract IS very prone to red rot. Not hard to see how that became "55J14s are prone to red rot" when it went through the grapevine.
• seal russet dichotomy - I remember that thread, and I don't recall there being any BS - as I recall, it can be summed up as "modern seals are rather too dark, and modern russets are redder than most were back then." No one's BSing there. Repro makers try their best to replicate 80 year old leather and they aren't perfect, what of it?

And for that matter, nobody objects to you contending with other people or asking for people to provide evidence. A lot of the time that's useful, and when you're able to debunk misconceptions, it's great to put it out there, even to trumpet it. We're all trying to improve our knowledge about these jackets, and having someone to challenge us to be more rigorous is great. But it is VERY possible to correct misconceptions without being obnoxious or rude.

 

[ZuZu]

Note the "pretty sure" was meant to indicate that we don't have hard evidence here. But I've never heard another explanation for why the Navy never switched to snaps on the light, intermediate or winter weight flight jackets during the war. And it's pretty clear that the same would hold true for zips. If corrosion prevents zippers from functioning, then snaps made of the same material would be subject to the same problems. That's a high enough bar of evidence to meet for my purposes. If someone else comes along and provides evidence that that's not the case, I'll adjust my position, but until then, I'll flag it as not totally verified with the comments like "pretty sure," and move on.


Keep telling yourself that. If you started digging into some of your "facts," you might learn that the very people you're citing as "fact" are engaging in some of their own speculation. Which doesn't make them wrong. It just means that your burden of proof is so extreme that nobody lives up to it.


Some might say that's already happened.

But they DID use zips! And after the war they used zippers that WERE prone to corrosion like the infamous California Sportswear G-1. So if they used zippers- why not snaps? I'd be more willing to believe (pure speculation here) that snaps were used on A-2s just because they required less work to put on. Navy contracts were smaller so they didn't care. But that's just bullshit- I don't know that nor have I ever read it!

As far as the "facts" I will tell you that the facts I see with my own eyes are the ones I know- the rest is just what I sort of think. 90% of popular history books and 99% of Youtube videos are just people creating facts by using a daisy chain of references that don't come from reality (original source material, documents etc.) The facts I can see about these jackets are their physical characteristics- those you can't really argue with. Facts about contracts and dates don't interest me as much but those also can be determined with 99% accuracy with pieces of paper.

"Facts" about why people did stuff or why services did stuff need to be backed up with references to letters or documents like Sweeting does in his chapters. Otherwise we just go down silly wabbit holes...

 

[Chandler]

But it is VERY possible to correct misconceptions without being obnoxious or rude.

What a concept.

But I guess if you apologize and explain it's part of your schtick, it's all okay.

 

[ZuZu]

Jeff, you get pretty hostile. Also, a lot of what you cited above as "BS" isn't really BS:

• red rot on the 55J14 - well, the Aviator's Clothing Co. 55J14 contract IS very prone to red rot. Not hard to see how that became "55J14s are prone to red rot" when it went through the grapevine.
• seal russet dichotomy - I remember that thread, and I don't recall there being any BS - as I recall, it can be summed up as "modern seals are rather too dark, and modern russets are redder than most were back then." No one's BSing there. Repro makers try their best to replicate 80 year old leather and they aren't always perfect, what of it?

And for that matter, nobody objects to you contending with other people or asking for people to provide evidence. A lot of the time that's useful, and when you're able to debunk misconceptions, it's great to put it out there, even to trumpet it. We're all trying to improve our knowledge about these jackets, and having someone to challenge us to be more rigorous is great. But it is VERY possible to correct misconceptions without being obnoxious or rude.

I keep saying I don't want to come across as obnoxious or rude. When does it happen? I just like to argue (as Marisa Tomei say in "My Cousin Vinnie) Does my voice come through the keyboard? I get excited and worked up and this is reflected in my writing. Like a 3 beer high- I talk loud and get a bit pushy. Sorry. I apologise.

My whole point about seal/russet is that there wasn't a dichotomy- just a subtle gradation of browns. Thus the Legend is the dichotomy which I think was created by black and white photos pored over by jacket nuts back in the olden days. Everyone who then saw an original A-2 was surprised at the browness of it. "Russet" is actually the color of hat brims and belts in the 30s and 40s- much redder and lighter than A-2s. "Russet" A-2s were brown.

 

[mulceber]

My whole point about seal/russet is that there wasn't a dichotomy- just a subtle gradation of browns. Thus the Legend is the dichotomy which I think was created by black and white photos pored over by jacket nuts back in the olden days. Everyone who then saw an original A-2 was surprised at the browness of it. "Russet" is actually the color of hat brims and belts in the 30s and 40s- much redder and lighter than A-2s. "Russet" A-2s were brown.

Now that's absolutely true - but didn't we already knew that, at least to some degree? "Seal" and russet" are just frames of reference for what was a broad spectrum of browns (as you said in your post). I guess I must have misread that thread.

I keep saying I don't want to come across as obnoxious or rude. When does it happen? I just like to argue (as Marisa Tomei say in "My Cousin Vinnie) Does my voice come through the keyboard? I get excited and worked up and this is reflected in my writing. Like a 3 beer high- I talk loud and get a bit pushy. Sorry. I apologise.

Eh, implying your fellow board members don't know what they're talking about and calling what they say bullshit is hostile. Doing it with laugh emojis doesn't help. It's not bullshit, even if it's incorrect. Bullshit is making a claim when you don't care if it's true or not (and yes, I did check the dictionary to verify that definition ). All of the errors you've pointed out (and to your credit, you've pointed out a lot of them) can more readily be attributed to much less malicious failings than bullshit.

Games of telephone happen and will continue happening on an internet board. Having someone around who gets everyone else to double-check how they know what they think they know is helpful (genuinely! For example, I'm glad the red rot error was called out. It allowed us to set the record straight and stop parroting the same old received faux-wisdom.). But it'd be nice if it could be done without the laugh emojis and suggestions that people are spouting nonsense when they're doing their best to get it right.

 

[ZuZu]

Now that's absolutely true - but didn't we already knew that, at least to some degree? "Seal" and russet" are just frames of reference for what was a broad spectrum of browns (as you said in your post). I guess I must have misread that thread.


Eh, implying your fellow board members don't know what they're talking about and calling what they say bullshit is hostile. Doing it with laugh emojis doesn't help. It's not bullshit, even if it's incorrect. Bullshit is making a claim when you don't care if it's true or not (and yes, I did check the dictionary to verify that definition ). All of the errors you've pointed out (and to your credit, you've pointed out a lot of them) can more readily be attributed to much less malicious failings than bullshit.

Games of telephone happen and will continue happening on an internet board. Having someone around who gets everyone else to double-check how they know what they think they know is helpful (genuinely! For example, I'm glad the red rot error was called out. It allowed us to set the record straight and stop parroting the same old received faux-wisdom.). But it'd be nice if it could be done without the laugh emojis and suggestions that people are spouting nonsense when they're doing their best to get it right.

I use the word "bullshit" in reference to people making shit up. As I've explained before my previous life has made me kind of a dick- I just say what I think. My whole point here is about speculation which whatever the intention is still just that. When speculation accretes enough repetition to become "fact" I call it out.

I honestly don't think people are so sensitive! Didn't know the laugh emojis were bad- I was trying to show I was not too serious!

And BTW- I was using bullshit in this sense- again- not trying to be mean...

 

[B-Man2]

And to think that this all evolved over a few simple comments about a jacket…… really?
Who has the time or the patience for all of this stuff.

 

[Chandler]

Who has the time or the patience for all of this stuff.

I think that answer is painfully obvious.

 

[ZuZu]

And to think that this all evolved over a few simple comments about a jacket…… really?
Who has the time or the patience for all of this stuff.

Obviously we all do! Why else are we on the forum?

"Nice jacket mate!" ... "Thanks mate!" ... "Nice fit"... "Thanks!"...is that all you want?

It is a forum- where views on a particular subject can be exchanged.

I find argument fun. Sorry...

 

[B-Man2]

Obviously we all do! Why else are we on the forum?

"Nice jacket mate!" ... "Thanks mate!" ... "Nice fit"... "Thanks!"...is that all you want?

It is a forum- where views on a particular subject can be exchanged.

I find argument fun. Sorry...

Zu
Yes … the forum has the “Nice jacket mate “ and “Nice fit” stuff, along with a hundred other pleasantries associated with courteous discourse. But you seem to be overlooking the daily exchanges of significant information on a variety of different topics and not just jackets. While you may “find argument fun”, many of us don’t but instead prefer meaningful dialogue and debate, at the conclusion of which we leave the discussion feeling that our ideas and contributions were heard and that we accomplished something and contributed to the discussion. Some of us prefer that, ..rather than having to defend ourselves from intellectual destruction because we may have made an mis statement or hold a different view point on a given topic. So …..argument vs debate … I’d be interested in knowing where some of the other forum members side on those two points.

 

[leper-colony]

Zu
Yes … the forum has the “Nice jacket mate “ and “Nice fit” stuff, along with a hundred other pleasantries associated with courteous discourse. But you seem to be overlooking the daily exchanges of significant information on a variety of different topics and not just jackets. While you may “find argument fun”, many of us don’t but instead prefer meaningful dialogue and debate, at the conclusion of which we leave the discussion feeling that our ideas and contributions were heard and that we accomplished something and contributed to the discussion. Some of us prefer that, ..rather than having to defend ourselves from intellectual destruction because we may have made an mis statement or hold a different view point on a given topic. So …..argument vs debate … I’d be interested in knowing where some of the other forum members side on those two points.

I won't argue with this.

 

[ZuZu]

Zu
Yes … the forum has the “Nice jacket mate “ and “Nice fit” stuff, along with a hundred other pleasantries associated with courteous discourse. But you seem to be overlooking the daily exchanges of significant information on a variety of different topics and not just jackets. While you may “find argument fun”, many of us don’t but instead prefer meaningful dialogue and debate, at the conclusion of which we leave the discussion feeling that our ideas and contributions were heard and that we accomplished something and contributed to the discussion. Some of us prefer that, ..rather than having to defend ourselves from intellectual destruction because we may have made an mis statement or hold a different view point on a given topic. So …..argument vs debate … I’d be interested in knowing where some of the other forum members side on those two points.

Wow- I didn't know I had that power. I've never been overtly mean or disrespectful- I've never called anybody names but have been called many. There is no "meaningful dialogue or debate" without argument- debate is argument. Nobody has to defend themselves- if you don't agree point out what you think is wrong as I do. But I have seen "meaningful dialogue" become wrong infromation and I will point it out. On a forum.

 

[Erwin]

Hey folks,

Thanks to all for the very informative posts regarding these jackets [waiting for continuation and more pictures].

 

[Erwin]

It is in my opinion an interesting piece, the seller stated that the label was re-fitted [refurbished as per the seller's description by Aero Lether Scottland]. But as far as I know [correct me when I'm wrong in my assumption] this is a label type from an A-2 jacket?

One more anj-3 with a non-standard feature, I haven't seen a hanging loop attached to the external part of any flight jacket before [but I a noob regarding flight jackets].