B-6 jacket made by John Chapman

[mulceber]

But couldn't that be simply down to B-6s being made in fewer numbers than B-3s and D-1s Jan? I don't have the numbers but I imagine that more B-3s and D-1s were made than B-6s.

Yep, that's sort of what I'm trying to get at: we've always assumed that B-6s were made in small numbers. According to Kermit, however, JC think this isn't true, and that B-6s were quite prevalent. In my experience, JC is usually right, but on this one I'm inclined to disagree with him (although I'd be happy to be persuaded otherwise) just based on the rarity of the B-6. If the B-6 was made in comparable numbers to the B-3 and D-1, then, all things being equal, we'd expect them to survive in similar numbers.

 

[FreddyF9]

Is it possible that the thinness of the B-6 and D-1 fur (compared to the B-3) makes these jackets more fragile ? Which would explain why the D-1 and B-6 series did not survive until our time ?
And I think that there were many more B-3 manufactured.
I wonder if the B-6 was manufactured in roughly the same proportions as the ANJ-4...
... Don't worry, it doesn't keep me up at night

You’re totally right, B-6s and D-1 were made of 1/4 inch sheepskin, so about half the thickness of B-3s; also they were less reinforced, since they hadn’t the elbow leather patches. In a private collection, some time ago I had the luck to see 3 original WW2 B-6s, one was almost completely rotten, the second had leather patches on both the elbows and one under the armpit, it was also rotting a bit on the back, the last one was in better shape, again it was rotting on the elbows. My idea is that, after some years of wearing (remember that back then people had few clothes in their closets), those jackets started to deteriorate and then they became too beaten to be worn; so the owners just threw them away.
Now I’ll look in my phone’s photos if I can find the pics I took of those 3 B-6s I mentioned before...

 

[Smithy]

Yep, that's my thinking: we've always assumed that B-6s were made in small numbers. According to Kermit, however, JC think this isn't true, and that B-6s were quite prevalent. In my experience, JC is usually right, but on this one I'm inclined to disagree with him (although I'd be happy to be persuaded otherwise) just based on the rarity of the B-6. If the B-6 was made in comparable numbers to the B-3 and D-1, then, all things being equal, we'd expect them to survive in similar numbers.

The thing for me is that whilst the B-6 was perhaps more prevalent than what people have thought, there's no way it will hit anywhere near the numbers of B-3s and D-1s, simply due to personnel numbers. The B-3 was the main jacket for bomber crew in the ETO on heavies aft of the cockpit level due to the lack of heating. The D-1 was a groundcrew jacket and there were more groundcrew than there ever were aircrew. These two would have substantially outnumbered B-6s in service.

 

[Kermit3D]

I may have mistranscribed what JC wrote to me by email.
He told me that the B-6 was made in large numbers but he meant that it is not an "extremely rare" jacket.
I think indeed (and it is probably also what JC thinks) that the B-3 was largely more produced than the B-6.
Sorry, I'm a little short on nuance when it comes to English.

 

[mulceber]

That clarifies things - thanks!

 

[FreddyF9]

I may have mistranscribed what JC wrote to me by email.
He told me that the B-6 was made in large numbers but he meant that it is not an "extremely rare" jacket.
I think indeed (and it is probably also what JC thinks) that the B-3 was largely more produced than the B-6.
Sorry, I'm a little short on nuance when it comes to English.

Well, put together the fact that they were produced in shorter numbers, their less resistance and you obtain a rare jacket to find over 80 years later!

 

[mulceber]

Another factor that might diminish the survival of B-6s: comfort of wear. B-3s and B-6s are constructed of basically the same materials (apart from the shorter shearling of the B-6, of course), but the B-3 is really well insulated and not very flexible, so anyone who had one after the war probably didn't wear it too much. B-6s were much more comfortable, so someone would be much more likely to wear and abuse it, resulting in a lower survival rate. Add to that the fact that they were made in smaller (but still overall large) numbers to begin with, and it makes perfect sense that they don't pop up on eBay every day.

 

[Micawber]

I had wearable (ie not rotten / decayed) original D-1 & B-6 jackets in the past and wear some I did but neither had the appeal, nor warmth, of a B-3. Being lighter they seemed more susceptible to damage and it was, maybe still is, tough to find a D-1 that hadn't been patched (repaired) but such was the usage nature of the beast.
It's true to say that the inherent self destructive nature of the shearling treatment was a recognised issue even when the gear was still being issued and in use. I believe Sweeting refers to this.

 

[Kermit3D]

Hi all, As some know, I'm on the waiting list for a B-6 GW.
Two contracts are available. The choice of contract is a very subjective decision, but I would still like to have your opinions.
The two contracts available are:

• The Acme contract :

It represents the vast majority of B-6 jackets. The Acme B-6 is a slightly earlier model which has zipper waist adjustment, rather than the late war model with a belt on each side of the waist.
Main zipper: Conmar
Waist zippers: "Waldes" brass Conmar-type slider on reproduction chain

• The Arnoff contract

Arnoff B-6 contract is easy to spot, as they applied the leather end tabs above the folded sheepskin at the bottom of the zipper. Aero and Poughkeepsie (Acme) B-6 jackets have that leather tab underneath the folded sheepskin. Also, they centered the epaulets over the shoulder seam.
The Arnoff contract is a late war model with a belt on each side of the waist.
Zipper: Conmar

Which of the two do you prefer ? Zip or belts ?
My decision is 70% made... but I'm waiting for your opinions.



I have a last question :
Goodwear offers an artificially worn finish that they call "Combat Clone".
In my opinion it could be confused with an original ...
Do you think it's worth it ?
Is the sheepskin (artificially worn) not likely to be damaged more quickly ?


Here are some pictures of a B-6 Arnoff "Combat Clone":

 

[flyincowboy]

Hard to tell like them both! but the first modell is my favorite.

 

[mulceber]

Tough call, Kermit. I always thought the side zips seemed more characteristic of the B-6 (and just a neat feature), but not having the authentic Aero label would bug me. Then again, you’re not me, and you might not care about the label that much. So, I’d vote for the zips.

 

[Kermit3D]

Tough call, Kermit. I always thought the side zips seemed more characteristic of the B-6 (and just a neat feature), but not having the authentic Aero label would bug me. Then again, you’re not me, and you might not care about the label that much. So, I’d vote for the zips.

Precisely I don't understand well : What is Acme compared to Aero? Was Aero a subcontractor from Acme ?

 

[Nickb123]

Prefer the Acme (Aero). John made up Acme to use instead of Aero because the Aero name is copyrighted. Confused me too at first. I thought it had something to do with the Road Runner.

 

[mulceber]

Precisely I don't understand well : What is Acme compared to Aero? Was Aero a subcontractor from Acme ?

Acme wasn’t a real contractor. JC can’t use the Aero name because the rights to it are owned by Aero Leather Scotland. For a while, John was leasing the rights, so he was using Aero labels, but that’s apparently over and done with.

 

[Kermit3D]

Prefer the Acme (Aero). John made up Acme to use instead of Aero because the Aero name is copyrighted. Confused me too at first. I thought it had something to do with the Road Runner.

I understand better ! thank you for that clarification.
Well seen for the Road Runner... Acme reminded me of something and I couldn't remember what.

... And indeed it bothers me a bit not to have a historically correct label.

 

[mulceber]

And indeed it bothers me a bit not to have a historically correct label.

Yeah, then I’d recommend going for the Arnoff jacket. Sounds from what you said earlier like JC prefers it anyway. And when we're talking about a craftsman of his caliber, I think you’ll get a better final product if the maker is excited about it.

 

[Kermit3D]

Yeah, then I’d recommend going for the Arnoff jacket. Sounds from what you said earlier like JC prefers it anyway. And when we're talking about a craftsman of his caliber, I think you’ll get a better final product if the maker is excited about it.

In fact that's also what I think.
I had a preference for Arnoff which is now clearly reinforced by the more authentic label. It may seem like a small detail, but even if it means buying a GW B-6, I want it to be as authentic as possible.
I also find the waist belts very aesthetic. And to my knowledge, no other reproduction manufacturer offers them. I like to have something different.

And finally, as you say, the Arnoff contract is JC's favorite ... he must have his reasons and I want to trust him.

So thank you for this feedback ! I learned something and it reinforces my choice.

 

[mulceber]

Out of curiosity, Kermit, what led you to ask our opinions just now? It just seemed like it came out of nowhere, and I wondered if you've had any updates from John.

 

[Kermit3D]

Out of curiosity, Kermit, what led you to ask our opinions just now? It just seemed like it came out of nowhere, and I wondered if you've had any updates from John.

It comes out of nowhere !

I have no news from John yet ... but he was mentioned a few weeks ago the possibility of choosing between these two contracts.
I had more or less chosen the Arnoff, then little by little doubt set in.
For example I wondered if the waist zippers are more comfortable when sitting? In short, I was not really sure of my choice.
And I finally did well to ask because I had missed the non-compliant Acme label. I thought Acme was a real jacket builder.
It is certainly something that I would have regretted later.

I also wonder if it is relevant to choose a "Combat Clone" finish on a sheepskin jacket...

 

[mulceber]

I also wonder if it is relevant to choose a "Combat Clone" finish on a sheepskin jacket...

I've been thinking about asking John to do some wonky stitching on mine, to make it more like an original, but personally I avoid artificially aging my jackets. I'd much rather they develop character on their own. But there are different opinions on this. I am confident though that John would be the best person to do it, if you decide you want the artificial aging.