Epaulette accuracy- various repros compared to original Aeros- 21996, 18775, 15142

[DiamondDave]

O

Has ANYONE posting on this thread ever worked in a proper sweat shop
I mean one where anything goes and the stopwatch is king?
That's what Aero in Beaconduring 1942 would have beenlike
And yes I have spent a few months in one

K

Not relevant once again. This thread is about poor fitting and ill-patterned pieces made by a reproduction company, and not, as you claim, about Aero, Beacon. You don’t even own the name “Aero leather Clo Co” Anywhere but your own country, and yet want to demand that people not use a proper label?


Keep digging,
DD

 

[Skyhawk]

I would think 60%-75% of the "X" showing seems to be what most of these photos (thus far) show. But I have not had access to handle as many original A-2's as you and many others on this forum. It almost looks like they made up epaulets the same and smaller sizes of finished jackets had more of the X not showing? Just making a guess and I could be wrong.

I would say that is very possible. Some contracts (Most?) made the pockets the same on all of them. They could have people hammering out eps and pockets all day. Then just have boxes of them to pull from.

 

[Ken at Aero Leather]

foster said:


Epaulet images from my original Aero 15142

View attachment 26671

View attachment 26672

See the ep’s aren’t even identical to each other, much less any other jacket. Or contract for that matter.

Nice to see DD can even argue with himself!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Priceless

 

[2BM2K]

Here is a 18775 jacket with a centred cross;

 

[Ken at Aero Leather]

I would say that is very possible. Some contracts (Most?) made the pockets the same on all of them. They could have people hammering out eps and pockets all day. Then just have boxes of them to pull from.

Yes, but as you know, sewing them on the fronts would have been one job/part in the production line. Once the X was sewn the amount that got lost (or not) in the sleeve seam was inevitable.
If one X sewer left more room for the sleeve seam than another more of the X would show. Hence the variations.

 

[Ken at Aero Leather]

Ken,,I need you to get back to me pronto,,Iv just checked my epaulets and the label on my jacket,,I’m just going to count the stitches now,,to say I’m shocked is an understatement ,is my jacket accurate?
The fact that I love my jacket is irrelevant,,I’m now waiting on some nugget to approach me in Glasgow and berate me for being taken in ,,,this jacket is heading to the classified section if this true ,A very miffed Peter.View attachment 26649View attachment 26650View attachment 26651

Fortunately, as an owner of a 1938 repro you can relax.
In those days, with no war on the US horizon (at least), Aero Beacon machinists weren't under the pressure they were in during 1942 (The theme of this thread)
They, like Aero Scotland's machinists had the time and inclination to be neat while fitting the epaulette X, taking care to see the X wasn't going to be half/three quarter lost in the shoulder seam

 

[Grant]

Sorry, doesn’t seem ludicrous to those who hope on improving your product. We’re just pointing out ways Aero could make their repro A-2 better. Your reaction speaks volumes.

 

[Ken at Aero Leather]

Sorry, doesn’t seem ludicrous to those who hope on improving your product. We’re just pointing out ways Aero could make their repro A-2 better. Your reaction speaks volumes.

How can copying obvious sloppy errors improve our product?

 

[petermack09]

Fortunately, as an owner of a 1938 repro you can relax.
In those days, with no war on the US horizon (at least), Aero Beacon machinists weren't under the pressure they were in during 1942 (The theme ofthis thread)
They, like Aero Scotland's machinists had the time and inclination to be neat while fitting the epaulette X, tyaking care to see the X wasn't going to be half/three quarter lost in the shoulder seam

That will do for me Ken.thanks for taking the time out to get back to me.For the record,my jacket has held up great over the years,and I’m sure it will be passed on to one of my grandsons who won’t give a shit about any issues,real or not,,As far as I’m concerned Edith sewed this jacket together better than any original

 

[ZuZu]

How can copying obvious sloppy errors improve our product?

Again- Awwww come on! The reason eps on the original Aeros looked the way they did was because of the sewing order they used! Each one of those cut off "X"s on the epaulettes which show up on 99% of originals happened because of the order in which the eps were sewn on. You'll never find a Rough Wear with this "flaw" because that "X" was sewn AFTER the sleeve was sewn in. I believe earlier collar stand Aeros may have been sewn like this also. But the mid-war simple collar Aeros were sewn so that the end of the "X" was often cut off. You should have caught this during the handling of the thousands of Aero originals you took apart. Also- if I want a repro of a specific jacket contract I don't want it interpreted and cleaned up! What does the supposed hooror of the sweat shop conditions the jackets were made under have to do with anything? The original jackets we handle today look a certain way- replicate it if you're going to claim 100% pattern accuracy etc.!

 

[Ken at Aero Leather]

Again- Awwww come on! The reason eps on the original Aeros looked the way they did was because of the sewing order they used! Each one of those cut off "X"s on the epaulettes which show up on 99% of originals happened because of the order in which the eps were sewn on. You'll never find a Rough Wear with this "flaw" because that "X" was sewn AFTER the sleeve was sewn in. I believe earlier collar stand Aeros may have been sewn like this also. But the mid-war simple collar Aeros were sewn so that the end of the "X" was often cut off. You should have caught this during the handling of the thousands of Aero originals you took apart. Also- if I want a repro of a specific jacket contract I don't want it interpreted and cleaned up! What does the supposed hooror of the sweat shop conditions the jackets were made under have to do with anything? The original jackets we handle today look a certain way- replicate it if you're going to claim 100% pattern accuracy etc.!

See in bold
Spoken by a man who has obviously never made a jacket

 

[DiamondDave]

Jeff is absolutely correct about the Rough Wear pattern. Wrong again Ken.

Keep Digging,
DD

 

[2BM2K]

Here is a 1939 Aero 3785 contract;

 

[Ken at Aero Leather]

Jeff is absolutely correct about the Rough Wear pattern. Wrong again Ken.

Keep Digging,
DD

If it's missed the dreaded missing section of the X how can you tell what order the stitch was done in?
Logic says 100% pre the sleeve fitting

 

[Grant]

It's not just epaulets.
What about more accurate spec labels, proper snaps, accurate zips, cotton thread, proper stitching?
Why is it Good Wear, Kelso and Diamond Dave all make more accurate Aero repros than Aero?

 

[DiamondDave]

If it's missed the dreaded missing section of the X how can you tell what order the stitch was done in?
Logic says 100% pre the sleeve fitting

Because when taken apart, original Rough Wears, have the X going through the sleeves seam allowance, as well as the body panels. Not possible if not sewn on after the fact.

DD

 

[ZuZu]

See in bold
Spoken by a man who has obviously never made a jacket

No- I never completed a jacket- however I did take a sewing class specifically to make a jacket- the one I was copying was missing the lining. The first thing the teacher taught me was that linings have to be slightly larger to accommodate movement. It's known sewing practice. Soooo....

 

[B-Man2]

My Original Aero 21996 for review

 

[B-Man2]

My Bad Dave
I posted the wrong jacket.
The one above is an original 21996
sorry

 

[DiamondDave]

My Aero 21996 for reviewView attachment 26704

Made exactly as expected by a skilled operator at Aero Leather of Beacon NY.
DD