ausreenactor
Well-Known Member
That is a Switlik A-2 label... They produced a lot of gear, not A-2s.... Even knocking up one label to move a jacket would be a chore for a nefarious dealer or vendor...
-
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.
missing link?
- Thread starter Silver Surfer
- Start date
Ken at Aero Leather
Well-Known Member
Looks to me like a machine sewn label done after the jacket was finished, probably done through the opened sleeve lining seam, very hard to do a convincing job this way. Also label hread looks different (thicker) than body thread
Would also explain the spool(bobbin) thread showing, lifting the foot during manouevre of the work will loosen the top stitch, tightens again when foot drops causing uneven tension on top thread. Lots of foot lifting needed while attempting sewing a small area (label) through the arm lining
Last edited:
Ken at Aero Leather
Well-Known Member
More important..............who actually made the jacket?
Ken at Aero Leather
Well-Known Member
Knowing the asking price would be the best guide to this theory
If it wasn't so obviously rare to start with the thinking that a mocked up label would increase the value seems to be counter productive.............at least to my logic.
Ken at Aero Leather
Well-Known Member
Agreed 100%
Officer Dibley
Well-Known Member
Exactly my point In post #31 ..... if ya paid $25 for it, likely original. If ya paid $5k for it, possible scam ....
Ken at Aero Leather
Well-Known Member
Am I correct in thinking that no photos nor a verified Werber 34-518P has surfaced so far?
Could this be one?
Could this be one?
2BM2K
Well-Known Member
None have been identified, it is in the right time period but this jacket does not have the characteristic knit colour of Werber.
Lorenzo_l
Well-Known Member
The collar and pockets look nothing like the Werber 33-1729's either. If it was, it would be a departure from that contract.
Last edited:
Ken at Aero Leather
Well-Known Member
Points of note and question?
1. Shows top thread on original top stitch
2. Shows spool thread of the orignal back of the zip topstitch. Which proves that the original method of top stitching an A-2 zipper was to topstitch the zipper with the leather side up not the easier way, lining up, as used in some WW2 contracts (Lower skill levels needed)
3. A very strange place indeed to ever need restitching, especially as the adjacent zipper thread is original and untouched, so not part of any other repair???????????
The darker brown (aftermarket) thread can be clearly seen over some of the original spool thread so unlikely to be a factory error restitched on the day of manufacture
The plot thickens
John Lever
Moderator
I am stunned at the levels of knowledge here.
MikeyB-17
Well-Known Member
There seems to be some very wonky stitching in places, especially where that bit of dark brown thread is, and possibly on the seam further to the left higher up? Also in one of the other pics along the bottom edge of the lining above the waist knit. Don't know if this helps, just observing.
mulceber
Moderator
2BM2K
Well-Known Member
Here are some ideas and speculations;
If the jacket was made before 1934 then there were only three known contractors; SAT, Werber
and Goldsmith.
The double stitched pocket and flap would rule out SAT and Werber but Goldsmith did use double stitching on the pocket.
If Goldsmith did make the jacket then there could be a number of reasons for it.
1. Goldsmith had a second contract
2. They made a commercial jacket.
3. They made another test jacket.
The provenance of the jacket is key and trying to identify the original wearer would help. I find it interesting that the jacket was at Wright-Patterson Field, home of the Materials Division and not far from Cincinnati, Ohio, where the Goldsmith Factory was.
Of all the places where I would expect to find a Goldsmith jacket Wright-Patterson is at the top of the list.
But then there is also the label to puzzle over.
If the jacket was made before 1934 then there were only three known contractors; SAT, Werber
and Goldsmith.
The double stitched pocket and flap would rule out SAT and Werber but Goldsmith did use double stitching on the pocket.
If Goldsmith did make the jacket then there could be a number of reasons for it.
1. Goldsmith had a second contract
2. They made a commercial jacket.
3. They made another test jacket.
The provenance of the jacket is key and trying to identify the original wearer would help. I find it interesting that the jacket was at Wright-Patterson Field, home of the Materials Division and not far from Cincinnati, Ohio, where the Goldsmith Factory was.
Of all the places where I would expect to find a Goldsmith jacket Wright-Patterson is at the top of the list.
But then there is also the label to puzzle over.
B-Man2
Well-Known Member
According to all contract records found on the Goldsmith, there was only one contract of 50 jackets and to the best of my limited knowledge. button hole pockets were in use for those jackets and the Sat jackets that followed. Pocket and collar snaps were soon to follow with the Werber but hadn’t been used up to that point in time. The jacket pockets and collar areas look to be original to the jacket so wouldn’t that mean that this jacket is more than likely after the period of the Goldsmith and Sat? Lastly , is there a possibility that this could be a commercially produced jacket made by Switlik, sort of a repro of that period of time . The Wright Patterson area was a dominant area of military flight and there were probably several companies producing flight gear and clothing for commercial use that replicated military issued clothing and gear .
Just trying to think outside the box a bit.
Just trying to think outside the box a bit.
saucerfiend
Well-Known Member
Here's their B-2
