Mystery M-422/G-1/Who the heck knows-You guys do !

[bozko]

***First thing-sorry for so many Pics! I've learned frm past experience that frequently it's in the details.
Here's the story-A pal gave me one of his Dad's jackets when his pa passed.His dad worked as a civilian contractor mechanic at Naval Auxiliary Landing Field (NALF) Santa Rosa, California.The base was commissioned in 1943 & decommissioned in 1953.There are no tags,stencils or perforations in the jacket ID'ing it as US Naval Property.
I'd welcome Your opinions re:Military or Civilian Issue,probable date of manufacture & ID of manufacturer.Thanks very much for any info on this long-time (had it for 40 yrs) mystery piece.

 

[mulceber]

Pretty sure it's a Block M-422A:

• Gotta be M-422 series, since that zipper is early-war.
• thread-bound vent holes at the armpits, instead of grommets - a unique feature of the Blocks
• salmon red lining, zipper construction and pockets shapes all match the Block.

 

[Skyhawk]

Yep my guess is HL Block M422a. Red liner, Embroidered vent holes and the pocket shape. The stencil appears to have been removed and covered up by something with a lighter shade of brown. With the Brass M-39 talon it could be a M422 as well.

 

[bozko]

You guys are phenomenal-You ought to branch-out into ID'ing unlabeled Stradivarius Violins ! So 'HL Block' was a manufacturer ,and why would they remove the Naval Stencil-resale/decommission after the War ? Early War I assume is a year or two after Pearl ?

 

[mulceber]

Yep - the contract was awarded in May of 1942 and completed in August of the same year.

why would they remove the Naval Stencil-resale/decommission after the War ?

I'm not sure this was the case with the Navy, but among the Air Force it was somewhat common practice to remove stuff that would identify it as government property, for fear that the military would ask for the jacket back when the airman left the service. If this jacket's owner had a similar fear, it would explain the USN stencil being covered up and the spec label being removed.

btw, you can find pics of another jacket from the same contract in post #9 of this thread.

 

[Skyhawk]

You guys are phenomenal-You ought to branch-out into ID'ing unlabeled Stradivarius Violins ! So 'HL Block' was a manufacturer ,and why would they remove the Naval Stencil-resale/decommission after the War ? Early War I assume is a year or two after Pearl ?

That would not have been done by the government. That would have been done after the jacket left the custody of the USN. The reason is a mystery.

 

[Skyhawk]

@mulceber
JINX

 

[Skyhawk]

With the USN, I don't think they required the Vet pilots to turn in their jackets. I know when I left the USN in the 1990's, you could keep whatever you wanted but if you didn't turn it in, they charged you for it. Deducted out of your last pay check.

 

[Chandler]

Pretty sure it's a Block M-422A:

• Gotta be M-422 series, since that zipper is early-war.
• thread-bound vent holes at the armpits, instead of grommets - a unique feature of the Blocks
• salmon red lining, zipper construction and pockets shapes all match the Block.

My AN-6552 has the stitched vents and salmon lining. Did Block continue the practices beyond the M-422?

 

[Silver Surfer]

block m-422a. the zipper box is the type made in 42. if the jacket was a m-422, it would have a sunrise talon stopper [circa 1940-41]. all the same

 

[Maverickson]

Hi All,

Yes, the jacket is a Block. Furthermore Block was one of those makers that did not always completely follow the M-422A specs. In this case requiring that horizontal stitch work so often seen at the backside of USN leather flight jacket collars. That stitch work was not required on the pre War M-422. Later adopted for the M-422A . Yet missing on all Block jackets.

Sometime back I ran into a fellow that swore his Block (non labeled but readily identifiable) jacket was a preWar M-422. Inspite of having an M-41 or M-42 zip and not the correct M-39. Be that as it may I could not convince him otherwise. That hard head was convinced that all USN specs were always followed for each and every given model.

He went so far as to tell me that the USN would never have accepted jackets that did not meet all USN specifications for a given model. In his defense. Block was probably the only War era USN jacket maker that failed to completely follow that extra collar stitch work that was not required on the pre War M-422.

As far as flight gear ownership goes officers paid for their flight gear upon issue. I know this is true because I have an original receipt and have seen others. The USN went so far as to quantify each and every piece of issued gear. Their jackets and other gear always belonged to them and because of that not required to turn back in.

Cheers, Dave

 

[bozko]

Sorry Guys,I'm a 'rookie' getting confused.So what yrs/months was this prob made best guess-M422,M422A ?

 

[mulceber]

Sorry Guys,I'm a 'rookie' getting confused.So what yrs/months was this prob made best guess-M422,M422A ?

the contract was awarded in May of 1942 and completed in August of the same year.

 

[Chandler]

Sorry Guys,I'm a 'rookie' getting confused.So what yrs/months was this prob made best guess-M422,M422A ?

Discussion: “A Better Fighting Garment…” - A Beginner’s Guide to the US Navy’s WWII-era and later Intermediate Flight Jackets

INTRODUCTION There have been various threads on VLJ which have listed the US Navy contracts from the M-422 to G-1 series of leather flying jackets. This thread is an attempt to pool the information into a beginners guide to sit alongside the A-2 contract dates thread as a resource on the Forum...

www.vintageleatherjackets.org

8th post in this very comprehensive thread.

 

[Skyhawk]

My AN-6552 has the stitched vents and salmon lining. Did Block continue the practices beyond the M-422?

California Sportswear and some runs of early L.W. Foster had threaded eyelets. California Sportswear could be a possibility with the red liner.

 

[bozko]

I just finished 'A Better Fighting Garment...' -extraordinary research.What an amazing book/booklet it would make.Generally I find scholarship of this type easier to fully grasp in hard copy form,but that's just me.It could just be organized into sections/chapters w/color photos & all the debates/add-ons & quibbles could be fully listed in a complete 'Footnotes' section.
A fee could be charged for the finished downloadable product-just a thought.I'd definitely have this & the A-2 guide w/ me for Fleas,Boots,Estate Sales,Militaria Shows,etc.The funds could be allotted to this Forum or individual Contributors-even 'gratis' forums seem to have a way of costing someone money !
PS-Great editing (organizational-not cutting),can take a great deal of time and talent.
-Superb work all !