• 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.

Show us your redye A2s

foster

foster

Well-Known Member
I could see no brush strokes on my 15142, but the inside of the pockets was clear of the darker color.

As for the thread, it almost seemed like they used one color for the top thread, and a different for the bottom.
 
tda003

tda003

Well-Known Member
John has been more than generous sharing his knowledge, time and photos with me. This would be a great project for someone near him with time on his hands to undertake with his support. If I lived near, I'd certainly offer my time. Heck, if I could get a copy of "Full Gear...", I'd find someone to do the translation, but I haven't been able to find one anywhere.
 
Micawber

Micawber

Well-Known Member
mulceber said:
No kidding. Absolutely the worst job on a bomber.
Click to expand...

But statistically one of the 'safest' in terms of protection from flak and enemay a/c due to the increased amount of material around the gunner and position of the body.

Being airfield museum curator meant I met quite a number of BTO's and virtually to a man said they preferred the security of the ball turret and that they felt much more vulnerable in the waist or tail. A very good friend and B-17 BTO with the 91st had his life saved by his mate, one of the waist gunners. The ship had been hit and the bail out bell sounded but my chum could not get the ball to rotate down so that the hatch was inside the plane, just as he was about to jump out the waist doorway his waist gunner mate looked back expecting to see the ball hatch open and his mate Bud out, chest pack fixed and making his way to theaight down door - but Bud was nowhere to be seen. What he did see was a loose ammo can jammed in the ball gear! Quickly making his way over to the turret he tore the can loose so Bud was able to position the ball so that the hatch was inside the plane [.50's pointing straight down] enabling him to release his safety strap then aided by his mate scramble out, clip his chest pack on and get to the waist and jump. They both survived but were picked up and made POW.

Just one story from one of the many veterans I met and friends I knew - sadly all but a few have passed now.

There are stories that do the rounds of this or that BTO being trapped in his turret when the plane had to belly land. Most stem from one journalist story and others are invariably annectodal, corrabaritive evidence is hard to find. Standard procedure on a B-17 was to unbolt and release the ball turret if a both wheels up belly landing looked likely as landing with the turret in place would often break the back of the aircraft.
 
Last edited:
Dany McDonald

Dany McDonald

Well-Known Member
Micawber said:
But statistically one of the 'safest' in terms of protection from flak and enemay a/c due to the increased amount of material around the gunner and position of the body.

Being airfield museum curator meant I met quite a number of BTO's and virtually to a man said they preferred the security of the ball turret and that they felt much more vulnerable in the waist or tail. A very good friend and B-17 BTO with the 91st had his life saved by his mate, one of the waist gunners. The ship had been hit and the bail out bell sounded but my chum could not get the ball to rotate down so that the hatch was inside the plane, just as he was about to jump out the waist doorway his waist gunner mate looked back expecting to see the ball hatch open and his mate Bud out, chest pack fixed and making his way to theaight down door - but Bud was nowhere to be seen. What he did see was a loose ammo can jammed in the ball gear! Quickly making his way over to the turret he tore the can loose so Bud was able to position the ball so that the hatch was inside the plane [.50's pointing straight down] enabling him to release his safety strap then aided by his mate scramble out, clip his chest pack on and get to the waist and jump. They both survived but were picked up and made POW.

Just one story from one of the many veterans I met and friends I knew - sadly all but a few have passed now.
Click to expand...


Priceless anecdote! Enjoyed it and wish it took 10 times longer to read.

D
 
Micawber

Micawber

Well-Known Member
Dany McDonald said:
Priceless anecdote! Enjoyed it and wish it took 10 times longer to read.

D
Click to expand...

Ok a bit more. The evening before that last mission they somehow managed to either wangle a pass [or slip through a well used hole in the boundary fence behind the Waggon & Horses pub - without checking my memory is hazy on this] and went into Cambridge. Having a drink or two in one of the pubs Bud met a girl, got on well with her and arranged to meet her again the following evening ....but the following evening he was to be a 'guest of the Third reich'. When he came to stay with us for a week or two we took Bud back to that pub and shared a few drinks together. Special - and priviledged- times. When I can access my other external hard drive I will post a photo in the gallery of Bud and his crew.
 
Smithy

Smithy

Well-Known Member
Micawber said:
But statistically one of the 'safest' in terms of protection from flak and enemay a/c due to the increased amount of material around the gunner and position of the body.

Being airfield museum curator meant I met quite a number of BTO's and virtually to a man said they preferred the security of the ball turret and that they felt much more vulnerable in the waist or tail. A very good friend and B-17 BTO with the 91st had his life saved by his mate, one of the waist gunners. The ship had been hit and the bail out bell sounded but my chum could not get the ball to rotate down so that the hatch was inside the plane, just as he was about to jump out the waist doorway his waist gunner mate looked back expecting to see the ball hatch open and his mate Bud out, chest pack fixed and making his way to theaight down door - but Bud was nowhere to be seen. What he did see was a loose ammo can jammed in the ball gear! Quickly making his way over to the turret he tore the can loose so Bud was able to position the ball so that the hatch was inside the plane [.50's pointing straight down] enabling him to release his safety strap then aided by his mate scramble out, clip his chest pack on and get to the waist and jump. They both survived but were picked up and made POW.

Just one story from one of the many veterans I met and friends I knew - sadly all but a few have passed now.

There are stories that do the rounds of this or that BTO being trapped in his turret when the plane had to belly land. Most stem from one journalist story and others are invariably annectodal, corrabaritive evidence is hard to find. Standard procedure on a B-17 was to unbolt and release the ball turret if a both wheels up belly landing looked likely as landing with the turret in place would often break the back of the aircraft.
Click to expand...

Great stuff Steve and a reminder that bailing out of a stricken bomber wasn't a walk in a park.

As an aside and perhaps not well known was that bailing out of a British heavy bomber was more perilous than doing so out of an American heavy. Night added greatly to the difficulty but also for example Lancs were notoriously difficult to bail out of because of their small escape hatches and the mid spar blocking most movement to the rear. Initially the SOP was for the bomb aimer to open the nose hatch and chuck it out - except for the fact that because of airflow it very often jammed in place. The bomb aimer and that nose hatch was vital because if there was a problem then the chances of those chaps in the front section of the aircraft were very dismal. The Halifax in comparison had a slightly better bailout rate than the Lanc due to larger escape hatches and that many of the crew were grouped closer to the nose hatch. But bailing from a British bomber was far more less likely to be successful than from a US one. Depending on the bomber the rate of successfully bailing out of a British bomber lies somewhere between a 25% to 45% success rate, for something like a B-17 it's somewhere around 50% to 70%.
 
Micawber

Micawber

Well-Known Member
Smithy said:
Great stuff Steve and a reminder that bailing out of a stricken bomber wasn't a walk in a park.

As an aside and perhaps not well known was that bailing out of a British heavy bomber was more perilous than doing so out of an American heavy. Night added greatly to the difficulty but also for example Lancs were notoriously difficult to bail out of because of their small escape hatches and the mid spar blocking most movement to the rear. Initially the SOP was for the bomb aimer to open the nose hatch and chuck it out - except for the fact that because of airflow it very often jammed in place. The bomb aimer and that nose hatch was vital because if there was a problem then the chances of those chaps in the front section of the aircraft were very dismal. The Halifax in comparison had a slightly better bailout rate than the Lanc due to larger escape hatches and that many of the crew were grouped closer to the nose hatch. But bailing from a British bomber was far more less likely to be successful than from a US one. Depending on the bomber the rate of successfully bailing out of a British bomber lies somewhere between a 25% to 45% success rate, for something like a B-17 it's somewhere around 50% to 70%.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, well said Tim. I came close to mentioning the very same thing, the woeful survival rate was horrendous as were the chances of survival of the various crew positions of the various crew members in the event of enemy fighter attacks especially so for the rear and mid upper turret operators. I met, knew and was friends with a lot of chaps who flew in the RAF and Commonwealth Air Forces and they each have my utmost respect. The early war years when the likes of Hampdens, Whitleys and Wellingtons etc did their bit are so often overlooked as is the visually impressive Stirling. I salute them all.
 
Smithy

Smithy

Well-Known Member
Micawber said:
Sincere apologies for the tread drift!

If I had access to my old photo prints storage I could scan pics of the odd re-dyed original I had back in the day <sigh>

Thread almost back on track ;)
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with a bit of a tangent drift - I live by the Billy Connolly school of drifting off subject for a time only to suddenly rejoin it in a sudden and shock filled realisation that you have actually drifted off of said target!
 
Dany McDonald

Dany McDonald

Well-Known Member
Hey Bud, before we bail out into the wind and flak, can we define if my jacket is a re-dye or tannery prepared? I wanna sound sharp and informed when the SS-Oberscharführer frisk us at Stalag Luft III down there somewhere...

There you go back on track!!!

Dany
 
Dany McDonald

Dany McDonald

Well-Known Member
If I remember well they did run around the camp rounding the selected men to be executed after the great escape plan made herr Hitler red in rage. But very true it was under luft management not the other bunch...

D
 
P-47 thunderbolt

P-47 thunderbolt

Well-Known Member
Jorgeenriqueaguilera said:
Original Rough Wear Clothing Co. 23380View attachment 62909View attachment 62910
Click to expand...
B-Man2 said:
Grant and Dany
Really cool looking jackets you guys have . I love the way the Russett undertones bleed through the top coat after a few years of wear. Very nice .
Click to expand...

Here is my ELC
20211111_141947.jpg
20211111_142033.jpg
RW 27752. In the way it has worn is far more akin to a redye like Jorge's or Grant's than it is to an original 27752 that develop a dark patina and reddish undertones. I actually bought the ELC because it was like a redye and I love it, it has a dark brown, slightly shiny finish instead of the matte brown of an original 27752. It is certainly more realistic than their 'reissue/escape a2' but I wouldn't say it was true to ww2 spec
20211111_143118.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

Total: 402 (members: 18, guests: 384)

Latest posts

Share this page

Top