MaydayWei
Well-Known Member
Good evening gentlemen,
Tonight I am writing to you all wearing the jacket in question.
I recently purchased this 7823D (WP) Martin Lane G-1 and I can say confidently that the jacket itself is genuine issue; my question is whether or not its patchwork legitimate or a later addition.
Photos will follow at the bottom, reasons for and against are as follows.
For:
I am of the opinion that the patchwork is legitimate because of the chronological consistency and historical accuracy of the story that the patches seem to tell.
Please note the following:
(A) The jacket itself is dated to 1968 (DSA100-68...); and
(B) It has 7 patches:
on the front it has [1] an ATRKON-145 patch and [2] a USS Ranger patch;
on the right arm, [3] an A6 Intruder patch;
on the left arm, [4] a Tonkin Gulf Yacht club patch; and
on the back, a [5] USS Enterprise Patch, [6] a carrier air wing 9 patch; and [7] an ATKRON-145 labelled Hawaiin Occupation patch (with the dates 14 JAN 69 & 4 MAR 69).
If indeed it was worn by a VA-145 pilot, all the patches weave a historically accurate and chronologically consistent story.
The jacket would have been issued to a new pilot in 68; fresh outta flight school he would go on to fly the A6 with VA-145 on his first cruise in 1969 with USS Enterprise (which was part of Carrier Air Wing 9 in 69). [This explains patches [1], [3]. [5] and [6])
However, the USS Enterprise suffered an explosion (on the 14th JAN 69) which put it into repair in Hawaii till MAR the 4th of 69. (This explains patch [7])
Being fixed up in MAR of 69, the Enterprise went on to serve in Vietnam. (Hence, patch [4])
Finally, after the 69 cruise, the pilot may then have continued with VA-145 on its OCT 70 - JUN 71 cruise aboard the Ranger; the directly subsequent cruise to the 69 Enterprise Cruise. (thereby explaining patch [2])
Hence, the pilot would have served to back to back tours with VA-145.
Assuming all the patches are legitimate, the story it tells is indeed chronologically consistent and historically accurate. (See: https://www.seaforces.org/usnair/VA/Attack-Squadron-145.htm)
I feel it would be highly unlikely that someone would illegitimately recreate the patchwork on this jacket to such a fine degree of historical accuracy and consistency; save, of course, for someone with the uncommon perseverance and eye for detail like @Maverickson (in recreating his father's jacket to a tee).
Against:
The strongest indication that the patchwork is not legitimate is the obvious lack of aviator wings/leather name tag with the pilot's name on it. Nor did I find any tag removal holes/patch marks where the name tag should have been (left breast).
It is my understanding that, despite having no patchwork guidelines, the USN requires an aviator's rank, name and wings to always be on his left breast.
Another thing was that, being totally candid, the jacket came with an additional USS Coral Sea patch; which would seem to suggest that someone may have wanted to patch up the jacket based on a different squadron aboard the Coral Sea but subsequently decided to go with VA-145 patchwork instead (?)
That's the best of my reasoning so far. But, honestly, the jacket spoke to the 'Top Gun' in me. It was my size, so I threw in an offer and went for it.
I especially love the colour of that collar; its a nice rust in the shade and a beautiful golden brown in direct sunlight.
Please share your thoughts, I would love to hear what you all have to say.
PS, I have my eye on an NOS E model Brill Bros. G-1 in 36; talk me out of it, please!
Fit pics to come soon!
Pictures:
View attachment VA-145 G-1 Front .jpeg
View attachment VA-145 G-1 Right Chest.jpeg
View attachment VA-145 G-1 Left Chest.jpeg
View attachment VA-145 G-1 Front Collar.jpeg
View attachment VA-145 G-1 Back Patches.jpeg
Tonight I am writing to you all wearing the jacket in question.
I recently purchased this 7823D (WP) Martin Lane G-1 and I can say confidently that the jacket itself is genuine issue; my question is whether or not its patchwork legitimate or a later addition.
Photos will follow at the bottom, reasons for and against are as follows.
For:
I am of the opinion that the patchwork is legitimate because of the chronological consistency and historical accuracy of the story that the patches seem to tell.
Please note the following:
(A) The jacket itself is dated to 1968 (DSA100-68...); and
(B) It has 7 patches:
on the front it has [1] an ATRKON-145 patch and [2] a USS Ranger patch;
on the right arm, [3] an A6 Intruder patch;
on the left arm, [4] a Tonkin Gulf Yacht club patch; and
on the back, a [5] USS Enterprise Patch, [6] a carrier air wing 9 patch; and [7] an ATKRON-145 labelled Hawaiin Occupation patch (with the dates 14 JAN 69 & 4 MAR 69).
If indeed it was worn by a VA-145 pilot, all the patches weave a historically accurate and chronologically consistent story.
The jacket would have been issued to a new pilot in 68; fresh outta flight school he would go on to fly the A6 with VA-145 on his first cruise in 1969 with USS Enterprise (which was part of Carrier Air Wing 9 in 69). [This explains patches [1], [3]. [5] and [6])
However, the USS Enterprise suffered an explosion (on the 14th JAN 69) which put it into repair in Hawaii till MAR the 4th of 69. (This explains patch [7])
Being fixed up in MAR of 69, the Enterprise went on to serve in Vietnam. (Hence, patch [4])
Finally, after the 69 cruise, the pilot may then have continued with VA-145 on its OCT 70 - JUN 71 cruise aboard the Ranger; the directly subsequent cruise to the 69 Enterprise Cruise. (thereby explaining patch [2])
Hence, the pilot would have served to back to back tours with VA-145.
Assuming all the patches are legitimate, the story it tells is indeed chronologically consistent and historically accurate. (See: https://www.seaforces.org/usnair/VA/Attack-Squadron-145.htm)
I feel it would be highly unlikely that someone would illegitimately recreate the patchwork on this jacket to such a fine degree of historical accuracy and consistency; save, of course, for someone with the uncommon perseverance and eye for detail like @Maverickson (in recreating his father's jacket to a tee).
Against:
The strongest indication that the patchwork is not legitimate is the obvious lack of aviator wings/leather name tag with the pilot's name on it. Nor did I find any tag removal holes/patch marks where the name tag should have been (left breast).
It is my understanding that, despite having no patchwork guidelines, the USN requires an aviator's rank, name and wings to always be on his left breast.
Another thing was that, being totally candid, the jacket came with an additional USS Coral Sea patch; which would seem to suggest that someone may have wanted to patch up the jacket based on a different squadron aboard the Coral Sea but subsequently decided to go with VA-145 patchwork instead (?)
That's the best of my reasoning so far. But, honestly, the jacket spoke to the 'Top Gun' in me. It was my size, so I threw in an offer and went for it.
I especially love the colour of that collar; its a nice rust in the shade and a beautiful golden brown in direct sunlight.
Please share your thoughts, I would love to hear what you all have to say.
PS, I have my eye on an NOS E model Brill Bros. G-1 in 36; talk me out of it, please!
Fit pics to come soon!
Pictures:
View attachment VA-145 G-1 Front .jpeg
View attachment VA-145 G-1 Right Chest.jpeg
View attachment VA-145 G-1 Left Chest.jpeg
View attachment VA-145 G-1 Front Collar.jpeg
View attachment VA-145 G-1 Back Patches.jpeg
