Snug or loose fit on WW2 flight jackets? Whats more "authentic"?

[Cooper A-2]

Maybe already discussed.
What is more like the WW2 fit of A-2, B-3 Irvin etc...snug and tight or loose?
All photos I have seen, more loose, not snug, not tight...
Opinions?

 

[Seb Lucas]

Coop, for A2's this comes up all the time and has been worked over pretty well. Do a search. My take on this is that the men were young and skinny and the jackets patterned trim. They were given jackets that were fitted trim or loose depending on the quartermaster's whims. You can find period photos of every kind of fit so really there is no authentic fit. But that won't stop people from having a bias.

 

[devilish]

The A-2 and G-1 fit varied vastly. The got what they got given. I do expect, just like today, each guy had his own preference though? Also knowing how things in wartime worked, I also expect a lot of horse trading went on so personal preferences could be reached? Not to mention the odd new guy coming back to barracks, suddenly to find his jacket has suspiciously changed size while he was gone??
As for the fleece jackets they tended to run big. They had to fit over all the other cold temp flight gear. A lot of pictures of Irvins especially look big because the RAF pilots would wear them when not flying. So they would be just over a regular uniform, giving a more loose appearance.

 

[jacketjunkie]

I think soldiers in WW2 had more concerning issues to deal with than style-points for their outfit. They certainly wore whatever got the job done and an inch more or less in body or sleeves was completly irrelevant to them.

 

[devilish]

^While I agree with this to some extent. Especially when it came to the front lines. However, GI's were human too and whenever possible they would want to look as good as possible in their uniforms. R n' R being one time in particular they'd want to look sharp.
Now as for Flyboys, well we all know how high an opinion of themselves some (not all) had. You can't tell me they wouldn't want the best looking A-2 they could get? After all it was those leather jackets that set them apart. Be it the A-2 or B-3 or Irvin, I am sure that caché was one of the reasons Patton and Monty chose to appropriate a couple?

 

[Peacoat]

As Seb Lucas said above, this topic has been worked over pretty good. Lots of different opinions. See below link for a 4 page discussion of the topic.

http://www.thefedoralounge.com/threads/correct-fit-flight-jackets.85117/

 

[Cooper A-2]

Thx to all.
Will do some search here.

 

[rocketeer]

'Authentic', 'Vintage', 'Classic', 'Original' They are only words that can be manipulated however the writer wishes to convey. Describe something using all of them and the object of desire is probably nothing like the description.

 

[Deacon211]

Be a bit careful with your expectations of where these jackets were worn.

These items were, and to an extent are, flight equipment. I can't say without hesitation that these jackets were never worn off base, but the overwhelming impression I have is that you weren't hanging around London or Honolulu pubs in your flight jacket showing Bugs Bunny kicking Hitler in the "Sudetenland", if you take my meaning.

You got your jacket, there was an attempt to give you a size that would fit you, and you wore it for flying. Maybe you wore it off base in the war zone when you were on flying business.

But, as cool as they were, I'm pretty doubtful that you were going on leave wearing it.

In the Marines, the flight jacket still is (or at least was) not authorized to be worn off base, on leave, or liberty. You could sneak about in it depending on how far from the flagpole you were. But there are always stories of hapless officers standing duty in full dress blues (w/ sword) for being caught off base by particularly inventive Group Commanders.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Technonut]

I've read stories of AAF vets who when asked, didn't know who the maker of their A-2 was, and didn't really care. As posted above, it was flight gear, and served an utilitarian purpose. Hell, there are many surviving A-2 examples out there with specks of paint all over them from returning vets who used them to protect their clothing while house-painting. When another vet was asked which jacket he liked more between the A-2 and B-10, he referred to them as 'the brown leather one', and 'the cloth one'...

I'm sure there were some officers out there who cared about their appearance in an A-2, as evidenced by the private-purchase jackets seen, but these officers more than likely had tailor-made uniforms as well. I probably have over 1000 period pics of AAF personnel in A-2's, and the majority of them are NOT snug-tight fitting. Folks seem to not realize that the A-2 was worn over undergarments, service shirt, a flight suit / coveralls, etc... It couldn't work for that purpose if it were tight-fitting with merely a tee-shirt worn underneath..

For me these days (going on 54 years old) comfort is king when choosing an A-2. I like a balance between baggy and too-snug, while still maintaining the 'look' of an accurate period pattern. I also like to get more than a couple month's of wear from an A-2 yearly, so it helps to have enough room to comfortably wear some layers, or a medium-thickness sweater, and still have room to move around in.

Here's some various pics to illustrate:

 

[Doctor Strange]

Stick with the photos. You CANNOT trust to elderly vets' memories.

My dad had been in the Air Corps, but not a flier. When I got interested in A-2s around 15 years ago, he said, "Boy, I always envied those beautiful leather jackets my flyboy buddies had." To honor his service, we got him a Bradley Associates A-2 replica, which was the bargain not-bad WWII A-2 repro back then. And despite its chocolate-colored cowhide, synthetic lining and knits, YKK zipper, too-big collar and pockets, too-thin epaulets, and other inaccuracies... he pronounced it, "Exactly like the ones I saw back in the war!"

Dad in a borrowed jacket in 1943:

His Bradley Associates jacket in 2009:

 

[pak]

Technonut, thank you for the photos. I especially like the one where the A-2 is layered under the B-3.

 

[Pdxgeo]

In the second photo down of the rakish young man I love the way that leather falls. I think he felt the same way. I know they generally felt these were utilitarian but that dude looks cool and he feels it.

 

[scotrace]

I interviewed a 90 year old vet who was a tail gunner on a B24 last year. He showed me his jacket, and I checked the tag for the maker.

He: "Huh. I never once thought to look."

 

[Pdxgeo]

I would imagine they never knew there were different "makers" back then. They might have cared more about how cool it looked on them but to be like "oh, i really want a Bronco" was likely not a thing...

 

[green papaya]

The men were much slimmer with lighter frames back then, plus they were young, the A2 should fit big enough to still have freedom of movement if wearing flyers coveralls and thermals, judging by the wartime photos their jackets still fit with room to move.

I noticed people these days that buy modern reproductions always buy them too "snug" for fashion, just big enough to fit with a tshirt or light pull over, they need to fit bigger than that if you want to wear them correctly as flight gear how they were intended.