U.S. Navy bridge coats

[Doctor Damage]

NEW POST

Following on from posts #11 and #12 above, here's a coats with rank stripes on the cuffs for a Lt Commander (this was stated in the etsy listing I got this photo from as they named the officer).



Here's one for a Captain.

 

[Ernest P Shackleton]

POST #12 WITH UPDATED PHOTO LINKS

Coat with 1 thick, 1 thin cuff stripes, presumably for a Lt. What’s interesting to me about these vintage coats is that their condition is often excellent, which I think demonstrates that many of these coats never got much use.

That's a funny observation. I had to save and save and save to buy mine from the vintage store, being a kid and having no consistent income. I was rather obsessed with it and drove the store owners nuts coming to look at it all the time. I finally bought it, hung it, and maybe...maybe...wore it once on a walk down the street. The walk was just so I could wear it. The walk served no other purpose. It was both so thick/heavy and a strange garment due to length etc that I could never figure out when to wear it. My brother used it for some school pictures, which is the only time it got any real use. Granted, civilian vs actual duty use, but I can see it being a piece of clothing for very particular use; thus, not seeing much use.

I tried to see in all the photos, but I couldn't find anything. Mine had a thickish chain for the hang loop. Is that common?

 

[freakazoid]

I have never run across a guide to the black cuff stripes for officers on bridge coats (and in the Army, greatcoats) so if someone has a guide please post a link. I think generals/admirals had a wide stripe, and other officers had thin stripes, but in what combination I personally don't know. Those sorts of stripes were for officers only and I doubt at the time chiefs were allowed to wear bridge coats (as they are allowed today).

I'd assume that the black cuff stripes would be the same as the gold for what they mean. Will need to see if I can find some old navy regulations that talk about who can wear the bridge coat. Need an old Bluejacket manual.

Here's something relevant, though:
https://www.history.navy.mil/browse...rms-and-personal-equipment/uniforms-1941.html

quote:
The captain’s overcoat is basically that of the 1922 order, which in turn was a modification of the World War I bridge coat. The 1913 outer coat had been worn completely buttoned, using black buttons. Gilt buttons were first permitted in November 1919 when the style of the overcoat was modified to bring it in closer agreement with the newly introduced double-breasted sack service coat. The first mention of an overcoat for officers appeared in the 1841 uniform instructions. In 1941, as in 1913, rank was shown on the sleeves with black braid with shoulder marks indicating both rank and corps.

This suggests that on WW2 era bridge coats the black cuff stripes showed rank the same as the epaulets and cuff stripes on service coats. That might explain why we see vintage bridge coats on e-bay and whatnot with weird combinations of cuff stripes.

I wonder what this "double-breasted sack service coat" is. From here, http://www.usww2uniforms.com/USN_officer_men_blue_service_coat.html It sounds like the "sack" is a design where the two halves are joined together on the back.

Here's links to download the US Navy Uniform Regulations for 1913, 1922, and 1941:
https://archive.org/details/cu31924030896363/page/n6
https://archive.org/details/uniformregulatio00unit
https://media.defense.gov/2018/May/31/2001925044/-1/-1/0/1941-USN-UNIFORMREGS.PDF

I've got one of those Japanese vintage clothing books and it has several pages of vintage bridge coats and peacoats. The old bridge coats had peacoat buttons or something similar, and some even had handwarmer pockets like peacoats (someone posted a coat like that earlier in this thread). It's clear that for a period in the past, it would appear WW1 and inter-war, that there was a lot of crossover between bridge coats and peacoats, leading to in WW2 a distinct differentiation between the two. I believe the very oldest, most vintage bridge coats, like in those scratchy old photos I posted, the bridge coats were unique items (custom made of course) and would have had a variety of details and probably didn't match any particular garment specifications.

Very interested in the Japanese book.

 

[Doctor Damage]

I wonder what this "double-breasted sack service coat" is. From here, http://www.usww2uniforms.com/USN_officer_men_blue_service_coat.html It sounds like the "sack" is a design where the two halves are joined together on the back.

Nearly all jackets have that centre seam on the back. Sack is a term often used in the first half of the 20th Century in American contexts and is more related to civilian clothing and typically means coats without front scythes or 'darts' (but this Navy jacket has them, so it's not really a sack). I have no idea why they're using the word sack in relation to the jacket in the photos, other than it was a term used in the civilian clothing world at the time, and even in the clothing industry terms are used willy nilly. Frankly I don't trust the text and wouldn't give it too much weight on this point.

Very interested in the Japanese book.

Here it is. It's all photos, basically no text. Worth getting in my opinion. You can find them on e-bay sometimes.

 

[Doctor Damage]

Here's links to download the US Navy Uniform Regulations for 1913, 1922, and 1941:
https://archive.org/details/cu31924030896363/page/n6
https://archive.org/details/uniformregulatio00unit
https://media.defense.gov/2018/May/31/2001925044/-1/-1/0/1941-USN-UNIFORMREGS.PDF

I've got one of those Japanese vintage clothing books and it has several pages of vintage bridge coats and peacoats. The old bridge coats had peacoat buttons or something similar, and some even had handwarmer pockets like peacoats (someone posted a coat like that earlier in this thread). It's clear that for a period in the past, it would appear WW1 and inter-war, that there was a lot of crossover between bridge coats and peacoats, leading to in WW2 a distinct differentiation between the two. I believe the very oldest, most vintage bridge coats, like in those scratchy old photos I posted, the bridge coats were unique items (custom made of course) and would have had a variety of details and probably didn't match any particular garment specifications.

Further to this, I've flipped through those three uniform regulations and in the second half of each there are illustrations. In the 1913 regulation officers and CPOs have bridge coats ("Overcoats") which are basically the same as pea coats of the era except with larger collars and skirts that extend below the knees, including the normal peacoat buttons and handwarmer pockets above the hip pockets, and lapels that are intended to button right up to the neck. In the 1922 regulation officers have what we know as the more modern bridge coat with lapels and button placement for the lapels/revers to be permanently folded down, gold buttons, and half-belt at back with gold buttons, while CPOs have the same 1913 "long" peacoat-style coat apparently unchanged. In the 1941 regulations officers have the modern bridge coat continued from 1922, while CPO's now get the same modern coat as the officers (replacing the old-school 1913 version) but without gold buttons and without the half-belt (so basically a bastardized version of the officer's coat).

So, to summarize, USN officers have had the modern bridge coat as we know it basically unchanged since 1922, while CPO's got the modern bridge coat (minus gold buttons and minus half-belt) in 1941, and the full officer's version of the bridge coat sometime after 1941 (hopefully we can find the date when both officers and CPO's got the identical modern bridge coats).

Edit: The 1959 uniform regulations (see link below) show that CPO's had the full-detailed bridge coat (gold button) either by then or starting then.
https://ia802900.us.archive.org/20/...s1959IllustrationPlates/usnur_1959_plates.pdf

 

[Doctor Damage]

Description from the 1883 regulations:



Description from the 1897 regulations:

 

[freakazoid]

Here it is. It's all photos, basically no text. Worth getting in my opinion. You can find them on e-bay sometimes.
View attachment 161998

That is neat. I'll have to find a copy. I wonder if I can find a copy while in Japan. Looks like it's sold out everywhere that I can find. And going off of the Sukajan issue I'll pay at least double of what it costs in Japan.

Further to this, I've flipped through those three uniform regulations and in the second half of each there are illustrations. In the 1913 regulation officers and CPOs have bridge coats ("Overcoats") which are basically the same as pea coats of the era except with larger collars and skirts that extend below the knees, including the normal peacoat buttons and handwarmer pockets above the hip pockets, and lapels that are intended to button right up to the neck. In the 1922 regulation officers have what we know as the more modern bridge coat with lapels and button placement for the lapels/revers to be permanently folded down, gold buttons, and half-belt at back with gold buttons, while CPOs have the same 1913 "long" peacoat-style coat apparently unchanged. In the 1941 regulations officers have the modern bridge coat continued from 1922, while CPO's now get the same modern coat as the officers (replacing the old-school 1913 version) but without gold buttons and without the half-belt (so basically a bastardized version of the officer's coat).

So, to summarize, USN officers have had the modern bridge coat as we know it basically unchanged since 1922, while CPO's got the modern bridge coat (minus gold buttons and minus half-belt) in 1941, and the full officer's version of the bridge coat sometime after 1941 (hopefully we can find the date when both officers and CPO's got the identical modern bridge coats).

Edit: The 1959 uniform regulations (see link below) show that CPO's had the full-detailed bridge coat (gold button) either by then or starting then.
https://ia802900.us.archive.org/20/...s1959IllustrationPlates/usnur_1959_plates.pdf

Yeah. Was looking through those links and there was some good information. Really liked the part about taking care of the uniforms, some pretty handy information. Lot's of good information, thanks!

 

[Peacoat]

Another good job, Doc. Thanks.

 

[Doctor Damage]

Another good job, Doc. Thanks.

I can't imagine we're going to learn too much more about the dates/specs of bridge coats, since it seems we now have a pretty clear evolution, although I'd be interested in learning about the non-wool 'raincoat' version which seems to be common at the Army-Navy games in recent times. The same can't be said about peacoats, though, for which there are still a bunch of gaps in our knowledge... hopefully you will rectify that, Peacoat!

 

[Peacoat]

My research days are over. I am willing to sit back, rest on my laurels and accept an honorary doctorate in Peacoat History from an institution of higher learning, with an impeccable reputation. I have pretty much taken the peacoat back to WWI. That is enough provenance for me.

One thing I found interesting in the regs you posted was the post war regulation that allowed the WWII peacoat to be worn with the top two buttons undone and the lapels folded back. This made it more consistent with the "new" post WWII version, although the lapels were unruly when worn in this manner.

The coat was designed for all buttons, including the top two at the throat, to be buttoned, and that is what the regs required. The sailors hated this, and routinely unbuttoned those top two buttons when on shore leave. They, of course, risked running afoul of the SP, who enforced all regulations, including, and especially, clothing regulations.

When a long time friend of mine gave me his 1965 peacoat, he showed me the WWII peacoat his uncle had worn during the war. He said he wore the WWII version instead of his issued one toward the end of his tour. That reg explains how he was able to do so.

A bit of ivy attached to my honorary diploma would be nice, but I would consider accepting one from Stanford, Vanderbilt, UVA or Duke. Doctor Peacoat has a better feel to it than Mr. Peacoat.

 

[Doctor Damage]

Here's some photos which show the differences between the wool bridge coats and those cotton/nylon/whatever bridge coats, which I have assumed are a lower-cost alternative or maybe an issue coat instead of purchased. Does anyone know? The photos show that the two types of coats are basically identical in design except the cotton/nylon ones have sewn-down flaps over the slash pockets.

 

[Doctor Damage]

Here's a couple photos from the Truman-era showing admirals in bridge coats. Both have cuff stripes that are arrayed the same as gold stripes on the services coats would be.

 

[Doctor Damage]

POST #21 WITH UPDATED PHOTO LINKS

Some additional WWII-era photos.

The following photo: "The Navy football team arrived today on the Pennsylvania Railroad for their football game against the Army team to be held tomorrow at Soldiers' Field, Chicago, Illinois, November 27, 1926."

 

[Doctor Damage]

POST #31 WITH UPDATED PHOTO LINK

Here's a band leader in 1953 wearing a bridge coat. Too bad it's a low quality image or we might see if he's wearing rank stripes on his cuffs or not.

 

[Doctor Damage]

POST #35 WITH UPDATED PHOTO LINKS

Photos of woman's bridge coats. These have six buttons, rounded collar points, and a shaped upper torso...



... except, of course, when they don't have those details: the one below appears to be the same as the men's coat but with six buttons, no shaping of the torso.

 

[Doctor Damage]

POST #36 WITH UPDATED PHOTO LINKS

Time for some oddball and misc coats. This one is was made by Neptune (from Boston) in 2008 and looks to be of high quality (as might be expected from this company) in a thick wool. It has normal pea coat buttons, which suggests it was aimed at the civilian market, but it has epaulet loops which suggests a military-intended coat; of course the buttons could have been changed at some point. In any case, if this coat had been a 42L I would have bought it for sure.



This coat is a bridge coat in all details except it has only six buttons. When I first saw it I thought it was a women's coat, but it doesn't seem to have the right details for that (see previous posts) and it measures out to a genuine men's size, so perhaps it's just a sample coat or something. [update: just noticed is has fixed shoulder straps making it impossible to attach proper USN shoulder boards, so perhaps this was was intended for the civilian market]

 

[Doctor Damage]

POST #28 WITH UPDATED PHOTO LINK

U.S. Coast Guard bridge coat, according to the seller. Unfortunately they didn't provide a photo of the tag(s).

 

[Doctor Damage]

^ Further to that supposed USCG coat that I posted above, I saw the following interesting photo. Definitely an inauguration. Looks like medium-blue bridge coats but I'm not sure if the two men are USN or USCG or something else... anyone? The cap badge is probably a giveaway but I know nothing about US military badges.

 

[Doctor Damage]

POST #39 WITH UPDATED PHOTO LINKS

US Merchant Marine Academy bridge coat, made from what looks like a fairly lightweight wool twill (definitely not melton or the vintage kersey). It has a removable warm liner and silver buttons.

 

[Doctor Damage]

POST #41 WITH UPDATED PHOTO LINK

LBJ in the naval reserve.