anj-3 on greedbay

[Silver Surfer]

item# 154391218024 anj-3 with retailers label. as discussed recently, these jackets probably never had "official" labels, and for the most part, did not find aaa or navy usage. the one offered is in [if measured correctly] a generous size 42, and looks to be in pretty good condition. one of youse guys may be able to land a rare bird at a reasonable price. happy hunting.

 

[Chandler]

...a generous size 42...

Not generous enough.

But wow, that's a nice looking example. Anyone recognize the brand?

 

[mulceber]

Looks like a W&G, civi version. Good find, and a rare jacket for anyone who jumps on it.

 

[Chandler]

Heeseman Sacramento -- private store that stitched its own label in place?

 

[B-Man2]

That’s in nice shape ... Interestingly enough it’s got that same Salmon colored lining that you see in many of these AN-J-3 jackets . Doesn’t yours have the same colored lining Jan? I’m surprised that someone hasn’t included a section in a flight jacket book about this jacket contract .

 

[mulceber]

Actually not - that's something I find interesting about this one. Mine has sort of a light brown rayon lining. Looks to be the same weave of fabric though:

 

[B-Man2]

Actually not - that's something I find interesting about this one. Mine has sort of a light brown rayon lining. Looks to be the same weave of fabric though:
View attachment 56490

This is probably one of the most puzzling jackets we’ve discussed here over the years . There’s enough of us here, who have found bits and pieces of information about this contract over the years and I know others who came before me have done some research on this contract as well. The problem is, that the information is scattered all over the archives of VLJ and we keep inventing the wheel and going over the same areas everytime one of these pops up. It might be a good idea to give this contract its own thread and as we find info to post it all in one central location for easy access .... just a thought .

 

[Chandler]

If you click *more* you really get more -- including measurements:

eBay

 

[mulceber]

This is probably one of the most puzzling jackets we’ve discussed here over the years . There’s enough of us here, who have found bits and pieces of information about this contract over the years and I know others who came before me have done some research on this contract as well. The problem is, that the information is scattered all over the archives of VLJ and we keep inventing the wheel and going over the same areas everytime one of these pops up. It might be a good idea to give this contract its own thread and as we find info to post it all in one central location for easy access .... just a thought .

Good observation, Burt. I've noticed that as well. I kind of wish, in addition to have sub-forums for different materials and ages of jackets, that the VLJ was divided into sub-forums for individual makes of jackets and even contracts. That'd be a bit much I suppose, but it sure would be nice to have all the information in one place.

 

[MikeyB-17]

Here we go again. JC had one on his site which he reckons is the work of Willis and Geiger-that one had an Abercrombie and Fitch label in it. Other than the label, they look for all the world like military issue jackets-like the white tag in the pocket.

Good Wear Leather Coat Company — Sale Original AN-J-3 Jacket

www.goodwearleather.com

 

[mulceber]

Yeah, JC's take on this is that wartime contractors were routinely given substantially more materials than they would need to complete the contract (in case of substantial defects in the materials, worker's errors, stuff like that). Whenever they finished making the contract, they would then use the leftover material to make civilian jackets that they could then sell, often using a similar/the same pattern to their military jackets. That's his explanation for these Civi AN-J-3s. W&G finished their contract for the military, made a bunch of civi jackets, and sold them to companies like Abercrombie & Fitch, and (apparently) Heeseman Sacramento.

 

[B-Man2]

At the risk of being a PIA we need a thread or a central location for all of this info , otherwise Mikey is right when he says “Here we go again” . In about a year we’ll be right back at this point again discussing the same info . Just my 2 cents worth .

 

[Ken at Aero Leather]

Yeah, JC's take on this is that wartime contractors were routinely given substantially more materials than they would need to complete the contract (in case of substantial defects in the materials, worker's errors, stuff like that). Whenever they finished making the contract, they would then use the leftover material to make civilian jackets that they could then sell, often using a similar/the same pattern to their military jackets. That's his explanation for these Civi AN-J-3s. W&G finished their contract for the military, made a bunch of civi jackets, and sold them to companies like Abercrombie & Fitch, and (apparently) Heeseman Sacramento.

Possible but unlikely, what you refer to is "cabbage". This is where a factory is supplied with material to make a fixed number of pieces. If the cutters manage to get the said number of garments without using up all the raw materials then the excess belongs to the factory.............or on some occasions the cutters...to do what they wish with, usually extend the run of that particular style

When the West End of London was full of little factories these garments, "the cabbage", was sold off in a row of wee shops in Great Titchfield St, I recall picking up a couple of Ossie Clark pieces in one!

It makes little sense that the military would have sourced the leather as the contacts and expertise lay with the manufacturere not the AAF

From personal conversations with Arnold Missner, one time president of Horween, I do know that Dubow received their Horsehide direct from Horween, delived by Arnold himself as a young lad at the tannery for "these fancy new flying jackets the Air Corps have ordered" quote

 

[mulceber]

It makes little sense that the military would have sourced the leather as the contacts and expertise lay with the manufacturere not the AAF

That's what I thought as well: it seemed like the government wouldn't have access to that kind of knowledge about who to buy from, but Eastman's A-2 guide (page 30) is explicit: "It was not sufficient that a contracted manufacturer couuld be allowed to select hides they felt would be appropriate, the leather itself had to conform to a strict government specification, which in turn was procured by the Materiel Division under contract just like the jackets themselves. Indeed, this applied to all the materials and components that went into the production of the garment: the lining, the knit, the press studs, etc, were all ordered through government contracts and sent to the manufacturer for assembly." The book also contains several letters written by the tanners to the AAF, inquiring whether an attached sample would meet their needs.

So it sounds like the tanners were sending the leather directly to the manufacturers, but the government had been the party that selected the tanner and leather.

 

[Chandler]

...the leather itself had to conform to a strict government specification...

With all the variations we see on original jackets, you have to wonder how "strict" those specs were -- especially once war production started.

 

[mulceber]

Agreed - I imagine that they spent way more time number crunching the bids the companies put in than actually looking at the samples.