Depot re-dyes. Why ?

[Peter Graham]

The B-3 I'm restoring has had a depot re-dye at some point. This was a common practice. It's now an all over dark seal. It got me thinking. Why, in the middle of a war was the time taken to re-dye a worn piece of combat clothing which was fully functional ? It doesn't seem logical. Surely it wasn't for purely aesthetical reasons. Any thoughts ?

 

[Jaydee]

I have heard for uniformity. Get them all looking the same rather then having all the rag-tag looking variations out there.

What a shame huh?

 

[zoomer]

Wear...dirt...discoloration?

 

[deeb7]

"Clothing-Refinishing Sheep Shearling Type Flying Clothing," Technical Order no. 13-1-10, Headquarters, Army Air Forces, Washington D.C., Oct. 16, 1943.

• 1. GENERAL
  
  A wide spread condition of unserviceable and unsightly sheap shearling clothing has resulted due to extreme wear and the use of some poorly tanned leather in the manufacture of this clothing. After a period of service use these garments become faded, cracked, and peeled. To augment further serviceability and to enhance their appearance sheep shearling garments will be refinished in accordance with the procedure outlined within.

 

[Marv]

I take it that was the same thinking behind the depot re-sprays of A2s also........

 

[deeb7]

I take it that was the same thinking behind the depot re-sprays of A2s also........

I think they were re-dyed only when it was necessary to freshen them up after refurbishment. Obviously they didn't suffer from flaking like the shearlings, so they didn't need the polyacrylate/clear lacquer treatment.

 

[dilbert]

Shearling is sheepskin turned “inside out”, that is the exterior skin, along with the wool of the sheep, is on the inside of the jacket while the weaker flesh side of the hide is on the outside of the jacket. This arrangement caused many difficulties- the flesh side is very difficult to finish and the shearling jackets and trousers had a tendency to shed their finish (along with their waterproofing) with wear. In WWII the Army established centers where these garments were serviced periodically by refinishing (which involved cleaning with acetone, re-dying and applying a top finish of lacquer via spray gun- all very flammable and hazardous if breathed). The shearling garments were heavy and cumbersome in tight cockpits and, although they did a fair job of keeping the wearer warm, they were a constant cause of complaints from air crews.

If you look at photos of aircrew wearing any of the shearling clothing you will see that the jackets frequently appear to be fairly old. That is because the finish of the jackets cracked and the weather proofing was gone, the jackets were not that old. It was decided that repairs to the jackets were too complicated and dangerous (because of the volatility of the chemicals used) to be done at squadron level and needed to be done by more experienced hands.

The A-2's and other jackets were not affected as the goat, horse and steer hides retained their finish.

 

[RCSignals]

It is my understanding that it was mostly B-3 and other shearling flight clothing that was re-dyed or actually lacquer coated in this way. As pointed out by the TO posted by deeb7 above.
dilbert gives the reason 'why'

From what I can gather A-2s were only refurbished as required, and that may have included a re-dye but was usually such things as knits, lining, etc.
It is my impression they were not 'painted' in the same manner as the shearling items, although that has become what is commonly stated today.
Has anyone seen a similar TO to the one above to cover A-2s?

 

[dmar836]

The A-2s were made substitute standard earlier than most think. After that, rather than standard issue, they were just serviced. I suppose it was up to the wearer when to turn it in for work.
I asked a vet this weekend about how he acquired some specific uniform items - his bullion patches, Type C helmet, etc. He just plain couldn't remember. I doubt, even at the time, many of them knew how things worked behind the scenes. Without those orders we are left to cross reference and speculate.
JMO,
Dave