My anomalous new G-1

[MikeyB-17]

Thanks to a heads-up from HHjackets, I've just nabbed this 1962 7823B Irvin B.Foster G-1 from the 'Bay. I'm especially pleased as I sold both my G-1's last year, my '63 Irvin B. and 50's L.W 7823(AER), and regretted it bitterly, and have been sniffing around for months for another one cheap enough. It's in pretty good nick for the money (£90 BIN), the usual few nicks and scuffs, and a zip replacement done by ELC (who, I have to be honest, have not done as good a job as Aero did for me with my old Irvin B., but no biggie), but otherwise no complaints, and a really nice mouton collar. It has a couple of odd features, though, which I wonder if anyone can shed any light on. For a start it's got a 2-piece back, and close examination reveals no new stitching, so I'm sure it left the factory that way. It's also got no USN on the windflap in the conventional fashion. It does, however, have a standard Bureau of Naval Weapons contract label. So it doesn't look like a private purchase, but it doesn't have the usual features of Navy issue G-1's. Prototype? test jacket? Using up odd bits of goatskin lying around spare?
It's a size 44-my old '63 was also a 44, but fit like a 42. This one is a 44 and fits like it, so I have a bit of extra room which I am quite happy about. I paid £300 for my old one from Aero, it was my first ever original jacket, I didn't know any better, and I was well pleased with it, but this is probably a better jacket for about a third of the price! Any road up, here are the slightly ropey pics.

 

[Jaydee]

I was looking at that one. Alas, I am a size 40. That is one strange back on that. Never seen that before, Not sure what to make of it. That seam might be a pain in the back on a long flight though.

 

[Clyde from Carolina]

Very, very cool jacket. I've got no clue on the unusual back, but I would guess they were using up some odd bits of leather.

I have been wanting a nice early 60s vintage G-1 for a while. Hmm, may have to start scouting the bay again.

 

[Tariacuri]

I've got one of those - well actually my brother has it right now. Maybe he can chime in here. I posted a query about the jacket when I got it - on one of the old incarnations of the VLJ. The consensus was that it represented a civilian model and that the tag may not be correct for the age of the jacket - at least for mine which was a C contract??

 

[tamoko]

I saw this Jacket, strange back panel.
If anybody interested this other nice one.
looks minty, good BIN price.
Item number: 150240120057

 

[rpmooreii]

I had one of these w/ the two piece back as well...mine was a C series in sz 46. It was a very odd jacket in that it alos had a fake fur collar (all issue Cs had mouton). Even though it had a military spec tage, I think it was a civie issue or internal practice jacket as none of the issue G-1s had a two piece back. Mine can be seen here:

http://moorecustom.com/jackets/G-1_7823C_IFoster_46.htm

 

[Anonymous]

I never saw a 2 piece back while I was on active duty, does not mean they dont exist, just never saw one like that.

 

[MikeyB-17]

It was a very odd jacket in that it also had a fake fur collar

Hold up Roger, you say in the link that it's a mouton collar (and it does look like one!). That one really does look like a civilian jacket, whereas I do reckon mine looks fairly standard Navy issue apart from the back and the flap. The lack of USN on the windflap does make me think civilian though. Who knows? I'm pleased with it anyway. Thanks for pitching in, was hoping you might-and thanks to all other contributors also.

 

[rpmooreii]

Ooops maybe mine did have a mouton collar...it is hard to recall as I do not have it anymore. In any event, the collar textures was not the same as the typical G-1. Yours does look much nicer than the example I had...good luck w/ the jacket.

...Roger

 

[porkchop]

From what I remember as a former Naval Officer that had responsibility for issuing flight jackets and related gear, these guys and Brill had the contract for G-1s in the late 70s early 80s and each made some modifications for jackets sold via the Navy Exchange. These jackets were exactly the same as the issued jacket (by that I mean they were made on the same "assembly line" as the "issue" jacket) except that that "USN" could not be punched in the windflap (or as Skeeter would say - tie flap ) and the label could be changed if desired by the manufacturer. I have two of the Brills from back then and Brill would change the label to their standard "store" label. I don't remember anything about two-piece backs. However, just to reiterate, it appears that your jacket may have been one of those sold through the Navy Exchange system and is not a repro (as the term is used on this site.)

Hopefully, this was of some help.

Bob.

 

[MikeyB-17]

Aah, that's cracking stuff Bob, many thanks for that-pretty much as I suspected from the lack of 'USN' on the flap. I'm just delighted to have another G-1 to wear.

 

[rotagz]

Can you tell if the windflap was removed, or left off during manufacture? There was a period when the Navy "demilitarized" G-1s by removing the windflap and then selling them to outside buyers. Also, looks like the line of stitching is missing from just above cuffs.

 

[MikeyB-17]

No, the windflap has definitely been there since it was made. I think it's had a re-cuff at some stage-the cuffs are an excellent match for the waistband, but they're not bi-weave. I think that's the reason for the missing stitching at the cuff.

 

[porkchop]

Windflaps were typically cut off unserviceable G-1s by the Navy (more specifically the squadron paraloft - parachute loft - personnel) before they were released for sale to the various army-navy surplus stores that wanted them. If a jacket had some manufacturing or other "damage" that rendered the jacket unfit for further service and/or issuance, the squadrons would cut off the windflap (and sometimes cut out the tags) and then sell them to the surplus stores. If memory serves, and I may be way off, but I seem to remember that at that particular time it was "illegal" for a civilian to wear officially issued flight jackets, so anything forwarded from a squadron to a surplus store, for example, had to be sanitized even if the article was damaged.

Hopefully, I didn't muddy the water on this subject.

Thanks,

Bob.