Bomber-jacket leather and our law

Cub Driver wrote in message . ..
On 15 Sep 2003 09:07:14 -0700, (Michael) wrote:

No leather in it though... cotton
shell with an alpaca lining. Much warmer than an A-2 (or a B-3 if you
wear an F-3 suit under B-10) and much easier to mass produce.

I think it was about the time of The Great Santini when the fighter?
pilots of the USAF persuaded the guvmint to give them back their
leather jackets.

The USAF brought the A-2 back in '87 or '88. The story as I read it
was that a squadron commander saw the A-2s his men were buying
privately to wear off base, and thought it might be a good moral
builder if he could get approval for the entire squadron to get them
to wear on duty. His request went up the chain of command and someone
along the way got the idea they'd be a good moral builder for all USAF
aircrew and it went from there.

Cotton of course is better than nylon, but it still burns.

I don't know which is better or worse. The AAF only made cotton
flight jackets for the last two years of WWII, then switched to nylon,
which they used until the 70s. So I'd assume the nylon was giving
them some sort of advantage the cotton wasn't and that's why they used
it, but who knows. Neither's as good as Nomex, that's for sure.

Pilots continue to favor leather today, though they aren't consistent about
this. I've never seen a pilot at the local airfield togged out in
leather helmet or trousers. Probably, like the Great Santini's pals,
they like the leather jacket for its WWI and WWII associations.

Oh, no doubt. The leather jackets have a lot more style than the
nylon and Nomex ones, and a certain vintage mystique that gives them
lots of appeal. But a leather windbreaker designed in the '30s and
intended for summer use in an open cockpit doesn't really fit in today
though. The AAF realized the A-2 didn't fit in in the 40s, and that's
why they switched to the B-10. Leather is too hot and doesn't breathe
in a closed cockpit at lower alt, and isn't warm enough at high alt.
In the case of the Navy's jacket, the G-1, I've read it hasn't been
worn in aircraft with ejection seats since the 50s because its fur
collar gets in the way of harnesses, the helmet and its wiring.

Why on earth we still make either jacket (A-2 & G-1) for military use
is beyond me. They aren't fucntional in the air, they fit into a
limited temp range on the ground, and the current jackets just aren't
that good looking IMHO (*especially* when compared to vintage jackets
from the 30s-50s). But if they make the guys and gals feel better, I
guess we'll keep making 'em. Spending $100-$150 on a jacket for
someone isn't that much after you've already spent millions training
them, is it?

~Michael

Why on earth we still make either jacket (A-2 & G-1) for military use
is beyond me. They aren't fucntional in the air, they fit into a
limited temp range on the ground, and the current jackets just aren't
that good looking IMHO (*especially* when compared to vintage jackets
from the 30s-50s). But if they make the guys and gals feel better, I
guess we'll keep making 'em. Spending $100-$150 on a jacket for
someone isn't that much after you've already spent millions training
them, is it?

~Michael

The Air Force did it to slow down the rate of pilots going to airlines. At
least that's what they told us in commander's call and the Air Force newsrag.
They also said helicopter pilots weren't going to get them because they weren't
going to the airlines.

In any event the leather jackets are not authorized for use in flight.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired