A2's, do you miss handwarmer pockets?

[Nick Charles]

I like mine just fine without warmers. Just stick your hands in your pants(pockets)

[guitone]

Well then if the fit is good, and I hope the 38 does it, then that may be it. I have to resolve my aversion to epaulets, if I cannot then the A2 with no epaulets, at that point since I am paying $100 more I would add handwarmers and an inner pocket. Can't think of anything else to add, I think two innter pockets would be too much. The goat, as I mentioned in another post, of the US Authentic jacket is so different than the G&B FLightsuit, more supple and substantial, better looking, I really liked it. I also think the cut of their jacket was nicer and I think the 38 will fit perfect, sure hope so. I should get it mid week so if the epaulets do not stick up (pucker) I may decide to just live with them, but on the 40 they puckered big time and that did not work for me, but the jacket was just too big all over.

[BellyTank]

A-2 epaulettes don't stand up or pucker, they're very unobtrusive epp's.
They stick right to the shoulders-
B
T

[guitone]

BT, thanks..then it must have been the fact that the jacket was just too big.. It would be nice to save the $100 and just have the jacket as it is intended...hope it works out that way.

[MK]

I like the way A2s look on other people. I don't like wearing one though. No hand warmers is the biggest reason.

[STHill]

Like K.C., I thought I'd miss the handwarmers, but I didn't. An A-2, in a proper 1940's trim fit, is really more like a heavy shirt than a jacket anyway. If it's cold enough to need handwarmer pockets, a heavier jacket is probably more appropriate. IMO, of course.

[Michaelson]

I like the additional handwarmer pockets on my Wings VIP A2000. Oddly enough, I have them on my Indy jackets and never use them, but I use them on my A-2's all the time! :rolleyes: Regards! Michaelson

[Mountain Pilot]

Never forget the design and purpose of these jackets. Their not at home, in design, out of the cockpit. I had a knock-off A-2, and in a short while, the leather handwarmer pockets streached open. Then they caught on everything they could while I was climbing into and out of the cockpit of a vintage A/C. Reference my posting on the Goodson A-2 I did some work to.
Perhaps also the USAAC just couldn't afford making these jacket with too many features. They had to make so many of them.
Auf Wiedersehn. . . :cheers1:

[Alan Eardley]

With an A-2 you put your hands in your pants pockets (look at war time photographs). If your jacket covers the openings to your pants pockets, it's too long.

Alan

[Edward]

Here's a thought, too... (I speak as someone who owns a modern style, baggy bomber, and is currently saving to buy an accurate A2 repro).... doesn't it have something to do with the length of the jacket? I tend to always walk hands in pockets, no matter what the out fit. Handwarmer pockets in a jacket seem natural if the jacket extends down far enough that they are in line with the toruser pockets, more or less (as is the case on a modern fit baggy bomber). OTOH, as far as I can make out a WW2 era accurate A2 stopped much closer the waist, so the trouser pockets would be accessible for the hands. In that case, i wouldn't miss them.

As to accuracy, A2s didn't have them as issued, but I'm sure I read on ELC or Aero or one of those sites a description of a jacket designed to replicate a field-modified jacket - one of those variations was handwarmer pockets, so it doesn't seem any great sin to add them in if you absolutely can't be without them.

ETA: Mr Eardley got in there first, and puts it rather better (and more succinctly) than I have!

[jamespibworth@n]

I have never even thought about the lack of hand warmer pockets when I put on my A2.

How about puting the money you will save on ordering a standard jacket towards a pair of gloves?

Cheerio;)

[greyhound68]

From what I had read was that no handwarmer pockets on the original A2s because the powers that be thought it would make their airman look like criminals. Go figure that one out. I like to stick with the original deal and have no handwarmer pockets which is why I got the A10 USAAF gloves that really keep your hands warm.

[Fletch]

HWP are convenient but not in a desirable way. In my case, they encourage me to stuff gloves (or hands) in them, even as cel phone, iPod, fountain pen and other necessities occupy the patch pockets. This results in a look known to my Italian ancestors as the labonz'.

[Edward]

HWP are convenient but not in a desirable way. In my case, they encourage me to stuff gloves (or hands) in them, even as cel phone, iPod, fountain pen and other necessities occupy the patch pockets. This results in a look known to my Italian ancestors as the labonz'.

I know three words of Italian - and two of those are "Vito Corleone." lol I have no problem figuring out what your ancestors meant though even if i can't translate the word. :D That is the think I've found with modern, baggier style bombers with the HWP - it all seems to add the bulk roundthe gut region, exaggerating any belly one might have, and creating one for those lucky enough not to have an overhang there to begin with!

FWIW.... a few months ago I picked up a Harrington for warmer weather wear (and because I've always wanted a bright red jacket... :D ). There are handwarmer pockets in that which I've simply never used because the overall length of the jacket - about the same as an A2 - is such that the trousers pockets are perfectly accessible. :)

[Mr. 'H']

With an A-2 you put your hands in your pants pockets (look at war time photographs). If your jacket covers the openings to your pants pockets, it's too long.

Alan

That makes perfect sense and I concur with that. When wearing a A2 your hands can go into your (khaki) pants pockets.

[Mr. 'H']

As to accuracy, A2s didn't have them as issued, but I'm sure I read on ELC or Aero or one of those sites a description of a jacket designed to replicate a field-modified jacket - one of those variations was handwarmer pockets, so it doesn't seem any great sin to add them in if you absolutely can't be without them.



Here is that jacket Ed:

http://pic80.picturetrail.com/VOL806/142228/4523653/56782292.jpg

http://pic80.picturetrail.com/VOL806/142228/4523653/56782389.jpg

[Edward]

That's the one! :)

[Technonut]

I prefer NO handwarmer pockets on my A-2's... I personally think the handwarmers take too much away from the intended look and style of the jacket. ;)

[green papaya]

I prefer NO handwarmer pockets on my A2, the style looks sleeker and more authentic without the hand warmers

hand warmers take away the classic looks of the A2

I prefer the original flap pockets because they are more secure for putting extra cash, loose change, papers, pocket watch, etc

[SamReu]

I'll pile on and say I don't prefer the handwarmer pockets, either. But I do like having an inside pocket; it's a trait that makes the G-1 a really nice jacket.

[Fletch]

Sleekness is the watchword. The A-2 is elegant because it is butt simple in design. What could you take away? The epaulets - but officers wanted them for rank. Maybe the windflap - but that's functional. Otherwise nothing.

[jamespibworth@n]

Here is that jacket Ed:

http://pic80.picturetrail.com/VOL806/142228/4523653/56782292.jpg

http://pic80.picturetrail.com/VOL806/142228/4523653/56782389.jpg

The leather on that jacket looks great but those pockets sure do go up high!
It reminds me of a jacket I saw on ebay about a month ago, a 50s star I think.
Was going to bid, but those pockets? not sure?:confused:

[Spitfire]

My goodness - those pockets goes all the way up under the arms!

And Handwarmer pockets - BAAAAADDDDDD pockets!

[scotrace]

Handwarmers mean it isn't an A2.

Do I miss having them? Not personally. Jackets with handwarmers usually have them placed so far back (Indy jacket included) as to be awkward to use anyway.


Back in 1997 or so Peterman was selling a leather "flight jacket" with high scoopy pockets and handwarmers. Also had a multiple-piece back panel, I think. A ghastly thing made of "5 lambskins." Yet the copy said "this is as close to an original as you're going to get." $395 i think. Absolute garbage.

[Mr. 'H']

My goodness - those pockets goes all the way up under the arms!

And Handwramer pockets - BAAAAADDDDDD!

Yes, is it really worth it? Having handwarmers???

[huh]

Look at this jacket's proportions - not as nice - especially when walking along with arms tucked in high up like Jack Nicholson's character in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.

[Feraud]

Real Men do not need handwarmers!

Kidding aside, I do not miss a handwarmer pocket on my a2. I can wear gloves or stuff my hands in my pants pocket if necessary.

[The Wingnut]

Putting one's hands in pockets directly in front of one's stomach feels - and looks - awkward. The handwarmers I had on leather jackets in the past didn't do much to warm the hands, either...in fact, they were downright pointless. You couldn't put much in them without having fear of it falling out.

I'd agree with Scotrace, if it's an A-2 with handwarmers, it's not an A-2.

[Edward]

Kidding aside, I do not miss a handwarmer pocket on my a2. I can wear gloves or stuff my hands in my pants pocket if necessary.

For me, trouser pockets would be fine - and as already discussed, a "true" A2 is short enough to allow that. Gloved hands are too bulky for most trouser pockets, but then if it's cold enough for me to need gloves, chances are I'm gonig to want something more substantial over my back than an A2. ;)

[Milu]

The jacket above is an "almost A2". It's an Aero 1950s flight jacket I have one in FQHH cordovan. It differs from a detail correct period A2 not only for the handwarmer pockets but also the slightly roomier fit.

I like handwarmer pockets not only to keep hands warm whilst outdoors, but also for storing items I want quick access to. They look an awful lot better in use than walking with hands in your pockets. I've never found them awkward to use, perhaps those with difficulties in using them are wearing very trim fitting jackets?

[Fast]

The A2 was designed to be worn by a man who sits in a cockpit and flies an airplane. I don't want the guy flying my plane to have his hands in his pockets. The sleeves are a little long as well. They're fine if you're sitting down and moving your arms out in front of you. The materials were chosen to keep the pilots warm. I miss the map pocket the navy so thoughtfully provided their pilots too.

As best I can figure, the reason anyone would wear these things after WWII had to do with economy. They were a steal from a surplus store at under $10 way back then.

There are plenty of folks out there who sell variants of these jackets at almost any price, with handwarmer pockets, attachable mouton collars, wool linings, cigarette pockets, ipod ports and all manner of stuff. They are just not authentic, and will not be unless they are what they were. They tend to be cheaper too, as authenticity is an expensive feature.

Carpe Diem
Fast

[Atticus Finch]

Hi Folks,

Like Scott, I think that if it has handwarmers, it isn't a real A-2. Sadly, the U.S. Air Force does not agree with us. The current issue A-2 (third generation A-2, if you will) has handwarmers. Hard to argue that it isn't real, since it is flying on the backs of Air Force pilots as I write this.

I do like functional outside pockets on flight jackets. This is one of the reasons that I prefer the L-2/B-15/MA-1 series of jackets to either the A-2 or the G-1.

Atticus

[Milu]

The A2 was designed to be worn by a man who sits in a cockpit and flies an airplane. I don't want the guy flying my plane to have his hands in his pockets.

Carpe Diem
Fast

;) Probably a good idea to sew up the pilot's trouser pockets too;)

[BigSleep]

I got my A-2 bone stock from Eastman.
It fits great and I think hand warmers would make the line lay differently.
My only suggestion is, figure out what size you want then think about getting one size up.
Mine fits great with a regular shirt on under it but with a sweater or sweatshirt it can get a little snug.
Just my 2 cents.

[Fletch]

The A2 was designed to be worn by a man who sits in a cockpit and flies an airplane. I don't want the guy flying my plane to have his hands in his pockets. The sleeves are a little long as well. They're fine if you're sitting down and moving your arms out in front of you.Not all (http://thefedoralounge.com/showthread.php?t=22370) of them are so fine doing that. Some WW2 contracts bind tightly at the shoulder and upper arm, even while fitting comfortably in the chest and trunk.

[Raymundo]

I really enjoyed reading this thread because of the many and varied replies and the fact that everyone respected the others replies. I would like to add my two cents to this subject. Like others, most of the jackets that I have worn over the years have come with handwarmer pockets so I am used to having them. When I joined various flight jacket forums I found out that the original A-2's did not have handwarmer pockets but did have patch pockets in the front. These pockets were useful for pilots crammed into tight cockpits where side pockets would be hard to reach. However, as others have noted, the Army Brass did not authorize side pockets on the design of the A-2 because they did not think it looked military to have Airmen walking around with their hands in their jacket pockets. So everyone had to put their hands in their pants pockets. Go figure. Over time, as Atticus mentioned, the A-2 evolved to the current government issue that does include handwarmers. They were included after surveys of Airmen indicated that they wanted them on their A-2's. What goes around comes around and the Air Force finally listened and agreed to modify the modern A-2 design to include handwarmers. When I was in the AF back in the 60's, pilots and crews were adding handwarmers and inside pockets at tailor shops in the Far East and Middle East. I have heard that WWII aircrews added inside pockets to their A-2's and would have liked to have had handwarmer pockets too. For me, handwarmers are practical and desirable because when the weather gets cold I would rather put my hands in my jacket than wear gloves. Maybe if I lived in a warm climate handwarmers would not be a necessity but I am used to having them. Seems like there is never enough pockets to cary stuff. I have two A-2's that do not have handwarmers that I don't wear much because I miss the practicality of the side pockets but I do understand the point of vue of those who wear their jackets for authenticity. Just my two cents.

Ray

[SamMarlowPI]

i have a couple A-2 style jackets, all with hand warmers, and a couple with paintings on the back that i think most of you would really dig...anyways, they dont bother me much...still a slim jacket, i switch my hands from the warmers to jeans or pants when walking or standing or whatever so they actually work fine, in my opinion :) im not one to complain anyway, cuz im the only one i know that wears those style jackets lol

[Bebop]

I think handwarmer pockets do take away the authenticity of the A-2 but I sure do like having them. If the jacket is done well, you can't really notice them until you need those hands warmed up a bit and your jeans pockets are a little tighter than they were 6 months ago.

[Doctor Strange]

My first high quality A-2, a black goatskin Civil model from FlightSuits, has handwarmer pockets. (I'm wearing it in my avatar pic.) Aside from throwing my keys in the right one, I find that I rarely use them. Putting your hands in your pants pockets just seems more natural with a short jacket like the A-2, and it looks a lot better. I wouldn't get an A-2 with handwarmer pockets again, especially if I were going for any kind of authentic look. (Of course, my black one only looks authentic in b/w photos!)

[aswatland]

I have been watching this thread develop with interest. Opinion is bound to be divided here. Being a purist IMO original A2s look far better as they were designed with two front flap pockets. Those with handwarmer pockets are convenient I guess, but I'm happy to use my trouser pockets if my hands get cold or wear gloves! Shoving your hands in handwarmer pockets can spoil the look of a leather jacket!

[kampkatz]

Having been issued a G-1 while in Naval aviation in the 70's (made of naugahyde,btw) I will add my unsolicited thoughts. Hand warmer pockets would have been welcomed even in Pecsacola, FL where winter temps sometimes dropped to just above freezing. Our pants pockets were not always available since flight suits were mostly worn under the jacket. One had to reach through the flight suit opening to get to the trouser pocket.

[Atticus Finch]

Having been issued a G-1 while in Naval aviation in the 70's (made of naugahyde,btw)

Hi Kampatz,

Welcome to the forum! I was never a Naval Avaitor, but I do collect G-1s. I guess I'm a bit off topic here, but from what you have said about your issued jacket, I expect it was one of the mid-seventies, E-series, Imperial Leather G-1s. In my opinion, this contract was the low point in G-1 manufacture. Imperial G-1s were actually made from thick, heavy cowhide sprayed with some kind of waterproof, squeaky finish that looked and felt like naugahyde. They were tough as nails, and built like tanks, but they were heavy, stiff and noisy jackets.

Atticus

[johnnyjohnny]

here in L.A. one would think hwpocks would be as gratuitous as earmuffs on your surfboard...howevah...

whilst my a-2 will be worn most of the time in weather over 65 degrees i like to stuff my hands in the side...even if the army air corps had the a-2 designed to prevent this 'thug' look...for me it's just a preference...

again, howevah...

i agree with most here that those slits in the side of the a-2 behind the flap pocket are abominable...i just returned a uswings jacket because what i thought were going to be hidden handwarmer pockets had those horrible slits...

i then spent the night searching the net to find a modern a-2 that was authentic enough in design to have hidden hwpocks...one shouldn't be surprised that i found one offered by legendary, that being the cockpitusa version, cockpit supplying the currrent usaf a-2 to the military (though the one they are supplying is apparently without hidden hwpocks)

while i'm enough of a panzy to want hwpocks, i'm enough of a stickler that i think they should not be seen, so that the jacket looks totally authentic... legendary/cockpitusa's model is the only one i found that was authentic to the style, and authentic to the current usaf issue model, but had the hwpocks...

if i had to settle for those side slits i would indeed prefer to do without hwpocks altogether...as for putting them on a ww2 replica a-2, i probably would do without any kind of hwpocks since, in that case, one is really trying to get as close to the real deal as possible...

thoughts from L.A....

[kampkatz]

Atticus,
In 1974 all of us in flight training were issued true naugahyde jackets. It was a time in-between the real leather. The Navy probably thought they could do some cost cutting, but eventually discovered that the plastic would not last as long as leather,so they eventually went back to the real animal skins. They did seem a bit unwieldy. One of my flight instructors was a salty Marine major who insisted we stow the jackets in the storage compartment before climbing into the cockpit, no matter how cold it was outside. He just thought the jackets restricted movement too much. As a green 0-1 who was I to argue with him?

PK

[Spitfire]

Missing handwarmer pockets?
I might be missing a P51 Mustang now and again - but handwarmerpockets. No way!lol

[Edward]

Mine fits great with a regular shirt on under it but with a sweater or sweatshirt it can get a little snug.
Just my 2 cents.

Seems to me this is an important thing for folks to bear in mind when buying the jacket. Typically, I've always gone a size up (most of my leathers to date have been bike leathers - not that I ever had the bike, but hey, call it a fifteen year old's desire to look like Alice Cooper which gave way to a 21 year old's desire to look like Dee Dee Ramone which gave way to a 33 year old's desire to look like Marlon Brando.... lol ... but damn me, bike leather can be snug, a 44 in those fits me like a 42 in anything else). With an A2, though, I'm planning to stick to my true size. They were of course designed to fit over only a shirt, really - bearing in mind that they were uniform issue and the time of year they were intended for. Not a garment intended for mid winter or the sort of temperatures where one would be wanting to wear a sweater underneath. Of course, for casual, civilan wear, this might be different, so yeah a size up would be something to think about. Myself, I'm planning to wear mine "as intended" when I get it (save that I'm not going for the uniform replication of course), but then the long term plan for me is to build a small collection of flight jackets with a B6, B2/3, B10 for colder weather. :)


(Of course, my black one only looks authentic in b/w photos!)

:D Depends on the lighting - there are colour photos I've seen of genuine A2s (both period and modern photos of originals) where a seal brown looks black. ;)


When I was in the AF back in the 60's, pilots and crews were adding handwarmers and inside pockets at tailor shops in the Far East and Middle East. I have heard that WWII aircrews added inside pockets to their A-2's and would have liked to have had handwarmer pockets too.

I think this is also something to bear in mind when we're discussing all-out autheticity. I certainly wouldn't claim to be able to hold a candle to the knowledge of most folks round these parts - pretty much everything I know about flight jackets I learned on here. That said, it seems to me there's two sorts of authenticity: there's the jacket completely as issued, sticking rigidly to the USAAF design specs. Then there's the jacket as might have been worn in the field - artwork, inner pocket added (I'm sure I read somewhere that in the Pacific theatre, blood chits were sometimes sewn inside the jacket on three sides, left open in top so that they could be used as a pocket?), handwarmer pockets, and so on. I'm sure I've seen a photo of an original somewhere where handwarmers were created which on the surface looked different only in that the stitching along the outer edge of the pockets was removed. Seems to me that if all those things were being done regularly by the flyboys back in the day, period-style field modifications are not "wrong" per se in a repro. It's a different sort of authenticity, though, so it's bound to appeal to a different crowd. Just my 0.01c (I don't think it's worth the 0.02c ;) ).

[John in Covina]

Handwarmer pockets make sense if you are going to be wearing the jacket a lot while not flying driving operating machinery etc all the time. So in ordinary use by ordinary people it is a feature that again makes sense. Some a-retenticve types feel that pilots with their hand in the pockets oes not look military enough, which then says I'd rather my pilots had cold hands and were uncomfortable and looked good (to me) than other wise. Funny how generals don't usually have to be unconfortable either.

[cheaterome]

No


jerome