1942 'Transitional' Tropical Tunic

[OSS]

Thanks for posting the additional pictures. As you have the tunic in hand, you are best suited to make a judgement on the sequence of pocket application. I have no doubt the pleats were period applied, I am simply at a loss to explain it. The redesign of the first model tunic was considered an improvement, if only from a manufacturing standpoint. The bellowed pockets from the original design were functional (to allow greater capacity) unlike say, the false "French" cuffs on tropical Luftwaffe tunics, or the false turn-ups on the visored tropical field cap, which were primarily for appearence sake. Why a contracted manufacturer would apply non-functional ornamental pleats to only two pockets escapes me.

[NZMark]

Thanks for the replies and pm's so far - all appreciated
I'd like to add this photo with the sewing threads marked a little more clearly on the S ring backing panel. The orange lines mark the grey thread, the yellow mark the olive thread. This was done in the factory before the pockets were applied, clearly showing the pockets utilized two threads during the manufacturing process - and not at all surprising due to the 'production line' method.
I would think that clears up any confusion when the pockets were applied.
The 'why' of the fake bellows panels' is another matter, of course. Did the manufacturer require a few 'home-made' breast pockets to complete the last run of 1st pattern tunics ordered, and these were used up on the next run which overlapped the 'new' 2nd pattern tunics?
We simply can't know.
I'd like to move on from discussing 'replaced' pockets as I think we've sleuthed that one out, to seeing any other examples or knowing if any period images are out there showing one in wear?
Regards,
Mark

[Mark Gibson]

I know that I'm going to cop flak over this but this is not a factory transitional tunic. The pockets have quite obviously been removed, had false pleats added and reapplied. The style of false pleat does not match any 1st pattern tunic that I have seen as the pleat does not go all the way to the top of the pocket, which is most unusual. The thread used is also different to the remainder of the tunic and sewn using a different guage.

Why would this have been done, possibly due to the pure look of having pleated pockets against unpleated pockets. We all know that the German army were quite 'fashionable' in many things that they did such as shortening tunics/panzer wraps (a high waisted panzer wrap was quite fashionable later in the war). We also see many later tunics with bottle green collars added, or just simple em's tunics with cuffs added.

I'm sorry if no one likes what I have to say here but sometimes you have to look at items without the emotion.

Respectfully

Mark

[NZMark]

Mark,
Nothing wrong with you having an opinion, except logic & the piece speak again'st it.
OK - let's say someone did indeed remove the breast pockets to add a false panel. They didn't need to remove the S flap backing panels, did they? (which is rather obviously sewn with two threads - an olive green thread and a grey thread (also seen on the rest of the tunic). This is clearly a case of a change of bobbins during the manufacturing process - no great mystery there - it can be clearly seen in the sewing run at the top of the pocket - grey thread along the top seem, then onto the green thread joining it and running vertically (again, we are talking about the S ring panel which sewn in place before the pockets go on.) Ignoring that evidence could lead to an assumption of re-applied pockets - but that leaves out actual pocket manufacture processes.
Right...so if we are to carry on the re-applied breast pocket theory - why didn't that person also do the bottom pockets too, to complete the overall 1st pattern look? The removed eagle is a tropical eagle judging by the size and sewing method, the tropical litzen are still in place - so it isn't a LW or Police conversion.....? So in that scenario it would have to be a conversion for a member of the Army...why not finish it?
Another point - there is absolutely no sign of removal - or re-application. I've been collecting for over 30 years and no novice at spotting re-sewn panels, wear and tear that simply doesn't add up - and this tunic's material is completely consistant in wear and use.
I have no problem with anyone not believing in such a piece but it is what it is and I stand behind it. (I also guess Johnny R is wrong in his experience with similar tunics - as those who have pm'd me are also wrong).
Thankfully I did indeed inspect this unique piece without emotion - I can't afford not to.
With Respect,
Mark

[madandi]

I´m with mark.
Hihi! Didn´t recognaize that both guys are "Mark".
I believe that the pleats are added later.

[NZMark]

Easy enough mistake!
Can I ask what you can see that would lead you to that conclusion?
Regards,
Mark T.

[madandi]

perhaps you can form my words form the pm to correct english and post it here

[OSS]

I too have concluded that the pockets have been altered since leaving the factory. One need only look at the pleats themselves; they are contructed of a different material than the rest of the pocket. And perhaps of equal importance; they are nonfunctional, purely ornamental. In my mind, the only explanation can be a tailored alteration to suit the owner. Tha alteration was nicely done and after washing and exposure it is possibly difficult to distinguish the faded threads. It is an easy mistake, but I don't think we need collectors scouring the world for the rare transitional tropical tunic.

[NZMark]

Actually, No - not an easy 'mistake' at all.
There are at least four different threads used in the tunics construction - so by the measure of some collectors that would make the whole tunic...altered?
And again - it seems some simply ignore the S panel sewing lines etc.
If you go by the 'custom altered' theory, please answer the question I posed earlier (also not yet answered) - why have the lower pockets not been customised as well - remember this is an Army tunic - not a LW look-a-like.
As for 'scouring the world for rare transitional tropical tunics' - why on earth not?? If we stuck to the 'text-book' mantra then too many original pieces would be rotting in rubbish dumps and everyone would have all exactly the same looking pieces in their collection. That kind of 'advice' is counter to the ethic of saving historical items - not preserving history - which is what we are supposedly doing.
Up until a few years ago, no one even (generally) knew about tropical wachmantel - now we know of at least two in existance (hopefully more).
OK - you wish not to accept such an anomaly on a production-line tunic - that's fine - but that's exactly what it is...
Respectfully,
Mark

[OSS]

OK - you wish not to accept such an anomaly on a production-line tunic - that's fine - but that's exactly what it is...

Perhaps you have discovered the heretofore unknown "missing link" between the first and second pattern Heer tropical tunics, or perhaps simply a tailor modified M-42; I adhere to the second school of thought. Let's agree to disagree, respectfully OSS.

[msteve21]

Thread

Hi Mark
Is it possible to see the stitching on the bottom unpleated pockets, I'm curious to see if they show diffent thread been used during application process.
Cheers
Mark S

[NZMark]

Thanks OSS - Agreed!
Mark S - Here you go. The thread used is the same as other parts of the tunic - but it is very important to remember these were production line pieces and the person sewing on the pre-made breast pockets was not necessarily the one sewing on the pre-made lower pockets - another simple explanation for the different pocket styles...
Regards,
Mark

[msteve21]

2nd pattern

Mark thanks for the extra photos

My thoughts or sewing theory with regard to the production of tunics is different colored threads were used by machinist in order to make it easier to identify production problems or mistakes in the assembly process, if this is true than the machinist would replace the cotton reel with same colour cotton. From the tunics I’ve inspected this would seem a reasonable assumption of how the production line may have worked.

Secondly I’m at a lost why the pleat is cut off at the button, if we are to accept the pockets are run of stock pockets then why don’t they comply to standard issue pattern?

The other point to consider is clothing manufacturing was strictly regulated during the TR and uniform manufactures were subject to inspections to ensure they follow strict guidelines, hence we see an almost identical consistency in tailoring of DAK tunics from all the clothing manufactures.

The one thing I’ve leant is to never say never and keep an open mind, however based on what been presented I would lean towards this been a field modified second pattern tunic.

Just my thoughts and look forward to comments that that could prove otherwise, either way it a interesting tunic.

Cheers Mark S