question Navy/Dark Blue Battle Dress? What is it??

[bodvoc]

Hi everyone,

I have found this uniform, it has no makers mark but has a patch that reads.

 

Utility BD. Size 15 (with the sizes for Breast & Waist) and an arrow (pointing up), and a rubber stamp mark that looks like a date but is so smudged/worn you can not read it... may be 194* or may be 199*

 

It also has a pair of trousers (matching) with slit pockets, button flies and buttons for braces and pressed turn-ups (but no size or maker or date marks). All buttons are a plastic type.

 

It feels and looks like a cheap wool demin mix and is a very dark blue or dark navy (almost black) in colour.

 

 

 

There signs of shoulder titles being on the top of the sleeves and also a patch (as it is slightly faded and cotton threads where they were).

 

Any ideas what it is?

 

Cheers all

 

John

[chevpol]

looks like a Civil Defence Blouse

 

Mark

[bodvoc]

looks like a Civil Defence Blouse

 

Hi Chevpol,

 

Thanks for a quick anwer, I only just posted

 

Yeah, that was my guess, but didn't want to put my neck on the line lol. If it really is a ARP/Civil Defence Blouse, then my prayers have been answered on a cheap costum option :wow:

 

I'll better wait and see if our thoughts are confirmed by a few others before I buy

 

Cheers

 

John

[BIGREDONE]

Looks post war to me, others issued this type as well as already mentioned Observer Corps, RNXS and Prisoners. the one pictured looks RAF coloured however the RNXS and Prisons were much darker.

 

Paul

Edited October 5, 2010 by BIGREDONE

[ArtistsRifles]

Hi Chevpol,

 

Thanks for a quick anwer, I only just posted

 

Yeah, that was my guess, but didn't want to put my neck on the line lol. If it really is a ARP/Civil Defence Blouse, then my prayers have been answered on a cheap costum option :wow:

 

I'll better wait and see if our thoughts are confirmed by a few others before I buy

 

Cheers

 

John

 

Oh dear - now I have a vision of some one wandering around the clubhouse screaming "put that light" out everywhere!!!

[bodvoc]

Looks post war to me, others issued this type as well as already mentioned Observer Corps, RNXS and Prisoners. the one pictured looks RAF coloured however the RNXS and Prisons were much darker.

 

Hi Guys..

 

I have lightened the picture only so you could see the detail, as it is a very, very dark blue. The trousers are slightly lighter, I guess from being cleaned more often? Stitched in the leg seem is a tag, it only says CC41?

 

The buttoms are the thing that confuse me, I would say they are bakelite, as they pass the bakelite test. Below is a picture of the spare button that was stitched into the jackets side seem.

 

 

 

(With the exception of one replacement button, what looks like an old coat button) all the buttons are the same, but there are two sizes and apart from a few that have been re-stitched on, most look to be as original as the day of making so should mean 1930s / early 1940s?

 

Bakelite buttons were produced until about 1930 when other plastics took over?? (ref: http://www.anthro.utah.edu/IMACs/475-Buttons.pdf)

 

The jacket is unlined, so may of been worn with a shirt (and tie?), if that helps anyone?

 

The seller says it came from a house clearance and was packed up with a cap (sold off seperately by mistake and he can't remember what style it was). It was wrapped up with moth balls (and it still smells of them), in brown paper and also a newspaper (The London Herald) dated Thurs 8th march, 1951 and in a suit case (like a childs evacuees). He still has these items and he seems genuine about its history on its arriving to him. (He claims it was recieved minus the ensignia/patches, and they must of been removed a long time ago, possible before it was put into storage?).

 

So I am still leaning to the 1940s date (as the third digit of the year is either a 4 or a 9, unless its a very good repro from the 1990s and would it of had bakelite buttons? and would someone go to the lengths of packing it up to look older?) It is a shame that the date stamp is smudged and worn, and the ensigna is missing, so it remains a mystery to me what it was used for, the seller thinks it's a 1940s ARP/London Fire Brigade Volunteer/Civil Defence Warden, I just don't know for sure... Still hunting for picture refs of something like it.. :cry:

 

Oh dear - now I have a vision of some one wandering around the clubhouse screaming "put that light" out everywhere!!! :-D :-D :-D

 

hahahahaha As a guy trying to give up smoking, I will probably do that outside the club house screaming "put that light" to all those still smoking (or I might just be begging for a fag depending on what sort of day I have had) hahahaha

 

 

Cheers all

 

John

[andym]

The RN was issuing ancient serge battledress as late as 1974, I remember collecting mine from stores at Wrangaton! Not sure about the trouser turnups, though.

 

Andy

[bodvoc]

The RN was issuing ancient serge battledress as late as 1974, I remember collecting mine from stores at Wrangaton! Not sure about the trouser turnups, though.

 

Hi Andy,

 

I would say the trousers are more Patt 39 than Patt 40 (no field dressing pocket), the turn-ups may of been a personal mod, as for the Jacket PATT no idea??

 

Spent the afternoon at the local Uni, a friend there is a costume historian and this is what we have turned up so far...

 

Its not RNVS, its the right colour but the cut is all wrong (the buttons are showing on the breast opening, no pleats on waistband, belt buttoned not buckled.) Fabric is close though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its not RN, its the wrong colour, so is fabric, again wrong cut on the buttons, no pleats on waistband.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's far to pale to be RAF.. and the collar is wrong (to high)... and pocket flaps wrong and still no pleats.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is the closes RAAF BD, right on the cut (well ish), but colours wrong?? Far to Blue and more cotton than wool fabric (like the cheap jeans or old style boiler suits).

 

 

 

 

 

 

The last thing I found out is that according to records we found, the London Volunteer Firemen (and women) wore Tunics or Boilersuits not BD and they were black not Dark/Navy Blue.

 

 

 

 

At the risk of dressing up as a common criminal I might just buy anyway, 'cos I am sure some smart arse at an event will tell me what uniform it is lol..

 

 

 

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

John

 

 

[unionjack]

The pattern of blouse in your photo was not introduced to the Army & RAF until 1949 at the earliest.

The Civil Defence blouses were of wartime pattern right through the 1950's. Not sure if they ever did swap to this pattern, but if they did it would be well into the 1960's.

 

I have a pair of rough serge dark blue BD trousers myself with no dressing pocket, they're not CD. Could maybe be AFS but all their stuff is usually labelled as such so I doubt it.

 

My guess is they were made for Prisons or some other 'uniformed' Government controlled agency.

[Degsy]

I remember the cc marking on items in the family when I was young,I always understood it meant civilian clothing and was to do with rationing ie so many coupons or points required to purchase items and I think this started in 1941 hence cc41.

[unionjack]

You're quite correct that CC41 stands for Civilian Clothing 1941.

That label was for all goods manufactured under the Utility scheme.

 

The Utility Scheme basically controlled how much cloth/buttons/pleats/darts etc you could use in a design, in order to save materials. It was also a high standard quality control.

 

There is a myth of Utility clothing being rubbish, I have quite a few items, and they are all superbly made. Certainly far better than today's throwaway clothes.

[ford 369]

You're quite correct that CC41 stands for Civilian Clothing 1941.

That label was for all goods manufactured under the Utility scheme.

 

The Utility Scheme basically controlled how much cloth/buttons/pleats/darts etc you could use in a design, in order to save materials. It was also a high standard quality control.

 

There is a myth of Utility clothing being rubbish, I have quite a few items, and they are all superbly made. Certainly far better than today's throwaway clothes.

 

I am not sure about cc41 standing for civilian clothing as the cc41 mark can be found on other articles such as furniture and is normally known as the utility mark it may however have originally only been used on clothing and adpted soon after for other items

[ford 369]

having just had a quick look on the web I stand corrected as cc41 does indeed stand for civilian clothing although it was later adopted for other items such as furniture and bed linen etc

[unionjack]

As I said, the 'CC41' label applied to all goods manufactured under the Utility scheme. These 'can do and can't do' rules applied equally to the making of sheets, chairs, blankets, tables etc as well as to clothing. For instance you won't find large pieces of timber on a Utility piece of furniture. A door of a Tallboy for example would be made of several smaller pieces to form panels. Far less timber is wasted that way.

 

We actually have two complete Utility bedroom suites, both post-war. Very interesting. The 'label' on furniture can be very hard to locate. It will be on each item but can be in strange places, often very faint and/or smudged. Can be in the form of an ink stamp, an impressed stamp, or a burnt brand.

[bodvoc]

Hi again guys,

 

Thank you all for your input You all have been a great help in adding to finding out what this uniform is.

 

The RN was issuing ancient serge battledress as late as 1974, I remember collecting mine from stores at Wrangaton!

 

I recently spent the day at Portsmouth, at the Navy Dock Yard museums there, and after chatting to one of the historians, can safely say its not RN design (in his words more Army than Navy).

 

I also went to the Royal Marines museum at Southsea, they had something similar (except again in cloth, colour and the pockets design), and they also said it wasn't known to be one of theirs either.

 

You're quite correct that CC41 stands for Civilian Clothing 1941.

That label was for all goods manufactured under the Utility scheme.

 

The Utility Scheme basically controlled how much cloth/buttons/pleats/darts etc you could use in a design, in order to save materials. It was also a high standard quality control.

 

The CC41 does mean it is a 1941 Gov pattern issue/directive, both sites confirm this, and could of been made as late as the mid 1960s. The cloth patch is military/Goverment issue (may be to ARP/Fire Guards /Street Fire Patrol?? they couldn't say for sure) but being blue could be discounted for regular Police Force or Fire brigade ... Or so I am told by these two historians???.

 

One historian thought it could be POW emergency clothing, but also put doubt on Prison clothing because of the military stamp on the patch? (the upwards Arrow). The other historian disagreed with that and felt that convicts would of worn their normal clothes or a demin two piece or one piece boiler suit or dungerees? Depending on there crime, the jail and lenght of jail sentence, and that went for even millitary prisoners (POW etc.)??

 

They both believed the trousers and the jacket were not part of the same uniform, even though there were the same fabric? they felt the Jacket was very early 1940s, and the rubber stamp mark the issue year date... (he felt it said 1943) but the trousers were more like civilian trousers of the mid to late 1940s/possibly early 1950s? and may of been replacements? This was due the turn-ups, stitched, waxed and pressed in and as they said, more a tailor style of the 1948-1955 era. The buttons they both believed to be standard issue, but made from 1920 to 1960.

 

The pattern of blouse in your photo was not introduced to the Army & RAF until 1949 at the earliest.

 

From a pattern book, he showed me sketches of BD uniforms, from the pleats, pockets, epaulets and collar/cuffs match a 1939 design made up until 1955, however the title of this was just "Utility Battle Dress", but just like the label on the jacket, no services use mentioned. Fabrics available serge, demin & cloth (May be Linen?), colours Navy, Blue/Grey, Black, Sand( May be Buff?) and Khaki, meets CC41 and Ministry Dress Patten 39.

 

 

 

It is to faint to see but the date reads 194 and either a 1, 3, 5 or 7... It's just to smudged/worn to read...

 

 

On my last tour with the guys we support, I took it to the Royal Air Force Museum at Cosford, the top guy there couldn't identify it either, but said it looked more Naval than RAF, here we go again back to the start :cry:

 

The only real connection that is left is the London one. May be a coincidence, it being packed up with the London Herald but, all I have to go on now. Does anyone know or have pictures of the London ARP or SFP uniforms (1940 onwards?).

 

The plot thickens and still no further forward lol..

Thanks all

Cheers

John

 

PS the pic below is an ARP of 1944, but note the pockets are again different from the jacket I have found... :-(

[unionjack]

The CC41 does mean it is a 1941 Gov pattern issue/directive, both sites confirm this, and could of been made as late as the mid 1960s. ........

 

.......From a pattern book, he showed me sketches of BD uniforms, from the pleats, pockets, epaulets and collar/cuffs match a 1939 design made up until 1955, however the title of this was just "Utility Battle Dress".......

 

.......PS the pic below is an ARP of 1944, but note the pockets are again different from the jacket I have found... :-(

 

 

Firstly, The word "Utility" on the label has nothing whatsoever to do with the 'CC41' Utility Scheme. Utility items were purely Civilian, Government issued uniform items not being rationed. Utility (CC41) items were most certainly not made until the 60's! They were rationed for a start and all rationing had ceased by 1954.

 

The word Utility on your label relates to the intended use I feel.

 

secondly, as I said, the pattern of your jacket is NOT the same as the earlier BD. The difference is the open collar design, rather than closed to the neck. Your type did not appear before 1949/1951.

 

Look at the neck of the Civil Defence BD you show to illustrate the difference.

Edited October 11, 2010 by unionjack

[bodvoc]

Hi Unionjack,

 

Thanks for the input

 

Firstly, The word "Utility" on the label has nothing whatsoever to do with the 'CC41' Utility Scheme.

 

Only the trousers have CC41 on a lable inside them, the jacket just has that lable saying Utility Battle Dress etc.

 

secondly, as I said, the pattern of your jacket is NOT the same as the earlier BD. The difference is the open collar design, rather than closed to the neck. Your type did not appear before 1949/1951. Look at the neck of the Civil Defence BD you show to illustrate the difference

 

Yes, I agree that everything doesn't add up, and I feel it is a fake or a repro made to look older, the biggest clue to me are the pockets and collar style. I have found several refferences to the lable inside the ARP jackets, and they all clearly say "Battle Dress Blouse A.R.P." with a number or pattern.

 

Utility (CC41) items were most certainly not made until the 60's! They were rationed for a start and all rationing had ceased by 1954.

 

It was only the buttons they said were made up until the 60s. The clothes were made up till early 50s, or so they told me???

 

Anyhow, I am of the opion that it was a inaccurate version of a reenactors or maybe a stage/film costume and the patches (that were on it, now long removed would of maybe shown, hence they were removed or were more valuable than the costume). I feel the newspaper it was packed with and suit case were all no more than props left over from some event or filming :-(, just packed up with TLC as a memoire by the previous owner, who knows... Just my guess...

 

As it stands, and I think as the fabric is correct, I may retailor it to be correct, or just sell it on as an old stage military costume.

 

All in all, as none of the museums could accurately place it, I think it is case closed rather than waste any more peoples time.

 

Cheers

 

John

[bodvoc]

I have eventually found out what this tunic is, it is a ...

 

1949 PATTERN (made 1967) BATTLEDRESS BLOUSE - CIVAL DEFENCE USED IN THE COLD WAR ERA.

 

After weeks of hunting and searching as to it's origin and date, a chance meeting with a fellow re-enactor and costume historian who, drummed up pictures and patterns for the exact same articale, blooming typical eh! lol

 

But that's it solved at last ;o)

 

Thanks to all those that helped out along the way.

 

John

[chevpol]

I have eventually found out what this tunic is, it is a ...

 

1949 PATTERN (made 1967) BATTLEDRESS BLOUSE - CIVAL DEFENCE USED IN THE COLD WAR ERA.

 

After weeks of hunting and searching as to it's origin and date, a chance meeting with a fellow re-enactor and costume historian who, drummed up pictures and patterns for the exact same articale, blooming typical eh! lol

 

But that's it solved at last ;o)

 

Thanks to all those that helped out along the way.

 

John

 

just what I said in post #2

 

Mark

[unionjack]

I'd be interested to know the source of the information as I've never seen a CD blouse in this pattern.

Also never seen a CD blouse that isn't marked as such on the label.

[bodvoc]

Yep Mark, you were dead right, should of listened to you

 

I'd be interested to know the source of the information as I've never seen a CD blouse in this pattern. Also never seen a CD blouse that isn't marked as such on the label.

 

A fellow re-enactor and military costume historian gave the final nod, and also backed it up with pictures and details of it's manufactor in Poland.

 

Cheers

 

John

[unionjack]

He had photographs of Civil Defence personnel wearing open collar pattern blouses?

I have photo's from the very end of the CD in 1968 and they're still wearing the wartime style blouse that could be fastened to the neck. As I said, I'd be very interested in the evidence.

 

What do you mean about being made in Poland? Our battledress was British Made by a variety of manufacturers.

 

Take a look at this one for sale on eBay:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/COLD-WAR-CIVAL-DEFENCE-BATTLEDRESS-BLOUSE-1967-/310273050561?pt=UK_Collectables_Militaria_LE&hash=item483db707c1

 

There's no pic of the label, and he doesn't actually say what is on the label. I've asked if it states Civil Defence on the label and had no reply. I suspect he is surmising it's a CD item.

 

Oh by the way, would you say yours is made from a similar feeling serge to Army Battledress? The '1949 pattern' style blue trousers of mine that I mentioned earlier are made from a much sharper nasty serge, more like a pan scourer! be interesting to know if your jacket is the same.

[bodvoc]

Hi Unionjack,

 

He had photographs of Civil Defence personnel wearing open collar pattern blouses?

Yep, he had several pics of people wearing these open neck blouse, One was dated by by Kodak on the back as June 9th, 1953. The others showed cars of the mid 50s in the background or something else date-able. The best picture is the dated pic, it was of a factory named WALESTA, in Cracow, Poland, with people wearing the BD (both male and Female, maybe the staff?). Maybe made under license there like some of our Tanks were in WW2? I will contact him and try and get scans of the pictures and post here

 

Oh by the way, would you say yours is made from a similar feeling serge to Army Battledress? The '1949 pattern' style blue trousers of mine that I mentioned earlier are made from a much sharper nasty serge, more like a pan scourer! be interesting to know if your jacket is the same.

 

It is a rough serge, but not as rough as your pan scourer trousers , maybe just the age or wear that has made it softer though? Very thick to the feel about 3 to 4mm thick on the plush of the weave...

 

All my lable says is "Utility Battle Dress", no mention of Civil Defence or anything, hence all the confussion early on lol.

 

 

Take a look at this one for sale on eBay http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/COLD-WAR-CIVAL...item483db707c1

 

 

That blouse does look VERY, very simular to what I have here, especailly the buttons, though the fabric looks more wooly than what I have, not so many pleats to the waistband (mine has only three, one, a three fold pleat on the back and one dart style, on each side by the arm/sleves, the ebay one looks to have 5 pleats/darts) and that one on ebay is a dirtier blue? Mine is more very dark Navy, nearly black? (like a Police uniform).

 

 

 

Cheers

 

John

[unionjack]

That would be great, I'd love to see those pics.

 

I've had a 'reply' to my question from the eBay seller thus - "WAR DEPARTMENT LABEL"

 

From this I can deduce two points. 1) a not very helpful seller! 2) It does not state Civil Defence on the label and is again merely supposition.

From looking at many of these blouses and similar items I'm aware that the labels always state either CD pattern numbers or AFS pattern numbers or very often both.

 

It's possible that the positioning of the pleats is a manufacturers variation I suppose.

[bodvoc]

Hi Unionjack,

 

I finally got hold of him, and he is going to post me copies of the pics (he doesn't know how to use the scanner he has).

 

It's possible that the positioning of the pleats is a manufacturers variation I suppose.

 

My guess would be, the more pleats the less likely it is to be from War Years (1939-45), as fabric was short supply. Tailors "Artistic license" would be more freely used when rationing wasn't in force. I have seen several versions of the same Patt BD, made by different firms but all exactly the same cut.. though by this I can't rule out a rouge Tailor knocking out something near enough or doing personal mods to the BD.

 

Cheers

 

John