experimental desert pattern???

click here
Note the odd contract no...
I was told that this is a commercial item. What do you think?
Philip

I have NEVER seen one of those so I cannot say one way or the other...That definately does not look issue as I have never seen a US jacket with epaulettes...

Steven

PS..I am going to post the 3 photos below..

THESE PHOTOS ARE THE PROPERTY OF MILITARYITEMS.COM & ARE SHOWN HERE FOR INSTRUCTIONAL PURPOSES ONLY

I just noticed this one too...they do not have all that accurate of info....they have a Czech MLOK long jacket marked as 80's swiss

http://www.militaryitems.com/product.php?productid=21409&cat=348&page=1

Well, I've never seen the pattern but it wouldn't suprise me especially since they were working with different patterns in 81. The tag does look legit, but they may have put a surplus tag on a fake jacket.
Andrew

Steven I don't worry about the epaulettes since it's an M65 field jacket.
I'm not sure but I think the stock no. belongs to a OG field jacket.
But check out the contract no. starting with DBA103... what is this???

derxsammler wrote:Steven I don't worry about the epaulettes since it's an M65 field jacket.
I'm not sure but I think the stock no. belongs to a OG field jacket.
But check out the contract no. starting with DBA103... what is this???

GOOD POINT Philip...I forgot about the M65s...the funny thing is...I am sitting on one right now as I type this...LOL

DBA...I will see if I can find anything..

STeven

NO IDEA...the only info I have as far as contract numbers go is this:

Military procurement was done through the Defense Supply Agency 1962-1977 and all contracts had a DSA prefix. The dates were by fiscal year...July 1 through June 30. Fiscal year 1962 had a DSA 1 prefix and E-62 suffix. 1963 and 1964 were the same but substitute "63" or "64" in the suffix. Fiscal year 1965 will just have the DSA 1 prefix and no date code. Fiscal year 1966 will have a DSA 100 prefix and no date code. Starting in 1967 there will be a DSA 100 prefix plus a two digit date code. So, for example, fiscal year 1968 contracts will have a DSA 100-68 prefix.

Contract numbers
WW2 - 195? no prefix - Contract for U.S Marine Corps (BuSandA symbol, stamped in sleeve)
1946 - 195? "Supply Department of the United States Marine Corps" and date (stamped in sleeve)
1953 – 1961 DA (Defense Agency)
confirmed examples of contract numbers: 1957 – 1961 DA prefix on the tag
1962 – 1977 DSA (Defense Supply Agency)
confirmed examples of contract numbers: 1962 – 1977 DSA prefix on the tag
1978 – 1993 DLA (Defense Logistic Agency)
confirmed examples of contract numbers: 1978 – 1993 DLA prefix on the tag
1994 – 2003 SPO (System Program Offices)
confirmed examples of contract numbers: 1994 – present SPO prefix on the tag

Stock numbers
194? - 1954 example of stock number "72-R-307-112" ????
1954 - 1974 FSN (Federal stock number), 11-digit number
1974 - present NSN (National stock number), 13-digit number

So DBA is a mystery...

Steven

This is the "Thule" pattern. I've never been sure if it was ever used in any serious trials or not, but in the 1990s you could get this stuff all day long through surplus catalogs. I kick myself for not having picked up any of it at the time. Oh well!

There are some odd stock prefixes out there which are legit. I don't know if this is one of those or not. Sounds familiar though...

Steve

Apparantly used by Abu Dhabi.

I have a pair of pants from same pattern in my collection, i got in a trade from "You Know Who" or the guy "must not be named" hahahaha
He told me it was from Abu Dhabi, but that's the only info i have.

I'm pretty sure that a "DBA" number is meaningless to the US government. Plus, the Thule trousers I have, and apparently the same as Danilo has, are missing significant BDU features and 100% cotton cloth. Whether these were used for a foreign contract or not is questionable. There were a ton of these items readily available on the commercial market here in the US during the 1990s.

Steve