Late war para trousers or Sturmgeschutz ?

[SMP]

Thoughts on these please.

[SMP]

2

[SMP]

3

[SMP]

4

[SMP]

5

[SMP]

6

[SMP]

7

[SMP]

8

[SMP]

last

[Yannis]

Hi Steve

Uniform items are designed with a specific function in mind and fj trousers were serving a specific function too, ie jumping out of aeroplanes. Hence the grav. knife pocket and knee pad slits. This pair, evident from the photos, lacks these features.
If by late war you mean that, since the fj were more or less restricted to an infantry role and thus, these features were rendered obsolete I would ask why would someone produce another uniform item when there are already existing ones serving the same purpose?
My opinion is not based on any hands-on experience with fj trousers as I have none, just common sense ( I hope my sense in common enough...)
Anyway, I vote for Sturm.
I'd be very interested to hear what others with much more experience have to say though.

All the best

[Gary Cain]

I am in agreement with Yannis.


Gary

Originally Posted by Yannis

Hi Steve

Uniform items are designed with a specific function in mind and fj trousers were serving a specific function too, ie jumping out of aeroplanes. Hence the grav. knife pocket and knee pad slits. This pair, evident from the photos, lacks these features.
If by late war you mean that, since the fj were more or less restricted to an infantry role and thus, these features were rendered obsolete I would ask why would someone produce another uniform item when there are already existing ones serving the same purpose?
My opinion is not based on any hands-on experience with fj trousers as I have none, just common sense ( I hope my sense in common enough...)
Anyway, I vote for Sturm.
I'd be very interested to hear what others with much more experience have to say though.

All the best

[FJR6]

Hello,
I don't really believe in these non-standard simplified late-war items.
Germany "simplified" the Tuchrock from the M36 via the M40 to the M43 without really leaving the traditional tunic path untill they came up with the M44 blouse.
Sorry, but I don't think the trousers are FJ.

best regards,
Volker

[Glenn McInnes]

I agree with the other comments they are Stug trousers. If you ever want to move them along please send me a PM.



Glenn

[Gran Sasso]

Since decades the discussion about these trousers goes on and on. Spoken to several collectors, checked many surviving examples.
My opinion: These trousers were meant to be used as both FJ- and Sturmgeschütz ones.
What leds to this opinion?

1) There are to many around to be just Luftwaffe-Sturmgeschütz-ones.

2) After outbreak of war and modification of jump-smocks (with pockets) and kneepads (to be worn outside the trousers) there was no need for expensive - and time-wasting - production of the "traditional" jump-trousers.

3) A few years back I owned a pair of Luftwaffe-Sturmgeschütz-trousers, they were well-marked with LBA, but don´t have any press-studs.

4) Fotos exist showing paras with fieldgrey trousers with pocket flaps, but without knife-pocket or openings for kneepads (e.g. page 49 of "German paratroopers" by Robert Kurtz).

Regards from bavaria

Patrick

[John Hodgin]

"After outbreak of war and modification of jump-smocks (with pockets) and kneepads (to be worn outside the trousers) there was no need for expensive - and time-wasting - production of the "traditional" jump-trousers."

While this makes good sense Patrick, how do you explain 1944 dated jump trousers made in the standard pattern with slits and the knife pocket?

AND, following this same logic; where are the late smocks without wind cuffs, without the holster, (that was almost never used) without the long tails, etc.? 1945 dated smocks were made EXACTLY like 1942 smocks. So, why only change some jump trousers while making others in the standard pattern with slits and knife pocket til the war's end?
Regards,
John