French uniform sizing

[rockape867]

Does anyone have a "ready reckoner" for French uniform sizes?
I usually need a 42" chest and 36" waist.
I'd prefer to use original kit so I need to be able to know what to aim for.

[earlymb]

That's a very good question. I don't know if there are any size charts, but I have an original TAP 47/56 jacket marked in size 32 that fits me although sleeves are too short. My US size is 46.

[rockape867]

That's a start.
Thanks for the info.
Maybe we can collate sizes on here?

[Kenneth]

Here is a link to sizing information: www.trancheemilitaire.com/content/16-tailles.

French uniforms that you're probably interested in from the 1940s and 1950s had a series of numbered sizes that corresponded to no measurements. That is, a "large tall (or long)" was a size 46. A large regular was size 26. British sizes worked the same way, starting with size 1. So you need a size chart. Different garments had different numbering systems. That information only includes the M47 fatigue suit, however.

These days, both the British and French size garments in centimeters but you also have to know how the garment, especially jackets, is supposed to fit. Sizes for shirts (these days) are usually by neck size. Thus, a size 42 shirt is a 16 1/2" neck, not a size 42 chest. But in buying used garments, it helps to know what the original size is. Sportsman's Guide is rarely all that accurate with regards to sizes for a lot of the surplus stuff they sell.

Other countries, like Germany and Netherlands, have their own sizing systems. Sometimes garments come with helpful illustrations is you aren't able to actually try on something. Sometimes a garment will have been altered, too, making the original sizing less accurate.

[rullow]

Hi Guys,
I made me this note I carry with me in the wallet to know what size is OK if I see something on ebay:




however TTA47 pants in size 33 seems a little bit smaller than the same size TAP... probably by 4-6cm... maybe it was just a "bad cut" but better to be more careful...

[Kenneth]

Nice charts. Good luck finding things with labels still intact. I've examined several airborne jackets, including one in plain olive green, apparently unissued, and they were all extra-large short. I've managed to find a couple of fatigue jackets with the paper label pasted to the outside still there. But even with the correct size, the sleeves were too short. Come to think of it, the fatigue jackets I was issued in the army also had sleeves that were too short.

I didn't know there were Vietnamese sizes in French uniforms. But the British introduced Gurkha sizes (prefixed G, I think) when they were first stationed in the U.K. after the war.

By the way, I have a copy of a British manual that explains sizes, each garment at the time having its own system, plus an explanation of how things were supposed to fit, sometimes allowing for shrinkage. However, I have a few things in different sizes (not British, though) that fit exactly the same.

[rullow]

the sleeves are always way too short... for the TAP as well as for TTA uniforms....many times you see the guys in algeria wearing the pullover and the sleeves on TAP jacker are rolled up all the way up . so you see basically only the sleeves of the pullover....

if you find a jacket with correct sleeves - it will be most likely ridiculously oversized....

[Kenneth]

There in an illustration in Martin Windrow's book of a soldier in Algeria wearing a fatigue jacket over a shirt, jersey and quilted liner and the sleeves are shown as being about four inches too short. Another illustration on the opposite page shows a different soldier with the sleeves rolled up, which is possible.

Another soldier in the same illustrations shows a soldier wearing a "djellabah." Anyone have one of those? Not worn in Indochina but certainly in North Africa.

[rockape867]

Excellent work guys. You've given me something I can work with.

[earlymb]

The sleeves om my TAP56 jacket are indeed about 6cm too short, while the rest fits nicely so I just rolled them up. I wonder if they were intended to be this short for some reason or were French para's the human equivalent of a T-Rex?

[Kenneth]

My theory is that all the ones that would fit were issued out in the service decades ago. Those left over were short. Of course, maybe people today are just taller.

[earlymb]

I don't think that explains everything, or most of the items we have in our collections now would be n mint condition. My jacket has certainly been worn and is faded to an extent I can't say it has never been to Algeria.

[rullow]

i think they just didnt care... and today is our perception of good length sleeves maybe a little different...
attributing factor is that the jackets were intended for shorter people but they were designed oversized on the body.... so to get correct length sleeves you jacket ended near your knees... if you check photos of 47/52 you see that clearly..... so if we have the jacket that fits us well - its actually way too small...
that changed after algeria only I guess....

who knows - we have to get use to it

[Kenneth]

I have a complimentary theory that says that some soldiers want a particular garment to wear so badly, that they will wear one that doesn't fit, at least if they can get it on. There are photos of a legionnaire in John Robert Young's book who is wearing an airborne jacket that is on the small size and short, too. However, it may be possible that the jacket had been extensively altered to keep up with the current fashion (in the legion) of a shorter jacket. Hard to say, really. Interesting book but most of the photos are on the dark side. Interestingly, that soldier and his comrades were stationed somewhere in the desert but wearing the camouflaged jackets (with OG shorts). In another section, soldiers stationed in the jungle, French Guiana, are wearing khaki short-sleeved shirts and shorts exclusively in all photos. It maybe that the French army does not adhere to the universal uniformity of their soldiers the way we think they would (or should).

I also hold to the theory that they were all shorter, too. The Italians even more so.

[rullow]

especially in algerie - making the jacket to fit you perfectly - in todays fashion terms - "slim fit" was quite common.
My TAP47/53 jacket is modified that way. it was shortened, pockets moved more in front and it was stitched together on the sides to have a more narrow and tight look (8RPIMA).
My TTA47/52 jakcet allegée was modified by stitching the sides together as well - to have more narrow look....

Time to time you find also TAP47/56 trousers with the pant legs stitched to have a narrower and tight look as well......

this led to the F1 way of wearing the unform tight.. as you can see in kolwezi.....

[Kenneth]

It was also a common practice when in was in the U.S. Army in the mid-1960s to have fatigues tailored, both the shirt and pants. Rarely would anything else be tailored, except for the hem in pants, because for most soldier, fatigues were all you ever wore. But it wasn't something everyone did, however. I have also read that it was sometimes done by German army soldiers in WWII, altering the field blouse. Apparently the fashion was to raise the lower pockets a couple of inches, shortening the entire jacket, and usually sewing down the bellows of the lower pockets. One should never underestimate the influence of contemporary fashions both within the army and without (that is, civilian fashions).

None of those alterations were ever mentioned in regulations and some were probably against regulations. But one should also be aware that the average soldier has only the vaguest idea of what the regulations actually are, having never had the opportunity (or interest) to read any of them. And besides, NCOs usually had their own interpretation of regulations, too. The lower ranks in all armies tend to develop the ability to avoid officers and senior NCOs whenever possible.

[lew]

Aug 23, 2018 8:39:04 GMT -5 Kenneth said:

I also hold to the theory that they were all shorter, too. The Italians even more so.

Relevant: Compare the average US soldier's size and stature in WW1 vs. WW2. The Depression caused an entire generation, on average, to be smaller due to the effects of malnutrition. I'm sure the French, Italians, et al... were similarly affected, and those effects lasted well into the '50's. Us Americans also tend to be on the larger end of the stature spectrum.

Guys, be thankful you don't have a 45" chest and monkey arms. Both of those make finding uniforms a blast.

[craigtx]

Try bein' 6'4" with arms to match... Findin' originals that fit are very few and far between. ;-)

[Kenneth]

There is a photo appearing in the Osprey book, "French Foreign Legion since 1945," of a company marching in Sidi-bel-Abbes in 1947, mostly wearing pre-war tunics (Vareuse toutes armes, I think). One man is at least a head taller than anyone else and a couple of other men at least a had shorter than anyone else. I guess there are always exceptions to the rule.