Giagantic marks..? What do we have here?

[marcotk]

Hello everyone,

I have been shown this set. It is claiming to be a kind of combat/field suit of the Red Army (precisely for tankists..). It obviously looks 70-80ies, but those huge marks (that I have never seen before) make me wonder if these are bogus, and/or if this is not a soviet set and someone just applied the marks..

BC I'd bet stands for Armed Forces..


What do you guys think? Prisoners tunics.. Regular Field/Training/Work uniform?

Thanks! :D

Pantaloni Tuta carristi URSS.jpg Guanti Carrista URSS.jpg Giacca Inver. Carrista URSS.jpg

[marcotk]

the rest of the photos

Vista retro Tuta Carristi URSS.jpg Tuta Inv. Carrista URSS.jpg Part. Pant. Tuta Carrista URSS.jpg

[Tretov]

A guess is that those ridiculously large marks were applied post-soviet to emphasize that the outfit is indeed from the USSR when sold abroad.

The hammer and sickle looks like a western interpretation.

[Commissar]

To be honest I did not see the markings at first and had to look closely at it.
Other than the markings it looks original?
But it kind of throws me off.

[DougD]

I have a winter coat like this to a Lt.General and it has the same mark on the back of it; I think it is just the Soviet Army mark, no more or less.

I'll try to shoot it on Friday.

[Commissar]

Well maybe if it is more common than we think it is probably more acceptable. :D

It doesn't look bad. The coat I mean, it looks pretty much genuine.

[DougD]

Here is mine, for a Lt.General...not the best looking coat, but warm and great for taking the dog out in winter. DougD

[desantnik]

This may have been a way to mark military property to prevent it from being used by manual labors???

[Commissar]

I heard it was common for soldiers in the Soviet Army to sell their uniforms, gear and equipment to people off base for extra cash; I heard it was a huge problem for a while in the mid 80s...
At least thats what a certain book tells me.

[marcotk]

Thanks to everyone. Good points were made pro and con the usage of such mark before 1991.. I personally don't imagine a general going around with such mark on his back :rolleyes:
Maybe such marking might have been introduced in the late 80ies* and due to the late introduction we do not see so many of them? (because, I repeat, I have never seen these before).
Maybe, they had a specific meaning but after the fall someone started to apply them indiscriminately (as Tretov pointed out .. we have seen this so many other times).
Maybe used only for trainings and/or military schools..?

Just speculating here.. :D

--
* (as the story on the "other" forum proves - where people who seemed either prisoners or deserters were seen leaving a military base wearing such clothes. I think this account testifies on the legitimacy of such marks)