-
So does this helmet have any maker marks? I think we all agree it's post war but where is the evidence this particular helmet is one of the "prototypes" as opposed to a replica made sometime recently. Certainly the pristine condition suggest recent manufacture, but are there markings that can tie it to 1958-60 period?
-
03-18-2017 11:39 AM
# ADS
Circuit advertisement
-
by
Anderson
So does this helmet have any maker marks? I think we all agree it's post war but where is the evidence this particular helmet is one of the "prototypes" as opposed to a replica made sometime recently. Certainly the pristine condition suggest recent manufacture, but are there markings that can tie it to 1958-60 period?
The pristine condition can also suggest it being unissued like OP suggests or stored in a safe place... Just because something is mint doesn't mean that it is 'recent manufacture'...
Regards,
Bas
-
by
warbuff
I have seen different threads on here and the WAF in which people have expressed positive feedback on these helmets. Just because there is a different helmet in a book, does not automatically make this helmet a reproduction. Do you have any hard evidence that proves this to be a reproduction other than the "100% factual" information you got from 1 book, or anything other than some pictures of someone else's helmet??
You don't have to beat him up for giving you an opinion which he backed up.... just because because you didn't like it
-
KMMorris,
Not trying to beat anyone up here, I just feel like people cannot jump to conclusions based on one source, when there are multiple threads on these helmets.
Here are some of the threads on these helmets:
Para Helmet - Page 11 - Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums
Early post war para helmet for opinion / discussion
https://www.warrelics.eu/forum/falls...-helmet-51615/
-
by
LeonardoL
The Bundeswehr was founded in late 1955. Who knows how many prototypes that havent been seen or have been made in just a few numbers exist.
Agreed, The Bundeswehr was officially established on the 200th birthday of Scharnhorst on 12 November 1955!....
Four Bees: Fallschirmj
This link is pretty interesting!....
-
"The pristine condition can also suggest it being unissued like OP suggests or stored in a safe place... Just because something is mint doesn't mean that it is 'recent manufacture'..."
Of course, but my question is; are there stamps and marking that can link it to the Bundeswehr? Wouldn't there be some sort of acceptance mark even for a "prototype"?
How would you separate this helmet from another with a crimped edge that is a recent replica?
-
by
LeonardoL
The Bundeswehr was founded in late 1955. Who knows how many prototypes that havent been seen or have been made in just a few numbers exist.
Founding in 1955 is right, but the Bundeswehr existed only on the paper. The set up started 1956.
Https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundeswehr
The first helmets came in 1956: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gefechtshelm_(Bundeswehr)
by
warbuff
Ogpsycho,
I appreciate your opinion, however I have to disagree with you. These bundeswehr fallschirmjager helmets were produced in two colors, blue and green. Very few of these helmets were actually issued which explains why there are many in unissued condition. The particular helmet you showed looks to be one of the issued helmet, which explains the condition of the helmet compared to mine. I seriously doubt that any faker would produce a fallschirmjager helmet with a crimped rim opposed to a rolled rim, as that would be an immediate red flag to a seasoned collector.
In this book you find the correspondence between the federal government and the helmet companies. Before you doubt a book, you should take a look. "Vom Stahlhelm zum Gefechtshelm - Band 2"
Your sources show the same helmet as yours. That are not BW Fallschirmjäger helmets. Also important to know, the Bundeswehr have only one color for helmets, since 1956! "Olive green" Only parade helmets are gray, but all the other helmets are olive green. Not blue, not gray ... Olivegrün
Helmets are olive green. To camouflage a helmet, the old helmets had nets or camo covers, the news (current) helmets has camo covers or are repainted by the soldiers themselves.
Kind regards
Basti
-
by
Anderson
Wouldn't there be some sort of acceptance mark even for a "prototype"?
How would you separate this helmet from another with a crimped edge that is a recent replica?
Not necessarily, it would depend on how the prototype protocol was established. I remember from my own service when the modern generation of field clothing was being introduced we were given all manner of bits and pieces that we didn't "sign" for and which had no military nomenclature markings at all. Some we were told were prototypes and some were described as "manufactures samples" for us to knock about and discover if they were "soldier proof". Included were things like goretex boot liners/socks and comfort boot insoles neither of which made it into the inventory. Other items had full NSN labels and were taken onto account to be tested to destruction with very specific instructions for their use and were never replaced or taken up for army wide use. Amongst these were items in the range of the hated '73 Patt plastic webbing which most people have never heard of or know by totally different names. There were also different patterns of waterproof clothing with the same part number! Some survived, some didn't. This was in an established army with tested procedures and admin systems not a brand new force built pretty much from scratch.
As for the subject grey helmets I wonder if these might have a similar history which might account for the absence of military nomenclature. The thing is that they are of very high quality construction. I have one myself which is the one in one of the threads mentioned above. If they are bogus why would the quality be so high yet such an obvious giveaway as the crimped rim be included? One would have to be really ill-informed on the subject to take these for a TR item. It is also possible I suppose that these represent a manufacturers bid for a contract that was not accepted. As I said in my own post, this is a very well put together and comfortable helmet and I would happily jump with it myself. Whatever it is it is not a typical "fake". There would be little money in it for fakers if any at all as these likely would cost more to produce as fakes than they would ever sell for.
Of course I would like it to be "credible" but more than that I want to know what it is rather than guess. In the end I like it what ever the real history and it is nothing like the cheap Chinese copies currently flooding the market.
Maybe they were a commercial line that was offered for sale to other nations (like the many and various composite helmets we see journalists wearing) but never found a buyer.
Maybe they were BW prototypes, maybe not. Maybe we will find the answer, maybe not. Either way I think these will always be intriguing and I won't be dumping mine any time soon.
Regards
Mark
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares more about than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature with no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
-
The helmet Warbuff has illustrated is an original post WW2 trial design fallschimjager helmet. It is not a modern reproduction but dates to the late 1950s. It is one of several quite similar designs that were trialled during the period prior to the formal adoption of the US styled helmet during the early 1960s. A very nice find and quite rare. PY.
-
No! The Bundeswehr used only olive green helmets. The only grey helmets are parade helmets.
Show me one source for this theory???
Schuberth and Römer build prototypes with different shells and liner systems. Which maker is the grey one?
Bookmarks