Late War Helmets

[cricketchris1944]

I have to agree the two last helmets posted by Brain are post war done.
COA are useless.
chris

[Brian]

As there appears to be a requirement on this forum to post sufficient clear, concise photos and straight-on shots of decals, (which I heartily agree with)
it would be nice if there was another requirement: when commenting yea or nay on a particular helmet, to explain exactly why a member thinks it is so.

While comments such as 'postwar done', 'no good', and 'fake' certainly tell us the general feelings of the member, it does no good to anyone beyond that. Why is the helmet postwar? If there is no explanation beyond that, it would seem that the member does not know why it is postwar; he/she is just spouting off with no forethought. Thus, it does nothing to bolster their position.

On other forums (not here) such comments with no explanation have been used as 'cheap shots' simply to stir the pot.


So Doug, you want us to believe that my purpose in starting this thread is to generate interest in my self-published books, but it is you who keep bringing up the subject and you have even posted a link to them. Thanks for the commercial, but you are the one doing the advertising.




---Finally: Are you suggesting that if none exist in period photos, documentation, without provenance, and no other known examples are known that it is not important?

Doug



Some collectors are of the false conviction that if the above is true, a helmet must be fake. This is ridiculous. Rare and unusual TR helmets simply exist. They do not need our permission to do so and can even exist despite the above being true. The idea that the above being true 'proves' that there was no such period helmet produced is a fallacy, plain and simple.

[DougB]

Brian you are indeed the master of the reverse deflection.

Your the one who made the thread saying Late War Helmets, meaning they are wartime. Why is this so? Or for those who say postwar, I agree, why? I don't know. I am merely curious as I feel these concoctions are more likely to be postwar given the destruction of the German industrial base in the immediate postwar era and the immediate need for civil helmets for civil use.

For for the unusual and rare I accept period photos, documentation, etc may not exist. But I've seen nothing that binds these other than your belief / theory they are wartime and others disagree. As a book is being self-published on the topic some clarity is in order it is a belief and not fact then because no period photos, documentation or otherwise exists.

As for the book and the appearance of this thread I stopped believing in coincidence in this hobby a long time ago.

$$$$$$$$$$$ is the reason.

Anyway, I feel like I am on a merry go round on Ground Hog Day participating this thread.

Chris and Munich have pointed out postwar helmets, I'll read and see what discussion transpires.

It was fun while it lasted. Actually no, it was not.

[Glenn66]

Why is the helmet postwar?

Why is the helmet TR? The same argument you use to declaim postwar is the same argument that can be used to declaim TR.

[Gunny Hartmann]

Why is the helmet TR? The same argument you use to declaim postwar is the same argument that can be used to declaim TR.

In the same vein why is the helmet German?, as it's been pointed out German factories were gutted of machinery by the Soviets, it could have been knocked together in Russia. Clutching at straws i know, but just saying!..

[Jareth]

Not again! Another site, same old discussion with nothing new.

[BOB COLEMAN]

Let's keep the discussion on track with the item. As no one has any documentary evidence of this being or not being 3rd Reich period, judgements can only be based upon what we see. Great minds discuss other peoples items. Small minds discuss other people. I personally do not think these show any evidence of being German. Let's keep the thread on track. Without any documentation, people can only guess as to the purpose of the helmet that started this thread.

[Jerry B]

Evidence appears to not be forthcoming as to the dating of these helmets, so to me it seems that until some proof either way can be produced, this argument is all it will be, an argument and there is little discussion that can be undertaken. Until then it is best that all members here maintain their dignity and do not resort to name calling, we are here to discuss military items not each other.

[StefanM]

That odd, thrown-together look I believe is indicative of the Reich's late war struggle to produce.
After hostilities ended, there were helmets everywhere but with no one to wear them. The numbers were so great that companies resorted to converting many to farm and kitchen implements.
There were so many good quality helmets available post war that there would have been no reason to produce junk like this.

It just doesn't make any sense. My two cents, anyway.

I don't collect TR but find these helmets interesting nonetheless.

I would pose the question(s) that if there were such huge quantities of good quality helmets available at the end of the war, or post-war to make them into kitchen implements, then why the need to produce the inferior made versions during the war...if the "correct" helmet for a particular service branch wasn't available why not just pick up any helmet from this vast stock and use that instead of going to all the time and trouble to cobble together entirely new, and as remarked "junk" helmets?

[Glenn66]

I would expect that the vast quantities of helmets available post war was simply due to the fact that nobody needed them anymore. While hostilities continued, I expect the demand for quality head protection was quite high.

I do agree with your point that inferior helmets weren't in demand during the war.

To me the thread starter helmet looks like a foresty workers lid.