Deutsche Akademie für Luftfahrtforschung.

[Richard Kimmel]

Thank you Adrian for honoring my request.

[Adrian]

The thread will remain open for Richard to present the measurements of his award and for the members to discuss facts and put the fiction to bed.

[Richard Kimmel]

I'm sorry I hadn't checked back on the thread since the new posts which are now removed as they were unecessary in my opinion.

The speculation about a worker is, like I said an irrelevance as it is pure speculation and has no bearing in determining if this piece is original, or fake.

If you wish to compare an American 1960's worker making mass produced vinyl records to a 1940's German worker in a factory making a limited production run of a controlled award you open up a wide ranging and ridiculous set of possibilites for all of our collectables. It cannot be proved and therefore it should not enter the discussion again as it is slightly insulting to the intelligence of the members here and like I said previously akin to a line put out by a dodgy dealer.

Adrian... One cannot catagoricaly conclude that this may not be the case, and yes it does reflect in many other situations; a point that collectors should definitely be aware of.

[HPL2008]

The 'worker who made a piece for himself and didn't mark it because it was a non issue piece but is a genuine award' is the sort of tale a hooky seller would spin in attempt to pass off a fake to a naive buyer.

In other words: The length and complexity of the theoretical explanation for a questionable item stand in inverse proportion to said item's likelihood of authenticity.

[rbminis]

I am going to make a logical statement that there were a specific number of the three grades of this decoration that were presented and serial numbered. I would logically conclude that more than just this amount was actually produced, and that the organization would not wait until they wished to take in another member before ordering a badge to be made in its entirety. If the organization had a supply of un-serial numbered decorations in stock or if the manufacturer had a small stock of these will never be known however, it would seem logical either way.

Hello Richard,
I have not posted on this thread, but I have read it all.
I do not study this award nor am I familiar with it in any way. I have to ask you to look at this in a way that any of us do when it comes to authenticating any of the items in our collections.
I ask you to, as you suggested earlier, to read your signature line and apply this here.
Ralph.

[Richard Kimmel]

The thread will remain open for Richard to present the measurements of his award and for the members to discuss facts and put the fiction to bed.

Adrian...In this respect I will agree, except for the use of the word "fiction", as there is not fiction here, simply speculation. Even should the measurements not coincide with the "Ailsby Chart", which we do not know where it was obtained given his past reputation, this speciment may still have been produced as an excellent copy from the 80's. I'm certainly happy with that

[Adrian]

Richard, I admire your tenacity but please stop with the unknowns and unprovables. There is no way this speculation can be presented as evidence as to the authenticity of this award. No way.

If the worker wanted a piece and run the high risk of punishment for making an unauthorised award, taking one of these pieces for a reason beyond me, I mean, he wasn't to know they would day become collectable so there is no reason for him to make and take an award he wasn't entitled to, wasn't his property and probably contravened every rule in the book over the regulations agreed by Lauer and the Akademie.

If he wanted one he could have just taken one without the need to make or pick a 'different' one.

This is the final word on that side topic. Get back to presenting the only things that will stand up in this discussion - FACTS!!!!

As the pertinent saying goes, buy the piece, not the story that goes with it or the seller's reputation.

In this case discuss the piece, not the story made up to accompany it!

[Richard Kimmel]

Hello Richard,
I have not posted on this thread, but I have read it all.
I do not study this award nor am I familiar with it in any way. I have to ask you to look at this in a way that any of us do when it comes to authenticating any of the items in our collections.
I ask you to, as you suggested earlier, to read your signature line and apply this here.
Ralph.

Hi Ralph...Thank you for making a sensible posting and just for the record concerning my signature, I have no where in this topic ever stated that my specimen is genuine, however just about everyone else has asserted that it is ia reproduction/copy. There still are a couple of open minds.

[Richard Kimmel]

In other words: The length and complexity of the theoretical explanation for a questionable item stand in inverse proportion to said item's likelihood of authenticity.

HPL...If I understand you correctly, you are referring to Sayre's law, that states, "In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake."

[Richard Kimmel]

Let us put on our thinking caps, set aside the symantics for a moment and consider the following questions:

What was the method of production; were all three versions of this award die struck or cast?

Would anyone have information as to the demise of the awards that were returned to the academy, but not reissued?

Does any member have a proven genuine example of this award in their collection?

I'm of the understanding that there is book on the Accadamy by Jorg M. Hormann; does anyone know of this book and possibly where copies can be obtained? I checked on Amazon and other books are listed by this author, but not this one. Possibly it may be out of print?