That is unusual ! - I like these brown bakelite grip bayos.........!
That is unusual ! - I like these brown bakelite grip bayos.........!
First, my sincere thanks to Sleepwalker for posting a copy of the original published directive regarding the use of the blue uniforms. It was very helpful in getting a visual sense of what was happening back then, as well as providing a basis for study.
For those readers who might be wondering what a “Turkish - breadbag” looks like, posted below are a typical pair of “breadbag” frogs. With as can be seen, two different types of leather used for the pouches, and with the different examples a fairly wide variety of fabrics, leather, different colored thread etc. being used in their construction. It should I think also be noted that because of their very flimsy construction (with a presumed very short life/service expectancy) many are in a damaged or very damaged condition. Also noting that some of the mid-war commercial bayonets were found instead with late or later general issue leather bayonet frogs in addition to the breadbag types. With the “Turkish” label something I had never heard of in the U.S. myself, being attributed to an unknown German source by the late Anthony Carter. Who besides being the author of some very helpful, well received books on blade related topics - was a gentlemen and scholar of the first order, whose very untimely passing was not expected.
With the “skeleton” types of frogs an area of interest, because on the West Coast it was not until some military surplus imports from as I recall Romania (or was it Yugoslavia?) where I began to see in some numbers not only some different types of ersatz fabric frogs (but not the one I posted earlier). But also some “skeleton” type frogs which I had misjudged from photos as being some kind of ersatz short frog for the folding shovel. But instead were noticeably different dimensionally, although with some of them it’s possible that some of the components might have first originated from German frogs. But then with some of the others, they sometimes had some non-Germanic appearing features. Which doesn't mean that there are not some other types of frogs out there like the afore mentioned pressed paper frogs. The 1938 dated laminated frogs, the fabric/rubber (neoprene?) 1941 dated frogs that were constructed somewhat like vehicle tires etc. All of which seems to suggest that from time to time there were some ongoing experiments.
With some years back, the Reichsarbeitsdienst being discussed as one of the possible “candidates” for the mid-war commercial bayonets and the breadbag frogs. And if there is some definitive period proof that ties the mid war period bayonets and the frogs specifically to the Reichsarbeitsdienst, as something specifically ordered and delivered to them, then that also would really be very interesting to see and file away for future reference.
Finally, I’m sorry that the “ab 44” bayonet did not quite live up to expectations with the first set of photos. But now I'm wondering if perhaps the Mundlos (“ab” ) bayonet posted here may have something in common with the double date 1944 bayonets by asw (Hörster) with both the 43 and 44 dates, which had the same problem, but were done differently than the single “4” digit dated 1944 bayonets by ddl (Corts).
Best regards to all, FP
I was aware of the double dated "asw" bayonets. Prompted by the new photos I checked the usual s84/98 site.
k98 bayonets data and registry
and I also found reference to double dated bayonets by "bym" "ddl", "cvl" and "fnj". So maybe Mundlos were doing the same thing. So this bayonet may in fact be matching even though the dates are different.
Could these double dates simply be from the turn of the year? The bayonet stamped up in Dec and the scabbard from January's production?
Had good advice? Saved money? Why not become a Gold Club Member, just hit the green "Join WRF Club" tab at the top of the page and help support the forum!
the two main versions of Type 1 "Breadbag frogs" out of cotton garment differ in the color of the stitching (annex 1 + 2). This is not that version who sometimes called "turkey" frogs ( Type 2) (annex 3). This one is a version of the "breadbag" frogs made out of canvas and a recycled leather Part. In the same time Germans used the same canvas garment to made main parts of breadbags. They looks like came out of the same producing facility. Maybe made of canvas because cotton getting rarer and rarer. The type 1 often be found in the east... Andy has Informtions about a depot in czech at the end of the war. This type i mostly found together with S84/98 III commercials late war ALCOSO. I don´t think RAD... this troops gets very much older material at the end of the war. Maybe Police, Postschutz or Bahnschutz.
The Type 2 i fond in my home area.
The skeletons (4) are also found at the former westfront, also in my home area. My one comes out an barn and smells smells today by horse. I don´t think, that they are yugo or romania after war produktions. The material is typical for a series of frogs made end 1944/45 out of leather residues and/or captuerd materials. The form is not made in dependence to the "Seitengewehrtasche für das zusammenklappbare Schanzwerkzeug" but because of the used material, old belts for example. A other form was not possible. With other leather residues they made frogs that look like the "standard" model (5 - this example has a maker mark of 1945 on the backside - also a found out of my home area) . This models owns typical german security loop. The backs has approximately the same dimensons. They use typical german rivets. Romanian frogs does not have.
There are more like the austrian M88 frog model or very simplified M98 Model..always with a groove instead of a oval hole for the frog stud... and most with a pointed front. The Romanians use, beside their own material, German equipment in large numbers after the war, so there was no need to create such a model. Often they repair a german frog with one of their own front section.
Yugo frogs were different in many cases, too.
In the end of the war german ordes to made frogs out of garment... i found a orginal one (6) and i made repros of the order type (7).
The 1937-1939 made frogs out of Kunstleder was more than a experiment. About the 1941 rubber frogs there were no informations... The other "presspaper" frogs came more and more after 1943.
Last edited by Sleepwalker; 12-10-2012 at 04:52 PM.
I stand corrected. AC#328 (the 3rd image) is the one that was labeled as possibly being Turkish. With AC#563 (image 1 and 2 or “Type 1”) one that has on occasion also been seen with a khaki colored fabric. With the green “Type 1” (or AC#563) being the one that is most commonly seen from veterans of various U.S. Army units, and also Free French Forces. So I don’t know personally that I would consider it as more of an “eastern” frog versus a “western” one. Being in agreement that the RAD is an unlikely choice for the mid-war commercial bayonets. With my own sense of it probably being the German Police who had a well developed presence/infrastructure in southern Germany, which is where the U.S. and Free French Forces were operating in close proximity to each other. With the bayonets from Hörster being the ones that I seem to recall being seen more often with the breadbags - but I may have to think about that for a while, so it’s not a given.
As for the “skeleton” frogs and some others, I’m just reporting what I’ve seen and remember from some very large California shows that were held years ago. Shows that saw significant imports of weapons and militaria not just from Romania or Yugoslavia, but from a number of countries that were emptying their warehouses of obsolete or unwanted items, that ranged from pre WW I and later rifles, bayonets, and sled mounted MG 08’s etc., to new or as new weapons from post WW II through Vietnam. Shows that at different times attracted not only U.S. dealers and collectors from all over the U.S. But also groups of buyers from Germany, England, Japan and other countries for either resale, or for their own collections. So it was not unusual at a show to have to go thorough hundreds of 84/98 bayonets at a time in large boxes on the floor as some of my friends did to try and find an original SS marked bayonet, or maybe it was for something else that they were looking for. Likewise, the field gear oftentimes was all mixed up in large piles: the good, the bad, and the ugly. With a lot of it very heavily used and abused, and not really that interesting to a collector who was also looking for good condition. But every once in a while something reasonably decent might turn up - which is what the “chase” after them was all about.
With all that said, I don’t philosophically have a problem with the idea of improvised weapons and accessories when the situation is desperate. Which is why we see some of the Russian, Japanese and other improvisations. Or changes in rifles such as the Kriegsmodell K98k. Or better yet the Volksstrummerkarabiner 98. In fact, given that a significant number of those in the Volksstrum were equipped with substitute rifles like the Italian Carcano. With some of the late non-conforming frogs they might have even been for the substitute bayonets that the Germans possessed - who knows?
As for leather gear in general, 1945 dated items can be difficult to find. At one show I remember being surprised to see stacks of unissued 1945 dated P-38 holsters that had been taken at the end of war by the Russians (to go with captured pistols). The holsters looked good, but I was not thrilled to see that somebody had added a TR motif stamp that did not belong on the holsters. Likewise, I’ve seen 1945 dated leather items that used individual hand stamps (like those that you might find in your average hardware store) done one stamp at a time. With one example that as I recall I traced not to a leather works, but to something like a machine shop. So I tend to be very cautious in looking at items that are supposed to be scarce. Looking at the complete item, instead of just what at first attracted my interest.
Attached: With this example the belt loop portion has been replaced using a piece of recycled leather from something else. Professionally done IMO, most likely it was because that was all that was available at the time to make the repair. Also: The rubber frog (AC#315) was made by C. Riese Berlin. With a frog stud hole that is not as elliptical as in the one in the book, so that example may have been stretched out.
Best Regards, FP