Regarding the checkerboard decal on the DD lid that started this thread, the graphics of the decal are slightly different than the decal in the Baer book, for instance, the dip in the center of the top of the decal in the book comes to a point, whereas the dip on this decal is more blunted. Who knows? I know that I do not know enough to opine one way or another. Cheers, Jim G.
I am interested to know if the shields came as both decals and also as versions which were painted?
Ade, I checked the 3 volume German language Baer treatise, and in volume 1 (Vom Stahlhelm Zum Gefechtshelm, Band 1 (1915-1945)), on pages 158 and 390, there are pictures of the Croation checkerboard shields. On page 158 Baer says that the straight shield was Heer and the fancy shield was Waffen-SS. Interestingly enough, the picture of the Heer insignia on that page appears to me to have been hand painted.
Thanks for posting the closeups of the decals Pascal.
It is good of you to post up such a helmet for evaluation, as we can all learn here. You have to understand that a helmet rarely seen and with no photographic or empircal evidence that they existed or survived will be met with a healthy skepticism as it should let there be a flood of Spanish Blue Division and French SS Charlemagne helmets flooding the market because we do not analyse these critically.
For better or worse and without seeing this one in hand, I have to say I remain very skeptical and here is why - not any 1 is a killer of the helmet but when you add them up it is more negative than positive for me;
1. There have been decals beneath these that have been aggressively removed causing serious damage to the paint. Not a killer but a red flag when compared with real examples of period decal removed helmets.
2. The shield has been aggressively scrubbed with something abrasive, note the scoring to the decal face, and something non abrasive, note the color removed from the right hand top portion of the shield. This is typically done to age a decal.
3. The SS decal I believe is a real ET or graphically correct fake but postwar applied from a damaged loose shield. It shows the same non abrasive scrub marks as the opposite shield. However there is something quite wrong and typically only seen on postwar applied decals that typically have damage to them. The cracking is not age cracking but application tearing or the decal was already damaged when installed on the shield. Note the areas I have circled. Age cracking I have shown on a classic aged ET SS decal. So with the scrubbing, the tearing damage to the decal, I believe it was postwar applied.
4. The helmet shows no signs of scrubbing or cleaning which would correspond to cleaning or scrubbing damage to the decals.
5. The ET decal would have had to have been field applied. Field applied decals were virtually exclusively a Pocher decal not an ET decal.
So I think someone has made a postwar Handschar helmet when I add up all of what is visually seen from the photos. Any one of these "problems" would not alone kill the helmet but 5 of them together kill it for me - by the photos.
I would love to have this in hand for further examination Pascal and sorry I cant give this one a thumbs up at this time until further evidence shows this to be real.
ET decal in question with application damage. The tearing and misalignment of the decal is obvious here and this can only happen upon application and not from age. NOTE the misalignment between the torn areas esp the bottom left and the symettry between the torn areas. this indicates postwar application for sure to me.
ET decal from a well worn SS camo I have for graphical comparison and structure comparison and also wear and tear damage.
ET aged decal from an M35 SS double decal I have that is textbook for proper age cracking.
Pocher decal unapplied from germanwarhelmets.com (Kens site) this is the decal that one would expect to see not an ET and note the damage to the decal. Same sort of thing we see on the ET in question. I have owned 4 unapplied Pochers (down to my best 2) and they exhibit the same sort of unapplied cracking, also the decals are brittle after 60+ years and can fall apart when applying.
Last edited by DougB; 07-16-2010 at 06:26 AM.
I remain unconvinced of its originality as well. Doug explained it well. The abbrasions around the decal are a red flag. I was also thinking post war applied original but still feel its graphically flawed and so a fake decal in my opinion. (the new picture help again to prove this).
The helmet color is also not how an ET with that batchnr would look like. For me the positions of the runes in the shield in relation to the borders is not correct.
Here's compared with an ET batchnr 900.
Although I can't add anything of a constructive nature, I just wanted to say that this thread is/has been very useful and extremely interesting.
Hi too you all ,
the reason that i wasnt online anymore is the next , i was in the hospital with my wife , who gave me a son . His name ,STIG , born 16/07/2010 50cm and 3160gr . Its my first one , so whe are living on a cloud for the moment .
I will read this again to pick up the tread in the coming days .
So we will keep in touch .