Type 90 IJA Helmet w/ Blue Name

[Kiipu]

Could the X marking indicate failure to pass army inspection?
Addendum to "The Evolution of the Japanese Army Steel Helmet", Post #5

[John4022]

Yes the chinstrap is severed and tied together. It certainty feels like its been tied for a longtime but I suppose there's no way of telling.

[Nick Komiya]

Here's where you normally should find stampings. These positions were stipulated in the weapons marking regs.

[John4022]

I looked again and I could not see a size stamp. Thank you for the photo, I'm definitely learning a lot

[Nick Komiya]

Could the X marking indicate failure to pass army inspection?

I've never seen a rejection stamp before, but the size is right and certainly can be. In the case of helmets, the steel mill's stamp served as the army's acceptance stamp, so a failed product would get the X instead of the maker stamp. In other words, if the maker stamp is present, that would not be a rejection stamp.

Normally rejects would have been scrapped, though.

[Nick Komiya]

As the X is in the exact position where the acceptance stamp should have been, I guess we need to conclude that the helmet never got any steel mill acceptance stamp, but was rejected and not paid for by the Army. Such a piece normally would be melted down or could have been used as a classroom sample at the manufacturer, which is consistent with the fact that the liner also is devoid of markings. Although it looks like a combat piece, it would never have left the factory and was possibly used as a factory air raid helmet after 1944.

It is a rare helmet in its own right, as this is the first rejection mark I've ever seen.

[Kiipu]

My experiences mirror those of Nick.
The Mysterious "w" Stamp!