Article about: Sometimes your searching for something and you come by chance across a gem that has been on the wishlist for quite some years. Arriving just before Christmas its my pricvate present for unde
I came across this barbwire cutter by Hugo Linder, it had an army contract, its has acceptance stamps of the Waffenamt & a stamp H, just like the Loesche knife have on the spine.
That H marking is also found on the back of an F.Dula hunting knife in combination with FB, so H F B (most likely Heeres Forst Beambte)
the abbreviation HFB for "Heeresforst-Beamte" cannot be correct. "Beamte" - Officials - was not stamped or used in this way. That can only ever have been a higher-level agency.
I also checked the list of abbreviations in this regard. HFB does not exist.
H was never used simply for "Heer" either. There was no such thing
In addition to internal markings for the workplace, quality inspection (you will find a few letters), etc., an H on equipment and devices can also stand for the Zeugamt Hannover - a military equipment office.
Sleepwalker you might like to review back to around post 90 on this thread, we thrashed the topic Ch.A.W. topic back then, eg;
"... The problem is the Chef d. Ausbildungs-Wesen is also connected to SA training, so any marks could be SA related not Luftwaffe. And secondly as Fred points out, the organization became independant later, so neither SA or Luftwaffe. As there are no dates on the Waffen-Loesche knife it will not be easy to say which organisation was responsible for the marks. That is assuming they are not Chromolit Arthur Wingen, which we cannot yet be sure of.''
There's still new information out there to find i'm sure
A lot has already been written so I will try to keep this brief and more focused on the new information. (And to keep it shorter, some of the minor exceptions and small details may be left out.) 1938 saw the older high grade German forests lose much of their importance to the military buildup because they were becoming too depleted.
For the Wehrmacht a different laminated much more common lower grade type of wood product was one solution, the other was plastics. That said, the German Army did use an “H” stamp on its rifles, marked on the buttstock (Kolben), a very limited number of “L” marked examples for the Luftwaffe, and even scarcer “M” for the German Navy also exist. With that said the vast, vast, majority are just Army marked.
Pistols were/are another matter, as the earlier German Navy types used their unique accountability markings in addition to the serial numbers and Waffenamts. The Luftwaffe, like the Army, did not. For items procured via Luftwaffe contracts such as dress swords, daggers, fighting knives, machine guns, (very limited P.08 pistols), survival guns etc. those items used the Luftwaffe style acceptance stamps that were sometimes also employed as inspection marks (just like the Waffenamts).
While researching and checking some different resources one thing that kept coming up was a lack of contracts with secondary suppliers (ie: not the actual item makers). Waffen-Loesche being a retailer of sporting goods with multiple locations. If for example the Luftwaffe wanted some Walther PP Model pistols for its personal they were procured via the Army that got them directly from the maker.
The special Luftwaffe type Luftwaffe holsters for that pistol came directly from the leather goods maker with those holsters having a Luftwaffe acceptance stamp. One of the purposes of the Waffenamts (in addition to the civilian style markings) as seen for example on the smaller caliber pistols that were also privately purchased by officers was to identify them as government property instead of private property.
My questions here as regards the Waffen-Loesche knives being:
1) Why no Waffenamts (or Luftwaffe acceptance stamps)?
2) Why the higher cost stag grips versus wood or plastic?
3) Why was a higher cost intermediary used versus a lower cost direct bulk purchase from the actual maker?
Maybe I’ve missed something and there are some good reasons that explain the knives and their markings but I don’t think that we are at that point with the information at hand. From the Internet posted below is I believe the same type of wire cutter with just the maker type of markings. Best Regards, Fred
Three very good questions Fred. All of which seems to suggest private purchase, yet there are those stamped issue or accountability numbers on many of these knives.
Three very good questions Fred. All of which seems to suggest private purchase, yet there are those stamped issue or accountability numbers on many of these knives.
Point noted. And something where I thought about different possibilities where that could be a factor. It might take a while, but collecting the available markings could give an indication of where these knives should fit into the overall scheme (pattern) of things. That said, given their robust construction no doubt a percentage of them acquired new owners at some point which could possibly skew the data. So far from what I've seen/recall from other places the majority seem to be unmarked. Best Regards, Fred
Three very good questions Fred. All of which seems to suggest private purchase, yet there are those stamped issue or accountability numbers on many of these knives.
Anderson, a WRF reminder of other possibly related topics popped up when I rechecked this thread that has me thinking of a possible scenario with this Waffen-Loesche knife. To not prejudice any thoughts in any direction I'm posting a link and one of the images. Is this the "Rosetta stone" key to the mystery? Best Regards, Fred
I haven't found any real evidence yet. But I suspect it was also searched in the wrong place.
Personally, I don't see any direct connection to a forest service.
I do not consider "Ch A W" to be a manufacturer's designation, but rather a stamp of the troops or property.
The fact is, the abbreviation "Ch AW" or "Chef AW" existed. This is the department "Chef des Ausbildungswesen der Luftwaffe" - Head of Training of the Luftwaffe - , which existed between February 1939 and July 1943.
In July 1943 it became the department "General of Fliegerausbildung" (Gen.d.Fl.Ausb.) - General of the Aviation Training -.
I think the search has to start here. Either members of this department were given these knives or they were given to certain recruits.
The hunting character of this knife could be found in Herman Göring's hunting affinity.
Regards
I already posted about the Ch. A. W. and the H markings in post #69 & #70
A pre war catalogue of Wingen or a Hunting magazine of these days bearing ads showing these knives would be interesting.
I did found some hunting blade ads in magazines of the 30ths but none of the Arthur Wingen ads showed these knives.
I already posted about the Ch. A. W. and the H markings in post #69 & #70
A pre war catalogue of Wingen or a Hunting magazine of these days bearing ads showing these knives would be interesting.
I did found some hunting blade ads in magazines of the 30ths but none of the Arthur Wingen ads showed these knives.
Ger
I think that period sources could be very useful in trying to determine the origin of these knives. Early in the 2Oth century Eickhorn listed some large hunting type knives as "Saufänger" (pig sticker?). In the TR era that was changed to "Standhauer". But with a seeming lack of appropriate period maker catalogues, by focusing on the potential customers via Hunting magazines might be an even better way to develop verifiable information. Best Regards, Fred
Yes, we aired the question of A.Wingen and "Chromolit" way back earlier so let's not re-invent the wheel. There's got to be some new pathways to solving the mystery.
I agree catalogues may be the key. If someone could turn up a Waffen-Loesche catalogue it may just be the breakthrough needed. My gut feeling is this was an off the shelf knife in the Waffen-Loesche inventory. And it could well be a hunting knife, as it is in keeping with the style of early 1900's hunting knifes, which often used a military style frog to attach to a belt.
OK, here's my wish list. Who's got this catalogue and this mysterious Alex Coppel look-a-like knife?
by gerrit
.
And something where I thought about different possibilities where that could be a factor. It might take a while, but collecting the available markings could give an indication of where these knives should fit into the overall scheme (pattern) of things. That said, given their robust construction no doubt a percentage of them acquired new owners at some point which could possibly skew the data. So far from what I've seen/recall from other places the majority seem to be unmarked. Best Regards, Fred
Bookmarks