Pab p&l l/18

[Norm F]

For me it is a real shame that that "thicker" pin is not seen on a marked P&L badge. That would be the icing on the cake for me with regard to the KVKs that are marked L/18.
But I can see the real possibility for P&L for the KVK from the series of uboat pics and different pins used.

cheers
Graeme

Hi Graeme,

We are covering a lot of territory in this thread but to come back to your above statement, although P&L never marked their combat awards and crosses, their Spanish Cross tells an interesting story.

The Spanish Cross in P&L's catalog is unique among Spanish Cross makers in that the swastikas are solid and not cut out as they are from every other maker. This makes it quite recognizable. As it turns out, the pin on these can be either the flat one like on their marked Sports badge or the thick one like on the KVK1.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Norm F]

Here's another P&L-type Spanish Cross with solid swastika which appears to have the L/18 stamp in the pin (photo a little too blurry to make it out unfortunately). As well here are two examples of the Otto Schickle Spanish Cross (with cut-out swastika) -- one stamped L/15 by Schickle and the other stamped L/18 by Mayer. This same type can also be found bearing concurrent stamps by Schickle L/15 and Zimmermann L/52 who also acquired some leftover Schickle stock, and furthermore this type is depicted in Schickle's wartime catalog.

It certainly doesn't make sense that Mayer would have made two different Spanish Crosses with different swastika cutouts and hardware and then supply one to P&L and one to Schickle for them to display in their catalogs --- obviously the more logical scenario is that Mayer acquired examples of both P&L and Schickle Spanish Crosses in the 1941 sell-offs and stamped them both L/18.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Norm F]

Hi Graeme,

I noticed that the Heer guys also tend to call this one an "unmarked F&R" but I can't understand why? It's clearly a different design from the "true" unmarked F&R.

Unless I'm missing something I see no reason to call that one an unmarked F&R?

Best regards,
---Norm

Hi Norm

To be honest, I am amazed at this comment of yours, especially from someone who has disected and discussed badges in great detail. I see all the differences in the badges that you have pointed out, but there is an overwhelming striking resemblence that you appear to want to rule out.

With such a close connection in design, imo, you can not dismiss this by saying this is "clearly a different design".
All these badges have several very unique significant details, not seen on other IABs.

best regards
Graeme

Hi Graeme,

To come back now to your statement above, I perhaps overspoke when I said "different design" when comparing the "true unmarked F&R" solid IAB and the "F&R-like" semi-hollow. I should have said "significantly different dies based upon the same design". But the truth is the marked F&R semi-hollows are a dead ringer for the "true unmarked F&R" solids but they're significantly different production dies from the the "F&R-like" semi-hollows.

When it comes to Minesweepers I'm used to looking at much more subtle differences between badges; you can see in this comparison that the F&B zinc Minesweeper is almost a dead ringer for the zinc B.H. Mayer (both marked badges with separate idiosyncratic reverse setups). This is an example of identical obverse design and closely related sister production dies.

Compared to that example, the contrast between the "true" F&R zincers and the "F&R-like" zincers is more significant, especially in the lower wreath. They could very well have come from the same die producer but the differences between them are far greater than I see within the production of a single Minesweeper badge maker. By that I mean all S&L Minesweepers (and there are a lot them) are identical even when you move from Tombak to zinc and all Schwerin Minesweepers (again a large production badge) have identical obverses in both Tombak and zinc. There are indeed recognizably separate sister obverse die sets within Schwerin's production but the wreaths are nevertheless identical between them.

And I'm not at all saying that the "true F&R" and the "F&R-like" zincers can't both have been made by F&R -- I'm only saying that we are currently unable to draw that conclusion by looking at their obverses because of the significant differences between them. That's why "F&R-like" is a more correct term than "unmarked F&R" for that semi-hollow zincer, in my opinion.

I hope that clarifies my meaning.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Norm F]

When it comes to Minesweepers I'm used to looking at much more subtle differences between badges; you can see in this comparison that the F&B zinc Minesweeper is almost a dead ringer for the zinc B.H. Mayer (both marked badges with separate idiosyncratic reverse setups). This is an example of identical obverse design and closely related sister production dies.

Compared to that example, the contrast between the "true" F&R zincers and the "F&R-like" zincers is more significant, especially in the lower wreath. They could very well have come from the same die producer but the differences between them are far greater than I see within the production of a single Minesweeper badge maker.

I hope that clarifies my meaning.

Best regards,
---Norm

My apologies, I just realized I forgot to include the attachments on my last post. Here they are.

Best regards,
---Norm