Nice 2nd pattern para helmet.

[Gary Jucha]

Corrected

Thanks Ade for confirming the straps ... Steve, I stand corrected sorry for any doubt !
.. It is a really Nice Helmet !

Regards

Gary J.



Hi Gary, stitching is fine

Cheers, Ade.[/QUOTE]

[force136]

MKI Para

Hi Gary

Firstly I must state- this is a MK I No.5 - Not a 2nd Pattern- The use of the term "pattern" has been overused by people like Harlen Glenn and many other reference books. Ex. -smocks denison airborne troops-
this is the proper "pattern" name- however subsequent changes did not warrant a change in the actual pattern- these were simply modifications to the original pattern. As for the helmets- the fibre band and stainless steel rim are the same pattern or helmet- No.5 for airborne troops. The only change to the Mark designation came as the entire harness system changed in the MK II and the helmet was standardized. You can more correctly refer to the two No. 5 helmets as MKI "early" and "late" because this does not refer to any official terminology. Fibre band based on "P" type - which is early- and the slight modification of the harness and rim on the later MK I.

This is a very nice helmet- it also has an early type net. I got one of these nets from a veteran of the 1st Canadian INfantry Division - PPCLI - it was in his duffle that he kept from the Italy campiagn- he was wounded and returned home. Many think this is a post war net.

The stitch harness is early and is derived from the experimental "P" types. They went to rivets because it was faster and easier to manufacture.

Ken

Thanks Ade for confirming the straps ... Steve, I stand corrected sorry for any doubt !
.. It is a really Nice Helmet !

Regards

Gary J.



Hi Gary, stitching is fine

Cheers, Ade.

[/QUOTE]

[Gary Jucha]

Thanks..

Hello Ken,
Thanks for the low down on the helmet patterns, ... I think that a few people will actually be interested in these pattern / type descriptions, ... as you have rightly commented on how in the past, various descriptions have been semi-attributed ... (Myself included !!)

Of note, my "Mk I No.5" is of the G and S production run (This has already been exhausted in a previous thread), .. and it's straps are rivetted .... also the leather looks to be about 2 x the thickness of SMP Steves.

.. As mentioned before, it looks like the G and S manufactured one's are all dated 1943 (If anybody has another date for a G and S PLEASE scream and post !)
..So, other existing G and S's, ... do they all have rivetted thick leather straps ?
.... Lets narrow some details down between us !!!

Regards

Gary J.

[JEROEN1944]

Very very nice helmet,...

Ken i agree about the helmet neting, it has thick knots almost all the postwar neting has thin knots...

[SMP]

.. and it's straps are rivetted .... also the leather looks to be about 2 x the thickness of SMP Steves.



Gary J.

Thanks for all the comments and extra info.

W.R.T. the thickness of the leather ......I was wondering if anyone had any firm information. I have seen both thick and thin chinstraps. From my limited experience I would say that the earlier the helmet , the thicker the chin-strap. Do others agree ?

Regards,
Steve

[Jack Dutton-Roberts]

Very nice helmet Steve

Steve, do you think the helmet net is original to the helmet? I ask this because of the scrapes to the paintwork on the top and the wear around the lip. Also, could we see a pic of the back two rivets?

Ade's right Gary, it isn't all that uncommon to see the earlier type stitched harness in later helmets. I suppose they used what they could find to complete helmets? You know the war effort thing and all that!

Ken, such terms as "Denison Smock" and "second pattern" are collectors' terms as you know. The vast majority of collectors understand and can easily relate to these words. Of course, strictly it is incorrect but we don't all call "Over Smocks" by their official name of "Jackets, Parachutists, 1942 Pattern" simply because it is much more difficult to say.

Thanks, from Jack.

[force136]

Helmet straps

Hi Steve

I am hoping to have a book out on all this. It is delayed simply because the 1st Canadian Parachute Battalion has been written about to death. Publishers here in Canada are not willing to do another book even thought it covers an aspect of the Battalion not previously covered-it also contains a new early history of the Battalion never before discussed. I am awaiting a private sponsor to do it.

It covers Canadian- British and US insignia-parachute clothing and personal equipment in detail as the Battalion wore a variety from Benning to Shilo to Ringway and Bulford.

I managed to find a huge chunk of Ordnance Docs on the British Helmets. This actually goes into the MKI chin strap.

By looking at helmets it is difficult to judge which straps are early etc. because the British Ordnance system constantly reused supplies. Initially the leather straps were thin and stitched on the experimental helmets. These carried over to the early MKI. During the use of the early MKI it was decided to thicken and strengthen the straps and simplify the widening of the strap at the chin ( it was too lengthy a process to form a deep draw to the chin cup ). They were desparate for helmets to supply a steadily growing airborne. That is why the experimental helmets are so hard to find- they were converted as the design of the helmet progressed. The design of the leather harness was already being reconsidered shortly after its change to rivet attachments. While a thicker strap is later in the scheme of things- the early experimental helmets also had testing on standard Infantry MK II chin straps and a web strap. In 1942 the web harness was already being devised and would be added to the helmet in 1943 ( not 1944 as many think ).

Anyway all the proof of this will be in the book along with photographs- hopefully it will not be too much longer. I've got a book on 1st SSF insignia to get out as well.

Ken

Thanks for all the comments and extra info.

W.R.T. the thickness of the leather ......I was wondering if anyone had any firm information. I have seen both thick and thin chinstraps. From my limited experience I would say that the earlier the helmet , the thicker the chin-strap. Do others agree ?

Regards,
Steve

[force136]

Terminology

Hi Jack

Yes you are right it is much easier to say. However making people aware of the actual history of the helmet is important which I am sure you agree. So correcting terminology- at least in their knowledge and not necess. in how they communicate- is important. This being becuase-as you know- many terms place items in time frames that are incorrect- 1944 pattern for SDAT - or 1944 pattern for the MK II HSAT. These dates do not apply. I find this in the US as well. Model 1942 jump jacket for example- well it was made in 1941 and it was never a Model. So proper terms are important- or as you state- at least an understanding.

I agree with the Oversmock - Jacket Parachutist- as the step in smock is also officially designated - Jackets Parachutist-. So you need to add the -Pattern 1942- which is a lot to say to tell the difference in designation. One was based on the other. It is interesting however that the term "Oversmock" is a wartime term used by the military and found in many documents to describe the "Jackets Parachutist-1942 Pattern".

Ken

Very nice helmet Steve

Steve, do you think the helmet net is original to the helmet? I ask this because of the scrapes to the paintwork on the top and the wear around the lip. Also, could we see a pic of the back two rivets?

Ade's right Gary, it isn't all that uncommon to see the earlier type stitched harness in later helmets. I suppose they used what they could find to complete helmets? You know the war effort thing and all that!

Ken, such terms as "Denison Smock" and "second pattern" are collectors' terms as you know. The vast majority of collectors understand and can easily relate to these words. Of course, strictly it is incorrect but we don't all call "Over Smocks" by their official name of "Jackets, Parachutists, 1942 Pattern" simply because it is much more difficult to say.

Thanks, from Jack.

[jelle]

I agree with force 136
His explenation of the helmet chinstrap is also what i have come to believe is correct.I have examined and handeld all variations of the mkI and own a fibre rim with the sewn non formed chincup,the early ones were formed and thinner ,the even later were as mine but riveted and the 1943 mkI the unformed chincup is larger and they are all riveted, so are GS.But as stated they have been repared,reisseud and parts swobt about.Thanks force 136 for the conformation.

[lnijherald]

Guys, I have seen a small number of helmets that had brown leather straps. I believe Guy showed one ago.
Is that a makers variation?
Cheers, Luc

[DJT]

Hi Ken,

Thats right, I've got a web chin strap para helmet thats 1943 dated. They are not commonly encountered. You mostly find the web chin strap helmets dated 1944.

In 1942 the web harness was already being devised and would be added to the helmet in 1943 ( not 1944 as many think ).

[SMP]

Very nice helmet Steve

Steve, do you think the helmet net is original to the helmet? I ask this because of the scrapes to the paintwork on the top and the wear around the lip.

Thanks, from Jack.

Hi Jack,
I can only go by what the seller said. WRT the wear under the net....it could have occured long before the net was finally fitted. I don't imagine helmets were ever issued with a net fitted from the start. Of course it could have been added by the seller.....eitherway it's a nice net !

WRT chinstrap thickness. I offer up this fibre rim. The strap is very thick and has a formed chincup. How does this fit with our theory of strap evolution ?

Regards,
Steve

[SMP]

thick strap :

[SMP]

chin cup :

[force136]

Hey!

It looks like you have a half and half here? As for brown straps???? Maybe the black wore off over time. Its possible they were made brown.

Another interesting note- there must have actually been old stocks of the leather chin straps when the web was introduced. Here in Canada in the 50's we did not have para helmets for our proposed MSF and had to convert Canadian made DR helmets to para. This was done by cutting the apron off and drilling holes for the leather harness ( odd they did not use web??) Anyway I've had three of these and all have what looks like brand new leather straps-rivetted type. I highly doubt these were made in Canada. There is no dif to the UK ones at all. Anyway just interesting if you come across one of these.

Oh- and Des- you should check any MKII helmet- the rear hinged loop. Some of these were made to pivot back and forth and turn around. This is a very rare fixture and I think only the very first ones had them in 1943. Like other stuff- it was probably too much and they decided to simply use the standard fixture. I've only ever seen one of these.

Ken

Hi Jack,
I can only go by what the seller said. WRT the wear under the net....it could have occured long before the net was finally fitted. I don't image helmets were ever issued with a net fitted from the start. Of course it could have been added by the seller.....eitherway it's a nice net !

WRT chinstrap thickness. I offer up this fibre rim. The strap is very thick and has a formed chincup. How does this fit with our theory of strap evolution ?

Regards,
Steve