RE: Thale B-II Stahlhelm auction

[Stefan]

I can not say where he comes, my father has until mid-eighties scrap collected and resold. Presumably, it is a relic of the time.
I did not know that he was worth, I do last year on eBay a similar view. I had then schaun times whether he was still there.
I can find no stamp, not in a helmet and not on the head part. The film was only incidentally with Photobucket, which offer this presentation.




With Google translated, without gun!

[Klaus1989]

I am not expert on these helmets but will offer my obeservations on helmets posted in this thread: I will advance the radical opinion that all of these alleged BIIs are authentic TR manufacture but are not all the BII. They are too different from existing helmets and are too hard to fake.

The vented examples are particularly interesting as I thought all BIIs were ventless. They are probably something else. Interestingly, they look somewhat like cross between TR BII and DDR M54. If not the BII, then what?

It seems we all know what BII is supposed to look like but what about the other prototypes? A is just modified M35 and Thale is presumably similar to BII. But what do B and C look like? No one seems to have any idea, especially with C.

regards
Klaus

[Mike G.]

I'm not certain it is okay to print photos appearing in the Ludwig BAER book on the forum and therefore will not. But if you have the book or access to the book, in the 3rd printing English Language version, there are pictures of all of the helmets that have been discussed. Also there are pictures of the two liners discussed - Model 44 and the HAENSEL liner system developed specifically for the new helmet.

On pages 388 and 389 appear pictures of the two liners.

On page 396 appears two pictures of the Model B. On page 400 and page 401 are two additional pictures of the Model B after being exposed to ballistic testing.

On page 397 are two pictures of the Model B/II.

On page 398 are two pictures of the Model C.

And on page 402 are two pictures of the Thale helmet. The Thale helmet is actually similar to the Model B.

[heinkan]

...

The vented examples are particularly interesting as I thought all BIIs were ventless. They are probably something else. Interestingly, they look somewhat like cross between TR BII and DDR M54. If not the BII, then what?

...

Well, with the Ludwig Baer book we know, what B and C should eventually look like.
We still don´t know what A should look like...
But it should be a "slightly modified M35" and I believe "slightly modified" doesn´t mean a different liner... ballistic tests were most done without a liner inside!
Maybe something a little bit similar to KVP M54?

We also know, there must be Volklingen B, B/II and C prototypes and Thale B, B/II and C prototypes.
I believe, there could be some steps before Volklingen and between Volklingen and Thale... single pre-prototypes, you know?

The vented examples could be the pre-prototypes, before they noticed, ventholes are not needed with this design...

[paracaidista]

Well, all this days I´m studying my helmet and continue doing that when I saw clear all I put my opinions but at this point I must say that Stefan´s helmet looks in proportions (measures) very similar of mine only I´m a little lost about the colour.

Stefan, can you say us if is black or what??

For the other hand I must say the persons think my helmets is a good ones then we know how one of the two supoused BII models is, as my helmet have maker marks named "BII".

I think Ice can be in reason when he say his helmet can be Thale made and mine is before made.


Another thing, I had studiing the maker marks and in the eagle we can see not very good but I see it "the Svastika sign" so if we can confirm my helmet is a good one then we can too confirm that really model BII is a WWII helmet.

[Stefan]

Well, all this days I´m studying my helmet and continue doing that when I saw clear all I put my opinions but at this point I must say that Stefan´s helmet looks in proportions (measures) very similar of mine only I´m a little lost about the colour.

Stefan, can you say us if is black or what??

For the other hand I must say the persons think my helmets is a good ones then we know how one of the two supoused BII models is, as my helmet have maker marks named "BII".

I think Ice can be in reason when he say his helmet can be Thale made and mine is before made.


Another thing, I had studiing the maker marks and in the eagle we can see not very good but I see it "the Svastika sign" so if we can confirm my helmet is a good one then we can too confirm that really model BII is a WWII helmet.

It is a very dark green, where the paint off it looks as if the light was green

[heinkan]

...If not the BII, then what?

After reading Baer again, I´ve noticed, we have forgotten one thing:

THE FRY DESIGNS!

Were there only blueprints of them?

[Brian Ice]

Both Dr. Hasel and Dr. Fry did have designs as per Baer. He states that the designs produced by Dr. Hansel proved to be the best.

I realize that the information we have is highly incomplete and insufficient to answer all of our questions, but trying to read between the lines may shed some new light.

IE: if Dr. Hansel's designs proved to be the best, then Dr. Fry's designs must have proven inferior.

For a design to prove itself one way or the other, would not at least 1 prototype example need to be produced to determine this? Could this be done strictly from blueprints alone?

I am thinking that both German technicians may have produced some early preliminary prototype examples for testing. From these very early tests, it was determined that Dr. Hansel's designs were superior.


Also concerning the Model A: what exactly was it?
Baer says that it was a 'slightly modified stahlhelm35'.

This 'slight modification', if I understand the term properly, could not have been similar to the M54, as the M54 is a completely different design.

The test photos show 'stahlhelm35' being ballistically tested, not some unknown design.

We also know that the M44 liner (or the liner system that would eventually be called M44) was designed specifically for stahlhelm35. (It was later found to work very well in Models B, B/II, C.

Reading between the lines once again, we have stahlhelm 35 being ballistically tested (as per Baer test photos), a new liner design (M44) was produced specifically for stahlhelm 35,

and all of this discussed in the framework of the prototype helmet program.

Based on this, I suspect that Model A is stahlhelm 35 with the M44 liner installed. Essentially what is called a late war M45-B.



As I see it, ballistic tests were conducted both with and without liners.

Without: looking carefully at some of the test photos, one can see holes punched into the tops of some of the test helmets: obviously for mounting during ballistic tests.

With: Testing involving helmeted cadaver heads is mentioned. This obviously would have been done with liners installed.

[heinkan]

Based on this, I suspect that Model A is stahlhelm 35 with the M44 liner installed. Essentially what is called a late war M45-B.

I do not agree with this! The A model was also for ballistic tests! Stahlhelm 35 with M44 liner would have the same ballistic features as with M31 liner... Baer also tells (in the german book), the M44 liner was developed at the end of ´43, Schuberth made 1000 pieces and sent them to Thale for troop testing!
But model A was some time before 1942!
No care if it was tested with or without liner, Model A must have had slightly different ballistic features too! If not, there was no need to test ist...
I don´t care if M54 is a DDR design or not, but model A must have looked a little bit similar, a slightly modified M35...

[heinkan]

Essentially what is called a late war M45-B.

Maybe the model A was a ventless stahlhelm 35, okay, this could be called a slightly modification, but not the liner system, this makes no sense...

[Brian Ice]

I do not agree with this! The A model was also for ballistic tests! Stahlhelm 35 with M44 liner would have the same ballistic features as with M31 liner... Baer also tells (in the german book), the M44 liner was developed at the end of ´43, Schuberth made 1000 pieces and sent them to Thale for troop testing!
But model A was some time before 1942!
No care if it was tested with or without liner, Model A must have had slightly different ballistic features too! If not, there was no need to test ist...
I don´t care if M54 is a DDR design or not, but model A must have looked a little bit similar, a slightly modified M35...

I understand what your saying but the evidence does not support your position.

To slightly modify something means to leave it essentially as it is, only small, minor changes take place.

What you are talking about is an entirely new, redesigned and restamped helmet. That is no slight modification. It is no modification at all. It is an entirely new helmet design.

For a major modification of a car, one might install a high performance engine. For a minor modification, one might install wider tires.

To replace the entire vehicle with a different one is not a modification, it is a completely new/different vehicle.


I agree that M35 w/M44 (or Dr. Hansel) liner is ballistically the same as M35 with M31 liner. The point is that the M35 was being re-evaluated and re-tested.

Suppose, despite all of the above, you are correct and that an entirely new helmet was made as the Model A.

--1. Where are the test photos of this new helmet? It has never been seen.

--2. Since testing was being made on M35 w/different liner (as per the photos), what was this test helmet called? There are no other designations given for test helmets than: A, B, B/II, C, Thale.

[Klaus1989]

I'm not certain it is okay to print photos appearing in the Ludwig BAER book on the forum and therefore will not. But if you have the book or access to the book, in the 3rd printing English Language version, there are pictures of all of the helmets that have been discussed. Also there are pictures of the two liners discussed - Model 44 and the HAENSEL liner system developed specifically for the new helmet.

On pages 388 and 389 appear pictures of the two liners.

On page 396 appears two pictures of the Model B. On page 400 and page 401 are two additional pictures of the Model B after being exposed to ballistic testing.

On page 397 are two pictures of the Model B/II.

On page 398 are two pictures of the Model C.

And on page 402 are two pictures of the Thale helmet. The Thale helmet is actually similar to the Model B.

Unfortunately I am the only one here who does not have access to this book, so my conclusion was just conjecture. Could you do the benefit of describing these models and how similar/different they are from the BII? That would help me.

I have heard the book is expensive and may be out of print, if I remember correctly. It sounds really great, so someday I will get around to buying German language edition but not right now with money tight.

regards
Klaus

[heinkan]

I understand what your saying but the evidence does not support your position.

To slightly modify something means to leave it essentially as it is, only small, minor changes take place.

What you are talking about is an entirely new, redesigned and restamped helmet. That is no slight modification. It is no modification at all. It is an entirely new helmet design.

For a major modification of a car, one might install a high performance engine. For a minor modification, one might install wider tires.

To replace the entire vehicle with a different one is not a modification, it is a completely new/different vehicle.


I agree that M35 w/M44 (or Dr. Hansel) liner is ballistically the same as M35 with M31 liner. The point is that the M35 was being re-evaluated and re-tested.

Suppose, despite all of the above, you are correct and that an entirely new helmet was made as the Model A.

--1. Where are the test photos of this new helmet? It has never been seen.

--2. Since testing was being made on M35 w/different liner (as per the photos), what was this test helmet called? There are no other designations given for test helmets than: A, B, B/II, C, Thale.

Sorry, I can´t explain, but for me, this theory sounds bad.
Baer wrote, there were ballistic tests with foreign and domestic helmets before the Fry/Haensel team developed new prototypes...
So the M35 was tested, why test it as model A once again?
Model A was sort out, because the angles were still too steep... this would have been clear before, when there was no other change than the liner...
The prototyp program should develope a better helmet, no need to test the old one once again...

Please notice:
M40 was a slightly modificated helmet, but it was still Stahlhelm 35, no name change!
M42 was a bigger modification, but it was also still Stahlhelm 35...
Why should model A be model A and not easily Stahlhelm 35...

I believe, you´re missunderstanding the german way of doing in this point...

[Brian Ice]

I understand that the M35 was first prototyped in 1934 and subjected to various ballistic and field tests. It was accepted and mass production began in 6/1935.

After the Polish campaign in OCT 1939, the M35 was once again under scrutiny, probably because of the number of head wounds seen in the campaign.

I believe this was the main reason to start the prototype program: the M35 was not doing the job sufficiently, so other helmet designs were investigated.

A cheaper liner was also investigated to replace the M31 (Hansel, M44).

The M35 was tested again because it was the current helmet in use. If the technicians were to present a superior design, it would have to be matched side by side with the current helmet (M35) to illustrate the advantages of the new helmet, and the disavantages of the M35.

I think they started with the M35 and matched it with a newly developed liner (DR. Hansel?) and called it Model A, the first prototype.

The M35 was in a sense the base point of the research. They wanted to design a new helmet that would be better than M35 in many different ways:

--cost
--ballistics
--field performance, etc....

The M35 had to be a part of this research so the technicians could demonstrate how far they had come in their program.

It was retained in the program as a measuring rule more than anything. They kept it in the program though ballistics testing and into field testing to demonstrate it's shortcomings.

As we know, the B and B/II were rejected and the stahlhelm 35 retained until the war's end. Right near the end, the mass produced M44 liner finally did make it into a very few ventless M42s and possibly some M42s.

So it seems quite ironic to me, that realizing that M35 was inferior in so many ways, and utilitzing that helmet in the prototype program (I believe as Model A), and spending years and no doubt alot of money to come up with superior alternate designs, what did they finally end up with?

--stahlhelm 35 w/(alternate liner)M44 liner (M45-B):

right back where they started in 1939. Hitler was the one responsible for that.


Guys: if you want to believe that Model A was some unknown M54 looking thing, well thats up to you. I don't believe that it is.

--stahlhelm 35 (Model A) could have started with the M31 liner, then the DR. Hansel liner, and finally with the M44 liner. The point is, we know from Baer that M35 was intimately involved in the prototype program.

Yes it failed ballistic tests. So then why did it go on to field tests? It should have been binned at that point.

As I mentioned, I believe that M35 was the measuring rule of success of the program. They had to keep it for both series of tests.

[Mike G.]

Brian,

I think you may be missing the "Key" point to your argument that heinkan is making.

The M-44 liner was designed, starting in 1943. It appears tests using it began in 1944.

If we are to believe as the Baer book infers, that the Model A helmet was tested and found to be no better than the M-35 in 1942, then it is doubtful the M-44 liner would ever have been tested in the Model A helmet. The liner came much later.

That is the point heinkan was trying make apparent to all.

Baer infers the Model A failed its initial tests back in 1942. It never got off to any kind of start. Probably, that is why there are no pictures and no blueprints. It was a failure from the very beginning. Testing of the other three helmets and the Thale helmet continued all the way into 1945. As a result, pictures and blueprints existed. I don't understand the interest in the Model A, since it didn't even pass the very first tests to which it was subjected.
_ _ _

Two apparent facts are being missed in the dialogue I am reading in this thread.

Instead of piece-meal reading the books and other sources of material available about this subject, I think members need to set aside time so they can read very carefully and closely all of the material. I keep seeing examples of where documentation is being misread or misinterpreted.

Firstly, the helmets Models A, B, B/II and C were all produced by a Team of Engineers, Doctors and Scientists headed by Professor FRY.
Dr. HAENSEL's position on the Team was that of Consultant. In addtion to a group of civilians, there were at least two Senior Ranking German Officers also involved in the testing.
If you understand this, then you understand that these four helmets were developed by a group of people, inclusive of both FRY and HAENSEL. No where have I seen documentation that FRY produced any other helmets other than the four addressed above. As "Leader" of the research team, he would have not only received equal credit for production of the helmets about which this discussion relates; but he would have had the final approval and say. I realize there is reference to HAENSEL developing the Model B and to creating the Model B/II. One however has to take this into the context of the whole, and not the one. It was a research team that did this. Not one person. Consequently, to both be fair and realistic, one has to comprehend that these four helmets were produced in reality, by both FRY and HAENSEL.

There is a great deal of documentation discussing the four helmets and the Thale helmet. There also are a lot of notes that survived upon which at least two notable books that have been published about military helmets, draw from as their source for the printed material that appears in them. A reasonable conclusion can be drawn that if there were other helmets produced by anyone on this team during this time (1939 - 1945) including Professor FRY - somewhere there would be reference to it/them.
There isn't.

It is simple arithmetic:

Four helmets were produced by the Team headed by Professor FRY and on which Dr. HAENSEL served as a Consultant.
Model A: Modified M-35.
Model B:
Model B/II:
Model C:

The Thale helmet, which looks very much like the paratrooper helmet it was designed to replace, was produced at and by the factory where orders were placed by FRY and HAENSEL for production of the B and B/II helmets for further testing.

That is it in a nut shell. I know of no other helmets.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Ventless helmets.

First - understand that vents in German helmets of WWII are there primarily due to a requirement imposed by the Medical Inspectorate Office.
They were there for medical sanitary purposes - air flow to the wearer's head.

The Model B and B/II (and Thale) all were ventless helmets. This is a fact and is documented for record both in the notes of FRY and HAENSEL. Further photos also support this.

They were ventless because the Medical Inspectorate Office (also involved in the testing) found that the "Shell" design of these helmets was such that air naturally flowed to the wearer's head - and therefore, vents were not required, nor needed.

I realize there is interest in WWII German Helmets. And there is a link between them and the East German Helmet.

For me, the novelty of this is not in any one specific helmet, liner or design feature. It is the observation that the East German M-56 helmet, which is clearly linked by the Model B/II to helmets of the Werhmacht, was worn by an Army of a Communist Country. That is the "Whole" of it. I find that ironic.

All the rest of the A Times B squared by E taken to the 5th Power and divided by .15 halved by the Square Root of C = D + H20 when split with an atom that was first neutralized by a negatively imposed neutron - means absolutley nothing to me.

I'm into the East German stuff.