Knight´s Cross "4"

[Dietrich Maerz]

"Das auf dem Photo abgebildete Ritterkreuz mit Eichenlaub ist die Auszeichnung welche Adolf Hitler am 3.8.44 mir persönlich überreichte. Dieses Verleihungsstück übergab ich meinen Vater zur Aufbewahrung, wo es den Krieg über blieb."
Dietrich I have really no idea if he received a complete new RK and EL set that day on 3.8.44, so to say again a new RK, and I don't know if that was common and happened more often.

Eric,

the translation of the German text clearly said:

"The Ritterkreuz with Oak pictured on this photo is the award which Adolf Hitler gave me personally. This award I gave to my father for safe keeping where it stayed during the war."

For me this German sentence is absolutely clear. He got a set and that is the completely unworn and unused set. This also explains the used L/12 which he got as his original RK and also explains the 'non-Godet Ersats-oak leaves.

And now the time line fits also with all the other time lines ....

Dietrich

[Leroy]

Not true in the the way you say it. The first operation did form the frame with the beadings, the second one did (maybe, not necessarily) cut out the frame.

Dietrich

Is there no DEFINITIVE understanding of exactly how these frames were made, in sequence?

Also, does anyone know if Hitler personally give one box containing the Oakleaves and another containing a new cross to the recipient? Why does Glunz's cross APPEAR not to be a new cross, but the Oakleaves APPEAR new, in the color photograph? Is it just a poor photograph?

I believe these are legitimate questions, without assumptions.

[Dietrich Maerz]

Is there no DEFINITIVE understanding of exactly how these frames were made, in sequence?

I can't answer for other people but for me it is absolutely clear. Why? Because there are contemporary articles describing the process step by step. They are for an Ek2 but it is clear that the RK is - for manufacturing purpose - nothing else than a larger EK2.

Dietrich

[DavidM]

Hello

Leroy, based on a comparison of the beading flaws between my two early S&L 57 versions of the RK and the S&L RK photos that you posted in posts 275 - 278, I would suggest that the one in your pictures was made around, or just after, my two 57 RKs. Therefore I would guess that it was made in the 1960's.

Regards
David

[DavidM]

Hello

Following on from the discussion about how the EKs and RKs were produced, below is a page from Vern Bowens book, 'The Prussian and German Iron Cross', (Iron Cross Research Publications 2005, page 379), which shows the means employed in ironcross manufacture. The caption reads:

'Production stages in Iron Cross manufacture. These items are exhibited in the Stadt museum, Ludenshcheid by whose courtesy the photo published. the methods illustrated are traditional, and were used for the 1939 swastika pieces also. The rims were always sawn ot of from plate as shown in the photo. This applied to all Iron Crosses from all periods using this type of rim. Those centre plates which were not cast, would have been pressed and prepared like the examples shown in the photograph.'

Bowen further states in other text that the techqniques used to make the EK, RK and Grand Crosses were exactly the same.

I will also post two further items from Bowens book, one being a photo of an actual machine used to stamp out RKs and the other a photo of the dies used in making the Grand Cross and dies used to make Oak leaves.

i hope these are of use and interest.

Regards
David

[DavidM]

Dies used for pressing the Oak leaves (top picture) and the Grand Cross (bottom picture). Bowen, 'The Prussian and German Iron Cross', page 381.

I would assume that the EK and RK dies are exactly as these, the only difference being the sizes of the rim that is produced.

[DavidM]

RK pressing machine. Bowen, 'The Prussian and German Iron Cross', page 380.

[Robert T.]

Dietrich,

IF the cross presented to Glunz in June 1944 shows the final stages of beading flawing and is similar to the NOV. 1944 CROSS (post 240)and also to the one in you book on page 107, does it mean that they could have been all from the same run or strike done weeks before ?
If so ,they must have repaired the die sometime in mid 1944 or completely stop making those crosses until the end of the war.

___________
Robert

[Dietrich Maerz]

Basically yes - but one would need to look at the 6 o'clock arm also. It seems that the 6 o'clock failure followed after the 3 o'clock. I also don't know whether the flawed cross pictured in the books represents the last stage of the die and also the last stage of awarded A-Type crosses.

[Robert T.]

Basically yes - but one would need to look at the 6 o'clock arm also. It seems that the 6 o'clock failure followed after the 3 o'clock. I also don't know whether the flawed cross pictured in the books represents the last stage of the die and also the last stage of awarded A-Type crosses.

Thank you.
__________
Robert

[Leroy]

Hello

Leroy, based on a comparison of the beading flaws between my two early S&L 57 versions of the RK and the S&L RK photos that you posted in posts 275 - 278, I would suggest that the one in your pictures was made around, or just after, my two 57 RKs. Therefore I would guess that it was made in the 1960's.

Regards
David

David,
I agree with you!
Many thanks for posting the photos, too. I haven't looked at Bowen's book lately, but will pull it back out!
Looking at the stamping machine itself, it looks small. Does anyone know if sheets of silver could be "fed" through it (like a machine gun belt) or was it done by manual feed, one piece at a time? That would seem awfully labor intensive, especially when it came to manufacturing EKII's, for which demand would be fairly high. The same thought struck me regarding "sawing out" each frame. How long would that take?
Thanks again,
Leroy

[Dietrich Maerz]

The size of the machine is really not a measurement of it's pressure. A "10 ton press" does not mean that the press has 10 ton of solid steel sitting on top and have it drop every time a frame is made...

The 10 ton is the expression of the force that can be brought to a specific area - in this case the area in which a die would fit. This then translates into force/square inch which in turn relates to the tensile strength of the material to be formed.

This force is created via means of mechanical advantage, most of the time via eccentric motion - which is a kind of leverage. And - as Archimedes said "Give me the place to stand, and I shall move the earth!" Powerful stuff.

Regarding the sawing out: maybe not all companies did it but I have pictures of clear and very distinguished saw cuts at crosses. The cross was hand finished anyway as the rounded corner of the Juncker series witness.

Sure, this would be all very expensive nowadays with hourly rates up to $ 50-60.- plus health care ... but of course that is completely wrong when judging manual labor in during the early 1940s. Labor was cheap!

[DavidM]

David,
I agree with you!
Many thanks for posting the photos, too. I haven't looked at Bowen's book lately, but will pull it back out!
Looking at the stamping machine itself, it looks small. Does anyone know if sheets of silver could be "fed" through it (like a machine gun belt) or was it done by manual feed, one piece at a time? That would seem awfully labor intensive, especially when it came to manufacturing EKII's, for which demand would be fairly high. The same thought struck me regarding "sawing out" each frame. How long would that take?
Thanks again,
Leroy

Hello

The entire process of manufacturing medals, badges and awards at that point in time was extremely labour intensive - and they did saw the frames out !!

I don't know how the sheets fed through the RK machine, but Bowen also shows a photo of an EK machine, which looks pretty large. The RK press may be bigger than it looks in the photo depending on where the photographer was stood when taking the picture.

Regards
David

[Dave Kane]

Judging by this craftsman's hands, he's been at it a long time!!!

[Leroy]

The size of the machine is really not a measurement of it's pressure. A "10 ton press" does not mean that the press has 10 ton of solid steel sitting on top and have it drop every time a frame is made...

Dietrich,

Thanks for that response, but I wasn't asking about pressure. I was asking about whether the machine could be "fed" silver sheets, like a machine gun is fed from a belt of ammunition, or did the worker have to "feed" the machine a sheet separately for each frame stamped?

Also , do you know whether S&L actually followed the Juncker procedure and sawed out, individually, each frame by hand? How long would that procedure take, approximately, for each cross? And one last, perhaps silly, question on this issue...was there an interim step where the bulk of the excess silver was cut out by machine stamping, so that workers only had to "finish" the removal by hand-sawing?

Thank you,
Leroy


To Dave Kane -- Go ahead, Dave, and admit it! That's YOU in that photo, isn't it?