'Juncker' Army Para Badge

[Warren O]

Nothing is taken wrong Prosper and appreciate your information but your the researcher not I. As far as dental materials and molding I worked with these materials for seven years and do not believe it feasible to produce these badges enmasse as many people believe, it would be extremely labor intensive.
And please give me more credit there was no need to research the demise of the LDO.
I still stand by what I first stated that I would need to have badges in hand before I would ever buy one. Of course armed with information you and Eric and any other source is the only way to make a decision. I'm a collector and student I'll leave the research to people more experienced in that field.
I have changed my mind though about Chris's badge and now believe it to be questionable, besides someone had to jump start this topic it wasn't going very far until I posted
Warren

[just-me]

I have to agree with Prosper. It looks like the entire eagle has been "scooted" forward, possibly by improper mounting. That, or maybe the wings really are too short. It'd be nice to know the wing measurements, etc. buuuuuuuuut, then, i don't know. It is a neat thread, though !

[Prosper Keating]

Likewise taken in good spirit, old chap! The reason I picked on your comments about molding is that I have known people who made copies of badges - as opposed to fakes - from a variety of whitemetals including aluminium. As far as I recall, they didn't have to change their molds each time they cast a batch. I forget what the molds were made of.

They also used sandcasting techniques which produced quite good results (note for people who aren't familiar with this subject: by 'sand', one doesn't necessarily mean the rough, grainy stuff at the beach…although the artists of Benin in West Africa used ordinary sand to produce cast gold statues and busts with spectacular results. A man making jewellery or badges would use a 'sand' of the consistency of talcum powder. Of course, new molds have to be made each time but it's not all that labour-intensive, especially when you can flog the results for significant sums of money. It's better than an office job.

But let's not get into this here, otherwise it might deflect us from the issue under discussion, namely the APB owned by Chris Sheppard. As soon as I have a few spare moments this weekend, I will post pictures of the 1943 APB being worn by a Brandenburg paratrooper. I will also post some scans of 1943 APBs. You will see that in terms of its design, the zinc APB is identical to its prewar counterparts in aluminium and silver. The finish is inferior and the hinge and pin assembly is slightly different…but it is still a Juncker badge. When you see this, you will ask yourselves: "Where exactly does the Juncker-marked APB as sold to Mr Sheppard fit into the equation?"

Where indeed? Another set of dies? Unlikely. If APBs like this are pre-May 1945 pieces, then why do none like them appear in period photographs, especially when many of them show signs of having been worn or, rather, signs of someone wanting the unwary to believe that they have been worn?

Prosper Keating

[exbooty]

Wing Tip size

The size of the top wing which is falling short of the wreath is from the centre of its curve to the far wing tip 38.5 cm, the tip fails to meet the wreath by approx .8cm. Thank you to all of you who have answered this thread. May there be more.
Regards Chris

[Warren O]

I have to agree now, that the eagle on the badge in question is either to small or placed to low. Small size would be a factor of casting. Its difficult to study a badge only from internet photos.
On late war badges what type of hinge is acceptable, do these badges come with the standard raised barrel hinge, the type seen on so many IAB's.
Warren

[Prosper Keating]

Here are two extracts from a photograph taken on board a Kriegsmarine vessel on the morning of November 18th 1943, after the victory in the fierce battle for the capture of the Dodecanese island of Leros. The full picture can be seen in the Army Parachutist Badge article. The man wearing an APB is a member of the Brandenburg's 15th (Parachute) Company. Given that the APB had been reinstated on June 1st that year by OKW with the Brandenburgers in mind and the fact that no aluminium APBs were made after January 1st 1939, it is quite safe to assume that this Brandenburger is wearing the APB struck from 1943 onwards in feinzink by C E Juncker of Berlin on the SAME DIES as the prewar 2nd pattern APBs in aluminium and silver. Note that in terms of its design, it is identical to the prewar 2nd pattern APBs. That wingtip overlaps the wreath which is the main point of reference in this this debate about the 'Juncker' APB belonging to Chris Sheppard.




And now, we will have a look at an original 1943 pattern APB in good condition. You will note details such as the inferior finish. It still looks OK but it really isn't a patch on the quality of finish of the prewar APBs. The hinge and hook assemblies reflect the need for a greater contact area of the back of the back of zinc badges for soldering purposes. They are also typical of C E Juncker mid-war production. The rivets are slightly different as well. But these details aside, the 1943 APB is identical to its prewar sibling, having been struck on the same dies, and the quality of the striking should be as good as that of prewar aluminium and silver APBs. As it is here. Of course, in some cases, the surface of a zinc badge can degrade slightly, leading to a loss of sharpness but it should still be evident that the badge, when new, was as sharp as a coral reef.





So…can the dealers who sell Army Para Badges like the one sold to Chris Sheppard for $1400 tell us where these Juncker-marked APBs like his fit into the chronological scheme of things? Ah yes…of course they can! These variants were all made in a basement somewhere in Berlin by Juncker employees after the factory was bombed out in December 1944. They cast up a load of APBs for issue to the hundreds of Heer soldiers being put through parachute schools. And then someone went back to the ruins and found a stamp so that they could mark them up.

I'm joking but the sad thing is that there are those who put such theories forward to justify some 'variant' in their collections or catalogues. They come and ask you for an opinion of their badge. You sometimes try to sidestep it but they insist. So you make it clear, gently or brutally, that you wouldn't give them ten cents for it. And you explain why. Assuming that they let you, because they've usually lost their tempers by then. They blame you for shattering 'the dream' instead of going back to whomever sold them the fake and shattering his dream…of a short holiday in some sunny spot with the doe ray mee he took off them.

This is not, of course, the case with Mr Sheppard. He stood up and took it, like the Royal Marine he was. We've all been in his position, haven't we? But how many of us could react like Mr Sheppard, in a cool, calm and detached manner? What it boils down to is this. There are essentially two kinds of people in the world: those who accept reponsibility and those who don't. In our field of interest, the latter category will rely upon a dealer's word like a suckling infant, instead of getting off their arses and making an effort to find out as much as they can about a medal or a badge that interests them before they hand over large amounts of money to a dealer or another collector who might be dishonest or, as is often the case, just as ignorant.

Eric and I never claimed our article as gospel. We never made some of the statements we've been accused of making by people who, I suspect, have the attention span of a goldfish when it comes to reading anything longer than the instructions on a condom packet. The article is based on research into a subject that passionately interests us and we shared our knowledge in good faith. It's a work-in-progress. There is already new information to be included in a revision. But badges like the one sold to Mr Sheppard will be remaining firmly in the Fakes section.

Prosper Keating

[Hugh W. Brock]

None of the badges illustrated have the correct finish. The aluminum badges were anodized (the aluminum was electrically prepared so it would hold finish) and the wreath dyed gold and the eagle light gray. (Go look at aluminum tools in a hardware store!) The real gold color is towards an orange, not yellow. The surface of the aluminum is grained to hold finish. Anodizing is ONLY done to aluminum, nothing else. If you do not anodize it, finish (paint) will not adhere well to the slick surface. The round letter mark is not found on any other Juncker badges made in the period 1937-1940.
I personally believe these Juncker marked badges were made by Juncker AFTER WW2. Klietmann knew the market and had the contacts, and his wife was one of the owners of Juncker. From the quality of the strikes, maybe the original dies were recovered from the factory and cleaned up. The wreath is not as sharp as the one 2d pattern aluminum I have that I believe is real. The eagle appears to be investement cast---there is a minute softening to sharp edges, and on the one I had there were 2 nodules that resulted from tiny air bubbles in the plaster cast.
There is a difference in sharpness, color and finishing details. There are a lot of these around from my experience (well, let's say they are the ones usually for sale).

[Eric Queen]

Gary Mott has written that the conclusions offered in Prospers and my article are simply our opinion, nothing more. He is correct. When no hard evidence ( i.e. documents from Juncker detailing the manufacturing process and number of total badges made ) exists, then the best we can do is offer an opinion based on what we know.

What you have to ask yourself is, what do we BASE our opinion on, and what do those who disagree with us BASE their opinions on?

So far all I have heard are idiotic notions such as “these badges were made in the millions” and “ you can’t reach any logical conclusions by looking at so few badges”. I interpret these to mean “ I don’t have anything what so ever to base a dissenting opinion on other than I bought one of these badges from Manions or somewhere and hope I didn’t get nailed in the ass”.

You are asking us to prove the negative that these did not exist. My challenge to you is prove they did exist ( during the period of 1937/38 when Juncker produced qualification badges in aluminum ). We can certainly prove that the ones we feel are original did exist.

Can anyone out there produce a concrete, provable link between one of the badges in question and a member of the Fallschirm Infanterie Kompanie ?

Can anyone produce solid evidence to support the notion that Juncker used this primer based finish on any prewar badges in aluminum. All originals I have ever seen or heard of have the same exact anodized finish as what should be on both models of the aluminum APB. Have a look at the Pilot/Observer badge in aluminum featured in Jacques article on this site. The finish is exact to what the APB should be.

Is there any evidence at all to support the notion that Juncker used mid war stamps on prewar badges. The one documented 2nd model badge in aluminum that we know of that was purchased in 1943 by an original member of the FIK had the pre-war stamp.

I will say it again, we did not base our opinions on looking at only 10 badges. But we did use these 10 as a benchmark when looking at the hundreds we have seen ( on the market and in collections ) between the two of us over the last decade or so. Not surprisingly there were unmistakable consistencies between all the badges we examined from the veterans ( which were across all four companies and award dates ), and these consistencies were present in very few of the samples viewed from other sources.
I would conservatively say that only one in every 30 or 40 I have seen have been consistent with the benchmark samples. But they are out there. Mark Miller, Peter Van Lukacs and John Garcia ( among others ) have some beautiful originals ( in my opinion ).

These badges were not made in the millions, not even close. The last documented award of the badge ( in aluminum ) was to Alfred Schwarzmann who was awarded badge # 864 on January 18th, 1939. 18 days after the award was discontinued. These badges were made by one company, for a very short period of time, for a very small number of people.

So, if you have a dissenting opinion, great. We would honestly love to hear it. That is certainly what this venue is for. But please, BASE it on more than wishful thinking, fantasies, or your letter of authenticity from the dealer you bought it from.

EQ

[Prosper Keating]

"So, if you have a dissenting opinion, great. We would honestly love to hear it. That is certainly what this venue is for. But please, BASE it on more than wishful thinking, fantasies, or your letter of authenticity from the dealer you bought it from."

Well said, Eric! Now, I'm a bit confused by Hugh Brock's observation that none of the badges illustrated have the correct finish. Are you saying that ALL of the badges shown in this thread are fakes? Or are you just referring to the APB that sparked off the thread? It's worth clarifying this because there are people out there clutching at straws - lot of them have already "been nailed in the ass" by the people who sold them fake APBs - and we wouldn't want to build up their hopes, would we?

You are correct about the anodised wreaths but you give the impression that the surface was quite rough as a result of the preparations for the anodising process. The reverse of 1st and 2nd pattern alumninium wreaths is quite smooth to the touch. The finish is a matt gold but the diving eagles were more of a matt silver with polished highlights when new. Like many early, quality 3rd Reich awards and badges finished in silver. I wouldn't say that they were grey.

The 1st and 2nd pattern APBs shown here - Peter's 1st pattern and the Ludwig 2nd pattern - are both originals. So is the 1943-issue APB which, of course, just had the typical mid-war gold wash applied to the wreath. On some I have seen, the finish has almost entirely disappeared, as with, say, a mid to late war LW Para Badge by Assmann.

As for Kleitmann, it is entirely possible that he was involved in making or passing onto the market fakes of the Army Para Badge but it should be pointed out that Frau Kleitmann actually ran the firm of Godet in the 1960s and 1970s. Perhaps the series of fakes of which Mr Sheppard's APB seems to be one originally had something to do with Kleitmann. Who knows? I know a man who might…but he'll never spill the beans because he sells reference works and top end 3rd Reich militaria.

I am glad - and I'm sure that I can speak for Eric too - that some of you find this thread and the article useful. I had to laugh when I heard yesterday that the price Mr Sheppard had paid had been raised from £800 or £850 to £1000 because the vendor reportedly felt that our article had helped to raise the price of Juncker-marked Army Para Badges. In fact, I'm still laughing as I type this paragraph…it's so grotesque!

Prosper Keating

[mmiller]

Juncker aluminum badges

Hugh,

As Prosper asked, are you saying all badges in the thread have the wrong finish, and are repro?


Eric, All,

As you pointed out, if we can conclude that the early Juncker aluminum Pilot Observer has the correct color tones, then a Juncker aluminum Para badge manufactured at the same time should have similar characteristics. Although not clearly seen in the scan, the Juncker hallmark on the PO badge is the early type, not the midwar type. The hinge, catch, pin, rivets.....all very similar.

Regards,
Mark

[Hugh W. Brock]

On the color, I was referring to the aluminum badges only. The zinc badges are painted (gold and silver bath).
My reference point for my observations on the aluminum badges are the other aluminum badges I have that so far as I know have not been faked (well used ones are horrible to look at, and collectors go for the nicer looking nickel silver/brass types that are far, far easier to find). It looks like aluminum was used from 1937-1940, and may have been due to the 4-year plan. Wehn they started using it for airplanes, they had found out what it was good for---up to then it was sort of a novelty metal that noone really knew what to do with.
I have a nice Juncker Radio Operator, thick version (last style eagle design) in aluminum. The mark is the standard small angular mark, sharply struck (no fuzziness). The eagle is a dark gray anodized color with bright highlights and the wreath is bright (unfinished) aluminum. Juncker is the only aluminum badge maker I have so far seen (and I have not seen many) that used bright aluminum for silver. All others copper plated the aluminum and silver plated the copper. I have an unmarked Observer badge in aluminum that has unusual large 2-piece copper and aluminum rivets with a medium gray anodized eagle and silver plated wreath. I have solid, unmarked silver-over-copper-plated aluminum infantry and general assault badges and have seen tank. As the general assault and infantry badges were authorized in June 1940, I would infer that aluminum was being used in 1940. I personally don't think aluminum was used after 1940 except in odd, unique cases (left over parts, etc.). I also believe Juncker redesigned their badges from the thin type to thick just for the aluminum badges---to beef them up.
The aluminum paratroop badge I finally ended up with is unused, and when compared to the other type 2 army para badge with painted wreath and round-letter Juncker mark, the color difference is clear. The eagle has a light gray cast to it---it is a very slight difference. The wreath is a flat color. I have seen painted wreaths with the dark gold color. The paint usually has a sort of greasy, shiny look. It is hard to describe the finish differences, but it is quite obvious when you have the two side by side. The casting signs (loss of detail, nodules, fissures and finishing details) are easier to learn, but it sure is easier and cheaper to have someone point them out to you than to have to learn the way I have. The old collectors I have tried to learn from about fakes either don't really know, can't explain, or just plain will not share (if I tell you it will get back to the fakers explanation).
As to Frau Klietmann, I did not investigate further but heard the Juncker connection from a couple of people and it could well be wrong.
Hopefully I will figure out how to post some comparison pictures soon. Hugh

[Philippe]

APB - About measurements ??

Hello All,

I have listed below measurements of some documented original badges (hight x width) :

1st type 800, engraved, F.I.K. = 55 x 42 mm.
1er type aluminium, engraved, F.I.B. = 54,58 x 42.05 mm.

2nd type aluminium, unmarked = 54,47 x 43 mm.
2nd type aluminium, unmarked = 55,4 x 42,7 mm.

2nd type zinc, unmarked = 54,70 x 42,32 mm.
2nd type zinc, unmarked = 55,00 x 42,52 mm.

Conclusion:
1-Average hight of APB wreath = 54,86 mm.
2-Average width of APB Wreath = 42,43 mm.


The badge bought by Chris Sheppard is 57,22 x 42,27 mm, even taking into consideration that all of these will differ slightly because of the hand tooling 57.22 mm seems quite high to me.....Any others opinions ??...any others measurements of genuine 2nd type alu APB to compare ??

Regards,

Philippe Letonturier
(majorplm@bigfoot.com)

[Peter v L]

My 1´st type is

54,5 x 42 mm

Peter v L

[Philippe]

Hello Peter,
Thanks for your answer, it's exactly match the 1st type of Prosper (engraved, F.I.B. O.gefr Sell 151 = 54,58 x 42.05 mm).
By the way, do you have some additional measurements ?
Thanks again.
Best regards,
Philippe

[jgarcia]

My 2nd. type aluminum, unmarked is 54.5x42 and my zink type is 54.5x42.2.

On the weekend I'll measure my questionable badge that is of the same type as the one in question here and post what I find.

John Garcia