EspenlaubMilitaria

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

'Juncker' Army Para Badge

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    Just a foot note in regards to applied finishes on aluminum.

    First, I believe a little background regarding anodized finishes on aluminum is in order.

    The chemistry of aluminium (and it's alloys) is interesting. Given that it's a reactive metal (more so than iron) one would expect it to naturally corrode more rapidly than it actually does. The reason it doesn't is that the initial formation of an oxide layer on the surface protects the base metal underneath. Aluminium oxide is a tough material (it's crystalised form is used as an abrasive - Allox), but normally it's formation in air results in an amorphous layer with little mechanical strength, it's a white powder that can easily be scraped off leading to further oxidation.

    Anodising on the other hand, is a process which forms a particularly structured and dense oxide layer which resists abrasion and thus protects the underlying metal. This layer is colourless, but it's possible to introduce a dye at one stage in the process to permanently colour the surface. Not all aluminium alloys can be easily anodised, cast aluminium (with a high silica content) is particularly difficult.

    Anodising is an electro-chemical process which physically alters the surface of the metal to produce a tough oxide layer on the surface. During the anodising process the oxide layer is at first porous, and at this point it's possible to introduce a coloured dye. 'Porous' in this case refers to the molecular level rather than gaping holes - the dye thus needs to be soluble to penetrate this layer. The porous layer is then 'sealed' by boiling the part in water (which converts the oxide to a different crystalline chemical form) permanently trapping the dye beneath the surface. It should be noted that as the anodised surface is a layer of aluminium oxide, rather than metal, it exhibits a very high resistance to electric current.

    Aluminum can be painted. Ask anyone who owns a late model Audi. Due to the chemical composistion of aluminum, and the aluminum oxide layer, you can not direct apply paint to the metal. It must first be acid etched with a chromate type primer, and then the paint applied to on top of that. Upmost care must be taken in properly preparing the surface before priming. Even when such measures are taken, it is still very possible to have the paint chip revealing the shiny metal underneath.

    Due to the various layers of material necessary to paint aluminum, the badge would be devoid of detail by the time it was done. Hence the necessary use of anodising.

    Accidentally offending people on the internet since 1997

    Comment


      #47
      tell it like it is

      I started this thread when I called prosper out over the insinuations over JC's site, and sent him a scan of the badge that I had brought from him.

      I felt it was good. I felt that Prosper would recognise it as being good.

      He and the rest of the forum gave some good arguments against. I would like to add however I recieved some messages that it was also very good.

      I have since had my suspicions of the badge with what I have learnt or observed on this forum. I have taken these points to the guy who sold it to me and I still hold good he has a good site.

      I have explained to him however that I felt that Eric and prospers arguments held more water ( I have tried my best to remain objective but not delusional).

      I asked him 3 direct questions. I felt I was getting smoke and mirrors in reply.

      It could be that I am not as knowledgeable..hey for sure. I will post his replies to my questions and doubts.

      I have posted his first email. I have asked Jamie permission to post the rest as I feel that as emails they should be given the respect as ordinary letters.

      I hope he says yes. That way it may be provide more proof one way or the other.

      This issue needs resolving once and for all. Good badge bad badge. The previous email from jamie is on "tell it like it is"

      Chris

      Comment


        #48
        SCAN

        Hi
        I have tried to put up a couple of picture taken from
        Orders,Decorations,medals & badges by David Littlejohn and Col Dodkins,
        But have had no success. If you go to our web site at Jamie Cross Militaria and look at the menu on the bottom left there is a page Army Para badges by C E Juncker part two you will see the pictures I am trying to post. These are of well have a look
        Jamie
        And if any one can put up these pictures please feel free to do so
        Last edited by jamiecross; 02-01-2002, 05:15 PM.

        Comment


          #49
          tell it like it is continued

          I started this thread so I will help to finish it. It is about a badge and not a site or a man. I will state here that I like Jamie cross's site and that he has some great kit on it.

          What started out in defence of him has taken a twist.

          Sorry but I am open to reason. I am trying to make no comment as I have a vested interest. But I have to admit whilst owning a badge that I like, Erics and prospers article has made me consider that the badge I own is fake.

          I have explained this to Jamie.

          I stress that I consider it a fake due to the well balanced article mentioned above. I would love some of the guys to say "hey its good" but I would rather live with reason than delusion. I'm trying not to say to much as I have formed an opinion which may be one sided due to lack of defence for the badge.

          I would however say that some guys have privately said its a great badge. I will say no more let facts speak for themselves on this emotive subject, hey guys why is it emotive.

          It's my grand.

          I'm chill about it. Have fun with reasons for and against but don't get bitter. Have a laff!

          I will let Jamie cross speak for him self. He has OKed me to use his replies. I have not used his Scans they belong to him, if he wishes he can post them.

          Hi Chris

          Thanks for the email I did scan a front of the para badges, but I have attached this again. (Chris..you can find this on his site)

          With regards to the angle of the eagles if you look at the badge you show ( Chris... I sent a pic of two LPB) the two LPW appear to be identical ( Chris...they are different makers) yet their angles do as you point out, differ.

          A photo can only testify to one badge, take off the shadow and angles and differences will be seen on these just like the glider badges.

          If each badge were identical dies struck you would get identical die marks which we have, but each badge is then finished by hand with the badge eagle attached by two rivets.

          Now have you ever tried to drill onto a pencil mark on a wall, or drill a piece of metal with a bench drill, you get movement don't you, even you centre punch it.

          Also the rivets on the apb appear to be attached after the die has ejected the badge again by hand.

          I have attached a scan of 5 apb's, all identical with the same flaws, notice the angle of the badges all are similar but not the same when you measure them the rivets on the reverse you get over a 2mm in difference between them. (IE 34.25 mm to 36.58mm) This is caused by drilling by hand the wreath, the angles will be similar but not identical but no manufacture is going to cast them out because of 2mm out.

          The badge was made by LDO, and as such they will have a manufactures name and not a number, stamped on them. Some idiot has stated that OKW would have been in charge of the manufacture and quality control of these awards.

          This has been blown away by the fact that you have scalloped bars to the EK's, rounded "3" daisy wheels tanks etc and the OKW were military and had no say in the supply of medals and awards.

          On hallmarks, there are a number of different hallmarks, The Flat"S" type that some people wrongly say are pre war and the rounded type which they say are war time. Now firstly consider that you are a manufacture have increased your labour force you are going to have more stamps made up correct, (in 1941 this happened, but in1941 you were instructed only to put on the Riechchancelry code not your name.) This is why we have a wealth of pre war early marked badges, The full effect came into force in 1942 and so far badges are makers marked after this date only coded. (IE in Junckers case "2")


          Now look at the luftwaffe pilots badge on the red background this has the rounded "S" also I can send a scan of a gilder badge with the rounded "S" both are pre war badges. The mark on your Para badge is slightly different to the two marked examples we have here, but both of these are different to each other. This as I stated earlier can be put down to two people marking these with their own Junckers punches.

          Hopefuly this has answered your two questions. (Chris ....er ...no I am blown away)

          The hooks as I stated you will find on different badges, some "G" some type "C" and some "?" all except the "?" have been both rounded and rectangled metel, some are on a long oval plate others are a rounded plate, some have no plate at all, these items were brought from a supplier and NOT MADE BY JUNCKER. It is very sad that some people make a judgement with only ever seeing a couple of badges. (Chris ....I agree)

          Regards Chris...PS I am going for therapy.. my head hurts.

          Comment


            #50
            Question for Jamie Cross.

            I think we will all agree that original aluminum badges were anodised. I would like to know if you agree with this and then why would the badge in question have what appears to be a dark undercoat that looks like some kind of primer?

            John Garcia

            Comment


              #51
              I really appreciate the precise definition of anodizing. It is hard for me to find that kind of information. All of the period specifications say the aluminum army para badges were anodized.

              Here are the specs on most of the badges I have had:
              1) Aluminum T2, Juncker mark (round letters), light gold paint on wreath, 54,69x40,72mm; 12,16 grams. Doubtful original.
              2) Aluminum T2, unmarked, anodized finish, 54,57x42,25mm, 11,76 grams. I am positive this one is original.
              3) Zinc, painted finish, 55,00x42,52mm, 29,18 grams
              4) Zinc, painted finish, 54,70x42,32mm, 30,69 grams

              As to the top wing, on the two zinc badges it comes to the center vein on the center leaf. On the original aluminum badge it comes to within 1mm of the center vein on the center leaf. On the doubtful badge, it just reaches the edge of the wreath.

              Comment


                #52
                As Mark said in his post, "Due to the various layers of material necessary to paint aluminum, the badge would be devoid of detail by the time it was done. Hence the necessary use of anodising."

                Here is a clear view of the kind of detail we're talking about when it comes to genuine Army Parachutists Badges. This happens to be a silver 2nd pattern APB by Juncker and dating from 1937/38. Its aluminium sibling was struck on the same dies and genuine aluminium APBs should be of this extremely high quality in terms of the surface detailing. The wreaths of aluminium APBs were anodised, as Mark says, to preserve the quality of the striking. The same applies to 1st pattern APBs, by the way, as we saw with Peter's example.



                I could post really large images but they might take time to load on your screens. Look at the APB owned by Mr Sheppard aka exbooty. And now look at this APB pictured here in this posting. Compare their respective overall quality of detail. If, having done so, you really believe that they all came from the same firm and the same dies in the years immediately preceding WW2, then I might as well be trying to convince Flat Earth Society zealots that our planet is round.

                Prosper Keating
                Last edited by Prosper Keating; 02-01-2002, 09:00 PM.

                Comment


                  #53
                  Proof

                  <IMG SRC="http://www.thirdreichmedals.com/main~1_files/armourer 10.jpg">
                  Last edited by jamiecross; 02-02-2002, 03:06 AM.

                  Comment


                    #54
                    A Close up and there was Light

                    <IMG SRC="http://www.thirdreichmedals.com/main~1_files/armourer 9.jpg">

                    Comment


                      #55
                      Lot of research done

                      Well I think the scans shown above just stopped prosper again.
                      after his exstensive research into the subject it is strange he did not see this, as it came from a Book printed in 1968. entitled
                      "Orders, Decorations, Medals and badges of the Third Reich" by David Littlejohn. and is shown on page 154

                      <IMG SRC="http://www.thirdreichmedals.com/main~1_files/armourer 10.jpg">
                      Last edited by jamiecross; 02-02-2002, 03:32 AM.

                      Comment


                        #56
                        A Close Up

                        <IMG SRC="http://www.thirdreichmedals.com/main~1_files/armourer 9.jpg">
                        Last edited by jamiecross; 02-02-2002, 03:31 AM.

                        Comment


                          #57
                          Hmmm. OK. Let’s examine this ‘proof’ or evidence on its merits, in a cool, detached and clinical manner.

                          These two images are presumably intended to prove that General Heidrich was wearing an Army Parachutists Badge on which the wingtip did not touch the wreath, thereby legitimising the design, at least, of Mr Sheppard’s APB and others like it.

                          It is quite a well known photograph of Richard Heidrich but this version of it does not match the original for sharpness and clarity. It is perhaps a scan of the photograph as published on low quality paper stock such as newsprint, for instance. It may even be a scan of a scan.

                          Whatever its provenance, it is a low resolution image in which there are not enough dots, or ‘pixels’, per square inch to render it clear and sharp. The more dots per inch or DPI you have when printing an image in a magazine or a newspaper, the sharper and clearer the image will be. Unless, of course, you are working with an image that is of inferior quality to begin with. Such as a scan of a scan of a photograph reproduced in a cheap journal or book.

                          Anyway, this image is, as you can all see, ‘pixelated’, to borrow a slang term from publishing. That is to say that you can see the dots, especially in the enlarged view of General Heidrich’s decorations and badges. This is because the DPI count is low so the dots have to be bigger. So the closer in you go in order to study the details, the more blurred and indistinct things become.

                          Just a side note here to put things in context: the lowest acceptable DPI count for images published in a magazine of reasonable quality in terms of paper stock etc is 300 DPI. The DPI count of these two images offered as ‘Proof’ is 72 DPI. And the DPI count of the images as scanned in order to convert them into these JPEG files may be even lower if the ‘pixelation’ is any indication.

                          As a result of all of this, definition and detail are lost. In this case, looking at the larger image, the wingtip seems to extend over the wreath in the normal way, as it should. In the enlargement, you can actually count the dots per inch without a lens! The tip of the wing is actually smaller than the dots or ‘pixels’, so it is lost. The pixels cannot reproduce it, thus giving the impression to the unwary or inexperienced that the wingtip, which is a blur, ends short of the wreath.

                          Here is another well known photograph of General Heidrich. It is very clear and defined. His Army Para Badge is clearly visible. Check that wingtip. The enlargement is beginning to lose definition but is still clear enough to show that Heidrich’s Army Para Badge is just as it should be: with that wingtip clearing the wreath.






                          I think that as and when we locate a nice, sharp copy of the photograph offered as evidence here to support the claim that wingtips did not reach wreaths on some original APBs, we will find that it in fact shows the wingtip extending over the wreath.

                          Next please!

                          Prosper Keating
                          Last edited by Prosper Keating; 02-02-2002, 07:11 AM.

                          Comment


                            #58
                            Rubish

                            Hi all,
                            I have seen this photo and no as can be seen the eagle tip does not quite touch on your image either. if you take the wreath and measure it around at the point it would touch it would have to gain a few mm`s and then the eagle tip you would touch. Admit it prosper you have got it wrong
                            Be a Man take it on the chin. Come on Detlev what do you say should prosper become a beanie bady collector

                            Comment


                              #59
                              "Be a man take it on the chin" That's rich coming from someone hiding behind a pseudonym! But I've already dealt with you over on the main forum in the 'Picture' thread.

                              Here's what you said and what I said to you…to save you - and the others - from having to go there.

                              james dangermouse
                              New Member

                              Registered: Mar 2001
                              Location: England
                              Posts: 4 A Tale of OUCH

                              Tale of Woe

                              Having followed the site for some time, I am please to read both
                              articles and posting, but only just recentley has my troubles started.
                              Like many I read the Para badge article and took it on faith. I had a
                              Marked Junckers that I brought in the 1980s for £325.00 and was
                              horrified to find out it was a copie (HA HA) I contacted the dealer
                              about this and he said was I sure and he would be at Bedford Arms Fair.
                              I arranged to meet him after printing out my proof . When the fair came
                              around last week I took it into him andf asked for my money back, He
                              asked if I was sure and I said yes and showed him my proof. He smiled
                              payed me my money and then put a £1000.00 ticket on the badge.!!! I said
                              this was ""$"£$%%^%^ to which he passed me a Magazine called the
                              Armourer and low and behold there is an article in there on these badges
                              showing in colour both the marked and un marked badge. he produced an
                              unmarked example and let me compare them my old badge and his one.
                              Not only do I feel sick, I have lost money but now have to find a real
                              badge.
                              I did some digging on Prosper Keating and after seeing that another
                              dealer shot him to bits and that he had started to rave again I feel I
                              cannot keep quiret. This man who has cost me in excess of £700.00 should
                              be band from making any contribution and should go become a beenie
                              collector in my opinion. I see the Para article has now removed that
                              marked photo and they admit that marked liteweight badges were issued.
                              Therefore what other mistakes have they made. I see they are putting out
                              a book I for one would only wipe my arse on it!! as I feel the content
                              would be about as useful as bog paper.
                              Sorry but I am very annouyed that such irisponsible persons have been
                              allowed to write articles such as these and I fell annoyed that I
                              believed them.
                              Yours
                              james






                              P.S I think the Hobby would be better Served if People like Prosper $£%%$ Off and became Beenie Baby Collectors
                              In fact I think I will start a Poll to see if other People aggree, If they say yes he should leave then he should if not then I should what do you say!




                              Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

                              02-02-2002 08:55 AM

                              lynx
                              New Member

                              Registered: Sep 2001
                              Location: Sydney
                              Posts: 19

                              James,

                              I've stayed completely out of this thread as I've only ever owned 1 aluminium para badge which I traded years ago so therefore have nothing extra to contribute.

                              Now, I don't know you or Prosper personally but I think it's out of place to attack him like this. He has been kind enough to donate his time and effort to write the article in question. And, you will find that he has stated that the article is not a 100% bible of black and white facts.
                              Infact, IMHO no article is. This could even apply to the article the dealer showed you. You chose to believe one line of thought, the dealer chose another.

                              What you have got to understand is that plenty of collectors have been burnt bad by fakes and this has developed into a collecting policy of " 1% of doubt is 1% too much! ".
                              Prosper and others have kindly written articles to help US decide whether a particular item is worthy or not of being in our collection. Even if articles only contain half the information we require to make a sound decision we are still better off.

                              The final decision always rests with you and how you've answered the question "Do I feel comfortable with this medal in my collection?"

                              Cheers and Roo
                              Kevin S




                              Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

                              02-02-2002 12:36 PM

                              Prosper Keating
                              Senior Member

                              Registered: Feb 2001
                              Location: Paris, France
                              Posts: 503

                              Dear Mr Dangermouse,

                              I smell a rat here. A smell of shill. For a start, if you're going to come on strong like that, why not post under your real name? And let's have some names and dates to support this tale of woe of yours. Who's the dealer who shot me down in flames and who's the dealer who bought your APB back from you?

                              And do you have pictures of your APB? Did it look like the one bought by Mr Sheppard aka Exbooty or like the one owned by Oberfeldwebel Ludwig? It's important to know because it might have been a fake, in which case you did well to get your money back so many years after buying it.

                              Yes…come on, Mr Dangermouse: tell us who this dealer is! He sounds like a wonderful chap, refunding you almost a decade and a half after he sold it to you and then double-checking with you before concluding the deal. And then showing you the article in The Armourer! It wasn't the author of the article, was it? No…it can't have been. He's known only to offer 70% refunds. This paragon of dealerly virtue refunded you in full, didn't he?

                              But if you are annoyed that you sold the badge after reading our article - and why do you reserve your venom just for me rather than aiming for both Eric Queen and myself? - then you have every right to be! With yourself! It's your fault. Not ours. At no time did the article ever state that Juncker-marked 2nd pattern APBs are fakes. Quite the contrary, in fact. I suggest that you go back to it and that you read it properly. It is and always has been very clear on this point.

                              As Confucious never said: it's better to learn to read before one starts to write.

                              ZAV!

                              Prosper Keating


                              __________________
                              "Youth and debauchery are magnificent but eventually you have the devil to pay”.



                              Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

                              02-02-2002 01:09 PM

                              Comment


                                #60
                                Don't have a dog in this hunt (though I would love to own a real Heer fallschirmjaeger badge) but strongly believe that Prosper and Eric have added significantly to the knowledge of this forum - and not just in this specific aspect alone (remember the doctored document?). In short they have nothing to apologize for - regardless of whether we choose to disagree with their findings or not. (Although the mental image of Prosper unleased on a Beanie Babies convention does make make this proposal sound very interesting indeed....)

                                With respect James - sorry it doesn't work that way. You alone are responsible for the decisions you make. I know - having p***ed away serious money (through my own inexperience and ignorance) on this addiction that masquarades as a hobby - that this is painful. Regardless you make the decisions, good and bad, and live with them. Learn and carry on or do something else - and remember there are crooks in every aspect of collecting.

                                Cheers

                                Mike

                                Comment

                                Users Viewing this Thread

                                Collapse

                                There is currently 0 user online. 0 members and 0 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 8,717 at 11:48 PM on 01-11-2024.

                                Working...
                                X