A.G.M.u.K. Blockade Breaker cases

[Norm F]

Since we have an interesting thread going on the Schwerin Blockade Breaker cases, I thought I'd start this parallel thread to discuss the cases of the A.G.M.u.K Blockade Breaker sets.

From early to late wartime there was a apparently a shift of some major KM badge production from Berlin to Gablonz as seen for example in the transition from Schwerin's 1st pattern U-Boat clasp (Berlin production) to the 2nd pattern U-Boat clasp (Gablonz production). Likewise, we can assume the exclusively zinc A.G.M.u.K. Blockade Breaker sets are later production than Schwerin's BB sets, and they also come in a distinctively different case. This different casing suggests to me that they were likely cased at the point of production rather than later in LDO shops or KM supply depots.

I'll show some of the differences from the Schwerin cases in the next few posts and then compare the two variants of A.G.M.u.K. case.

Best regards,
---Norm

[Norm F]

differences from Schwerin

Firstly the textiles. On the exterior, the A.G.M.u.K. cases all show a fine-pebbled faux leather texture in contrast to Schwerin's woven fabric texture.

On the interior, the A.G.M.u.K. cases show a fine grain flocked texture while the Schwerin uses a plush blue velour. The insert on the A.G.M.u.K. case is one piece with a score line between the areas for the full-sized badge and the mini. As discussed in the Schwerin case thread, the insert on those is in two pieces and when the cardboard insert is removed the underside bears an embossed code "2599 D&B"

[Norm F]

hardware differences from Schwerin

Comparing the hardware, the A.G.M.u.K. has a metal ring around the release push button which the Schwerin doesn't. The hinges on the A.G.M.u.K. are in 5 segments as opposed to 4 segments on the Schwerin.

As well in this comparison you can see that the relative heights of the top and bottom are more equal in the A.G.M.u.K. while the base has a lower profile than the top on the Schwerin case.

[Norm F]

A.G.M.u.K. case variants

Now, focussing on the A.G.M.u.K. case there seem to be two distinct yet related variants which I'll call Type 1 and Type 2.

They both have the same exterior and hardware so the differences are confined to the interior.

Type 1 (which seems to be the more common or "classic" type) has a green flocked surface to the insert while Type 2 has blue flocking. They both have the same diagonally ribbed cloth lining inside the lid. A separate piece of this cloth is applied over the interior of the hinge area; on the Type 1 this piece of cloth is oriented with the ribbing slanted to the left while on the Type 2 it slants to the right.

[Norm F]

Looking a little closer, there are two more differences in the interior. The position of the retaining loop for the mini on the Type 1 is better centred in its designated area whereas on the Type 2 it's shifted towards the left. The retaining loop itself is a different material -- on the Type 1 it's made of blue fabric whereas on the Type 2 it's the same kind of flocked blue paper that lines the insert.

[Norm F]

So that's a start to this discussion. I haven't been able to find any postings of examples with the insert removed so I don't know if the A.G.M.u.K cases bear any tell-tale markings in the manner of the "2599 D&B" mark embossed in the Schwerin case inserts (noted in the Schwerin case thread).

Please feel free to add any information or observations to increase our knowledge about these cases.

Best regards,
---Norm

[MH184]

Hi Norm,

The "all-in-one" base with the scribed divider for the mini is devoid of any codes, this is normal for such bases of the type, which is found in an array of cases for a multiple of awards. The most frequent and more obvious is found in the all cardboard, *material hinged Luft Flak case; others include the wound badge cases and KVK 1 Cl, too. Many, many others also.

I may be going against the convention of thought, but I don't deem these such cases as "late," per se. I think each individual case should be based on its merit of overall construction, and that such cases have their origins from a period in 1942 and thus continued, hence the differences in the duration of manufacture constitute the belief it is late as such.

Such transitions can be attested to in the Luft badges range of cases, crosses, wound badges and certainly those of the LDO range too. Another potential theory I have is that - partly based on fact - is that a multiple of companies didn't from an earlier time use cases for a range of their badges and adopted packets and cardboard cartons - not to be confused with the retail forms - be they designated or not.

I will get back to both threads tomorrow with some pictures and further comment on both threads.

* Also found in the hard shell, metal hinged case.

Kind regards,

Marcus

[Norm F]

I may be going against the convention of thought, but I don't deem these such cases as "late," per se. I think each individual case should be based on its merit of overall construction, and that such cases have their origins from a period in 1942 and thus continued, hence the differences in the duration of manufacture constitute the belief it is late as such.

Hi Marcus,

Thanks for chipping in.

By "late" in this context I simply mean the era of zinc badge production so the period you quote of 1942 onwards for these cases fits with zinc production in Gablonz.

The Blockade Breaker badge was instituted in April, 1941 and Schwerin likely transitioned from Tombak to zinc in Berlin by early 1942. Meanwhile the A.G.M.u.K. Blockade Breaker was produced only in zinc. Hence the cases for the Tombak Schwerin likely preceded the A.G.M.u.K cases.

I suppose one could argue the A.G.M.u.K. cases were made for some earlier award and only used later for the BB set. But I haven't seen those exact cases in any other context. Similar construction cases could have been made earlier by the same company but the large ones with scored inserts specifically for the A.G.M.u.K. BB sets would have been made later than the ones used for the Schwerin Tombak BB sets. Of course there would likely have been overlap in production of later Schwerin cases and early A.G.M.u.K cases.

Best regards,
---Norm

[MH184]

Yes, Norm, this is basically along the lines of my findings and belief, too.


However, in regards to ''late'' I am making a reference which is perhaps deviating from the thread topic to a perception and consensus among many collectors where they are discerning a period estimation. Where as you have taken into account the ''transitional period'' or as you say the ''overlap.'' This can be observed in a range of cases where the incipient shell of the case is found to have a combination of internal components relating to ''earlier'' and ''later'' indications. In my opinion where the inherent confusion permeates from is in the tombak and zinc badge assimilation in relation to the components of the case.

Generally, the whole timeframe in my opinion is far more condensed than ever realised or even contemplated; pertaining to the thoughts from several years ago. And it is only when looking literally at the whole range of the cases that you can see an evident ''pattern'' emerge. And this is very important to bear in mind.

Although, we can perhaps see this better illustrated in the Schwerin thread.



A.G.M.u.K. base and internal view; note the recess for the hinge, catch and pin and the dimensions; I will make further reference to this in the Schwerin thread also.

[MH184]

Just to coincide with the exact theme on the Schwerin thread, note this Luft Flak case and the above BB case.

[MH184]

The other point to note regarding these BB cases is that that lid liner is what I call the ''vacuum liner.''

Essentially the lid liner is devoid of any material padding or an additional cardboard template/backing behind the forward facing side. The four sides of the liner are glued via only a few millimetres of the liners leading edges firmly around the compartment of the lid. The liner is slightly arched/bowed into position giving the liner a slight lifted appearance having the visual effect of those fitted with padding; perhaps mildly steam treated just prior to affixing?

Again, a notion I was guilty of a few years ago is in attesting to this method being of a more later date. It is used on later cases too, yes, but its origins in use to date would appear to be from certainly a mid period of the war.

A example of a case synonymous with Carl Wild crosses with a view of its vacuum liner. Also, note the incuse border around the base and of course the underside too. These tend to have a ''snare'' style catch and for the day these on the whole would have been a ''new'' an alternative concept in packaging presentation.

[Norm F]

The other point to note regarding these BB cases is that that lid liner is what I call the ''vacuum liner.''

Essentially the lid liner is devoid of any material padding or an additional cardboard template/backing behind the forward facing side. The four sides of the liner are glued via only a few millimetres of the liners leading edges firmly around the compartment of the lid. The liner is slightly arched/bowed into position giving the liner a slight lifted appearance having the visual effect of those fitted with padding; perhaps mildly steam treated just prior to affixing?

Hi Marcus,

Just to be sure of exactly what you mean I'm adding an image pointing out the features you've described. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Best regards,
---Norm

[MH184]

That is correct, mate, yes