Unique Pilot Observer Badge

[Dietrich Maerz]

I'm posting this badge for a friend who wants to have some input regarding originality.

Thanks!

[Dietrich Maerz]

The reverse.

[Dietrich Maerz]

The left rivet.

[Dietrich Maerz]

The catch.

[Dietrich Maerz]

And finally the hinge.

[Thomas Durante]

Hi Dietrich,

A good one IMO. Its an early, unmarked FLL. The left rivet may have been tightened up at some point but all else looks good to me.

Tom

[Marc Garlasco]

As he said

[Larry Lipps]

How many hinge types are allowed on FLL? It appears to me that almost any badge without a maker's mark automatically becomes an FLL. I still have problems with these barrel hinge FLL's.

[militaria.no]

I'm posting this badge for a friend who wants to have some input regarding originality.

Thanks!

Hello Dietrich,

here you can compare the eagle on your friends badge with my FLL. As you can see, the FLL eagle is very characteristic with it`s detailed feathers. Your friends badge is a beauty

[Marc Garlasco]

How many hinge types are allowed on FLL? It appears to me that almost any badge without a maker's mark automatically becomes an FLL. I still have problems with these barrel hinge FLL's.

Larry,
I did an extensive analysis of the FLL badges in my flak book, including pilot. There is a lot more than a hinge linking things.
Marc

[Thomas Durante]

It appears to me that almost any badge without a maker's mark automatically becomes an FLL.

Not at all Larry, only the ones with these exact obverse die characteristics. The same wreath was used on their Para badges & on their observer badges.

As far as hardware goes, FLL is reknown for using several variations when you look at their other awards such as their CCCs, IABs, PABs, etc. This PO is a very early example IMO, when they were using tube hinges (like most other early P & PO manufacturers. However, they quickly switched to using the block hinge that we are usually more familiar with, and then switched to thier sheetmetal hinge on their later zink variants. It is a natural progression IMO. The block hinge was mass produced and less labor intensive then these earlier tube hinges, which had to be manually cut out by hand each and ever time (notice the cut marks about the hinge). The switch to a sheetmetal hinge was also a natural progression late in the war, and is very common on their PABs & IABs.

Regarding the catch, these are much more straightforward, and are almost always a "?" shape soldered directly to the wreath neatly. Later on, they switched to a more thick-wire catch soldered onto an oval plate, which is identical to their zink Paras, zink PABs, zink IABs, zink Flaks, zink CCCs, etc.

If you disregard all badges made from zink (as some purist collectors like to think), then you can certainly raise questions about such a badge as these FLLs that are found with many variant setups. However, zink badges were without a doubt produced during the war, and I would venture to say as early as 1941! There is period documentation that states the recommendation of switching to zink for badge construction (specifically wound badges, as found by Andreas), not to mention the many, many zink badges with provenance.

Tom

[Larry Lipps]

Marc,
I have your book and understand your comments. Dietrich did the same thing in his Knights Cross book but still has no definitive proof on dates of manufacture. It all boils down to circumstantial evidence and trust. For me, I don't trust the barrel hinge examples. JMHO.

Larry

[Marc Garlasco]

Larry,
While I agree we do not have a maker's mark, I think you are being overly anal. Men have gone to prison for less proof than we have on these!
Marc

[Thomas Durante]

Marc,
For me, I don't trust the barrel hinge examples. JMHO.

Larry

Hi Larry,

What don't you "trust" about them? Is the eagle, is it the wreath? Is it the hardware?

Do you believe ANY of the so called FLL pilot or PO badge? If you do, then what do you "trust" about those, but not trust about the barrel hinge variants?

For me, there is no "trust" about anything, but rather evidence we can point to and actually see on a badge. If you look the FLL Ps & POs with the block hinges, they are identical in every respect to the wreath and eagle design as these barrel hinge variants. In some cases, they are even better detailed than the block hinge variants because they were earlier IMO. So, in my book, if everything is identical except the hinge, then the badge stands a great chance of being an original but with variant hardware. The possibility is so much better that an original manufacturer used different hardware setups rather than this being a very well made fake IMO. If it were such an exact copy and replica of an original badge, why would the faker not choose to copy the typical hardware as well? Doesn't make sense. Fakers do weird things, and anything is possible, but is it likely? I don't think so, espeically when it comes to FLL, a maker who is reknown for using many variant setups when you study their entire range of combat badges.

Tom

[Lubo]

Po

Hi guys,
It is funny but I saw exactly the same PO at the show in Chicago this month. But with superb burnished highlights, with very nice deep cuts on the right wing-presentation piece (by the way I hate when I see an early FLL without the usual deep hand work on the right wing - like Dietrich's ). The Chicago PO was an absolute stone mint, cased in a stone mint early to mid-war box. It had the same set up of the hardware. We did a side by side comparison with a reg. pilot FLL, interesting was that apart of the greater attention the PO've received (hand work), the wreath of the reg pilot was much flatter than the PO, the PO's wreath inner side was higher (close to the eagle) than the outer side .
Hope that was helpful.
I love when something new and less seen pops up, we realize how much more we have to explore
Regards