Retired Pilot's Badge - Question

[Sponc]

Hello,
the L/11 maker is with Juncker in the makers list in the book "The Luftwaffe" of C. Ailsby.
It's a good one!

[George L]

IMO, I wouldn't rely on this writer's opinion too much for anything, in light of the recent fraud charges, and obvious fakes like #'d Luft tank badges he's published.

Hello,
the L/11 maker is with Juncker in the makers list in the book "The Luftwaffe" of C. Ailsby.
It's a good one!

[Thomas Durante]

Have asked ebony to take some pictures and post the images for me. I have also tried to compare a couple of features of this badge with some other Deumer badges I have so we can begin the study of the manufacturer's footprints of the badge. An approach Tom Durante favours. I support Tom's type of approach on this one because this would seem to be the only way to advance the study of these.

The only way to go because you are 100% correct, vet stories are only 1 piece of evidence we have to go on. Unfortunately, memories and eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable, especially 65 years after the fact, just ask any detective. Provenance and vet accounts are important, but only 1 piece of the puzzle that should be included along with the forensic analysis of the badge's physical characteristics to ultimately come up with an opinion on a badge in question. Too many times collectors want a concrete "YES" or "NO" answer to a badge's authenticity, but all ANY of us can really offer is an opinion. Many similar opinions usually form a consensus on a type of badge, but as time goes on and new information comes to light, these can sometimes change. Sometimes for the better, but also sometimes for the worse. The best part about the forensic approach is that it allows any collector to form their own opinion on a certain badge and not have to rely on a guru dealer. Those days are behind us.

Tom

[Thomas Durante]

Chris,

Thanks for posting your badge, and to the others that also posted theirs. So what do we have here as far as to the Retired Pilot badge in ZINC??

Firstly, 1 good sign to me is that all of the zinc ones have the same obverse die characteristics. That is a positive, and probably tells us we are dealing with 1 or a very few makers that were involved in zinc production of these. HOwever, they do not match the Juncker die's, so definately a different maker than Juncker.

The reverse hardware shows variations, but all combinations are acceptable and typical of wartime zinc badge construction. The oblong plate is a new one to me on a supposidly Deumer badge. HOwever, it is very commonly used on accepted wartime S&L badges.

The L/11 mark looks a bit odd to me. Reminds me of the fake L12 Juncker marks, with very simplistic form. Deumer definately used more than 1 stamp, but all the "L/11" marks have charactistic slash marks for the "1"s, very typical of Deumer marks. Can anyone show another Deumer badge with this exact type of maker mark shown on Chris' badge?

The other problem I have with these zinc badges is that this exact design can be found in several other "questionable" forms. They can be found with post war 1957 hardware and also found with a fake souval L58 mark. Here are a few questionable ones I have on file. All appear to have the same obverse designs and are identical to my eyes.

Tom

[Thomas Durante]

Cutout legs

[Thomas Durante]

Another one, with cutouts. Weird comination of hardware, very questionable catch and odd scrath marks all over it.

[Thomas Durante]

Revesre

[Thomas Durante]

Here is another. Weird 57 type hinge, and marked L58.

[Thomas Durante]

Reverse L/58

[90th Light]

Hello Tom,

the first two badges that you show have "real" potential in my opinion. The third one marked with the incised L/58 is certainly questionable and may in fact be a copy of the first one you show.

the file marks on the reverse of the second example do not worry me at all and are typical of what you sometimes will see on a Deumer Minesweeper with the horizontal broad pin esp the later zinc type which has not had a heavy plating. Although I do agree the marks are very heavy on this example. The pin and hook are a little different however. Could also be a left over war time work in progress which was finished off post war to sell to Allied servicemen. I wonder what the backs of the zinc examples of this badge on the so called "salesmens sample boards" look like if you see what I mean.

the first example that you show with cut-out legs is quite impressive and and has the most potential to be pre-May 45 in my opinion and based on computer images only (nothing beats a hands on sometimes). I wonder if it was made that way or done by the pilot who got it. Notice also how the hinge on this one is attached to an oblong plate for better adhesion.

One question which has sprung to mind for me, did "Deumer" and "S&L" have a working relationship like "Juncker" and "Jmme" did. Did they exchange dies, components or sub-contract for each other ? because my retired pilot would appear to have the same hinge and hook with oblong plate that is an exact match for the S&L Panzer badge yet it is marked "L/11"

This might also explain why the 1957 version of this badge is the "chicken-feet" type because S&L simply modified theirs or Deumer's war-time die or at least used it as the basis for the 57.

I could be wrong but the indicators so far are saying these two companies to me
(would need the L/58 in hand to say more about that)

To me it is logical that every manufacturer will have their style, their manufacturing foot-prints. Once a collector knows these then they will pick good from bad regardless of the story or dealers COA that goes with it. The makers marks "will silently speak to you" as you study it. What we collectors have to be careful about however is to not instantly dismiss as bad the original examples which the fakers have copied. I believe for sure that this is happened with SS M43 caps and in fact good caps are now being written off with the bad. Another thing we must be careful of is to not just write off what we do not at first understand because it does not fit our realm of knowledge. This zinc retired pilot and the ball hinge glider badge come into this catergory and in these sorts of cases veteran aquired examples are very important so we can see as much as we can before that link with direct history is gone forever.

All involved need to keep in mind is that learning goes on forever with this stuff, no-one knows it all. I once read that no sooner is a rule of thumb written down in the latest book than an example will emerge from the wood-work to challenge that rule. Sometimes these examples turn out to be an as to then unknown variation (although of course not always these days with dangers like the "African Hero" latest efforts to watch out for).

Regards, Chris

[Tim Calvert]

Check this out!

http://www.blackcrossmilitaria.com/german8.htm

[Leroy]

Tim - you must spend all day looking for fakes! Good job!


On another note, here's one I have.

[Leroy]

Reverse.

[Leroy]

Mark.

[90th Light]

Check this out!

http://www.blackcrossmilitaria.com/german8.htm

Very interesting Tim,

and the questions which spring to mind from that for me are;

1/ Post war fake badge as described ?

2/ Pre May 45 badge wrongly identified as fake with a false "900" silver content mark added post war ?

3/ Cast copy of an original but the oblong plate does not look cast in however ?

4/ Did S&L get up to their old trick like they did with the RK's and keep on turning these out from either their dies or Deumer's dies ? (just like the 57 RK's, they made a 57 Retired/P version with the same "chicken" characteristics)

5/ What does the reverse of the examples found on the "salesmans sample boards" look like ? (because the obverse like we can see in post 26 is certainly a "chicken foot" type like mine)

6/ Was there an unissued hoard found 25 years ago which came on to the market or did someone get the war time dies up and going again then ?

This is an interesting thread which is probably breaking new ground on a badge consider at this stage to be a fake. The question is are they or are they not or are there some that are good and some that are not.

Again I come back to Tom's approach, it is the manufacturers footprints which will tell us more; "Deumer" ? S&L ? or Who knows where in 1980-84 ?

Chris