M. from Berlin
Well-Known Member
usaaf was over stamped with usmc at my AN-H-15!!!
saw it first time.
but see here:
saw it first time.
but see here:
-
When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
usmc / usaaf stamp at flying helmet
- Thread starter M. from Berlin
- Start date
Phantomfixer
New Member
That is kinda neat ..... surprised the Marines would have worn anything worn by the AAF.... 
M. from Berlin
Well-Known Member
Has anyone ever seen this stamp on USMC helmets?
Are most USMC helmets from USN!?
Are most USMC helmets from USN!?
a2jacketpatches
Active Member
Doesn't seem right to me, thinking this was done by a civilian owner post war. USMC just didn't do this kind of thing.
Phantomfixer
New Member
My first thought was a Garcia stamp...The Marines/Navy would have used their version of the cloth helmet the M-450 or the AN6540-3... P297 of MJ Prodger's Vintage Flying Helmets. The AN 6540 has the EGA stamp but larger than the one shown in OP.
Having said that...could a Marine pilot have used/stolen borrowed a USAAF issue helmet? With supply lines so thin maybe so??? Anything could happen..I think the USN/USMC had a different style comm connector than the AAF. Earphones would fit and work, just different connector.
No way tell/prove how it got there or why....but a great flight helmet with a past...
Having said that...could a Marine pilot have used/stolen borrowed a USAAF issue helmet? With supply lines so thin maybe so??? Anything could happen..I think the USN/USMC had a different style comm connector than the AAF. Earphones would fit and work, just different connector.
No way tell/prove how it got there or why....but a great flight helmet with a past...
a2jacketpatches
Active Member
Phantomfixer said:
Just doesn't make sense,but I guess you're right that anything could happen, just HIGHLY unlikely. Especially considering it still says Army Air Forces.
M. from Berlin
Well-Known Member
I found this helmet and an 40s officer USN hat with an us army emblem at german flea market in 1995/96.
Where could the seller give me no information, only that they came from her grandfather.
Where could the seller give me no information, only that they came from her grandfather.
a2jacketpatches
Active Member
M. from Berlin said:
So an Army flight helmet with a USMC stamp and a USN hat with an Army emblem from the same guy? I think it's safe to assume the worst.
unclegrumpy
Well-Known Member
I agree this one is hard to tell, especially from pictures.
However, lets say for a minute that this over stamp was done by the Marines. If so, I highly doubt is was done in WW II. My guess would be in the 1950's, and for a use other than issue to regular aircrew.
This type of AAF helmet is very similar to the Navy version from WW II, and is a pretty good illustration why the Government went to the AN (Army/Navy) system to simplify procurement and the supply chain. I don't think it is much of a reach to assume that later on, near obsolete flight gear that was similar, was regrouped under one stock number. And, that if a box of mismatched helmets landed in Marine Supply, that they might be over marked before they were issued.
My suspicion is that if they were used, it would have been more often in training or for a one time use. Like for example, maybe a cargo or transport plane might have a box of these on board for passengers to wear and then leave after the trip.
Anyway, I think if you look at this helmet as something that was at the bottom of the barrel when it was used, rather than the top, it makes some sense. This one still might be fake, but even if it is real, I don't think it has great added value given what it was likely used for.
However, lets say for a minute that this over stamp was done by the Marines. If so, I highly doubt is was done in WW II. My guess would be in the 1950's, and for a use other than issue to regular aircrew.
This type of AAF helmet is very similar to the Navy version from WW II, and is a pretty good illustration why the Government went to the AN (Army/Navy) system to simplify procurement and the supply chain. I don't think it is much of a reach to assume that later on, near obsolete flight gear that was similar, was regrouped under one stock number. And, that if a box of mismatched helmets landed in Marine Supply, that they might be over marked before they were issued.
My suspicion is that if they were used, it would have been more often in training or for a one time use. Like for example, maybe a cargo or transport plane might have a box of these on board for passengers to wear and then leave after the trip.
Anyway, I think if you look at this helmet as something that was at the bottom of the barrel when it was used, rather than the top, it makes some sense. This one still might be fake, but even if it is real, I don't think it has great added value given what it was likely used for.
a2jacketpatches
Active Member
Good points / remote possibilities unclegrumpy, but a Navy cap with army insignia from the same guy :?: Two items in a row? I've been doing this too long. Just a little too far fetched for me to justify.
M. from Berlin
Well-Known Member
I bought it from a young girl , and she had 100% no idea what it is. There were only 10-15 german Mark at this time.
You can get from time to time some US stuff from WWII in Germany.
But as the asian material here comes from, the devil knows.
You can get from time to time some US stuff from WWII in Germany.
But as the asian material here comes from, the devil knows.
unclegrumpy
Well-Known Member
I see three points here:a2jacketpatches said:
One, is the USMC marking something the Marines did or some faker.
Two, were the two items originally from the same veteran.
Three, why these showed up at a German Flea market.
I was only addressing the first point. Personally, I was throwing out the connection of this being from the same veteran, and coming from a German Flea market, because without ironclad providence, both are really irrelevant when judging the validity of point #1. In my mind, the helmet marking needs to stand on it's own.
Personally, I agree with you, and would not pay any extra for this marking, but it is the kind of thing I have run into over the years that is odd, but I knew was real given where I found it and what I paid for it.
Being "real" does not always mean cool either, because most of the time these markings and modifications were done a long time after the item was originally made and issued.
In the end, I think this leaves us in the same place, it could be good or it could be bad, but without more to go on, either way it probably does not matter much.
a2jacketpatches
Active Member
Copy that.
unclegrumpy
Well-Known Member
What I think this helmet also illustrates is how it would be nice if we lived in a perfect world....one without any fakes or fakers.....and I don't mean the guys who make and sell things as reproductions, but the ones who intentionally do it to deceive.
a2jacketpatches
Active Member
Unfortunately, the fakers tend to destroy value in their attempt to increase it. A perfect example is......these days, a painted M1 helmet is probably a fake M1 helmet and then it's tagged for life as such. There's guys out there recording these fakes. Most collectors won't even pay the price of a good plain lid for it.
unclegrumpy
Well-Known Member
A perfect example!
M-1 helmets with anything painted on them were always scarce, even back when these helmets were only worth a few dollars....yes a few dollars. And when you did find something, some of the art work was not that good either.....:shock:
M-1 helmets with anything painted on them were always scarce, even back when these helmets were only worth a few dollars....yes a few dollars. And when you did find something, some of the art work was not that good either.....:shock:
M. from Berlin
Well-Known Member
same problem with german steel helmets, reproductions in poland, a little bit paint, a little bit acid, water, 2 weeks and it looks like WWII!
tooooooo much fakes..... look on ebay! sadly.
tooooooo much fakes..... look on ebay! sadly.
Phantomfixer
New Member
Something to kick around about German flea markets....
The US Military had a very large presence in Germany for decades...Having spent 4 years at Ramstein, I can tell you there were a lot of US personnel that were collectors,stationed in Germany buying and selling at these flea markets. I saw stacks of B-4 mae wests, AN-h-15 winter flight helmets, the list goes on...
My point being, on this helmet, it could very easily have been swapped several times from "collectors" stationed in Europe....Just because it was found in a swap meet in Germany does not mean it was left behind by a WWII vet...
Agreed that folks should not tinker or clean artifacts... I have two M1917 helmets, one with no liner, the other with a partial liner, both as is....but why put a Chinese made liner in them? Then it is no longer USGI WWI
The US Military had a very large presence in Germany for decades...Having spent 4 years at Ramstein, I can tell you there were a lot of US personnel that were collectors,stationed in Germany buying and selling at these flea markets. I saw stacks of B-4 mae wests, AN-h-15 winter flight helmets, the list goes on...
My point being, on this helmet, it could very easily have been swapped several times from "collectors" stationed in Europe....Just because it was found in a swap meet in Germany does not mean it was left behind by a WWII vet...
Agreed that folks should not tinker or clean artifacts... I have two M1917 helmets, one with no liner, the other with a partial liner, both as is....but why put a Chinese made liner in them? Then it is no longer USGI WWI
a2jacketpatches
Active Member
Well just as my gut feeling and common sense tells me -
http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/ ... c+%2Bstamp
If nobody jumps in on this forum to give it even a maybe thumbs up, it ain't real. As one guy says here "I've never seen a flight helmet marked this way" Never mind it being an Army Air Forces helmet to begin with that still says Army Air Forces. I can almost see whoever is responsible for such a thing losing flight status and being banished to latrine duty. Marines just would not sit still for this in any event. This is a blatant and ridiculous attempt to fake an item, now it just stinks like you know what forever....
http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/ ... c+%2Bstamp
If nobody jumps in on this forum to give it even a maybe thumbs up, it ain't real. As one guy says here "I've never seen a flight helmet marked this way" Never mind it being an Army Air Forces helmet to begin with that still says Army Air Forces. I can almost see whoever is responsible for such a thing losing flight status and being banished to latrine duty. Marines just would not sit still for this in any event. This is a blatant and ridiculous attempt to fake an item, now it just stinks like you know what forever....
unclegrumpy
Well-Known Member
I am not sure that one can bank on everything those guys say over there, but in this case I suspect they are right about these flight helmets.
However, I think you are being a bit too black and white regarding the actual use and marking of equipment. There are plenty of period photos of Marines using US marked web gear, especially in the Korean War. I have also seen a number of items, though not flight gear, that have been remarked with EGAs or more commonly USMC....but again mostly post WW II.
This all reminds me of a story. About twenty years or so ago, a four foot square crate....maybe two or more of them, came out of a Government Surplus Auction at one of the Marine Storage facilities in the Southern California desert.
They were filled with USMC camouflage helmet covers....all different types, time periods, and variations, but more than half WW II and Korean War era ones. Many had EGA's stenciled on them, but some did not.
One of the enterprizing guys selling the covers noticed that the ones with the EGAs sold a lot better, so he started marking the others. It was not commonly known at the time that the unmarked ones were the earlier ones....the actual WW II ones....and this guy...no, knuckle head....F***'ed upped a lot of very nice helmet covers....covers that were hard to come by, even back them.
Interestingly, the Marines had stenciled EGAs on some of the older covers too....to update them to be inline with the later issue ones. Some of these "original" covers were in the pile too....but, they quickly became very hard to tell from the newly stamped ones.
I guess the moral is nothing really changes :cry:
However, I think you are being a bit too black and white regarding the actual use and marking of equipment. There are plenty of period photos of Marines using US marked web gear, especially in the Korean War. I have also seen a number of items, though not flight gear, that have been remarked with EGAs or more commonly USMC....but again mostly post WW II.
This all reminds me of a story. About twenty years or so ago, a four foot square crate....maybe two or more of them, came out of a Government Surplus Auction at one of the Marine Storage facilities in the Southern California desert.
They were filled with USMC camouflage helmet covers....all different types, time periods, and variations, but more than half WW II and Korean War era ones. Many had EGA's stenciled on them, but some did not.
One of the enterprizing guys selling the covers noticed that the ones with the EGAs sold a lot better, so he started marking the others. It was not commonly known at the time that the unmarked ones were the earlier ones....the actual WW II ones....and this guy...no, knuckle head....F***'ed upped a lot of very nice helmet covers....covers that were hard to come by, even back them.
Interestingly, the Marines had stenciled EGAs on some of the older covers too....to update them to be inline with the later issue ones. Some of these "original" covers were in the pile too....but, they quickly became very hard to tell from the newly stamped ones.
I guess the moral is nothing really changes :cry:
