juvatwad

The double-hose 10-6701 was found in a basket full of USAAF A-14 oxygen masks in a surplus store near Kelly AFB in San Antonio, TX sometime back. I believe it was found in the 1970's. This makes sense, since San Antonio is still one of the main centers for aviation medicine for the Air Force. It was probably discarded after evaluation.

USAF photo of this type of mask:

Here are a few of the more unusual masks I have. The first is an early oxygen tube, BAL stamped on the hose and dated, I believe, 1934. Interestingly, this is the only German mask of the era with a cloth-covered hose. The second is an experimental version with dual small caliber hoses. I don't know much about this model, but I have seen similar style medical masks from the period. The medical masks can be distinguished by the position of the valve. On the pilot version, the valve is almost flush with mask, but on the medical version it protudes from the mask. Finally there is the modified 10-6701 mask. This has a double hose closed system, and was possibly developed for high altitude helmets being developed at the War's end.

Harrier, I appreciate your comments. I'd be greatful if others would weigh in as well, particularly those who commented on the previous thread. Is there anything here that would cause you to change your opinion? Thanks, Ian

That's my dilemma. Given the details of construction, this doesn't look put together to deceive. If one does not accept this example as a legitimate officer visor, what else can it be?

I think officer's visors with the waffle pattern top are the type seen in period photos. Theoretically it would be easy to take an enlisted top (which this resembles) and put it on an officer body, but this top and body appear to me to have been constructed as a unit. The cloth pocket on the top and the corresponding tongue on the body are a first for me, although I haven't handled many white visors at all.

Awhile back I posted this white top officer visor. The general consensus was that it was not good, mainly based on the lack of a waffle pattern top. I took it apart, and I have to say, I personally don't know. I do know where it's been for at least the last 30 years, and the construction is complex for a 1970's fake. The top has a flap into which a corresponding tongue on the main body fits. It is then fixed with a single small snap. I didn't take it apart the first time I posted it here, so I would appreciate a reevaluation now. If it's not real, what exactly is it? Has anyone seen this construction before? Thanks! Ian

Great, thanks.

Nice group. Can you show the back of the Yugoslav pilot badge? If not, what number is on the back? Thanks, Ian

Ok, I understand now.

No, No. I was refering to Panzerpionier stating the website referencing WW 2 era wings was "crap" with respect to its Spanish section. The wings shown on that site are spot on.

So, you say the Spanish section of the website I referenced shows inaccurate WWII era wings? I disagree.

The wings are neither pilot, pilot/observer, nor obsever. I don't know what they are, though. http://www.ww2wings.com/main.shtml

These are as good as I can get. It looks OK to me, but has some minor damage. Agree?

Two more examples, both of which I believe are authentic. the "fingerprint" is there on th epilot, but clearly absent on the P/O. Would anyone call the P/O a fake? Ian

I suppose it comes down to the gestalt: do the eagle, wreath, pin, hinge, and catch conform to known originals? Does the maker's mark match known originals? Obviously some have the defect in the circle, some don't. If the above are OK, then I'll be convinced the badge is real. If someone is that close on everything mentioned above, why wouldn't they complete the "perfect fake" by adding swirling tool marks to the back of the eagle? That should be the easiest thing to do.

So Jon, if you don't see a fingerprint in either a pilot or p/o badge, even though everything else looks OK, you'd pass? How many dies were used in the construction of the eagle? If the fingerprint has to be on everyone, then that implies only one die was used to make all of GWL's eagles, right? Ian

Yes, I'm not speaking about a particular badge, but in general, should the defect in the stamp be a minimum requirement for authenticity? This comparison photo is from another forum....

I'd like to see if there is anything approaching a concensus on whether or not the defect in the GWL stamp is a baseline requirement for originality. Obviously defective makers marks can be faked, but if the circle is without defects, would you even entertain the possibility that the badge is authentic? Thanks, Ian

It looks like a made up cross between a Republican wing and a Nationalist wing. The fat propeller blades don't fit with the crown. Both examples from Bob Schwartz's site. Nationalist: Republican:

I have this 1939 dated uniform for a member of the French Air Service (named Le Garrec). I've noted the loops on the left breast for medals/ribbons. Can anyone help me in finding a set that is correct for the period and service? Thanks, Ian

Yes, it seems sudeck13 may be a group of people who act as a conglomerate to buy these photos. I've heard Luftwaffe researches here have subsequently asked for permission to view the photos for research purposes, but have been invariably denied except for one Dr. Prien. Ian

Yes, the breast plate. I don't know how the whole thing was stored, but I've never seen one either, so they must have been easy to lose. Ian