Kriegsmarine Deumer maker of "unknown" Hymenn U-boat badge

[John R]

Instead of reposting all the images here, I will provide the link to my thread at WAF. This is based on the 1937 Deumer catalog now for sale by Kai Winkler. While dated 1937, it seems that the catalog actually came out in final or other versions well after that date without changing the "1937".

I think the only conclusion is that Deumer made the "Hymenn-type" badge and later changed to the Deumer style we are familiar with.

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/sho...ad.php?t=245935

I want to be clear in what I am saying: there are two Hymenn "type" badges. One, identified in Torpedo Los as "Hymenn" is the only accepted Hymenn badge. The badge I am referring to here is the "unknown Hymenn type" in Torpedo Los and on this forum--it seems very clear to me that the "unknown Hymenn" type was probably made by the firm Deumer.

John

Edited October 11, 2007 by John Robinson

[RichardT]

Instead of reposting all the images here, I will provide the link to my thread at WAF. This is based on the 1937 Deumer catalog now for sale by Kai Winkler.

I think the only conclusion is that Deumer made the Hymenn-type badge at least in 1937 and later changed to the Deumer style we are familiar with.

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/sho...ad.php?t=245935

John

Unfortunately, John, it appears that only members to the forum can access the images. Any chance that you can post them?

Richard

[John R]

Unfortunately, John, it appears that only members to the forum can access the images. Any chance that you can post them?

Richard

Do not have time yet, but will do so when I can. I recommend you join as many forums as you can, they each have something to offer. By the way, it is free and takes 5 minutes to join waf to view the images. Much of what I deduced in this thread came from Gordon's posts/images/postcards and Torpedo Los.

John

Edited October 10, 2007 by John Robinson

[RichardT]

Thanks John.

Richard

[Michel]

Hello John,

Without a better picture I can't agree your theory, some differences are visible :

* top of the wings

* head and body cut out (not on Hymen)

* position and orientation flag

* dimension of the propeller

* dimension of the rudder

* cut and forms external ballast

Regards,

Michel

[John R]

Hello John,

Without a better picture I can't agree your theory, some differences are visible :

* top of the wings

* head and body cut out (not on Hymen)

* position and orientation flag

* dimension of the propeller

* dimension of the rudder

* cut and forms external ballast

Regards,

Michel

Since it is a drawing and not a photo, doubt if you should be so specific in your comparison--I would call it an artist's interpretation of the badge itself. In fact, it might have only been taken from a drawing, not the final design. If you are correct, then who made the unknown Hymenn style?

No matter what, even if you were right, we now know for sure that Deumer had a Hymenn type badge for sale which has not made its appearance if one were to go by measurements from a drawing, which would be strange as this company is one of the oldest makers of badges in Germany.

Best wishes, John

Edited October 11, 2007 by John Robinson

[John R]

Dietrich has provided this image from the 1938 Deumer catalog. I think this is as good as one would need beyond having a technical drawing of the finished product. "Original" means exact size to the example in the catalog for those not following this thread on other forums. John

Edited October 11, 2007 by John Robinson

[John R]

The first badge is the accepted Hymenn badge, not the one in the Deumer catalog drawing. The second badge is the "unknown" Hymenn, now apparently made by Deumer. Clearly the drawing of the unknown badge is very similar to the one being sold by the firm of Deumer.

Note the line in the rudder, not apparent in the accepted Hymenn version. Deck gun, flag, flat eagle head, basic expression of the eagle--many other details. The two badges are very different and the one in the Deumer catalog matches the second badge in nearly every basic conceptual aspect. Also remember the badge was not actually authorized until 13 October 1939, so changes would have been made between drawing (artist's rendering of the badge) and final production.

Additionally, the reverse setups on the "unknown Hymenn" which I now call Deumer, are exactly the same as the EK1 spanges by Deumer. Those images are on the link provided.

John

Edited October 11, 2007 by John Robinson

[John R]

Richard,

This should basically bring you up to date but the link provides much more information. John

Edited October 11, 2007 by John Robinson

[RichardT]

Thanks again John.

Richard

[Gordon Williamson]

Very interesting. From the first small images it didn't look too conclusive but the larger image certainly covers almost all of the main design features of that specific variant.. Catalogue drawings are often "improved" - i.e. the SChickle U-Boat drawing in the catalogue even has a small swastika drawn on the flag - obviously not reflected on the actual badge so it doesn't surprise me too much that the solid area around the eagles neck on the actual badge is shown as cut away.

Deumer catalogue drawings are no where near as true to the real thing in terms of small details compared to, for instance, Steinhauer.

Good to have this badge identified. I just wish we could find a definite Steinhauer now. Personally I wouldn't be surprised if early Tombak Steinhauers are being mis-identified as unmarked Schwerin.

[John R]

Just to help visualize the point made by Gordon on the possiblility of the unmarked Schwerin as a possible Steinhauer.

It does make sense in a way---I can't think of any other Kriegsmarine Schwerin that is not marked but the one U-boat badge. There were 3 main marked Schwerin U-boat types, two with the the wire catch (different mark fonts) and the third with the flat catch and marked and then the fourth, unmarked style which is identical to the third type but no mark. Actually, there are two versions of this unmarked style, one of which is below and matches the catalog it seems.

I am also assuming the only reason we call the Schickle type a Schickle is the catalog illustration? We do not know for sure since we have no reverse setups from Schickle with this pin type? The second image is the Schickle catalog drawing from this website.

John

Edited October 17, 2007 by John Robinson

[Gordon Williamson]

There are already several precedents for different manufacturers making badges with identical obverse features, the Schickle/Mayer U-Boat badges being just one example. The Steinhauer catalogue proves that they provided tombak U-Boat badges which look the same as Schwerin's pieces. Seems to me that there must be a very strong possibility that at least some of the presumed unmarked "Schwerin" pieces are actually from S&L.

I suspect there may be a clue in the pin fitting which from the S&L catalogue illustration seems of excessive length. Some unmarked "Schwerins" I have seen seem to have longer than necessary pins too.

[nesredep]

Hello!

Intresting and good news.

Best regards

Nesredep

[Martin W]

I suspect there may be a clue in the pin fitting which from the S&L catalogue illustration seems of excessive length. Some unmarked "Schwerins" I have seen seem to have longer than necessary pins too.

Gordon,

is this what you are referring too?

Regards,Martin.

[John R]

Martin, could you show the front of the badge? John

[Gordon Williamson]

Gordon,

is this what you are referring too?

Regards,Martin.

Exactly !

[Martin W]

John,

here is the obverse view.The damage on the badge is due to a very poor attempt by the recipient at hand vaulting,it appears.

Martin.

Edited October 15, 2007 by mwestley

[John R]

Please note that the hinge has been turned upside down on this version to accomodate the pin length. This is a quick way to spot this version besides the color of the pin and the shape of the pin and separate it from the "normal" schwerin version below.

Personally, at this point, I do not see this badge as a Schwerin quality standard badge due to the above "tricks" to the reverse hardware and differences in finish to the pin.

John

Edited October 18, 2007 by John Robinson

[Gordon Williamson]

Theorising aside, lets look at what we know

Fact - Steinhauer offered a U-Boat Badge in the 1940/41 period catalogues

Fact - In the time frame, this would certainly be a Tombak badge

Fact - The badge has the same design as Schwerin

Fact - The Steinhauer badge is shown with an elongated pin.

Fact - Precedence exists for multiple manufacturers using identical obverse features, so that only the pin fittings differ.

Fact - We have a so called "unmarked Schwerin" which fits all the criteria for consideration as a Steinhauer piece.

So - What evidence do have for automatically assuming that badges such as Martin's are made by Schwerin ??.

I'd say the previous erroneous assumtion that the newly identified Deumer badge was a Hymenn illustrates the dangers of assuming an identity for an unmarked piece just because it bears a strong resemblance to a known maker.

[Colin Davie]

They say that the human figure is one of the hardest things to draw, so I always found it interesting that the 1935 Labour Day tinnies for example, featuring three men of different professions were always virtually identical, even though I looked at what must have been nearly a dozen different manufacturers badges, it made/makes me think that clearly the production of identical hardware distributed between different manufacturers re dies and molds was practiced, that of course leads to the thought of why we have so many different looking IAB, PAB etc.. why not just share identical hardware again?

Could mutiple identical dies be produced? If so any ideas why that was'nt practiced more instead of everyone making their own dies?, maybe they were willing to use multi dies on tinnies but got a bit more houseproud when it came to awards?

Interesting field though, certainly the Africa Hero guy is happy to share designs among many different makers

C

[Gordon Williamson]

Could mutiple identical dies be produced? If so any ideas why that was'nt practiced more instead of everyone making their own dies?, maybe they were willing to use multi dies on tinnies but got a bit more houseproud when it came to awards?

Hi Colin,

Depends what you mean by "identical". I'd say that if the same master was used, several dies could be cut which would on the face of it be visually almost identical with the naked eye. I would think that however if they were examined under magnification there would probably be tiny differences between them.

Within engineering it is quite common for a manufacturing firm to sub-contract the cutting of some die tooling to smaller specialist firms. Back in my days as a toolmaker we used to make most of our own die tools but due to lack of capacity due to pressure of work etc, occasionally production of a die set would be contracted out. Fairly common practise so it wouldn't surprise me if the same thing happened in Germany. Could be that both Schwerin and Steinhauer procured their dies from a single source or that Schwerin made their own die and another for Steinhauer or vice versa, or one firm stamped out the blanks for both and each did their own finishing.

All sorts of possibilities, but of course all just speculation.

It does seem incredible that badges produced by one of the most prolific manufacturers remain "undiscovered". We aren't talking about a rare late war badge produced just before the end but a high quality early piece produced right at the beginning. Clearly there are tombak U-Boat Badges out there which mimic the Schwerin obverse. If they aren't the so called "unmarked Schwerins", where are they ??