WWI Enlisted Aviator Wings

[cthomas]

These wings look like the real deal. What are your opinions?

[cthomas]

A view of the reverse...

[cwnorma]

Charles,

 

They look like they could be good. They are a bit different in design from the "regulation" pattern, but I think they may be OK.

 

I hate exotic stuff out on the loose. Did you get any history on them?

 

Chris

[cthomas]

Charles,

 

They look like they could be good. They are a bit different in design from the "regulation" pattern, but I think they may be OK.

 

I hate exotic stuff out on the loose. Did you get any history on them?

 

Chris

 

 

Good morning Chris. I didn't get any history behind them. Sorry. All I know is that they came out of an 'old' collection probably dating back to the 40's/50's. I will check again and see if he can recall anything about these wings. They have a 'feel' and look about them that tells me their a legit set. I look forward to more replies.

[pconrad02]

Charles,

 

They look interesting. My only issue is, as mentioned in an ASMIC article (last year I think), these are supposed to be on dark blue. Of course all the photos of the time are in B&W so the majority of the repros are done on black. Just something to think about.....

 

Paul

[cthomas]

Charles,

 

They look interesting. My only issue is, as mentioned in an ASMIC article (last year I think), these are supposed to be on dark blue. Of course all the photos of the time are in B&W so the majority of the repros are done on black. Just something to think about.....

 

Paul

 

Good morning Paul.

I understand what you mean by "supposed to be". I've been in this hobby long enough to know where regulations fall into the scheme of things. There are your textbook examples and the others are not. I don't discount the nonconformists outright, though it always makes me that much more focused on the details. Could this have been a private made set?

 

 

With that said, it's also the perfect excuse for reproductions to exist in our hobby.Are there other Enlisted wings out there for me to compare them with?

 

-Chuck

PS I'll check out your site in a minute Paul. Thanks again for your input!

[pconrad02]

Good morning Paul.

I understand what you mean by "supposed to be". I've been in this hobby long enough to know where regulations fall into the scheme of things. There are your textbook examples and the others are not. I don't discount the nonconformists outright, though it always makes me that much more focused on the details. Could this have been a private made set?

 

 

With that said, it's also the perfect excuse for reproductions to exist in our hobby.Are there other Enlisted wings out there for me to compare them with?

 

-Chuck

PS I'll check out your site in a minute Paul. Thanks again for your input!

 

Chuck, yes as this was a somewhat uncommon rate, I suspect most of them were privately made. You will nothice the ones on my site are black too

[cthomas]

Chuck, yes as this was a somewhat uncommon rate, I suspect most of them were privately made. You will nothice the ones on my site are black too

 

 

Thank you again Paul for your input. Nice collection & website you got going there. I've bookmarked it for future use.

[cpatrick]

Chuck,

 

Paul has an incredible collection, and an outstanding website!!

 

Great set of wings!

 

I was actually speaking with a well known, very experienced dealer in militaria the other day about some pretty interesting stuff that is affecting our field right now. Two of these things that we discussed go hand in hand:

 

Militaria (Especially WWI!) is known for its variations in style and construction. Case in point, if we were to look at 50 WWI wings, there would be several that are not the same. Some would vary slightly, others, like this example, would be deemed as unique. Does this mean that the wings are bad? No, no, no.... not as some would like us to believe..

 

The second issue that was discussed concurrently with the above issue is the problem with the "guru's". These people are very dangerous to the hobby, and do more harm than good. They attack others about "misinforming" collectors, when they, themselves are flat out wrong. One of these self-appointed guru's might argue that the only way that they would believe that this variation of wing was legit, would be if you could provide photographic evidence of this wing in use. Well, that would be rather difficult if this wing was an "odd-ball", even back in 1918. If there were only a "handful" of these that were made, finding a photograph may prove difficult.

 

I am also a very avid Third Reich collector. I once owned a completely unmarked SA dager, with NO motto, no maker on the blade. I had several collectors tell me that the dagger was no good, and that I was a fool to think that it was a good blade. Everything about the blade seemed right, It was a superb quality, early piece with the nickel silver fittings. Not a screw was ever buggered with, never taken apart, etc. After perhaps four years of owning it, I sold it to a collector who "had to have it". Price? $1,500. It was shortly after the unmarked SA/NSKK dagger was sold, that people had accepted this dagger as legit - a very rare variation. So much for the guru's. Morons of the highest order, and it should be criminal for them to defraud people of good information.

 

Does this mean that every piece that does not fit into the mold should be embraced as a unique variation? No. Common sense and a ***working knowledge*** of militaria is necessary. It's important for collectors to know what "could" be OK, and what is obsurd.

 

I think that you have a nice set of original wings. Who cares if these don't conform to the norm. Remember, these were not made with us, the collector in mind.

 

 

 

Chris

[cwnorma]

Militaria (Especially WWI!) is known for its variations in style and construction. Case in point, if we were to look at 50 WWI wings, there would be several that are not the same. Some would vary slightly, others, like this example, would be deemed as unique. Does this mean that the wings are bad? No, no, no.... not as some would like us to believe..

 

The second issue that was discussed concurrently with the above issue is the problem with the "guru's". These people are very dangerous to the hobby, and do more harm than good. They attack others about "misinforming" collectors, when they, themselves are flat out wrong. One of these self-appointed guru's might argue that the only way that they would believe that this variation of wing was legit, would be if you could provide photographic evidence of this wing in

 

Chris,

 

You hit upon the thing I personally like best about collecting WW1--all the variations!

 

I too get a good laugh whenever someone says "always" or "never" about that war. So many things were hand made, I believe you could collect WW1 for a lifetime, and never have it "all".

 

Best wishes.

 

Chris

[cthomas]

Good morning guys. Just like to thank Chris and umm...Chris! for your replies.

 

Cpatrick- Thank you for that well thought out reply. You have put into words what I couldn't. There was something there that has really got me excited about getting into collecting WWI but I really couldn't put a finger on it. Reading your reply, I couldn't have said it better. Thanks!

 

cwnorma-And thank you for your input once again.

 

I think I've seen a set of wings like this before. It was from an old illustration and it showed them sewn(?) on an overcoat. That brings up another point I wanted to make on these wings. Do you think they were sewn to the uniform or that they came with the backing that had a clutch & pin assembly?

 

-Chuck

[pconrad02]

I believe they would have been sewn directly , as they wore these on the shoulder if I remember correctly

 

Paul

[Lee Ragan]

I believe they would have been sewn directly , as they wore these on the shoulder if I remember correctly

 

Paul

Paul is correct, these were worn on the right sleeve above any rank chevrons.

[cthomas]

Thank you Lee and Paul. That was just the info I was looking for. Does any one else happen to have a set of Enlisted Aviator wings???

[pfrost]

Thank you Lee and Paul. That was just the info I was looking for. Does any one else happen to have a set of Enlisted Aviator wings???

 

I have seen a few of these in a couple of higher end wing collections, and they have almost always been on bluish or blackish backing sewn with white silk thread and of much higher quality workmanship than these shown. In fact, Paul has some in his collection that fall more in line of the others I have seen than these.

 

Acting as devils advocate, these wings seem awful crude and unattractive for a hand embroidered patch. Sewing and embroidery were important skills in this time period, and it would seem that anyone with ANY amount of familarity with a needle and thread could have done a much better job of rendering these wings. The feathers are outlined with thread in an amature fashion, the stitching is loose and uneven, the excess thread on the back reminds one of the vast number of fake squadron patches currently available and the fact that its not on the proper background would give me pause.

 

I have to believe that an enlisted pilot would have had a high level of training and education to have achieved flight status and likely would have had a great deal of pride in gaining his wings, it is hard to imagine wings of this quality would have been acceptable to him.

 

Finally, if I remember correctly, at this time officers were expected to buy their own uniforms and insignia. On the other hand, the government issued uniforms and equipment to the enlisted men. So, what was issued from the quartermaster would have had to achieve some level of standardization and authorization acceptable to the government inspectors.

 

Of course, these points dont mean that the wings could have been something that an enlisted pilot put on his uniform.

 

I guess the biggest problems I have with these wings are two fold. First, they really dont follow the regulations for these insignia and second, they look like they were made by someone with very little skill at sewing. One of my collecting rules is that if something LOOKS like it cobbled together in someone's garage, then I assume it WAS cobbled together in someone's garage--and if that is the case, I would look long and hard for some other concrete indications that it wasnt cobbled together. That is where things like provenance, photographic evidence, or other "proof" is so important in establishing its vintage.

 

However, if you are happy with it in your collection and are convinced its real, then that is all that really matters.

 

Patrick

[kiaiokalewa]

Well stated Patrick and a personal observation that I follow when finding or chasing after WWI/Post WWI cloth insignia in the never ending mine field of hand made variations out there. Looking for those insignia that are made of higher quality overseas with materials that are consistant with known original examples has so much more appeal than the funky and questionable types. I guess it is a matter of personal preference and being able to live with the fact that there is an item in the collection that with always cast some doubt in your mind of being something other than the real deal. It is also a good to have around since it would serve as excellent visual reference to compare with something else down the road. Sometimes this could lead to the origin of where the insignia had come from and as to whether it was actually from the time period or if it was something that was made in Belgium recently for the re-inactors or collectors for example... Aloha John

[cthomas]

John & Patrick-

 

Thank you for your feedback. It is appreciated!

 

I don't know for sure until I compare them to others or somehow get lucky enough to find photographic documentation but I believe them to be legit. The simpleness of the design doesn't have me too concerned although I would have loved the highlights to have been done a little better than shown. As mentioned before, this shouldn't totally rule it out. I've seen some real strange variants even on WWII stuff to include embroidered pilot's badges (WWII German). You figured they'd be a little more on the ball when it came to the manufacturing process. But alas, there's just too much to consider to be 100% in either camp (legit or repro). I sure don't mind holding onto them a while longer

[pfrost]

Here is a photo of a guy wearing the aviation mechanic patch on his great coat. Notice that his friend has lost his arm!

 

I know it is not the same as the enlisted pilot wing, but it was worn in a similar manner.

 

You can see the quality of the embroidery in the close up scan. Hope that gives you some idea of how the badge was worn at the very least.

 

Best

 

Patrick

[pfrost]

Here is a patch of an enlisted man in the aviation section. It doesn't have the circle around it like the one from the previous post.

 

The regulations said it was to be white silk on blue background, but I rarely see them on anything that isnt very dark blue...almost black. See "More silver wings, Pinks and greens" page 54 for a nice enlisted pilot badge (also on black woo).

 

This patch may be a fake, I have no idea.

 

Patrick

[cthomas]

Here is a photo of a guy wearing the aviation mechanic patch on his great coat. Notice that his friend has lost his arm!

 

I know it is not the same as the enlisted pilot wing, but it was worn in a similar manner.

 

You can see the quality of the embroidery in the close up scan. Hope that gives you some idea of how the badge was worn at the very least.

 

Best

 

Patrick

 

What an interesting and poignant photo Patrick. Do you know the significance of the armband? I've seen something similar being worn by an Italian Pilot.

 

Here's an image from "The Cantonment Manual 1917" which shows the wings in question. The "highlights" on the set I posted are a fair attempt at putting some sort of detail to the embroidery.

 

Also, nice patch. Can't say much about its originality though. I've got a few aviator patches similar to that one but without that style backing.

[pfrost]

Did you notice that they got the lables wrong for the enlisted pilot and the aviation mechanician?

 

No idea about the arm band and what it is. The cut of the jacket looks different as well.

 

I am sure somewhere we have an expert in this forum who will have an idea and enlighten us.

 

Patrick

[cthomas]

Did you notice that they got the lables wrong for the enlisted pilot and the aviation mechanician?

 

No idea about the arm band and what it is. The cut of the jacket looks different as well.

 

I am sure somewhere we have an expert in this forum who will have an idea and enlighten us.

 

Patrick

 

You're right- they did label that one wrong. I have seen another illustration of these wings somewhere but I need to track it down. Will post it just for future reference.

 

I'd sure like to hear more about that photo if someone could fill us in on the details....

 

-Chuck

[Baker502]

I had 2 uniforms with enlisted wings on them, but only kept the named one, and sold the other last year at SOS. Here is the un standard sleeve wing. Paul

Named to Enlisted pilot Applebaum

Here is a windo banner for an enlisted pilot

[cthomas]

Paul-

 

Thank you for posting these interesting wings and that aviation service banner. Very nice!

 

Speaking of militaria shows, what's a good one to go to for U.S. stuff?

[Patchcollector]

What an interesting and poignant photo Patrick. Do you know the significance of the armband? I've seen something similar being worn by an Italian Pilot.

 

Here's an image from "The Cantonment Manual 1917" which shows the wings in question. The "highlights" on the set I posted are a fair attempt at putting some sort of detail to the embroidery.

 

Also, nice patch. Can't say much about its originality though. I've got a few aviator patches similar to that one but without that style backing.

 

 

I know,old thread.I just wanted to comment on the armband that the fellow was wearing.Might it be for his wound?