new (and my first) TO Technical Observer wing

[pfrost]

The TO wing is one that I have been missing out of my collection for some time, but one in which I never really spent much time seeking out. There just seemed so many fakes that it just never really caught on fire.

 

The forum has had a number of threads on IDing good NS Meyers wings. Then MTMAN posted some really AWESOME threads about some rare wings (like his thread on the military aviator wings http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/314188-1937-military-airplane-pilot-rating-wing/ and his observation about the "1930's balloon observer conundrum" http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/forums/index.php?/topic/307639-balloon-observer-wing-for-review/) that really started me thinking about my own wing collecting biases.

 

I think many collectors' interests begin to diverge and focus, and for the last few years, I found myself searching more for WWI bullion wings than anything from WWII. I tended to dismiss NS Meyer wings as mundane (at least to me) and found that I was becoming sloppy in not looking more carefully at these types of wings when the were available. I try to keep my mind open on the forum and certainly mtman opened up my thoughts on how I was likely missing some gems (both in my own collection and things that were available for purchase).

 

One day recently, I found this wing on the internet and began to compare it to some other wings. As usual, the first three things I do when I want to do some research is (1) search Bob's site for comparable wings (and look through my various books on wings), (2) search the forum for previous discussions (3) tap into my "brain trust" (you guys know who you are!). Eventually, I came to the conclusion that this was a good wing and one that I wanted to add to my collection. The thing is, if mtman hadn't been making me rethink some of my biases, I may have just moved over this wing. I didn't get it at a great price, but I did add a TO wing to my collection!

 

Again, a hat tip to Bob's site. Those of you who don't spend your time using his webpage as a great reference source are missing out!

http://www.ww2wings.com/wings/usaaf/technicalobserver/presleyaaftechobserver.shtml

[cwnorma]

Patrick,

 

First and foremost: Super, great wing! Congratulations.

 

I think it is always a useful exercise to question our preconceived cognitive biases.

 

Decades ago, when I first started into collecting some older collectors would tell me; "Its good because I say it is!" or something similar. I never found that sort of thing to be a satisfactory answer--so would often do my own research to independently confirm. Sometimes it turned out they were right, other times not. No doubt they thought they were right.

 

Later, when I was writing my thesis, one of my Professors, and a great mentor, inculcated me with the maxim; "Beware opinions masquerading as facts." This is especially true if it is information in a published work that is purporting to be scholarly. Some once generally accepted references in the militaria hobby are products of their eras, based on the best information available at the time, but have consequently not aged well. Perhaps if the authors had been more forthright about not presenting their opinions, theories, or suppositions as facts those works would have fared better the test of time?

 

At any rate, we do live in a wonderful age where there are many high quality resources readily available for militaria collectors. Bob's site is one of them, this forum is another.

 

Congratulations on adding another fine wing to your collection!

 

Chris

 

 

 

[pfrost]

LOL Chris, I really like your post. I had a similar interaction with my PhD advisor who (facetiously) said... "Patrick, you never seem to let facts get in the way of a good hypothesis".

 

I learned a long time ago not to trust in "dealer lore". I can't tell you how many times I have heard... "I've never seen one of those, so it must be fake" Or its twin brother... "I have a couple of those in my collection, so I know they are good!"

 

P

[mtnman]

Patrick,
I saw these wings in your first picture and I knew you had nailed it! Look at the clutch back pins. The base of these pins are affixed with a silver braze, with NO roundel*, which signifies the early war (1940-1943) clutch back attachments. That is a beautiful technical observer wing, a scarce wing .....you knocked it out of the park my friend.

 

Thanks for showing this wing because your thesis is right on regarding how we get stuck in a particular bias toward wings which have been counterfeited. We must remember that they were counterfeited because they were, in their authentic veracity, very much worth counterfeiting because of their excellence and concomitant identity with the time they were made. Another great thoughtful thread Patrick!

 

*(roundel at base of clutch pin *typically alludes to late 1943-1945)

[Kropotkin]

I would like to thank Patrick for his timely posting of this thread as it appeared just in time for me to consult on acquiring the same pattern T/O wing with confidence. Looking at it in detail it appears to come from the same die and has the short pins without the ‘tack head’ bases. This is also my first T/O wing. Thanks again.

 

 

[Jumpin Jack]

Patrick,

 

First and foremost: Super, great wing! Congratulations.

 

I think it is always a useful exercise to question our preconceived cognitive biases.

 

Decades ago, when I first started into collecting some older collectors would tell me; "Its good because I say it is!" or something similar. I never found that sort of thing to be a satisfactory answer--so would often do my own research to independently confirm. Sometimes it turned out they were right, other times not. No doubt they thought they were right.

 

Later, when I was writing my thesis, one of my Professors, and a great mentor, inculcated me with the maxim; "Beware opinions masquerading as facts." This is especially true if it is information in a published work that is purporting to be scholarly. Some once generally accepted references in the militaria hobby are products of their eras, based on the best information available at the time, but have consequently not aged well. Perhaps if the authors had been more forthright about not presenting their opinions, theories, or suppositions as facts those works would have fared better the test of time?

 

At any rate, we do live in a wonderful age where there are many high quality resources readily available for militaria collectors. Bob's site is one of them, this forum is another.

 

Congratulations on adding another fine wing to your collection!

 

Chris

 

 

 

Chris, I applaud your comment. At 82 years of age, I have seen the steady passage of information concerning WWII military history and collecting. Collectors started off as gatherer/hunters with bring backs by the Vets. No information available, only the knowledge that it was Axis in nature. The first transition to learning came with TME's dealing with Axis forces. In a matter of a few years, soft back references began to appear, largely dealing with identification and virtually no information. Hard bound books began to surface--some good, but limited, and others not so good. This was followed in the early 60's with a rash of beautifully produced books totally designed to deceive the enthusiast. This caused me to take up the task of trying my best to correct this situation. I found that some "absolutes" were not necessarily correct. My position quickly added yet another course to take--show me the rule, and I will show you the verifiable exception. What I love about the Forum is the wealth of very informed individuals in our midst whose mission is to protect themselves and others around them. Thank you Chris.

[pfrost]

Great find! Pretty nice wing, isn't it!

 

Congratulations

 

I would like to thank Patrick for his timely posting of this thread as it appeared just in time for me to consult on acquiring the same pattern T/O wing with confidence. Looking at it in detail it appears to come from the same die and has the short pins without the ‘tack head’ bases. This is also my first T/O wing. Thanks again.

 

[Kropotkin]

Thanks, it is! So happy to find one that I won’t have lingering doubts about.

[pfrost]

Well, there seems to be a "large", almost unprecedented increase in finding/posting of TO wings. I think prior to 2018, I can only recall about 2-3 TO wings being posted.

 

This week alone there have been a couple more posted, including this new one that I picked up.

 

It was an ebay find that had horrible pictures associated with it, but thanks to a tip from mghcal, I took a shot.

 

This is a snowflake backed wing marked "STERLING". It hard to get good pictures of the back, but the "snow flake-marks" on the back are very nice and crisp. This is very hard to accomplish when they cast a wing. The findings are identical to some of the other early AMCRAFT wings I have found.

[pfrost]

A touch more detail on the front.

 

and some of the back detail.

[pfrost]

And a final picture of the back that is a tad clearer.

 

The two TO wings in my collection.

[Jay V]

Patrick

Thanks for sharing,and those are some nice additions to any collection,and one missing from my own collection.,Congrats. Jay

[The Rooster]

Dang!!! An Amcraft too! Nice Patrick!!! No body should quibble about that one.

[The Rooster]

I am truely surprised that no one has picked up this one off that site I was talking to you about a while ago.

It seemed reasonable priced.

[Tony V]

Congratulations ! Just super wings. Thank you for the posting

 

Tony