Jump to content

aef1917

Members
  • Content Count

    1,798
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by aef1917

  1. It only covers fixed-loop helmets though.
  2. There were 1,535 made and all but 3 went immediately into storage.
  3. There are reproductions, but they're nowhere close to being potentially mistaken for an original.
  4. It's 20 layers of quilted silk to protect against bullet splash.
  5. It wouldn't be completely outlandish to have a piece of equipment from Italy. AEF Ordnance documents show that there were offers of supply of steel helmets (of experimental design) from Italian firms. I looked through my AEF helmet files, and found no mention of tank helmets, so it doesn't seem like they went through the normal Ordnance procurement process. The only leather tanker helmet developed stateside that I'm aware of never made it past the prototype stage.
  6. I think both are Navy shipboard helmets and I'd leave them as-is.
  7. 194,683 M3 helmets on contract W-20-018-ORD-2593 154,683 M5 helmets on contract W-20-018-ORD-10253
  8. The helmet looks OK to me. There isn't anything unusual about it being a Mk. I, since back then a helmet was a helmet and the US was still purchasing them from the British as late as 1919.
  9. Given where it was found, I would say 319th Infantry. Possibly MG Co, but thats usually a darker blue.
  10. That helmet doesn't need any cleaning or preserving. Looks good as-is.
  11. Drilled vs. punched doesn't really mean anything anymore, if it ever did. There's a seller on ebay (cart32tfs) who has been punching holes in nice m1917s and adding EGAs for years now.
  12. The USMC m1917 is one I am staying far, far away from.
  13. This one looks like a low-pressure liner made to look like a steel helmet.
  14. In the initial test of M1 liners (after the TS-3 Hawley/Tenite/Ethocel etc. experiments), there were 63 prototypes submitted by various manufacturers, and the Bureau of Standards marked and recorded each one. I'd expect to see such markings on a true prototype. I don't see the SC mark, and given the missing eyelet, I suppose it's possible that this is a "prototype" in that it could be a pre-production example, but who knows?
  15. Aside from the missing eyelet, what else is there that would make it a prototype, as opposed to a standard 1st pattern?
  16. I can count the number of people that I know of who are interested in m1917 maker codes on two fingers, so I don't think there would be much of a premium on it. It's an interesting helmet in that it looks like it was never finished. I've got a ZN55 that's the same way.
  17. A mark starting with Z would be a US m1917. ZN is highly unusual though. Can you post a pic of the mark?
  18. I'd never heard of the Italy patch before today. It would be great to find more info on it. I have a 332nd painted helmet and etched mess kit with the lion of St. Mark where the book is replaced with an Austrian helmet. It's an interesting variation that appears in one of the unit histories (but which one escapes me at the moment).
  19. Collar disc is 322nd Infantry Regiment and the patch is the 81st Division wildcat.
  20. Indeed. With maybe 1,000 produced and who knows how many "expended in test", these are super-rare.
  21. WWII Parish-Reading with the factory finish and straps.
  22. R.J. Stampings started making helmets in 1970, and produced them with the crimp-on chinstraps until 1975-76, at which point they switched to the clip-on straps.
  23. That looks like incompatible paints to me, like lacquer over enamel.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.