Bullion balloon wing- reproduction

[Tonomachi]

I saw this for sale at the flea market today. I didn't buy it because it was pretty pricey but the seller let me photograph it. I know nothing about these types of wings but the amount of age to the bullion doesn't seem to match the age of the base material which seems mint. I've heard of people sprinkling sulfur on bullion and heating in the microwave oven to get this look. Any thoughts?

[Tonomachi]

Back

[Tonomachi]

More photos

[Tonomachi]

Last photos

[KASTAUFFER]

It looks artificially aged to me, but I am no expert.

 

Kurt

[gwb123]

Same comment as Kurt. The cloth looks bleached out, and the bullion portion is a really odd looking color. Also note that as beat up as this item looks there is no sign that it has ever been sewn onto a uniform.

[Gary Cain]

Just like on standard bullion pilots wings the letters should have better form. I have seen legitimate bullion wings with oxidation like this that were stored very poorly so it is not impossible to see this. However, when the oxidation was like this the ground material was likewise stained. This is not. So this is a fake IMO.

[CliffP]

:think:

 

Someone may have gone to a lot of trouble in finding a third-world laborer to fashion that badge but it's hard to duplicate the really fine materials that were available or the embroidering skills and deft fingers that many women possessed just within the United States and Europe during the first half of the 20th Century. Therefore, in addition to the comments posted by Kirk, Gil and Gary, another sure give-away that balloon pilot badge is a fake would be the crudely applied letters "US" on the shield. It's safe to say that in those by-gone days of old (at least up to 1950 or a bit beyond) such sloppy workmanship as found on that badge would have never been tolerated by any manufacturer.

 

Cliff

 

THIS WOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPENED: :pinch:

[pfrost]

Hello,

 

In many ways, this wing is a classic example of almost ALL the danger signs in a bullion wing.

 

First, it looks like it is modeled after a WWII bullion wing-style. Not the more typically (if any WWI aeronaut wing is typical) seen wing. This is a wing that I recently picked up and it compares well to others I have seen. I think the side by side comparison of both manufacturing techniques and patina give you a good example of the differences between a "good" and "questionable" wing.

 

Second, The bullion work on the wing from my collection is rather "delicate" compared to the other wing. The US seems to be more integral to the overall design of the wing compared to the other wing. The patina has a rich bronze color--which is frequently associated with cigaret or cigar smoke according to a vastly more advanced collector.

 

Third, the work on the balloon and gondola is more creative and artistic. Notice that the other wing was just made by horizontal strips of bullion. No effort was made to delineate the parts of the balloon.

[pfrost]

Fourth, the most obvious problem with the wing is the artificial aging of the bullion and fabric. I have included a comparison of a wing that came off a bit of old uniform. You can see from the front that the fabric of the wing has bleached out to a purple-grey color. This is typically what you would see from sun bleaching. In the case of this wing, it was mounted on a bit of the original uniform and then framed, so it was exposed to the light for many years.

 

When I removed the wing from its bit of uniform, you can see that the back of the wing fabric retained its original black/dark blue color. This was because the back of the wing was protected.

 

In the fake, the wing is dipped in some sort of bleach, as as such BOTH sides of the wing gets wet. Simply put, you can not only bleach on side of a bit of fabric using a liquid. The ONLY way you can get a result like this is by natural aging of the wings.

 

The fake is clearly an attempt to artificially age the wing with a bleach solution. I see the same thing being mentioned about artificially aged patches.

 

Patrick

[pfrost]

Next, the aging of the bullion is typically not uniform over the surface of the wing. A couple of other collectors I know call this the "rainbow" effect. If you look at this wing, you can see that the edges of the feathers are darker than the middle of the wing. This is due to the physical properties of oxidation and tarnish of the metal. The more surface area exposed to air, the faster the wings will tarnish. Eventually, the whole wing may become tarnished, but in almost all cases, the wings will tarnish along a gradient, first at the tips and then move into the center giving the wing a "rainbow" look.

[pfrost]

Sometimes different types or styles of bullion thread in the same wing will tarnish at different rates. This is what happened with this French made wing. Some of the thread darkened much greater than the neighboring threads. IN person, this wing is not so "gold" as the scan makes it seem.

[pfrost]

Finally, here is a wing that has what I think is a "storage-related" tarnish effect. Not so clear but if you look at the right side of this wing, it is much darker than the center and left side. I believe that this wing was stored on a uniform, such that part of the wing (the right side) was exposed to the air, while the rest of the wing may have been under the lapel or another bit of cloth, so that it wasn't so exposed to the air. It is more clear in person that part of the wing has a great deal of tarnish, the other side doesn't. Again, this type of pattern is IMHO, almost impossible to replicate artificially.

 

I have found that when collecting bullion, you have to decide if YOU like the bullion and go from there. With enough effort, you can always find something not to like about a bullion wing. Some are easier to tell than others. In this case, the example shown is pretty ugly and most likely the faker relies exclusively on the buyer being naive and having never seen a good example of a bullion wing.

 

On the other hand, they seem to have made an almost perfect teaching tool with this horrid example of what to look for in determining fake from legit wing.

 

P

[pfrost]

Here is another example of this bullion wing on eBay right now. Not as chemically aged as the first one at the top of the thread, but still pretty bad.

 

Note the splotchy patina on the wings, with some areas and even some individual threads being more aged than the adjacent areas.

[tredhed2]

First thing I need to say is that I am not a wing expert. Period. However, one of the signatures of a fake WW I SSI is the similar wool rectangular background on the wing that began this thread. In addition to the color, and the nap, easily visible in the pic, what's not visible is the deep thickness of the wool material. You could insulate a house with enough of it (OK, maybe in L.A.)

 

It is safe to say that if you ever see any kind of WW I era insignia, and it has this type of wool background to which the insignia is applied, it is a fake/repro, made to fool collectors.

[pfrost]

First thing I need to say is that I am not a wing expert. Period. However, one of the signatures of a fake WW I SSI is the similar wool rectangular background on the wing that began this thread. In addition to the color, and the nap, easily visible in the pic, what's not visible is the deep thickness of the wool material. You could insulate a house with enough of it (OK, maybe in L.A.)

 

It is safe to say that if you ever see any kind of WW I era insignia, and it has this type of wool background to which the insignia is applied, it is a fake/repro, made to fool collectors.

 

That is a good point. In fact, I think a lot of these wool background come from old cut up wool army or navy blankets. They go buy a blanket for 5-10$ at the flea market and cut them down for use in these type of patches and insignia.

 

Not sure if this is true, but someone once told me about a fake squadron patch where you could still see a bit of the "US ARMY" lettering from the blanket that was used.

 

In fact, that may explain why they had to bleach down this wing, to get rid of the OD color from the blanket. I wonder if the "patch guys" can either refute or corroborate this hypothesis--that some of these fake items are made with old blankets as the backing material?

 

Kind of looks like right thickness, texture and color.... :think:

 

Patrick

[tredhed2]

I honestly can't tell you about bleaching but the tan color of the background in the earlier posts vs. the OD of any army WW I - WW II blanket is very different.

 

I have heard that blankets have been used, but am not familiar with pre-WW I or WW I blankets, nor had any contact with these patch fakers ("hey, how'd you do that?"). I had made several comparisons of the backgrounds of WW I SSI in determining whether an SSI was real, or not.

 

As with many computer images, the color of the background material in posts #1-4, plus #8, looks different than that posted in #16. That being said, the color, thickness, and nap in background of the earlier posts in this thread is not a good sign and is more closely representative of a bad WW I insignia.