WW2 R.E. steel helmet divisional sign

[High Wood]

Could anyone please enlighten me as to the significance of the blue, yellow, blue triangular flash on this R.E. steel helmet?

Thank you.

[Mike Jackson]

This is the formation sign of the very short lived British 66 (Lancs and Border) Division. This was raised as the duplicate of 42 (East Lance) Division in 1939 and was disbanded in June 1940. The formation did not serve outside UK. The sign was not worn on uniform. This must be a very rare helmet - do you own it? Mike

[leigh kitchen]

The 66th Division used the same sign during WWI.
The badge on the front of the helmet is a King Geo V version of the RE's badge - is it definitely a WWIi rather than WWI helmet?

[High Wood]

Originally Posted by Mike Jackson

This is the formation sign of the very short lived British 66 (Lancs and Border) Division. This was raised as the duplicate of 42 (East Lance) Division in 1939 and was disbanded in June 1940. The formation did not serve outside UK. The sign was not worn on uniform. This must be a very rare helmet - do you own it? Mike

Thank you, somewhere I have a 66th Division Great War Christmas card with the same formation sign on it; it had completely slipped my mind. The helmet belongs to a friend of mine who asked me to identify the F.S.

Simon

[High Wood]

Originally Posted by leigh kitchen

The 66th Division used the same sign during WWI.
The badge on the front of the helmet is a King Geo V version of the RE's badge - is it definitely a WWIi rather than WWI helmet?

Yes, despite the KGV cipher on the R.E. badge it is a WW2 helmet as it appears to be stamped 1940. I was told that there may be a Home Guard connection.

[magpie]

It looks more ww1 to me with that chin strap and what seems to be a mild steel rim rather than stainless steel, perhaps someone with more knowledge on helmets will tell you.

[leigh kitchen]

Does it have any small perforations stamped through the metal of the rim on either side? (Edit - of course it hasn't, they'd show in the photo).
I've forgotten the designations of the helmets with varying numbers of perforations, but they were of inferior quality and used on the Home Front.
I have one with two or three on each side and a Royal Fusiliers transfer badge on the front, which I take to be a Home Guard helmet.
I don't read the "1940" as such (0140?). I'm not sure what the stamping is. The liner and as already stated the chinstrap aren't right for a WWII helmet.
A WWI private purchase (if only the liner) officers helmet?

[High Wood]

Originally Posted by leigh kitchen

Does it have any small perforations stamped through the metal of the rim on either side? (Edit - of course it hasn't, they'd show in the photo).
I've forgotten the designations of the helmets with varying numbers of perforations, but they were of inferior quality and used on the Home Front.
I have one with two or three on each side and a Royal Fusiliers transfer badge on the front, which I take to be a Home Guard helmet.
I don't read the "1940" as such (0140?). I'm not sure what the stamping is. The liner and as already stated the chinstrap aren't right for a WWII helmet.
A WWI private purchase (if only the liner) officers helmet?

Yes, it turns out that it is a Great War helmet, I have only seen photographs not the actual helmet. Thank you to every one who has contributed.

Here is my mate's response:

Hi Simon,
just got online now, many thanks for the info, brilliant results.
The pot is definitely WW1 and the number/code stamp is the manufacturers code, it looks like 40 but possibly letter O for rare maker.
I was not expecting to find any info on flashes, over the moon, thanks again. D.

[High Wood]

The 1918 66th Division Christmas card.