WWII Commando Title opinions

[Phill Lockett]

Hi all

Can I have opinions on this commando title .

it is narrow lettering, does not exhibit letters ////// and is not paste back.

Is this a reproduction.

regards

Phill

[Mike B]

Phill
Have you tried shining a UV light on it? my guess is that the reverse will glow indicating synthetic material - ie modern manufacture. You note several issues I would not be comfortable with (eg form of letters). However 'Pasteback' is just one manufacture method of 'COMMANDO' titles there are several others. A UV light test may be worthwhile.
Mike

[Phill Lockett]

Thanks Mike

Its not in my possession , on a auction site for 2 quid in NZ.

I do have a UV light , my next question is if it doesn't glow would it stll be regarded as a legit WWII era piece bearing in mind the letters and non paste-back.

cheers

Phill

[Mike B]

Phill

Based on what you have said - only buy it if you want to experiment - I was brought up with the adage 'if in doubt leave it out', though I keep some items in a query box like a lot of people. I never mount a doubtful badge in my collection as it will cast doubt on other items. There are in deed quite a few legitimate variations of the 'COMMANDO' designation (of wartime manufacture) - black gauze/material backing is one - but often (not always) white exposed reverse to lettering can be problematic - if wrong, it will be this that glows.

If is good you have a UV lamp, but for others who have not it is worth recapping their use:

As for UV Glow etc (tested in the dark) - you can buy UV torches etc from the internet and they are well worth the investment as they can save you a great deal more than they cost. A lot of people on the forum include them in their kit along with jewellers loups etc. Mine is a torch that is used in forensic work to detect blood splatter etc, and came off the internet. Others have adapted nail varnish hardening UV apparatus - not sure how effective these are but they appear to work. You will see synthetic stuff (and dust) glow a brightish violet-white if synthetic.

Although some synthetic materials were around during WW2 - ie Rayon I believe - I understand relatively few were used in British insignia manufacture. Never say never though. The best way to use a UV torch is on the basis it will help diagnosis but further research and expertise will inform your opinion. The vast majority of times glow is a no no.

I have heard of glow on good badges caused by glue attachment on previous owner display frames etc and through washing - so be wary.
The UV light is a very useful piece of kit when used properly - bearing in mind the above observations.

When a synthetic item etc is detected letters often glow quite clearly - generally a lot more clearly on the reverse.

Mike

PS - Some people do a 'burns test' and swear by it - extract a thread - put a lighter to it - if it kinks / melts etc it is synthetic - if it burns it is cotton etc. Not a test I particularly like but others do so fair enough.

[Phill Lockett]

Thanks Mike

Great to remind the collectors on UV testing.

DuPont came out with some of the first polyester (synthetic) in the 30's. As you know, the most well known use of polyester during the war was for stockings and also use in the making of parachutes , so it had limited use.

The meaning of Rayon(natural) in US terms ,is used when describing natural thread for manufacturing US patches during WWII and into the mid 50's when polyester(synthetics) thread was slowly introduced.

With US patches I can tell the difference between synthetic (translucent look) and Rayon(dull twist look) and the construction of the patch , also the history (activation and deactivation dates etc.).

But with British FS and Cloth titles in particular "commando" titles, is a bit more difficult as I am new so have to start from scratch.

Did they stop making them at wars end? Was the title "commando" only generic to WWII era?

I do have a Royal Marines Commando title , paste back with white bobbin thread and tested with UV light and it doesn't spark up, so I guess its good to go.

There has also been suggestion that the chemicals in laundering have had an effect on patches making patches glow when removed from shirt, however this has had discussions for and against.

As you have so rightly pointed out it should be but one of the tools we collectors need to have.

The burn test (if your game), if melts into a ball its polyester , if burns and crumbles and leaves a slight ash its natural. I've only tried it once-new the result before I tested a single long thread!

Mike I agree "If in doubt leave it out", I don't have any repro alongside my legit patches-any I have are all in a box tucked away.

Below is my UV light-a nice smallish torch.

Phill

[Mike B]

Hello Phill and all

There is mention of generic 'Commando' titles in Brian Davies Book 'British Army Uniform and Insignia of WW2' amongst others. As you know the title is found in white on black embroidered and red on black embroidered and printed - chronology does not appear as clear as one might think. I guess that was part of the reason for your question. In simplistic terms with the disbandment of Commando Group 'Army' Commandos circa CoS decision of 27 Sept 1945 (C Messenger 'The Commandos 1940-1946' p.413) post war Commando insignia placed more emphasis on Royal Marine Commandos, their sources of supply, and nomenclature etc. (not forgetting those who subsequently went though the All Arms course) - Sorry not to be more specific - I need to do more research. Although it may be thought that this might mark the demise of generic 'Commando' title we know several post war designations do appear with the word 'Commando' - including bullion on black, blue on white etc (best stop there as the RN blue on white 'Commando' designation also excites comment regarding era worn) ... it does appear to be quite a complex subject.
Mike

Further thoughts welcome please, particularly any dative information regarding the generic 'COMMANDO' title

[Belly]

Interesting thread guys

A couple of thoughts:

Just for clarity, only white or very pale synthetic thread will ‘glow’ under UV.

In my opinion, the front of the badge looks okay for late war examples (as Mike rightly says when the army cdo dropped the numerals), and I have some attributed ones in my collection, see here:
http://www.britishbadgeforum.com/for...ictureid=84891

However, mine are just paste back and don’t have the black gauze/material backing like this one. This is also consistent with other late war variants of this type, I’ve only seen No 5 and No 10 with the same style lettering and paste back (known as the 45/46 pattern). That said there are plenty of WWII Cdo badges that do have that the same style black gauze backing, so potentially it could be some manufacturing variant.

At the end of the day if all you want is a nice example of an unnumbered Cdo title, there are plenty out there that can be picked up for £10-£20 that are proven authentic and are probably nicer! So in view is it worth the gamble? Probably not!

WWII Cdo is a fascinating area to collect, so welcome and enjoy the ride!

Cheers
Paul

[Mike B]

Nice album Paul and good illustrative grouping - looking forward to a catch up in due course. Good point re the white/pale synthetic glow. Regards Mike

[Mike B]

I have this example which has a bit of a nasty back. At first it might look like glue but in fact black gauze/material with residue on from previous mounting. It has a more standard thickness lettering. Also to illustrate Paul's point - the thin lettered No10 Commando - glue back.

[Phill Lockett]

Thanks Paul and Mike

Paul I don't know how I missed your album in galleries!! I shall be studying your patches closely.
Again its only the white thread that glows and or paper residue from the modern era.

I am starting to see a clearer picture of what you guys have shown and the slight variations , thin tight letters numbers , reverse spaghetti joined lettering (not the thicker Paki repro version) on either felt or wool base. Also 3 types of stabilizer , open weave gauze(3cdo), thicker gauze around the letters(6 cdo) and a rigid cloth((?) 5 Cdo).

Another question , I have heard of late war , which years are we talking about 44 or 45 , 45?

Would the different color's of commando units , ie 3 Cdo, white on black, be regarded as early war 1940-43 before the standard red on black/dark blue was introduced?

One more question both Paul and Mike's all look machine made, are there hand made examples in Paul's gallery.

I use the term machine made as opposed to the US who had a specific manufacturing process they used on a loom called schiffli(large commercial looms) and any other type of embroidered on goods was done on a "machine made" loom and hand made again different to schiffli and MM.

Again guys much appreciated about the information , if I do err please let me know.

Phill

[Mike B]

Phill
A quick reply - yes the various coloured unit titles predate standardisation to red on black circa 1942. It is a huge specialist area and as you suggest great care needs to be taken as some reproductions are very good. The early insignia is particularly desirable, rare and expensive. You have a good knowledge of manufacture so my guess is you know this already.
Mike

[Phill Lockett]

Thanks Mike

It always helps that you guys are leading us collectors in the right direction and reaffirming with excellent advise , that is something we collectors should always be guided by when making decisions.

There is no harm in repeating what you and Paul have stated, its very reassuring thank you.

cheers


Phill