Airborne insignia

[stef]

Hi,

I have a bad feeling about these, can anyone confirm?

Thanks

[Mike B]

Hi Stef
Sorry no one has responded to your questions yet - no doubt they will soon.
I have to agree that most of the items look doubtful. I reserve judgement on the Glider Pilot Titles although I am not a fan of the reverse. Have you put them under UV light? - I wondered if the reverse would glow even on these. The reverse of Glider Pilot and Parachute Regiment look similar - I can not say I like either really but await further opinions.
All the best
Mike

[Unknownsoldier]

I honestly don't like any of them and would put them to one side if I had them. The reverses on 99% say not right immediately.

Mike, the Black light is a dubious test at best, and sadly inconclusive on most stuff; down to environmental factors, and materials; fluorescing materials/dyes were being used as far back as the 1700s, not exclusively but it shouldn't be used to 100% discount an item, (however on these I guarantee it would be like an acid house party with it's level of glow). I only know about this from the arguments going on on the TR groups.....

T

[stef]

Thank you both for your opinions

[Mike B]

T
I agree re the UV test only being indicative not definitive. It also fails where items have been washed in certain cleaning agents. I believe it is also limited in terms of use on American manufactured items. It is really one of only a 'battery' of tests, but one that, with caution as you suggest, can help to inform opinion. I would agree that research and consultation (such as through this forum) helps shape our knowledge; and that you are right to emphasise potential weaknesses of UV test.
M

[Phill Lockett]

I would like to reiterate what Mike B has pointed out , that UV is one of many tests that the modern day collector should use. However the two most important point Mike has raised is all platforms of research, forums, websites, my favorite are books from noted collector's (yes there are some contentious issues) but most importantly make contact with individuals,as I have done with Mike B to fill me in on specific information.

There are many individuals on here whose opinion I value , I may not know them personally however the detailed answers based on 20-40+ years of research helps a new person like myself try to understand British WWII era manufacturing and construction of cloth insignia.

As for UV testing , one has to know what your looking at first ie the cloth insignia's history, specific construction traits, embroidery machinery used,yarn/thread and relevant history of the unit concerned before , during and post period etc. I base my research on all the above on collecting US patches from WWI-1960's, also great to have mentors(40-60 years exp).

Once you get all of that down, I still use UV to confirm specific patches that are c1944-55 period before polyester replaced rayon thread but thats a whole new subject.

Phill

[Mike B]

It is always a pleasure to share views such as these. We have some great specialists on the Forum. Over the years collectors have very wisely learned to be forensic, as Phill says, using as many sources and tests we can to inform our decisions.
All the best
Mike