Printed Brit Para Wings

[JerryBB]

Originally Posted by tcrown

No Jerry, I'm just curious! As already stated, J. Bouchery in his "D-Day Paratroopers" claims that Printed Para Wings were issued. I haven't seen any other publication confirming it.
This forum is a great place for debating and exchanging ideas!
Cheers

My mistake, the internet is a strange place sometimes.

Interesting about Bouchery's book, not one I have. did he share any period images?

This forum can be great if those n the know are willing to get involved in the discussion....sometimes posts just fall flat.

[grey_green_acorn]

D Day Paratroopers by Jean Bouchery states on page 40:

"There was also a rarely seen printed version of the wings (not shown here.)"

Tim

[grey_green_acorn]

It seems that the Broad Oak Works Accrington aka 'Calico Printers' intended to produce a printed parachute wing (although a contract may not have been placed!).
See https://www.britishbadgeforum.com/fo...ght=accrington
scroll down to the 7th illustration.

Tim

[rhodesianmilitaria]

Originally Posted by grey_green_acorn

It seems that the Broad Oak Works Accrington aka 'Calico Printers' intended to produce a printed parachute wing (although a contract may not have been placed!).
See https://www.britishbadgeforum.com/fo...ght=accrington
scroll down to the 7th illustration.

Tim

May have been approved but not worn. May have been worn by a few as stated by Bouchery which begs the question as to how many were made and why did only a few get to wear them?
Where did Bouchery get his evidence that some were worn?

[tcrown]

Originally Posted by Luc

I seem to remember they were shown in Militaria Magazine?

Thanks Luc. Can anyone confirm? I recall a special edition of Militaria on Arnhem, was it in this one?

Bill posted a general warning on Bouchery's work related to Canadian patches here https://www.britishbadgeforum.com/fo...light=bouchery
To me, Bouchery is one of the pundits on British militaria and I don't have any reason to consider his book on Para stuff unreliable. Of course, an error can't be entirely dismissed on this particular case. I'll try to contact his son who owns a shop in Paris and let you guys know.
Cheers
Pierre

[Hoot]

Originally Posted by silverwash

Order, order ! Blame it on Brexit.

So that's what a tookus is, well it has to be said, there's no bigger tookus than that one, that's for certain!!!.

[Frank Kelley]

I too, would be interested to know the answers to those questions!

Originally Posted by rhodesianmilitaria

May have been approved but not worn. May have been worn by a few as stated by Bouchery which begs the question as to how many were made and why did only a few get to wear them?
Where did Bouchery get his evidence that some were worn?

[rhodesianmilitaria]

I don't want to deviate from this thread because I find it very interesting. In reference to Bouchery's book I'll say this. I have never seen a book on Rhodesian militaria, badges or insignia that was entirely correct. They all had mistakes including Radford which had some corkers. Apart from the mistakes there was significant information not included and I can only assume that was because they didn't know.
One example is that much is not known about Rhodesia's para wings and two titbits of info (rather significant) is probably known to just four of us.
Therefore imo I wouldn't discount Bouchery's book until the info is corroborated.

[silverwash]

in view of the fact that there were printed examples of trade patches, rank chevrons etc, why would a printed wing not exist ? going off tangent, in an old "Eagle" magazine reference is made of two designs for the Army Flying Badge which were produced and submitted for approval by General Browning, the known version chosen, albeit in an embroidered form.

[Postwarden]

As a latecomer to this thread may I add my twopennyworth.

From early 1942 as an economy measure - introduced by the Ministry of Supply who placed all official orders for these badges - printed versions of cloth badges began to replace the embroidered versions. There are pattern cards of printed badges dated February 1942 and they are first referred to in print in the June 1942 ACI introducing the Badge, Army Fire Service which is stated to be printed.

My forthcoming book illustrates 19 printed trade and skill at arms badges including the parachute wing. It also shows a prototype SAS printed wing which was not adopted as it was apparently cheaper to produce it as an embroidered version.

The badge shown in the Broad Oak catalogue - a selection of the badges produced by the Calico Printers Association, the only company that made printed badges - is interesting for two reasons. It lacks the stiffening applied to the badges issued and it is rectangular. It is worth noting that not until January 1945 did the Ordnance Depot issuing the parachute badge suggest that cloth could be save by supplying the Badge, Arm, Parachutist cut to shape instead of bring rectangular which clearly proves the issue badge was rectangular and must therefore have been trimmed to shape locally - which explains the numerous versions that exist.

There is another explanation for the lack of printed badges and the many trimmed parachute badges. During the war there sprang up an extensive network of shops supplying tailoring services and selling privately-made badges. If you were issued a printed badge you either went to local shop, bought one and had it sewn on or more likely were told by your Sgt Major to do so. There are numerous anecdotes about soldiers being told to throw the issue item away and get a "proper" badge. As a result there are very few surviving uniforms with printed trade etc badges on them although formation signs and printed titles are quite common, the titles regularly replaced by embroidered ones of the type known as paste or starch back.

Comments welcome.

Jon

[Mike B]

Jon
Absolutely fascinating - a real insight into the quality of your research, and the unmissable information to be published in your forthcoming volumes.
Mike

[tcrown]

Originally Posted by Postwarden

The badge shown in the Broad Oak catalogue - a selection of the badges produced by the Calico Printers Association, the only company that made printed badges - is interesting for two reasons. It lacks the stiffening applied to the badges issued and it is rectangular.

Thanks Jon for your contribution.
I agree with you that if a printed para badge was ever issued it would likely have been rectangular and trimmed like the other early cloth version of the badge.
Could it be possible that the Broad Oak catalogue was created before the Army Council started to regulate the fabrication of para patches in printed form (around late summer 1942 if I'm not mistaken)?
I'm intrigued about the two samples of the qualification badge for non-regular parachute trained personnel. They are very different from the issued printed version (see in the photo below for a comparison). This version was short lived as a pattern card with a new design was issued mid April 1942 (source Olivier Lock).
The catalogue could have been a selection of issued insignias as well as projects that were never approved.

[Force136]

There were investigations into printed parachute badges. There was even a suggestion to make a printed version of the Canadian badge. However it was realized almost instantly that no one wanted to wear such a badge. It was bad enough the Americans had a sterling silver badge worn on the chest. I am certain that experiments must have been carried out. However the badge that began this thread is of a post 1940's style of British Army Parachute Badge and therefore could have nothing to do with WWII. As for printed SAS Badges. The SAS badge was NOT an official badge and therefore was not part of the supply system until after the war. During WWII the only Government sanctioned badge was the Army Parachute Badge. This was for ALL involved with parachuting from Army, SOE to SAS. If they wore something else, it was not government sanctioned. I have a ton of documents from Kew on all of this but I know that if a printed badge was experimented with during the war, it would have been designed to resemble the wartime sealed sample badge. As I have stated on here before the actual design of the wartime badge was a bungled job as it took some time to figure out which branch of the service would control it's design. That is why the unofficial original examples of the badge were embroidered to the backing colour used by the RAF. These wings are seen being worn FIRST at Ringway on a black rectangular background. They were quickly replaced by the same shape of badge on khaki when the presenting of the badge became a strictly Army job and the RAF Para instructors at Ringway adopted the circular patch.

Ken

Originally Posted by Postwarden

As a latecomer to this thread may I add my twopennyworth.

From early 1942 as an economy measure - introduced by the Ministry of Supply who placed all official orders for these badges - printed versions of cloth badges began to replace the embroidered versions. There are pattern cards of printed badges dated February 1942 and they are first referred to in print in the June 1942 ACI introducing the Badge, Army Fire Service which is stated to be printed.

My forthcoming book illustrates 19 printed trade and skill at arms badges including the parachute wing. It also shows a prototype SAS printed wing which was not adopted as it was apparently cheaper to produce it as an embroidered version.

The badge shown in the Broad Oak catalogue - a selection of the badges produced by the Calico Printers Association, the only company that made printed badges - is interesting for two reasons. It lacks the stiffening applied to the badges issued and it is rectangular. It is worth noting that not until January 1945 did the Ordnance Depot issuing the parachute badge suggest that cloth could be save by supplying the Badge, Arm, Parachutist cut to shape instead of bring rectangular which clearly proves the issue badge was rectangular and must therefore have been trimmed to shape locally - which explains the numerous versions that exist.

There is another explanation for the lack of printed badges and the many trimmed parachute badges. During the war there sprang up an extensive network of shops supplying tailoring services and selling privately-made badges. If you were issued a printed badge you either went to local shop, bought one and had it sewn on or more likely were told by your Sgt Major to do so. There are numerous anecdotes about soldiers being told to throw the issue item away and get a "proper" badge. As a result there are very few surviving uniforms with printed trade etc badges on them although formation signs and printed titles are quite common, the titles regularly replaced by embroidered ones of the type known as paste or starch back.

Comments welcome.

Jon

[tcrown]

Originally Posted by Force136

"I am certain that experiments must have been carried out. However the badge that began this thread is of a post 1940's style of British Army Parachute Badge and therefore could have nothing to do with WWII. "

Thanks Ken for your input.
I believe you're right about the printed pattern what was presented on this thread: It can't be WW2. I've made a double photo exposure of both a WW2 standard badge (from a WW2 veteran) with this printed pattern (1st photo): it clearly is not a match. However, a similar comparison with a post war badge (60's) is almost verbatim (2nd photo).
In conclusion, the printed pattern discussed on this thread can't be WW2 and is probably a fake as I don't think printed badge were ever considered after the war.

[akiko]

Probably a silly question but does anyone have or has anyone seen a wartime sealed sample badge?

Fascinating thread by the way.