A Special M16 Helmet

b.loree

Administrator
Staff member
This helmet was brought back by CEF Pioneer Wiltsie. He picked it up at the Canal du Nord. I bought it from his son who told me the story. The holes are from a bullet not shrapnel. Camo is dark green, brown and red brown sepearated by the usual black lines. The liner is complete but I have inserted foam into the interior to prevent the fingers from flopping around.
M1712.jpg
[/img]
Bullet entry hole.
M17Wiltsie2.jpg

Exit hole..obviously, the back of the skull was blown off.
IMG_0045.jpg

Interior:
M177.jpg
 
Great helmet Brian,
But why do you call this an M17, it looks like an M16 to me.
Gus
 
OK must be M16. I read somewhere that they did not introduce these until 1917. Must be my mistake though as you are much more knowledgeable on these than I. Thanks Gus. I will change the title. B
 
Brian
This is a nice helmet and story . These helmets were intialy issued for the attacks on Verdun in 1916 and were standard by 1917 .
 
Hey Brian,
As far as I know, the M16 had the leather liner band, the M17 had a steel liner band,
Gus
 
Thanks for the clarification guys. I will keep that info in mind. Wiltsies' kids used to wear this out on Haloween as well. I got his pay book as part of the deal. I had to drive to Woodstock to talk to the son and make the deal but hell we all would drive hundreds of miles for some good militaria! Brian
 
I drove 4,000 miles to get a CEF cap, but there was some beer and a few laughs too.
Gus
 
hello,

were intialy issued for the attacks on Verdun in 1916

I fand no proof about it, and wrote something about it here :

http://lagrandeguerre.cultureforum.net/parcours-de-divisions-de-regiments-de-soldats-f3/le-fort-de-douaumont-ce-25-fevrier-1916-t27884.htm#195889

Mle 17 is not an official pattern.

There were :

M 16 1rst pattern (leather band)
M 16 2nd pattern (steel band)
M 18
M 18 Mit Ohrenauschnitt.
 
Excellent JR92! Many thanks for the information on the different models. The paint on this M16 has certainly seen a great deal of wear and tear. However, there can be no doubt that it was actually "There"during the conflict. Regards, Brian
 
JR92 said:
hello,

were intialy issued for the attacks on Verdun in 1916

I fand no proof about it, and wrote something about it here :

http://lagrandeguerre.cultureforum.net/parcours-de-divisions-de-regiments-de-soldats-f3/le-fort-de-douaumont-ce-25-fevrier-1916-t27884.htm#195889

Mle 17 is not an official pattern.

There were :

M 16 1rst pattern (leather band)
M 16 2nd pattern (steel band)
M 18
M 18 Mit Ohrenauschnitt.



The use of the first steel helmets during the opening stages of the Verdun Offensive is well documented. P.C. Ettighoffer mentions this in his book Verdun, Das grosse Gericht, stating that small numbers of assault units were issued the first Stahlhelme in time for the opening offensive. The best source on the subject I have found is Ludwig Baer's Vom Stahlhelm zum Gefechtshelm Volume I. It contains very valuable information on the subject (and many others) drawn from surviving contemporary sources.

30 000 steel helmets were ordered in November 1915 to be ready by the end of January 1916 specifically for Verdun. These were earmarked for selected units - mostly assault units and specialists such as Pioniere, Fammenwerfer units, etc., but elements of at least one Landwehr formation, the 6. Bay. Landwehr Div., was issued with 250 of these first helmets. Initial trials had already been successfully conducted under Hauptmann Rohr in December 1915, and Verdun was to be the final large scale testing ground prior to the helmet's approval for large scale production. Questionnaires were handed out to the soldiers issued with helmets, and the responses analyzed. This information can be found in Baer's book in much greater detail, and it is a very interesting read.

The Stahlhelme used at this early stage were the pre-production model known as the "square dip" to collectors. Full production of the M16 only began after April 1916. The square dip was manufactured exclusively by Eisenhuettewerke Thale. A thread showing an example of this helmet and a brief overview can be seen here:
http://www.pickelhaubes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4301

Regarding the designation M17, I think it's a very valid one as it effectively distinguishes the helmet as a 1916 model shell with a 1917 introduced steel liner band, which was in response to the ever increasing shortage of leather. It should be remembered that in Hauptmann Schwerdt's January 18 1916 patent, the liner band is described as being made of either leather or metal.
There are a few variants alone in the M16 liner which seem to follow a specific time-line, due either to improvements in design (the prototype liner pads in early square dips vs in the production model pads) or to combat the increasing leather shortage (thick liner bands in earlier M16s vs. the two-ply leather bands in later M16s).

The main helmet shell models as I see them are:
1. Pre-production M16 "square dip" (30 000 manufactured from the beginning of Dec. '15 - the end of Jan. '16.)
2. Production model 1916 (April '16 - August 1918)
3. & 4. M18 and M18 mit Ohrenausschnitt - aka 'M18 ear cut-out' (both introduced in August 1918.) The ear cut-out M18 was an experimental model in that it was designed to improve hearing and was issued with a felt textured paint to cut glare. Like the "square dip", only Thale was involved in the production of this model.

There's one other model on which I can find very little information, the so-called "full visor variant" mentioned in Baer's book. Outside of the one pictured in his book, I've never seen another example in any collection. These were apparently made in both M16 and M18 models.

~Hans
 
hello,

Sorry for my poor english, but I think I have to give some answers.
The use of the first steel helmets during the opening stages of the Verdun Offensive is well documented. P.C. Ettighoffer mentions this in his book Verdun, Das grosse Gericht, stating that small numbers of assault units were issued the first Stahlhelme in time for the opening offensive.
Verdun, Das grosse Gericht… This book is a novel
Reichsarchiv are not novels ! And we can read it : “"Gewehre und Maschinengewehre werden noch einmal gründlich gereinigt und eingeölt, das Sturmgepäck (Mantel, Zeltbahn, Kochgeschirr) wird gerollt, der Tornister selbst zur Aubewahrung abgegeben. Mit 150 Patronen, dazu zwei bis drei handgranaten, drei eiserne Portionen und zwei weiteren Verpflegungsportionen, mehreren leeren Sandsacken am Koppel, Gasmaske, Spaten oder Beipicke, Drahtschere, Schutzschildern, Helm ohne Spitze, so belastet keucht der Feldgraue Stürmer nach vorn zur letzten Ablösung vor dem Angriff".
This information can be found in Baer's book

And also in Larcade's book about Stosstruppen.

A thread showing an example of this helmet and a brief overview can be seen here:
http://www.pickelhaubes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4301
What you let see us here as a “square dip” is not one, but a little size helmet.
We wrote something about this here : http://lagrandeguerre.cultureforum.net/la-ou-on-papotte-f13/il-y-a-de-belles-pieces-sur-ebay-c-est-vrai-t28371.htm

http://cgi.ebay.fr/casque-allemand-ww1-complet-dorigine_W0QQitemZ300401934010QQcmdZViewItemQQptZFR_JG_Collections_Militaria_Uniformes?hash=item45f159beba

The “square dip” looks so, much squarer than your photo,
and the inside is very different :

Regarding the designation M17, I think it's a very valid one
I do not; M16 first and second pattern are according to me the right names. Please let me know, where you find it on an official text.

About M18 mit Ohrenauschnitt : There were only 100 000 of these introduced after August 1918 :
 
IR92,

Your quote from the Reichsarchiv shows what the vast majority of the soldiers were equipped with during the opening offensive, including the Helm ohne Spitze, but it certainly doesn't disprove the fact that steel helmets were issued to selected units just because these aren't mentioned. The steel helmet was not yet an officially approved piece of equipment at this time and it was issued in small numbers at Verdun for field trials. There's no doubt that this was the case. Baer found official records confirming this, and if you dig deep enough, I'm sure you'll find confirmation of this too.


The helmet shown in my other thread is unquestionably a square dip. I suggest you look at the pictures again. The helmet is a size 62, and I purposely compared it to a production model 1916 E.T. 62 to show the clear differences between both the shell and the liner. I'm very familiar with collectors sometimes confusing a small size helmet, usually a Gnuechtel, with a square dip, but this isn't the case here. The angle of transition from the visor to neckguard, which is perfectly square on mine, is not the only hallmark (design flaw) that distinguish these helmets from the production model, and I would hope that I succeeded in showing this in my photos.

The three finger liner pads you show are interesting, and would be the third variation I've seen in these early helmets. A picture of the reverse showing the cushion pouches would be welcome. The liner shown in the drawing accompanying Schwerd's liner patent also shows three finger liner pads, but I don't think they're described as such. The other liner variant I've seen, in a size 60 square dip, had a two piece front pad. The liner pads in mine are also clearly different from the standard production model, and are the most common variant that I've seen in other square dips. I think this indicates that various patterns were experimented with until one was selected that was considered ideal. The square dip was a Versuchshelm - there isn't just one right or wrong type liner.

M17: Like I said, it's a collector term indicating that the model 1916 shell is furbished with a model 1917 liner. It is a term that is logical and works nicely. I'm quite fond of it and will continue using it. I assume you have an official source designating these the 'first and second pattern M16 helmet'?

Thanks for the article on the M18/M18mOA. It can be found in Baer's book. Point #3 is interesting in that it states that reports on this experimental helmet's effectiveness should be submitted by December 1st 1918.
~Hans
 
hello Hans

Thanks for your interessant aud argued answers.

The steel helmet was not yet an officially approved piece of equipment

May be I read your post too quickly, and here, sure, we are OK. I often re-act when I read the legend according to "garde troops wore the first Stahlhelm during thae attack on verdun".

A picture of the reverse showing the cushion pouches would be welcome.
I think you can find it under the E Bay link.

Thanks for the article on the M18/M18mOA. It can be found in Baer's book.
My source was "Deutsche Waffen und Munitions Journal", and, in the "Regimentsgeschichte" of JR 109, is explained, why these "Halbmondformig" holes were practised.

I assume you have an official source designating these the 'first and second pattern M16 helmet'?
Sure not, like I think there is no one designating M17 helmets, that is, as you write 'a collector's term".

And I have a question :
100 000 M18 with Ohrenauschnitt were produced, with the "Wollstaub" paint. How could we explain, to see some of these helmets with the "camo" paint ? Some of these seem to be originals, what I can't believe. :?: :?: :?:
 
JR92 said:
And I have a question :
100 000 M18 with Ohrenauschnitt were produced, with the "Wollstaub" paint. How could we explain, to see some of these helmets with the "camo" paint ? Some of these seem to be originals, what I can't believe. :?: :?: :?:

Since there never seems to have been a summation of the pros and cons of the M18mOA or the Wollstaub textured paint, we can only guess at the results of the field tests.

I've seen camo painted mOA helmets as well as (WW1 period) examples that have been painted with the regular factory applied field gray with no trace of Wollstaub in the paint. It's quite possible that this textured paint, for whatever reason, failed to be effective in the field trials. The fact that none of the regular M18s seem to have had the Wollstaub paint applied could be a clue to it having not performed to expectations. I don't know. It would be interesting to know if any regular M18s with this paint have surfaced.

The Kriegsministerium's article on the new M18 helmets does state that the (July 1918) camo regulations would still stand and should be continued. There are many factors to explain why an M18 ear cut-out would have had 3 tone camo applied, and I have no problems with seeing this camo on these helmets.
~Hans
 
Hello,

It would be interesting to know if any regular M18s with this paint have surfaced.

Sure. I know some of these, and one found in an attic in the Ardennes (France) where I lived, that was in good condition, with liner made of white leather.

I think M 18 with painted with the regular factory applied field gray with no trace of Wollstaub are not WW1, but Reichswehr.

And how I read this :






"Versuchshelme" are M18 mit Ohrenauschnitt
"Anstrich der Stahhelme werden hierdurch..." : these stahlhelme are the M 18 "not special".



 
Back
Top