fzs FG42 question
- Thread starter mrfarb
- Start date
Guillaume d'Orange
Senior Member
If you can't find your answer in the USA, 4 of them are at the Musée de l'Armée in Paris:
Pics of FG42s in Paris
The "Musée de l'Armée" reopened and I realized there are 4 FG42s on display there (one is in the "Musée de l'Ordre de la Libération"). I've never seen an FG42 before and was stunned to see how compact this thing is (some 16cm shorter than a 98k) ! Unsurprisingly, the 4 of them were made by...
www.k98kforum.com
Guillaume d'Orange
Senior Member
I would be happy to help. Do you know where to look for ? On the FG42 fzs 239, there is no luftwaffe stamp (at least on top of the receiver).
I have a copy of « death from above » and the waffen revue issues about the FG42 and there is no mention of luftwaffe acceptance. It does not prove anything, but perhaps there was no acceptance team at Krieghoff in the second half of 1943 (one of Ryan’s assumptions, right ?)
BAL acceptance is just above the SN. Small parts on the Type 1s probably have some acceptance also. The Type 2s don't seem to have any, probably because of the shakeup of the Ingenieurkorps in December 1944. BAL was always there, there just might have been a change in BAL office (BAL2 to BAL22) in Suhl in late 1942. Maybe, maybe not.
Attachments
Guillaume d'Orange
Senior Member
Thanks Ryan, this side of the guns was not visible. Fzs 239 belongs to the Musée de l’ordre de la libération, fzs 920 to the Musée de l’armée. I will try to contact someone at both institutions and ask for pics (or that they show me the guns). This is August and almost everyone is on holidays (this is France). So an answer may not come until September. I hope one of the two institutions will agree to the request. I will keep you posted.
Guillaume d'Orange
Senior Member
I just had a look at "Death from above":
Guillaume d'Orange
Senior Member
Nobody answering the phone. I wrote an e-mail to the curators of the two museums, one guy is back on the 25th. I forgot there are 2 Type E at Musée de l'Armée. If we are lucky, we will get 3 pics.
Guillaume d'Orange
Senior Member
Hi gents, I got the pics. The plot thickens and I will let you react first.
You will note that on the pic of #190 from James Julia (with BAL22), there's no third stamp with the eagle/F.
Pic of #239 is courtesy of Musée de l'Ordre de la Libération, Paris.
Pics of #640 and #920 are courtesy of Musée de l'Armée, Paris.
Unfortunately stamps of #920 have been scratched or poorly applied (or both).
I also got pics of the type G #2351 and they may have an interest in understanding how Krieghoff worked.
You will note that on the pic of #190 from James Julia (with BAL22), there's no third stamp with the eagle/F.
Pic of #239 is courtesy of Musée de l'Ordre de la Libération, Paris.
Pics of #640 and #920 are courtesy of Musée de l'Armée, Paris.
Unfortunately stamps of #920 have been scratched or poorly applied (or both).
I also got pics of the type G #2351 and they may have an interest in understanding how Krieghoff worked.
Last edited:
Yes, not what I expected either. I was hoping this would be the nail in the coffin for late HK Lugers, but it certainly looks like BAL2. I am very surprised to see an example with an early BAL stamp too. Thanks so much for the pics.
The 'Eagle F' is the Fehlerstempel. It indicates that either the receiver failed initial acceptance and had to be sent back for correction, or it was presented to the BAL with minor deficiencies which were accepted by the BAL as unimportant (similar to the Crown/RC on WWI Gew98s and Lugers). The L.Dv does not elaborate on this stamp, unfortunately, so it could be either.
The Type 2 will probably lack any BAL acceptance instead having two Weimar style fireproofs on the receiver. I think this may have been because most of the upper echelons of the Ingenieurkorps were apparently sacked in December 1944. There probably wasn't time to make a new acceptance stamp for 1945 production so they just used the FP stamps in it's place.
Many of the Type 2s are U stamped also, and at some point I need to look at SNs that have this stamp. If they are all late it may be rejected receivers that were simply thrown in around April or May because it didn't matter anymore.
Should note that the FG42 book shows one gcy (L.O. Dietrich) FG42 that does appear to have BAL acceptance on top. Can't read it of course, but maybe BAL11 continued there after the December purge.
SN190 remains an interesting mystery. Maybe one day we can find better pics.
The 'Eagle F' is the Fehlerstempel. It indicates that either the receiver failed initial acceptance and had to be sent back for correction, or it was presented to the BAL with minor deficiencies which were accepted by the BAL as unimportant (similar to the Crown/RC on WWI Gew98s and Lugers). The L.Dv does not elaborate on this stamp, unfortunately, so it could be either.
The Type 2 will probably lack any BAL acceptance instead having two Weimar style fireproofs on the receiver. I think this may have been because most of the upper echelons of the Ingenieurkorps were apparently sacked in December 1944. There probably wasn't time to make a new acceptance stamp for 1945 production so they just used the FP stamps in it's place.
Many of the Type 2s are U stamped also, and at some point I need to look at SNs that have this stamp. If they are all late it may be rejected receivers that were simply thrown in around April or May because it didn't matter anymore.
Should note that the FG42 book shows one gcy (L.O. Dietrich) FG42 that does appear to have BAL acceptance on top. Can't read it of course, but maybe BAL11 continued there after the December purge.
SN190 remains an interesting mystery. Maybe one day we can find better pics.
Guillaume d'Orange
Senior Member
Ryan, I've posted pics of the Type 2/Type G #2351 here :
Pics of FG42s in Paris
The "Musée de l'Armée" reopened and I realized there are 4 FG42s on display there (one is in the "Musée de l'Ordre de la Libération"). I've never seen an FG42 before and was stunned to see how compact this thing is (some 16cm shorter than a 98k) ! Unsurprisingly, the 4 of them were made by...
www.k98kforum.com
What do you mean by "U stamped" ?
Do you lend some credibility to what Dugelby and Stevens wrote about production in Liège ?
The problem is that what we observe on FG42s contradicts the observations on the flare pistols (on the one hand, a move from BAL22 to BAL2 on FG42s, on the other hand, BAL22 on flare pistols)
A pure speculation : what about 2 factories owned by Krieghoff with 2 different acceptance teams but using the same "fzs" code ?
If so, which BAL corresponds to which plant ?
Last edited:
I'll attach some examples (all very late) with the U, likely the Unbrauchbarkeitstempel. IMO, these are rejects that were simply thrown in at the very end. But I have not looked at enough to say this for sure.Ryan, I've posted pics of the Type 2/Type G #2351 here :
Pics of FG42s in Paris
The "Musée de l'Armée" reopened and I realized there are 4 FG42s on display there (one is in the "Musée de l'Ordre de la Libération"). I've never seen an FG42 before and was stunned to see how compact this thing is (some 16cm shorter than a 98k) ! Unsurprisingly, the 4 of them were made by...www.k98kforum.com
What do you mean by "U stamped" ?
Do you lend some credibility to what Dugelby and Stevens wrote about production in Liège ?
The problem is that what we observe on FG42s contradicts the observations on the flare pistols (on the one hand, a move from BAL22 to BAL2 on FG42s, on the other hand, BAL22 on flare pistols)
A pure speculation : what about 2 factories owned by Krieghoff with 2 different acceptance teams but using the same "fzs" code ?
If so, which BAL corresponds to which plant ?
If BAL2 remained in Suhl through at least 1944, then BAL22 would have to be working elsewhere. HK apparently did control the old Pieper factory in Belgium. Perhaps items produced there were BAL22 inspected? Or maybe the Kufstein, Austria factory? I honestly don't know. I still think it's very weird this stuff is fzs marked if it was made in Belgium or Austria.
Would be interesting to know if there were other equipment from another manufacturer also accepted by BAL22.
Attachments
Guillaume d'Orange
Senior Member
Understood, those "U" stamps appear on "Kriegsmodell" copies of the FG42 if I can put it this way. I notice nobody bothered to apply any stamp (even firing proof) where they appear on serial number #2351.
Still mere speculation, I would rather see Krieghoff trying to set up a production line in Liège (with BAL22) and then bringing it back to Germany (with BAL2) then the reverse.
I agree with you that finding other items with BAL22 (potentially from an other manufacturer) or getting a confirmation that the first 200 FG42s got a BAL22 will help connect the dots.
Coming back to the Lugers (I know little about them), Germans made poor choices but continuing the assembly or manufacture of P08s in 44-45 with acceptance stamps sounds ridiculous. Knowing more about Krieghoff will help solve the riddle.
Guillaume d'Orange
Senior Member
Taking a few steps back, the other speculation is likely:
Krieghoff is busy with its current production, makes 200 copies with BAL22 stamps and decide to send to Liège the equipment they may have themselves received from Rheinmetall. However the experience is a disaster (that would explain the many Fehlerstempel next to the BAL2 and the slow rate of production).
For Type 2/Type G or even before, Krieghoff brings back some capacity or all capacity to Suhl and this matches the disappearance of any BAL stamp on Type2/Type G and your theory of no HK Lugers with BAL stamps past sometime in 1944.
[Liège is liberated beginning of September 1944]
Stamp « 1 » on Type 2/Type G would indicate parts made at Pieper in Liège.
Stamp « 2 » would indicate parts made at Krieghoff in Suhl (like the stamped sheets receiver)
Krieghoff is busy with its current production, makes 200 copies with BAL22 stamps and decide to send to Liège the equipment they may have themselves received from Rheinmetall. However the experience is a disaster (that would explain the many Fehlerstempel next to the BAL2 and the slow rate of production).
For Type 2/Type G or even before, Krieghoff brings back some capacity or all capacity to Suhl and this matches the disappearance of any BAL stamp on Type2/Type G and your theory of no HK Lugers with BAL stamps past sometime in 1944.
[Liège is liberated beginning of September 1944]
Stamp « 1 » on Type 2/Type G would indicate parts made at Pieper in Liège.
Stamp « 2 » would indicate parts made at Krieghoff in Suhl (like the stamped sheets receiver)
Last edited:
I just noticed the '1' stamped on many parts of these Type 2s (including the ones I posted). Very interesting, because I think Rheinmetall was BAL1. Perhaps these fzs guns were mostly made/finished from Rheinmetall provided parts? It does seem unlikely that the relatively small HK company could have gotten all of this very complicated metal stamping equipment setup very quickly. This is not easy stuff to do right.
That said, not sure about the rest of your idea as it seems unlikely to me that BAL2 would have moved from Suhl to Belgium in 1942/43. Maybe. However, I do like your thinking of initial production being with BAL22. SN190 certainly looks like it is BAL22 accepted and perhaps they gave Belgium a go initially before abandoning it? Hopefully we can find an earlier gun on day to test this idea.
Guillaume d'Orange
Senior Member
Hi Ryan, thank you. I came across Claus Espeholt's page about the FG42 : http://claus.espeholt.dk/fg42.html
He shows a pic of the custom-made grenade launcher :
Even if it is faint, it looks like a WaA1. In any case, Rheinmetall was probably "number 1" for HWaA or BAL in 1943/1944.
Other interesting things on his page, there's a FG42 #404 with the Fehlerstempel. I cannot see the BAL stamp.
He also shows detailed pics of FG42 #2314 which was sold by RIA in September 2014 (pics are also on RIA's site), it has only 2 Weimar style eagles on top of the receiver like #2351 in Paris. No BAL.
Finally, FG42 #3714 seems to have no stamps at all on top of the receiver.
Last edited:
Guillaume d'Orange
Senior Member
I looked up the business of Pieper ("Anciens Etablissements Pieper"), they manufactured Bergmann MP 28/II under license for the Belgian army under the name "Mitraillette Modèle 34". It is a "Beutewaffe" designated Maschinenpistole 740(b).
It came to my mind that September 1943 might be a big turn of events as Speer finally won over Göring and took over the "Reichswerke AG für Waffen und Maschinenbau". With the MG15/17 being sdiscontinued at that point in time, the Reichministerium, Rheinmetall or Krieghoff might have relocated the production of the FG42 that just started, probably 1 month of production as BAL 22 apparently disappears between #190 and #239 (on average, between 130 and 185 FG42s were produced each month).
With all those BAL22 stamps on MG15, I tend to think these parts were produced at Pieper. I've found a testimony from a Belgian resistant who worked at Pieper:
The factory was not idle, there was sabotage and misters Delchef and Peterman were executed for that matter in August 1942.
I was also thinking about the Rheinmetall-Krieghoff partnership for the manufacturing of the MG15, maybe they used the arrangements they had for the late production of the FG42.
It came to my mind that September 1943 might be a big turn of events as Speer finally won over Göring and took over the "Reichswerke AG für Waffen und Maschinenbau". With the MG15/17 being sdiscontinued at that point in time, the Reichministerium, Rheinmetall or Krieghoff might have relocated the production of the FG42 that just started, probably 1 month of production as BAL 22 apparently disappears between #190 and #239 (on average, between 130 and 185 FG42s were produced each month).
With all those BAL22 stamps on MG15, I tend to think these parts were produced at Pieper. I've found a testimony from a Belgian resistant who worked at Pieper:
Brigade Piron - Témoignages - Sartori Jean
www.brigade-piron.be
I was also thinking about the Rheinmetall-Krieghoff partnership for the manufacturing of the MG15, maybe they used the arrangements they had for the late production of the FG42.
Last edited:
Guillaume d'Orange
Senior Member
More pics courtesy of Musée de l'Armée. In the absence of archives, we can only observe and make conjectures. However, the absence of markings on #201 leads me to think a transition was going on around this serial number, like moving production from one factory to another.
On #1410, the BAL2 (?) has been stamped two times seemingly and on the right it looks like there's another Fehlerstempel.
What can be of use for HK Lugers is the consistency of the acceptance pattern at (probably) Krieghoff in the last quarter 1943 (guessestimate): first Weimar eagle, second BAL2.
On #1410, the BAL2 (?) has been stamped two times seemingly and on the right it looks like there's another Fehlerstempel.
What can be of use for HK Lugers is the consistency of the acceptance pattern at (probably) Krieghoff in the last quarter 1943 (guessestimate): first Weimar eagle, second BAL2.