HGU-48/P helmet
Latest update 18. april 2012

Message 1526:
The HGU-48/P which was standardized as the HGU-55/P actually used the U.S. Navy's PRK-37/P shell. USAF technical reports on the development program clearly indicate that cutting the HGU-22/P shell back in the 3, 6, and 12 o'clock area weakened the helmet shell and made it unsafe. You see, they (USAF) was cutting the shell back at the request of pilots who were complaining about the lack of visibility in the HGU-2 A/P and HGU-26/P flight helmets. Steve N.

Message 1497:
I have noticed a trend on E-Bay and it may have something to do with the distribution of US flight equipment. I am just thinking out loud and welcome any comments.
I would say that during the cold war, a substantial number of  USAF aircraft may well have been deployed in Europe. I noticed early on when dealing with European collectors that they had quite an array of USAF flight gear, but were not as well stocked on US Navy equipment. In fact, I made quite a few trades of Navy equipment for International equipment. It would seem that the "demand" for US Navy equipment has created a sort of conversion process for sellers on E-Bay. What was a USAF helmet can be cleaned up and marketed as a US Navy helmet to fetch a higher price.
One of the things that is disturbing to me is the very high premium some collectors are willing to pay for "decorated" helmets. Especially when the helmet has a nice fresh coat of paint and shows no sign of wear. Coupled with the confusion over USAF vs US Navy helmets, it would seem there are a lot of cross over items that are simply not authentic.  I am interested in hearing the opinions of others as regards to the paint jobs and decorations that adorn some of these flight helmets and also would like to hear from others on the US Navy Vs USAF helmets.
The USAF life support guys told me they didn't use Navy helmets AT ALL. Perhaps because the helmets are all cut from about the same mold, literally. To put this in perspective:  The APH-5 and HGU-2 are the same helmet shell. The HGU-22/P is the same shell as the HGU-2 which is the basis for the HGU-26/P.
This next part is probably going to get me in a jam, but here goes anyway. The USAF tried to cut the HGU-22/P shell back at the 3, 9 and 12 o'clock position to increase visability. It was discovered that these cuts waekened the shell .So the USAF jumped on the HGU-33/P shell (PRK-37/P) for the HGU-48/P which was the basis for the HGU-55/P.
That means there are basically 2 helmet shells for most of the USAF/USN helmets and would mean that cross use between services is unecessary.  Even the APH-6 is the early shell with o-mask cut outs.
For the record, I have a report on the HGU-48/P that verifies the use of the HGU-33/P shell. This should also explain why the Navy could transition with little effort to the HGU-55/P. Cause the -33 is a -55 with a visor assembly....
Now you may talk amongst yourselves. For the record, my parents were married. Cheers, Steve N

Message 899:
Hi Craig, Yes, just so happens I visited Trey's X-files a few days ago, while idly surfing the web during a lull, and spotted this "Warthog NVG special". It would appear from this that the HGU-48/P "shell" is cropping up all over the place, although Trey's HGU-48/P would appear to be a special work-up. I doubt seriously if a whole squadron was similarly outfitted. This may have been an experimental model or a functional test/trials prototype of some sort. The problem with so many helmets whose origins and production are unclear and uncertain is that frequently all we have to go on are photographs; it is very difficult to do a reasonable analysis of something remotely, simply through the use of images (unless you happen to be a former LandSat satellite image analysis specialist for NOAA or NASA), of course. Still, I found the purported HGU-48/P in Trey's X-files to be quite interesting. I'll have to ask Trey for more information on it, when I talk to him again. Thanks for bringing this to our attention; it had quite slipped my mind after experiencing momentary bemusement upon running into it the other day. DocBoink out.
[Pictures provided by Steve Vallejo of an HGU-48/P similar to the one mentioned by DocBoink above but without NVG]

Message 891:
Hello all, Below , please find a few images regarding the HGU-48/P discussion. Included is a Gentex tag differing from the one posted earlier. It was found under the earcup pile fastener of a parts shell used for spares. The shell had been configured as a HALO helmet I believe based on the dual hook ups for the com gear present on both the right and left side of the shell. You may also be able to see that on what's left of the leather friction pads, that they are a separate piece of leather as noted in Steve N's earlier message. Included are the undersides of the "poured " liner halve with some interesting info. I originally thought that " Norton " may have been a name , but the underside markings showed it to be Norton AFB. Seems they may have done some of this work on a depot level perhaps. Any thoughts guys ? Steve Vallejo
hgu-48p noreg norton milehigh 03_tn.jpg (52868 bytes)
hgu-48p noreg norton milehigh 02_tn.jpg (47753 bytes)

Message 890:
Hello All: Has anyone seen the photo of the "HGU-48" on Trey Turner's website in the "X-files" section? ...comments? Craig

Message 876:
Steve: That is excellent information and this puts the HGU-48/P matter to rest, I would imagine. Rich has himself a really nice example of a rare HGU-48/P! Actually, I could not for the life of me see how that sticker on the helmet shell could be a fabrication. It just looks too genuine (always has); besides, the subject of the 'genuineness ' of an HGU-48/P is so arcane and obscure a subject that it is highly unlikely anyone would go to all the trouble of fabricating a label for a helmet that most collectors aren't even aware exists. At any rate, good show Rich! Thanks for putting us all back on the correct track as regards the (not-so) mythical "production" (albeit VERY limited) HGU-48/P helmet! Good sleuthing! Cheers, DocBoink

Message 871:
New information on the HGU-48/P from Gentex, and Edwards Air Force Base: Label on Rich's helmet is correct and is valid. The contract number has been verified by Gentex. The self proclaimed "Old Farts" of Life support are amazed that anyone has ever heard of the HGU-48/P much less interested in it. Their view(s): Rich's HGU-48/P is probably real. May even have been flown as is. Seems they used the helmets for a number of tests including at least one parachute jump with a helmet mounted camera. Most had "Poured" liners with gray and black leather. The edgeroll was NOT the one piece as used on the -55. So the consensus is the helmet is a genuine HGU-48/P. One of 600 made.Cheers all, Steve N

Message 869:
Hi Steve, I added a picture of the label in question. Looks like a nicely done job to me. Can anybody shed a light on the contract number that is printed on it? The leather shows some wear and the neckstrap looks like it was dyed. (as per T.O.), Bye Ron

 

Message 853:
Because of the possible ramifications of this situation, I have been reluctant to provide the details of my research into the HGU-48/P. I have included what I know, but must caution everyone that I am still trying to verify much of this against existing documentation.
There were 600 HGU-48/P helmets made by Gentex based on a modified HGU-22/P shell. The shell, in all liklihood was hand trimmed by a life support technician at Nellis Air Force Base to appease pilots complaining about the poor visibility and weight of the HGU-26/P. This trimmed shell became the HGU-48/P.
Every F-16 pilot in the USAF was issued one of the HGU-48/Ps for the test program. The helmet was well liked and since the HGU-55/P was essentially the same helmet, many probably continued in service.
A few points:
1- The edgeroll on the HGU-48/P was a single piece of leather as on the HGU-55/P. The helmet sold on E-Bay had 3 pieces of leather.
2- All 600 HGU-48/Ps had custom fit liners as was the standard in the USAF at the time. So it is unlikely (but not impossible) that sytrofoam liner and sizing pads were used in the helmet.
3- a Gentex rep (no names please) stated that no HGU-48/Ps were issued with paper labels as the helmets were part of an in service test. If you think about it, what could they be confused with?
The helmet could, in fact be an HGU-48/P that bounced around the USAF and ended up being sold off as surplus. The pilot would have removed his custom liner and re-used it. The leather repair may have been just that, and "in service" to boot. But in looking over the TOs for the HGU-55/P there is a correct procedure for replacing the entire edgeroll and I am not sure the repairs made to this helmet are correct.
I have waited to provide this information as I am finding that the memories of some people aren't quite as good as they might think. Documentation on this helmet does exist and we should be able to clarify this very quickly.
Hope this helps and I would again caution you that any of this could change. cheers, Steve Norris

Message 504:
After looking closely at this item on eBay, I believe it is a not-often-seen HGU-48, which was actually built in the life support shop, not Carbondale.  Note the thin edgeroll, and that the "elephant ears" are not part of the edgeroll, as on both early and late HGU-55s. Rich Mays