Red Banner.

[Lapa]

Paul,

It is more that simply turning one photo around, which I could have done myself. I am after a different direction of lighting, to detect possible indications of foul play.

Marc

[PaulR]

Marc,

I took a completely new photo... I did not simply spin the existing photo around. Look at the flash highlights. All I have for a camera is the phone. I will try some more angles.

Here are the new photos. I just discovered that I did not have to sit and resize photos!!!! That makes things a lot easier. I hope that these help.

I see no scratches, thinning of metal, or any evidence of anything else having been removed. No difference in patina or etc. The etching is nice and deep as well as oxidized.

Off to the gym. I will return in an hour or so. Thank you all again!

Regards
Paul

I look forward to your thoughts? Why would such an early variation have such a late number? I see no no signs of tampering or modification.

[drill]

Originally Posted by PaulR

The seller tried one source to research it, but it came back without results... ...Would it not be cool if it were associated with VietNam or Afghanistan?

Paul, I'm sorry but I consider that all is much more prosy.

I think this MMD-mark was being in use not long. Let’s look at its conspicuous letters.
We can find alike only at the end of the first MMD batch in the 1951 with ##359xxx – 361xxx.
The second MMD batch of similar orders (identical obverses) was started from 381xxx with new different mintmark. And the old one we can observe no longer and nowhere.

IMHO, we became witnesses of an error. The correct number should be another – 360531. And then everything will fall into place.
And the handwriting told the same. :idea

[drill]

There are the farthest examples of this mark’s using, which I managed to find in my database.

[drill]

Some people believe that the maximum issue for ORB was the number 567288.
Ok, but what would you say about such number? It's genuine, no cheating. :bigthumbsup

[PaulR]

Very interesting theory. It would make sense, however, if the order was awarded out, it would still have to be logged by the number present, correct?

Also, can we please see additional images of the Order that you pictured, with the 2 million + number? That is very interesting as well. The number looks as if has been on there forever.

[drill]

Originally Posted by PaulR

...The number looks as if has been on there forever.

Undoubtedly!

[drill]

The ORB's №2.955.363 registration form :chuckle

[Christophe]

Originally Posted by drill

Some people believe that the maximum issue for ORB was the number 567288.
Ok, but what would you say about such number? It's genuine, no cheating. :bigthumbsup

Has anyone an explanation why a so high number ?
Mint mistake ?

Many thanks in advance.

Cheers.

Ch.

[desantnik]

Originally Posted by Christophe

Has anyone an explanation why a so high number ?
Mint mistake ?

Many thanks in advance.

Cheers.

Ch.

I have a similar Red Star with an impossibly high eight digits. As with it, in this case I'm certain the engraver briefly had his attention distracted and accidentally doubled the "5" in the middle.

Take it out and you probably have it's "real" s/n.