Become our sponsor and display your banner here
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Help on type 95 NCO

Article about: This one looks like a good one to me but wanted second opions. Thanks! https://www.lakesidetrader.com/item.php?ID=6017

  1. #21
    ?

    Default

    Hello Stu!
    i place the sword as being made in 41-42 and as you mentioned it would be mid-war.
    Popular belief has it that the brass tsubas were made prior to the steel ones, however, there is no real evidence to support this. Both brass and steel tsuba swords were made concurrently throughout the war until the wooden handle variants were introduced, with the brass ones being the initial types as we know.
    The brass tsubas continued to be used up to the 160k range.
    The steel tsubas are issued as low as 18k ranges and continued to the end of the war.
    Also they were not confined to a particular sub-contractor/Arsenal, as both variants appear in the same number ranges from each of the sub-contractors.
    As the 11mm brass tsubas were primarily used on the copper handled swords and a very few Aluminium variants,
    with the available evidence, i would tend to agree that Suya is the only sub-contractor to have made them, although i have no definitive proof.
    From the 10k range onwards we see the introduction of other sub-contractors such as Gifu and Iijima, none to my knowledge have had the 11mm tsuba.
    I think our timelines are fairly consistent and similar, but our understanding of the events that occurred, differ.
    I've been looking at the type 95 for a while now and this is what i have found from first hand observations.
    Cheers
    Ern

  2. #22
    ?

    Default

    What intrigues me is the production process, in particular, -the allocation of serial number ranges for production.
    It makes sense that you would continue to make one variant until the time to re-tool and then make the new variant. (with certain hybrids, like the run out models in cars, also appearing due to the utilisation of old 'stock')
    The serial number range, suggests that each contractor had two different production lines running simultaneously.
    Perhaps ranges were allocated like a dealer dealing cards for example, where the cards are stacked in sequence and un-shuffled? (where the dealer is the Arsenal in this case and the players are the contractors)
    any opinions? i would like to hear them if you do.
    Ern

  3. #23
    Rod
    Rod is offline
    ?

    Default

    Hi Ern,

    You've just thrown a fly into the ointment. Great that you're studying the Type 95 NCO and have something of real interest to share. Stu's article and this link

    Non-commissioned officers Gunto 1935 (Type 95 GuntM)/title>

    are the most concise information I've seen on the subject. Gregory and Fuller's book doesn't provide much beyond a very basic primer although I'm sure there's more available. I would be happy to provide what little information I have if someone's planning a database. Love to know more!

    Regards, Rod

  4. #24
    ?

    Default

    Stu,
    To fully answer your question, i guess i am basing my timeline on the serial number ranges being sequential.
    That is #110500 was made "before" #120000, this should enable a guess on the year of manufacture.
    Knowing the year production started, monthly/yearly outputs, etc we can extrapolate and have one picture of what occurred.
    To account for my observations on the steel/brass tsubas, it would mean that they still had to be made simultaneously, up to the introduction of wooden handles.
    I find that The 'Evolutionary' picture ,which i think is more in line with your thinking (-timeline wise), doesn't account for the observations.
    Ern

  5. #25
    ?

    Default

    Thanks Rod,
    Yes i have read the pinned thread by Stu and found it very good.
    My intention is not to put flies in any ones ointment, just to generate an exchange of knowledge.... so we can all hopefully learn more.
    Cheers
    Ern

  6. #26
    ?

    Default

    Hi Ern,

    I'm one of those who believe the brass tsuba were made and used prior to the introduction of the iron type. While there may be limited information available to that effect I have never seen any to the contrary. What is causing some confusion (and I'm not suggesting you are confused) is that the old stock was probably still being used up by some of the makers who turned theirs over more slowly than did the bigger makers. That, combined with what you have suggested about multiple production runs and perhaps separate serial number sequences, is indeed highly likely in my view. The result of which is confusion for many as to the production timelines. Given the extensive loss of records due to the war I doubt we will ever be able to know with certainty some of the answers regarding these topics but I have been thinking of harvesting as much information as I can from the Net regarding serial numbers, arsenals, type and how they interrelate then putting it in some sort of order. That's the kind of project that's best begun at the start of the long Canadian winter. Or maybe I'll just go to sunny Arizona and visit my WAF buddies.

    Regardless, I want to thank you for your input. I know you are a true student of the Type 95 and I value your opinions.

    Regards,
    Stu

  7. #27
    ?

    Default

    Hi Ern,

    What do you think of the possibility that the sequential time line has points of compression and expansion in it due to increases and decreases in demand. In short, many swords made some months and less in others, that throw off (but not negate) the extrapolation theory.

    Regards,
    Stu

  8. #28
    ?

    Default

    Hi Stu,
    You are right in what you say, i believe it is logical that supply is governed by demand. The initial demand to 'arm' for expansion and then the need to 'replenish' and to a lesser extent 'maintain', would see these compressions and expansions you mention.
    However, the observations still need to be accounted for, in this case the brass/steel tsuba production in relation to serial numbers.
    They point to the introduction of the steel tsuba in about 1940, perhaps at a time when the US embargo of critical resources was foreseen, and they provided a solution to 'conserve'.
    They could have also been the precursor (along with the need to improve on the type 98 mounts to be more field friendly) to the development of the type 3 mounts in 1943. i believe that by this year the last of the brass tsubas were phased out of production.
    It is documented that at this point, Kokura relinquished control to Tokyo 1st and Nagoya, where upon new blocks of serial number ranges were allocated, that is the remaining 100k range for Tokyo 1st, the 200k range for Nagoya and 300k range for Jinsen.
    The point you made about throwing off the serial numbers ranges, can you explain this a little more please, in case i have misunderstood something.
    Ern

  9. #29
    ?

    Default

    Stu,
    i think it's a job for the Canadian winter..... if your WAF buddies are like any of mine it involves a lot of drink and not too much productivity!!

  10. #30
    ?

    Default

    Hi Ern,

    I think you understand my point about serial numbers. In short though just in case anyone else does not I'll use an example.

    If series number 1 is used in Jauary and number 100 in December it is not necessarily the case that number 50 was used in June/July unless manufacturing volumes remained consistent throughout the entire period. Hypothetically swords 1 through 90 could all have been made in January then none till November then finishing in December. That's what I am meaning by the compression/expansion of the manufacturing time line.

    Ern, I'm away from home till early November but when I get back I'll see where I can go with this. Perhaps starting a database of sorts. I'll get hold of you then and get your input. Perhaps we can collaborate?

    Regards,
    Stu

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. 06-17-2014, 11:20 AM
  2. 05-04-2014, 07:48 AM
  3. 06-07-2013, 02:56 PM
  4. 06-05-2013, 08:04 AM
  5. Japanese Type 99 or Type 38

    In World Firearms
    04-17-2010, 04:43 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •