Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I saw a few viewpoints pointing out that the Japanese Army had equipped the Type I for a short period before the Navy equipped them. One of them even said that the Army found the Type I inferior to the Arisakas due to the “outdated” action and the poor processing found on some of these rifles.
However, the materials I’ve read all said the Type I rifles were bought by the Navy instead of the Army because of their lack of infantry weapons, and none includes the “fact” that the Army had used them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Yes, in a small quantity. IJA troops surrendered some Type I in mainland China theater after V day. I doubt the statement that these rifle were bought by and for IJN since Ministry of Army was involved in procurement & transportation of Type I. I have a short research on this topic:History of Japanese Type I Rifle
 

·
Platinum Bullet Member with clusters
Joined
·
2,236 Posts
On page 146 of MROJ is a photo of the Japanese ordnance team accepting the Type I production. You'll notice they're all IJA. The tallest of the Japanese officers was a major at the time, and he corresponded with me about the contract. He wrote me after seeing a copy of the book and was surprised to see the photo of himself. Ok, as it turns out, the major was in a procurement position and handled all firearm orders for the IJN. He said the army procured weapons for the navy. That was a surprise. I would have thought the navy would have done that, but possibly the navy needed the army ordnance knowledge and experience. We're talking shoulder arms here, not machine guns. Don't know how far the army responsibility went on weapons other than rifles and pistols. He was implicit in stating those rifles were for the navy only. I've always been one to never say never and to expect the unexpected, but that's the word from the source.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Yes, in a small quantity. IJA troops surrendered some Type I in mainland China theater after V day. I doubt the statement that these rifle were bought by and for IJN since Ministry of Army was involved in procurement & transportation of Type I. I have a short research on this topic:History of Japanese Type I Rifle
Thanks for the source;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
On page 146 of MROJ is a photo of the Japanese ordnance team accepting the Type I production. You'll notice they're all IJA. The tallest of the Japanese officers was a major at the time, and he corresponded with me about the contract. He wrote me after seeing a copy of the book and was surprised to see the photo of himself. Ok, as it turns out, the major was in a procurement position and handled all firearm orders for the IJN. He said the army procured weapons for the navy. That was a surprise. I would have thought the navy would have done that, but possibly the navy needed the army ordnance knowledge and experience. We're talking shoulder arms here, not machine guns. Don't know how far the army responsibility went on weapons other than rifles and pistols. He was implicit in stating those rifles were for the navy only. I've always been one to never say never and to expect the unexpected, but that's the word from the source.
It really helps, thank you very much:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
The IJA 186th Airfield Battalion under the 13th Air Division in Nanking reported 30 Type I rifles in their inventory after surrender. Type I rifles were definitely meant for navy use, but Japanese weapons logistics are full of surprises.
Source JACAR ref.C15010742400
By the way, I have heard some people saying that the dust cover of Arisaka rifles was designed as the result of the dusty/sandy climate on the battlefields of northeastern China during the Russo-Japanese War. But I think it’s obviously nonsense, because the type 35, the “improved Arisaka” by Nambu, already features a dust cover(though it needs to open and close manually) in 1902, which is ahead of the war. However, considering that the dust covers on a type 35 and a type 38 were slightly different, I’m not sure if the war had somewhat boosted the appearance of type 38’s dust cover.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
There is my guess :

Dust cover was a navy request for the Type 35.
The Russo-Japanese War revealed the effectiveness of this device when some Type 30 rifles and carbines went ineffective due to storms while Type 35 rifles didn't suffered that way.
So IJA decided to include a dust cover in its new rifle design.

L
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
494 Posts
Interesting to note that the Siamese Mausers were in production in Japan around the same time as the Type 35 and they featured a dust cover.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adachi
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top