Gunboards Forums banner

1 - 1 of 1 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,321 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Type 99 dating
Topic:




Topic author: Ronin48
Subject: Type 99 dating
Posted on: 02/17/2006 04:32:42 AM
Message:
I tried this seveerl years ago in a BANZAI artile and later in "The Japanese Type 99 Short Rifle" book. I took the beginning of production as the fall of 1939 as reported in MRoJ and still believe that was the fact. If you had produced close to 3 million T-38s you certainly knew how to fabricate rifles. You adopted a new rifle your troops were clamoring for, you were fighting in China. Do you wait a year before you go into production? I think not, but that's another story.

One error I made in my dating chart was to assume the long rifle was produced before the short, probably not the case. Why don't a group of you interested in when the various series weree fabricated form a 'committee' and work on the problem. You have Nagoya production by FY in MRoJ to work from, this would allow you to break series production into fiscal year. Then you would have to assume parts changes at other arsenals occured in roughly the same time period. Factor in what we do not about production, example, that Kokura changed from rifle to MG production in, believe it was 44. (ORD Tech Intel Rept 19?) Here again the sticky point is when did production start. Does the FY 40 (April 1 40, March 31, '41) include 1939 production, I think so. Anywy I tried my hand at it eons ago, we need some fresh thoughts. And reread Bill Easterly's comments on production records in a previous post before you start.​

Replies:

Reply author: arisakadogs
Replied on: 02/17/2006 09:22:22 AM
Message:
From what I've seen, I think '99 production began later than most think. The date of my manual (Aug,'41) is a hint & Shin Nimura has some information about when production of ammunition for these new rifles began. He's disappeared, but it seems the date was late '41 or early '42.

Reply author: Ronin48
Replied on: 02/17/2006 12:21:08 PM
Message:
Oh Bull S**t Rob, use your head, when you get it out of your backside (why you don't need a buttplug!) Seriosuly, reread the first part of my post, typing errors and all, I have a Japanese 'document' noting that "trial" 99s were first produced in 38. Fred's Japanese sources say adopted in mid-39 and production began Oct(?)1939. Japanese were up to their eyeballs in Chinese trying to kill them, a 6.5 bullet put a hole in them, but did not "put em down." You wait until late 40 early 41 to produce your new, "killer' rifle? Reread the first sentence. (Still love me or you lining up with Trey with the Roman Candles?)

Some bean counter back in Tokyo fills in a form, figures placed in the wrong column while dreaming about his previous night's lay.

I worked for the Georgia Marble Company in the mid-60s, 90+ percent of their production was MARBLE, calcium carbonate. One limited area in the New York mine produced a dolomitic marble.(MgCaCo3) Went to work with the U. S. Bu Mines in Dec. 67. When the Bureau of Mines new Stone Secialist in Disneyland East (Wash. DC) called the company to ask about their production he got a clerk with a third grade education, (or North Georgia inbreeding) who had heard something that morning about the dolomitic marble production (my guess). When asked what stone type the company produced the reply was
"Dolomite!" Ever afterwards the "Official United States Government, Federal Bureau of Mines" Stone Chapter reported that Georgia was a leading producer of dolomite (marble not noted) and I could not get the ass hole to recheck, he was too interested in the "big picture, total U. S stone production. So much for "official figures."

Perthaps our friend in Tokyo was more interested in total ordnance production and not when it began, or the person that summerized the yearly data had a helping of bad rice balls that morning. What ever the reason, God gave us a brain to use, just because some figures on a sheet say production began in the latter part of 1940 "don't make it so!"

In closing, we had two aids in Ga Marble's Geology Dept, Charles and Albert. I heard one ask the other one day, "Is this marble still growing?" The answer, "No, I think it is extenct." So much for the 'experts.'

Reply author: Ronin48
Replied on: 02/17/2006 1:04:24 PM
Message:
Rob, I apologize, your head is not up your backside, That rough riding Harley shook your brain loose and when you stood up in fell out your shorts down your pant's leg. Sorry (not really), the devil made me do it.

Seriously, if any of you take me up on the dating chart why not make two. One beginning production in the 'erroneous' late 40 early 41 period and the correct period, 1939 (My mind is made up...).

Perhaps with the two charts to compare, and with other data we may be able to acquire (?) it may be possible to determine which is more correct. I had not planned to get involved, but "if you want a job well done, do it yourself." and dating 99 production has been a deep interest of mine for 20 years or more.

If any of you are interested in working on this drop me an email, [email protected] When we get our little email address group formed we can email the members, back and forth, with our thoughts, and hopefully come to an agreement. Many heads being better than one, except in D.C. If any of you want the glory (or blame) for solving the puzzle I'll happily bow out.

Reply author: Ronin48
Replied on: 02/17/2006 1:44:11 PM
Message:
Just dug out my file on Nagoya weapons production "1941-1945." For FY 41 99 production for the first four months, April through July was exactly 5K a month (30 days, 5,000 rifles, first month of production you produce exactly 1,666 and a fraction rifles each day, no more, no less.) Then for the next several months you produce 10K a month and in April 42 11,320, a total for the FY of 101,150. T-38 production for the first 11 month period was 10,650/month, in the last it was 11,320, 128,470 (end of the 27, all 28th and part of 29th?). Ain't in 'wonnerful' how they produced exactly the same amount each month for months on end, suppose they quit each day when the rifle counter reached a certain number?

The total FY 99 production , 101,150 is the figure, as I remember, in MRoJ. That throws the t**d in the punch bowl. If you don't believe your "first years" years figures how do you prorate? So much for our little project. But you can see, 'any similarity between actual and reported production are purely coincidental aka luck.

I'll continue to believe that production began in 1939 and reached projected levels by at least six months before Pearl Harbor. Those of you who wish can continue to believe in the Easter Bunny!

An afterthought, why don't some of you go ahead and prorate the Nagoya figues by FY. For FY 41 you would have either the "o" series and part of the first or all long rifle production amd 60% of the "O" series. Think somewhere there is a figure reported for calendar year 1941, someone could possibly come up with it which should account for most/all fo the longs and some of the "0".

With Nagoya production prorated by FY into series and a knowledge of when major component part changes were made at the various producers you can assign series production by FY from other the producers I have some data on FY production at the othere arsenals and this could be a check. I QUIT ON THIS SUBJECT.





Reply author: byf45
Replied on: 02/17/2006 1:44:32 PM
Message:
Rob
Shinichi got out of Japanese collecting about 2 or 3 years ago. He's climbing all the high peaks in California these days and collecting old cameras. I have his e-mail address if you'd like or need it.
John

Reply author: Ronin48
Replied on: 02/17/2006 1:44:41 PM
Message:
Just dug out my file on Nagoya weapons production "1941-1945." For FY 41 99 production for the first four months, April through July was exactly 5K a month (30 days, 5,000 rifles, first month of production you produce exactly 1,666 and a fraction rifles each day, no more, no less.) Then for the next several months you produce 10K a month and in April 42 11,320, a total for the FY of 101,150. T-38 production for the first 11 month period was 10,650/month, in the last it was 11,320, 128,470 (end of the 27, all 28th and part of 29th?). Ain't in 'wonnerful' how they produced exactly the same amount each month for months on end, suppose they quit each day when the rifle counter reached a certain number?

The total FY 99 production , 101,150 is the figure, as I remember, in MRoJ. That throws the t**d in the punch bowl. If you don't believe your "first years" years figures how do you prorate? So much for our little project. But you can see, 'any similarity between actual and reported production are purely coincidental aka luck.

I'll continue to believe that production began in 1939 and reached projected levels by at least six months before Pearl Harbor. Those of you who wish can continue to believe in the Easter Bunny!

An afterthought, why don't some of you go ahead and prorate the Nagoya figues by FY. For FY 41 you would have either the "o" series and part of the first or all long rifle production amd 60% of the "O" series. Think somewhere there is a figure reported for calendar year 1941, someone could possibly come up with it which should account for most/all fo the longs and some of the "0".

With Nagoya production prorated by FY into series and a knowledge of when major component part changes were made at the various producers you can assign series production by FY from other the producers I have some data on FY production at the othere arsenals and this could be a check. I QUIT ON THIS SUBJECT.





Reply author: davef
Replied on: 02/17/2006 8:49:46 PM
Message:
hmmm...t-99 dating...seems like that should be followed by " well maintained and fully mummed nagoya ,in the toriimatsu district seeks mate with similar interests,preferably a substitute standard type ,with blued complection and rosey wood,possibly from the hoten area, send me pics of arsenal and proofs and Ill send you mine...Kokura need no respond".

Reply author: spd7143
Replied on: 02/17/2006 9:50:08 PM
Message:
Now that was funny as hell!


Reply author: arisakadogs
Replied on: 02/18/2006 01:10:13 AM
Message:
Wow Doss, do you have some money riding on this or something? I don't have any hard evidence of when production may have started. I'm just going by very limited & heresay information. Perhaps the publication of my manual was timed for the first issue of these new rifles. They sure didn't need the manual to make them. Hope your blood pressure has returned to normal! Yikes!
I always get amused by all the "when was it made" questions we see all the time. The Japanese should have done us all a favor & dated them like the pistols! We do know all the T-99s were made within a pretty narrow time frame. And, who knows how much time passed between the start of production and the appearance of these rifles in the field? Anyway, I don't lose any sleep over when production actually began. It would be nice to know, but...

davef, that was very funny!


Reply author: Charlie Lima
Replied on: 02/19/2006 10:44:34 AM
Message:
OK, so I am a FNG here, but at first glance it looks like some attention should be made to an oh so true comment by one Samuel Clemens (deceased)"there are lies, damned lies, and stastics"



 
1 - 1 of 1 Posts
Top