Author Topic: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?  (Read 26999 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Worm

  • BATTLEFIELD COMMISSION
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Sharp-Shooter
  • *
  • Posts: 1264
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #20 on: January 16, 2015, 08:19:40 PM »
You can bet on it. Pretty sad when people forget they are Americans & give in to illegal laws, unjust laws that infringe on our rights. But people do because of fear.

It would be cool if you could find out what he's got, if he has anything, and if he still has anything. Report back!  :)

Offline Saigon1965

  • SKS-FILES CONTRIBUTOR
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Cadet
  • *
  • Posts: 56
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #21 on: January 18, 2015, 09:02:39 PM »
KW - Please feel free to add the 64 serie photos to this thread for comparision -

Saigon1965 -

Offline Worm

  • BATTLEFIELD COMMISSION
  • Trade Count: (+7)
  • Sharp-Shooter
  • *
  • Posts: 1264
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #22 on: January 18, 2015, 10:08:55 PM »
Thankya Saigon  thumb1

Offline Bunker

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Rifleman
  • *
  • Posts: 155
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #23 on: September 13, 2015, 02:56:26 AM »
Old thread but more info to contribute since I'm late to the party.  This is a lot of info from a few books and declassified Top Secret and Secret CIA documents crammed into a summary.  Clearly the country of origin for the /1\ SKSs is North Vietnam but this doesn't really answer the question at hand of whether they actually produced the weapon in whole but this does provide a little more insight surrounding this period of time.  Long write-up so bear with me.

Background: At the time North Vietnam had a large measure of independence within the Communist Bloc, and it avoided committing itself to either side in the Sino-Soviet dispute. They avoided taking a clear-cut stand in favor of either party and had continually worked to bring the two together. Ho Chi Minh pursued the role of mediator, with at least superficial success, at the 1960 all-party conclave in Moscow, and had persisted in his efforts to heal the breach. Ho’s skill and his prestige a senior Communist statesman, an associate of both Lenin and Stalin, has contributed to North Vietnam’s ability to avoid committing itself when other Bloc parties had done so.

In any event, Moscow, Beijing, and Hanoi almost certainly agreed on the classic principle of combining military and political action, with the differences being a matter of degree and emphasis.

North Vietnam had received extensive economic support from the Sino-Soviet Bloc. The initial phase of the Bloc aid program consisted largely of grants to support the North Vietnamese economy after the partition in 1955. Foodstuffs and other consumer goods were dispatched under these grants as well as equipment and materials for economic reconstruction. The reconstruction effort was merged into a broader buildup of the economy in 1956, which required additional financial aid during the period 1956-1960. A third round of financial assistance was extended to North Vietnam in 1960-1961 to support the economic development anticipated during the First Five-Year Plan (1961-1965). The Sino-Soviet conflict probably had some adverse effect on Bloc coordination of the foreign aid program in North Vietnam, but to what extend is hard to determine.

During this period Communist China was the largest contributor of aid to the development program of North Vietnam.



Ho Chi Minh regarded the Soviet Union and China as Vietnam's big brother and big sister, and he hoped for united Sino-Soviet support for his revolutionary cause in Vietnam. Russian and Chinese leaders agreed to give Hanoi full support. The growth of U.S. military involvement in South Vietnam, culminating in the formal establishment of the U.S. Military Assistance Command in Vietnam (MACV) in February 1962, which caused Russian and Chinese leaders deep concern. In order to meet Hanoi's urgent needs, Moscow and Beijing gave high priority to supplying arms and military equipment to Hanoi.

Before 1965 the Communist forces fighting in South Vietnam were equipped for the most part with old French models, holdovers from the French-Indochina War, as well as captured U.S. equipment. Weapons of Free World origin accounted for almost 60 percent of those captured in South Vietnam. North Vietnam’s inventory of military equipment before 1965 consisted largely of older infantry equipment left by the French and some ground equipment, propeller aircraft, and naval craft supplied by Communist countries during the years 1954-64.

Only limited amounts of Soviet and Chinese weapons were in use at this time. Military production in North Vietnam was limited to small amounts of infantry weapons, mortars and grenades. Vietnam served primarily as the funnel for the infiltration into South Vietnam of military supplies from other countries.

After mid-1965, Communist military forces in North and South Vietnam were equipped increasingly with a modern family of weapons supplied by Communist countries. Communist China and the USSR were the major donors of military equipment to North Vietnam and to Communist forces in the South, but some infantry weapons, mortars, rockets, and light artillery came from North Korea and the Eastern European countries. Most of the more complex material for the defense of North Vietnam came from the USSR, including heavier field and antiaircraft artillery, the SA-2 missile system, more advanced radar and aircraft, and various types of armored vehicles. China supplied most of the infantry weapons, mortars, and rockets used in South Vietnam. Small quantities of equipment and weapons from North Vietnam, North Korea, East Germany, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Romania were also used in Vietnam. Most of the weapons observed in the South since 1965 were manufactured since the Korean War. Although the USSR and the Eastern European Communist countries had supplied weapons manufactured primarily in the late 1950’s, most of those were still used extensively in their own armies. Some Chinese observed equipment had reached South Vietnam six months after leaving the factory.

With the initiation of the Rolling Thunder program in 1965 and Hanoi’s increasing direct involvement in the war in the South, both North Vietnamese and Viet Cong regular forces were equipped with modern weapons, including types that were standard equipment within the Communist donor countries. North Vietnam’s defenses were greatly expanded and strengthened by the introduction of MIG-15/17 and supersonic MIG-21 jet fighters and the SA-2 missile system as well as by the addition of light and medium antiaircraft artillery and radar. The USSR was the major contributor to the buildup of North Vietnam’s air defense. Communist China upgraded North Vietnam’s naval capability and provided most of the infantry weapons used by North Vietnamese and Viet Cong forces. The European Communist countries are not known to have supplied appreciable quantities of weapons to North Vietnam or to Communist forces in the South.

North Vietnam had to rely on outside assistance for the vast amount of infantry weapons and ammunition required for its forces in North Vietnam and for the reequipping of the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese forces fighting in South Vietnam. Only a few light infantry weapons, grenades, and ammunition were manufactured in North Vietnam. Communist China was the major source of infantry weapons, and smaller amounts were supplied by the USSR, the Eastern European countries, and North Korea. Most of the combat material that furnished Communist forces in South Vietnam was infiltrated from North Vietnam through Laos, although small amounts were infiltrated through Cambodia.





Here is another CIA declassified document authored in 1968 (declassified in 1998) that outlines the first observation of weapons in Vietnam.  This doesn't include observations after 1968.  I only highlighted the 7.62mm carbines observed in country at that time up to 1968.  In the case of North Vietnam it was first observed in 1965.  Throughout this document the CIA Analyst notes North Vietnam as producing limited amounts of small arms and ammunition, to include the SKS.  But again, that doesn't necessarily prove to the level of production. 



We do know they produced weapons long after the Vietnam War as the video shows but that doesn't prove the level of production (likely with aid and assistance) during the Vietnam War.  Here is a known example of the TUL-1 LMG produced in Vietnam in 1990 as additional info.




Offline Loose}{Cannon

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+16)
  • Sniper
  • *
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • Constitutional Extremist
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #24 on: September 13, 2015, 08:04:00 AM »
I have seen this last document listing the weapons before... Believe GM found it buried deep in a slew of other docs.  My issue with it is, Its not proof.  Its simply an account of what guns were found in the conflict at the time. Anyone picking up an NVA property marked sks would more then likely simply record what they see.  A chinese gun with no typical chinese arsenal stamp but having a star1 property mark would be recorded as NVA. 

Its quite literally no different then one of us picking one up at a funshow and saying 'oh looky, an NVA sks'. 



      
1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms... It doesn't matter how many Lenins you get out on the street begging for them to be taken.

Offline Loose}{Cannon

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+16)
  • Sniper
  • *
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • Constitutional Extremist
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #25 on: September 13, 2015, 10:10:38 AM »
Another issue I have.   :o

That list simply says '7.62 carbine'.   Could be anything really.... Not exactly clear about what its referring to in the first place. 

Even the 7.62 K-50m is a carbine and its widely mislabeled as being made by the NVA, but it was in fact just a very crudely converted Chinese T50.   :). So they couldn't even make a stamped gun yet alone an exact clone of a milled T56. 

Modern Firearms - K-50M
« Last Edit: September 13, 2015, 10:19:54 AM by Loose}{Cannon »
      
1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms... It doesn't matter how many Lenins you get out on the street begging for them to be taken.

Offline Greasemonkey

  • Professional foul mouth. Banned for life!! Certified Enabler
  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Sniper
  • *
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • The only way to avoid SKS #2, is avoid SKS #1!
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #26 on: September 13, 2015, 02:58:09 PM »
K-50m was nothing more than an adaptation of the Type 50, the Type 50 was China's copy of the Soviet PPSh-41. One of the main differences between a Type 50 and a K-50m, was the K-50m was modified to use a MAT-49 style wire stock, and a few other small changes. And the Chinese Type 50, largely used box magazines, not drums. Now, the French MAT49, left overs from the IndoChina War, another that was hybridized by the commies, instead of being chambered in the normal 9mm, the Chinese as I understand rebarreled it and modified it to use 7.62x25, and up'ed the firing rate.

Quote
Military production in North Vietnam was limited to small amounts of infantry weapons, mortars and grenades.

So many questions...

Now, one thing of interest,  The PPSH-41, Type50, K50-m, MAT49 and AK, RPK, even possibly the Soviet Sniper rifle in 7.62, what do they have in common short of all being available in 7.62? They are all stamped weapons. Now, from a logistical point, they, stamped weapons, are super quick and easy to produce and use very limited resources(a plus when Uncle Sam is banging on your door), they could be made in any tiny little machine shop, like, a bike builder. Resources were a high priority and in demand, does it make sense to waste blocks of steel for an obsolete weapon or to build an aircraft or other usable item, and use some left over sheet metal for a bunch of stamped receivers.  Why would one even attempt to try to machine and produce the SKS at that time, while under duress from war, comparatively, it was clearly obsolete, low capacity, fairly difficult to manufacture and a resource/material hog. Now to be given an SKS as aid for use, and just stamp it as yours is one thing, but why try to produce it, when they could stamp a Ak, PPSh or ?? receiver out of a shovel or any thick sheet of metal and just have China supply the barrels. A weapon like the Ak and been around for what, 15 yrs and it was proven.  The boys in the jungle would not know the difference nor would they care what or who made it, if it went bang, thats what they were after.

Also, North Vietnam didn't really have much in the way of weapons making equipment or ability or maybe the technical know how prior to this time, weaponry was provided by the Communist nations or later, by war capture weapons. Personally, I've seen thousands of nations weapons, but never a NVA, till the SKS, they went from making no weapons prior, to instant SKS manufacturing, good theory, but I don't buy it. So, to go from being supplied by others on both sides to suddenly becoming expert weapons makers, machining and cranking out SKSs is pretty difficult. Again, being supplied with sterile SKSs and some barrel blanks and producing a home made stamped weapon vs a totally machined weapon is a quick, easy, not to mention, a more believable operation.

Just my .000002 cents. :)

Even the quoted mortars and RPGs could be stamped out, I mean an RPG-2 is a chunk of exhaust pipe with a few modifications and a firing group shoved on it, they could made along side an Ak and simple pull and chuck grenades, those wouldn't be a stretch either. Also, what does the CIA Analyst deem as a carbine, assault weapon and rifle, terms then could vary widely vs. terms used today. Technically, a K98K and Swiss K31 are carbines, every bit as much as a Mosin M44 7.62 carbine.

And no one mentions the Czech weaponry, the Cz52s, Cz52/57s and Vz 58s used there, more 7.62 weapons. In Cambodia, the Vz 24 and Vz 26 were pretty popular, and could have trickled into the NVA hands, both in 7.62x25.
I'm going to make him an offer he can't refuse......

Leave the gun, take the cannoli.

I said I was an addict........I didn't say I had a problem

Offline Bunker

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Rifleman
  • *
  • Posts: 155
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #27 on: September 13, 2015, 03:54:26 PM »
Another issue I have.   :o

That list simply says '7.62 carbine'.   Could be anything really.... Not exactly clear about what its referring to in the first place. 

Even the 7.62 K-50m is a carbine and its widely mislabeled as being made by the NVA, but it was in fact just a very crudely converted Chinese T50.   :). So they couldn't even make a stamped gun yet alone an exact clone of a milled T56. 

Modern Firearms - K-50M

Granted there is no FOM or equivalent designator assigned in these documents but I have little doubt that they are not referring to the 7.62 SKS Carbine and not homemade weapons produced in VC workshops. 

I’m generally with you on this but I believe it does suggest, not prove, North Vietnam (country of origin) was involved at some level.  Possible these rifles were either being assembled or some level of manufacturing (even if it was just stamping the receiver numbers and stigma) was taking place that is unknown to us.   Could have possibly been with either USSR or China support/assistance but the CIA documents make a clear distinction between the two countries of origin.  If it was simply China, they would have said so, similar to the M21.

Here is the complete listing of 7.62 weapons from that document.  When looking at the countries noted for the 7.62 carbine (USSR, China, East Germany and North Vietnam), we know for sure the first three are SKS producers.  Almost all declassified documents related to small arms used during the Vietnam War, and even the Indonesian-Malaysian Confrontation, will refer to the SKS as 7.62mm carbine, with a distinction between other 7.62 weapons.



We also know that both Russian and China had advisors/troops in Vietnam.  Could either of them aided in the Star 1 weapons?  We don’t know that answer but we do know the estimated CIA numbers of troop involvement.  Also, Laos and Cambodia were areas with numerous logistics and support infrastructure.

Offline Loose}{Cannon

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+16)
  • Sniper
  • *
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • Constitutional Extremist
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #28 on: September 13, 2015, 04:10:21 PM »
I have seen this last document listing the weapons before... Believe GM found it buried deep in a slew of other docs.  My issue with it is, Its not proof.  Its simply an account of what guns were found in the conflict at the time. Anyone picking up an NVA property marked sks would more then likely simply record what they see.  A chinese gun with no typical chinese arsenal stamp but having a star1 property mark would be recorded as NVA. 

Its quite literally no different then one of us picking one up at a funshow and saying 'oh looky, an NVA sks'.

Perhaps it IS the sks they are referring to but the above mentioned is a very real probability, and GM makes some very good points as well.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2015, 04:24:25 PM by Loose}{Cannon »
      
1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms... It doesn't matter how many Lenins you get out on the street begging for them to be taken.

Offline Bunker

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Rifleman
  • *
  • Posts: 155
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #29 on: September 13, 2015, 04:26:24 PM »
Agree!  I have some T56 assault rifle info that is somewhat related that I'll post later on this evening.  Doesn't answer the question at hand but just more info.

Offline Greasemonkey

  • Professional foul mouth. Banned for life!! Certified Enabler
  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Sniper
  • *
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • The only way to avoid SKS #2, is avoid SKS #1!
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #30 on: September 13, 2015, 04:29:17 PM »
Not trying to go all conspiracy theorist, but, first things, first, it is declassified CIA documents, from the Cold War era, exactly how much of it is a best guess, and how much is fact. How much of it is blown up or out of proportion, to suit the D.C. bean counters and keep the desk heads happy.

Could very well be "Assembled in North Vietnam" from parts "Made in China" , it happens to this very day, why would the '60s or the commies be any different?

At first, they both denied involvement in the conflict, maybe with super secret sterile rifles the NVA stamped as theirs, later, maybe China didn't care, and up'ed the ante, M21 this, M22 that, Type 56 this, Type 54 that, also Soviets started to pump in metric crap tons of stuff also. What could we really do at that point, we had our hands full in the jungles Vietnam?
Now imagine, a worse case scenario for that time, the U.S. trying to invade mainland China, to halt NVA military support, during that whole mess with crazy Mao in office and Khrushchev and later Brezhnev backing the Soviets with paranoid itchy trigger fingers, and then figure in the loopy Cuban Castro and finally, the other totally wigged out guy still fuming and pissed from the '50's, Mao Zedong.


I'm going to make him an offer he can't refuse......

Leave the gun, take the cannoli.

I said I was an addict........I didn't say I had a problem

Offline Greasemonkey

  • Professional foul mouth. Banned for life!! Certified Enabler
  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+14)
  • Sniper
  • *
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • The only way to avoid SKS #2, is avoid SKS #1!
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #31 on: September 13, 2015, 04:58:03 PM »
And it is intriguing how the documents get more and more vague as time passes, I mean look how loosely the CIA documented Grenada. Oh, about 8000 plus small arms or so.. "MOSTLY" some Warsaw pact, so this means on the flip side, some were, Nato, who knows.  Besplode One would think, they would have accounted for any and everything captured given more modern times.

Again, CIA involvement, I'd take with a grain of salt.



Now compare the total small arms information from the statement on Grenada from the office of the Prime Minister of Jamaica at the time Edward P.G. Seaga

« Last Edit: September 13, 2015, 05:04:25 PM by Greasemonkey »
I'm going to make him an offer he can't refuse......

Leave the gun, take the cannoli.

I said I was an addict........I didn't say I had a problem

Offline Loose}{Cannon

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+16)
  • Sniper
  • *
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • Constitutional Extremist
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #32 on: September 13, 2015, 05:51:42 PM »
To me, the circumstantial evidence is moot and can be debated until the end if time.  I mostly like to look at the hard evidence.  The type of stuff you can see, hold, touch, smell, and taste if you like. 

Board user Saigon was kind enough to post very detailed pics of 5 star1 property marked chinese guns in the past. As a former machinist and having nearly all years of Jianshe production in my collection, It is of my opinion that ALL characteristics are exactly identical to early Chinese rifles of the same time period. All other countries are NOT identical to one another other as the Jianshe guns and the star1 guns are.

Lets get to the meat and potatoes...   :)

Inspectors within production facilities are assigned oddball stamps in which they apply to components in which they check. This is most commonly dimensions and tolerances of dif portions of a completed component.  This is nothing new and most will say 'welp yeah', but when it comes right down to it.... Its about as close to a smoking gun as you may find. The ability to accurately identify a specific inspection stamp unique to one country and investigate where it is/isn't found. 

I have been sitting on this one for a while..  Below you will see three of Saigons rifles. The center/bottom location of the receiver is where many of said inspection stamps are found, especially on early chinese carbines.  As time progressed in the T56, these dwindled down to almost non existent. 










As you can see in the pics above, they all have a common stamp that looks like half a 'diver down' stamp which are all the exact same size as each other.

Note below pictured on my Chinese 1962 Jianshe '7m' gun having the exact same stamp...    thumb1





« Last Edit: September 13, 2015, 06:03:16 PM by Loose}{Cannon »
      
1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms... It doesn't matter how many Lenins you get out on the street begging for them to be taken.

Offline Saigon1965

  • SKS-FILES CONTRIBUTOR
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Cadet
  • *
  • Posts: 56
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #33 on: September 13, 2015, 07:48:35 PM »
Gentlemen - Here's another for the debate -

A documented bring back RPG-2 or B40 in Vietnam -

Obviously Chinese made with a NVA property mark -







Offline Loose}{Cannon

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+16)
  • Sniper
  • *
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • Constitutional Extremist
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #34 on: September 13, 2015, 07:58:19 PM »
When did China start making those? 
      
1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms... It doesn't matter how many Lenins you get out on the street begging for them to be taken.

Offline Saigon1965

  • SKS-FILES CONTRIBUTOR
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Cadet
  • *
  • Posts: 56
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #35 on: September 13, 2015, 08:01:32 PM »
I understand they were licensed and I hear that some of these were also made in VN -

I have yet to come across an example purely made in VN -

Offline Loose}{Cannon

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (+16)
  • Sniper
  • *
  • Posts: I am a geek!!
  • Constitutional Extremist
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #36 on: September 13, 2015, 08:06:49 PM »
I understand they were licensed and I hear that some of these were also made in VN -

I have yet to come across an example purely made in VN -

Good luck on your search.   :-X


I looked it up, you guessed it, the chinese version was the Type 56 rpg. So by your serial # its a 1965 which is well into the erra when the Chinese were simply sending Chinese marked SKSs.   thumb1
      
1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms... It doesn't matter how many Lenins you get out on the street begging for them to be taken.

Offline Saigon1965

  • SKS-FILES CONTRIBUTOR
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Cadet
  • *
  • Posts: 56
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #37 on: September 13, 2015, 08:10:57 PM »
Thanks LC -

The serial range is neat - My birth year!

Offline Bunker

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Rifleman
  • *
  • Posts: 155
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #38 on: September 13, 2015, 08:19:13 PM »
Thanks LC!  Excellent stuff…no doubt whatsoever the same stamp!  That answers the one question regarding if the Chinese were involved with the star 1 manufacturing, which I think most have believed to be the case but in varying levels of certainty or uncertainty.

The second question may never be answered as to whether North Vietnam had any hand in the production or if it was solely the Chinese.  I’d love to know exactly where the star 1 markings were applied, be it China or North Vietnam or somewhere else for that matter.  Probably doesn’t even matter, other than dotting another ‘i’.



Offline Bunker

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Rifleman
  • *
  • Posts: 155
Re: The NVA SKS, Domestically produced rifle or just a property mark?
« Reply #39 on: September 13, 2015, 11:09:39 PM »
Gentlemen - Here's another for the debate -

A documented bring back RPG-2 or B40 in Vietnam -

Obviously Chinese made with a NVA property mark -








Here's another North Vietnamese B40 variant.  North Vietnamese markings "Giai Phong" meaning "Liberation and the "B" in B40 means "Ba do ka", Vietnamese for bazooka and of course the 40 represents 40mm.