Type 99 Monopods

[jac72t]

Put a few hundred thousand of them in a pile and you'd change your mind.

No I wouldn't. Even if you could gather them all up in the same place (an impossibility), a few hundred thousand pods would yeild just enough metal to build about 5-7 T-97 tanks.

[Guamsst]

No I wouldn't. Even if you could gather them all up in the same place (an impossibility), a few hundred thousand pods would yeild just enough metal to build about 5-7 T-97 tanks.

Ok, and we had scrap drives but you think the Japanese weren't scrounging every piece they could get? Ever see a bamboo cleaning rod? I really think you are failing to see how desperate they were.

[jac72t]

Ok, and we had scrap drives but you think the Japanese weren't scrounging every piece they could get? Ever see a bamboo cleaning rod? I really think you are failing to see how desperate they were.

Guamsst
Neither of us were there so we’ll probably never know for certain. However, in my view, the logistic nightmare involved in collecting the nominal metal in monopods is enough to cast doubt on the scrap theory. At its peak, the Japanese Empire spanned thousands of square miles across the globe. The Japanese encountered severe difficulty in delivering supplies to all of the thousands of outposts and garrisons within that expanse, particularly as the war progressed and lines of supply were increasingly interdicted by allied military action. Throughout the war, thousands of Japanese soldiers died of hunger because supplies could not reach them. If the Japanese had such difficulty reaching all of their outposts with supplies, then IMHO it is not likely that they would have expended any logistical resources to reach those outposts for the purpose of collecting monopods, the scrap value of which would have been nominal. Moreover, since monopods were functional parts attached to weapons in the hands of soldiers fighting for their Emperor, Empire and very survival, there would be little reason, in my estimation, to remove them and render those weapons less effective.

I think it far more probable that the Japanese removed monopods when they were bent beyond re-use or when their mangled condition hindered use of a rifle. As for wooden cleaning rods, I’ve seen 3 or 4 of those. My suspicion is that they were field expedients made to replace broken or lost rods. Rods were necessary for cleaning and stacking purposes and their miniscule scrap value would have been easily outweighed by their value as cleaning and stacking devices. The Japanese deleted rods from late war guns (just like the Germans did with K98k production) in a measure to simplify, and therefore speed up production.

Like I said, we’ll never know for sure. This is why I like collecting. You can always get into good discussions with fellow collectors and conjecture about why things are a certain way, and no one is ever wrong!
Cheers
John

[Guamsst]

Guamsst.............Like I said, we’ll never know for sure. This is why I like collecting. You can always get into good discussions with fellow collectors and conjecture about why things are a certain way, and no one is ever wrong!
Cheers
John

Oh, some people are wrong, SOOOO VERY VERY WRONG....LOL I'll follow that up later.

You have a point I just don't agree with it though and that's fine for arguments sake. As to shipping, the ships that made it to their destinations came back empty or close to it in many instances so the return of scrap metal would be easy and a priority. Also, the troops in China didn't have to SHIP anything. They could use other transport to get scrap to Mukden or Jinsen and why not throw in those monopods and dust covers while they are at it?

As to people who are WRONG, The guy who swore all Jap rifles had No1 Mk3 Enfield rear sights, or the folks who think the slot inside the Luger holster was for the "suicide bullet".

[blu 97]

My dust cover is serilized to my rifle as are all the other parts, guess mine missed the scrap iron drive.

[Guamsst]

My dust cover is serilized to my rifle as are all the other parts, guess mine missed the scrap iron drive.

Is your rifle mummed? I have yet to see a ground mum with a serial number matching ORIGINAL condition rifle. Not sayiin it never happened or they don't exist. Just that the lack of them supports that there weren't a bunch of them in arsenals or armories at wars end. Still isn't proof of a scrap drive but something was happening to them and I have yet to see a theory that can't be argued against.

[jeep]

Yes its not uncomman to not have the monopod even though the barrel band has holes for it. The metal was needed and the AA sites omitted to . I don,t like the early rifles with monopods and aa sites. I like the trans rifles like the 6th series. To many people putting new made monopods on,who needs them.

[Guamsst]

I can't understand the need for "correct" rifles to the point that people make them incorrect. I do like the early rifles like 99 Long rifles with monopod, dustcover and AA sights. The early war 99's I like stripped down because they feel more like a real battle rifle with no bells or whistles. The last ditch rifles I like because they have so many variations and generally I look at them and wonder how Japan could have any hope when they were issuing rifles like that.