British Ordnance Collectors Network
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Japanese Powder bag
- Thread starter Lou
- Start date
Slick
Well-Known Member
BOUGAINVILLE
Well-Known Member
Hi,
This charge bag was filled at the Osaka Army Arsenal in January 1939. I could be wrong but I would rather think that is for the 70mm Type 92 Infantry Gun (Howitzer). This is the 3rd increment charge bag
Hope this is of help,
Cheers,
BOUGAINVILLE
This charge bag was filled at the Osaka Army Arsenal in January 1939. I could be wrong but I would rather think that is for the 70mm Type 92 Infantry Gun (Howitzer). This is the 3rd increment charge bag
Hope this is of help,
Cheers,
BOUGAINVILLE
BOUGAINVILLE
Well-Known Member
The crossed cannons mean "Osaka Army Arsenal"
Hi Lou,
Nice one!
I have quite a few charge bags by now, but not yet this particular one. Am I mistaken or is it maybe only half of it (i.e. the top part)?
If it's complete, it should be like an "empty cushion". The given transcript above is IMO not completely correct. After having studied quite a few specimens, it is my understanding that the proper reading is as follows:
The cannons: "Osaka arsenal"
Above the cannons: "1 Sho 14" = January, Showa year 14 = January 1939.
Left of the cannons: "5 g" = AFAIK, the actual filled weight, in this case 5 grams.
Right of the cannons: "3", the meaning of this is as of yet not known to me.
Below the cannons: "Type 92 infantry gun 2nd 4th" ("2nd" (otsu) and "4th" (tei) should be the charge increment designators).
The usage of these charge increment designators seems to be consistent with what one finds in documents like OpNav 1667, and what is seen on actual specimens. I have some 7 15cm charge bags at home that initially had me very puzzled, as just like Bougainville, I assumed the Kanji '1', '2', or '3' marked on them to be the charge increment designator. This was then wildly at odds with the given weight actual filled weights elsewhere on the same charge bag, vs. the indications for the weight increments given in OpNav 1667. Further interpreting the bottom markings, after the weapon type, then made clear to me that for the types of charge bags that come in increments, the very last position of the markings is occupied by an indicator depicting the charge increment.
Interestingly enough, this bag shows two such indicators; "otsu" meaning "2nd" followed by "tei" meaning "4th".
OpNav 1667 doesn't have a very nice clear table of the actual weights per charge increment (I shall check the British docs to see if they do list them separately), but instead it just mentions 4 'normal' increments, being: 5.4 grams, 8.9 grams, 16.8 grams, 18.7 grams, all in dark blue (?!?) silk bags. Also, there was a fifth special one, in light blue silk, being a 3.1 grams black powder igniting charge.
The mention of these colours has always very much puzzled me. So far, all gun type charge bags I have seen have been made of white silk, with some of the really big ones being 'tan' coloured (possibly not bleached?), with as sole exception a yellow-brownish tall donut shaped mortar charge bags, which unfortunately I missed out on.
I have not yet seen any blue bags, and overall spoken I concur that this is most likely to be indeed a charge bag for the 70x101R Type 92 infantry gun. It's my guess that the Japanese also used white bags for this calibre. A further strange matter is the double increment indicator; the Japanese were not known for "over marking" their items, and charge bags were no exception: these tended to be marked as minimalistic as possible, whilst featuring all information of relevance. In light of the quoted increment weights, it would seem at odds that there would be a 2nd AND 4th increment that would be around 5 grams (as marked on the bag), whereas only one similar weigth (i.e. 5.4 grams) is given.
I shall delve a bit into the British documents to see if I can find more/better details there.
Cheers,
Olafo
Nice one!
I have quite a few charge bags by now, but not yet this particular one. Am I mistaken or is it maybe only half of it (i.e. the top part)?
If it's complete, it should be like an "empty cushion". The given transcript above is IMO not completely correct. After having studied quite a few specimens, it is my understanding that the proper reading is as follows:
The cannons: "Osaka arsenal"
Above the cannons: "1 Sho 14" = January, Showa year 14 = January 1939.
Left of the cannons: "5 g" = AFAIK, the actual filled weight, in this case 5 grams.
Right of the cannons: "3", the meaning of this is as of yet not known to me.
Below the cannons: "Type 92 infantry gun 2nd 4th" ("2nd" (otsu) and "4th" (tei) should be the charge increment designators).
The usage of these charge increment designators seems to be consistent with what one finds in documents like OpNav 1667, and what is seen on actual specimens. I have some 7 15cm charge bags at home that initially had me very puzzled, as just like Bougainville, I assumed the Kanji '1', '2', or '3' marked on them to be the charge increment designator. This was then wildly at odds with the given weight actual filled weights elsewhere on the same charge bag, vs. the indications for the weight increments given in OpNav 1667. Further interpreting the bottom markings, after the weapon type, then made clear to me that for the types of charge bags that come in increments, the very last position of the markings is occupied by an indicator depicting the charge increment.
Interestingly enough, this bag shows two such indicators; "otsu" meaning "2nd" followed by "tei" meaning "4th".
OpNav 1667 doesn't have a very nice clear table of the actual weights per charge increment (I shall check the British docs to see if they do list them separately), but instead it just mentions 4 'normal' increments, being: 5.4 grams, 8.9 grams, 16.8 grams, 18.7 grams, all in dark blue (?!?) silk bags. Also, there was a fifth special one, in light blue silk, being a 3.1 grams black powder igniting charge.
The mention of these colours has always very much puzzled me. So far, all gun type charge bags I have seen have been made of white silk, with some of the really big ones being 'tan' coloured (possibly not bleached?), with as sole exception a yellow-brownish tall donut shaped mortar charge bags, which unfortunately I missed out on.
I have not yet seen any blue bags, and overall spoken I concur that this is most likely to be indeed a charge bag for the 70x101R Type 92 infantry gun. It's my guess that the Japanese also used white bags for this calibre. A further strange matter is the double increment indicator; the Japanese were not known for "over marking" their items, and charge bags were no exception: these tended to be marked as minimalistic as possible, whilst featuring all information of relevance. In light of the quoted increment weights, it would seem at odds that there would be a 2nd AND 4th increment that would be around 5 grams (as marked on the bag), whereas only one similar weigth (i.e. 5.4 grams) is given.
I shall delve a bit into the British documents to see if I can find more/better details there.
Cheers,
Olafo
Hi again.
Sorry, I'm half ill today and hence I made an -IMO- misinterpretation above. The forum software doesn't let me edit it anymore, so please ignore the above post, and just read the corrected version down below instead, which I feel is the correct interpretation:
Hi Lou,
Nice one!
I have quite a few charge bags by now, but not yet this particular one. Am I mistaken or is it maybe only half of it (i.e. the top part)?
If it's complete, it should be like an "empty cushion". The given transcript above is IMO not completely correct. After having studied quite a few specimens, it is my understanding that the proper reading is as follows:
The cannons: "Osaka arsenal"
Above the cannons: "1 Sho 14" = January, Showa year 14 = January 1939.
Left of the cannons: "5 g" = AFAIK, the actual filled weight, in this case 5 grams.
Right of the cannons: "3", the meaning of this is as of yet not known to me.
Below the cannons: "Type 92 infantry gun 2nd 4th".
The part below the cannons is open for two distinct interpretations to me, being:
Below the cannons, interpretation 1: "Type 92 infantry gun 2nd (and/or) 4th (charge increment)".
Below the cannons, interpretation 2: "Type 92 infantry gun 2nd (type casing) 4th (charge increment)".
It is my opinion that the second interpretation is the correct one.
I'll explain:
The usage of the final position for the charge increment designator seems to be consistent with what is seen on actual other specimens. As an example, I have some 7 15cm charge bags at home that initially had me very puzzled, as just like Bougainville, I assumed the Kanji '1', '2', or '3' marked on them to be the charge increment designator. This was then wildly at odds with the actual filled weights mentioned elsewhere on the same charge bag, vs. the indications for the weight increments given in OpNav 1667. Further interpreting the bottom markings, after the weapon type, then made clear to me that for the types of charge bags that come in increments, ALWAYS the very last position of the markings is occupied by an indicator depicting the charge increment.
Now, Interestingly enough, this bag of yours shows TWO such indicators; "otsu" meaning "2nd" followed by "tei" meaning "4th".
OpNav 1667 doesn't have a very nice clear table of the actual weights per charge increment (I shall check the British docs to see if they do list them separately), but instead it just mentions 4 'normal' increments, being: 5.4 grams, 8.9 grams, 16.8 grams, 18.7 grams, all in dark blue (?!?) silk bags. Also, there was a fifth special one, in light blue silk, being a 3.1 grams black powder igniting charge.
The mention of these colours has always very much puzzled me. So far, all gun type charge bags I have seen have been made of white silk, with some of the really big ones being 'tan' coloured (possibly not bleached?), with as sole exception a yellow-brownish tall donut shaped mortar charge bags, which unfortunately I missed out on.
I have not yet seen any blue bags, and overall spoken I concur that this is most likely to be indeed a charge bag for the 70x101R Type 92 infantry gun. It's my guess that the Japanese also used white bags for this calibre. A further strange matter is the potentially double increment indicator; the Japanese were not known for "over marking" their items, and charge bags were no exception: these tended to be marked as minimalistic as possible, whilst featuring all information of relevance. In light of the quoted increment weights, it would make no sense that there would be a 2nd AND 4th increment that would be around 5 grams (as suggested by interpretation 1), whereas only one similar weight (i.e. 5.4 grams) is given in OpNav 1667.
Now, as the casings for this particular calibre came in two types, being the very uncommon "1st type" (with a thread near the bottom, so it could be screwed open to vary the charge - see Bougainville's gallery for pictures), and the more common "2nd type" (often quoted as "Mod. B") single piece casing. It is my opinion that the second interpretation given above is the only possibly correct reading, in light of the way the Japanese tended to mark their items (Note: these single piece casings on the side carry an 'otsu' (i.e. '2nd') marking!). Interpretation 1 seems to be at odds with it (in light of the actual charge weights given in OpNav 1667).
Surely we will find that the 4th weight increment is the 5.4 grams one.
Cheers,
Olafo
Sorry, I'm half ill today and hence I made an -IMO- misinterpretation above. The forum software doesn't let me edit it anymore, so please ignore the above post, and just read the corrected version down below instead, which I feel is the correct interpretation:
Hi Lou,
Nice one!
I have quite a few charge bags by now, but not yet this particular one. Am I mistaken or is it maybe only half of it (i.e. the top part)?
If it's complete, it should be like an "empty cushion". The given transcript above is IMO not completely correct. After having studied quite a few specimens, it is my understanding that the proper reading is as follows:
The cannons: "Osaka arsenal"
Above the cannons: "1 Sho 14" = January, Showa year 14 = January 1939.
Left of the cannons: "5 g" = AFAIK, the actual filled weight, in this case 5 grams.
Right of the cannons: "3", the meaning of this is as of yet not known to me.
Below the cannons: "Type 92 infantry gun 2nd 4th".
The part below the cannons is open for two distinct interpretations to me, being:
Below the cannons, interpretation 1: "Type 92 infantry gun 2nd (and/or) 4th (charge increment)".
Below the cannons, interpretation 2: "Type 92 infantry gun 2nd (type casing) 4th (charge increment)".
It is my opinion that the second interpretation is the correct one.
I'll explain:
The usage of the final position for the charge increment designator seems to be consistent with what is seen on actual other specimens. As an example, I have some 7 15cm charge bags at home that initially had me very puzzled, as just like Bougainville, I assumed the Kanji '1', '2', or '3' marked on them to be the charge increment designator. This was then wildly at odds with the actual filled weights mentioned elsewhere on the same charge bag, vs. the indications for the weight increments given in OpNav 1667. Further interpreting the bottom markings, after the weapon type, then made clear to me that for the types of charge bags that come in increments, ALWAYS the very last position of the markings is occupied by an indicator depicting the charge increment.
Now, Interestingly enough, this bag of yours shows TWO such indicators; "otsu" meaning "2nd" followed by "tei" meaning "4th".
OpNav 1667 doesn't have a very nice clear table of the actual weights per charge increment (I shall check the British docs to see if they do list them separately), but instead it just mentions 4 'normal' increments, being: 5.4 grams, 8.9 grams, 16.8 grams, 18.7 grams, all in dark blue (?!?) silk bags. Also, there was a fifth special one, in light blue silk, being a 3.1 grams black powder igniting charge.
The mention of these colours has always very much puzzled me. So far, all gun type charge bags I have seen have been made of white silk, with some of the really big ones being 'tan' coloured (possibly not bleached?), with as sole exception a yellow-brownish tall donut shaped mortar charge bags, which unfortunately I missed out on.
I have not yet seen any blue bags, and overall spoken I concur that this is most likely to be indeed a charge bag for the 70x101R Type 92 infantry gun. It's my guess that the Japanese also used white bags for this calibre. A further strange matter is the potentially double increment indicator; the Japanese were not known for "over marking" their items, and charge bags were no exception: these tended to be marked as minimalistic as possible, whilst featuring all information of relevance. In light of the quoted increment weights, it would make no sense that there would be a 2nd AND 4th increment that would be around 5 grams (as suggested by interpretation 1), whereas only one similar weight (i.e. 5.4 grams) is given in OpNav 1667.
Now, as the casings for this particular calibre came in two types, being the very uncommon "1st type" (with a thread near the bottom, so it could be screwed open to vary the charge - see Bougainville's gallery for pictures), and the more common "2nd type" (often quoted as "Mod. B") single piece casing. It is my opinion that the second interpretation given above is the only possibly correct reading, in light of the way the Japanese tended to mark their items (Note: these single piece casings on the side carry an 'otsu' (i.e. '2nd') marking!). Interpretation 1 seems to be at odds with it (in light of the actual charge weights given in OpNav 1667).
Surely we will find that the 4th weight increment is the 5.4 grams one.
Cheers,
Olafo
Last edited:
Hi,
O.k., I forked out some time to check the British documents, and they are far superior to OpNav 1667.
If you download the following document:
http://www.nvbmb.nl/downloads/e19.pdf
...you can check pages 2 and 5 for confirmation of all of my assumptions. Charge no.2, indicated with a 'D', is the 76 grains (i.e. 5 grams) one. Note on page 5 that it is indeed marked with the 'tei' marking, winding down to "4th" increment.
This document also shows that these charge bags indeed existed in white silk too (along with the blue silk versions).
The attached document also has some very nice drawings and pictures of this type of ammunition.
Enjoy!
Olafo
O.k., I forked out some time to check the British documents, and they are far superior to OpNav 1667.
If you download the following document:
http://www.nvbmb.nl/downloads/e19.pdf
...you can check pages 2 and 5 for confirmation of all of my assumptions. Charge no.2, indicated with a 'D', is the 76 grains (i.e. 5 grams) one. Note on page 5 that it is indeed marked with the 'tei' marking, winding down to "4th" increment.
This document also shows that these charge bags indeed existed in white silk too (along with the blue silk versions).
The attached document also has some very nice drawings and pictures of this type of ammunition.
Enjoy!
Olafo
Lou
Well-Known Member
Last edited: