what rifle did the north koreans use?
- Thread starter scoops
- Start date
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
scoops, you ever been to Korea? Lemme put it this way: Don't take a 100-yard gun to a 500-yard fight. Korea has multitudes of mountain ridges with fairly wide valleys between--which is why "Take The High Ground" was so important.
In 1950, both North Korea and Communist China had mostly a mish-mash of old Soviet arms, Japanese arms, and some U.S. stuff. Of course, they did have a helluva lot of it. By 1950, Russia had done a bunch of supplying to NK and the PRC with their pre-WW II leftovers and some of the then-modern stuff.
The NK folks mostly had the old Moisin-Nagant bolt actions plus some copies of the Soviet PPSh M1941 subgun.
According to some of the guys who had been in combat there, the Chinese "human wave" assaults had the first few ranks with full-auto stuff; the next ranks had the bolt-actions; and the next ranks had clubs, knives and bags of ammo.
FWIW, Art
In 1950, both North Korea and Communist China had mostly a mish-mash of old Soviet arms, Japanese arms, and some U.S. stuff. Of course, they did have a helluva lot of it. By 1950, Russia had done a bunch of supplying to NK and the PRC with their pre-WW II leftovers and some of the then-modern stuff.
The NK folks mostly had the old Moisin-Nagant bolt actions plus some copies of the Soviet PPSh M1941 subgun.
According to some of the guys who had been in combat there, the Chinese "human wave" assaults had the first few ranks with full-auto stuff; the next ranks had the bolt-actions; and the next ranks had clubs, knives and bags of ammo.
FWIW, Art
I'd much rather have had an M1 than most of the weapons that either the Chinese or the NKs had. Not only would it function in nearly all weather conditions, but it was accurate and powerful.
Of course, given my druthers, I'd rather have had a BAR. All the benefits of the M1, plus higher rate of fire.
Of course, given my druthers, I'd rather have had a BAR. All the benefits of the M1, plus higher rate of fire.
Mike Irwin
Staff
Mainly they had Moisin Nagant rifles, Arisaka Type 38s in 6.5mm, and PPsH and variant submachine guns.
The SKS MAY have been used, but I don't think so. The AK-47 was still a Soviet state secret at this time, so I don't think it ever made an appearance.
The SKS MAY have been used, but I don't think so. The AK-47 was still a Soviet state secret at this time, so I don't think it ever made an appearance.
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
buzz_knox, I watched a demo of a BAR in Basic in 1954, and have played Jimmy Carter, ever since: Lusted in my heart, if not my billfold. It's far more usable at 500 yards than any FAL, G3, whatever--it's controllable.
Staying away from home defense, plinking and all that, I'll take a Garand over any carbine type critter, any day. If I'm seriously hostile and it's any sort of battlefield situation, I wanna be able to play Ma Bell and have them hear the call.
, Art
It's far more usable at 500 yards than any FAL, G3, whatever--it's controllable.Staying away from home defense, plinking and all that, I'll take a Garand over any carbine type critter, any day. If I'm seriously hostile and it's any sort of battlefield situation, I wanna be able to play Ma Bell and have them hear the call.
, ArtThe NK & Chicoms used mostly Moisin Nagants & PPShs, some Chicom divisions were armed completely with US weaponry left over from their Civil War -lots of them were even US-trained, this is why the communists killed them off in human wave assaults. I've never heard of units armed with clubs before -the Chicom units in Korea were actually elite units, they were just screwed in their leadership, tactics and supply.
PPShs were really common, it cost less than a Moisin Nagant to make & took 3.5 minutes to manufacture.
Korea is not "arctic" although cold enough.
UN units there had to "pee" on their guns to unfreeze them, probably the same for the communists.
PPShs were really common, it cost less than a Moisin Nagant to make & took 3.5 minutes to manufacture.
Korea is not "arctic" although cold enough.
UN units there had to "pee" on their guns to unfreeze them, probably the same for the communists.
http://www.mosin-nagant.net/russian_mosin_nagant-m44carbine03.html
Good picture of a happy GI with his captured M44 in Korea
Good picture of a happy GI with his captured M44 in Korea
Mike Irwin
Staff
"took 3.5 minutes to manufacture..."
Uh... No.
Assembly maybe, but manufacturing took longer than that. About 4 to 7 hours total, if you include the time spent running the stock blank through the pantographic lathe.
Uh... No.
Assembly maybe, but manufacturing took longer than that. About 4 to 7 hours total, if you include the time spent running the stock blank through the pantographic lathe.
Did you see movie "Enemy at the gate"?
chinese army were most like that, "1 person with rifle shoot", "person with ammo behind pick up rifle when he falls",
and most of GI took mistake to see as human wave, since most of chinese attack was at dark night, since they didn't have good air nor artillary support like US,
real human wave tactics were used by south korean army by south korean army,
chinese army were most like that, "1 person with rifle shoot", "person with ammo behind pick up rifle when he falls",
and most of GI took mistake to see as human wave, since most of chinese attack was at dark night, since they didn't have good air nor artillary support like US,
real human wave tactics were used by south korean army by south korean army,
Last edited:
Art Eatman:
My uncle was issued a BAR during Korean War. He never had a good thing to say about the weapon to the day he died. He told me about having that heavy weapon up one mountain then down the other side followed by up another mountain... Also, he told me about how he was afraid of the recoil from the weapon. He told me how he hated that POS all his life. But then maybe it was because he was 16 years old and was no more than 5' 3" and 110 pounds in those days.
25 years later when my cousin arrived in Vietnam guess what he was issued? Yup, a BAR. He actually thought the BAR was a very good weapon but not in the middle of triple canopy jungle. He carried the BAR for about 5 months in Vietnam until he switched to a M2 Carbine.
You should have seen those 2 guys argue about the BAR after finishing a bottle of Johnny Walker.
My uncle was issued a BAR during Korean War. He never had a good thing to say about the weapon to the day he died. He told me about having that heavy weapon up one mountain then down the other side followed by up another mountain... Also, he told me about how he was afraid of the recoil from the weapon. He told me how he hated that POS all his life. But then maybe it was because he was 16 years old and was no more than 5' 3" and 110 pounds in those days.
25 years later when my cousin arrived in Vietnam guess what he was issued? Yup, a BAR. He actually thought the BAR was a very good weapon but not in the middle of triple canopy jungle. He carried the BAR for about 5 months in Vietnam until he switched to a M2 Carbine.
You should have seen those 2 guys argue about the BAR after finishing a bottle of Johnny Walker.
CWL:
You are thinking about the PPS M1943. PPShM 1941 took a lot more time and machinery to build. PPS M1943 was designed to be built using very basic machinery and less than 4 man hour of labor. I saw couple of M1943 when I visited Moscow and you can see that the barrel jacket was formed with a hammer. They looked very crude but it worked good enough to beat the Germans.
You are thinking about the PPS M1943. PPShM 1941 took a lot more time and machinery to build. PPS M1943 was designed to be built using very basic machinery and less than 4 man hour of labor. I saw couple of M1943 when I visited Moscow and you can see that the barrel jacket was formed with a hammer. They looked very crude but it worked good enough to beat the Germans.
johnAK:
As someone pointed out previously, the Chinese "Volunteer" divisions in the Korean War were "elite" by their standards. They were armed fairly well (and not with bags of ammo, clubs or knives).
The Chinese Communist forces did use the so-called human wave attacks in Korea. Generally though, the Chinese preceded such attacks by infiltration and flanking first. Some of the "human wave" attacks were necessitated by constricted geography of the Korean battlefields. During the Chinese Civil War itself, the Chi-Com forces actually showed considerable ability to maneuver, particularly near the end of the conflict.
ROK forces did NOT use human wave attacks except perhaps at the end of the war during the battles for the hilltops. Throughout most of the war, ROK troops generally broke easily, especially when attacked by armored forces or Chinese troops.
To be fair, the ROK forces were generally poorly equipped, led and trained. They had virtually no anti-tank weapons to speak of and they lost most of their better trained officers and men during the retreat to the Han (1950) when the bridge was cut pre-maturely, trapping the bulk of their army north of the Han River and to the mercy of the mechanized North Korean forces.
Of course, to their credit, the ROK folks did acquit themselves well later during the Vietnam War (when they did have better weapons, leadership and training, not to mention pretty stern discipline).
Skorzeny
As someone pointed out previously, the Chinese "Volunteer" divisions in the Korean War were "elite" by their standards. They were armed fairly well (and not with bags of ammo, clubs or knives).
The Chinese Communist forces did use the so-called human wave attacks in Korea. Generally though, the Chinese preceded such attacks by infiltration and flanking first. Some of the "human wave" attacks were necessitated by constricted geography of the Korean battlefields. During the Chinese Civil War itself, the Chi-Com forces actually showed considerable ability to maneuver, particularly near the end of the conflict.
ROK forces did NOT use human wave attacks except perhaps at the end of the war during the battles for the hilltops. Throughout most of the war, ROK troops generally broke easily, especially when attacked by armored forces or Chinese troops.
To be fair, the ROK forces were generally poorly equipped, led and trained. They had virtually no anti-tank weapons to speak of and they lost most of their better trained officers and men during the retreat to the Han (1950) when the bridge was cut pre-maturely, trapping the bulk of their army north of the Han River and to the mercy of the mechanized North Korean forces.
Of course, to their credit, the ROK folks did acquit themselves well later during the Vietnam War (when they did have better weapons, leadership and training, not to mention pretty stern discipline).
Skorzeny
yes, chinese divisions were "elite" for the chinese sense since they have a little bit of battle experience,(mostly thou guerilla tactics against superior japanese forces in the north china area, not like full army strength battle experience like US),
contrary to media belief, soviet didn't supply lots of arms or ammo to neither to north korea or china, both almost begged for it to Stalin, but stalin stayed away mostly due to fear of provoking a war with britain or US in Europe,(that was main reason why soviet and china got bad relationship in '60s, simply chairman Mao got pissed in 1950-1953) probably they got a little, but not more than what US gave away after WWII, probably soviet's
purpose was clearing old inventory crap,
They lost trained south korean officers in the beginning of war? hello???? what are you talking about? that was another pure media political propaganda crap,
south korean army was established in 1948, so only 2 year of experience ( most of battle experience was fighting & killing unarmed civillian population hundreds of thousands in the south)
and most of south korean army officers and generals was ex-japanese 2nd leautenant or NCO at most, remember '60-'70 south korean dictator Gen. Park??? general??? pure POS crap, he was 2nd leautenant in japanese army in north china area when WWII ended, and became general already in 1950, most of officer and general was like that(and that was the biggest reason why south korean population didn't like south korean government, rather like north korean, also that was the reason why south korean government's main job at war was slautering civilian) and all they know about tactics are from japanese style, pure lunacy "Banzai", that's where US GI's impression of human wave attack in korean war,
contrary to media belief, soviet didn't supply lots of arms or ammo to neither to north korea or china, both almost begged for it to Stalin, but stalin stayed away mostly due to fear of provoking a war with britain or US in Europe,(that was main reason why soviet and china got bad relationship in '60s, simply chairman Mao got pissed in 1950-1953) probably they got a little, but not more than what US gave away after WWII, probably soviet's
purpose was clearing old inventory crap,
They lost trained south korean officers in the beginning of war? hello???? what are you talking about? that was another pure media political propaganda crap,
south korean army was established in 1948, so only 2 year of experience ( most of battle experience was fighting & killing unarmed civillian population hundreds of thousands in the south)
and most of south korean army officers and generals was ex-japanese 2nd leautenant or NCO at most, remember '60-'70 south korean dictator Gen. Park??? general??? pure POS crap, he was 2nd leautenant in japanese army in north china area when WWII ended, and became general already in 1950, most of officer and general was like that(and that was the biggest reason why south korean population didn't like south korean government, rather like north korean, also that was the reason why south korean government's main job at war was slautering civilian) and all they know about tactics are from japanese style, pure lunacy "Banzai", that's where US GI's impression of human wave attack in korean war,
johnAK:
You must remember that the Chinese divisions in Korea were not only veterans of the guerilla war against the Japanese, but also those of the more "conventional" war against the nationalists that ended in 1949. If you examine the history of the Chinese Civil War, you will learn that the Communist forces displayed a considerable skill in a large scale maneuver warfare, particularly near the end of the conflict. By 1950, many of their elite divisions were veterans of decades long guerilla wafare against the Japanese and over 4 years of conventional one against the Nationalists.
Contrary to your rantings about "media" knowledge, the historical fact is that the Soviet Union supplied North Korea of all its attack aircraft, armor, lorries and artillery (not to mention the PPsh that the motorized infantry were armed with) . These were decisive in the beginning of the Korean War. ROK forces (devoid of any anti-tank weapons) in the western part of Korea were overwhelmed by North Korean air, artillery and armor attacks. In the east, ROK forces actually did pretty well. ROK 6th Division in Chunchon area actually repulsed North Korean attacks and then retreated in good order when the two western divisions were overrun.
The Soviets also captured a HUGE supply of arms when they overran the Japanese Kwantung Army in Manchuria in 1945. This supply had been prepared by the Japanese since the 1930s in preparation for a possible "northern" strategy. This huge cache of arms was passed on to the Chinese when the war ended and equipped a sizable portion of the Chinese "volunteers."
Your two points about the ROK forces are valid: they were mainly trained for anti-partisan warfare (in fact, much of their forces prior to the beginning of the hostilities were engaged in counter-insurgency against communist guerillas in the South) and their officers were mainly Japanese-trained.
However, I take some issues with the statement that ROK forces killed "hundreds of thousands of unarmed civilians." While some civilians were killed during counter-insurgency operations, the number was hardly "hundreds of thousands." That sounds remarkably like communist propaganda.
Furthermore, you should recall that I wrote "better" trained. Meaning, the quality of training of the officers and men in the pre-war army were generally better than those of the middle of the war. Aside from their Japanese experience, they had two years of training from their American advisors. When this army was trapped and destroyed north of Han in 1950, what remained was, well, the remnant. Men were conscripted hastily during the chaotic retreat to the Pusan perimeter. There was hardly any "training" to speak of. Officers were simply "commissioned" (as opposed to those prior to the disaster, many of whom had some battle experience with the Japanese or training from the Americans).
The training, leadership and morale of the ROK forces did not really recover from this calamity until the ending phase of the war when some ROK forces did display discipline and bravery during the battles for the hilltops.
As for "Japanese style, pure lunacy 'Banzai'" attacks, you ought to remember not to characterize an entire military force with what came of desperate forces trapped on islands. The Japanese did not always launch into "lunatic" Banzai charges. Those attacks really came during the desperate (to the Japanese) phase of the Pacific War against the Americans (talk about "media" perception of Japanese military operations!). If you recall, they did not capture the Philippines, Singapore, Hong Kong, the Malaya, Burma and the Dutch East Indies with simple "lunacy" attacks.
Skorzeny
You must remember that the Chinese divisions in Korea were not only veterans of the guerilla war against the Japanese, but also those of the more "conventional" war against the nationalists that ended in 1949. If you examine the history of the Chinese Civil War, you will learn that the Communist forces displayed a considerable skill in a large scale maneuver warfare, particularly near the end of the conflict. By 1950, many of their elite divisions were veterans of decades long guerilla wafare against the Japanese and over 4 years of conventional one against the Nationalists.
Contrary to your rantings about "media" knowledge, the historical fact is that the Soviet Union supplied North Korea of all its attack aircraft, armor, lorries and artillery (not to mention the PPsh that the motorized infantry were armed with) . These were decisive in the beginning of the Korean War. ROK forces (devoid of any anti-tank weapons) in the western part of Korea were overwhelmed by North Korean air, artillery and armor attacks. In the east, ROK forces actually did pretty well. ROK 6th Division in Chunchon area actually repulsed North Korean attacks and then retreated in good order when the two western divisions were overrun.
The Soviets also captured a HUGE supply of arms when they overran the Japanese Kwantung Army in Manchuria in 1945. This supply had been prepared by the Japanese since the 1930s in preparation for a possible "northern" strategy. This huge cache of arms was passed on to the Chinese when the war ended and equipped a sizable portion of the Chinese "volunteers."
Your two points about the ROK forces are valid: they were mainly trained for anti-partisan warfare (in fact, much of their forces prior to the beginning of the hostilities were engaged in counter-insurgency against communist guerillas in the South) and their officers were mainly Japanese-trained.
However, I take some issues with the statement that ROK forces killed "hundreds of thousands of unarmed civilians." While some civilians were killed during counter-insurgency operations, the number was hardly "hundreds of thousands." That sounds remarkably like communist propaganda.
Furthermore, you should recall that I wrote "better" trained. Meaning, the quality of training of the officers and men in the pre-war army were generally better than those of the middle of the war. Aside from their Japanese experience, they had two years of training from their American advisors. When this army was trapped and destroyed north of Han in 1950, what remained was, well, the remnant. Men were conscripted hastily during the chaotic retreat to the Pusan perimeter. There was hardly any "training" to speak of. Officers were simply "commissioned" (as opposed to those prior to the disaster, many of whom had some battle experience with the Japanese or training from the Americans).
The training, leadership and morale of the ROK forces did not really recover from this calamity until the ending phase of the war when some ROK forces did display discipline and bravery during the battles for the hilltops.
As for "Japanese style, pure lunacy 'Banzai'" attacks, you ought to remember not to characterize an entire military force with what came of desperate forces trapped on islands. The Japanese did not always launch into "lunatic" Banzai charges. Those attacks really came during the desperate (to the Japanese) phase of the Pacific War against the Americans (talk about "media" perception of Japanese military operations!). If you recall, they did not capture the Philippines, Singapore, Hong Kong, the Malaya, Burma and the Dutch East Indies with simple "lunacy" attacks.
Skorzeny