Cnock Posted 31 December , 2014 Share Posted 31 December , 2014 with Gewehr 88 with Gewehr 88 with Gewehr 88 in the trenches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cnock Posted 31 December , 2014 Author Share Posted 31 December , 2014 with Ersatz bayonet and Demag knife/short bayo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 31 December , 2014 Share Posted 31 December , 2014 with Gewehr 88 with Gewehr 88 with Gewehr 88 in the trenches Those are really great photographs! Especially that last one, which I may want to use in an article - but if I wish to do so I will of course request your permission first. I am away from Ankara and so I can't cross-check my books for a list of known units who used the Ersatz, but it is useful to have the photographic information that what I think is the Landwehr-Infanterie-Regiment Nr. 102 (sächs.) - he has an 'L' over the 120 on his Überzug; and the 9. Rheinisches Infanterie-Regiment Nr.160, used them. Trajan with Ersatz bayonet and Demag knife/short bayo Another nice one - and I have never seen somebody with both a Demag and a bayonet of any kind before! Any chance of getting the unit number? Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cnock Posted 31 December , 2014 Author Share Posted 31 December , 2014 Trajan, yes You may use the foto, it is part of a larger postcard, taken in North Italie (Piave) regiments are indeed L 102 and nr.160 regards, Cnock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 31 December , 2014 Share Posted 31 December , 2014 Just question from ignorance, Cnock Previously I would have assumed Ersazt bayonets would have been more common later in the war. These pictures (well at least the first three) would seem to suggest earlier (pickelhalben etc) - so was it rather that Ersazt bayonets were produced as a stop-gap (quick production) to fulfill an early shortfall in numbers rather than as a result of shortage of materials later? Happy New Year! Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 31 December , 2014 Share Posted 31 December , 2014 So was it rather that Ersazt bayonets were produced as a stop-gap (quick production) to fulfill an early shortfall in numbers rather than as a result of shortage of materials later? Yes that is exactly the situation as you describe, they were caught short early on in the war (ie 1915/16) but later production managed to keep up with demand. And a Happy New Year to you as well Chris.! Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph J. Whitehead Posted 31 December , 2014 Share Posted 31 December , 2014 In regard to the use of Ersatz items, many times they were used in training. I have many photos of men using similar items with Swiss rifles, etc. Sometimes the equipment would be upgraded when going to the front. The first photos are of men in or just finishing training. Many shortcuts were used in equipment where outdated machine guns were issued in the field, some reserve batteries did not have 10.5cm light field howitzers, the regiments used a mix of Model 98 and Model 88 rifles, even late 19th Century M73 8.8cm field guns were used without shields, recoil systems, etc. While prepared for a massive increase in the army numbers it was still a strain to get everything in place and equip them quickly. Ralph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 31 December , 2014 Share Posted 31 December , 2014 Yes that is exactly the situation as you describe, they were caught short early on in the war (ie 1915/16) but later production managed to keep up with demand. And a Happy New Year to you as well Chris.! Cheers, S>S Cobber, I think you are incorrect here - they were 'caught short' in 1914, and responded pretty much immediately... IIRC, and according to my notes, the facts are that the Interimsseitengewehr - the first of the Ersatz series - was commissioned 11 Nov. 1914... The all steel Aufshilfsseitengewehr 88/98 came into production sometime around March 1915. As I remember it, and I could be wrong, the production of these all-steel versions probably started to slow down in favour of 'regular' bayonets around late 1916, when some of the firms originally contracted to make the all-steel 'Ersatz' (e.g., Bekka-Rekord) began making the 84/98, but the evidence is that all-steel Ersatz production may not have ended until 1917. Oh, one minute to midnight here! Happy New Year! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 1 January , 2015 Share Posted 1 January , 2015 ... so was it rather that Ersazt bayonets were produced as a stop-gap (quick production) to fulfill an early shortfall in numbers rather than as a result of shortage of materials later? Precisely! Well, up to a point! The commission of the Interimsseitengewehr - literally, the 'interim [measure] bayonet' (or S.1914 bayonet), was (as stated above) in November 1914, and the introduction of the all-steel job came in 1915. In 1914 the German army suddenly had to mobilise around a million men and there were not enough rifles never mind bayonets to go around (I have talked about the desperate need by Germany for foreign rifles on another GWF thread - Fremde Gewehre). The German documents are pretty clear, if not precise. BUT, it seems that the immediate need for steel for heavy weapons (artillery and the like) meant that from late 1914 the heavy industry boys were focussed on producing metal for and making these rather than making bayonets, the production of which was contracted out initially to small firms, for example, SAMSON, ODEON, and GOTTSCHO. By 1915, other firms were employed in the production of the same and all-metal bayonets, but a glance at the the production of 98/05 bayonets shows that more firms were engaged in making these in 1915/1916 than was the case earlier, so marking the gradual demise in production of the all-steel Ersatz. The information is all there, in the literature (German and English)... But not everyone likes to follow the bookish learnin' approach... Quarter past midnight here - so belated Happy New Year! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 1 January , 2015 Share Posted 1 January , 2015 In regard to the use of Ersatz items, many times they were used in training. I have many photos of men using similar items with Swiss rifles, etc. Sometimes the equipment would be upgraded when going to the front. The first photos are of men in or just finishing training. Many shortcuts were used in equipment where outdated machine guns were issued in the field, some reserve batteries did not have 10.5cm light field howitzers, the regiments used a mix of Model 98 and Model 88 rifles, even late 19th Century M73 8.8cm field guns were used without shields, recoil systems, etc. While prepared for a massive increase in the army numbers it was still a strain to get everything in place and equip them quickly. Ralph Exactly Ralph. August 1914 saw German units armed with everything up to and including the Gew.98 - some units even had refurbished Gras rifles captured in 1871... The great need for German in 1914 was for steel and factories for making artillery, not bayonets, and so bayonets took the back seat for a couple of years. Note the incredible use by German of captured rifles and bayonets - especially the Russian jobs... Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 3 January , 2015 Share Posted 3 January , 2015 I contacted a German bayonet collector on this issue - why and when were 'Erstaz' bayonets made - and he quoted me this: "They were made not because of a shortage of material but simply because of the need to provide the great number of newly mobilised German soldiers (the whole lot - Erstaz batallions and all) with bayonets". More interestingly, he also commented (but without providing a source - yet!) that there was a complaint by the Prussian War Ministry in Spring 1915 that the 'S 14', the original intermisseitengewehr, were even more expensive than the all-steel 'Ersatz' jobs... Now, ok, I need to get more data on this... But, given that S 84/98 n.A. started to be made in 1915 (but when?), this allows for a hypothesis. Might it be that after the initial contracts were sent out to Odeon, etc., in November 1914 for the making of the S 14, that as these were proving expensive and/or time consuming to supply, the all-steel 'Erstaz' jobs were quickly commissioned to make up the shortfall? And might it be that by Spring 1915, when the Prussian War Ministry realised it was cheaper and more efficient to get 'regular' bayonet makers back up to speed, so the production of the S 84/98 (and others) began in earnest bringing about the eventual termination of the contracts for the all-steel 'Ersatz'? All comments welcomed! I am perchance am bloedesten in this area of studies.. Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 23 February , 2015 Share Posted 23 February , 2015 with Gewehr 88... Looking back over these excellent photographs to see what else can be learnt from them... That chappie in Landwehr-Inf.Reg. Nr. 102 looks to have a EB 34, with a set-back 'muzzle ring' - not a common type. The man with 9. Rheinisches Infanterie-Regiment Nr.160 has one of those double-crossguard pieces from the EB 3-6 group (Carter, not being a trained typologist, massively over classification the Ersatz series! These EB 3-6 are all essentially the same re: grip and crossguard type, just minor variations in the shape of the handle, fullers, etc.). The third chappie has one in the EB 9-13 series - solid crossguard, I think (again, over classification...). The fourth one was the one that has just really caught my attention, though, the grenade thrower... What's he doing with an Ersatz (I guess EB3-6 type?) in a leather scabbard? Have to check the scabbard type later as the wife and boys have just come home and dinner to make (cottage pie...!). Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gew88/05 Posted 24 February , 2015 Share Posted 24 February , 2015 Let us know what you find about the "leather scabbard". I think you will find that it is one of the standard ersatz scabbards with mud or damage that gives you the impression of it being leather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 24 February , 2015 Share Posted 24 February , 2015 Let us know what you find about the "leather scabbard". I think you will find that it is one of the standard ersatz scabbards with mud or damage that gives you the impression of it being leather. I did wonder about that... But rushed into things while being hassled here as the the frog looks to be a 98/05 type with a straight top edge to the frog-stud opening, and the shiny bit at the bottom of the scabbard looks like a metal chape - and an EB 9-13 series bayonet does fit into a 98/05 leather scabbard. But, on reflection you are probably right - the shape of the 'chape' is as an Erstaz type 4-5-6 scabbard, and is not right for a 98/05 chape. So, yes, strange pattern of wear of the paint there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gew88/05 Posted 25 February , 2015 Share Posted 25 February , 2015 You are certainly correct about the 98/05 frog, possibly a salvaged frog reissued with an ersatz bayonet and scabbard, certainly by 1915 equipment was being scavenged and reissued. And an ersatz bayonet will fit in a 98/05 scabbard but I can't think that would be the case here. I had meant to say in my earlier post that these are excellent photos, thanks to Cnock for sharing them with us, detail is excellent, I especially like the riveted sling shown on the Gew88 in the first image. Also, the Ersatz bayonet and Demag in the 5th photo would be no more unusual than a bayonet and trench knife of any other pattern. Still, quite an inspiration for speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 17 March , 2015 Share Posted 17 March , 2015 Having just started analysing the data of over 400 Erstaz bayonets that can be positively associated with specific regiments, I thought I'd bring this thread up to date with some of the relevant documentary information and other data. Full details (i.e., final analysis, references, etc.) will be put up later, but just for teasers( ): From the documentary evidence I have managed to accumulate so far the production dates for all forms of the knife-type Ersatz can be narrowed down to November 1914 - September 1915, the peak period for their production being in the months leading up to June 1915 - in that period, almost half of the bayonets received into service by one State were Ersatz knife-bayonets... Orders were given for the gradual withdrawal of the Ersatz from front-line units and their replacement with (mainly) 98/05's sometime around the middle of 1915, and by the end of that year (November, to be precise), they were also being withdrawn from service with Landwehr and Landsturm units. Despite the consensus view, that the Ersatz were predominately used by "recruiting and clothing depots, training battalions and companies from infantry regiments and for machine gun troops, Landwehr or Landsturm formations and lines of communication units", some 40% of the examples identified by unit were in the possession of regular line infantry regiments. A reasonable number of Ersatz were issued to cavalry units, which ties in with the documentary evidence that in November 1914, the decision was made to arm cavalry units with shorter bayonets. However, I have not as yet identified a single Ersatz issued to any of the 13 or so Jäger-Regimenter-zu-Pferde... Anybody out there got one???!!! That's all for now, as more work needs to be done on the data (and in any case my regular work, what pays for my hobby, demands attention!), but I hope the above may be of interest to some of you out there... Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 29 March , 2015 Share Posted 29 March , 2015 And following on from the above... I am remarkably short of examples of paired unit-marked Erstaz bayonets and scabbards... Only 12 so far from over 400 in my data base - which of course I am happy to share details with for those interested! This proportion appears to be less than the unit-marked examples of the S.84/98 which was issued around the same period... So, if anyone out on GWF has such a thing as a paired marking for an Ersatz bayonet and scabbard - or even an unpaired marking with just a marked scabbard! - I'd love to hear from you!!! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 30 March , 2015 Share Posted 30 March , 2015 Trajan Thanks for putting up this information, that date range is very interesting. No matching numbers for me Im afraid, although the one unit makred ersatz bayonet i have is a regular unit - the 1st Bavarian regiment. Cheers, Jonathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 30 March , 2015 Share Posted 30 March , 2015 Trajan Thanks for putting up this information, that date range is very interesting. No matching numbers for me Im afraid, although the one unit makred ersatz bayonet i have is a regular unit - the 1st Bavarian regiment. Cheers, Jonathan Happy to hear it is of interest! And I'd like details of that Bavarian one if I may - I'm also looking into whether specific AK received distinctive types of Ersatz... Haven't got too far there, yet, but one thing I have noticed to date is that although I have at least one unit-marked Ersatz for each of the AK, the majority are for units attached to 3 or 4 specific AK. It could be simply because those units kept marking weapons after 1914, or it could be because they received more Ersatz than other AK... I am working on a way to test those ideas... Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 30 March , 2015 Share Posted 30 March , 2015 Hi Trajan - I actually posted the unit marking in your "German bayonet unit markings" thread - around page 4 or 5 from memory. Cheers, Jonathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 30 March , 2015 Share Posted 30 March , 2015 Hi Trajan - I actually posted the unit marking in your "German bayonet unit markings" thread - around page 4 or 5 from memory. Cheers, Jonathan I thought you might have done... To tell the truth I haven't scoured the GWF for unit marked examples of Ersatz to add to the data bank yet ... That will be next weeks / months job... (Sometimes I wish I could take 'early' retirement, but 10-12 years to go before the kids are out of school - their granny can take over the uni. bit!)... Anyway, found the post and yours is one of the EB 09-13 series, I think? And 'B.I.R.3.3.', and so Königlich Bayerisch 1. Infanterie-Regiment Kompagnie 3.Waffe 3. A quick scan of my Ersatz data bank (still in the 'editing' phase) indicates 15 or so out of the over 400 that were issued to Bavarian units - yours makes it 16, so they are around 3.7% of the total, and is the first one so far recorded as issued to the Königlich Bayerisch 1. Infanterie-Regiment. No time to check now - but wonder what percentage of the German army was formed by Bavarian units? Would be fun if it was also only around 3-4%! Trajan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jscott Posted 30 March , 2015 Share Posted 30 March , 2015 My feeling would be it might be a bit higher than that - my guess would be 10%? But thats pure speculation. German unit markings seem to follow odd trends. I have a 98/05 marked to the Bavarian 5th regiment and if you take a look at the Roy Williams book there are about 5 bayonets marked to this specific Bavarian regiment, which seems like an extraordinarily high percentage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 30 March , 2015 Share Posted 30 March , 2015 My feeling would be it might be a bit higher than that - my guess would be 10%? But thats pure speculation. German unit markings seem to follow odd trends. I have a 98/05 marked to the Bavarian 5th regiment and if you take a look at the Roy Williams book there are about 5 bayonets marked to this specific Bavarian regiment, which seems like an extraordinarily high percentage. Yes, I must check on those proportions, Bavarian to the rest - on the basis of regular pre-August 1914 I think there were 21 AK and 3 Bav.AK, so yes, - without counting actual regiments, etc., that would be a nominal 14% or so... As for marking patterns, yes they do indeed follow odd trends! Some units certainly kept marking until 1916 (when ordered to stop), and others may well have stopped before then... Plus, of course, the 'survival' factor in biasing the results... Even so, why is it, for example, that there are seemingly no Ersatz marked to those Jaeger zu pferd regiments? After all, I believe that they were issued with carbines (and will doubtless be corrected soon if I am wrong on that!) and already in the autumn/winter of 1914 there is documentation about issuing short bayonets, including 'metal-handled' ones to mounted units - so, why this exception? I find it a little odd that I have examples of Ersatz marked for all the other mounted units, but not these jaeger zu pferd boys. As for the regular bayonets, I do have a draft data set of the Colonial KS 98 ones, which shows some very odd patterns and which I want to get out of the way next, and then my aim is to get a data base of unit-marked regular bayonets, again to see what the patterning is... It's those odd exceptions that prove the rule that fascinate me - as in why would a MGK man have a S.98? Trajan PS: Yes, I know, 'Get a life', and all that - but I am simply applying to these German bayonets the same analysis I use for Roman army units... And this is more fun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 22 April , 2015 Share Posted 22 April , 2015 Just an update... Data crunching (and adding!) goes on in the odd spare hour when the boys are out! Well, I have some 450 unit marked or unit-associated (by photographs) Ersatz listed so far, and of these somewhat less than half (177) are marked for units that in theory at least certainly saw regular service, that is to say, they are regular IR and cavalry units, and reserve IR and Ersatz IR units. If one adds the Landsturm, though, it pops up to almost 50%, and adding the Landwehr tips the balance - a total of 271. What I haven't done the sums on yet are the artillery examples (but still no foot (i.e., heavy) artillery examples), a fair number of miscellaneous 'MGK's, and so on. But, examples marked for the BekleidungsAmt, Recruit depots, flieger, etc., are very few and far between - a rough guess? Less than 60! So, the evidence so far goes against what Carter (and others) have believed, that most went to rear units... Trajan PS: it should be needless to say, but just for confirmation I will be putting up the final analysis when that is completed! And of course am happy to share what I have now if others wish to see it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khaki Posted 22 April , 2015 Share Posted 22 April , 2015 Cobber, I think you are incorrect here - they were 'caught short' in 1914, and responded pretty much immediately... IIRC, and according to my notes, the facts are that the Interimsseitengewehr - the first of the Ersatz series - was commissioned 11 Nov. 1914... The all steel Aufshilfsseitengewehr 88/98 came into production sometime around March 1915. As I remember it, and I could be wrong, the production of these all-steel versions probably started to slow down in favour of 'regular' bayonets around late 1916, when some of the firms originally contracted to make the all-steel 'Ersatz' (e.g., Bekka-Rekord) began making the 84/98, but the evidence is that all-steel Ersatz production may not have ended until 1917. Oh, one minute to midnight here! Happy New Year! From what I have read Julian, you are absolutely correct about the 1914 shortfall in bayonets being the 'spur' behind the manufacture of ersatz models. From what I can tell there is nothing physically wrong with an all metal bayonet, the feel and balance seem ok. I wonder why they didn't continue on with production instead of returning to the 'originals' that appear to require more 'workmanship'. khaki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now