Luftamp 4 marked depot K98k - DWM recycled receiver

Hello,
For your viewing and comment here is a Luftwaffe depot build rifle marked with the Luftamp 4 proof and found in the e-block serial range as is supposedly common with these. It uses a 1918 recycled DWM reciever which I also read may be common at the end of the depot build range. I just bought it today from a friend. I told him what it was when I first saw it and thus offered a fair price. I was fairly certain it was correct and seems to match the profile since doing even more research. I am not sure why the rifles were in such short supply in '40-'41 (I think this is the accepted period - please correct me) that they needed to fulfill the contract using rebuilds but I am sure someone here will know. Please post any commentary, positive or negative, and please understand that while I understand enough to know what it is, I can still learn plenty more so any info is welcome. I also assume these were primarily issues to paratroops and AA gunners, correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks,
Diehard

pics

few more,
Diehard

wow

coolest rifle ive seen posted in a while !!! A true depot build. Non recycled g98 rec. Never serial numbered. Left over 1918 rec. I had one built up as a g98m.
This shows the lenght the luftwaffe would go to produce rifles during this period. As a major shortage of k98's was aparant in 41.. This falls into the left over BSW builds and a pant load of luftampt 4 rebarrels as well...

quite an interesting rifle....second LzA built rifle on a WW1 rec ive ever seen. cool cxm bbl too. thanks for sharing

Nice rifle, thanks for posting! And is that a Reichsbahn eagle in your avatar?

more pics

A few more to include the bolt.
Yes, Berliner, at least in spirit it is a railway eagle but I believe it to be a reproduction.

Thanks,
Diehard

Very cool K98k! Thanks for sharing the pics.

DiehardWWII said:

I am not sure why the rifles were in such short supply in '40-'41 (I think this is the accepted period - please correct me) that they needed to fulfill the contract using rebuilds but I am sure someone here will know. [...] I also assume these were primarily issues to paratroops and AA gunners, correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks,
Diehard

Click to expand...

Apparently, rifle production in 1941 plunged. The usual reason given (by BBTOW) is overworked factory workers and lack of investment in factory maintenance and modernization. I'm sure that Mike and Bruce will give us a much better answer in VolII. This dip in production coupled with the large equipment losses in the East in 1941 probably resulted in weapon shortages (or at least the fear of it). So the Army and Luftwaffe had their depot systems start rifle assembly in 1941/42 to supplement the struggling factories. Anybody know if they assembled any MGs as well?

Very cool e block. I'd say most of these ended up in the mobile AA units and later the field divisions. Certainly, some ended up in FJ units as well. Thanks for sharing!

Very nice and interesting rifle. Thanks for posting.

That is a cool rifle. I don't know why production lagged in 40-41 (or if it even did, I haven't seen the numbers), but we are going to dig into that question. Another theory may be that production didn't lag at all, just that forces expanded beyond production capacity:

From http://www.axishistory.com/index.php?id=3633

Manpower strength of the Wehrmacht

1939 1.300.000
1940 5.600.000
1941 7.200.000
1942 8.600.000
1943 9.500.000
1944 9.100.000

Source: "The Penguin Historical Atlas of the Third Reich" by Richard Overy

Think about it- going from 1.3 million to 7.2 million in 2 years!

That is a great rifle!

Thanks for posting!!!



..

Very interesting rifle.. One of the most interesting ones' that I have seen in a long while...BILL

Neat rifle, textbook for these well known depot build variants. All of these assemblies bear consistent characteristics showing they were done by the same depot. Mine is a BSW 1939, but there are Gew.98 receivers, bcd 41 recievers, blank receivers, all known on these, with armorer or recycled parts. They are all "e" block. They are all numbered in the same fashion. They were fabricated at the earliest in later '41 and assuredly in 1942. Thanks for posting it Diehard.

Great rifle

As other have said..the most interesting rifle posted here in a while.

1940 and 1941 monthly rifle production figures found on the web. Note big drop in October-December. Apparently, these numbers are from the massive Das Deutche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg Volume V/I. Haven't been able to find the figures from V/II which covers from 1942-1945. The books have been translated into English, but copies range from $300 to $800 a piece.

Drop in Rifle Production - Late 1941

My thoughts on the lower production in late 1941 were that they were not due to any problem at the K98k contractors but a combination of lower orders from the war ministry and the loss of ERMA as a primary contractor. When we start digging in to Vol.2 and get any military purchase order data from 1941 that should help clarify the situation. Records for Mauser are spotty but those surviving records in Jon's collection are the best shot at getting a snapshot of what was happening from a procurement basis in that time period.

Obviously too, the drops in production were a result of manpower, materials, and production being diverted to other more important things, such as AFVs, aircraft, heavy munitions, MGs, etc., all of which were much more important to Barbarossa than K98ks. Interesting stuff.

Thats one neat rifle. First time Ive seen one like it. Thanks for taking the time to share with us

Production across the board lagged in 1941, it wasn't due to any decrease in orders or commitment of resources to the war effort though (these factors had never been higher). Fully 55% of the industrial workforce was committed to direct war contracts, most of the balance to industries critical to the economy and war industries indirectly (mining, steel, transportation, etc...). In part it was due to what Craig alludes too, diversion of resources to other fields (autarky programs in particular took enormous resources, - synthetic fuels, rubber substitutes etc..), also the military took large numbers of skilled workers into its ranks, nearly a million from the metal working fields alone by 1941, - the military was by far the largest impediment to mass production up until 1942, they not only plundered war industries of the most skilled and efficient workers (unlike in the western democracies) but also meddled endlessly in how contracts were undertaken and conducted.

While Germany had been on a war footing prior to the war, efficiency declined as the war progressed. By 1941 output per worker was lower than in 1939, even with much more resources committed to the war effort. This was industry wide, not just in small arms. The main problems revolved around the fact that the military had too large a role in manufacturing and that Germany lacked a sufficient centralize control over industry (as existed in the United States & Britain). The various branches of the military contracted directly with manufacturers (competing with one another, often duplicating effort and wasting raw materials), they meddled in every aspect of production, demanding high finish standards at the expense of production and often making changes to production models without regard to the impact on efficiency. Worse the military had significant contempt for any type of civilian control (or influence) or restraint in military meddling in production, they resented mere civilians dictating military production standards or procedure. If this wasn't bad enough, military conscription in the skilled work force was decimating the most efficient workers, largely without need, as the German military wasn't short of manpower, they were poorly organized (bayonet strength to support) and inefficient with the men they received- as General Milch outlined during the war, when he had a study conducted to show the military (Army) was misusing the manpower it already had and didn't need to cripple German industry with more demands...

Anyway, there are other reasons, a great many in fact, they are critically outlined in a number of books, some of them costing hundreds of dollars as Ryan stated, but the best author on this subject, that is readily available, is the one Mike mentioned. I mentioned this author to Bruce a couple years ago also, - Richard Overy, I recommend you avoid all of his "pulp history" books, which are numerous, but do consider the following two books if you have an interest in the German war economy.

His best work is found in his early writing for economic journals, a publisher condensed many of these obscure economic journal articles into one really must have book, "War and Economy of the Third Reich", which is without a doubt the best overview of the topics relating to war production.

The only other book I would recommend of his, related to this topic, is a book some might not think related, it is actually more a biography of Göring, but as many know, Göring was the head of the German economy and played an important (and incredibly detrimental) role in the German war economy. The title is "GOERING, The Iron Man".

mrfarb said:

... by Richard Overy

Click to expand...

Thank you Paul. I was fumbling about with the general concept, but not the important facts. The stereotype is of industrial efficiency, but you've shown different.