First wartime use of SKS (other than in the Korean or Vietnam war) in the Cold War?

Sks accepted into service 1945
Red accepted into service 1945
Ak47 accepted into service 1947
Normally I use reason and logic in these situations but I will just go with the reason why we didn't see them is we were not there. Again sorry to the op
 
gewehr76 said:
Why T34/85 tanks were sent instead of JS4?
Click to expand...
They had the T-54 too, but that was super secret. Soviet policy at around 1944 was to minimise deployment of new weapons until after the war, then to keep quiet about it. They had T-34 and KV-1 at the start, with improved T-34 and KV/JS at the end. They weren't interested in introducing fantastic new weapons in the last few months like the Brits and Americans.
The West didn't get a T-54 to play with until 1956, and then they had to panic and get the 105mm L7 gun in.
I can believe that some Colonel in Korea saw a gun that he hadn't seen before and decided it must have been an SKS, certainly. But there were cameras in those days, pics or it didn't happen :).
 
Thanks for the replies, but maybe you could re-read my original post as to what I was asking for :). Does anybody have any pictures of the actual prototype SKS rifles used in the late WWII Soviet offensives, it would be great (not line drawings, or misidentified prototypes). On this score, I am not going to take the word of Western intelligence or Western historians. ;)

*Edit: I have done some cursory research on this before and only came up with one post with a pic taken from a Russian book showing some perhaps misidentified prototypes. I have no doubt the rifles depicted therein were real, but the times names and dates seem to get lost in the translation, if you know what I mean.

I would have to see the Ezell book to get an idea of what he mentioned, and what his research material was to be able to come to some sort of conclusion as to what his opinion is worth.
 
Last edited:
Turns out the account I read was from Hackworth. Copy and paste from an online source

"When I realized Chris wasn't dead and there was no chance of him dying I had another look at the dead Chinks. They looked like an FO team, but a number of them were armed with SKSs. They had not set up yet, but looked as though they were just going into position when we surprised them by coming up from behind. Their mission had probably been to put a little heat on the main line with some well-directed H&I fire and selective sniping. Well, not this time, I thought. It was broad daylight by the time we scooped up their radio, weapons, and papers and made tracks to the cut in B Company's wire. When we arrived, Sergeant Costello, another G Company stud who'd also served in the 8th Rangers, loaded the Raiders on our waiting trucks and took them home. Sudut took Chris and me to his CP so the doc could go to work."
 
After all this time & interest in red rifles and no pictures have surfaced of even one Korean capture SKS in a regimental museum in the USA or that of any other UN combatant nation? An artifact such as that would arouse tremendous interest and publicity. Still nothing in 2015!

Such claims sound to me like retail talking points at a gunshow.
 
Last edited:
Think of the timeframe 1950-1953.
Sks was adopted in the configuration we know it lets say in 1949 with spike bayo. So by 1950 the start year of Korean war, Soviet industry which was almost destroyed during the WW2 and which was not even fully recovered well into 60s. Had to crank out well over a million SKS to supply its own demand and also Chinese/North Korean armies? If that's the case then we should have been flooded with 1949 sks. So how come we have later built ones instead?
 
gewehr76 said:
Think of the timeframe 1950-1953.
Sks was adopted in the configuration we know it lets say in 1949 with spike bayo. So by 1950 the start year of Korean war, Soviet industry which was almost destroyed during the WW2 and which was not even fully recovered well into 60s. Had to crank out well over a million SKS to supply its own demand and also Chinese/North Korean armies? If that's the case then we should have been flooded with 1949 sks. So how come we have later built ones instead?
Click to expand...

Oh I agree with you. I just mean to say I wasn't there so I don't know exactly what was there. Their is a possibility of an SKS being there but the numbers are unknown and the numbers not as high as people would think and possibly not even in the hands of Korean fighters.
 
Surplus1 said:
Sks accepted into service 1945
Red accepted into service 1945
Ak47 accepted into service 1947
Normally I use reason and logic in these situations but I will just go with the reason why we didn't see them is we were not there. Again sorry to the op
Click to expand...

I don't really buy the highlighted part. It was in development until about 1948 as far as I know, and as far as having enough AK47s to sell to non aligned nations in 1950? Don't buy it. Dropped by a Russian soldier observing far behind the front lines in the Korean War in early 1950s? Don't buy it.
 
Last edited:
RedApe said:
https://books.google.ca/books?id=iE...v=onepage&q=sks in algeria french war&f=false

you also have the Algerian independence war with France during the late 50s and early 60s.

Every rifle made in the 1940s was and is involved in every current and post conflict. Guns that work and are cheap will always be fired and used.
Click to expand...

Geez after WW2 France sure lost control over just about everything, Who was the president of France a that time. France mst of had a wacky foreign policy back then.
 
larrysmith said:
Geez after WW2 France sure lost control over just about everything, Who was the president of France a that time. France mst of had a wacky foreign policy back then.
Click to expand...

France was doing what most Empires at the time were doing, giving up lost cause colonies and trying to hold onto ones they found to hold value. Algeria had value to them. Look at India, Britain realized it was smarter to give independence and walk away looking like friends than bring about the hammer.
 
RedApe said:
France was doing what most Empires at the time were doing, giving up lost cause colonies and trying to hold onto ones they found to hold value. Algeria had value to them. Look at India, Britain realized it was smarter to give independence and walk away looking like friends than bring about the hammer.
Click to expand...
What was the value of Vietnam?
 
The Americans fabricated an non-existent incident in the Gulf of Tonkin to get involved in Vietnam.Same lie later used in Panama........Harold
 
Perhaps there were SKS used in the Korean war, but with no photographic evidence and no weapons in the hands of US troops, it seems unlikely. Certainly it would seem strange for a Soviet advisor to go to Korea with an SKS, considering that there would be no ammunition available. The idea of a Ch77
Going by the years in the name is not really valid, certainly the SKS was developed in 1945 and the AK47 in 1947, but large issue of these weapons was usually much later.

In the Soviet Afghanistan war, AK74's didn't show up until 1982 or later, and were never common even the the Soviets were there until the late 80's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom