yes and the China optionMay 8 2016 at 10:46 AM
Response to Re: Rheinmetall options from Kosar
It certainly is possible, but I doubt that in 1920 a Thai Army workshop could have done this without outside help. Production of the barrels is specifically delicate if there is no experience. But maybe there was?
Could be that Siam, cut off from traditional European manufacturers during WW1, started up its own production. But that may have cost a lot of time and money.
Wish one of our Thai forum members (dont know if still active) would go the check the markings on this guns at both facilities. Then we might know for sure.
What about China as origin of this gun? We know that the Japanese transferred some military equipment during WW2 to the Thai Amr (for instance from the NEI). This weapon could be a captured Chinese copy of the Type 41, whence the differences! And there were several production facilities from at least 1921 throughout China:
From the Landships site:
The poor road infrastructure of China meant that mountain guns proved to be better than conventional field guns to support infantry in spite of the lesser performance of mountain guns. Both the Nationalist and Communist Armies in WW2 used numbers of captured Japanese Type 41 guns. These seem to have remained in service until the end of the Civil War in 1949.
Copies of the Japanese Type 41 mountain gun were manufactured at the Shansi Province Arsenal controlled by the warlord Yen Hsi-shan as the Type 133 (Model of 1924) mountain gun; Shansi Province Arsenal also manufactured a copy of the Type 41 (Improved) mountain gun as the Type 17 (Model of 1928) mountain gun. The Manchurian Arsenal in Shenyang also built copies of the Type 41 as the Type 14 (Model of 1925). 72 of these guns were made at Shenyang by 1931.4 The image below is of a Chinese made Type 41 gun at the Beijing Military Museum. The plaque says it is a Type 10 (1921) gun which, if correct, suggests another Chinese centre of production of the Type 41 gun.