| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Battle of Warsaw 1920: Difference between revisions
Pandolfini (talk | contribs) |
Pandolfini (talk | contribs) |
||
| (21 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
In the Browning Hi-Power to see at a glance, so I can blame. Otherwise, the presumption of innocence applies everywhere, right? Accuse the filmmakers of anachronism by blurred shot? It was there that I can write it straight, it's not a grenade, but the sand full dummy :)--[[User:Pandolfini|Pandolfini]] 02:52, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | In the Browning Hi-Power to see at a glance, so I can blame. Otherwise, the presumption of innocence applies everywhere, right? Accuse the filmmakers of anachronism by blurred shot? It was there that I can write it straight, it's not a grenade, but the sand full dummy :)--[[User:Pandolfini|Pandolfini]] 02:52, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | ||
So what are we saying here? That a gun that didn't come into production for another 15 years is in the movie representing...what, a Colt Model 1903 Hammer? I wonder why the film maker did not just use a Colt 1911, or a Luger, or a C-96 Mauser? Those guns are all readily available and fit the 1920 time period. This smacks of laziness on the film maker's part. [[User:Harleyguy|Harleyguy]] 22:05, 15 June 2012 | |||
Exactly - they are lazy. And despite a meal budget - the most expensive Polish film ever!--[[User:Pandolfini|Pandolfini]] 01:31, 16 June 2012 (CDT)--[[User:Pandolfini|Pandolfini]] 01:32, 16 June 2012 (CDT) | |||
:A Model 17 doesn't need to survive. It's very easy to make custom props.[[User:Chitoryu12|Chitoryu12]] 00:51, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | :A Model 17 doesn't need to survive. It's very easy to make custom props.[[User:Chitoryu12|Chitoryu12]] 00:51, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | ||
::Of course. But I doubt that any movie maker would make such props when there are plenty dummy Model 24s. And the grenade on the screenshot looks more like Model 24. But I don't insist if you are completely sure that this is Model 17. [[User:Greg-Z|Greg-Z]] 02:20, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | ::Of course. But I doubt that any movie maker would make such props when there are plenty dummy Model 24s. And the grenade on the screenshot looks more like Model 24. But I don't insist if you are completely sure that this is Model 17. [[User:Greg-Z|Greg-Z]] 02:20, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | ||
::It's very difficult to tell with the blurry photo, but it does seem to have a thinner head than a 24. But since 24s seem to have varying head sizes, I don't think there's really any way to properly tell unless we can find a screencap showing the little lever-like handle on the side of the head. [[User:Chitoryu12|Chitoryu12]] 17:08, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
=== One more MG === | === One more MG === | ||
| Line 15: | Line 21: | ||
This light MG is most likely based on Czech [[UK vz. 59|Vz. 59]] which is disguised as [[Maxim#Maxim_MG08/15|MG08/15]]. | This light MG is most likely based on Czech [[UK vz. 59|Vz. 59]] which is disguised as [[Maxim#Maxim_MG08/15|MG08/15]]. | ||
I think that it is definitely a Czech Vz. 59. Also if there are no objections as I mentioned earlier I have been trying to clear up the spelling and grammar on the page and will continue to do so. --[[User:6pulkpancerna|6pulkpancerna]] 18:51, 13 | I think that it is definitely a Czech Vz. 59. Also if there are no objections as I mentioned earlier I have been trying to clear up the spelling and grammar on the page and will continue to do so. | ||
--[[User:6pulkpancerna|6pulkpancerna]] 18:51, 13 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
Thx very much for this!--[[User:Pandolfini|Pandolfini]] 06:15, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
=== BA-27 === | === BA-27 === | ||
| Line 39: | Line 42: | ||
And it's not by chance the model [[UK vz. 59|Vz. 59]]?--[[User:Pandolfini|Pandolfini]] 06:02, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | And it's not by chance the model [[UK vz. 59|Vz. 59]]?--[[User:Pandolfini|Pandolfini]] 06:02, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | ||
: It's hard to say for sure - too far and too blurry. If this is disguised Vz.59 too (as with 08/15 and the aircraft MG) then the disguise is very good. [[User:Greg-Z|Greg-Z]] 06:49, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
=== The problem with identifying a rifles === | === The problem with identifying a rifles === | ||
| Line 47: | Line 51: | ||
[[File:Borys_Szyc-rifle-detail.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Arisaka rifle]] | [[File:Borys_Szyc-rifle-detail.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Arisaka rifle]] | ||
:Arisaka rifles were purchased in Japan by Russian army in 1914-15. In 1917-18 when the old Russian army collapsed, its weapon including Arisaka rifles came in hands of the armies of Poland, Finland and other new states. So Arisaka in this movie is historically correct. [[User:Greg-Z|Greg-Z]] 06:47, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
Thx very much, Greg! --[[User:Pandolfini|Pandolfini]] 07:21, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
:Interesting, but I don't think that is an Arisaka. The front sight is too large and too close to the front of the barrel, the stock end cap is too long, and it has a guide for the cleaning rod under the barrel which the Arisaka doesn't. Looks more like a Mauser of some sort. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 08:34, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
:: [http://mauser98k.internetdsl.pl/wz29/15.jpg Polish Mauser wz.29]? [[User:Greg-Z|Greg-Z]] 09:12, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
:::The front sight is similar (if not the same), but I think the rifles here look like they are full size, rather than the wz. 29 which is a carbine. Also note that the rifle in the film has the top of the barrel exposed forward of the barrel band (metal loop that goes around the middle of the handguard) unlike the wz. 29 which is covered. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 17:59, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
[[File:Szyc-rifle1.jpg|thumb|none|500px|]] | |||
[[File:Szyc-rifle2.jpg|thumb|none|500px|]] | |||
[[File:Borys_Szyc-rifle.jpg|thumb|none|500px|]] | |||
That's right, there are inconsistencies and for this i sent more pictures of this rifle. And what's the loop on the of the other rifles? It's like the Enfield.--[[User:Pandolfini|Pandolfini]] 11:20, 14 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
Other adepts to Rifle of Jan Krynicki: | |||
[[File:M1917enfield.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Enfield rifle]] | |||
[[File:GewehrModel1891.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Mauser 98 rifle]] | |||
[[File:Gewehr1888 OE.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Mannlicher rifle]] | |||
That's a M91 Mauser, not a M98. The rifles in question are 98 actions, probably Persian 98/29 (long rifle) and Czech vz.24 (short rifle) based on the prominent BRNO front sight protector's "ears". They are certainly NOT M1917s or Arisaka 38s.--[[User:Stomper|Stomper]] 20:30, 20 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
[[File:Czech_Persian_Mauser_98-29.jpg|thumb|none|500px|]] Here is and thanks for identifikation. --[[User:Pandolfini|Pandolfini]] | |||
01:02, 21 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 06:32, 16 June 2012
Several questions
Model 17 Stielhandgranate
Are you sure that it is Model 17? It seems to me that this is Model 24, as in every other movie with German grenades. I doubt that a real Model 17 could survive until 2011. Yes, O. K. But aim is perhaps to inform the viewer what weapons the his heroes to used in historical reality. I write about it here - All Quiet on the Western Front (1979)--Pandolfini 00:28, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
- I cannot agree. If we see Browning Hi-Power in 1920 we say that this is anachronistically used Hi-Power and don't say that this is a Model 1903, right? So if a Model 24 grenade is used, we say that a Model 24 is used in the movie though it stands for Model 17. I think so. Greg-Z 02:20, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
In the Browning Hi-Power to see at a glance, so I can blame. Otherwise, the presumption of innocence applies everywhere, right? Accuse the filmmakers of anachronism by blurred shot? It was there that I can write it straight, it's not a grenade, but the sand full dummy :)--Pandolfini 02:52, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
So what are we saying here? That a gun that didn't come into production for another 15 years is in the movie representing...what, a Colt Model 1903 Hammer? I wonder why the film maker did not just use a Colt 1911, or a Luger, or a C-96 Mauser? Those guns are all readily available and fit the 1920 time period. This smacks of laziness on the film maker's part. Harleyguy 22:05, 15 June 2012
Exactly - they are lazy. And despite a meal budget - the most expensive Polish film ever!--Pandolfini 01:31, 16 June 2012 (CDT)--Pandolfini 01:32, 16 June 2012 (CDT)
- A Model 17 doesn't need to survive. It's very easy to make custom props.Chitoryu12 00:51, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
- Of course. But I doubt that any movie maker would make such props when there are plenty dummy Model 24s. And the grenade on the screenshot looks more like Model 24. But I don't insist if you are completely sure that this is Model 17. Greg-Z 02:20, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
- It's very difficult to tell with the blurry photo, but it does seem to have a thinner head than a 24. But since 24s seem to have varying head sizes, I don't think there's really any way to properly tell unless we can find a screencap showing the little lever-like handle on the side of the head. Chitoryu12 17:08, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
One more MG
I have found in Internet a screenshot from the movie:
This light MG is most likely based on Czech Vz. 59 which is disguised as MG08/15.
I think that it is definitely a Czech Vz. 59. Also if there are no objections as I mentioned earlier I have been trying to clear up the spelling and grammar on the page and will continue to do so. --6pulkpancerna 18:51, 13 May 2012 (CDT)
Thx very much for this!--Pandolfini 06:15, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
BA-27
The armored car which is "playing the role" of Soviet BA-27 (which, in turn, didn't exist in 1920) is a modern replica of Polish Vz.34.
I am just trying to fix a lot of the spelling mistakes on this page.
- - Greg-Z 14:44, 13 May 2012 (CDT)
Thx for all repair.--Pandolfini 06:20, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
Unidentified MG
It will help someone identify what kind of light machine gun?
- Chauchat. The barrel looks a little long so it could be a modern replica. Greg-Z 03:56, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
And it's not by chance the model Vz. 59?--Pandolfini 06:02, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
- It's hard to say for sure - too far and too blurry. If this is disguised Vz.59 too (as with 08/15 and the aircraft MG) then the disguise is very good. Greg-Z 06:49, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
The problem with identifying a rifles
After regaining independence, the Polish Army were armed with Mosin1891, Mannlicher M1895 and Mauser M1898. Along with the "Blue Army" soldiers French rifles appeared ( Berthier and Lebel ). But also Lee Enfield and Japanese Arisaka! Especially those last two I can not distinguish between them, so it is possible that the hero has not in his hand Enfield, but that is a Japanese rifle :)
- Arisaka rifles were purchased in Japan by Russian army in 1914-15. In 1917-18 when the old Russian army collapsed, its weapon including Arisaka rifles came in hands of the armies of Poland, Finland and other new states. So Arisaka in this movie is historically correct. Greg-Z 06:47, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
Thx very much, Greg! --Pandolfini 07:21, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
- Interesting, but I don't think that is an Arisaka. The front sight is too large and too close to the front of the barrel, the stock end cap is too long, and it has a guide for the cleaning rod under the barrel which the Arisaka doesn't. Looks more like a Mauser of some sort. --commando552 08:34, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
- Polish Mauser wz.29? Greg-Z 09:12, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
- The front sight is similar (if not the same), but I think the rifles here look like they are full size, rather than the wz. 29 which is a carbine. Also note that the rifle in the film has the top of the barrel exposed forward of the barrel band (metal loop that goes around the middle of the handguard) unlike the wz. 29 which is covered. --commando552 17:59, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
- Polish Mauser wz.29? Greg-Z 09:12, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
That's right, there are inconsistencies and for this i sent more pictures of this rifle. And what's the loop on the of the other rifles? It's like the Enfield.--Pandolfini 11:20, 14 May 2012 (CDT)
Other adepts to Rifle of Jan Krynicki:
That's a M91 Mauser, not a M98. The rifles in question are 98 actions, probably Persian 98/29 (long rifle) and Czech vz.24 (short rifle) based on the prominent BRNO front sight protector's "ears". They are certainly NOT M1917s or Arisaka 38s.--Stomper 20:30, 20 May 2012 (CDT)
Here is and thanks for identifikation. --Pandolfini
01:02, 21 May 2012 (CDT)