Red Army Uniforms 1918-1945

Tal Inbar · 03-02-2002, 04:28 AM

This book describes all types of soviet uniforms with many pictures, part in full colours.

DougD · 01-14-2003, 01:22 PM

Best overall book on WWII Soviet uniforms; better than Webster and Nelson which has some errors and some repro uniforms in it.

DougD

charlet · 01-14-2003, 07:03 PM

I confirm this book is a very nice ref. The russians now collect and gather infos and its visible!!

but can you indicate the errors you detected in webster and Nelson book ? (pages?) thanks by advance!
sebastien

DougD · 01-14-2003, 09:33 PM

First, let me say I helped put the book together and a few of the uniforms in there are from what was my collection (photos by Les Kirby plus a few other I sent to Dave). I am thanked in the front of the book. Anyway, I also want to say that the book was a great effort and a first. I have heard others talk about writing books here in the USA but these guys actually did it. Most of the book was done in 1996 and 1997 and then took a year to publish and edit. So, alot of info is incomplete. Having gone through the book many times I have developed the following opinions ( and these are MY opinions only):

P.57 - in wrong section, belongs in M1940 section

p.71 I think the belt buckle is non-army

p.86 this is tough, but i was told by 2 russian collectors, both of whom have large colelctions that this tunic is a copy. The awards don't seem to match up to anyone, but that is not real proof.

p.102 don't like this uniform; admirals style buttons were not introduced until 1945, so why is this guy from 1940 wearing them? also the 'gold' embroidery looks way to yellow ( compare to real gold on next page). Two problems with this tunic.

p.145 the boards on this tunic are copies; flat embroidery and small stars ( i have a set myself for 'tank marshal')

p.146-147 again, bad boards anyone who has had real boards would not be fooled by these.

p.148 infantry general with technical generals hat

p.158 the general is technical NKVD frontiern naval troops

p.165 belt of this type UNDER the tunic

p.168 took years to prove, but this uniform is a copy. i have taken years to research this as I had two real ones in. If you want to do a seperate thread on why its a copy, let me know and we can start one. belt is not even right, even though its the one part thats real! its for technical generals.

p.172 hat is postwar ( my fault)

p.180 mongol order on left side sould be last, not first

p.243 the marshals hat on lower left is real BUT the oneuper left on p.245 is a copy; notice?

p.251 my mother could tell you the marshals boards are copies as are the top right stars.

anyway, thats from one look through. I consider myself an expert on generals uniforms of wwii having owned over 50, so thats why i pick up the most errors there. i bet others could pick up others perhaps.

DD

otlichnik · 01-15-2003, 04:14 AM

Doug,

When you loaned me that book several years back I sent you a list of what I found. I can't seem to find my list but there were a few other problems. Maybe you have it?

The only one I remember right off, without having seen the book in about 4 years, is with is so called Military Intelligence general's uniform. This is actually an M1940 uniform for a major-general of the NKVD's GUPVO - Chief Directorate for Border and Interior Guards. I have a very similar, better ;), one for a lieutenant-general. There was never, ever, ever, any uniform or badge or other insignia in the USSR period for Soviet military intelligence personnel either GRU (or their pre-1942 form - UR).

There were other problems with describing what were genuine, but misidentified uniforms.

Shawn

DougD · 01-15-2003, 09:15 AM

Shawn,

Stay warm over there...

No , I rmember the list you sent, but i don't have it any more.

The M1940 NKVD general is mis-identified as a military Intl. general. The one you got from me is identical, but one rank higher. The pockets on yours are also a bit differnet; ever notice how only NKVD generals had the extra pockets on the M1940 on the breast?

otlichnik · 01-15-2003, 09:48 AM

Doug,

Other NKVD uniforms have odd pockets too. The M35/M37 ones, even the M24 French tunics I think. They must have needed extra pockets for all those little black notebooks.

On the NKVD M1940 general's uniforms. Still no sign of a green border guards version?

I was wrong on one point on one point on my last post.

The M40 is not for a general of the NKVD GUPVO (Chief directorate of border and interior guards) since it was replaced on 2 February 1939 with seven separate Chief directorates (GUs):
- GUPV - border guards
- GUKV - convoy guards and GULAG guards
- GUVOVPGO - key state industry and facilities guards
- GUZhV - railroad guards
- GUInzhV - engineers
- GUIntV - intendants service/quartermaster
- GUVS - military construction

In spring 1941, the GUOV - operational forces - was added.

On 25 June 1941, the GUVV - interior troops - were formed uniting some or all of operational, convoy, railroad, construction and facilities troops (even though units held on to convoy and railroad designations through 1941).

By early 1943 the NKVD forces were structured as:
- GUPV - border guards
- GUVV - interior troops w/operational, convoy, railroad, construction and facilities troops
- GUVOT - forces for guarding the rear of the Red Army.

The point is that from 1935 (and earlier) to 1939 the border guards and interior troops were united in one directorate but at officer and enlisted level at least had separate uniforms. After that tey were in seperate directorates. We know they had separate uniforms from 1943 on.

What about 1940??

Shawn

Gene · 01-15-2003, 11:00 AM

In the Webster book, are there any Air Force uniforms that appear to be fake, upgraded postwar or modified? I've been using this book as a guide (as well as countless emails to Doug) in helping me determine what items are original or not. Aside from the uniforms, what about the headgear? All good from you've seen? I haven't seen the Red Army Uniforms 1918-1945 book yet; does it cover Air Force items?

charlet · 01-15-2003, 05:25 PM

hi Doug, I get up in the debate only now. Thanks for the very detailled answer. The debate is interesting. But be quiet, I did not want mean the book was a bunch of errors. I think as young collector and as history teacher its an excellent base of work and sure a great amount of work. Its default, you put it forward, could be the lack of textual infos, but it is quite a sumn, and anybody who has written a real texte (like me for my diplom) can understand the problem of incomplete details...
thanks again, I'll read it with a brand new eye!

DougD · 01-15-2003, 06:17 PM

I mean no disresepct to the authors, but the only way collecting grows into new areas is by examining assumptions and statements. The book was a good first effort, but am also a youngish (ok, 30 is still young in my mind) history teacher and I know that if I had this many errors in my MA thesis I would not have graduated.

The first article i ever did, on M1945 generals uniforms for Benders "Military Advisor" was filled with errors; in my later articles were much better prepared.

However, If I were doing such a large book I think I might have been more sure about a few of the main points.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The Naval Uniforms 1917-1945	Tal Inbar	Reference Books And Catalogues	8	05-06-2009 05:28 PM
Red army breast badge 1918	Kim	RSFSR Badges	8	09-11-2004 08:52 AM
UNIFORM OF THE RED and SOVIET ARMY 1918-1945	Tal Inbar	Reference Books And Catalogues	0	04-14-2003 12:12 PM
Uniforms of the Soviet Union 1918-1945	Tal Inbar	Reference Books And Catalogues	0	03-02-2002 04:35 AM

01-14-2003, 01:22 PM	#2
DougD Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: NJ Age: 50 Posts: 2,060	Best overall book on WWII Soviet uniforms; better than Webster and Nelson which has some errors and some repro uniforms in it. DougD

01-14-2003, 07:03 PM	#3
charlet Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Germany Age: 49 Posts: 791	I confirm this book is a very nice ref. The russians now collect and gather infos and its visible!! but can you indicate the errors you detected in webster and Nelson book ? (pages?) thanks by advance! sebastien

01-14-2003, 09:33 PM	#4
DougD Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: NJ Age: 50 Posts: 2,060	First, let me say I helped put the book together and a few of the uniforms in there are from what was my collection (photos by Les Kirby plus a few other I sent to Dave). I am thanked in the front of the book. Anyway, I also want to say that the book was a great effort and a first. I have heard others talk about writing books here in the USA but these guys actually did it. Most of the book was done in 1996 and 1997 and then took a year to publish and edit. So, alot of info is incomplete. Having gone through the book many times I have developed the following opinions ( and these are MY opinions only): P.57 - in wrong section, belongs in M1940 section p.71 I think the belt buckle is non-army p.86 this is tough, but i was told by 2 russian collectors, both of whom have large colelctions that this tunic is a copy. The awards don't seem to match up to anyone, but that is not real proof. p.102 don't like this uniform; admirals style buttons were not introduced until 1945, so why is this guy from 1940 wearing them? also the 'gold' embroidery looks way to yellow ( compare to real gold on next page). Two problems with this tunic. p.145 the boards on this tunic are copies; flat embroidery and small stars ( i have a set myself for 'tank marshal') p.146-147 again, bad boards anyone who has had real boards would not be fooled by these. p.148 infantry general with technical generals hat p.158 the general is technical NKVD frontiern naval troops p.165 belt of this type UNDER the tunic p.168 took years to prove, but this uniform is a copy. i have taken years to research this as I had two real ones in. If you want to do a seperate thread on why its a copy, let me know and we can start one. belt is not even right, even though its the one part thats real! its for technical generals. p.172 hat is postwar ( my fault) p.180 mongol order on left side sould be last, not first p.243 the marshals hat on lower left is real BUT the oneuper left on p.245 is a copy; notice? p.251 my mother could tell you the marshals boards are copies as are the top right stars. anyway, thats from one look through. I consider myself an expert on generals uniforms of wwii having owned over 50, so thats why i pick up the most errors there. i bet others could pick up others perhaps. DD

01-15-2003, 04:14 AM	#5
otlichnik Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Canada Age: 56 Posts: 547	Doug, When you loaned me that book several years back I sent you a list of what I found. I can't seem to find my list but there were a few other problems. Maybe you have it? The only one I remember right off, without having seen the book in about 4 years, is with is so called Military Intelligence general's uniform. This is actually an M1940 uniform for a major-general of the NKVD's GUPVO - Chief Directorate for Border and Interior Guards. I have a very similar, better ;), one for a lieutenant-general. There was never, ever, ever, any uniform or badge or other insignia in the USSR period for Soviet military intelligence personnel either GRU (or their pre-1942 form - UR). There were other problems with describing what were genuine, but misidentified uniforms. Shawn

01-15-2003, 09:15 AM	#6
DougD Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: NJ Age: 50 Posts: 2,060	Shawn, Stay warm over there... No , I rmember the list you sent, but i don't have it any more. The M1940 NKVD general is mis-identified as a military Intl. general. The one you got from me is identical, but one rank higher. The pockets on yours are also a bit differnet; ever notice how only NKVD generals had the extra pockets on the M1940 on the breast?

01-15-2003, 09:48 AM	#7
otlichnik Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Canada Age: 56 Posts: 547	Doug, Other NKVD uniforms have odd pockets too. The M35/M37 ones, even the M24 French tunics I think. They must have needed extra pockets for all those little black notebooks. On the NKVD M1940 general's uniforms. Still no sign of a green border guards version? I was wrong on one point on one point on my last post. The M40 is not for a general of the NKVD GUPVO (Chief directorate of border and interior guards) since it was replaced on 2 February 1939 with seven separate Chief directorates (GUs): - GUPV - border guards - GUKV - convoy guards and GULAG guards - GUVOVPGO - key state industry and facilities guards - GUZhV - railroad guards - GUInzhV - engineers - GUIntV - intendants service/quartermaster - GUVS - military construction In spring 1941, the GUOV - operational forces - was added. On 25 June 1941, the GUVV - interior troops - were formed uniting some or all of operational, convoy, railroad, construction and facilities troops (even though units held on to convoy and railroad designations through 1941). By early 1943 the NKVD forces were structured as: - GUPV - border guards - GUVV - interior troops w/operational, convoy, railroad, construction and facilities troops - GUVOT - forces for guarding the rear of the Red Army. The point is that from 1935 (and earlier) to 1939 the border guards and interior troops were united in one directorate but at officer and enlisted level at least had separate uniforms. After that tey were in seperate directorates. We know they had separate uniforms from 1943 on. What about 1940?? Shawn

01-15-2003, 11:00 AM	#8
Gene Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 34	In the Webster book, are there any Air Force uniforms that appear to be fake, upgraded postwar or modified? I've been using this book as a guide (as well as countless emails to Doug) in helping me determine what items are original or not. Aside from the uniforms, what about the headgear? All good from you've seen? I haven't seen the Red Army Uniforms 1918-1945 book yet; does it cover Air Force items?

01-15-2003, 05:25 PM	#9
charlet Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Germany Age: 49 Posts: 791	hi Doug, I get up in the debate only now. Thanks for the very detailled answer. The debate is interesting. But be quiet, I did not want mean the book was a bunch of errors. I think as young collector and as history teacher its an excellent base of work and sure a great amount of work. Its default, you put it forward, could be the lack of textual infos, but it is quite a sumn, and anybody who has written a real texte (like me for my diplom) can understand the problem of incomplete details... thanks again, I'll read it with a brand new eye!

01-15-2003, 06:17 PM	#10
DougD Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: NJ Age: 50 Posts: 2,060	I mean no disresepct to the authors, but the only way collecting grows into new areas is by examining assumptions and statements. The book was a good first effort, but am also a youngish (ok, 30 is still young in my mind) history teacher and I know that if I had this many errors in my MA thesis I would not have graduated. The first article i ever did, on M1945 generals uniforms for Benders "Military Advisor" was filled with errors; in my later articles were much better prepared. However, If I were doing such a large book I think I might have been more sure about a few of the main points.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)