Fed-Arsenal

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jacques M.


About the n° 237, you confirm it was KOMZ plant?

---

Yes, it was the future KOMZ. At that time this plant had another publicly name: "Volzhskiy optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod" (The Volga Optical and Mechanical Plant).

P.S. Need I to explain where Contax cameras must been manufactured? ;)

Dear Jacques,

it is not a delay but rather copy-paste of the previous contributions from this thread. I am very appreciated Bill Parkinson for his skepticism that forced us to go to archives and find the documents. To my knowledge no documents were shown elsewhere prior this thread that confirm the originality of FED Arsenal.

with best regards
altix

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

To my knowledge no documents were shown elsewhere prior this thread that confirm the originality of FED Arsenal.

---

A careful reading of the book "История завода "Арсенал" имени В.И. Ленина" (Киев, "Наукова Думка", 1986)* -- is enough. ;)
But this is not the only source, of course.

*) -- The history of the "Arsenal" plant named by V.I. Lenin. -- Kiev, "Navukova Dumka" publishing, 1986.

Yes, this book cites the article from Radianska Ukraina that is given here. This citation alone cannot serve as a proof of Arsenal camera originality since the phrase there "...soon here would appear the camera on which people would search usual trademark FED but would find another - a Kiev one. " is not fully clear. The strong support for FED Arsenal originality is given by Khrushev letter. Above I just pointed out that the letter of Khrushchev to Ustinov on zenitcamera is taken from this thread.

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

Yes, this book cites the article from Radianska Ukraina that is given here. This citation alone cannot serve as a proof of Arsenal camera originality since the phrase there "...soon here would appear the camera on which people would search usual trademark FED but would find another - a Kiev one. " is not fully clear.

---

Is not fully clear? Not for me... ;)
The Khrushchev's persistent desire to drag manufacture cameras to Kiev was known. FED, Exakta, Contax cameras... This letter is not the only one. It was still appeal to the GKO (not sure what to Stalin). This history as a whole is clear, just some details are unknown...
P.S. Sorry my English...

quote:

---

Is not fully clear? Not for me... ;)

---

this great, Zoom. I think it is easy to understand for people from the territories of former Soviet Union. But I had some private discussions where this quote was not considered as a definite proof (especially taking into account that the book is from 1986). Therefore some additional effort was needed.
It is pity that you joined this discussion late enough.

P.S. the citation of Radianska Ukraina in the book is given with the mistake (wrong datum).

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

P.S. the citation of Radianska Ukraina in the book is given with the mistake (wrong datum).

---

You mean the page 337, note #6?
The source: "Радяньска Україна, 1945, 12 лист" -- what is wrong? The list number 12?

I need to have a look but as far as i remember it was cited as 12th November and not as 12th October. That misprint caused a problem by first request in archives.

As I see it, so far, from the information and documents found or now known to us through the forum (thank you, Alzo, Altix, Zoom) :

1. The Khrushchev - Ustinov document states that all the FED parts and manufacturing equipment were sent to Zavod No. 237 (The Volga Optical and Mechanical Plant ,      future Kazan - KOMZ). And, that No. 237 did not work on the construction of cameras (and so parts and equipment was probably sitting at Kazan between 1941 and 1945).

If true: This may leave Berdsk out of the picture. There may be no ‘FED Berdsk’. Also it would mean that all the FEDs were made at Kharkov before Sept. 1941  (with the exception of      some possibly being made by Arsenal in 1945 - 1946) - not some at Berdsk.

2. The Khrushchev document requests Ustinov to order factory No. 237 to transfer of all equipment, devices, incomplete production, and documentation to ‘Ukropromsovet’. Here I have a       question, which is:

What is “Ukropromsovet”? Is it the Arsenal Factory, or is it a military or government department?

3. The Khrushchev document also asks Ustinov to assist in the starting of camera production through use of the mentioned optical and control-measuring equipment. Which      is listed as:

a) Equipment 23 items (appendix 1)
b) Control-measuring equipment 26 items (appendix 2)

Here, my question (maybe not an important question) is:
What are these items and are “appendix1” and “appendix 2” available to see?


4. The newspaper articles are very interesting but more like propaganda than documentary. It is not clear to me that the articles speak of actual production of a FED at Arsenal,        or if possibly the writers are just relaying information from Government officials that there will be new camera production of rangefinder cameras. At the time, the idea that        these cameras could be like a Contax was probably not thought of yet, except by the people who were involved in bringing the equipment and parts from Germany, and so it        may have been assumed that it would be a “FED” camera that was going to be made.


To me, although the Khrushchev document may clarify a certain question about where the FED parts were during the War and possibly change the ‘Berdsk’ story, it does not authenticate the actual two versions of the FED-Arsenal that we have been discussing. I still have many questions about these specific cameras that can best be answered by careful examination of the parts they are constructed from. If they are made from evacuated parts from Kharkov then the parts should all be consistent with pre-War FED parts. They will not be considered authentic if they are made of mixtures of parts, especially if the engraved rangefinder housings are from later cameras, but the engraving is identical to examples that have pre-War rangefinder housings. Also, between different examples, the vulcanite used must be compared, as well as the indentations on the housings for the rewind lever and other construction and parts details.

As Zoom has said:

“Yes... These cameras have long been known. As I understand, they were considered as fakes. This is not surprising: the market was swamped with forgeries made in Ukraine (plus Poland). However, it is possible that some "made in Arsenal" FEDs are fakes. Unfortunately, this story is interesting to me only as a part of the KMZ's history. The rest I'm not interested... In particular -- this cameras themselves. From the word "absolutely". ;)”

I am not ready to make the leap to authenticity of the FED-Arsenals that we know exist, just because there is documentation that Khrushchev ordered a transfer of parts and equipment and wanted to start camera production in the Ukraine. This is good historical information, but, in my opinion, is not solid proof of the authenticity of either of the versions of “FED-Arsenal” that we have seen.


Regards, Bill

quote:

---

Originally posted by nightphoto

... And, that No. 237 did not work on the construction of cameras (and so parts and equipment was probably sitting at Kazan between 1941 and 1945).

---

Between November 1942 and 1945... So they in Berdsk had about six months in 1942... ;) I can't say anything, because never interested in these (FED-Berdsk) cameras. May be "yes", may be "no"... But during the war not to the production of cameras.
(Btw. in summer of 1944, FED factory management building fired. All design and technological departments documentation was destroyed.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by nightphoto

What is “Ukropromsovet”? Is it the Arsenal Factory, or is it a military or government department?

---

This "Ukropromsovet" (more correct name is: "Ukrpromrada") was an Ukrainian Industrial Cooperatives Union head organization.
See notes on the page http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/misc/letter-snk-ukssr-13021945-552.html

Khrushchev was not an idiot, but his proposals in this letter* were idiotic...
Nevertheless, he achieved his goal. Not quite as planned, but...

*) -- Btw, this letter looks like an order.

quote:

---

Khrushchev was not an idiot, but his proposals in this letter* were idiotic...

---

I am not a great expert to evaluate Khrushchev's level of idiocy or stupidity of his orders. I address you to the nice survey on the topic of Zeiss reparations of Dr. Matthias Uhl in the book "Sowjetische Demontagen in Deutschland 1944-1949. Hintergruende, Ziele und Wirkungen" (Berlin 2002). I translate some parts from this book to make the matters clear. in the following RGAE is the Russian State Archive on Economics. (sorry for my poor translation)

"In September 1944 the State Planing Committee by Council of People Commissariats of USSR asked every People Commissariat to provide the information about the German factories that are interesting for them to be dismantled. In the beginning of 1945 this information was further specified and updated. For every People Commissariat was created the "target lists". (cf. letter of the Head of agricultural-machine building by People Commissariat of Mortars, Hlomov, to the director of production department, Dolozhenko, 13, 11. 1944 in RGAE 7962/1/196; Letter of assistant of director of State Optical Institute (GOI), Vanin, to the chief of 2. Main Administration of NKV, Frejberg, 13.8.1945, in RGAE, 7572/2/1018 )"

"Finally in Moscow was decided which administration departments would obtain factories in Jena. The special committee by Counsel of People Commissariat hand over the firma Carl Zeiss to People Commissariat of Armament immediately after the occupation of Thueringen, i.e. in July 1945 (The letter of Ustinov to Berija, 26.10.1946, in RGAE, 8157/1/1089). This commissariat applied for this factory by State Planing Committee previously (in 1944). Since the People Commissariat for Armament was the main producer of optical goods this decision did not meet any protest of other Commissariats. In this situation, the People Commissar of Armament, Dmitriy Ustinov, asked other Ministries, which were interested in optical production of Zeiss factory, to apply through the 2nd Central Administration of his Commissariat. This administration tried to fulfill all incoming requests. at the same time the applicants were able to have a look on necessary technical documentation and blueprints. (For example the People Commissariat for Shipbuilding obtained from Jena rangefinders, cf. the letter of Head of 2. Central Administration of People Commissariat of Armament, Dobrowolskij, to commissioner of Zeiss factory of people Commissariat of Armament, Nikolaev, 6.10.1945 RGAE 7572/2/1018). In this way all possible concurrence from other ministries was eliminated from the very beginning.


In August 1945 the Committee of 2nd Central Administration inspected the conditions in Jena for dismantlement. In their report they propose to Soviet specialists the following actions:

"a) Organisation of thorough inspection of production in Zess factory and Shott by Soviet scientists, constructors, technologs and specialists within the period not less than 6 months. Afterwards the Zeiss factory must be dismantled.

b)During this period Zeiss and Shott factories in Jena should continue the production of civil optics and optical glass.
Simultaneously in Soviet Union the production and leaving places must be prepared for transported Zeiss factory." (The report of commission of Ministeriums of Armament about Zeiss factory and Shott, 18.8.1945, RGAE, 7572/2/1019 )

...In plans of People Commissariat of Armament in Moscow the idea to transport the whole Zeiss factory to one place was considered as impossible. They decided therefore to split the factory into six Soviet optical factories. The expert commission in Jena was against this proposition. They were afraid that the split of production line into separate pices could badly influence the production quality and that "this can cause the demolition of production that has universal importance". As an alternative the specialists of 2nd Central Administration proposed to empty completely the optical factories Nr 349 in Leningrad and Nr 356 in Sverdlovsk and transport there the machinery from Jena, Saalfeld, Poessneck and Gera. (Report on assignment in Zeiss factory, 18.8.1945 in RGAE 7572/2/1127, In Leningrad was planned to produce measurement-, military- , astro-equipment and microscopes, whereas in Sverdlovsk - Geoequipment and optical lenses. ) Simultaneously expert commission concluded that successful reconstruction of factory in USSR would be possible only in the case when many German specialists would also arrive.

In the beginning of September 1945 the People Commissariat for Armament started the concrete planning of dismantling process.

So, first of all, everything connected with optical production was regulated by Ustinov bureau. That is why Khrushchev wrote the letter to him. I do not consider his letter idiotic. During the war no FED cameras production was started in Kazan as we infer from the letter. I doubt that after the war this production would be organized there. At the same time in destroyed Kiev were people who wanted to assemble optical devices. Why the letter is idiotic?

Since already in February 1945 it was realized that Zeiss factory would be in the Soviet occupation zone it is completely reasonable that its dismantling was only a matter of time. Khrushchev was most probably aware about these plans and started actively prepare the place and workers for the future production. I can only wonder his speed (11 February - end of Yalta conference, 13 February - Khrushchev's letter). FED Arsenal was probably a good idea to teach ex-dairymaids how to assemble cameras.

The statement that Khrushchev decided to bring Zeiss Jena production in Kiev is wrong. The only person who decided was Ustinov. Ustinov (and I assume Berija) were the people who decided to split the factory into 6 parts. Ustinov's subordinate, Dobrovolskiy, thought that the factory should be transported to Leningrad and Sverdlovsk. If Ustinov decided that time to take Dobrovolski's opinion into account, then I would hardly imagine KMZ or optical division in Arsenal.

I do not really understand any mythology connected with Volga camera. To my knowledge there were no definite plans of optical plant construction in Stalingrad. Probably that were dreams of Dobrovolski or Turygin? The later asked to prepare the drawings of a new camera with conventional name "Volga".

The transportation of equipment from Goerz factory in Berlin, Zeiss Ikon factory in Jena, Voightlaender production line in early 1945 to Moscow, Kiev and Leningrad, was also regulated by Ustinov.

quote:

---

Here, my question (maybe not an important question) is:
What are these items and are “appendix1” and “appendix 2” available to see?

---

I've found that these appendices are not interesting. But I can share them if you really want.

quote:

---

The newspaper articles are very interesting but more like propaganda than documentary. It is not clear to me that the articles speak of actual production of a FED at Arsenal, or if possibly the writers are just relaying information from Government officials that there will be new camera production of rangefinder cameras. At the time, the idea that these cameras could be like a Contax was probably not thought of yet, except by the people who were involved in bringing the equipment and parts from Germany, and so it may have been assumed that it would be a “FED” camera that was going to be made.

---

In archives one can find other documentation on FED Arsenal cameras that are more official. There exists a problem to obtain the permission to copy them but interested people can find them and read them directly in the archive. But we are working on getting such a permission to copy.

The mention of Contax camera is connected directly with Contax camera production.In the beginning of October 1945 Zeiss specialists were asked to start Contax camera production for Soviet Union. The article in the newspaper is from 15.10.1945. The director of Arsenal plant knew since August 1945 about the future dismantlement of Zeiss Jena factory and was preparing the place for it. 17.10.1945 Major Turygin ordered blueprints of Contax camera and lenses for the future production in USSR. Note that there is no official name for the camera. Probably for Zeiss workers the conventional name "Volga" is used in blueprints (from 9.11.1945). Kiev logo appeared one year later.

It is worth to note that nobody from Zeiss factory was aware of future dismantlement. In August 1945 one Soviet lieutenant-colonel
said on meeting in Carl Zeiss Jena factory "We have with certain intention completely dismantled Zeiss Ikon in Dresden and Berlin, since we needed the machinery for our serial production in Russia. The situation with Zeiss (Jena) is completely different. The factory should remain in its original place to be able to solve the plethora of tasks, since in this field the factory is unique in the whole world " (Bestand Betriebsarchiv Carl Zeiss Nr 15135).

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

So, first of all, everything connected with optical production was regulated by Ustinov bureau. That is why Khrushchev wrote the letter to him. I do not consider his letter idiotic. During the war no FED cameras production was started in Kazan as we infer from the letter. I doubt that after the war this production would be organized there. At the same time in destroyed Kiev were people who wanted to assemble optical devices. Why the letter is idiotic?

---

I see that you didn't read notes in the page http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/misc/letter-snk-ukssr-13021945-552.html :(

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

FED Arsenal was probably a good idea to teach ex-dairymaids how to assemble cameras.

---

Sorry, no comments... Kiev... an ex-dairymaids...

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

The statement that Khrushchev decided to bring Zeiss Jena production in Kiev is wrong. The only person who decided was Ustinov.

---

Yes, but he can be ordered through GKO. What was done.

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

I do not really understand any mythology connected with Volga camera. To my knowledge there were no definite plans of optical plant construction in Stalingrad.

---

I see that you didn't read notes in the page http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/misc/letter-snk-ukssr-13021945-552.html :(

Btw, a collection center of all documentation, most part of optical instruments and equipment, coming from Germany, was Krasnogorsk.

Thank you for the information. I believe that the story and most details concerning the 'Contax to Kiev' story are well-known and the political relationships are interesting. What I was saying about the propaganda style newspaper articles is that basically they did not know about the Contax - Kiev story at the time the articles were written and so it may have been confusing to the authors of the article when the officials just told them that there was going to be large camera production in Kiev soon. They may have thought that it would be FEDs when in reality the plan was for Contax-like cameras, what we now know as the 'Kiev'. Whether this is the case or not, I believe that the main starting point of this forum subject was: Are the cameras that we know of and call 'FED-Arsenal' (Serial numbers: 00004, 00020, 00067, 00070, 00216, 00222) authentic made by the Arsenal Zavod during immediate post-War times, or are they fakes, made by forgers at a much later time? This is the question.

I agree that the historical facts that are coming to light, or have been known for some time by some, lead to a clear conclusion that camera manufacturing was directed to Arsenal Zavod during this period, and the exact history is very interesting, but so far does not show clearly or prove that either any FED cameras were made at Arsenal or that the cameras we have seen (serial numbers above) are not fakes or forgeries. I will not say that they are fakes, but that they have not been proven to be authentic. To prove they are authentic there will have to be dated photographs showing them with details visible, passports or instruction manuals, or actual documents that describe them in detail from the factory. In addition, the details of construction of the cameras will have to make sense in the constraints of the time period that they were thought to have been made.

I have no doubt that if these cameras are authentic that there will be indisputable proof in one of these forms existing, and that it will eventually show up. Or enough examples that can be examined in detail and be compared will accumulate over time and tell a story. But to try to obtain a consensus of authenticity for these cameras without actual primary documentary proof, or consistent viewable details on a number of examples, is just not possible.

There are many questions still unanswered. For example why are there two models or varieties of logos, each group with a different range of serial numbers. It is okay to guess things like some were given to factory workers and poor workmanship of chroming is due to 'milkmaids' (of course most women in Ukraine were milkmaids during hard times of war and they had to milk the cows, and the women in the photo with theodolites look highly skilled, very intelligent). But two ranges of serial numbers can also mean that the first range is authentic and the second higher range are fakes made in a much higher serial number range so that there would not be two of the same number (why a number of cameras up to 00070 and then none until 00216?). It is a strange numbering and needs an explanation.

So maybe I go on too long (as we can all agree and I am always certain to provide material for controversy) and I appreciate the hard work and good results of the research that has been done, but volume of information alone will not make it be so. It will have to be proven and I hope that real proof about these cameras will come soon. Sometimes it can take a while as we all can see with the evolving story of 'FED Berdsk' and the untold story of TSVVS.

Regards, Bill

quote:

---

I see that you didn't read notes in the page http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/misc/letter-snk-ukssr-13021945-552.html :(

Btw, a collection center of all documentation, most part of optical instruments and equipment, coming from Germany, was Krasnogorsk.

---

Alas, it seems that we speak about two histories that happened in parallel universes. So far on the given link I see only some your thoughts that are doubtful.

I know that during the first stage of dismantling (fall 1945) some documentation on military optics was brought to Krasnogorsk. During the complete dismantling (fall 1946) the documents were transferred to KMZ by specially ordered planes. The documentation from Zeiss Ikon (Dresden) was lost in fire. Krasnogorsk was chosen as the main optical production center much latter than the time I am speaking about. I can give you the exact weight of dismantled equipment and raw materials for every factory in a list. And Krasnogorsk was only one among another factories that are in a list. Say, Krasnogorsk obtained 722 t semi-assembled pieces of production, Leningrad (factory Nr 349) - 1705.95 t, Lytkarino (factory Nr 233) - 3843 t, Kiev - 667.7t. The distribution of machinery among factories was almost equal. Kiev obtained less machinery since it had already some tools brought from Dresden.

I do not understand you when you want to show some superiority of KMZ. Its superiority in some sense appeared in 1948-49. Krasnogorks was the first factory among the others which successfully started its production. The factory tried to use the production discipline of Zeiss factory. It is true. I was always amazed by high quality of early Krasnogorsk products and appreciate your work done on its history but I have different opinion concerning some of your comments and interpretations.

Yes, in Arsenal among few specialists worked ex-dairymaids. There is no wonder since after the war males were rare to find in post-war Kiev. Some people were still on their way back to home. Krasnogork escaped the destiny to be demolished in war fire two times as Kiev was and this is not a reason to put irony here

quote:

---

Sorry, no comments... Kiev... an ex-dairymaids...

---

P.S. The complete list of what was transported to what factory and how much you can find here "Short report on the results of dismantling Zeiss and Schott factories in Jena " 2.4.1947 RGAE 7572/2/1129.

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

I do not understand you when you want to show some superiority of KMZ.

---

I'm not going to claim this. So I don't understand what you don't understand... ;)

Btw.: There is such a thing in the Russian railways: The default city. You see only the ends of the roads, the destinations... But in any case, all railway carriages will pass through this Default center.

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

Yes, in Arsenal among few specialists worked ex-dairymaids.

---

Sorry, but where in Kiev you can find dairymaids? Just logically explain me this point... However, you may not answer. It is not an interesting discussion...

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

The complete list of what was transported to what factory and how much you can find here "Short report on the results of dismantling Zeiss and Schott factories in Jena " 2.4.1947 RGAE 7572/2/1129

---

Thank you! You helped me a lot!

To come back to our main discussion, we can think, now, that one or two series of Fed-Arsenal were really made at Arsenal's. I have said "think"! Of course, we don't have any material proof. But thanks to Altix's and Alzo's researches, we know really much more about these years.

There is something which puzzles me too. The history of Fed seems more and more complex. The way from Kharkov to Kharkov, during and after the war, was tortuous. Berdsk, and now Kazan and Kiev: what was the exact role of these places in Fed history? Finally, which camera was mounted or made where?

I had ideas, but I am not sure they are always valid!

Jacques.

Dear Zoom,

quote:

---

Thank you! You helped me a lot!

---

if you need these data, please contact me. I can share them with you for your cite.

And dairymaids came from nearest villages. The post-war years were a good chance to stay in the city and I think it was much easily to survive in cities (I think).

If you really have documentary proof that the creation of optical plant in Kazan was planned together with the production of Volga cameras I would be very appreciated for such documents. Say, Peter Hennig writes that Volga is the working name for Contax cameras production in USSR. In the view of available information I have the same opinion.

I agree with Bill that there is a long way to get the whole picture about this period of history and probably many aspects would remain unclear. But it is nice that we discuss the subject and there are a lot of new information and interesting opinions.

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

if you need these data, please contact me.

---

I have already contacted... Here. ;)
You can send them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

Say, Peter Hennig writes that Volga is the working name for Contax cameras production in USSR.

---

Yes. http://fotos.cconin.de/ussrphoto/conkie_3.pdf -- for example. Then there is a simple logic: what brand is peculiar to the "Volzhskiy optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod"? If known that on this new plant was planned to produce cameras...
Do not wait for documents. Many puzzles are solved by an ordinary logic.

P.S.
You read this text: "Його бере у майстра дівчина, що прийшла на завод з колгоспу." and think that:

quote:

---

Originally posted by altix

And dairymaids came from nearest villages.

---

You believe on this bla-bla-bla ("she came to the plant from the kolkhoz")? That she was taken to work in a military factory without a passport? There is no logic.