ZF markings - again

[Edward Horton]

I worked 38 years at a military depot in the U.S. and was a Quality Control Inspector for over 25 years. My inspectors stamp and signature was on the equipment I inspected on a condition code tag placed on these parts and equipment.

Below a yellow condition code "A" tag for new and overhauled parts and equipment.



A green condition code "F" tag for repairable parts and equipment that need to be sent to the appropriate overhaul facility.



A red condition code "H" tag for items that are unserviceable, if the item contained serviceable parts or components the item was sent to the appropriate depot for disassembly and the serviceable parts removed for disposition. (the entire item was not disposed of if serviceable-repairable parts were part of the assembly)



Now to the British system, if the rifle receiver was scrap or "ZF" was the entire rifle disposed of or were the serviceable parts removed for further use?

In the U.S. the receiver would be removed and cut in half and the remaining "serviceable" parts returned to service or sent for overhaul. A civilian inspector at the highest levels of maintenance was not allowed to condemn serviceable parts or components without a letter from the owning organisations. (Item manager Headquarters)

Bottom line we reused serviceable parts or repairable parts and we were required to place condition code "A" or "F" tags on these items.

[Son]

Just a thought, Curly... Perhaps we should look at this from the other side. How many No4 trials rifles with the A serials are out there and not ZF marked? If there was such an order, surely they would not have been sold out of service without their final sentence applied?
One with the opposed arrows mark and not ZF'd would prove that.

Bindi, just for $hits and giggles, I'll bring it to Lithgow if you're coming.

[Bindi2]

Just a thought, Curly... Perhaps we should look at this from the other side. How many No4 trials rifles with the A serials are out there and not ZF marked? If there was such an order, surely they would not have been sold out of service without their final sentence applied?
One with the opposed arrows mark and not ZF'd would prove that.

Bindi, just for $hits and giggles, I'll bring it to Lithgow if you're coming.

It is in the plan

[Ian Skennerton]

Hi from the Gold Coast in Oz,
Regarding the ZF mark, I've only seen it painted or stamped on the buttstock. And way back in my memory, I recall it stencilled in white paint on a fore-end, long before I knew what the ZF indicated. Not being stamped on the action body could be a clue, that it could/might be repaired at the factory, after which the ZF designation would no longer apply. I think PL (Peter) would have the best take on this one. I've only picked the designation up from a list I found at the Pattern Room at Nottingham.
Enfields rule!
Ian

[curly]

Hi Ian,

thank you very much for the kind reply, can you tell us any more about that mid 1950's order to withdraw and scrap rifles with the 'A' Suffix - and why it seems not to have been carried out?

Curly

[Peter Laidler]

Curly. I don't think that you have understood so far.......... The reason why the order wasn't carried out is because there wasn't an order. Look and listen. There were STILL old trials and other A suffix rifles in circulation in the late 70's and there were STILL some trials and A suffix rifles in circulation when the very last vestiges of the No4 were withdrawn in the 90's. How do I know this? It's easy! A) Any order would still be available for Armourers to see, probably incorporated into the EMER's and b), I saw them

Next bit of advice. If you have a rifle marked ZF, then don't use it

[curly]

Yes Peter, I heard you the first time, why don't you let Mr Skennerton answer my question which was addressed to him? However, I'm sure we all thank you for butting in and offering your excellent advice as usual.

As I am sure you can appreciate only too well yourself (Savage No.4(T)s and Kodak scopes...), if someone publishes a book which is intended to serve as a reference work, and there is something incorrect in that work, then they should be given the opportunity to explain that mistake shouldn't they?



t. t. f. n.

Curly

[Peter Laidler]

As one fallible author speaking up for another fallible author, I'm just thinking of something infallible to say...................... But say, I will!

[Badger]

Thread is CLOSED as it's deteriorating and starting to go in circles ….

As one fallible author speaking up for another fallible author, I'm just thinking of something infallible to say...................... But say, I will!

... my wife says I'm fallible all the time, but I don't believe her ..

Hi Ian,

thank you very much for the kind reply, can you tell us any more about that mid 1950's order to withdraw and scrap rifles with the 'A' Suffix - and why it seems not to have been carried out?

Curly

Yes Peter, I heard you the first time, why don't you let Mr Skennerton answer my question which was addressed to him? However, I'm sure we all thank you for butting in and offering your excellent advice as usual.

Hi Curly ...

Ian answered your question the best he could and essentially deferred to Peter for additional background, which Peter kindly provided, to the best of his recollections and abilities as well.

Perhaps we don't understand what your asking, but I think both Ian and Peter (plus others) have given you the best answer you're going to get on the subject. If I understood it correctly, Ian said to check with Peter and Peter summed it up by saying there was no order.

As confirmed by Ian, I would also suggest that Peter, given his experience as the most senior armourer in the UK Military (now retired) and currently based as a Technical Officer at the UK Military Small Arms School, would have provided the most accurate answer for you.

If you still need clarity, I'm not sure there's much else this group of Enfield collectors can tell you, so perhaps you should post your question on other Enfield boards on the Internet until you get the answer you're seeking.

Thanks ....

Regards,
Doug