Mystery of the Missing Wartime Long Branch Snipers

[Seaspriter]

Dear o' dear..... this thread seems to be getting into one of those number game quizzes. In fact it actually READS like a numbers game. For heavens sake, can't someone just put it all in easy to read and decipher tabulated form before our screens explode in a complete jumble of numbers. Anyone out there a mathematics/arithmetic graduate

I must concur -- this thread is a bit confusing to those just interested in the conclusions, not the data collection. I'm going to suggest that anyone who has "number crunching" data just send me a PM, and I'll share it with Lee Enfield and Seaforth72, who are also collecting data.

Bottom Line: we are getting closer to the answers.

you also have a number of fakes built into the lot. That is going to make documenting them much harder. I know of one person in this province who has been having LBs cobbled together into snipers for a few years now and tossing them into auctions or dragging them out to gun shows. He does not declare their providence (or lack therof), even when asked.

This is quite disconcerting and probably explains why we have so many anomalies in outside the typical block ranges. We should probably post a warning to any buyer that anything outside verified block ranges be very carefully inspected to be sure its authentic. The block ranges that seem secure to me are: 1944-45 -- 68L 320 - 68L 400, 71L 000 - 71L 651, 74L 001 -74L 350, 80L 8001- 80L L8099, and 90L8000 - 90L8360. There are many authentic ones in the 1941-43 range, but they don't seem to have "block serial numbers" (small batch lots instead).

In thread https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=55722&page=5 Hal O'Peridol give us another clue to the Missing Wartime Snipers:

Numrich had somehow acquired some original pads, front and rear, 25 bucks the set (should have bought all they had!). Front pad had a small dent in the rear lower corner where some great clod had chiseled the pad off the body.

This would lead us to the conclusion that many Snipers were simply scrapped for parts after the war as surplus. While the Numrich parts may have come from more that just Long Branch Snipers, it's important data. Thanks Hal for the clue.

[Cold_Zero]

People are collecting Data. Can those that contribute see the final results?

[Seaspriter]

People are collecting Data. Can those that contribute see the final results?

Absolutely yes. I'm more than happy to send anyone my data base (it's in Excell spreadsheet format, so you will need to give me your email address.). Also, I'll meet with folks when possible -- sometimes one-on-one discovery opens up new insights. (I'll be in Calgary in early April and Edmonton in late April for anyone in Alberta who wants to share a Molsons and data.)

First, start with the number 1588 as the number of Snipers reported by Clive Law in "Without Warning" which cites archived records.
Second, we know from production reports that 1944-46 resulted in 1517 Snipers produced.
Third, that means 71 Snipers must have been produced in 1941-43, making them quite rare.

-- Here's what doesn't make sense: About 25 of these 71 ('41-43) rifles have surfaced -- 35% of production in this period. Wait! this percentage appears to be too high -- the percentages of survivors from other date ranges would make one expect less than 10 of 1941-43 production should have been preserved. If I was a betting man, I'd say as many as 2/3rds of the Snipers in this date range may be suspect. Any Snipers in this date range should be very carefully examined to be sure it's the real thing (beware of a sniper that just "surfaces" from unknown origin -- ask for provenance because they could be fakes).

-- The Total 1944-46 production was 1517 -- all data confirms this number. The confusion in this three year zone occurs because the serial numbers and the date stamps on the receivers are not in logical, linear order. Nor do the scopes fit a logical linear pattern. Here's where people get confused (for good reason):

1944: Rifles with serial numbers 64L to 80L would have been pulled from the production line between late April and late October, 1944. However, many in existence at the latter part of this range have 1945 dates, indicating they were not released for shipment up to a year later. The production reports tell us the shortage of scopes was the production bottleneck. When REL could not produce enough scopes, some Snipers were fitted with Lyman Alaskan scopes, others seem to have been shipped to the UK for fitting scopes. You can imagine people scurrying around in a fit trying to fill production orders without the right components. (It's like trying to pay bills when you don't have enough money -- who do I pay first? who is put on hold? where do I take from Peter to pay Paul? tons of Sturm und Drang ....you get the idea.....) Add to this the fact they were probably often using the FILO (First In Last Out) inventory system.

Anyone who has studied Chaos Theory in mathematics understands this predicament: where dynamic (rapidly changing and uncertain situations) are impacted by just small differences in initial conditions, widely diverging outcomes make predictions or logical analysis extremely difficult. (Think Heisenberg's uncertainty principle if you remember physics or a guerilla combat scenario). So, to understand what actually happened requires hard data points (the evidence) and then pattern analysis (the correlations that may lead to cause and effect conclusions.)

Sorry if this sounds a bit technical, but that's why no one has cracked the code on this so far. Don't be dismayed -- more valid data, old reports and records will help unscramble this. But, particularly in 1941-43, we must be cautious of any fakes that may throw our analysis off course.

[Sentryduty]

Sorry if this sounds a bit technical, but that's why no one has cracked the code on this so far. Don't be dismayed

Any good path to discovery is seldom a linear one, I am sure with time and data things will develop.

Riveting stuff, however I think the data could be more easily understood with some sort of graphical representation. Could make for a sub discussion perhaps?

[Peter Laidler]

Whenever I get to page 2 of this thread, I go for a lay down in a darkened room with a glass of something alcoholic from Scotland. Maybe I'm an academic dunce who fell asleep during mathematics at Uni!

[Seaspriter]

I go for a lay down in a darkened room with a glass of something alcoholic from Scotland

We still love you Peter.

This kind of code cracking is the work of Sherlock Holmes, Scotland Yard, and the Enigma Machine crew at Bletchley Park -- lots more questions than answers until the pattern becomes clear.

In the mean time, enjoy a good malted Scotch!

[desperatedan]

Absolutely yes. I'm more than happy to send anyone my data base (it's in Excell spreadsheet format, so you will need to give me your email address.). Also, I'll meet with folks when possible -- sometimes one-on-one discovery opens up new insights. (I'll be in Calgary in early April and Edmonton in late April for anyone in Alberta who wants to share a Molsons and data.)

First, start with the number 1588 as the number of Snipers reported by Clive Law in "Without Warning" which cites archived records.
Second, we know from production reports that 1944-46 resulted in 1517 Snipers produced.
Third, that means 71 Snipers must have been produced in 1941-43, making them quite rare.

-- Here's what doesn't make sense: About 25 of these 71 ('41-43) rifles have surfaced -- 35% of production in this period. Wait! this percentage appears to be too high -- the percentages of survivors from other date ranges would make one expect less than 10 of 1941-43 production should have been preserved. If I was a betting man, I'd say as many as 2/3rds of the Snipers in this date range may be suspect. Any Snipers in this date range should be very carefully examined to be sure it's the real thing (beware of a sniper that just "surfaces" from unknown origin -- ask for provenance because they could be fakes).

-- The Total 1944-46 production was 1517 -- all data confirms this number. The confusion in this three year zone occurs because the serial numbers and the date stamps on the receivers are not in logical, linear order. Nor do the scopes fit a logical linear pattern. Here's where people get confused (for good reason):

1944: Rifles with serial numbers 64L to 80L would have been pulled from the production line between late April and late October, 1944. However, many in existence at the latter part of this range have 1945 dates, indicating they were not released for shipment up to a year later. The production reports tell us the shortage of scopes was the production bottleneck. When REL could not produce enough scopes, some Snipers were fitted with Lyman Alaskan scopes, others seem to have been shipped to the UK for fitting scopes. You can imagine people scurrying around in a fit trying to fill production orders without the right components. (It's like trying to pay bills when you don't have enough money -- who do I pay first? who is put on hold? where do I take from Peter to pay Paul? tons of Sturm und Drang ....you get the idea.....) Add to this the fact they were probably often using the FILO (First In Last Out) inventory system.

Anyone who has studied Chaos Theory in mathematics understands this predicament: where dynamic (rapidly changing and uncertain situations) are impacted by just small differences in initial conditions, widely diverging outcomes make predictions or logical analysis extremely difficult. (Think Heisenberg's uncertainty principle if you remember physics or a guerilla combat scenario). So, to understand what actually happened requires hard data points (the evidence) and then pattern analysis (the correlations that may lead to cause and effect conclusions.)

Sorry if this sounds a bit technical, but that's why no one has cracked the code on this so far. Don't be dismayed -- more valid data, old reports and records will help unscramble this. But, particularly in 1941-43, we must be cautious of any fakes that may throw our analysis off course.

Whilst this is all good stuff I'm not sure that I'd agree with the theory regarding the proportion of early survivors and potential fakes. On the supposition that the 71 from 1941-1943 were "pre-production" then surely they're less likely to have been issued and so more likely to survive than those from the later production batches that would have seen active service with a consequent greater risk of loss.

To my mind given their relative rarity and (as yet) apparently not appearing as reproductions, aren't the REL scopes are a better indicator of "genuine" or otherwise, than the rifles themselves.

I'm happy to declare an interest here as the current owner of a 1943 39L (previously mentioned in this thread) which started life matched to Mk1 scope 10-C but sometime in its life being replaced with Mk1 271-C. I've no doubts as to its provenance.

Cheers

Kev

[Seaspriter]

current owner of a 1943 39L (previously mentioned in this thread) which started life matched to Mk1 scope 10-C but sometime in its life being replaced with Mk1 271-C. I've no doubts as to its provenance.

Congratulations Kev, you've got a beautiful sniper.

aren't the REL scopes are a better indicator of "genuine" or otherwise, than the rifles themselves.

Absolutely yes. Problem is so many snipers have taken leave of their scopes, brackets, and transit cases. Whenever they are together, validation is much easier.

supposition that the 71 from 1941-1943 were "pre-production"

The idea of "preproduction" doesn't appear to be what was happening. Lee Enfield believes these were just small batch lots ("one or two off" as we say in America, or "bespoke" as this is referred to in the UK). The slow production was causing fits in the UK, where more snipers were needed.

1941-1943 were .......surely ....less likely to have been issued and so more likely to survive than those from the later production batches that would have seen active service with a consequent greater risk of loss.

This is a good theory, but does anyone have any evidence that it is true? It makes sense in our arm chairs of 2016, but I doubt any weary soldiers were thinking this way during the war.

Here's what the data tells us:
1941-3 (early-mid war) Production: 71 with 24 reported surviving == 35% survival rate
1944-mid 45 (late war) Production: 933 with 73 reported surviving == 8 % survival rate
mid 1945-46 (post war) Production: 595 with 131 reported surviving == 22% survival rate
IOW, the survival rate of early/mid war production exceeds late war production by a whopping 4 times. Does something seem amiss to you?

Keep up the good detective work -- every bit of evidence counts.
Robert

[Lee Enfield]

Congratulations Kev, you've got a beautiful sniper.

Absolutely yes. Problem is so many snipers have taken leave of their scopes and transit cases. Whenever they are together, validation is much easier.

The idea of "preproduction" doesn't appear to be what was happening. Lee Enfield believes these were just small batch lots ("one or two off" as we say in America, or "bespoke" as this is referred to in the UK). The slow production was causing fits in the UK, where more snipers were needed.


This is a good theory, but does anyone have any evidence that it is true? It makes sense in our arm chairs of 2016, but I doubt any weary soldiers were thinking this way during the war.

Here's what the data tells us:
1941-3 (early-mid war) Production: 71 with 24 reported surviving == 35% survival rate
1944-mid 45 (late war) Production: 933 with 73 reported surviving == 8 % survival rate
mid 1945-46 (post war) Production: 595 with 131 reported surviving == 22% survival rate
IOW, the survival rate of early/mid war production exceeds late war production by a whopping 4 times. Does something seem amiss to you?

Keep up the good detective work -- every bit of evidence counts.
Robert

You are making the (incorrect?) assumption that a 1943 receiver date is a reliable indication that the conversion was completed in 1943 (and therefore counted into the 71 completed before January 1, 1944 rifles)..

For example the 64L block sniper receivers are dated 1943, however standard production rifles in the 62L block are dated 1944.

To me this is an indication that "batch serial block" production was already underway, ie) a serial# block or group of rifles was set aside and separately either completed rifles, or bare receivers were set aside for conversion to sniper rifles.

Also to address the "large" percentage of early conversions being known is more an indication of early release from government service due to their MkI (and early obsolencence) scopes, and the attractive and valuable aspect of the rifles themselves...ie) they were commercially marketed in North America as collectors items from day 1...late 1950s and early 1960s.

[Seaspriter]

You are making the (incorrect?) assumption that a 1943 receiver date is a reliable indication that the conversion was completed in 1943 (and therefore counted into the 71 completed before January 1, 1944 rifles)..

Not sure it really matters. If it was produced in 1945, Marshall's production report would have excluded it from the 71.

To me this is an indication that "batch serial block" production was already underway, ie) a serial# block or group of rifles was set aside and separately either completed rifles, or bare receivers were set aside for conversion to sniper rifles.

This is a pretty safe assumption. There's certainly evidence to show that in 1943 they were moving from small batch to block conversions.

they were commercially marketed in North America as collectors items from day 1...late 1950s and early 1960s.

It's fascinating to download an old copy of Guns Magazine to read the ads from 1959-60. Enfields were flooding the market. SMLEs could be purchased for $9.95. No. 4 snipers for $35-45 including the scopes. What we have to realize is that about 26,000 snipers were produced in the UK during the war, compared to 1,588 in Canada. Canadian production is only 6% of the sniper total. I can't tell from the advertisements, but it seems the surplus distributors were dumping anything that would sell and didn't distinguish between a Canadian and a British sniper.

To put everything in wartime perspective, when we begin to realize that the Long Branch plant was pumping out 1,000 No. 4 rifles per day at peak production in 1943 (plus Stens), you can see how insignificant the sniper production was compared to the whole effort. In other words, the entire production of snipers from 1941 to 1946 was the equivalent of only 36 hours of non-sniper production in that plant. I suspect snipers were actually a big pain in the behind, absorbing more time and angst than they seemed worth, especially when REL couldn't produce scopes.

Does anyone know how many snipers (if any) were sent to the UK without scopes?