Printable View
I read an article on that somewhere Lee not sure if it had to do with ignition times, hang fires or just p*ss poor quality control wish I could remember the site but going a bit daft of late.
I have some ball H/S 303 British WRA ammo here where the primers are staked which was purportedly to stop the primers backing out causing issues when they were used in MG's used in aircraft
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINDERS
I read that is was dimensional inconsistency which meant they jammed in the chamber and even the 'system' that was supposed to clear it (don't know how that worked) was unable to get the cartridge out of the chamber.
The investigation teams found that a high quantity of the aircraft shot down (at the time) had their guns jammed 'with one up the spout', and all had the Winchester ammunition. It was then decreed that the Win must not be used in aircraft.
I never read that it was a timing / synchronisation problem - were the wing guns on the fighters outside the arc of the prop anyway ?
What is the last digit of the scope number?Quote:
Originally Posted by mackms
If original, and three or four digit as it appears to be, I find it interesting that a Mk.I scope probably made in mid-1942 was fitted to a No.4. perhaps as much as two years later! However, that would fit with what I've hypothesized before about production of No.4(T)s actually being as little as a quarter of the rate previously reported.
If there is no fourth digit, then I presume the original fitting must have been a Mk2/1 scope from U.I.C.?
Is the rifle serial number stamped on the "tongue" of the butt?
Is there a U.I.C. Mk.2/1 scope in the house, serial number 321 ? :D
Did you ever pull the buttstock off Mackms to see if this butt is serialed to the rifle?
And if you want to post a close up of the scope number on the wrist of the butt, then we can probably say conclusively whether your rifle had a Mk.2/1 scope originally, or just a regular Mk.I.