An interesting scope combo.

Hi all, miserable day here in the UK.
Last week I had a call out of the blue, a local chap heard that I was interested in all things L1A1 and thought I might want this.

He was a REME officer serving in NI in 1972, he procured this scope combo from his armourer team.

Used for the remainder of the tour and stored ever since.

It's in excellent condition, crystal clear optics and free turrets.

The No71 scope has a standard No32 rectical.

It's extremely well put together with a well attached mount.

I know we have discussed these NI specials over the years here, but here is the evidence that they do actually exist, not just a grainy photograph!

A very interesting piece of NI service history!

All change, I think it's an L1A1 trials scope...
Pics to follow...

As relayed by Pete a long while ago, it's one of these.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=32631&

OK but pics?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

OK but pics?

---

Here we go Jim, back on the PC, my phone wouldn't let me attach for some reason.

I assume DDE 23930/395 on the mount is the Enfield? drawing number??

Isn't that interesting...again very high to clear the front sight. A non issue with the magnification. Neat item.

R. & J. Beck the maker presumably.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Surpmil

R. & J. Beck the maker presumably.

---

Apparently so, R J Beck were (are?) mainly a microscope maker of note, I am about to submit a request for information regarding the trials of these scopes with Royal armouries in Leeds.

Going by the complete Fal book, 19 of the first type were made for trials, I would like to know how many of the second production version (this one) were actually produced.

I think I be right in saying that this must be the only scope setup that was actually calibrated for the L1A1 specifically, unlike the various attempts at recreating this setup by unit armourers in NI using No32 scopes and cobbled mounts.

I would assume these must have been made as a very limited trails batch. I'll post any information I can find regarding numbers made and trails results.

I will be trialling this tomorrow hopefully, weather permitting, though with the .22 conversion kit as I don't want to risk damaging this exceptionally rare item....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

I would assume these must have been made as a very limited trails batch.

---

There were also attempts by individual weapon techs. I had a PH sight mounted to a body cover by the local shop for accuracy shooting, which apparently didn't work out. I kept it for years and found it was about perfect. The other optic attempts were noted to have "Flex" in the body cover so until the Germans came out with a more rigid body cover no one had any faith.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

There were also attempts by individual weapon techs. I had a PH sight mounted to a body cover by the local shop for accuracy shooting, which apparently didn't work out. I kept it for years and found it was about perfect. The other optic attempts were noted to have "Flex" in the body cover so until the Germans came out with a more rigid body cover no one had any faith.

---

I've a very similar one Jim, it consists of brazed blocks onto the top cover, with the indent for PH rings, I'll have to dig it out....

Edit, here she is, like this one Jim?
I often wondered if this was an Armourers NI 'special' prior to the SUIT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

I often wondered if this was an Armourers NI 'special'

---

Peter might know as we had a reward for innovation, a cash sum. Maybe he had the same system. Mine was mounted on the attachments of the old leaf sight for out original C2 "LAR" rear sight. Just one stump at the back half. You might have to resort to looking in an FN book to see, this would date back to the unaccepted rear sight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

Peter might know as we had a reward for innovation, a cash sum. Maybe he had the same system. Mine was mounted on the attachments of the old leaf sight for out original C2 "LAR" rear sight. Just one stump at the back half. You might have to resort to looking in an FN book to see, this would date back to the unaccepted rear sight.

---

Sounds like an interesting rig there Jim...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

Sounds like an interesting rig

---

It worked great but it was a one off. There had been others I think but had long since gone.

I took the afternoon off to head to my local range to test the scope out.

What a lovely scope to use, very nice optics x 3 or x 4 magnification, (clarity not captured by my phone unfortunately), micro click adjusted and perfect eye relief for me.

As I previously mentioned, I am restricting my use of this scope to .22 conversion kit, as I don't want to risk damaging what is an exceptionally rare collectors scope.

As set up, it was easy to dial in at 30 yards (dial set to 100 yards) with .22 put me fractionally below bull.

Accuracy is about right with the kit, printing sub inch groups at 25 yards generally.

All in all a lovely scope, from a shooters perspective, it feels 'right' on the rifle, with the dials coming to hand easily and perfect eye relief.

It really does seem a shame it never reached general issue, obviously as a planned No4T replacement, it would never cut the mustard, but as a designated Marksman's rifle with this set up, it would be about perfect.... Mounting ruggedness aside of course, but its certainly more sturdy than the SUIT setup!

I can only assume my example was on REME trials in the 1960's and never got returned, possibly the only one (or very few) that actually got used for its intended propose in NI back in the early 70's!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

It really does seem a shame it never reached general issue, obviously as a planned No4T replacement

---

Our FN scopes were never to surpass or replace the #4, the C# came in to do that. Ours was issued as a marksman's optic. I had one issued to me during the peace negotiations in Nicosia Cyprus in 1975. The actual snipers still had the C3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

As set up, it was easy to dial in at 30 yards (dial set to 100 yards) with .22 put me fractionally below bull.

---

We had to set our rear iron sight to 600 on the rifle to engage the targets with the insert. I expect the same with this...sights up to strike on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

Our FN scopes were never to surpass or replace the #4, the C# came in to do that. Ours was issued as a marksman's optic. I had one issued to me during the peace negotiations in Nicosia Cyprus in 1975. The actual snipers still had the C3.



We had to set our rear iron sight to 600 on the rifle to engage the targets with the insert. I expect the same with this...sights up to strike on.

---

As I understand it Jim, the original idea behind this specific scope combo was to allow the retirement of the No4T that was certainly looking 'tied' by 1960.

Until I can access trials data, it's all subjective, but going as far as developing/ modifying the scope and mount and producing a trial batch, only to then discover a well fettled 4T can easily out shoot it, really dosen't seem like rocket science!

I would have thought a relitivly simple trial at Enfied with a tool room made mount and commercial scope would have identified the limitations and put the idea to bed before serious money was wasted!

That said, with this well thought out scope and mount combo already developed and I assume trialed, why on earth wasn't it adopted as a designated Marksmans setup?

Looking back at this retrospectively, it seems obvious.

Such is the mysteries of the procurement process I guess...

John,
I would place a date around early to mid 70's as we trialled several spot orientated scopes then in Northern Ireland, as we found the SUIT series wanting. I know we have spoken about those early scopes on the site before but all was lost on a site upgrade with the photos to, as I can't now locate them. Peter may have some dated papers that could shed light on this interesting scope you have. Nice find mate.

Ah, yes. The designation will give you an age marker. The Noxx MkX instead of the Tel Strt Stg LxAx type designation dates these to pre 65 - I was going to say. But this one is 1967 - as is the one that I have got.

There is also an EMER for them which I will try to find. It was only a provisional EMER which gives a further clue about its longevity in service. I also found the trials report from the Trials unit at Warminster. Like all optical sights fitted to L1's, it's the interface that is the problem and that was the cause of this little sights demise which, so it seems, struggled on into 1970 and was them made obsolescent. The steel plate between the cover and the sight would tear the spot welds away in pretty short order, believe me

They came in a longish kakhi heavy duty canvas bag, lined with a felt material with a buckle fastener - like the usual '44 or 58 pattern green alloy style. At the back there were two similar buckles that you could put a cross-strap through. The rifle, VERY good though it was, was never going to be a sniper rifle. That said, late on came the Alvis/AVIMO SUIT which, while it looked good wasn't as good as the little No74. If you could mount a tele sight onto the body, then that would be another matter. But alas, it doesn't make a VERY good infantry rifle into a snipers rifle. Only the No4T and the L42 can do that!

Those are my only observations of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

it doesn't make a VERY good infantry rifle into a snipers rifle.

---

Exactly... But a decent optic can help with moderate eyesight, as long as you can keep the rifle mated to the optic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Ah, yes. The designation will give you an age marker. The Noxx MkX instead of the Tel Strt Stg LxAx type designation dates these to pre 65 - I was going to say. But this one is 1967 - as is the one that I have got.

There is also an EMER for them which I will try to find. It was only a provisional EMER which gives a further clue about its longevity in service. I also found the trials report from the Trials unit at Warminster. Like all optical sights fitted to L1's, it's the interface that is the problem and that was the cause of this little sights demise which, so it seems, struggled on into 1970 and was them made obsolescent. The steel plate between the cover and the sight would tear the spot welds away in pretty short order, believe me

They came in a longish kakhi heavy duty canvas bag, lined with a felt material with a buckle fastener - like the usual '44 or 58 pattern green alloy style. At the back there were two similar buckles that you could put a cross-strap through. The rifle, VERY good though it was, was never going to be a sniper rifle. That said, late on came the Alvis/AVIMO SUIT which, while it looked good wasn't as good as the little No74. If you could mount a tele sight onto the body, then that would be another matter. But alas, it doesn't make a VERY good infantry rifle into a snipers rifle. Only the No4T and the L42 can do that!

Those are my only observations of it.

---

Many thanks for the information Pete, like I originally said, this was given to a young REME officer by the armourer and he occasionally used it through the remainder of his 1972 NI tour.

My excitement upon receiving it (L1 anorak firmly on and zipped up) was equally matched by his excitement upon a fair trade for a good bottle of Whiskey.... Both parties were delighted!

Any information you can provide on these would be greatly appreciated, I'm assuming a very limited production run...

This one has certainly seen very limited use...

I have been racking my brain in the search for a B/W photo of, I think, a Royal Marine with this sight mounted on an L1A1 on top of New Lodge flats in Belfast. Seems to have disappeared when the photos went on a website upgrade a few years ago. I will continue my search. The photo was clearly taken mid 70's as we (2 PARA) were there a couple of times with our last tour in the city being 1972, it was a rough time there as well!!
The sanger from which the photo was taken was built on top of one of the flats well after our time there so must have been mid 70's.
Anybody got the photo to put me out of my misery............OR was it a different sight and I'm losing it??;)

Gil, was it this picture?

It does look more like a No32 scope though. You can see the added foregrip too.

There's also another pic (can't get original from photobucket now sadly) that seems to show one of the scopes that John has.

Edit - added another Reg Maudling photo showing the same scope - photo dated 7 July 1970

Edit - and another different angle.

Attachment 130524Attachment 130526Attachment 130528Attachment 130527

Nailed it Kev, finally we have pictures of the scope in the wild!
Many thanks for posting....

Kev's post raises an interesting question, I was working on the assumption that the scope was ex trials and brought out of retirement due to the pressing need for optics at this very dark time in NI.

That of course is still plausible, but it's looking more like the scope was actually a ( very) limited issue piece...

I know this is off topic, but what made the Brits decided on that extremely long flash hider?

I've always assumed it's down to the influence of the US T48 Fal prototypes on the inch pattern design Daan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daan Kemp

I know this is off topic, but what made the Brits decided on that extremely long flash hider?

---

Presumably the bayonet wouldn't fit if it was any shorter? :madsmile:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by desperatedan

the bayonet wouldn't fit

---

There were bayonets for all the different REAL contenders, they had to also pass trial.

Sorry Jim, I couldn't resist replying like that, my British sense of humour on a quiet Sunday afternoon :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

I've always assumed it's down to the influence of the US T48 Fal prototypes on the inch pattern design Daan.

---

It just seems so unwieldy, must have taken getting used to and then it didn't matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daan Kemp

It just seems so unwieldy,

---

Well I can tell you it's not.

Kev,
Yes that is the photo left hand one of the soldier looking down on St Annes Cathedral on top of the New Lodge flats in Belfast. Not a Royal Marine, but an infanteer from another Regiment. Thanks for digging it out.
That sanger on top of the flats wasn't built until we left in 1972 so it does show the sight was about to the mid 70's.

It's interesting to note that if you Google No74 MK1 scope you come up with absolutely nothing!

That gives you an idea of rarity, strangely they don't appear to have even been discussed before in an open forum be such as Milsurps.

* Edit, with the exception of PL's 2011 post....

I'm looking forward to some trials data on these.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daan Kemp

It just seems so unwieldy, must have taken getting used to and then it didn't matter.

---

If you compare a x8 or ex1 to a c1 or l1, the extra (close to 4") length difference is noticable.

The Australian L1A1a or the metric "combo" device is much superior from a useability level - I believe it's 2-1/2" shorter than the C1/L1 flash hider.

O well, we make do with what they issue us, not so?
Thank you BAR and Lee Enfield.

John,

I came across a better one of the previous photos without the photobucket ruining it which you might like to save.


Attachment 130569

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by desperatedan

John,

I came across a better one of the previous photos without the photobucket ruining it which you might like to save.


Attachment 130569

---

Cheers Kev, great spot, it looks like we are steadily dragging this rarity out into the light, bit by bit.

It's always surprising when you come across a genuine head scratcher.

When I met up with the previous owner I totally expected a SUIT, so, I was genuinely taken back when he put the No74 on the table!

A little like the 8 slot plastic NZ handguards with the top vents, just occasionally, the inch pattern can still surprise you with a curiousity that you didn't know existed.
Trial data should give us more information...

Those pix of the cover with the PH compatible blocks look VERY similar to the ones fabricated here in Oz. I wonder if the bloke doing them here had picked up a "sample" in his travels. Sadly, I cannot ask him as he demised over a decade ago.

Interesting Bruce, mine was an original Enfied top cover, it came to me among a mixed box of second hand / new old stock top covers I bought from a certain major UK dealer a good few years ago.

It's origins will never be known....

I have to say, the more I look into 1970's NI Armourer workshop specials, I do wonder if this one came from that direction...

And then there was two....

I visited a well known UK Milsurps Gunsmith yesterday and after a bit of looking, he came up with this!

Its been in his position a very long time indeed.....

This one lacks its mount, B.L 63, mine is B.L 33.

Its looking very much like a limited trails batch, the question is, of how many, logic dictates 100 examples, seems like a sensible number considering the tooling up costs of such an endeavour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

how many, logic dictates 100 examples

---

Or perhaps even though 100 was the original number there were substantially les actually produced? Stopped short because of a change of mind...? Then they usually try to corral them all for destruction too.

Another example has now surfaced, this one in a private collection and complete with mount and original bag....


So we have BL033, BL063 and BL078 so far.

From memory, we can thank Peter for these images :cheers: I forgot I had them

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../UuuunBT-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../IPuivcS-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../oJ5xrCS-1.jpg

Would the L1A1 scope survive internally over time with the inertia of the rifle using Green Spot or alternative 7.62 round, or am I being negative? Can't help thinking, if this scope was the answer and the supposedly B's & E's , why terminate its production? Something was'nt right!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nzl1a1collector

From memory, we can thank Peter for these images :cheers: I forgot I had them

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../UuuunBT-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../IPuivcS-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../oJ5xrCS-1.jpg

---

Many thanks Kev, much appreciated mate.
Peter is very kindly sending me a copy of same.

It did make me laugh, as Pete pointed out, the No74 illustrated, is mounted the wrong way round!

Perhaps as part of a separate trial, ensuring Snipers didn't bug out to soon, as the enemy would appear miles away!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

Many thanks Kev, much appreciated mate.
Peter is very kindly sending me a copy of same.

It did make me laugh, as Pete pointed out, the No74 illustrated, is mounted the wrong way round!

Perhaps as part of a separate trial, ensuring Snipers didn't bug out to soon, as the enemy would appear miles away!

---

Morning Gil, Pete pointed out that one of the issues was the typical one regarding optics and mounts spot welded to the cover.

Basically the mount would inevitably detach before long as the spot welds failed under recoil.

I would imagine two things put paid to the No74 MK1, first and most obvious, the rifle isn't capable of the accuracy required in a dedicated Sniper rifle, second, the mounting system was funimentally flawed.


The second issue could have been avoided if they manufactured a top cover with a slightly raised ( so avoiding the reciprocating bolt group) flat platform formed into it, allowing it to be screwd or bolted through. The downside here, is it would mean the scope mounted even higher......

The No74 itself is a really nice,well thought out little scope though.

It's interesting the EMER is dated March 1966, the surviving scopes found so far are all 1967 dated and in a serial range below 100.

Of course this might just be a coincidence, re the serial range found so far, but it does suggest a very limited initial production run.


I

Probably best fitted to the H&K or Armalon .22 inerds for shooting then. Thats the place for it.:thup:
That drawing is for the Gurkha Regiments ONLY

It's funny how you don't immediately see what's staring you in the face....

Looking at the image of the prototype No74 scope, it's obvious that the mounting system discussed earlier is exactly what they originally envisioned.

It's not possible to see how this has been constructed dur the limitations of the image, but it appears to be much more robust mounting base.

Perhaps a separate prototype dust cover?

I assume the bean counters got involved and insisted on a mount assembled to a standard top cover, probably dooming it to failure...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

Perhaps a separate prototype dust cover?

---

That dust cover resembles the one issued for our AN PVS 502. It was a huge hollow affair with two holes at top for screws to attach the rail. Not much better than spot welds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

It's funny how you don't immediately see what's staring you in the face....

Looking at the image of the prototype No74 scope, it's obvious that the mounting system discussed earlier is exactly what they originally envisioned.

It's not possible to see how this has been constructed dur the limitations of the image, but it appears to be much more robust mounting base.

Perhaps a separate prototype dust cover?

I assume the bean counters got involved and insisted on a mount assembled to a standard top cover, probably dooming it to failure...

---

The prototype illustrated appears to be mounted on a modified X8E2 (Ex2) unit sight top cover.
https://www.forgottenweapons.com/x8e1-x8e2-slr-manual/
The extended scope base, addition of the locking tabs to the rear and deletion of the front locating pin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

It did make me laugh, as Pete pointed out, the No74 illustrated, is mounted the wrong way round!

Perhaps as part of a separate trial, ensuring Snipers didn't bug out to soon, as the enemy would appear miles away!

---

Judging by the markings on the elevation drum, the scope is shown correctly, but with the shade on the objective rather than the ocular - obviously wouldn't clear the mounts as shown, but probably a wiser place for it if it would have fit.

I see your point!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee Enfield

The prototype illustrated appears to be mounted on a modified X8E2 (Ex2) unit sight top cover.
X8E1 X8E2 SLR Manual
The extended scope base, addition of the locking tabs to the rear and deletion of the front locating pin.

---

I think you're right, if not a modified original, then certainly based closely on it.

Having submerged myself in the relevant section of The Fal Rifle book, the time line starts become clear.

Varians of this scope had been trialed seriously in prototype form since 1960. It appears in 1965, someone decided to push it into production and the scope and Enfied production mount went into limited production in 1967.

Without reference to the trials information, I'm more inclined to think the thing that killed the No74 MK1 off was an obvious inability to place shots with required accuracy at range with the L1A1.

The switch in interest to reduced light capability scope, generally issued, (the eventual SUIT) scope, trialed in prototype form in 1969, shows the 'Sniper L1A1' must have been dead in the water by 1968 at the latest.

Considering the abysmal failing SUIT mount that followed the No74 MK1, they couldn't have had a huge amount of issue with spot welding the mounts on...

Or perhaps trials were stopped before that lesson could be absorbed!

As a side note, Pete has mentioned that as far as he can recall, it was intended to pair a sight unit to a rifle by electo penciling the rifles S/N on the scopes top cover.

I assume by testing and putting aside the most accurate rifles as designated sniper L1's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

I see your point!

---

Begs the question: how deeply recessed is the objective lens? Would a shade be necessary? I'm guessing it would.

Something similar a little larger would probably have made a good replacement for the No32.

In "Without Warning" pps. 65-71 the trials are detailed which led to the adoption of the E. Leitz Canada "Sniper Scope C1" in 1959. One of the sights included in the trial was a "UK 3x Type 1956"; anyone know what those were?

By way or comparison the Soviet PSO-1 came out in the early 1960s with a range-finding illuminated reticule, IR detector and zero-retaining quick release mounts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Surpmil

Begs the question: how deeply recessed is the objective lens? Would a shade be necessary? I'm guessing it would.

Something similar a little larger would probably have made a good replacement for the No32.

In "Without Warning" pps. 65-71 the trials are detailed which led to the adoption of the E. Leitz Canada "Sniper Scope C1" in 1959. One of the sights included in the trial was a "UK 3x Type 1956"; anyone know what those were?

By way or comparison the Soviet PSO-1 came out in the early 1960s with a range-finding illuminated reticule, IR detector and zero-retaining quick release mounts.

---

The UK 3x was this scope, in an earlier version.

It's actually a very nice scope, lovely clear optics, good positive click adjustment and they fall very naturally to the hand, so you can zero without breaking your aim.

Had it been boosted to X4 with a slightly larger field of view, it would have made a good No32 replacement...

That said, when the decision was made to go with the L42, why fix what isn't broken?

What's shown in the EMER is the Trials scope c1960 fitted to a modified FAL Cover, the same as used for the X8E2/EX2 optics. These Scopes were known as the No. 74 EX1 and according to the info 12 or 13 were made (depending on which page you read) S/N of scopes BL1, BL2, BL3, BL4, BL5, BL6, BL7, BL8, BL9, BL10, BL11, BL12, BL13 by R J BECK. The original 12 were returned to BECK due to a breakdown of the sealant to be examined.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../IXDxZo4-1.jpg

Still mounted arse about face on the top cover or is it me?

Basic physics will put a stop to a scope of this weight being capable of reliable use. While the scope - like the SUIT - will pass the standard fastness test - or recoil test, with the Enfield layer or rest set at hard, the fact remains that the telescope will always recoil radially rearwards. It's physics at work. The telescope is good, the rifle is good but the cover is thin pressed steel, a third the thickness of a bit of car body steel

One of the old workshop notes I have refers to repairs to the cover in the event of it splitting - notice the reinforcing piece at the rear of the cover, below the actual mount part. To be honest, in all my time, I never understood the need for the little 'stops' at the rrear of the L1 cover! It's nt as though you could push the cover on too far! They were forever splitting - due to that nasty rule of physics again. Eventually, they were simply cut off and made good. Just like FN did at the start.

Worth bearing in mind that while the scopes are dated '67 or so, NI didn't start until late '69 and didn't start hotting up until mid '71(?) depending where you were based of course!!!!!

I suppose the pressing need for optics must have entailed someone looking through storage and dragging these out.

Certainly mine has very few signs of use, it certainly points towards the No74 MK1 being cancelled almost as soon as it was manufactured.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

The UK 3x was this scope, in an earlier version.

It's actually a very nice scope, lovely clear optics, good positive click adjustment and they fall very naturally to the hand, so you can zero without breaking your aim.

Had it been boosted to X4 with a slightly larger field of view, it would have made a good No32 replacement...

That said, when the decision was made to go with the L42, why fix what isn't broken?

---

The No.32 Mk3 was an antique by 1970, albeit a strong and reliable one. A lighter, brighter and higher powered or even variable(!) scope would have been more effective and also reduced or eliminated the failure of the pads due to the excessive recoil forces of the No.32.

But if they couldn't be bothered to replace the butts with something more user-friendly, they certainly weren't going to bother with a new scope.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gil Boyd

Still mounted arse about face on the top cover or is it me?

---

No, it's the lens hoods that cause the confusion. The long hood is apparently slotted to fit over the front of the mounts, and this illustration shows the short hood for the ocular lens which was missing from the previous image(s).

The arrow indicates where I believe we can just make out the edge of the bead on the opposite side of the slot.

The long hood shown above fitted to the ocular end is clearly not the same type: no bead and no slot, so either a service replacment of the short hood or a civilian addition.

Just a wild guess from the Penal Colonies.

I suspect the little folded tabs at he lower rear of the L1A1 dust cover may be a hangover from the construction of the early X-8 series covers that retained the ability to use those various charger clips. With a "full-length" cover, as the rifle recoils, the cover cannot "slide forward"; with a "half-length" cover, the tabs were "needed" to stop such movement.

As the design advanced towards the "definitive L1A1", the recesses in the body, and the dust cover tabs never quite got scrubbed from the drawings, so, here we are today chatting about arcane details on vintage hardware. Chicken / Egg and "Tab / Recess".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruce_in_Oz

Just a wild guess from the Penal Colonies.

I suspect the little folded tabs at he lower rear of the L1A1 dust cover may be a hangover from the construction of the early X-8 series covers that retained the ability to use those various charger clips. With a "full-length" cover, as the rifle recoils, the cover cannot "slide forward"; with a "half-length" cover, the tabs were "needed" to stop such movement.

As the design advanced towards the "definitive L1A1", the recesses in the body, and the dust cover tabs never quite got scrubbed from the drawings, so, here we are today chatting about arcane details on vintage hardware. Chicken / Egg and "Tab / Recess".

---

I would guess it was a rifle steering committee mandate....

I'm just going to place this here and walk away chuckling, I was going to start with the mix of Lithgow and Enfield L1's, moving on the non adjustable No42 scope, but I think I would run out of internet before I finished!

What a splendid example of NEVER BUY A STORY!


Deactivated RARE British SLR L1A1 with Scope - Modern Deactivated Guns - Deactivated Guns


" The scope is marked “No42 Mk.1” – a scope dating as far back as WW2 which was often seen on Enfield No4.T sniper rifles, modified from its original role as an artillery spotting scope.

Dated 1959, it is quite conceivable that this rifle has seen service in the Falklands War and the Northern Ireland theatre of operations to name but a few."

"with a remnants of a matt subdued finish on the buttstock, further pointing towards its use for covert or reconnaissance purposes."

That's strange....... Artillery spotting scope eh! To spot for the Artillery, you'd need a bit more than x3 power for their distances in my limited experience. I learned from the paperwork that the little No42's and 53's were used as the coaxial MG telescopes in the Churchill Mk7 and 8 gun tanks and the Comet tank.

just to add another piece of the story,

Here's the web bag we can assume the limited run came in, pics kindly supplied from a private collection.

The bag appears very much a limited run up prototype, I'm sure had the No74 gone into widespread issue (as a designated marksman's scope), with 10,000 plus being procured, than a production bag, based on this would have been procured.

Many thanks for the pictures!

When information has dried up, still waiting on a few sources of potential trials information, I will collate it all together to hopefully become a sticky thread. Attachment 130812Attachment 130813Attachment 130814

Maybe a few enquiries reating to R&J Beck is the next move.

Does anyone know what happened to them, who acquired them or what.......?

The bag with it's velcro looks like something we'd have had.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Maybe a few enquiries reating to R&J Beck is the next move.

Does anyone know what happened to them, who acquired them or what.......?

---

Looks like all the usual ownership and location shuffles: R and J Beck Limited | Science Museum Group Collection

69 Mortimer St., London would just have been their office.

Seems there was a works in Watford from quite early on and may still be something, though clearly not in Bushey Mill Lane.

Name now persists as "Beck Optronic Solutions Ltd." but degree of connection unknown: https://find-open.co.uk/hemel-hempst...imited-1169841

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Surpmil

Looks like all the usual ownership and location shuffles: R and J Beck Limited | Science Museum Group Collection

69 Mortimer St., London would just have been their office.

Seems there was a works in Watford from quite early on and may still be something, though clearly not in Bushey Mill Lane.

Name now persists as "Beck Optronic Solutions Ltd." but degree of connection unknown: https://find-open.co.uk/hemel-hempst...imited-1169841

---

I've contacted Beck Optronic Solutions asking for information, no response so far unfortunately...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

I've contacted Beck Optronic Solutions asking for information, no response so far unfortunately...

---

If you can find older, retired staff members through social media etc. they might have better knowledge than current staff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Surpmil

If you can find older, retired staff members through social media etc. they might have better knowledge than current staff.

---

That's an excellent idea. I will certainly look into that.

A quick update, Jonathan Ferguson, curator of firearms has kindly been able to confirm that seven No74 Mk1 scopes are in the Leeds Royal Armouries collection, with one mounted on a rifle.

There is a a good deal of information relating to the scopes and trial in the archive there and Ive been given permission to look through the documentation.

This really is a huge help and should allow us to form a complete picture of the project.

A small update today,

Unfortunately, Beck Optronics don't have records going back to the 1960's anymore, so that particular line of enquiry is dead, however, some of this information might (possibly) be in the royal armouries archive, if its wrapped up within the Mod project data.

One reference I noticed when looking into Beck was a donation made to The Science Museum in the 1960s, so if there was a clear-out then it's possible some other materials went there also.

Quick update:

The examples in Leeds Royal Armouries listed online are as follows:

BL 010 (With mount)
BL 026 (With mount)
BL 027 (no mount info)
BL 048 (no mount info)
BL 053 (With mount)
BL 075 (experimental mount)
One other example L1A1 mounted no s/n provided. ( I will try to obtain that s/n)
All the above gifted to Leeds from the old Enfield pattern Room Collection.

To this we can add the privately owned examples
BL 033 (with mount)
BL 063 (no mount)
BL 078 (complete, mount and prototype bag)

I will attempt to get information relating to the experimental mount fitted to '075'.

From this information, I think we can confidently now say we have a run of 100 No74 Mk1 scopes.

The No.71 scope is a No.32 scope with a + reticle for the Wombat Anti Tank rifle
MANY have been converted back to a No.32 reticle style.
I have done several over the years and a fair number from "down under"
cheers,
Warren

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warren

The No.71 scope is a No.32 scope with a + reticle for the Wombat Anti Tank rifle
MANY have been converted back to a No.32 reticle style.
I have done several over the years and a fair number from "down under"
cheers,
Warren

---

Hi Warren,

The No74 scope comes from a different linage, its not No32 based.

Warren correctly stated that the No71 scope was based on the No32 scope and not the No74.

I understand that the No71 scope wasn't fitted to the old Wombat anti tank gun, certainly not in my time working on them, but the Mk2 Centurion for the polsten cannon in mch the same way as the No42 was used in the Mk7 and 8 Churchill gun tanks.

This is the reason why the 71's were painted silver

The BAT had a .303 Bren as a ranging gun mounted on the left side of the main gun. The MOBAT - a modified BAT (Mo BAT) was a BAT without the massive shield and had either an L4 or .303 Bren mounted against the main gun. But, alas, the 7.62mm round did not give the same correct trajectory as the original .303 bullet and there was a sort-of formula to correct this!!!!! Later they both had the M8C .50" short calibre rifle fitted that solved the problem.

The real problem with the feared BAT family wasn't the gun as such but was feared by Armourers who had to work on them, especially the barrel trunnion bearings and electrical firing mechanism and sliding breech mech on the BAT and MOBAT. I'm not sure that the soviet tank armies facing NATO on the European border seriously feared the recoilless rifles or the 3.5" anti tank rocket launchers we were using. Not until the substantial Cark Gustav - or Charlie Gee came on the scene. That was different

I finally had a chance to circle back around to the ongoing research....

Attached are a series of detailed cut out images I've taken of my example for future reference.

So late 60s is the era of ex-Beck employees you want to find. Start as close to the top of the tree as possible perhaps as depending on how large or spread out the company was those lower down may not have known what was being done in other departments?

Excellent photos. Not much of a case is it?

A bit of deformation at the front top of the cover from recoil "slamming"? A half-round reinforcement brazed on there would have been a good idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Surpmil

So late 60s is the era of ex-Beck employees you want to find. Start as close to the top of the tree as possible perhaps as depending on how large or spread out the company was those lower down may not have known what was being done in other departments?

Excellent photos. Not much of a case is it?

A bit of deformation at the front top of the cover from recoil "slamming"? A half-round reinforcement brazed on there would have been a good idea.

---

Research will trickle on as and when I get time. It's Warminster first to check for any trial information and then Leeds to look at their examples and the considerable documentation archive on the subject there.

The pouch ( provided cleaned up image, not my pouch) does appear a little Health Robinson, it was a trials pouch however and I'm sure a far more robust example would have been produced to integrate with the 58 pattern ?? web equipment, had the No74 been adopted.