Printable View
Anyone happen to know if a Navy issue (That is what the "N" is designating, right?) No.4 MKI T is a scarcer animal to come across as compared to her other siblings? Also, would a Navy T be likely issued to the Royal Marines as opposed to regular Navy?
I bet someone will now tell me that the "N" does not mean Navy and is just a prefix to the serial number. That will be ok, I'm a big boy and can take the education very well.
Ian
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_4000-1.jpg
I will be that killjoy. N for November is a 1944 BSA Shirley serial number prefix. Funny thing, my copy of Stratton's book has a typo in the 1944 serial number ranges. It lists alphabetically the letters, and shows two M's and a P. I believe that ought to read L, M, N, P, Q (no O for Oscar).
Nevertheless, a 1944 serial sniper rifle is a gun that very likely saw action in 1944 and 1945. They didn't put these guns back on the rack so some collector sixty or seventy years later could gaze upon it.
While I certainly don't claim to be an expert, I've heard from reliable sources that the N does mean Royal Navy (ie Commandos) - it's an interesting one.
Also weren't the BSA letters normally in 'line abreast' with the numbers? The few 'N' 4Ts I've seen have all been marked centrally.
I partially agree with Maple_Leaf_Eh, but I have seen more than a few 1944 "T" rifles that are likely stores room queens. I suspect that "proven" rifles were first to be used and reused and rebuilt and first out the door to the field again. No sense messing up the "new" kit...
Attachment 31630
My father was a sniping instructor at the Royal Marine Small Arms School during the Second World War. I have several photographs in which No.4 Sniper rifles are featured,
I'm afraid that I vote for the N being the serial number prefix as well. It is the right letter for the year and it would be odder for the serial number not to have letter prefix.
As to the N's positioning, my BSA No.4T has the letter/numbers all in line but it is real squeeze with the last number almost not making it. So I make that a good reason for marking the OP's rifle the way it is.
That is a great photograph!Quote:
Originally Posted by Terrylee
Excellent Pic Terry,
Anyone notice the two P14,s ( N03 Mk1* (T) ) one on the deck and one with Marine Horan.
The N is part of the serial number
So, what if anything would identify a Navy/Marine issued rifle ?
Would like to ask the same and if anyone has a pic or two of the correct location for the Navy "N" stamp, it would be greatly appreciated.
Ian
\there is nothing in the Naval BR's (the equivalent of the Army EMER's and Air Force AP's) anywhere relating to the No1 or No4 rifle that says that they are, were or will be marked with any letter to show that they were Naval issue. Unless anyone out there has a more up to date set!. In fact the Royal Marines work to Army EMER's.
There is one small variation to this (and this is second hand this afternoon and I haven't ever seen it.......) it goes on to say that for ships at sea where arms may be pooled (presumably for operational reasons/boarding parties/shore patrols I am guessing....) arms may be identified by the vessel number on the forestock.
At the risk of appearing a tad anal about it the two P14's are No3 MkI*(T)A being the Alex Martin produced weapons as as oppose to the No3 MkI*(T) which were the PP Co / BSA weapons. The addition of the A suffix was said to denote "Aldis", however I've observed rifles with Aldis pattern III, pattern IV, Watts and Periscopic Prism Co scopes mounted on them.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigduke6
Cheers,
Simon.
Don't worry Simon, I don't think that you're being anal!
Really good photo though!
Attachment 31644
Here is a photo of an "N" marked on a S.M.L.E. Mk. IV. It is not associated with any serial number. If the Navy did not mark their rifles in any way, I wonder what it represents?
Thanks Peter,Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
Have to agree it really is a great picture and I'd love to see some of the others if Terrylee will oblige?
I notice Lt Col Armstrong seated in the front row, he of "Fieldcraft Sniping and Intelligence" fame.
Cheers,
Simon.
Glad you mentioned that TL. I should have mentioned that I was trawling through an old 1949 Navy BR for Armourers and maintainers. That's why I asked if anyone had a more up to date version. Maybe they did mark them many many moons ago but there is no reference to any special identifying markings as there is in the EMER's or RAF AP's.
I worked on a good few Navy weapons including Lanchesters, Brens and No4's (not hundreds I must confess, but certainly plenty.....) at the big Base workshops where we had the only true rustproofing facilities and I never saw a N mark on one. They did have plenty of No2 rifles but they never came through us. THat's a thought........... anyone out there with an 'N' marked Lanchester?
The fact is that the serial number N-3xxxx is a 1944 block and in any case, by 1944, all BSA rifles were prefixed
Only my 2p's worth of course. But BRILLIANT photo......... I am a big believer in the phrase 'one picture describes a thousand words'. But some pictures describe TWO thousand words
Attachment 31654
Simon, I'm interested to see that you have a copy of Fieldcraft, Sniping and Intelligence by Nevil Armstrong. He was a personal friend of my father's and my mother took several of the book's photographs. He gave her a copy in appreciation and I attach what he wrote in it.
I have several more group photos taken at the R.M.S.A.S. and shall scan them for you. Unfortunately, the two of trainee snipers are largely a repetition of that already posted. The rifles are the same, the instructors are the same and its only the marines that differ!
An Excellent piece of Sniping history, thanks for posting it. I particularly like what I assume was a tongue in cheek comment regarding a "2nd Great War"Quote:
Originally Posted by Terrylee
Cheers,
Simon.
I think that we've got reference to the same man in the Small Arms School library. I'll look out for it
One is one of my L42's & the other is a 1943 AV prefix 4T. Note the N's have serifs & are quite unlike the N prefix letter. Do they mean 'Naval'? I don't know, but it has been postulated as such....
Comments DPL??
ATB
P.S. Sorry the pix aren't the best, but I think you can see enough.
Funny that DRP.............. I have the same serif type N on my trials No4T/L42 A-0xxx. As you say, quite unlike the prefix letter N.
What we need now is the serif 'N' on a bog standard No4, then a Lanchester and then a Bren, then a............
Ok everyone, start looking!
ATB
Since this thread seems to be wandering at times, I will post pictures of what I found doing a quick look in the vault as a separate thread. I am reasonable convinced thate these are naval issue as two are line throwers.
Here is another '44 N series sniper upgraded to L42 status in '74
I think I have found my Holy Grail of SMLE's - it would be one with the RM stamped on the buttstock - having been a Marine, U.S. type one each, it would really be an item to have in my space - -
Attachment 31696Attachment 31697Attachment 31698Attachment 31699
Some more photos from Bisley and the Royal Marine Small Arms School.
We're still trying to get the NRA to fill in those bloody big holes on Century.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terrylee
That is certainly a long-standing problem! The caption on the back of the photo reads: "Building loopholes at Small Arms School, Bisley July, 1940". It is interesting to note that the early sniper training in the Second World War was very much influenced by the conditions of the First. This is also very obvious in the book by Nevill Armstrong which was written at about the same time as the photo was taken.
The front row has a Capt Willson, MC RF. I get Military Cross, what is RF?
Royal Fusilliers. Can anyone identify the two locations. Bisley and an old Hythe man says Hythe but I have my doubts
Someone mentioned the 'N' on a navy line thrower. Has anyone got a sight-less linethrower with a pistol grip grafted into the knuckle of the butt. Some like this passed through us but I thought that they were a local mod but it turns out that they were a Navy mod
When the Royal Marine Small Arms School photographs were taken, we were living in Lee-on-Solent. I thus expect that it must have been somewhere in the Portsmouth area.
I guessed at Century Range, Bisley because it looked right for Century. As for that building in the course photos, FAR too posh for Bisley.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
Excellent little book, with great colour plates.Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon
My own copy came out of Ireland, and is marked on the inner flyleaf to a fellow who appears to have been a Canadian? My reading of 1940's copperplate is not the greatest....and the "war stock" paper isn't all that great either....
....The fact that Canada doesn't have "Postal Union" with Ireland, ended up costing me some $80+ when it was all said and done....
Peter asked for a "bog standard No.4 with a serif Navy "N" stamp and here it is. This rifle also has the serial number stamped on the top of the wrist of the butt as discussed in an earlier thread.
I'd much rather they filled in the pot holes on the range road! Oh, and put in some tarmac-ed car parks on Short Siberia, hard surfaced the road that connects Century and Siberia and, and, and. I'm afraid that as jewels in crowns go, Bisley is looking very tarnished. The facilities at most German regional clubs put Bisley to shame. I have to admit, I enjoy it less and less every time I go there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerhunter
Regarding the 'N' Navy mark again. I have just spoken to a 60's era Navy and Marine Armourer (I mean REAL 60's era Armourer and not a 'maintainer' as they seem to be called now) of the No4 era and he's been back and looked through his notes and there is no official record of any Navy weapons being officially marked with the 'N'.
He also confirms that so far as he's aware, certainly from the 50's, that where EMER's were available, then these were the yardstick. Obviously for other stuff, like Lanchesters, the old BR's still applied.
That's not saying that the letter 'N' isn't a Navy mark as it clearly indicates that it is no coincidence that is was Navy. But it's another thing that needs investigation
Really interesting thread this one chaps - am enjoying the debate, and it seems to be one of those 4t bits of lore which hasn't quite been stood up either way.
Purely speculating as to why Navy 4ts may have been marked with a serif 'N' while other weapons were not... Perhaps because Royal Marine snipers might have gone on more courses than most with their army colleagues and it made it more straight forward to get their weapons back from the armoury (not all serial nos are that clearly marked)? Just idle speculation though.
I know this is not a No4MkI (T).
Recently bought this Maltby 1942 in an auction. The rifle is marked "N" and the serial number is stamped on the butt. 2 grooved barrell and MkIII backsight, magazine serial numbered. The bore and the bolthaed do not show any signs of wear.
I think this is one of the Navy issued rifles as discussed earlier in this thread.
Any comments please.
Attachment 41591Attachment 41592Attachment 41593Attachment 41594Attachment 41595Attachment 41596Attachment 41597Attachment 41598
From my collection, N (Navy issue) and Royal Marine marked Lee Enfield rifles:
Naval marked guns have the N on the left socket side. The first example shown in this thread is a serial number prefix N.
Left to right:
Long Lee with Royal Marine marking
No.4 Mk1 Line Thrower
No. 1 MkIII line Thrower
Charger Loading Lee Enfield
A few months ago a friend & I bought two dozen nice SMLE's from one of the leading UK dealers. They had about a hundred or so & we did some cherry picking. The rifles were all from the batch recently released by the Italians from the Terni arsenal where they had been stored by the Italian Navy. I gather they were supplied by the UK to the Italians at or shortly after the end of WW2. I am speculating here, but I wonder if the transfer may have been Navy to Navy (ie RN to Italian Navy), as most of the Mk3's are retro-converted 1917 & 1918 Mk3*'s (I think the Naval unhappiness with the lack of a cut-off is well known), & many, though not all, bear the 'N with serif' marking on the L side of the butt socket as already discussed in this thread.
ATB
Roger I had quite a few SMLEs from the same source, quite a few had the N mark as well, some also had Canadian ownership marks on the receiver ring.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Payne
I examined some of the No4s out in italy, but the ones I saw never had any N marking.
When they were first released I spoke to the Italian wholesaler who told me they were originally supplied to Italy by Canada.
Thanks Simon. I must admit I haven't looked at any of the SMLE's for Canadian marks but I'll check them. There were No4's available as well, & indeed all were Long Branch mfr. However, we only bought four as all were two groovers & no matter how much you tell people two groovers shoot fine the punters always seem to want five groove barrels; at least round my neck of the woods they do.
ATB
Just for a break I took my favorite '42 Long Branch which did see FTR at CAL post war but still sports it's original 2 groove barrel and did some testing yesterday afternoon on my range. I put up blank typewriter paper targets at 25 yards with a 1" round paster on center and shot 3 rounds of Iraqi Mk.7, Greek Mk.7z, Portuguese Mk.7z and Yugoslavian Mk.8z. Guess what, they all printed under .50" in nice, tight little groups from 1" low on the paster to dead nuts. There is absolutely no difference in performance between a 2 and 5 groove barrel. If there was, they wouldn't have been adopted them in the first place. The proof is in the pudding.
You're dead right of course Brian. We even did student tests from the Enfield rest on the ballistic range. I've written it all up on the forum but like you say, you just can't tell some people. The grooves just impart stability into the projectile in flight. Nothing more and nothing less. (For the pedantic, that's not STRICTLY all it does but.........)
Peter/Roger/Brian: If as accurate, why were the 2 groovers automatic rejects in the No. 4 T program? Were there concerns about longevity? Speaking out of ignorance, I would imagine there's quite a difference in relative areas of land vs groove in the two versions which you'd think would affect something- friction, blowby, etc? My most accurate LE is 2 groove Savage (No. 4T replica), my second most accurate is a '43 Longbranch with 6 groove barrel installed in the fifties.
Ridolpho
I won't go into the reason for the No4T/2 groovers again Ridolpho but put simply, the original spec for the No4T stated quite clearly that it had to be standard/spec of the No4 with the addition of......... and ...... And at the time, the No4 had a 5 groove barrel and a split foresight block. But we all know now that the spec changed - as did the No4T....., eventually. After trials proved that the 2 groove barrel.................... I won't go on!
The title page of the book describes him as "Late Chief Reconnaissance Officer, Canadian Army". That sounds like a WWII title, rather than WWI. At thepeerage.com he is stated to have commanded the "Canadian Corps Sniping School" from 1916 to 1918. His records state he was "seconded as Inst. Cdn. Corps School 9th Feb. '17 to 7th Jan. '19. He was a figure in the Yukon before WWI and joined the 50th Gordon Highlanders in Victoria, BC on Nov. 14th 1914. He went to France with the 48th Battalion, Canadian Expeditionary Force. So he served in the 50th Gordons when (Lt. Gen. Sir) Arthur Currie was the OC. He would have had to wind up his affairs in the Yukon and then find steamer transport south (not easy then). He was SOS Canadian Army, 31st May 1920. I'm guessing he might have been one of those WWI officers who came over to the UK with the Canadian Army in 1939-40 and were then weeded out as over-age in 1941-42. He was born in 1874 so he was already 40 years of age in 1914. The Royal Marines were probably glad to snap him up for instructional duties.