Printable View
One of my de-ac Brens, a MK3, has a cross pennant/flag marking electro-pencilled to the top of the breech block. I take this to be an ownership or inspection mark. Would it be a Naval or maritime marking and has any-one seen it before or know it's significance? Thanks for any info.
I confess to having seen that mark about a zillion times Fleiger...... It's the UK Military proof mark!
When was the mark used/current, please, peter?
That cross flags (I think it is actually 2x crossed lances) has been used since pontius was a pilot! The last proof mark I ever recall seeing on L4 breech blocks were the words RSAF etched on in a square format topped with a crown
Totally agree with Peter. The 'Standard' UK Military Proof marking. Observed by all Armourers. Peter underestimates his statement of seeing this mark a Zillion times.
It is more like Twenty Zillion times for Us! As it was part of the procedure in ANY inspection, to view Proof Marks. On any Barrel, Reciever & Bolt/ Breech Block. On
ALL in Service Small Arms. This was stated in Inspection Standards. As a 'Safety' procedure, to ensure. That High pressure Components had Been Proof Tested.
Military Proof is of a much higher standard than Civilian. In that Civy Proof generaly involves one Proof round to be fired. Military Proof, TWO rounds are fired.
One Dry (Standard Proof) & one 'Wet' (Oiled) The reason oil was used, was that it increased pressure on the pressure bearing parts, during Proofing.
Basicaly, a Proof round is one & a half times MORE Breech Pressure than a 'Standard' Round. The thinking behind this standard is: If it will withstand the pressure of a Proof round. it will easily handle any off the shelf available Ammo. Does not quite take into account an incorrectly hand reloaded private/Civilian Round situation!
But you will understand, the need for a baseline safety starting point!
I remember clearly seeing this marking the odd time myself in Canada on breech blocks for FN...electro penciled on...
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...05/proof-1.jpg
Thought I would post a picture so people can see it.
This jogs something in my memory, I think I may have seen this marking in the same fashion on some barrels of issued Browning Hi Power Pistols.Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
That would be correct...specially the older ones, we still had a few around slotted for the stock. Some had been filled with weld. Some not. No tangent sights though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentryduty
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../05/bhp1-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../05/bmp2-1.jpg
I like the tangent sights.
Yes but these were still in service with us a few years ago and the tangent sights left many moons back...they overstruck the numbers too. I liked the whole setup of the stock on a Browning...or a Mauser...or Luger...
The stock is a nice option. This one for the Glock is compact.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...lockbutt-1.jpg
With a red dot sight, vertical forward grip, suppressor and 50 round drum it turns the pistol into a little SMG.
I'm just thinking now............... If I was an Infantry Section Commander or a Platoon Commander, what would I rather be armed with on an advance-to-contact. Would I opt for the little Glock - or would I prefer a Sterling SMG. And you always have to appreciate what the blokes you are briefing are thinking too.
Reminds me of a little incident when........... It doesn't matter.........
As a section comd, which I was for many years, I'd rather have a rifle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
But as a REME section Commander Bar.......
A half-dozen or more inter-trade sharp witted comments sprung to mind about what an REME Section Commander ought to carry, but I will bite my tongue and smirk to keep the peace...Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
:D
Agreed, and I still remember when our Inf sect comd carried an SMG. We decided it made them stand out at distance and left them a bit underarmed in a counterattack situation. But other trades...of course. Depended on our job in the Bn too...as Darren will attest...I was carrying a 1919A4 and a pistol for a while too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
I'm sure that Us R.E.M.E Types can attest to being the Butt of many jokes & Banter from members of units we have been attached to. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Sentryduty
HOWEVER!..........We could ALWAYS have the upper hand, & most certainly the last Laugh!.........;)
I quote but one case of a 'Person' that annoyed/upset Me on one occasion. (An Officer) As I was at that time attached to an Mechanised Infantry Unit, most infantry Officers carried an L1A1 SLR, especially on Ops. I went to that Officers Armoury & identified his personal Weapon. I got a pullthrough & attached some flannelette that was a bit larger than authorised/should be used.
I pulled the cord through the barrel until it got tight & eventually jammed! Then pulled harder until the pullthrough cord snapped! Replaced the rifle in the rack & left the Armoury.
A couple of days later, the visiting R.E.M.E PRE TEAM (Unit Circuit Inspection team. which ensured quality control, & we were doing our jobs correctly) arrived. & yep you guessed it, they discovered the 'obstruction in the Bore' & I was called for. I explained ALL the units weapons had been inspected by Myself & my Lads under Me. Only a couple of weeks previously & there had been no exercises or range firing during that time. The aforementioned Officer was called for an explaination!........as HIS signature was in the Armoury Ledger & was booked out by HIM. As everyone had to clean thier Personal Weapons VERY frequently. The 'Evidence' pointed towards Him, with no get out excuse!.......He was reported to the unit CO where all Hell was thrown at him. As the CO is responsible for pretty much everything connected with HIS Unit. A Good PRE Post Inspection report is very important to a Unit & it's CO in Particular. It shows the Units state of readiness to go to war with Weapons Fit For Purpose. it reflects on the CO if there is anything wrong that is a Vital element connected to that unit. As If He commands a Particular battalion, He has to show that he IS in control of anything connected to it's Performance!.........And CAN in some cases, affect His confidential report anually. & indeed, his career promotion prospects!........:sos: The Officer concerned, was very rapidly posted to another Battalion, & I have no doubt a 'stain' on his confidential report. Would affect his future career!...What a shame. NOT!!!
So..The lesson is: Don't Fuc.....Er. Mess with the Armourer, He will get YOU as surely as eggs are eggs If He wants to!....:m:madsmile:
And giving the Armourer stick is a VERY short sighted policy in Service. The day WILL come, when you need his help. For a Private job, or to get you out of the Brown stuff in a bad situation!....:cheers:
The Armourer is with a unit to HELP. He is your Friend......Until you **** Him off!......:nono:
There is always a bit of rivalry and banter between the various "Trades", (Arms and Services), in the big firm.
Here in Oz, RAEME was alleged to stand for: Royal Australian Easy Money Earners.
Our callsign, "Bluebell" often morphed into "Tinkerbell" in the uncouth hands of others.
Signallers (Pronto) became "Tonto", etc.
But, NEVER when the "action" was serious, even on "Chocco" ("chocolate soldier" / reservist) exercises. The ribaldry and rivalry was carefully saved up for post-activity/ exercise "refreshments".
Agreed, Healthy Inter Unit/ Capbadge Rivalry. Is always generally good natured & can be a real laugh at times.
But as Bruce points out, when the chips are down. & you are back to back with a guy from the Same Armed Forces, no matter what the capbadge. You are in the company of Brothers! :thup:
Even the HIGH Rivalry of 'Elite-est' Troops such as the Airborne & Marines, Which border often on Violence. In the Falklands that went out the window on the Battlefield.
But VERY soon was re-established on the Troopships return journey to the UK afterwards!..:confused: