-
Peter, in fact forums (or is it forae?) such as this have quite revolutionised the spread of information on all sorts of subjects; in our case in respect of Enfield Rifles
. There is now far more accurate info in the public domain, say, for example, concerning No4T markings, production, transit chest variations etc., etc., than is in any of the texts - even yours - & you & many others have brought it about by freely passing on what you have managed to glean over the years. We are lucky to have such a rich collection of knowledgeable people on this forum so that postings are of a high quality & can generally be relied upon.
Thanks everyone for teaching me a bit more each day!
-
The Following 4 Members Say Thank You to Roger Payne For This Useful Post:
-
12-30-2011 12:05 PM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
One example of someone who doesn't put his entire wealth of knowledge out "in toto" would be Simon. He has a great amount of info on the L42a1s, but hasn't seen fit to plaster all he knows on the internet, or elsewhere. Doesn't mean he doesn't have the data...
-
Thank You to jmoore For This Useful Post:
-
-
Ah............. yes, EXACTLY. If you have the info and someone wants or needs it, then pass it on. But to keep it to yourself for no other reason than to......, well whatever it is, is the point I make. To be honest, I WANT all the info I've gleaned over the years to be available.
I'll give you an example. When I wrote the Sten gun book, I found getting some info from one particular source was like drawing teeth simply because nothing was EVER volunteered. A specific question might be answered but even then........... But, alas, the info was also duplicated at Warminster and elsewhere. When the book WAS published, complete with the info I'd tried so hard to obtain, the cheeky blighter phoned me and suggested that ........... Anyway, suffice it to say, I replied with both barrels and haven't asked or answered a question since.
Luckily I didn't have to rely on that source and some of the info I did get was the same old heresay that I was trying to get away from. But there you go..................
Last edited by Peter Laidler; 12-30-2011 at 01:44 PM.
-
The Following 6 Members Say Thank You to Peter Laidler For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
Maybe the retention of information is for commercial purposes - ie holding it back for some book or other on the subject (although I doubt there's an enormous amount of cash to be made from niche publishing like that - especially given the time taken to collate/write etc).
However the more information that is open to public scrutiny before publication also means, from the author's perspective, that fewer clangers are likely to be dropped when he finally goes to print - and be there with your name on for ever.
-
-
Legacy Member
Enfield records show that 5 of the 90L batch were converted to L42A1
-
The Following 3 Members Say Thank You to XL39E1 For This Useful Post:
-
Advisory Panel
Originally Posted by
XL39E1
Enfield records show that 5 of the 90L batch were converted to L42A1
How many of the 71L batch?
Someone named "Pete" flogged a scope on Ebay from one which (according to him) didn't make the cut during the conversion process....
-
-
Legacy Member
-
-
But better the loose REL telescope from an unserviceable/scrap LB rifle is back on another serviceable 71 or 90L rifle than sitting on a shelf or in a drawer for the next 40 years. Wouldn't you agree Lee Enfield?
-
-
Advisory Panel
But better the loose REL telescope from an unserviceable/scrap LB rifle is back on another serviceable 71 or 90L rifle than sitting on a shelf or in a drawer for the next 40 years. Wouldn't you agree Lee Enfield?
Yes I would... :-)
-
PM
