Lee Enfield vs P14

[ssj]

From what I have seen written the P14 timing was un-lucky as WW1 broke out before it had really been accepted and issued. There also seems to have been considerable politics going on where some didnt like the rimless ammo etc etc Plus the SMLE is a great short range battle rifle and the P14 not so much so more of a long range gun.

What "confuses" far more me is after WW1 and all the dis-advantages of the SMLE were well known is why we ended up with a no4 of the same design heritage and problems and not a "Pattern 1920". or even why when the 6.5mm or 7mm in rimless were shown to be better rounds we stuck with the 303 rimmed.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Seaspriter]

What "confuses" far more me is after WW1 and all the dis-advantages of the SMLE were well known is why we ended up with a no4 of the same design heritage and problems

SSJ, this is a highly relevant and insightful question, and it seems so vexing from the perspective of the 21st century. But the prevailing view in the 1920s & '30s was quite different. Given the horrible carnage on the battlefields, everyone at that time referred to the "Great War" as the "war to end all wars." (No one called it WWI then.) Disarmament was the prevailing belief of the time.

Thus, anyone who proposed an escalation of armaments would be severely disdained. Senior military leaders, sitting atop their rarified hierarchy, tend to have a know it all attitude, and regard those of lower rank with a jaundiced view. Any innovator in the middle ranks of command had better have a powerful "godfather" to protect his views and stripes from "attack by friendly fire." Just look at the Court Martial of Billy Mitchell in 1925 as an example.

By 1930, the Great Depression consumed the energies of every world leader except Adolf and ToJo, then Benito who took a far more aggressive stands. But as late as 1938, world leaders still believed there would never be another war. Neville Chamberlain signed the Munich Accords in late 1938 believing Hitler's annexation of portions of Czechoslovakia would be the end of aggression.

The entire Munich debacle was debunked by Winston Churchill, whose opinion held minority status at the time. His response was prophetic: "England has been offered a choice between war and shame. She has chosen shame, and will get war." A year later Hitler stormed into Poland, then struck France, followed by the Battle of Britain. The illusion (delusion) of the "War to End All Wars" was shattered.

Only then, once the crisis had struck, were questions of advanced armaments considered in earnest. That's when technological advancement shifted into high gear. That's why the No.4 Mk1 is approved in 1939 -- there was no more time left for endless testing, debate, and bureaucratic dallying.

In the end, WWII is the only war in history where the principal weaponry that won the war did not exist before the war: Radar, Computers, Proximity Fuses, Atomic Bomb, etc. It's hard to understand in hindsight, but easy understand at the time, when military leaders, seasoned on the field of battle in the last war, and second-guessing their own strategies and tactics, as well as those of their opponents, are readying to refight the last war, not the future war. Likely the victor will think "bigger and more of the same," while the vanquished "changes the rules of the game."

Even with the pressure of war, strange decisions were made. For example, Frank Whittle invented the jet engine in Britain in the mid-1930s. The Germans had their first prototype jets flying in 1939. Britain's first jet prototypes were flying in 1941. But why were Allied jets not a factor in the war?

Thus your question is still highly relevant -- and still vexing to answer.

[Lee Enfield]

From what I have seen written the P14 timing was un-lucky as WW1 broke out before it had really been accepted and issued. There also seems to have been considerable politics going on where some didnt like the rimless ammo etc etc Plus the SMLE is a great short range battle rifle and the P14 not so much so more of a long range gun.

What "confuses" far more me is after WW1 and all the dis-advantages of the SMLE were well known is why we ended up with a no4 of the same design heritage and problems and not a "Pattern 1920". or even why when the 6.5mm or 7mm in rimless were shown to be better rounds we stuck with the 303 rimmed.

While we (Western Europeans,Pre-British Empire (You "Yanks" eh!) and "commonwealth" English speakers) think of WWI as ending in November 1918, war did not end for Central and Eastern Europe; In 1920 the (not yet stabilized) world was awash with small arms. Russia and central and eastern Europe was in various civil and wars of independence (Ireland, Ukraine, Poland, Finland, Red & White Russia, Latvia, Lithuania, Czechoslovakia ect.) and when you have 3 million P14s and 4 Million Enfields, and Billions of rounds of ammo in store for your 150,000 man peace time military it really doesn't make much sense to make an expensive change of material and training.

Exactly the same reasoning Macarthur used to kybosh the .276 Pederson cartridge... (which would have been close to what is today considered the "ideal cartridge")

Also 2 really good reasons for not adopting the P13 and .276 cartridge was related to the fact that 7Remington Magnum does not make a very good combat cartridge...way too much recoil...and pressure, resulting in at best in "sticky" extraction.

At the point in time of development, Britain had armed forces on all continents (Shackleton was on the Antarctic in 1913/14) and weather conditions. The .276 was a cartridge on the edge of a "pressure excursion" due to the "fast" powders and limited heat stability of the powders of the day.

After all, a war cartridge has to work in Northern Europe, India, Singapore jungles and African deserts in primitive storage conditions & exposures.

And, the cartridge itself is huge! I have a single round, but I also have the 5 round stripper clip charger....the cartridge base makes 300win mag look like a kiddy toy...