Another Oddball Scope.......this time a Model 1918.

[Roger Payne]

Since the advent of the internet I don't get offered nice bits & pieces to buy 'over the counter' at arms fairs like I used to. So long as it is a non-restricted item, it is so easy for people simply to drop the thing on to an on-line auction site.

However, at the June Motorcycle Museum show a dealer acquaintance sidled up to me & asked me what the scope was that he'd just had come in over the counter. I told him it was a Model 1918 scope, made by PPCo & that most of them were fitted to the No3 T, with the Aussies also fitting them to the SMLE at the tail end of WW2. He then asked me what it was worth..........I was obviously interested in purchasing it from him if he was interested in letting it go.........so that posed a dilemma! Anyway, I was honest & asked if he'd be interested in taking a quick profit. To my delight he did me a good turn, letting me have it for a quick modest return & turning it over, rather than hanging out for every last penny.
I was keen to have it for my collection as I had noticed that it had non-standard markings on it, although the scope itself was otherwise a run of production PPCo manufactured Model 18 & rings..........or so I thought!

After the initial excitement of acquiring it had died down, it went into a drawer until I had time to have a serious close up look at it. I only got round to that the night before last. On scrutinising it more closely I couldn't help thinking the leg of the rear ring seemed a bit on the long side, so I compared it to the leg on the rear mount of the scope from my No3 T. There is clearly a difference. In fact the rings, whilst generally similar to & of the same 'system' as the No3 T & the later Lithgow No1 Mk3 H T, are distinct, & appear to be the same as the rings seen occasionally on Aldis scopes intended for the early/pre-production P'14 snipers, & likely for the claw mount SMLE's that PPCo set up more or less contemporaneously with the No3 T contract, but about which not a great deal is known. My machinist did a limited production run of these rings & bases for me about ten years ago.

Now, shoot me down in flames if you like, but I am pretty sure that this Model 1918 scope is an example fitted not to a P'14, but to a SMLE using the claw mount system circa 1918 or 1919. It is known that these rifles were fitted with Aldis scopes using this mount system, but with 1" rings, of course, but I have never seen or heard of any evidence to suggest that Model 1918's were fitted as well. If my assumption is correct, we have a previously lost piece of the jig-saw puzzle that is British & Dominion Great War sniping equipment. The Australian use of AOC produced Model 1918's on SMLE's is well known, but it seems possible that the first use of this scope on the SMLE may have occurred a quarter of a century earlier.

Have a look at the photo's & see what you think...........I've stated my case & I'm happy to take it on the chin if anyone can see that I've dropped a clanger.......!

And no, it's not for sale!!

[Surpmil]

Great find Roger; is there another possible explanation? Could this be an experimental version of what became the mount for the Patt.14 rifle? Doesn't seem like it could be from the "upgraded" version of the No.3 Mk.I*(T) considered in the late 1930s (TBS p.96-7).

Have you ever seen such markings before as are below the drum? "Periscopic 1918", "x3 - No.6088 7½"

Is there an inch symbol after the 7½ as it appears to be? And what does the 7½ infer in your view: the total length? Can't be the ring spacing obviously.

The scope appears to be the same length as other Patt. 18s(?), so that designation rather implies that this particular scope was a new design when that marking was put on(?)

The "6088" does not fit the numbering of the scopes themselves and so presumably is the rifle number? If so, can it be other than a very early Patt.14 number? That would fit with this being a very early Patt.18 scope and fitting, but is there any way that rear leg could be made to fit on a Patt.14??

I suppose you've checked the list of rifles removed from the Pattern Room collection in 1940 for re-issue?

And what is on the drum for range markings? Edit: I can see it has the typical(?) 1-10 in your photo of the three scopes together.

It looks as though the front rings were soldered into their base at some point - have you been able to follow the trail backwards in case the bases are still out there somewhere, perhaps unrecognized?

I've taken the liberty of tweaking your photos a bit.

Further thought Roger: are there any of the usual markings on the objective lens cell?

Very nicely made bases by the way!

[Lance]

I think you found another unicorn Roger, well done you lucky guy! With the introduction of the P14 Mk I*W(T) in early 1918 it would make sense that they also trialed the M1918 on a SMLE or two for a comparison of both rifle vs rifle and scope vs scope. The non-standard markings on the range block also lean towards its early trials origin hypothesis. I hope you have time to create a tribute rifle using it!

[smerdon42]

Roger great find , i am looking for a set of HT bases i, i have a aoc 1918 scope but the bases are like rocking horse **** . There was a scope and bases sold in oz last year for 2500 and I wasn’t quick enough to get them .

[Roger Payne]

Thanks for your input gents - all welcome.

Yes, I'm leaning towards an experimental/test/prototype piece. It is conceivable that a more appreciable quantity could have been fitted to the SMLE, but one would have expected (assuming the markings on this were standard), that one would have seen a few more examples of such like scopes. However, this is the first example that I have ever heard of, let alone owned.

The front claw could be fitted in the P'14 front base with only minor tinkering, but functionally the P'14 front base is the same as far as I can see (& the late Bruce Gorton thought the same) as the 'proper' SMLE claw mount front base, shown with the front ring sitting in it in one of the photo's I uploaded. The rear ring leg is simply too 'deep' to fit the conventional P'14 T rear mount, but is about right for the similar in principle SMLE rear mount.

It's only a best guess, but I assumed the markings on the range drum saddle were; x3 magnification; 6088 rifle serial; 7.5 degrees Field of View.

I've checked in Skenny's SAIS dealing with sniping rifles & the list of the 'lost collection' from RSAFE is contained at the back. Unfortunately, 6088 is not recorded there.

The Ainley rifle used a dovetailed rail on the side of the receiver, & the proposed update of the No3 T at the beginning of WW2 did not amount to anything as extensive as altering the mounts.

As you surmise surpmil, the range drum appears to be pretty much standard 1 to 10.

Of course, now this scope has turned up I'll have to fit those bases to a suitable Great War SMLE & get it all together!

And I'll keep my eyes open for No1 Mk3 H T bases.....

[Surpmil]

7½ degrees, of course, that makes perfect sense, and should have been obvious now that I think about it!

The 6088 is certainly odd: doesn't fit the numbering sequence of Aldis scopes which seem to have started in the 50,000 range and continued on from there sequentially, including all the Patt./Model 1918 scopes IIRC

Were it an SMLE number we'd expect a letter as well, would we not? As per the tube markings of all earlier Aldis-SMLE fittings(?)

And to put the rifle number as it were in the middle of the scope designations is even more odd...

As you say Roger, if it won't fit a Patt.14, what else can it be; I was just wondering if they might have first trialled a lower placement of the rear base on the Patt.14; but would such an arrangement clear the backsight or could it be made to with some metal removed?

Perhaps an attempt to devise a mounting that could be used on both the Patt.14 and the SMLE with only the radius under the front base being different? (Sounds much too logical I know!)

I hope you can follow the trail back to the bases and perhaps even the rifle.

[smerdon42]

Cheers roger

Thanks for your input gents - all welcome.

Yes, I'm leaning towards an experimental/test/prototype piece. It is conceivable that a more appreciable quantity could have been fitted to the SMLE, but one would have expected (assuming the markings on this were standard), that one would have seen a few more examples of such like scopes. However, this is the first example that I have ever heard of, let alone owned.

The front claw could be fitted in the P'14 front base with only minor tinkering, but functionally the P'14 front base is the same as far as I can see (& the late Bruce Gorton thought the same) as the 'proper' SMLE claw mount front base, shown with the front ring sitting in it in one of the photo's I uploaded. The rear ring leg is simply too 'deep' to fit the conventional P'14 T rear mount, but is about right for the similar in principle SMLE rear mount.

It's only a best guess, but I assumed the markings on the range drum saddle were; x3 magnification; 6088 rifle serial; 7.5 degrees Field of View.

I've checked in Skenny's SAIS dealing with sniping rifles & the list of the 'lost collection' from RSAFE is contained at the back. Unfortunately, 6088 is not recorded there.

The Ainley rifle used a dovetailed rail on the side of the receiver, & the proposed update of the No3 T at the beginning of WW2 did not amount to anything as extensive as altering the mounts.

As you surmise surpmil, the range drum appears to be pretty much standard 1 to 10.

Of course, now this scope has turned up I'll have to fit those bases to a suitable Great War SMLE & get it all together!

And I'll keep my eyes open for No1 Mk3 H T bases.....

[lmg15]

I agree with the learned contributions thus far. My only observation is that Enfield SMLE serial numbers are 1 to 4 digits long, so the number is more consistent with an EFD SMLE than a P14. But as mentioned previously, you might expect a letter prefix. Then again, if the rifles were selected and the number of scopes fitted was limited, you would not expect a serial number repeat.

I have never seen PERISCOPIC 1918, scope specs or rifle's serials engraved on the turret. I can't quite see it, but does the engraving on the scope body have the usual PERISCOPIC PRISM CO and MODEL 1918 /I\ as well?

cheers, D

[Roger Payne]

Thanks for your input. Much appreciated. No, there is no 'Periscopic Prism Co.' nor 'Model 1918' engraved/rolled onto the tube. The markings on the range drum saddle appear to be instead of rather than as well as.

I shall be without the scope for a few weeks as my machinist is figuring out if he can make an extra set of mount bases for me so I have temporarily left it with him. He's actually looking at three little jobs for me at present. I wasn't going to leave all of them with him this visit but he has been bored lately & is champing at the bit! He's a keen motorcyclist but will need things to keep him occupied during the winter months. I am definitely not complaining......

[Promo]

Ha, at least I remember discussing the scope with you back when you bought it! A few thoughts, right out of my mind without detailed thought on it: what makes you think the SMLE overbore mount pre-dates the P.14 mounts? Could it just be that this was an early sample that later got overruled by the P.14 rifle design? Secondly, does it fit to any of the mounts that are listed in Ians books/any ideas on how they may have named it and would it indicate how many were made?
Re the 6088: for whatever reason I know some companies didn't start at serial number 1. For whatever reason they could also had started the serial range at 6000 (maybe for 5000 previously made for P.14, plus a handful "extra ones", so then take the next full number) and this could be the 88th scope made. For the lack of the manufacturer markings on the tube, maybe it was made on left over parts at the factory after they went bankrupt?



PS: I'm keen to learn how your "Dream French Interior" looks like! If you don't know what I'm refering to, then check the background of your pictures