-
To be honest, there's not much else that can be said is there. Great period photo but the rifles except 5th man from left are odd-balls (Non standard No4T's probably being tested against the standard No4T that is the control sample.
How accurately the rifle with the shortened fore-end shoots can only be guessed at as we KNOW what happens when you cut the fore-end off! The Lymans.........., well............, anyway let's pass! The British
certainly gave it the thumbs down in no uncertain terms. The eye relief on the two on the right (No67's?) looks too short to me too.
The snow smocks are interesting. We used to have a similar thing here, but camouflaged, called a 'smocks, windproof' and were issued up until the mid 70's and was well liked by the snipers over the suggested paratroopers smocks as it was longer, windproof of course and if washed in a water repellent wash, was sort of waterproof.
There, some comments to get your teeth into
-
-
06-13-2012 06:12 AM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
It's a remarkable photo indeed but I couldn't add anything to what others have said. I think cheesycigar's inital assessment is likely to be accurate. If only someone could contact any of those guys who might still be living.....
ATB
-
-
-
Originally Posted by
CheesyCigar
The 5th man from the left appears to be holding a plain-jane No.4 telescopic rifle. (unless someone can spot something out of the ordinary)
The man 6th from the left is holding a cut down rifle. I am almost certain that it is (or is closely related to) this rifle:
1943-44 Enfield No.4 Mk1* Experimental Long Branch 'Scout' Sniper Rifle
Like the rifle listed in the
Knowledge Library, it has a cut-down stock, a totally new buttstock (rollover cheekpiece and a rubber butt), and no charger bridge. From this angle, it's difficult to tell whether or not it's fitted with the windmill-style 4 position backsight (which was mounted on the left side of the receiver) As well, this rifle mounts a different scope: the C No.32 Mk 4 (C No.67 Mk I) onto what should be a Griffin & Howe mount. (which was what the type was configured with. I, however, might be incorrect. But from I can see, it appears to be a match)
Great quality pic….. 
Thanks for posting it for everyone to share … 
I believe your conclusions about that specific rifle are correct. I have enlarged an area of the pic where you can see through to the other side and you can just make out the windmill off-set rear sight, plus when you look at the from sight area, you can clearly see how it swivels outwards to the left, in order to line up with the windmill sight.
Attachment 34490 (Click PIC to Enlarge) Attachment 34491
Other than the butt, which in our MKL example is a standard looking No.4 butt with the cheekpiece, it does appear that the one you've referred to in your grandfather's pic is also one of the 10 experimental rifles produced at Long Branch.
Although you can't tell from the angle of the barrel whether the rifle in the pic has a bayonet lug, if it did, then like the one in the library entry, it would be just 1 of 4 (possibly 3 if US bayonet lug) produced like this. Extract… "Four of these were to accept the No.4 spike bayonet, three were described as "semi-long forend and US bayonet" while the last three were not setup to accept any bayonet."
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Regards,
Doug
-
The Following 4 Members Say Thank You to Badger For This Useful Post:
-
It's also a thought that as you might recall from 105 and 120mm tank barrels, the fore-end also acts as a thermal sleeve for the No4 barrel. Seeing that it's pretty cold there, I wonder just how a cold breeze across the barrel would affect accuracy. It certainly did with tank barrels
-
Thank You to Peter Laidler For This Useful Post:
-
FREE MEMBER
NO Posting or PM's Allowed
I'd like to thank everyone for their responses.
Just out of curiosity; does anyone have any figures for the rifles that had sporty buttstocks? How many were made? Did it ever make it beyond the testing fazes? How many were fitted with the No.67 scope?
Last edited by CheesyCigar; 06-13-2012 at 03:21 PM.
-
No idea here but we have one of the butts. It would be an absolute doddle to reproduce one on a copy lathe connected to a shadowgraph. Simplified I know, but the engineers will see what I'm getting at
-
-
FREE MEMBER
NO Posting or PM's Allowed
.
If we assume that the two rifles on the left side of the picture are identical, here is an enlargement of the other four types. With the variety of rifles here, this picture almost screams "TESTING" of sniper rifles. It is also possible that the two rifles on the left with the Lyman Alaskans on them had different magnification power on the lenses or different reticles ----eg. crosshair in one and post and crosshair in the other --Lyman did make both types.
.
.
Last edited by buffdog; 06-15-2012 at 10:50 AM.
-
Advisory Panel
If memory serves, I think rifles with the C No.67 scope numbered 150 or so not counting the experimental types which was only 10 or 12. The Trade Pattern rifles with the Lyman Alaskans numbered 350. Don't quote me here maybe someone more knowledgeable on the production figures can comment. You out there Clive?
-
-
-
-
350 Lymans........... So they're not exactly rare then? Had a PM about the 'special' butts. Has anyone done them on a copy lathe or thought about it?
-
PM
