SMLE found by an author researching the fighting and retreat to Dunkirk

[Frederick303]

Very good Point 5th Battalion.

That said, since arms were intended for adoption by the Naval service, Land service and the Air Ministry, prototype arms would have such features. That such arms have the provision do not mean the Land services issued such arms. Perhaps some arms assembled with cut-offs were hastily issued to the Land services. It is also possible that arms that at one time had cut-offs never had them removed.

Lets review the history of the cut-off issue:

On the MLM and MLE it was always issued.

As a result of the SMLE MK I trials, the cut off is said to be assembled for Naval issue only (page 86 of Major Reynolds Book, The Lee Enfield Rifle). This order dates from December of 1902

Feedback from officers from regiments utilizing Native troops objected, nonetheless when the SMLE MKI was reintroduced in 12 August 1903, the Cut off was only approved for Naval issues once again. (same source page 98).

Because of objections in India, on 17 August 1906 the cut-off was reintroduced and was to be fitted to all SMLE rifles in the British army, including overseas forces (page 107)

Skennerton (2007) notes an order for all rifles to be so equipped on 25 October 1906 (page 132)

Both Reynolds and Skennerton agree that when introduced in 26 January 1907 all SMLE MKIII rifles were equipped with cut-offs.

A new pattern of cut-off was introduced for service on 5 March 1909, to be applied to all rifles

Now when the removal of the cut off was approved for the army is not quite certain. The order for transfer of the SMLE MKI*** rifles to the army was in August of 1915 (all had to be sited for the MKVII ammunition), and it predates the first reference to the Land servcie removal of the cut-off, at least that I know of. The approval of deletion of the cut-off and the cut-off slot to BSA is dated from September of 1915. The formal date for approval of the SMLE MKII* is 2 January 1916 (Reynolds page 120).

After that date, every reference to the Land services contain no requirement for a cut off. In fact Skennerton references that the only service requiring post this date was the Navy, and rifles dated 1917 had the * canceled and were issued with the cut-off (for naval issue only).

Of course it is possible that I have missed a reference someplace, but every reference I can find on the trails rifles refers to the cut-off requirement being a Navy requirement alone, both on the No 1 MK V and No 1 MK VI. If I am in error on this, please feel free to correct me, though I would very much appreciate a source. Not because I do not trust you, but because I would like to read it and fully understand it.

regards
Frederick303

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.

[Peter Laidler]

Fred........ There's no other way I can explain this because I wasn't there when it was found but we can see it, in the flesh and it has its pedigree/provenance written all over it - even to the missing magazine and bolt that has quite clearly and most obviously been removed at the same time the rifle was rammed into the framework of the hayloft. But, like the mystery rifle, in the world of aerodynamicists, bumble bees CANNOT fly, even using brute force but they do. We know they do, because we see them and they've been doing it happily for many years. There will be an answer of course but us mere mortals who only understand engineering won't ever grasp the reason

It's just like this rifle. In theory, according to the books, it shouldn't have been there. But guess what............, just like the bumble bee that does indeed fly, it WAS there and we can see it with our own eyes. If this was a Court of Law, they'd say that the evidence was beyoned all reasonable doubt

[Thunderbox]

Frederick303,

The Daily Mail photo archive in UK contains many classic 1939-40 war photos (including, incidentally, a series of rifle refurb activity at Weedon or similar); several of the photos clearly show line infantry (ie not TA or support corps) carrying No1 MkIIIs complete with cut-off and volleys. Clearly unmodified MkIIIs were in common usage at the time.



This rifle was recovered from an attic in UK; its a completely original WW2-issue rifle marked to a regiment local to the place it was found. It has a cut-off:




....and an unpinned windage-adjustable rearsight....

[Frederick303]

Gentlemen,

I do not doubt it was found as described and that all the evidence indicates it is of 1940 vintage. Not in any way. My posts were all just musings on it, as it seems rather an uncommon configuration for the period. I was, and am hoping that this most unusual relic will open up some someones memory or knowledge base and we Enfield fans will be able to pick their brains. My posts were just attempts to keep the discussion going. I have already learned that unmodified SMLE MKIII rifles are more common then I thought, at least in England. They are not common here, though one does see them on occasion. Most though seem to be restorations, at least here on this side of the pond.

One of the things I have wondered about is the near complete lack of SMLE MKI rifles in existence today. Here in the US other then a very few SMLE MKI rifles of various configurations, the only SMLE MKI rifles one sees are the MKI*** Irish rifles, of which 4,105 were imported into the US of A in February of 1962. Even in Australia, from what I have seen, the only common MK I configuration is the pre-war police rifles. Other versions of the rifle just are not around except for a very rare example here and there. For example I have never seen a barleycorn sighted SMLE MKI in the flesh, only pictures of one and have never seen on for sale on this side of the pond..

Yet the 1924 UK inventory shows ~90,000 on hand, what happened to them? I have always assumed that the UK sent them to India, to be broken down and rebuilt into some sort of MKIII configuration. This relic seems to indicate there might be another explanation and that they may have seen some use far past when anyone thought they saw service. It is all very interesting and I hope more informations is ultimately forthcoming.

regards

[HOOKED ON HISTORY]

Peter Laidler
If the pictures were posted without the story my reaction would be "how sad". The pictures with the story "magnificent"! Thank you for sharing.
P.S.
Could you share the title of the book you are reading?

[Surpmil]

The missing safety and the heavily damaged wood suggest to me that a generation or two of children may have played with it. The missing marking disc and the tape around the butt wrist as well. Someone has recently broken the head off the rear guard screw I see.

I'm not very up on early SMLE's; is that the correct foresight blade?

[5thBatt]

I'm not very up on early SMLE's; is that the correct foresight blade?

Correct blade, here is a photo of my two 1904 Mk1 SMLEs

[Peter Laidler]

Kids, playing Surpmil? Obviously a jestful comment........ It's a ring of oily stuff around the butt. The butt marking disc has recent fallen out as can be seen by the dust free recess and verdegres, caused by the screw just falling out of the dry-rotten wood. It just looks to me that the change lever/safety screw has been removed to further disable the rifle by throwing the safety mechanism away. Obviously done at the same time

Can't answer the sheared off screw but it's recent. The rifle is what it is and been where it's been

[Rusty.303]

G'Day all, I must say I am enjoying the thread.
A bit off topic but anyway.
My neighbors father is 96 years old, he fought in Greece in WW2 when the Germans invaded.
He narrowly escaped with a few others by requisitioning a small boat, rowing to where they were randomly picked up by an allied destroyer.
Before this they ditched the rifles minus mag and bolt.
He told me about 6 months ago that when he reached home questions were asked about the his rifle, he told me he was going to be charged for the rifle until he produced the mag and bolt which he still had.
The sharp old bugger still remembers the rifles serial no.

[Beerhunter]

My neighbors father is 96 years old, he fought in Greece in WW2 when the Germans invaded.

Even further OT (perhaps) there is an old boy (at least there was a few years back) who lives in the centre of Crete. IIRC he was about nine years old when the Germans invaded in 1941. Being that kind of boy, he started "picking stuff up" and has been doing so ever since. So he now owns one of the best collections of German and British Commonwealth kit on the island. (Bits of Ju52, gliders & tanks, guns, radios, etc.) It's mostly in a dreadful state but it is worth a visit.

BTW, if you visit his "museum" and you have a British or antipodean accent you will be treated like a king, I was. Many Cretans believe that the Greek Government left them in the lurch and the British Commonwealth soldiers did their best to protect them from the Germans. Additionally, the Cretans felt that they did not have the means to defend themselves and so after the war, lots of German weapons were "picked up" by the locals and secreted away "for the next time".