Inherent Weakness ?

[Gibbs505]

Analogy - apparently NASA spent millions of dollars developing a pen for space, it must write in zero gravity, upside down, and the 'right way' up.

The Russians used a pencil.

Sometimes simple is best.
Nuff said !!

Sometimes you have to look a little deeper. The pen developed for space was safe and left no comtaiments floating around.
The pencil had to be sharpened, which created shavings and graphite from the lead, and also was much sharper then the pen. Not a problem you say? Have you ever been stabbed with a pencil? i have, accidently, and it hurts! And can draw blood!!

[Edward Horton]

Sometimes you have to look a little deeper. The pen developed for space was safe and left no comtaiments floating around.
The pencil had to be sharpened, which created shavings and graphite from the lead, and also was much sharper then the pen. Not a problem you say? Have you ever been stabbed with a pencil? i have, accidently, and it hurts! And can draw blood!!

You are bitching about a pencil in space and being stabbed with it, what would happen if someone had severe odorous flatulence with contaminates floating around and they wanted to open a hatch.

Now stop your bitching, you could always stab yourself to death with a pencil if the fecal debris and odor inside the spacecraft became too objectionable.

I have been told they now use odorless eatable felt tip markers on all manned missions into space. (They contain a large percentage of charcoal)

[Gibbs505]

You are bitching about a pencil in space and being stabbed with it, what would happen if someone had severe odorous flatulence with contaminates floating around and they wanted to open a hatch.

Now stop your bitching, you could always stab yourself to death with a pencil if the fecal debris and odor inside the spacecraft became too objectionable.

I have been told they now use odorless eatable felt tip markers on all manned missions into space. (They contain a large percentage of charcoal)

My, my, guess I struck a nerve! I was merely pointing out that the so called 'simple' solution was not nearly as simple as it seemed at first glance.
Your example of a problem in space, is really to ridulcious to comment on. The rigiourious training along with the well documented medical oversight will have taken care of such a potential situation well before the space cowboys let the launch pad.
now back to your bitching.

[Alfred]

>>>The trigger mechanism is worked on two pivots, and is much less complicated than either the Mauser or the Mannlicher trigger action.<<<

Anyone that has compared the two actions know this is pure bunk.

I'd have to agree with you there, and the British finally went to a trigger mechanism hung from the action body and strap rather than pivoted at the triggerguard.
The LE Trigger is fairly easy to work on once you get the hang of it though, but its also easy to screw one up beyond repair if you get ham handed.

From the book linked to earlier

The stability gained by a nitro-glycerine powder was purchased at a very high cost in other directions. The hot flame of the cordite explosion is very wearing on the barrel, and rifles in which cordite is used suffer from gas cutting and erosion to an extent far in advance of the same trouble in rifles in which nitrocellulose powders are used. Service rifle users in Britain very quickly became aware of this disability. The following paragraph from "Arms and Explosives " of August, 1894, teNs its own tele :

"The War Office authorities are always informing us that cordite is making rapid strides in popularity in the Services, both for small-arm and ordnance purposes. Such a statement is practically impossible to controvert so far as the Regular branches of the Services are concerned. These have but little opportunity of preferring one powder to another, inasmuch as they are, in a vast majority of cases, bound to use Service explosives. Even here it is well known that those officers who go in at all largely for rifle-shooting very often employ their own private fancy in powders, without, however, giving such publicity to the fact as to lead the authorities to believe that they dislike cordite. It is very different with the case of the Volunteers, and the Bisley meeting affords a far better criterion of the popularity of cordite than any of the naturally prejudiced statements of War Office officials. It is, therefore, interesting to learn that where cordite had to meet with full, fair and free competition with other powders it came out very badly. Particulars have appeared in the public Press, which tally pretty accurately with our own information, as to the powder used in one of the leading M.B.L. competitions at Bisley—the Duke of Cambridge prize. Although cordite was served out gratis to the competitors, only two out of twenty-two used it. All the others seem to have preferred one or other of the various guncotton or nitro-cellulose powders now on the market. Indeed, it is claimed by the representatives of one of these that it won all the M.B.L. long-range competitions. When men of the experience of Sir Henry Halford, not to mention many others, publicly show their preference, and justify it by their success, for other powders than that officially adopted for the Services, something more Is required to convince us of its growing popularity than the asseverations of the War Office. So far as we could gather at Bisley, the feeling was that the man who respected the bore of his rifle should be very chary of subjecting it to the heat developed by cordite, and that as a shooting powder the latter was not to be relied upon."

It is certainly true that in the early stages of the development of cordite it was not as accurate as it might have been; but this unfortunate feature of cordite has now been removed to so great an extent that it can compete on equal terms with the most highly developed nitro-cellulose powders. As regards the destructive effects of cordite, recent modifications in the specification have done little or nothing to remedy the complaint. The shooting in the 1914 match rifle competition at Bisley demonstrated to admiration that, though M.D. cordite can be made to shoot with wonderful regularity, its destructive effects increase rapidly when charge and velocity are put up. Five hundred rounds of .280 cordite ammunition leave the barrel very worn and badly gas cut at the breech end.

The history of the British cartridge-case and bullet in the first few years after its adoption is interesting and instructive in that, when considered together, they indicate the growth of knowledge and the adaptation of design to cope with difficulties which presented themselves in practice.

It has often been said that the correct method of procedure is to evolve a cartridge which will give the desired results, and then produce a rifle to fire it. We believe that Major Rubin did follow this course, but he is apparently the only man who has ever done so. Certainly in 1888 the Lee-Enfield rifle was chosen first, and the cartridge evolved with much trouble and expense subsequently. In this case, there was the excuse that the main point of the Committee's deliberation was the adopting of a magazine rifle, and that it could not be expected to think of the cartridge first. Neither could it know that black powder was so soon to be tumbled from the position it had occupied for centuries, and its place taken by a more complete and less easily understood propellant—one which, whilst solving some of the Committee's difficulties, would upset a great number of their carefully worked out calculations.

The original cartridge-case was almost an exact copy of that of Colonel Rubin. It had a rimless base, and the bullet was held into the top of the case by means of a split ring,

It goes on to say

The Ross rifle is the arm of the Canadian forces; and as it is a Canadian production is looked on with considerable affection by the sons of the Maple-leaf. It is regarded by them as being very considerably superior to the Service rifle of the Mother Country, and the consistently good shooting of the Canadian teams which have visited this country has fostered the idea. In thus praising the rifle at their own expense, the members of the team probably belittle themselves unduly, for they have to use the same cartridge as their British fellow subjects when firing at Bisley, and there is nothing in the design of the Ross rifle that could make a great deal of difference in the usually good shooting of the Mark VI. ammunition. The difference would come into play if a heavy cartridge had to be used—one which the British action would not stand up to—then the stronger bolt of the Ross rifle would give it a tremendous advantage (see Plate XXIII.).

The Lee action is the invention of an "American Gunsmith", James Paris Lee, chosen by the British and improved upon over the years.
The Lee action in .45-70 had been used by the US Navy since the 1870's.
The Remington Lee action of 1899 was used to some extent in .30-40 Krag caliber, but its rear locking bolt design proved to be a dead end when more powerful cartridges were considered for adoption.

The 1903 loading of the Springfield cartridge used a propellant nearly as erosive as Cordite, and the case design and loading procedure did not allow for a Card wad between propellant and bullet.
It was found that gas erosion led to the failure of even full metal jackets with the lead cores blown through.
According to a quote of J H Hardcastle the firing of the MkVII ammunition with card wad left out resulted in the barrel life being cut to one sixth that of a barrel firing the same loading with card wad.
If the Bore of an individual rifle left the factory with grooves cut to the maximum acceptable depth of .008 the card wad could be vitified and worn down enough to allow significant blowby mid way of the bore.

I haven't found any decent studies of bullet jacket damage from UK sources yet but I did find that the US Chief of Ordnance had reported on testing done when shed jackets became a problem with the 1903 cartridges.
http://books.google.com/books/downlo...ummary_r&cad=0
Another source with good photos of recovered bullets damaged by increasing levels of gas erosion.
Ordnance and gunnery: a text-book ... - Google Books

The Glazed surface of the Card served an unusual purpose. When ammunition was exposed to heat for any length of time Nitroglycerin could soak into a non glazed wad, and the wad itself became an explosive.

The .303 being an updated Black Powder cartridge, and its loading procedure being suited to placing a compressed Black Powder pellet into the case before the neck was formed, allowed for the insertion of the card during manufacture. This greatly complicated ammunition manufacture and made reloading using Cordite a very iffy proposition.

As for failures of Low Numbered 1903 actions, there were more failures of LE actions recorded in a two year period in Canada and listed in the House of Commons debates on the Ross Rifle.
These debates are another source of the claim that the rear locking bolt of the Lee resulted in a weak action, and the number of bolt head failures and listed injuries plus at least one death due to bolthead failures didn't help the rifle's image.

The well known tendency of the earlier tublar jacket bullets to shed their jacket in the bore or sometimes down range has led to some believing that only tublar jacket or mutilated Dum Dum bullets can shed their jackets in the bore. This could lead to accidents in the future as used and abused Enfields end up in the hands of younger shooters who don't know that erosion certainly can result in heat damaged and stripped jackets.

The British first looked for both a stronger action and a cartridge with better performance, this ultimately resulted in the P-14. The action was fine, but the cartridge it was originally designed for failed due to the harsh character of the propellant. That and a brilliant muzzle blast that would give away a rifleman's position.

The problem of muzzle blast remained so long as Cordite was used, resulting in the use of Mk8Z NC loaded ammo in the Bren when the gun was used in low light conditions. Brilliant muzzle blasts also gave away the position of British Night Fighters according to a recent interview with one of these pilots.

The Lee Enfield was if anything held back by the British insistence on using Cordite rather than developing existing Nitrocellulose powders.
Production bottle necks resulted in Britian having to buy ammo from the US and Canada , and this ammo had to be shipped through U-boat infested waters at great cost in lost ships and men.

BTW
The British respected the 1903 Springfield rifle enough to attempt to contract Remington to produce the rifle in .303 in the 1940's, and then bought thousands of the .30-06 rifles when this proved too difficult.

I've passed up several 03 Springfields over the years, I like the feel of the Lee Enfields better, and when a properly taylored handload is used the rifle is remarkably accurate.
I'd have to go along with the Bisley crowd and chose not to use Cordite loaded ammo, even if they began producing it again.
Awhile back I had intended to try to find some of the most recent production MkVII, but after studying what the British themselves had to say about it I figure I'm better off using only taylored handloads that come close ballistically.
No sense using up whats left of my rifle's accuracy life un necessarily. Besides mis fires can get someone killed in serious situations and hang fires can lead to accidents.

PS
http://books.google.com/books?id=6Oe...esult&resnum=1

MkVII ammunition proved to be relatively ineffective against even the primitive Body Armor and Trench Shields in use during WW1. This resulted in the use of heavy caliber sporting rifles by British Snipers when such hardened targets were encountered.
Though telescope sighted No.1 rifles were produced, the P-14 and Ross rifles seem to have put in a better showing for numbers employed.

[Edward Horton]

My, my, guess I struck a nerve! I was merely pointing out that the so called 'simple' solution was not nearly as simple as it seemed at first glance.
Your example of a problem in space, is really to ridulcious to comment on. The rigiourious training along with the well documented medical oversight will have taken care of such a potential situation well before the space cowboys let the launch pad.
now back to your bitching.

I’m guessing but you seem to have trouble telling humor from fecal debris

eBay.com.my: Vintage SPACE SHUTTLE Pencil Sharpener Old (item 250439280416 end time Jul 07, 2009 08:50:48 MYT)

[villiers]

I own (and shoot) two rifles: a Mauser 33/40 "Gebirgsjäger" and an LE No. 5 "Jungle carbine". Both load approximately the same Kemira N140 powder charge (according to the book). I hardly ever use the Mauser and I keep it mainly because it´s so beautifully (and expensively) made. Both rifles are very accurate (or I´d have got rid of it) but I practically never shoot the Mauser competitively. I always choose the Enfield ... and have now got myself another .308 Win Enfield conversion. I still prefer the .303. In my younger days, I saw action with the No. 4 & 5 and the FN. Of course times change ... and the FN was a very efficient weapon. But the Enfield was the product of a very long period of evolution which eventually made it better than all the others. I`m quite sure that "collectors" would prefer the Mauser but anyone who has ever used one in action will always stick to the Enfield.

[Patrick Chadwick]

Ireload2 has used the old rhetorical trick of forming a hypothetical question that is completely off the track of the discussion, which concerned the time leading up to the FIRST world war. So while "American Gunsmith" was shooting his mouth off, the British, being inadequately provided with Lee Enfields and aware of possible improvements, turned to American private enterprise for adequate production of the P14. Meanwhile, for three years the US authorities appear to have taken a "doesn't concern us" attitude to WW1 and Springfield was producing rifles at a rate that would have matched the later M1917 production by about 1940, if the troops could have waited long enough. They could not. So the US in it's turn had to be saved by the same private enterprise production in a brilliant piece of pragmatic planning and production ramp-up by converting the P14 to a 30-06 version and producing the M1917 in quantities that made Springfield look like a garage operation. If the British firearms planning was completely inadequate, then the US planning while the war was already engulfing the world could be described as criminal negligence on a national scale. In both countries, the officials could be described as "minutemen" because that appears to have been their major activity - writing minutes.

[Edward Horton]

When someone asks a question in a forum with the intention of answering his own question one would have to wonder about the value of the question in the first place.

Some Americans actually enjoy their Enfield Rifles, unfortunately a few Americans should be stabbed with dull pencils and be left floating in the vacuum of space.

On the bright side here is some useful information on the Enfield rifle from an American.

RE: Jim Sweets Competitive Rifle Shooting Book

Hello Ed

This is a popular book here in Australia. It retails for $24.06 US, working on today's exchange rate. But of course that will vary on the day the sale is processed, not be much. Postage will be approx $14.00 US. If you wish to proceed with the sale we suggest sending your credit card details in two emails, half in the first email and the other half in a second email, as we don't have a secure site for payment over the internet. We don't take Diners Club or AMAX.

Regards

Mike & Jenny
QRA
Q Store
Email: michael@qldrifle.com
Ph: (07) 3843 5377
After hours: (07) 5495 2441
Fax: (07) 3395 2777
Business hours: Thursday,Friday,Saturday, 10am - 5pm

[louthepou]

I wonder why someone would call a rifle that can shot thousands of rounds and keep working great for tounsands more with the most basic maintenance "inherently weak". Others are stronger, better made etc., but that's beside the point I think.

Lou

[ireload2]

ireload2, there were many times when the Lee Enfield equipped troops went into battle against semi auto rifle equipped troops. They also came out of those conflicts quite well.
Good training and discipline under fire make up the difference. To many people think that the ability to spray a lot of bullets in the general direction of the enemy is the best policy. Not so.
IMHO a man equipped with a bolt action, being well trained in its use and confident in his ability is a far more dangerous adversary than a man equipped with a spray and pray assault rifle. Rifles, like the Lee Enfield, are also purpose designed aussault rifles and in the proper hands every bit as effective.
There are many more arguments in favor of bolt action rifles and I won't go into that here. I will also say that in the proper hands a properly trained man with a semi/full auto rifle is also extremly effective.

In the end it's all in the training.

I agree about training being a good thing.
But if the training is of equal quality then the higher fire power has an advantage. If a machine gun is a good thing then a semiautomatic rifle is also a good thing when the entire squad is so armed. I have talked to many people that discuss the war only in the context of the fighting in Europe.
In the Pacific the Marine rifle squads began with 2 Bars and 4 Springfields,
Then went to 2 Bars and 2 Garands, then grew larger with 3 BARs and 6 Garand Rifles. You can see the tremendous increase in firepower when the BAR LMGs were supported by Garand rifles. These squads usually included an NCO or someone with a Tommygun and a Marine with demolitions or a flame thrower.