It did make me laugh, as Pete pointed out, the No74 illustrated, is mounted the wrong way round!
Perhaps as part of a separate trial, ensuring Snipers didn't bug out to soon, as the enemy would appear miles away!
Judging by the markings on the elevation drum, the scope is shown correctly, but with the shade on the objective rather than the ocular - obviously wouldn't clear the mounts as shown, but probably a wiser place for it if it would have fit.
“There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.”
The prototype illustrated appears to be mounted on a modified X8E2 (Ex2) unit sight top cover. X8E1 X8E2 SLR Manual
The extended scope base, addition of the locking tabs to the rear and deletion of the front locating pin.
I think you're right, if not a modified original, then certainly based closely on it.
Having submerged myself in the relevant section of The Fal Rifle book, the time line starts become clear.
Varians of this scope had been trialed seriously in prototype form since 1960. It appears in 1965, someone decided to push it into production and the scope and Enfied production mount went into limited production in 1967.
Without reference to the trials information, I'm more inclined to think the thing that killed the No74 MK1 off was an obvious inability to place shots with required accuracy at range with the L1A1.
The switch in interest to reduced light capability scope, generally issued, (the eventual SUIT) scope, trialed in prototype form in 1969, shows the 'Sniper L1A1' must have been dead in the water by 1968 at the latest.
Considering the abysmal failing SUIT mount that followed the No74 MK1, they couldn't have had a huge amount of issue with spot welding the mounts on...
Or perhaps trials were stopped before that lesson could be absorbed!
As a side note, Pete has mentioned that as far as he can recall, it was intended to pair a sight unit to a rifle by electo penciling the rifles S/N on the scopes top cover.
I assume by testing and putting aside the most accurate rifles as designated sniper L1's.
.303, helping Englishmen express their feelings since 1889
Begs the question: how deeply recessed is the objective lens? Would a shade be necessary? I'm guessing it would.
Something similar a little larger would probably have made a good replacement for the No32.
In "Without Warning" pps. 65-71 the trials are detailed which led to the adoption of the E. Leitz Canada "Sniper Scope C1" in 1959. One of the sights included in the trial was a "UK 3x Type 1956"; anyone know what those were?
By way or comparison the Soviet PSO-1 came out in the early 1960s with a range-finding illuminated reticule, IR detector and zero-retaining quick release mounts.
“There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.”
Begs the question: how deeply recessed is the objective lens? Would a shade be necessary? I'm guessing it would.
Something similar a little larger would probably have made a good replacement for the No32.
In "Without Warning" pps. 65-71 the trials are detailed which led to the adoption of the E. Leitz Canada "Sniper Scope C1" in 1959. One of the sights included in the trial was a "UK 3x Type 1956"; anyone know what those were?
By way or comparison the Soviet PSO-1 came out in the early 1960s with a range-finding illuminated reticule, IR detector and zero-retaining quick release mounts.
The UK 3x was this scope, in an earlier version.
It's actually a very nice scope, lovely clear optics, good positive click adjustment and they fall very naturally to the hand, so you can zero without breaking your aim.
Had it been boosted to X4 with a slightly larger field of view, it would have made a good No32 replacement...
That said, when the decision was made to go with the L42, why fix what isn't broken?
Last edited by mrclark303; 03-25-2023 at 08:32 PM.
.303, helping Englishmen express their feelings since 1889
What's shown in the EMER is the Trials scope c1960 fitted to a modified FAL Cover, the same as used for the X8E2/EX2 optics. These Scopes were known as the No. 74 EX1 and according to the info 12 or 13 were made (depending on which page you read) S/N of scopes BL1, BL2, BL3, BL4, BL5, BL6, BL7, BL8, BL9, BL10, BL11, BL12, BL13 by R J BECK. The original 12 were returned to BECK due to a breakdown of the sealant to be examined.
Still mounted arse about face on the top cover or is it me?
'Tonight my men and I have been through hell and back again, but the look on your faces when we let you out of the hall - we'd do it all again tomorrow.' Major Chris Keeble's words to Goose Green villagers on 29th May 1982 - 2 PARA
Basic physics will put a stop to a scope of this weight being capable of reliable use. While the scope - like the SUIT - will pass the standard fastness test - or recoil test, with the Enfield layer or rest set at hard, the fact remains that the telescope will always recoil radially rearwards. It's physics at work. The telescope is good, the rifle is good but the cover is thin pressed steel, a third the thickness of a bit of car body steel
One of the old workshop notes I have refers to repairs to the cover in the event of it splitting - notice the reinforcing piece at the rear of the cover, below the actual mount part. To be honest, in all my time, I never understood the need for the little 'stops' at the rrear of the L1 cover! It's nt as though you could push the cover on too far! They were forever splitting - due to that nasty rule of physics again. Eventually, they were simply cut off and made good. Just like FN did at the start.
Worth bearing in mind that while the scopes are dated '67 or so, NI didn't start until late '69 and didn't start hotting up until mid '71(?) depending where you were based of course!!!!!
It's actually a very nice scope, lovely clear optics, good positive click adjustment and they fall very naturally to the hand, so you can zero without breaking your aim.
Had it been boosted to X4 with a slightly larger field of view, it would have made a good No32 replacement...
That said, when the decision was made to go with the L42, why fix what isn't broken?
The No.32 Mk3 was an antique by 1970, albeit a strong and reliable one. A lighter, brighter and higher powered or even variable(!) scope would have been more effective and also reduced or eliminated the failure of the pads due to the excessive recoil forces of the No.32.
But if they couldn't be bothered to replace the butts with something more user-friendly, they certainly weren't going to bother with a new scope.
Originally Posted by Gil Boyd
Still mounted arse about face on the top cover or is it me?
No, it's the lens hoods that cause the confusion. The long hood is apparently slotted to fit over the front of the mounts, and this illustration shows the short hood for the ocular lens which was missing from the previous image(s).
The arrow indicates where I believe we can just make out the edge of the bead on the opposite side of the slot.
The long hood shown above fitted to the ocular end is clearly not the same type: no bead and no slot, so either a service replacment of the short hood or a civilian addition.
Last edited by Surpmil; 03-26-2023 at 01:49 PM.
“There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.”
Originally Posted by mrclark303
PM
