Signalling Telescope Stands (Tripods),

[srf]

Signalling telescope stands (tripods) with short legs.

I have a 1916 Mk V signalling telescope stand (tripod) with short legs that I always thought was not as originally issued in the Great War. I assumed it had been cut down from a WW1 'long leg' version for later civilian or military use. I have noted that other contributers to the forum do not believe that the short leg versions of the Mk V stand that exist were issued in the Great War. This seems a fair judgement to make because there are apparently no period photos or written descriptions of a short leg Mk V. Also given the military's habit of 'giving everything a number' it would be expected that an issued short leg version would be marked to distinguish it from the standard item.

Expecting that my Mk V would have no historical value as an unoriginal item, I was planning to turn it into an indoor display tripod by felting the jaws and fitting new longer legs with rubber feet. However, I thought I would do a little more research before taking this step. As a result I am now not so confident that my short leg version of the Mk V is unoriginal. There seems to be evidence that is as originally put together, if for military use this was probably before WW2 and possibly during the Great War.

I would welcome any opinions on my findings below.

Above is a photo of the long leg Mk V. What I have noted here is that the legs are tapered like snooker cues. They are 'tenoned' into the brass leg sockets, finishing flush with the outside of the sockets. The metal spikes are slightly wider than the leg at the bottom. There is a metal loop fixed to the bottom of a leg to take the carry strap.

Below is a short leg version of the Mk V that has obviously been cut down from a long leg stand. Note that the legs are flush with the brass sockets and that the repositioned metal spikes are now slightly narrower than the leg because of the leg taper (the long wood leg being wider nearer the top). Also note that the bottom strap loop has not been discarded but repositioned on one of the legs.

http://www.collectorssource.com/item.asp?recid=4540

Below is another long leg version that has obviously been cut down. This has been cut down from a later incarnation of the Mk V that was re-designated a No. 21. This example was originally a WW1 Mk V long leg stand with the SIG.TEL.STAND lettering ground off and replaced with the new designation. It was also cut down at some point. Note again the legs flush with the sockets and the reused spikes slightly undersize for the diameter of the leg.

http://www.collectorssource.com/item.asp?recid=4417

The No 21 stand seems to have been simply a re-designation of the MkV and issued as a long leg stand originally, either new make or re-marked Mk V. Below is a webpage with a picture of a WW2 New Zealand made version.

http://www.dickinsauctioneers.com/BidCat/d...&LotRef=224

Above is another cut down long leg version. Note the legs flush with the sockets and the repositioned bottom strap loop.

Cont' on next post to include extra images.......

[srf]

cont from previous post.....

Above is a picture of my stand. Note here that:-

The leg is not 'tenoned' into the socket but is a simple non-tapered dowel thin enough to push fit into the brass socket.

The metal spike feet are a good fit - slightly wider than the leg as with the standard long leg tripod.

There is no evidence of a carry strap loop ever having been fitted to the bottom of a leg.

The wood is hickory. I am expert ref' woodworking and can identify this timber, Hickory has never been a d.i.y. timber in the UK. It has always been a commercial imported timber used for sports equipment etc. and would have been a timber of choice by a manufacturer for a usage like this.

The Hickory is old. This wood is notorious for large uneven levels of shrinkage with age. The tripod legs exhibit this trait.

I have removed a spike and found the timber accurately machined to an off-centre taper to take the spike. This is not a d.i.y job but a machine shop operation.

Where the timber fits into the brass socket the brass retaining screws are patinated exactly the same as the brass of the socket. This argues for the legs being in the sockets for a long time.

Originally the legs were held in the sockets by a filler or gap filling adhesive as well as the screws. With the hickory shrinkage this has largely fallen away. Where it has fallen away it reveals unvarnished timber underneath. This shows that the legs were fitted unvarnished, then the wood and filler varnished over after fitting, not cut down from already varnished legs then pushed back into the sockets

All these features surely point to the tripod being made at the outset with short wood legs in a manufacturers workshop - not made from a long leg tripod cut down.

The million dollar question of course is when did this happen. The tripod is 1916 so this would seem to be the date. The shrinkage of the hickory and patination on the fixing screws seems to support this. However, I guess there could have been a stock of unused brass tripod components left over unused after WW1. These could have been fitted with the short legs later for military or civi' use. If for military use it would certainly seem to have happened before WW2 because by then the tripods had a No.21 classification.

My tripod was made by Blunt & Wray. They were ecclesiastical metalworkers specialising in brass working. There is a picture of another short leg Mk V by this maker (to big a file to include in this post). This is interesting as it also has thin non-tapered legs that look like hickory. Unfortunately there are no metal spikes just rounded timber ends and the retaining screws seem to be later steel replacements. Despite being compromised in this way it does suggest that perhaps this maker was specialising in short leg tripods.

Steve

[MikB]

Well, that bit of forensic work was certainly worth its own thread, wasn't it? Previously I've often accepted uncritically other posters' comments that these were later mods, not original manufacture, and you seem to've defeated that idea.

Nevertheless the dearth of WW1 era photos of shortleg stands is a puzzle. One photo I can remember seeing in a friends book, of a Signalling scope mounted low in a forward sap, showed full-length legs, but the stand seemed to allow these to be almost horizontal, and that was how the low mounting on the parapet had been achieved. A shortleg tripod would've been better in that situation had it been availble.

Regards,

MikB

[philsr]

Just to throw a small spanner in the works.

I notice that all of the tripods photographed have varnished legs, I have one that has been painted olive green a long time ago.

It's also got a wooden block with a protruding stud that fits in the clamp that supposesdly mounts a camera.

Has anyone else seen one like this.

Philsr

[srf]

Ref' the green paint, the No 21 short stand I give the web i.d. for (first post) has the remnants of olive green paint on it.

When I first looked into the history of my stand a few years back I was offered the following from someone from RCSigs militaria ref' using the telescope:-

From the 1938 signal training manual "The best position is the

laying position, with the elbows on the ground, the head resting on

the hands."

This suggests a short stand would be needed.

Before I concluded that my stand must have been cut down I did wonder if it was a response to trench warfare. Sitting on a sandbag using a long leg stand does not seem a healthy option in these circumstances. The short stand would be better than resting the 'scope on an improvised support with regard to holding the target and avoiding dirt getting into the draws and onto the glass.

Although there is no evidence of a short stand in use during the Great War I don't think that this completely rules out the possibility because there are very few photos even of the long leg Mk V in use during the conflict. When I first looked a few years ago I only found two. If MikB's memory of the book illustration is of a long leg Mk V that still only makes three.

Steve

p.s.this is Blunt & Wray tripod I could not include the picture of in my second post. It is unfortunately compromised as evidence for reasons stated.

[6th Hauraki KIA KAHA]

Hi

All I can add is in all the Signal manuals I have from 1904 to 1938, no mention is made of a short stand, or any drawings, only the tall stand even in the 1938 manual.

So it seems the tall stand intended for Signals use.

I have never seen a photograph of the shorter stand in use.

Who can say for what other uses the shorter stand was not made and when.

I have seen a few of the short stands before, and used to own one myself, now only 3 of the tall stands WW1 dated

I have seen quite a few photographs of the tripod in WW1 service and all are the tall stand.

I have taken the tall stand and tripod to a shoot before and the stand can be made to almost touch the ground withe legs spread out in trenches all the photos of use did not have a tripod just had it rested on the side of the trench, no need for a tripod.

[srf]

I have seen a few of the short stands before, and used to own one myself, now only 3 of the tall stands WW1 dated

I would be interested to know what your short leg stand was like if you can remember. Do you think it was cut down from a long leg stand? Was it like mine and if so can you remember the maker?

Steve

[Michael Pegum]

On another thread (Irish Guards officer) I posted this photo of an Irish Guards officer. It was probably taken before the war or soon after the war began, as he was killed in October, 1914.

It looks as if it is a tripod. What do the experts think? Is that how it was carried?

Michael

[reese williams]

To confuse things even a bit more, I dragged out my two tripods, one long, one short.

The long one is a 1916 Siemens Bros & Co. Ltd London. The legs on it are tenoned into the head as mentioned above, but are of constant diameter round dowel over their entire length. One of the metal feet protudes slightly past the leg but the other two are flush (like the top) and obviously appear to have been designed as a flush finish.

The short one is a 1916 Blunt & Wray London. The legs are tenoned into the top, constant diameter dowel with flush fitting feet. There are holes about midway down the legs that appear to have been the mount points for a bracket or buckle on one leg and single holes indicating an attached strap. Looks like it was rigged with a strap to either limit the spread of the legs or to tie them together for carrying. The whole thing appears to have never been apart. Particularly the screws holding the feet to the legs. They were dressed flush with the feet when they were installed and the slots are completely unmessed with. It certainly looks like it was manufactured this way, longer ago than the 50's and 60's when I understand the short height scope stands became popular in British and Commonwealth shooting circles.

The legs on both look like hickory with a coat of varnish. The heads are anodized brass and the feet are steel with a coat (or remnants thereof) of black paint.

[Wardog]

I once had one which had had longer copper clamps fixed to the original clamps. It had sold out of service arrows. It had varnished legs with metal spike ends. Hard to say what alterations could have been made by a 'sporting/hunting' shooter between the wars.

[srf]

To confuse things even a bit more, I dragged out my two tripods, one long, one short.

The long one is a 1916 Siemens Bros & Co. Ltd London. The legs on it are tenoned into the head as mentioned above, but are of constant diameter round dowel over their entire length. One of the metal feet protudes slightly past the leg but the other two are flush (like the top) and obviously appear to have been designed as a flush finish.

The short one is a 1916 Blunt & Wray London. The legs are tenoned into the top, constant diameter dowel with flush fitting feet. There are holes about midway down the legs that appear to have been the mount points for a bracket or buckle on one leg and single holes indicating an attached strap. Looks like it was rigged with a strap to either limit the spread of the legs or to tie them together for carrying. The whole thing appears to have never been apart. Particularly the screws holding the feet to the legs. They were dressed flush with the feet when they were installed and the slots are completely unmessed with. It certainly looks like it was manufactured this way, longer ago than the 50's and 60's when I understand the short height scope stands became popular in British and Commonwealth shooting circles.

The legs on both look like hickory with a coat of varnish. The heads are anodized brass and the feet are steel with a coat (or remnants thereof) of black paint.

[srf]

Sorry about that - clicked the wrong button.

These are both very interesting tripods.

Ref' the short leg one it seems to be very similar to the first one I gave a web i.d. for in my first post. one of the reasons I was convinced that this was cut down from a long leg version was the metal spikes fitted 'in line' with the leg. This looks like a d.i.y. job. I assumed that the 'offset' fitting of the spikes was an indication of original manufacture but perhaps not. This offset arrangement is much more difficult to manufacture but allows for better deployment of the tripod and a neater, less likely to snag, arrangement when folded.

Also I assumed that the thing on the leg was the replaced carry strap loop (now somewhat redundant with the short legs). This is obviously what happened with another of the short leg stands I showed. However this might be a fitting to tie the legs together as you suggest could have been the situation ref' the old fixing holes with yours. The image is not good enough to tell unfortunately.

It does look like you also might have a possible WW1 era purpose made short leg stand and also that I might be wrong about the one in my first post being a later cut down.

It would be interesting to know if the spikes on your tripod are straight or offset, also if the old fixing holes are all on the same leg.

Ref the long leg one it would also be interesting to know if the spike feet are offset or straight.

Steve

[srf]

On another thread (Irish Guards officer) I posted this photo of an Irish Guards officer. It was probably taken before the war or soon after the war began, as he was killed in October, 1914.

It looks as if it is a tripod. What do the experts think? Is that how it was carried?

Michael

I have looked at this and done an experiment with my own short leg tripod.

I invite everyone to look very closely at the photograph and see if you agree with me about two features.

There is a thin strap just visible over the left shoulder. It seems to pass under the collar and other shoulder strap down to our puzzle item. This must be the item carry strap.

The item in question seems to made up of 'legs' that are retained by a strap or tie wrapped around our item about one third the way along the visible portion from the arm.

I experimented by shoulder slinging my folded tripod on a cord from the loop at the head. It hung with the legs dangling down as would be expected. I then used a strap to tie the legs as I asssume in the photo and ran the cord through the strap loop at the head and also through the tie. It then hung exactly like the photo with the weight of the brass head to the rear tipping the legs upward along the line of the carry strap. Unfortunately I don't have a digi camera available at the moment to post a view of this but will do it in the future.

All this looks very good for this to be a short leg tripod particularly if Reese's short tripod (previous post) is original WW1 era and had a permanent 'tie-up' strap to the legs as he suggests from the old fixing holes.

Another possibility that would have a short leg tripod hanging this way I guess is if the carry strap ran through the brass loop on the head and also a brass loop on a leg. The kind of situation illustrated on the last image in my first post on this.

The problem with the tripod idea is the poor image definition at the end of the item.

If you have the original photo then check with a magnifier, or if there is a better quality digital version then expand it and look for detail in this area. If this is a tripod like mine with 'offset' spikes, the metal spike ends fold inward until the points are very close together, the three spike ends together forming an approximate big blunt triangular point.

If this last detail can be confirmed then it will make for very strong evidence of short leg tripods being issued and used in the Great War.

Steve

[reese williams]

Ok, here are some pictures of my tripods.

The first picture shows the marks from the missing bracket or strap from the short one. The middle leg shows two holes and marks from something similar to the strap bracket found on the long tripods plus a third, larger hole that goes completely through the leg. The other two legs have a single hole and the mark of a bracket.

[reese williams]

Next is the upper ends where the legs fit into the heads. On both the 2nd and 3rd pictures, notice how the construction is the same, speaking to me of a standard set of specifications. In all the pictures the long tripod is on the top.

Third is a shot of the feet of both long and short.

[reese williams]

Fourth is a picture of my short tripod with a post-WWII Parker Hale commercial and a WWI rangefinder tripod

Last is a close up of the tie strap on the range finder tripod.

I guess I come down in the "Short tripods were made sometime prior to WWII" camp for the following reasons. Mine and others I've seen look like they were made that way. Their appearance is too uniform and too much like the condition and appearance of the long tripods I've seen. All of the short ones I've seen have been of the same length. If they were post-war modifications for civilian shooters I would expect to see variations in length and in the replacement off the feet. Some would be taller or shorter and some would have had the feet left off where the owner had simply sawn off the legs of a long tripod. What would make me change my mind is if some one came up with a copy of an inter-war Parker-Hale or A.J. Parker catalog with pictures of short tripods for sale. I know PH and many others sporterized SMLEs and No.4s I have a very basic SMLE by NRF that was sporterized by PH including PH sling swivels, sling and markings.

[6th Hauraki KIA KAHA]

It looks more like the rangefinder tripod with the strap that reese has shown, than the signals tripod in the photograph. it could also be a folding seat or anything.

I still go by what are in the manuauls and photographs as a signals tripod it was used with the long legs and the modifaction was a post WW1.

If it was shortened for heliograph flag and signal work it would be to short for this use with them.

I have only seen one heliograph signal lamp shortened and that was post WW1.

[srf]

Ok, here are some pictures of my tripods.

Thanks for these. The holes in the short legs of the Blunt & Wray Mk V are very puzzling, They don't look like a bodge job because, as you mention, the impressions of metal fixtures are clear. From the image they seem to favour the inside surfaces of the legs which seems strange for a tie-up strap. Also a tie up strap only needs to be fixed to one leg so it doesn't get lost. This suggests a restraining strap to stop the legs spreading as you mentioned in your first post on this - but this negates the whole design of the tripod. The independant movement of each leg allows for adjustment on uneven ground and height adjustment also. A leg spread restraining strap would surely make these adjustments very fiddly. Another possibility ref' the twin holes only is, as you suggest, that they were for a carry strap loop. From your long leg version you should be able to tell if the twin hole marks are in the right position on the circumference of the leg for a similar carry strap loop. The hole that goes all the way through suggests a later bodge of some kind.

This tripod does look like it hasn't been 'worked on' for a very long time for the reasons you have already given. It looks to me that from the wear and the patination of the screws that it could be old enough to be Great War vintage in the present short leg form . Interestingly, although mine has thinner legs, both our short leg versions are Blunt & Wray.

Steve

[srf]

It looks more like the rangefinder tripod with the strap that reese has shown, than the signals tripod in the photograph. it could also be a folding seat or anything.

I don't think the case for the item in question being a Mk V short leg tripod is at all proved but I am not convinced by Reese's type of rangefinder tripod being the item. This rangefinder tripod is an interesting piece of kit but looks quite a sizeable piece, to big for the item in the photo I think. Also the detail doesn't look quite right. Also, if the strap on Reese's tripod is in a fixed position it is in the wrong position ref' the photo.

The thing we haven't discussed here is what kind of kit would a junior officer wear in this way. It is obviously an item of importance - he is not carrying it casually like a bag of shopping. It is carefully and comfortably slung and the carry strap actually seems to run under his dress belt shoulder strap (is this a 'Sam Browne'?) indicating an item carried around all the time.

If this was a folding stool or some similar creature comfort being carried around all day by junior officer -he would have been laughed out of the regiment I would think. It must surely be a serious piece of military kit which must reduce the number of possibilities.

I am sure that part of the answer ref' the identity of this item lies in the general role and operations of the soldier's regiment. I have no detailed knowledge of WW1 operations but if he was in a Guards Reg't would he be carrying about any type of rangefinder tripod? I would assume this kit was used by artillerymen. Also, would a junior officer be carrying such a piece of kit. Also, what would be the point of carrying around the tripod without the rangefinder itself? How big is the rangefinder - will it go in his big tunic pocket?

Similarly of course, what would be the point of carrying around a telescope tripod without the telescope?

On this issue I might have had a 'uereka' moment. I noted that the item carry strap is about the same width as the signalling telescope carry strap. What if he is carrying a telescope on the same strap out of view behing his lower back?! I once again did an experiment with my tripod, slinging it as before but this time on my telescope strap with the telescope positioned just behind the stand. Once again I could get a very similar appearance to the photo. As some will know from my posts on the signalling telescopes strand I have a Tel.Sig. type telescope the right kind of size and case type for this experiment although mine is lighter than the actual period issue models. As I said before I will photo this experiment and post some pics for criticism but this won't be for a month or two when I know can eventually get the use of a digi camera.

This puts the ball in the court of those of you who are expert on the military organisation and operations of the Great War, I have no detail knowledge in this area. Would it be a reasonable possibility that a junior Guards officer in this regiment would carry a telescope?

Steve

[Michael Pegum]

If you have the original photo then check with a magnifier, or if there is a better quality digital version then expand it and look for detail in this area. If this is a tripod like mine with 'offset' spikes, the metal spike ends fold inward until the points are very close together, the three spike ends together forming an approximate big blunt triangular point.

Steve

This is a very interesting discussion. Unfortunately, the photo is from one of the magazines recording the deaths of (mainly) oficers. The original image is only 25mm/1" high, and the quality of the image cannot be improved.

As a Guards officer, he was with the infantry, and he was on his way from the front line to the reserve position to take over the transport when he was wounded by artillery fire, dying two days later.

Here's a thought. He had been in the Boer War as an officer, possibly even before the Irish Guards were formed in 1900. The badge on his cap looks like the badge of the Irish Guards, but could the tripod, if it was one, have been something infantry officers carried in the Boer War? The photo might have been taken when he was called up and before he left for the Great War.

Michael

[srf]

This is a very interesting discussion. Unfortunately, the photo is from one of the magazines recording the deaths of (mainly) oficers. The original image is only 25mm/1" high, and the quality of the image cannot be improved.

The original photo used by the magazine would likely have been bigger and obviously better quality than the printed version and just might turn up somewhere else in better quality having been used at the time in another publication. This is a long shot but there is a photo of this officer apparently in the book 'Our Heroes: Mons to the Somme August 1914-July 1916'. I guess this is probably the same photo, but if you haven't already checked this out you could ask the forum - someone is bound to have the book I would think.

Steve

[Michael Pegum]

In fact, the photo is from "Our Heroes", and an original copy at that, not the modern reproduction. My grandfather appears in it, and that's how I come to have a copy!

I have met a relative of the officer in the photo, but he had never seen it before, so he doesn't have a copy of the original photo.

Michael

[George Armstrong Custer]

These may be of interest:

[green_acorn]

Could I suggest the "short" tripod was a post war modification by sporting shooters, bird watchers etcetra, and not an official tripod. This would account for the various styles of footing seen, a very nice one just having gone on eBay Australia for about 100GBP.

Cheers,

Hendo

[srf]

Ref Post No 23 - the photos posted by George Armstrong.

One thing that might be of interest to the signalling telescope enthusiasts that I have just noticed here. Note how the spare eyepiece is rigged on the carry strap by the 'pros', tidily trapped by the strap loops against the telescope body. The spare eyepiece cases can been seen in this position tucked under the body of both telescopes shown. On the many display photos I have seen of the signalling model 'scope I have never seen this set up before. Could this perhaps be a reason why this model telescope was always provided with an end cap only case, to allow for this rigging and not a full Scout Reg type case?

Steve