Zero/ sighting of new issue

[17107BM]

Hello all.

New rifles issued in the field, how were these rifles Zero'd ? Was it left to chance?

Given the SMLE perameters were Rifles pre..sighted before issue

[4thGordons]

Hello all.

New rifles issued in the field, how were these rifles Zero'd ? Was it left to chance?

Given the SMLE perameters were Rifles pre..sighted before issue

I believe each rifle was test fired and zeroed as part of the final inspection process at the manufacturer.

I do not recall the details (could probably look them up) but I believed they were clamped in a fixed rest and several rounds fired at a fixed target with a specified number having to fall within the required zone on the target.

Chris

[4thGordons]

"Testing

All rifles are fired at 100 feet and 10 per cent are also fired at 600 yards and any which give doubtful results at the shorter range being included among those tested at the longer. In both cases the rifle is held in a mechanical rest, designed to approximate the conditions under which it is ordinarily fires as regards points of support, recoil etc. Means are provided for laying the rifle by hand wheels, and with the aid of a special telescope laid on the blade of the foresight and bearing on the upper surface of the windgauge,a true full regulation sight is obtained. After laying and before firing the telescope is carefully removed.

The following is the test procedure in firing tests at 100ft range: trial shots are fired and, if necessary, the foresight blade is adjusted laterally (within limits) ori ut may be replaced by one higher or lower as required. Five rounds are then fired and four shots of the five must come within a rectangle 1 inch broad by 1.5 inches high. Failing this the rile is not accepted. At 600yds nine out of a group of 10 shots must lie within a two foot circle.

After passing a satisfactory test the blade of the fore-sight is fixed by the top edge of the front of the stool of the block band fore sight, being punched into a recess cut in the fore sight. Rifles are once more given a general inspection and are then packed and passed into store."Outline of Manufacture and Inspection of the Service Rifle (Text Book of Small Arms 1909)

Although this was pre war practice and production demands may have squeezed this slighlty in numbers (I do not have a source for this but it would stand to reason) I believe this basic practice continued as the model

Chris

[TonyE]

The device described in Chris's post is the famous "Enfield Rest", which simulated the hold that the soldier would normally use.

More details at:

http://www.rifleman.org.uk/Aim_teaching_devices.htm#Enfield_Rest

Regards

TonyE

[Thunderbox]

Normal military practice would be for the soldiers to zero weapons at a range, before moving up to the line. There were hundreds of improvised shooting ranges in the rest areas to the rear of the lines.

There was a large turnover of rifles during WW1 - damaged and salvaged rifles being returned to depots for refurbishment, before being sent for issue. Fag packet calculations indicate that a "pre-war" rifle from a regular unit may have gone around the replacement system up to five times.

Although its hard to find actual evidence of how rifles were issued, I have seen several accounts whereby new and recovered soldiers received their new/refurbished rifles at Etaples. This would make sense - marrying up replacement soldiers from UK with equipment from French depots at the large replacement camps. The routine in these camps would have included range practice as well as the (notorious) battle drill practice that went on.

[TonyE]

Only relatively minor refurbishment took place in France/Flanders. It was decided quite early on that all major repair should take place at RSAF Enfield, as they had the greatest availability of spares and were already set up to perform conversion and re-sighting.

It is difficult to estimate exactly how many rifles were repaired as the records of RSAF do not differentiate between re-sighted and repaired rifles, but the total for both categories by the end of 1916 was 743,370 rifles. Since there were only 400,000 long rifles available for conversion it can be estimated that approximately 350,000 rifles were recovered, repaired and returned to service.

Regards

TonyE

[17107BM]

Thanks for your very informative replies. Given the sheer number of rifles issued it's a wonder that pre sighting took place at all.

TonyE. Thanks for the link, this site will keep me occupied for some time to come.

Cheers all.

[4thGordons]

Related question for TonyE if I may.....

Tony - was any particular attention paid to the ammunition used in these tests or was it simply normal service (Mk VI or MkVII) ball redirected to the factory? It would appear possible that wartime production tolerances in ammunition might have been sufficient to cause enough variation to "fail" these tests? was there a particular supplier or particular pre-inspection of the test ammunition or was it just "normal ammunition"

Chris

[Thunderbox]

Rifle recycling is an under-researched topic, and its hard to find contemporary accounts which detail the process.

Whilst RSAF may have recorded c.350k refurbished No1 rifles, the actual total numbers of salvaged rifles - "churn" - must have been enormous. There were c. 3.2 million British & Empire casualties during WW1 and presumably a large fraction of that number were infantry soldiers in possession of a rifle at the time they were hit.

I would assume that the rifles sent back to RSAF Enfield were probably in the worst damage category - e.g. rifle largely destroyed except for the receiver. Given the simplicity of No1 rifle construction, I would have thought that re-barrelling, woodwork replacement and general repairs would all have been easily carried out in theatre depots & workshops, and would not have required the logistic expense of shipping back to UK.

One of the Etaples accounts (in a popular WW1 anthology) notes that the narrator was issued a brand-new rifle, but his first job "up at the line" involved carrying large coils of barbed wire - which lacerated the woodwork of his new rifle....

This photo always brings a lump to my throat:

[TonyE]

Chris - I would presume that normal run of production ammunition would have been used, but of course they would have know which were the better manufacturers and so perhaps avoided unnecessary errors. Ammunition made by Kings Norton was recognised as the most accurate and consistent so may have been the preferred source of supply.

There was special ammunition called "Ballistic Standards" that as the name implies were made to a specific standard, but these were for proof of production lots rather than rifle testing.

Seth - That figure is only to the end of 1917 of course and would have been far higher by the end of the war. I researched this in some detail for my M.A. and there is a file in the N.A. (will try to look it up) that states that it was decided to return asll but minor repairs to Enfield, rather than ship parts to France. It does not define though what a "minor" repair was - a new butt? The great majority of rifles recovered would have probably simply been dirty and need a clean and check. For example, after the attack on Vimy Ridge the Canadian salvage companies recovered 11,000 rifles - most of which seem to be in your picture!

Regards

TonyE