Whose rifle ?

[deano]

If a group of soldiers were to heap their rifles together say in a cafe/railway carriage/camp etc, how did they know whose rifle was whose, did they mark them in any way ?

Dean.

[Stoppage Drill]

They're all serially numbered. It's a basic soldierly instinct to look after your rifle. You know where it is. You don't "heap them together."

[303man]

The Brass Butt Disc usually had unit, coy, and rack no on it (or as we call it today the Butt Number). See other threads for pictures of Butt Marking Discs there is a small pamphlet by Peter Laidler that identify s most of the unit markings.

[TonyE]

True at the beginning of the war, but by 1916 butt discs had been removed. As Stoppage says, soldiers get to know their own rifle and serial number.

Peter L's pamphlet, which is really just a repint of what is in the various editions of "instructions for Armourers", only gives examples of the more common ones. Skennerton's "Broad Arrow" is better but even that is far from complete because many of the abbreviations were never listed. I don't think there is a comprehensive list anywhere.

Regards

TonyE

[Stoppage Drill]

Peter L's pamphlet, which is really just a repint . . .

Regards

TonyE

I'll have whatever he's drinking . . . .

In later years it did become common for a short rack number to be painted on personal weapons, but this really only became necessary when routine storage in armouries became the norm. In the days when soldiers kept their rifles in racks in barrack rooms (up to the end of National Service more or less) such numbering wasn't necessary.

[shippingsteel]

True at the beginning of the war, but by 1916 butt discs had been removed ...

Here are a couple of examples of butt discs that appear to have been dated later in the war. Note the Battalion and Regiment stamps and rack numbers.

Cheers, S>S

[Thunderbox]

Human recognition powers are quite acute - so you tend to recognise your rifle anyway, even if it is a modern plastic rifle, and even if it has no rack number or overt distinguishing mark. Enfields would have had a sling attached, possibly a breech cover, the wood might have been a particular colour or mismatch, and various dings or shiny bits would all have been sufficient visual clues.

O.k., there are certain soldiers who couldn't recognise their own mother, but most tend to be fairly perceptive about their kit.

[Stoppage Drill]

O.k., there are certain soldiers who couldn't recognise their own mother, but most tend to be fairly perceptive about their kit.

"I'm yer mother now, son"

[SiegeGunner]

Human recognition powers are quite acute - so you tend to recognise your rifle anyway, even if it is a modern plastic rifle, and even if it has no rack number or overt distinguishing mark. Enfields would have had a sling attached, possibly a breech cover, the wood might have been a particular colour or mismatch, and various dings or shiny bits would all have been sufficient visual clues.

Suppose it was dark ...

[dman]

I remember taking ROTC when in College - some of the upper classmen who had attended ranger school (2 months

marrching around in the swamps....!) told how never put rifles down because instructors would steal them . Then we say

"Cadel X where is your rifle....?"

Then would bitch you out and devise some unpleasant task (usually meant carrying the squads M60 machine gun

in addition to your equipment - M60 was famously know as the "pig" for its weight....."

[smleenfield]

From ROTC in High School with our M1 Garands up through active duty with M14's and M16's, when we stacked arms I always knew which was mine. Often the stack could be up to 12 rifles but I still knew my rifle out of the batch. Never thought much about it until now.

[MikB]

Suppose it was dark ...

Oh dear - you do make it awf'lly difficult.

Of course, someone could use a torch or strike up a lucifer if the enemy weren't in view.

I've never heard of any requirement to identify rifles with luminous paint, and there would of course be certain drawbacks...

Regards,

MikB