Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Wire reinforced SMLEs


David Filsell

Recommended Posts

True. Designed to support repeated firing of the Mills 36 grenade with gas check in the Burn Cup discharger. Certainly in WW2. Unsure about WW1. Have not yet seen evidence of WW1 use of wire binding. Would be pleased to be proved wrong. Have also seen the P17 with wire binding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have heard of, but have not understood this practise. As far as I know the SMLE barrel was not a tight fit in the woodwork  and hence wire binding on the wood work, while perhaps being a safety measure if the barrel burst, would not directly support the barrel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding it was to reduce the possible splintering of the wood should a barrel rupture.

The barrel should, I would guess, split rather than shatter, so that would produce a gas spurt against the wood work which might then splinter.

The copper wire binding would at the same time contain the timber, but would also expand sufficiently to allow the gas to vent more or less safely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, T8HANTS said:

My understanding it was to reduce the possible splintering of the wood should a barrel rupture.

The barrel should, I would guess, split rather than shatter, so that would produce a gas spurt against the wood work which might then splinter.

The copper wire binding would at the same time contain the timber, but would also expand sufficiently to allow the gas to vent more or less safely.

 

I think that probably sums it up well. A few years ago I was visiting my gunsmith and he had just acquired a wire bound SMLE. It was ex Home Guard and had been discovered when a house was being cleared. The wire was very thick, maybe about 1/8 of an inch. Pretty heavy duty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's in a new book, Vimy The Battle and the Legend "Rifle grenadiers had specially equipped, with reinforced Lee Enfields. Bombs fitted with rods slid into the bore of the frilled, and when fired, the grenade and rod were launched up to 100 metres". 

Edited by David Filsell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The No.36 rifle grenade, launched from the Smith-Burn discharger cup, did not even exist until September 1917, so a little late for the April battle of Vimy Ridge. As Gunner Bailey has said the wire bound rifle is certainly known from WWII, but questionable from WWI.

 

 

 

265

Edited by 14276265
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very informative clip on this subject https://youtu.be/CT1DyyCxf9Q

 

Generally an excellent channel on some obscure and lesser known weapons. Wire wrapping not introduced until 1942 apparently, so the Vimy Ridge story above looks mistaken. 

Edited by ServiceRumDiluted
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, ServiceRumDiluted said:

Very informative clip on this subject https://youtu.be/CT1DyyCxf9Q

 

Generally an excellent channel on some obscure and lesser known weapons. Wire wrapping not introduced until 1942 apparently, so the Vimy Ridge story above looks mistaken. 

 

I wonder if some divisions introduced wire reinforcement as a 'local' modification? I'm pretty sure I've come across a reference to this in 55 Division's documents for 1917, along with a complaint that the modified rifles soon lost their 'zero' despite the modification. (I seem to remember it in one of the Third Ypres after-action reports from a grenadier section, but may have been in a memo in divisional or brigade documents, so will need to make a lengthy search to dig it out.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats not improbable, especially if a rifle grenadier had experienced an 'interesting' event!

The mystery deepens...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to EGB Reynolds' book (The Lee Enfield Rifle) wire-wrapping was authorized on Dec. 9, 1918 but only on rifles to be used at Army Schools of Instruction.

That is so close to the Armistice that one wonders if wood splinters had been noted in the field, and unit armourers had responded by wire-wrapping on their own initiative; positive results were then posted up the chain and the modification became official.

 

Regards,

JMB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, David Filsell said:

 Can someone explain to this pilgrim,"lost their zero," please.

 

Bullets do not go where the sights were pointing in simplest of terms.  A Rifle is Zeroed when the MPI (Mean Point of Impact) of the Group is superimposed on the CZP (Correct Zeroing Position)  At 100yds with the sights on 300 it is about 4 inches high of where you aim.

 

A Group is a series of shots not less than three fired from the same rifle in the same wind weather and light conditions,  These shots will seldom if ever go through the same hole but they will form a distinct pattern this is known as the Group.  

 

And Yes I was a Skill at arms instructor!

Edited by 303man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Almost all of the GF/EY rifles I have seen got their wrapping well post WWI, some post WWII, although many of them were WWI vintage rifles. Some of the earliest wrapped rifles I have seen were cord (like a thickish twine) wrapped rather than wire wrapped. At a later date India wrapped quite a number of rifles and also reinforced some with sheet steel. There have been several previous threads on this topic over the years.

 

I have looked but never seen any photographic evidence of wrapped rifles in use during the Great War - but never say never. It is one of those things (like trimmed fingers on handguards) which appears to "make sense" and certainly became commonplace later on but I have never seen conclusive proof of it as a GW practice.

 

Some of the cord wrapped examples were rifles that significantly predated WWI. There also seem to have been a number of wrapped ShtLE MkI*** to have come out of Ireland (quite a large number of MkI*** rifles were supplied to Ireland in the 20s/30s. These have new CR/GR serial numbers.

If anyone is interested I can post pictures of several wire/metal wrapped rifles.

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After all, the use of the No.36 grenade and Smith-Burn discharger seems to be a red herring. The attached two pages from a Court of Inquiry are dated March 1917, and concern a SMLE barrel bursting when firing the No.23 MkII rifle grenade with 6-inch rod. Other reports concern similar events, so if it was a not uncommon occurrence, it would make sense that local field modifications to rifles used for No.23 grenade launching included binding of the fore stock.

 

The report describes the rifle having a worn barrel, having fired a "considerable amount of SAA". On the cover of the report the rifle is described as SMLE EY, and being well before the introduction of the No.36 grenade, this tends to put to rest the dubious claim that EY were the initials of the "inventor" of the bound rifle. EY here would simply seem to denote a well worn rifle, that was drawn from Ordnance in August 1916 for firing grenades.

 

 

265

CoIn_1.jpg

CoIn_2.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this, I had not seen it before

The EY saga (also discussed previously) continues!  :)

Chris

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Outstanding find!

Would they have been Gibbons Grenades? The thought of a live grenade dropping 3 yards in front of the rifle must have been uncomfortable - unless fired from a trench of course.

 

It's worth noting that the split was at the fore end not near the receiver. Rifles I have seen have been bound at both fore end and receiver end. Perhaps barrels burst in different places depending on the grenades' rod or gas check use?

 

Edited by Gunner Bailey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

An earlier thread on the EY. Lots of heat in it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the responses, much appreciated. I must say that the question was not posed because I though it incorrect, but because I had never seen an SMLE so described. Clearly the 'never say never' rule applies here. So possible? Apparently, Likely? Maybe. Certain? No. And thanks for explaining zero.

Regards

David

Edited by David Filsell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a soldiers notebook from the Northern Command Grenade School Otley.  From mid 1918, there is no mention in the section on the Cup Discharger about rifles being wire bound.

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/20/2017 at 06:44, Gunner Bailey said:

It's worth noting that the split was at the fore end not near the receiver. Rifles I have seen have been bound at both fore end and receiver end. Perhaps barrels burst in different places depending on the grenades' rod or gas check use?

Hi

quite right, usually the maximum pressure when the rifle is fired is at the breach with a .303 producing around 49-50,000psi this tapers off as the round travells down the barrel. Any inpingment of the barrel even with a blank being used will create more pressure at the point of impingement where it meets the rod of the grenade. This is why the cup discharger is of a substantial construction at the base so as to take this pressure.

regards  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...