David Filsell Posted 18 April , 2017 Share Posted 18 April , 2017 New one on ignorant me, rifle grenadiers specially equipped with "wire reinforced Lee Enfield. True or false? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 18 April , 2017 Share Posted 18 April , 2017 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 More sharing options...
Old Tom Posted 18 April , 2017 Share Posted 18 April , 2017 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 More sharing options...
T8HANTS Posted 18 April , 2017 Share Posted 18 April , 2017 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 More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 18 April , 2017 Share Posted 18 April , 2017 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 More sharing options...
David Filsell Posted 18 April , 2017 Author Share Posted 18 April , 2017 (edited) 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 19 April , 2017 by David Filsell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
14276265 Posted 18 April , 2017 Share Posted 18 April , 2017 (edited) 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 19 April , 2017 by 14276265 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Filsell Posted 18 April , 2017 Author Share Posted 18 April , 2017 Thanks. Not sure quite where this takes me!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ServiceRumDiluted Posted 18 April , 2017 Share Posted 18 April , 2017 (edited) 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 18 April , 2017 by ServiceRumDiluted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 19 April , 2017 Share Posted 19 April , 2017 Thanks for that confirmation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IRC Kevin Posted 19 April , 2017 Share Posted 19 April , 2017 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 More sharing options...
ServiceRumDiluted Posted 19 April , 2017 Share Posted 19 April , 2017 Thats not improbable, especially if a rifle grenadier had experienced an 'interesting' event! The mystery deepens... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 19 April , 2017 Share Posted 19 April , 2017 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 More sharing options...
David Filsell Posted 19 April , 2017 Author Share Posted 19 April , 2017 Can someone explain to this pilgrim,"lost their zero," please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoppage Drill Posted 19 April , 2017 Share Posted 19 April , 2017 Not hitting the target at point of aim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
303man Posted 19 April , 2017 Share Posted 19 April , 2017 (edited) 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 19 April , 2017 by 303man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 19 April , 2017 Share Posted 19 April , 2017 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 More sharing options...
14276265 Posted 19 April , 2017 Share Posted 19 April , 2017 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 19 April , 2017 Share Posted 19 April , 2017 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 More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 20 April , 2017 Share Posted 20 April , 2017 (edited) 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 20 April , 2017 by Gunner Bailey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 20 April , 2017 Share Posted 20 April , 2017 An earlier thread on the EY. Lots of heat in it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Filsell Posted 20 April , 2017 Author Share Posted 20 April , 2017 (edited) 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 22 April , 2017 by David Filsell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
303man Posted 20 April , 2017 Share Posted 20 April , 2017 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 More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 20 April , 2017 Share Posted 20 April , 2017 This old thread has a mention: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave1418 Posted 21 April , 2017 Share Posted 21 April , 2017 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 More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now