Enlarged magazine for the SMLE?

[onesearch]

I seem to recall a previous thread about 20 round SMLE magazines that had something relating to the leather pouches for them as well but it's a bit cloudy. I think it may have been in the same thread that someone found a bunch of un issued pouches for them at an auction, but there again  I may have come across  that somewhere else.

Obviously the 20 round magazine wasn't a standard  issue item but the fact that pouches exist for them with loops for webbing seems to indicate they could be worn & hence carried. So was the idea to fit them when needed ie swapping out the standard capacity magazine or how did they envisage them to be used? Discardable...seems unlikely?

As has been said 303 from clips can go in fairly easily & quickly so I'm not sure of the benefit of a high capacity SMLE mag but I suppose for a less proficient handler it could have merit. Saw a SBS demo of FN v No4 ....aimed shots No4 won.

Long mgy, higher heads up attitude would be an issue in some instances, same issue with  the introduction of the army's bullpup. Some were very against th bullpup concept & this was one thing cited against it.

[reese williams]

I don't know about a bunch of them being found. They do come up for sale occasionally, certainly more so than the magazines, but not in bulk that I've ever seen. I did buy mine separately from the magazine and it appears to have been unissued.

I I mentioned above, the magazine doesn't change your shooting position with the rifle so there is no "higher heads up attitude". 

[JMB1943]

I have just found the reading reference to my description of loading the 20-round magazine being hard on the thumbs,

"At the beginning of 1919 there was a request from the British troops in France for a more certain means of getting off twenty rounds of continuous fire with a rifle under the existing conditions of trench warfare. When men and equipment became plastered with mud it was often impossible to keep it off the chargers and, in loading, it was inevitably transferred into their magazines, and caused malfunctioning. Ways and means were sought to obviate this danger and eventually magazines were designed to hold fifteen and twenty rounds. A number of these were submitted to trials at the war-time School of Musketry at Bisley and, although the twenty-round magazine gave an increased rate of fire, this was more than outweighed by many disadvantages. Difficulties were experienced in charging up the last five rounds, and firers complained of tired muscles due to continuous action, and consequent loss of control of their weapons. The big magazine interfered with the grip of the left hand on the rifle and with efficient use of the bayonet. It was also considered too cumbersome and liable to damage. In view of the many serious disadvantages the large magazine was not recommended and, with the war ending, the requirement was given no further consideration."

The Lee Enfield Rifle, E.G.B. Reynolds, 1906, p. 121. (available on-line).

Regards,

JMB

[4thGordons]

I assume the date in the first line of the quote is a typo? Maybe 1917/18?

Chris

50 minutes ago, JMB1943 said:

"At the beginning of 1919 there was a request from the British troops in France for a more certain means of getting off twenty rounds of continuous fire with a rifle under the existing conditions of trench warfare.

Edit: I just looked at my copy of Reynolds -- which does indeed say 1919 so a typo in the original

Also the copyright date on the book is 1960.

Edited 3 November , 2021 by 4thGordons

[JMB1943]

Yes and yes to two typos!

Regards,

JMB

[Wigeon]

Follow-up to a previous post regarding spare rifle magazines. TNA WO 95-35-1 War Diary GHQ QMG, entry for 30th July 1917.

" Spare Magazines for Rifles. Reference previous entry of the 17th May. To Fifth Army stating that the 50 000 spare magazines asked for by them are now available and distribution desired should be communicated to the D.O.S. The adhesive tape asked for to assist in keeping the cartridges in the magazine is being arranged for and will be sent up as soon as it becomes available."

[SLON]

On 28/10/2021 at 10:10, Felix C said:

Frank Percy Crozier in his Angels on Horseback is the TMI 2nd Boer War source.

I tried to find a more accurate quote, but the version of Google Books is greatly cut-down, and I won't know where to find an original book (despite the fact that I managed to find a lot of rare literature).

Interestingly, the case for a spare magazine is present on some engravings, dated at least 1892, although it would seem that it should have been out of use for a long time.

[SLON]

On 10/31/2021 at 6:20 PM, onesearch said:

Obviously the 20 round magazine wasn't a standard  issue item but the fact that pouches exist for them with loops for webbing seems to indicate they could be worn & hence carried. So was the idea to fit them when needed ie swapping out the standard capacity magazine or how did they envisage them to be used? Discardable...seems unlikely?

Obvious for this. The idea seems to be to wear it separately and only use it when needed. Otherwise, there would be no point in giving own pouch, if it had to replace the main magazine. I'm really not sure if it would carried loaded, as it would be pretty heavy.

There is actually valuable evidence about the Boer War - very few people write about such "small" things. In fact, I'm not surprised either, especially considering that MLM/MLE was still essentially a new rifle (and even not all units were armed with it at that time), and its system was originally designed for this (even if it does not work so good - the problem with Lee's magazine is that it is quite fragile, and their lips - so to speak - are pretty "complex" for a quick replacement). According to recollections from various wars, some units also carried more magazines than according to the regulations, so this apparently was always possible if desired. Especially if this is the only way to fast reload. The war with the Boers was apparently quite a wake-up call, as your enemy puts in five rounds while you only one; so I no wonder they did it. As well as why the charging bridge was one of the main innovations after the war.

[SLON]

An additional Slade-Wallace pouch for the reserve magazine, and in an even rarer black version:

https://collection.nam.ac.uk/detail.php?acc=1978-02-37--171

It looks like this whole story with additional magazines is quite mysterious.

[SLON]

Also interesting quote from "The Navy and Army Illustrated", 1898: https://imgur.com/a/ZHkgKOn

Apparently, spare magazines really took place before the chargers, although this, obviously, was not widespread.

[Felix C]

I recall the expression "Charge magazine". So always believed the stripper clip and ammunition was the charger. The Lee Metford not being charger fed means it would have to go the spare magazines route.   

Edited 28 December , 2021 by Felix C

[Sarchet]

19 hours ago, Felix C said:

I recall the expression "Charge magazine". So always believed the stripper clip and ammunition was the charger. The Lee Metford not being charger fed means it would have to go the spare magazines route.   

Charge is defined as "to load or fill to the full or proper extent". The command "Charge Magazine" would have predated chargers (never clips in British/Commonwealth parlance), and the Lee-Metford and Lee-Enfield rifles were loaded (charged) with single rounds in most cases, hence why the official equipment didn't provide for more than one spare magazine but did provide ammunition pouches to carry single rounds and packets.

[Sarchet]

Other expanded capacity SMLE magazines that might be of interest are:

The Schofield 20-round rotary magazine, invented by a Lance-Corporal in the NZEF and apparently fitted alongside the standard magazine;

A 15-round trials version of the Linley box magazine;

A modified Bren magazine c.1941-42 used with the Charlton conversion;

25- and 30-round magazines of unknown design c.1941 made for the Rieder automatic conversion

 

All pulled from Skennerton's The Lee-Enfield.

[SLON]

What is even more strange, so this is what actually there are two different known types of Slade-Wallace pouches for additional magazines. The first is a small case in the form of a non-uniform rectangle, just on the size of the magazine. This is the one that can be seen on a number of images/photographs from the 1890s.
The second type is much more interesting. It represents a larger-size bag (also worn on the left brace), which seems to be able to accommodate as many as two magazines (?).
It is interesting that there is no additional particular information about them, and it does not appear in any pictures.
Nevertheless, they seemed to have been made enough, to be available for sale now. In fact, they are even more common now, than really issued cases.
Was it some unrealized later decision, before moving to the charger, and the Bandoller 1903 equipment?

[SLON]

There is also the following quote from the 1895 "Canadian Magazine":

https://imgur.com/a/5mILq6f

It may well be assumed that this was part of the pre-charger doctrine, although apparently the use of additional magazines was rather limited to some units, and the introduction of clip-loading was in any case a solid help, since, as you know, there are no too many magazines.

Curiously, looking through all this material, I also came across some discussions (from around 1893-98) in which the lack of clips was described as not needing to worry, since they supposedly would have weighed down the carried ammunition, and magazine feed (as you know) then still considered as an emergency measure.

[SLON]

Also another one (of the relatively some) photographs from the period, showing pouches for a reserve magazine:

https://collection.nam.ac.uk/detail.php?acc=1978-02-37--139

Also, one of the documents from 1888, that I came across while searching, mentioned that the number of spare magazines could be increased to 4 if necessary. Obviously, this was never done, but it would be quite interesting to see Slade-Wallace with 4 of these pouches.

Also, interestingly, there is no evidence at all of spare magazines for carbines, or any kit to carry them. Obviously, for them, a large ammunition was not considered an advantage (after all, only the first cavalry carbines had a full-sized magazine, before it was cut-down to 6 rounds).

 

[SLON]

On 28/12/2021 at 04:14, SLON said:

An additional Slade-Wallace pouch for the reserve magazine, and in an even rarer black version

In addition to the above - note the extra swivel on the buttstock, so this is really not an early Mk I/Mk I*.

Also in 1890-91 the additional magazines were indeed taken out of service, as also stated in the 1891 discussion; but, what is most interesting, by 1892 they were clearly reintroduced (appearance in photographs, images, etc.). Interesting twist, isn't it?

Well, pouches of a later pattern (in particular, with an additional strap, obviously to prevent accidental unfastening) are a separate issue, about which, however, there is even less information.

In any case, there is very little information about this, but I tried to figure it out from what is. So yes, it was indeed broader than commonly thought, but still more of an exception than something universally accepted. However, given that the additional magazine was originally a purely optional thing, it is not surprising.

Speaking already about the fact that additional magazines could be carried simply as a reserve in case the main one breaks down, just like about issuing them already to the SMLE - well... one can only guess here. Nothing specific. (but Long Lee's extra magazines were indeed intended for emergency reloading - one of the 1890 documents directly states this).

Also an interesting detail - not only SMLE (with the exception of the very, very first ones) do not have a mounting chain lug on the magazine, but also CCLE. The latter is interesting, because these efforts seem to be redundant (why remove what is already working?). And this is not only a replacement of magazines - there is evidence that they were also cut-off from the old ones.

Pouches for 20-round magazines are also an interesting thing - it was probably meant that each soldier could be given a pair (mags) to change them (otherwise what is their point at all then?), But, obviously, in practice everything was like always, not so.

[SLON]

Again, a quote from the Journal of the Royal United Service Institution, Vol. 47, 1903:

https://i.imgur.com/WDTuiMQ.png

Searching for original sources is tedious, but the results are interesting. Nothing new, but this again reinforces my theory that before 1903 (when SMLE No.1 Mk.1 with charger system was introduced) this was actually a possible part of official tactics.

[SLON]

On 31/10/2021 at 05:12, Sarchet said:

A note on the spare magazines originally issued with the Magazine Lee-Metford: because they were withdrawn so quickly, the pouch for the spare magazine is one of the rarest issues pieces of the Slade-Wallace equipment.

I think they just weren't enough in general. Even less than the magazines themselves. In fact, they were not even in the very beginning a mass thing, and apparently spare magazines, if available, were worn in breast pockets or elsewhere. In addition, British soldiers towards the end of the Anglo-Boer wore a hodgepodge of equipment (including a photo where some of them carry at the same time, Slade Wallace with one ammo pouch, Oliver's Canadian (!) pouch (essentially just a bag where you can put everything whatever), and a ammo bandolier over his shoulder).

[SLON]

So, supply invoices from Enfield for 1900/1901 mention the supply of about 14 thousand spare magazines, plus another one and a half thousand Mk.I magazines (early eight-round magazines, single-row feed). As always there's no mention of what this will be used for (since it's just bills), but there are a couple of things to note. Firstly, this is a very large delivery - earlier and later reports mention the spare magazines, but the figures there in relation to the number of rifles are simply insignificant (I also did not find reports earlier than 1892, but for the period 1892/93 an unexpectedly large number is indicated - disassembled into separate parts - Mk.I magazines, which may be the answer to where it all went after the abandonment of the spare magazine as a standard part). Secondly, according to, for example, the 1902 standards, spare parts for magazines were supplied in the form of separate components, at the rate of 5 cases, 5 platforms, and 25 springs for every 1000 rifles (apparently, these are not mandatory, but simply the minimum required figures), which is also in general corresponds to the invoiced delivery quantities of these individual parts. The assembled magazines go beyond this scope, therefore they were intended for something else.

The lack of spare magazines was mentioned, for example, at a discussion in Oxford in 1900 (published in print in May, but it itself probably happened a little earlier).

So, well, apparently some additional magazines were ordered and delivered at a later stage. Not that this would have played a big role - at that moment there were already tens, hundreds of thousands of rifles in stock that arrived without additional magazines.