Jump to content
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

SCOUT REGIMENT and SIGNALLING TELESCOPES


philsr
 Share

Recommended Posts

Thanks MikB, I went for it and removed the cloth from the pancratic tube. It was not backed with card - the stiff backing was dried adhesive. I could see minute specs of brass on the cloth so I brushed them away with an old toothbrush then stuck it back in with double sided.

"The operation was a great success but the patient died". Even that tiny increase in thickness from the double sided made it very tight - to tight unfortunately. I was lucky I could remove the cloth and clean away the adhesive residue quite easily. I tried again with the cloth in loose and it was much tighter than originally - I then realised that the brushing I gave it had raised the 'nap' on the velvety surface making the cloth a tiny bit thicker. Of couse this new tightness might not last long. If I have to address this again I will try 'packing ' the cloth - perhaps with just a couple of small strips of double sided - until I get the tighness right.

I think this 'raising of the nap' could be the intended way to tighten up the draw of the pancratic tube on this telescope. What I took to be a badly oiled cloth on close inspection turned out to be a different type of cloth to the other draws (perhaps these had been renewed) - much tighter woven and with more nap.

You were asking if anyone knows the source of the cloth. The cloth in the pancratic looks just like cotton 'moleskin' to me. This is the kind of very hardwearing stuff that traditionally country folk have made their trousers from! It can be very tightly woven and comes in different weights. It has a very fine tight nap similar to suede or indeed 'moleskin'.

My project is finished now but for a bit of stitching on the case and some cleaning. I am wondering whether to try and clean the glass faces on the inside of the 'scope. Even though I can see specks on the surface I am particularly worried about tackling the optics in the pancratic tube. These are fixed in the middle of the tube and very inaccessible.

Ref' you observation about the weights of the Tel. Sig. telescopes, it seems that my version of this type is markedly lighter. My scales are not that great but without the case it is 1.2 kg. approx. This is the same as the BC scout regiment model apparently. It would seem that this model is in has the BC Scout Reg. lightweight engineering but inorporated into their older WW1 design.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...I am particularly worried about tackling the optics in the pancratic tube. These are fixed in the middle of the tube and very inaccessible.

:huh: ???? All the pancratic eyepieces I've seen are short brass cells with a lens screwed on at each end, the whole thing a smooth push fit in the magnification adjustment tube. They have a deep plano-convex lens at the field end, and are retained in the tube by the lip of the eye lens carrier butting against the end of the tube with the external thread for the eyecup. Usually there's a fingernail slot in the thread to aid dismantling. In fact, they're just like a fixed-power eyepiece, except you can vary the distance from the erector cell.

It sounds as if maybe someone in the past lost the inner (cell) tube and repaired the scope by somehow fixing the lenses independently into the pancratic tube. Have they been wrapped in tape or shim or something, or glued in place?

Regards,

MikB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ref the pancratic assembly, unfortunately I don't really understand what I am looking at and I am reluctant to 'prod about' or try to take anything apart. I have no experience ref' the optics side of things.

The eyepiece lens is a single lens in a carrier that screws into the end of the tube (under the eyepiece).

The other lens is situated about 1/3 the way down the draw form the eyepiece. It is held in a short carrier with an apature to the eye end, I can see a screw thread between the apature and lens. This carrier looks original because the blacking inside the tube looks pristine and seems to 'seal' this carrier in place. It does not look like a bodge job.

However your observation has explained one puzzle. The eyepiece lens carrier has the fingernail slot in the eyecup thread that you mention - even though on this 'scope it screws in! I spent a few minutes trying to lift it out until I had a trial untwist!

Thanks one again for the input,

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My mistake - I have just tried again with the fingernail slot and the lens assembly draws out exactly as you describe. It is a tight fit which is why I thought I had done the business by just unscrewing the eyepiece lens!

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dunno what to make of that - has the eye lens come unscrewed from the cell, and the cell then got pushed down the tube, taking the field lens with it?

Normally, I think the 'aperture' you speak of might be the ring-stop of black-painted brass that's usually soldered or press-fitted about 2/3 of the way up the cell between the two lenses.

If it was me, I'd be inclined to stuff some clean rag or kitchen towel in the bottom of the pancratic tube, remove the eyecup and lens, then try to push the field lens and whatever's attached to it up and out the tube with a wooden stick or something.

I'm having trouble visualising what's been done here, but in a properly-constructed telescope - and all Broadhurst Clarksons I've seen have been so - you should be able to dismantle straightforwardly for cleaning, down to each lens with its metal threaded carrier.

Regards,

MikB

Ah - just re-read your last post and it looks like maybe you've sorted it after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry about the needless confusion here MikB. As you probably now realise I had unscrewed the eyepiece and was looking down into the cell thinking I was looking down the pancratic draw! The eyepiece cell assembly should have been apparent to me. As they say "it's easy when you know how".

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Ref' my previous post on the telescope renovation project regarding the type of cloth used for telescope slide bush fabric.

I had mentioned cotton moleskin as possibly the 'right' kind of cloth. I managed to obtain a piece of this in what I think is the thinnest grade currently available. Unfortunately it proved to thick to use as a replacement in the pancratic draw. It was also to thin for the other draws on this particular BC 'scope! However, it did look to be identical to the old pancratic cloth in terms of general type and should be the kind of fabric to serve well for replacements providing the thickness is right (a word of warning for anyone trying it - it must be cut 'on the bias' or it will fray badly').

Now that the telescope project is near completion I have turned my attention to an unusual MK V signalling telescope stand that might be of interest to forum members. I would like to offer some info' and seek some opinions on this. As I am new to the forum can someone advise if it would be best to add a post to this strand dedicated to the Signalling Telescope, or start a new strand about the signalling telescope stands.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For ease of future retrieval, I'd suggest a new thread. But I can't see it creating big difficulties if you didn't.

Regards,

MikB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
I am trying to research production of the Signallers and Scout Regiment Telescopes.

Would members send in the engraving on the smallest draw of the scope such as -

Tel Sig also GS Mk IV

R and J Beck

1917

3483

/|\

In time I should be able to determine when different manufacturers changed from one Mk to another and what the serial number ranges were.

Thanks in advance.

In case you have not spotted this 'scope on ebay at the moment - this seems very interesting from what little I have picked up about the history of these fine instruments.

It is a Scout Reg with TWO eyepieces and a cruddy looking leather substitute cladding.

post-42384-1237497522.jpg

post-42384-1237497588.jpg

post-42384-1237497644.jpg

post-42384-1237497697.jpg

post-42384-1237497673.jpg

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/WWII-BROADHURST-SCOU...A1%7C240%3A1318

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In case you have not spotted this 'scope on ebay at the moment - this seems very interesting from what little I have picked up about the history of these fine instruments.

It is a Scout Reg with TWO eyepieces and a cruddy looking leather substitute cladding.

Steve

It's one of the later models with the thermoset coating - I have a similar KEC, but it still has all the blacking on the tubes.

The extra lens is the 30x 'High' option from a Tel. Sig. It's usable in a Scout Reg. if you hook out the standard eyepice cell with your fingernail, but you're then left having to stash the eyecup separately somewhere because you can only get the cell into the spare lens case.

Alternatively you could discard the Tel Sig eyecup and screw the High lens cell into the Scout Reg's eyecup - it has an extra internal thread cut to take it.

To my mind, this is all rather more trouble than the extra 8 -10x magnification is worth. The choice of an intermediate power between the two offered in the Tel Sig, coupled with the separate case that allows the bondage kit that the Tel Sig comes with to be dropped, seem to me to be excellent design decisions and made for a lighter and cleaner scope with a lot less fiddling about in use.

Regards,

MikB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's one of the later models with the thermoset coating - I have a similar KEC, but it still has all the blacking on the tubes.

The extra lens is the 30x 'High' option from a Tel. Sig. It's usable in a Scout Reg. if you hook out the standard eyepice cell with your fingernail, but you're then left having to stash the eyecup separately somewhere because you can only get the cell into the spare lens case.

Alternatively you could discard the Tel Sig eyecup and screw the High lens cell into the Scout Reg's eyecup - it has an extra internal thread cut to take it.

To my mind, this is all rather more trouble than the extra 8 -10x magnification is worth. The choice of an intermediate power between the two offered in the Tel Sig, coupled with the separate case that allows the bondage kit that the Tel Sig comes with to be dropped, seem to me to be excellent design decisions and made for a lighter and cleaner scope with a lot less fiddling about in use.

Regards,

MikB

Ref' Springs inside some Signalling Telescope eyepiece draw tubes.

Thanks for the interesting reply MikB - this gave me an idea ref' some earlier posts about the puzzle of the springs inside the eyepiece tubes of some Tel.Sig's.

On the face of it there looks to be no clear purpose to these springs as was observed on this strand (I read a suggestion on a sellers site that the purpose was easy 'ejection' of the eyepieces for changeover with gloved hands but this makes no sense).

My BC pancratic is not of this type but reading your comments above it seems that the cell screws into the eyecup on the two eyepiece types (it doesn't on mine).

This is my thought - what if the cell became accidentally unsrewed from the eyecup? Could it slip down inside the draw tube? If this scenario is possible then the spring would enable retrieval! I am sure I have seen situations in motor mechanics or plumbing where a spring is fitted into a tube just to stop a component getting trapped inside. This function might not be so apparent today because the springs by now will likely be very tired - when specified the makers were probably only thinking ten years ahead not ninety.

If the cells on these spring loaded 'scopes always have a 'lip' and fingernail slot for removal then my idea is obviously no good.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ref springs in Signalling Telescope eyepiece draw tubes

Just had another thought - If the cell 'binded' slightly in the tube then unscrewing the eyecup from the draw tube would potentially unscrew the eyecup from the cell at the same time and leave it vulnerable to slipping down the draw!

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ref' Springs inside some Signalling Telescope eyepiece draw tubes.

... puzzle of the springs inside the eyepiece tubes of some Tel.Sig's.

On the face of it there looks to be no clear purpose to these springs as was observed on this strand ...

If the cells on these spring loaded 'scopes always have a 'lip' and fingernail slot for removal then my idea is obviously no good.

Steve

No, actually it's the most sensible suggestion I've heard - not that I've ever actually examined a Tel.Sig. with a spring in it.

You're quite right to point out the shortcomings of eyepiece cells that screw into the eyecup. It isn't just a design quirk that the slide-fit flanged eyepiece cell retained by an eyecup screwing onto the final drawtube, much like your pancratic or the standard Scout Reg, eventually became by far the most common. For the reasons you suggest it's the most practical from the maintenance viewpoint, and it's also significantly cheaper as it needs one less mating pair of threads.

Some scopes from the 1850s, especially the pocket 6-draw types, have an eyepiece cell that screws into the final drawtube, with a narrow flange just larger than the tube, and then an eyecup that screws onto the the back end of the cell. This can have an extreme version of the disadvantage you describe; if someone's done up the whole assembly really tight a lot of years ago, either the eyecup unscrews from the cell and it's potentially damagingly difficult to get the cell out of the tube, or the whole assembly unscrews from the tube and you can't get the eyecup off without pliers or the like.

The whole history of the telescope is an object lesson on how long it takes humans to make something in a practical, maintainable and economic manner... :D

Regards,

MikB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Scout Regiment Telescope Instruction Manual

I came across this whilst surfing the net for telescope cleaning tips and I thought it might be of interest ref' this strand.

It is the instruction manual for the WW2 Scout Reg 'scope posted on a military surplus website.

I looked to reduce and post the actual pages but they become illegible so I include the web page info'. For anyone interested I would advise downloading the pages whilst they are available.

http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=900

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Guest HeikoZink

Hello,

a friend of mine is looking for equipment.

He has a

Tel. Sig. ( Mk IV ) also G.S.

R & J. Beck Ltd.

London

1915

No. 11007

This telescope needs a new field lenses and maybe a new eye lenses.

Does anyone have an idea where he can get these equipments?

Or does anyone have an idea or know someone, who is able to build such lenses?

Many thanks in advance.

Regards,

HZN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am trying to research production of the Signallers and Scout Regiment Telescopes.

Would members send in the engraving on the smallest draw of the scope such as -

Tel Sig also GS Mk IV

R and J Beck

1917

3483

/|\

In time I should be able to determine when different manufacturers changed from one Mk to another and what the serial number ranges were.

Thanks in advance.

Phil,

I found this boxed in a junk shop about five years ago and seeing the 'scope thread' this morning reminded me that it was still in my 'Things to do' pile ! I havn't a clue what it is.

The box has a stamped brass plate on the front marked; 2.12 Pr P. Was this the sort of thing that would still be in use during WW 1, if it is indeed Military or Navy?

post-45038-1240910211.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

My information from research into Military optics and their History is that OS stands for Optical Store ... not Ordnance Supply. I have a MKII Tel Sct Reg by BC Ltd & Co.

Best, Tiki.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My information from research into Military optics and their History is that OS stands for Optical Store ... not Ordnance Supply. I have a MKII Tel Sct Reg by BC Ltd & Co.

Best, Tiki.

I now think that's so too.

I was at one time told in a letter from the Army Museum that they thought the OS no. was an Ordnance Supply Contract No.

But hey, whadda they know...? :D

Regards,

MikB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hello All, love the forum and enjoying all the reading...

I have recently recieved a telescope from my grandmother, who got it from her father..Im not able to find much info regarding this specific one...

What do ya know about it?

It clearly looks similar to many of the signalling scopes on here, but... the only markings on the entire thing are " SIG M 1696"

I has a tripod with it, a shortend one, it says

Siemens Bros & Co Ltd

London

1908

The other side says

SIG TEL STAND

MARK IV

NO 982

To mix it up a bit more,some one, years ago wrote " property of Oregon National Guard Rifle team" on the leather with a pen

I'm wanting to clean the brass, leather and lenses... good idea or no? it has a nice patina to it and seams to function nicely...

any advice would be great

Thanks,

Zeke

post-55818-1275930303.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello All, love the forum and enjoying all the reading...

I have recently recieved a telescope from my grandmother, who got it from her father..Im not able to find much info regarding this specific one...

What do ya know about it?

I'm wanting to clean the brass, leather and lenses... good idea or no? it has a nice patina to it and seams to function nicely...

any advice would be great

Thanks,

Zeke

Hullo Zeke,

It's very like a Signalling Telescope, and clearly once was in British military service - see the Broad Arrow to the right of the markings?

It would have had a strap passing through the sling loops on the caps and barrel leather, and usually an additional eyepiece in a small case - there were 2, 15x (Low) and 30x (High) though yours may predate that - I have some reasons to think the 30x was introduced after 1909. Your eyepiece has an early plain swivel shutter without the 'moderating glass' (just a sunfilter really) that the Mk.IV** and Mk.VI had.

I would guess it was made for and accepted by the Army sometime in 1915 or 16 by a manufacturer who wasn't normally a WD contractor, but accepted directly from them rather than purchased or donated from civilian supplies - if it had been it would've had an 'S' rating and a separate hand-engraved register number.

Those tripod stands are quite sought-after and subject of several animated discussions about whether they were made that short, or shortened in service.

I wouldn't polish the brass, but dismantle the thing and wash it in detergent, scrubbing if necessary with a nailbrush - but the finish looks fairly original.

Clean the lenses with optician's lens cleaning fluid and a soft lens cloth.

Feed the leather with some neutral cream or restorer. I doubt you'll get out the Oregon National Guard Rifle Team markings, nor should you want to.

Regards,

MikB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi, I have photographs of about 40 Scout Regiment Telescopes by B&C, HCR, HBM, and KEC as well as pictures of Tel Sig ranging from MkII, to MkIII, MkIV and MkVI from makers B&C, TT&H, Beck, Ottway and Dallmeyer.

If there's something particular you would like to see wrt markings, let me know. If I've got a pic of it I will post it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, I have photographs of about 40 Scout Regiment Telescopes by B&C, HCR, HBM, and KEC as well as pictures of Tel Sig ranging from MkII, to MkIII, MkIV and MkVI from makers B&C, TT&H, Beck, Ottway and Dallmeyer.

If there's something particular you would like to see wrt markings, let me know. If I've got a pic of it I will post it.

Ah, well have you a definitive identity for KEC? I had thought it was Kodak Eastman Co., but have wondered since if it could Keuffel & Esser Co. of New York, or E K Cole (EKCO - whose GPO manufacturer code was kec) - though the latter denied any manufacture of telescopes when I emailed them.

Regards,

MikB

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...