Anorak question: makers marks

Discussion in 'Shooting, Hunting and Fishing' started by stoatman, Oct 24, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I have a 1947 dated number 5 rear sight, with maker's mark P

    Any idea who the maker is?

    Interestingly, I discovered a major difference between the number 5 and number 4 rear sights (aside from the range markings): the battle sight is set significantly lower on the number 5, and tests on the range indicate that its range setting is best described as "bayonet range" as opposed to the 300-odd yards of the number 4.
  2. P is Poole, who also made No5 bayonets.

    The battlesights are indeed set to different heights, the No5 set to about 300 yds and the No4 to about 500 yds (both these ranges assume that the rifle is properly zeroed).

    The main sight graduations are also slightly different to allow for the shorter sight base of the No5. Interestingly its come to light that, during trials of the then new L42 rifle, it was discovered that the graduations on the .303 No5 sight were quite close to the true ballistics of 7.62mm from the L42. Unfortunately, No5s had been declared obsolete and the sights were no longer "in the system". Too penny pinching to go to the Trade and buy back 1,000 No5 rearsights, the MoD chose to use the No4 sight and instruct snipers to discover and memorise the difference between all the .303 range settings and the true 7.62mm POI....

    (These sights are mounted on a common axis pin, so you can see the differences in elevations)

  3. Just using the mark one eyeball here, but wouldn't the carbine battle sight actually be set to 200 or less, and the rifle 450 (which would interestingly be the same as the pattern 14)?

    My experiments with my sight actually indicated that the battle sight was set a fair whack under 200, based on fall of shot.

    Nice picture though!
  4. Actually I couldn't find an axis pin of the correct diameter, so the sights are not quite aligned as they should be. The "300" figure is quoted officially somewhere, so my photo is a bit of a fudge.

    The fall of shot depends how you zeroed the rifle - the No1, 4 and 5 sights were all calibrated to be zeroed at 200/300 with the bayonet fitted, with subsequent elevations being true if the rifle is shot without the bayonet - the assumption being that the bayonet would be fitted at 300 and under. Trials showed that fitting the bayonet depressed the POI by about 4 minutes (there was a wide variance), so the sights would have been calibrated to raise the POI by 4 minutes or so. If the No5 is zeroed with bayonet fitted, the battlesight then should equate to 300. Since the No5 zeroing trials showed a wide variance, its likely that individual rifles - such as yours - will buck the trend.

    The No4 battlesight was supposed to be set at 400, but usually seems to be around 450-500 on a correctly zeroed rifle.