Non-standard, substitute standard, and captured weapons in British and Commonwealth service

Fascinating about the Pistols .455in, Spanish, Old Pattern. These were obsolescent when new, S&W copies by the Eibar consortium were only intended to be acquired as 'substitute standard' during the First World War and were being withdrawn from front line service in 1916. Needs must.

My Dad did his RAF basic drill and musketry in 1943 with P14 and Ross rifles. He liked the Rifle No.2 (P14) and hated the straight-pull Ross - "how could you put confidence in a bolt that doesn't close?".

Keith

The quality was indeed poor and large numbers were rejected on inspection at Enfield which was eventually resolved by sending Spanish craftsmen to the UK to rectify faults. However, we eventually had over 30,000 of them.

They did see front line use as well, as I have pictures of their use.

Regards
TonyE

 

Also, the Webleys were .455 not .45

Well, I must admit that's something I wondered at - it's a comment from David Orr's Duty Without Honour, the history of the UHG...but could .455 Webleys fire the old Webley Bulldog .45 Adams round that the "Webley RIC" did? The RUC inherited a lot of that from the RIC. It might also account for the "underpowered" .45 issue that Willis has also heard of in RUC service...

and which pistols do you describe as the 1932, '38 and '42 versions?

Again it's another quote from David Orr, but it could also refer to purchase batches by the RUC in those years rather than production versions.

 

Yes, the .455 Webleys and others could fire the old .450 cartridge, although not very efficiently.

Your explanation also explains the odd "model" numbers if they are actually acquisition dates. They certainly are not recognised Model numbers.

In 1920 the RIC applied to the Disposals Department for Webley .455 inch Self Loading pistols but were told none were available. They were offered a raft of different pistols including .38 S & W, H & R and others, including the Old Pattern pistols a number of which that they eventually took.

Regards
TonyE

 

Yes, the .455 Webleys and others could fire the old .450 cartridge, although not very efficiently.

That also confirms something I heard thirty years ago as a teenager LOL This was mentioned in passing at a lecture on handguns to a local wargaming society in Belfast by a replica collector and ex-RUC constable....a hobby that was NOT common in N.I. at the height of the Troubles! I always wondered if my memory had played me false or not...

 

I am not sure what you mean by the "weaker" Webleys. I would much rather have a Mark VI than an O.P. pistol!

Also, the Webleys were .455 not .45 and which pistols do you describe as the 1932, '38 and '42 versions?

TTH- I would also describe the Pattern '14 rifle as considerably better than "quite accurate". I have owned two (still shoot one) and both were very accurate without any "target" work done on them.

With regard to secondary weapons in WWI, the four volumes of my "British Secondary Small Arms 1914-1919" are still available and cover in detail all the weapons and ammunition discussed previously, e.g. Arisaka, Ross, Remington and Winchester .44 and .351 inch rifles, Colt, S & W and O.P. pistols etc.

They are:
Vol.1 The Arisaka in British Service
Vol.2 RFC and RNAS Small Arms
Vol.3 Land Service Small Arms
Vol.4 Royal Navy Small Arms.

I did not cover the Pattern'14 rifle as with 1.2 million delivered it was more "mainstream", but I have a book in (long term) preparation on it.

Regards
TonyE

Many thanks, Tony, I did not know there was a good book on the subject of non-standard WWI arms and if you give the title I will definitely look for yours. I have learned through various sources about Arisakas, the Savage M99, Winchester M94, M95, and M07 carbines and various non-standard pistols in Great War use. This could get very weird, apparently the RN had a lot of M1903 Browning pistols in 9mm Long, acquired along with Turkish contract warships seized in 1914. I also read somewhere on the net that the RFC used some Winchester M97 pump shotguns in WWI, though there was no indication of which sub-type (Riot, Trench, or Trap). According to the Hyperwar Lend-Lease link, the British got large numbers of shotguns from the US in WWII, but again there is no breakdown by maker or model.

 

The quality was indeed poor and large numbers were rejected on inspection at Enfield which was eventually resolved by sending Spanish craftsmen to the UK to rectify faults. However, we eventually had over 30,000 of them.

They did see front line use as well, as I have pictures of their use.

Regards
TonyE

As to the quality of the Eibar guns...I knew large numbers had been rejected. However, I looked them up on some gun hobby boards and some modern owners have shot them with good results. Whether that would make the O.P. a robust service weapon under trench conditions is a different matter. Some guns just aren't up to the battering of military use.

 

On the P-14, when I say "quite" accurate I am using literary understatement. (I've read too many British books.) I know it had an excellent reputation, it wouldn't have been the standard British sniper rifle for so long if it hadn't.

 

Tony mentions the .455 W&S revolver - Young cadet and I got to fire one belonging to an ACF officer, The name cut into the barrel was so unusual it has stuck with me all these years Lieutenant Im Thurn Hampshire Regiment (WW1)The officer who owned it (1964) was a collector so I imagine it is still out there in a collection. We got to fire many weapons belonging to Lt Frank Spencer ACF - coaching pistol. 1911 Colt, a replica Brown Bess, the black powder Navy Colt. Springfield and a collection of black powder pistols. Not allowed now!



Some of the tales older RUC officers told of the .38 and .45 yarns about hitting someone wearing an overcoat and giving them a huge bruise and nothing else. Not so sure myself! Sgt H, R (RUC)- allowed me to fire his Rugger .44 down the pipe range at Glassmullin blimey that was a beast.
Im Thurn...hmmm. I wonder if that was Donald Im Thurn, the ex-MI man who passed the Zinoviev letter to the Conservative Party in 1924.

 

Skennerton's British Small Arms of WWII has a lot of information on odd small arms. The thousands of American handguns are a subject unto themselves, so I'll leave them aside for now. I also noted the following, with quantities and WO acquisition or contract dates where known:

M1888 Mannlicher rifles 475 9/41
Schmeisser and Solothurn 'automatic rifles' 500 5/42
7.92mm Bren Guns ('Far East') 189 2/41
Hotchkiss 13.2mm MG 35 1935/36
Suomi 9mm SMG 500
Vickers 7.92mm MG 750+326 12/39

I also found small batches of 7.63mm Mauser and Astra C96 type pistols and machine pistols, Mausers purchased through Liege in 1940 and both Mausers and Astras purchased through Shanghai before Pearl Harbor. Again, the exact models aren't specified.

These items raise lots of questions. The M1888's might be ex-Italian, ex-Austro-Hungarian weapons captured in North Africa. The Schmeisser and Solothurn 'automatic rifles' might be several things: Solothurn anti-tank rifles (ex-Iti again?), Schmeisser-Haenel MP28, Steyr-Solothurn S100? Who knows? The Hotchkiss HMG might be a trial batch. I presume the 7.92mm Vickers were foreign contract guns seized by the government. I don't think the 7.92mm Bren were actually 'Bren,' because I don't think Inglis started making them until later than 2/41. They might be an ROF trial batch, or ZB 26's that got into the pipeline in the "Far East." (I don't recall anything on this in The Bren Gun Saga.) Ordnance tested the Suomi before the war and were keen on it, but they couldn't work out a contract so the Thompson was bought instead. I have no idea when or how they got a batch as big as 500. So, if anybody knows anything on these, chime in.

 

I wonder if the M1888 Mannlicher rifles were ex UDF?

I don't think the Suomi SMGs were ever delivered, neither were the Schmeisser "automatic rifles" which were probably SMGs. We certainly took delivery of several Solothurn 20mm A/T rifles pre-war for trials as we did an Oerlikon 20mm on tracked mounts.

The 13.2mm Hotchkiss MGs were an Air Ministry order as we came quite close to adopting the 13.2mm as aircraft armament just before the war. I have details of the trial firing of 13.2mm AP and incendiary against Blenheim targets on the ground at Orford Ness in about 1937/8.

It is sometimes quite difficult when going through the contract books (as Ian did) to ascertain what was actually delivered. I have just been doing that for ammunition orders for a talk I am giving at the IAA meeting in St.Louis next month and it does not help to find entries like "Ordered Abroad" or "Cancelled?".

Another complication is that in most of the early records the Lanchester is referred to as the "Schmeisser gun", for example the order for 9mm ball and proof ammunition from Winchester in 1940 which is for "Schmeisser guns for Admiralty".

There is a book in preparation on WW2 non standard and substitute arms but it is still some way from completion as new information constantly turns up.

If anyone would like to order any of my WWI secondary weapons books they can be obtained from me directly. PM for details.

Regards
TonyE

 

I have learned through various sources about Arisakas, the Savage M99, Winchester M94, M95, and M07 carbines and various non-standard pistols in Great War use.

Hello,

Could you possibly post any information you have on any military use of Savage 99s? I'd be very interested in reading it. I've never heard of this before. One of my favorites.

Thanks,

Dave

 

Savage M99 muskets (i.e. with full length stock complete with bayonets) were used by the Montreal Home Guard in WWI in .303 Savage calibre. The rifles are now very scarce and the bayonets even more so. Full details can be found in Luke Mercaldo's new book "Allied Rifle Contracts in America" which covers these plus Pattern '14, M-N, Berthiers etc.

In the UK copies are available from me, PM for details.

Some Savage 99s also came to the UK in 1940 under the "Guns for Britain" scheme but I do not have a figure for how many.

Regards
TonyE

 

Savage M99 muskets (i.e. with full length stock complete with bayonets) were used by the Montreal Home Guard in WWI in .303 Savage calibre. The rifles are now very scarce and the bayonets even more so. Full details can be found in Luke Mercaldo's new book "Allied Rifle Contracts in America" which covers these plus Pattern '14, M-N, Berthiers etc.

In the UK copies are available from me, PM for details.

Some Savage 99s also came to the UK in 1940 under the "Guns for Britain" scheme but I do not have a figure for how many.

Regards
TonyE

Thanks Tony.

I found this picture on the net. Straight grip and lever, sling swivels, military open sights. Very, very neat!

Dave

 

More captured equipment was used in the Middle East than in any other theater of the Second World War. The main reason for that appears to have been sheer scarcity of standard equipment, which persisted well into 1942. I've done quite a lot of research on the 9th Australian Division, and from what I can make out I would say they were the champions of captured equipment use. This was especially so during the 1941 siege of Tobruk, when the famous "Bush Artillery," 2/12th Field Regt and 2/3rd Anti-Tank Regt, and the British AA brigade all used Italian artillery. Italian pieces definitely employed by the 9th in Tobruk were the 75mm M06/11 field gun, 100mm M1916 Skoda field howitzer, 105mm Schneider-Ansaldo M1913 field gun, 149mm M14/16 Skoda medium howitzer, Breda-Bohler M35 47mm anti-tank gun, and the Breda M35 20mm light AA gun. There were also a few 102mm AA guns (presumably Modelo 38), and perhaps one or two ancient 149mm Model A non-recoil heavy guns. The 9th also had some Swedish-made Bofors 37mm M36 anti-tank guns, purchased originally by the Egyptians.

Enemy infantry weapons employed by the 9th included German and Italian 81mm mortars, the Brixia 45mm light mortar, the Solothurn 20mm anti-tank gun, the MG34, the MP40, Breda M37 MG's, Fiat-Revelli M14/35 MG's, the Breda M30 LMG, and M1891 Carcano carbines with folding bayonet. As for vehicles, the 9th would hardly have been able to move at all if it hadn't had large numbers of ex-Italian trucks. Most of this enemy gear was the fruit of O'Connor's campaign.

Use of enemy and other non-standard equipment to supplement firepower remained traditional in the 9th Division to the end of the war. At Alamein, 9th Div units were well over-strength in heavy weapons thanks to an exceptionally aggressive salvage policy. Besides the usual enemy types, for Alamein the 9th had some Brownings (.303? .30?) and 7.92mm Besa guns salvaged from wrecked Allied tanks and aircraft. There were also a small number of American M3 37mm anti-tank guns, obtained God knows how. On Tarakan, the 9th definitely used some Japanese MGs (I saw a picture of what I think was a Type 92), as well as at least one Type 41 75mm mountain gun. (The crew of the weapon called themselves "1 Australian Tree-Felling Unit.")

 

Thanks Tony.

I found this picture on the net. Straight grip and lever, sling swivels, military open sights. Very, very neat!

Dave
That's a beautiful shot, Dave.

 

Below is an extract from a letter from Major Sandilands from the 2nd Bn RSF.
dated 27/11/43 it describes him using a variety of German kit he picked up in Sicily.
hope it adds to your research.

ttfn

Iain

 

Savage M99 muskets (i.e. with full length stock complete with bayonets) were used by the Montreal Home Guard in WWI in .303 Savage calibre. The rifles are now very scarce and the bayonets even more so. Full details can be found in Luke Mercaldo's new book "Allied Rifle Contracts in America" which covers these plus Pattern '14, M-N, Berthiers etc.

In the UK copies are available from me, PM for details.

Some Savage 99s also came to the UK in 1940 under the "Guns for Britain" scheme but I do not have a figure for how many.

Regards
TonyE


I had never heard of the .303 Savage cartridge either. Wiki has this info on it. Were the British rifles marked .301?

Non-compatibility with .303 British

As with any firearm, it is essential to use the correct type of ammunition. The .303 Savage and the .303 British cartridge are not interchangeable with each other. Neither the bullet diameter nor the cartridge dimensions are compatible. Attempting to use .303 Savage ammunition in a firearm chambered for .303 British (or .303 British cartridges in a .303 Savage weapon) is guaranteed to have serious consequences. Such attempts will severely damage the firearm and possibly injure the user. In the UK the .303 Savage was called the .301 Savage to avoid confusion.

.303 Savage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

As is so often the case, Wiki tells part of the story but not all of it!

I have a reasonable collection of early ammunition catalogues and it seems Eley Brothers decided to call it the ".301 Savage" initially, as they were the first British ammunition makers to offer the round. This in itself must have caused confusion as the guns are marked ".303 Savage", whether for Britain or not.

The 1902 Eley catalogue lists it as the .301 Savage. The Eley 1910 lists it as ".303 (.301) Savage" and by 1912 they list it only as the .303 Savage.

Kynoch do not list the round until 1905 when it is the .303 Savage which it remaimed until the last (undated) Kynoch catalogue c. 1960.

If you like I can post pictures of the round compared to a .303 British.

Interestingly, Westley Richards took the opposite approach. When they sold the 7.63mm Mauser C96 "Broomhandle" pistol in the UK they deliberately called it the ".303 Mauser" and had this engraved on the backsight to stimulate sales.

Regards
TonyE

 

As is so often the case, Wiki tells part of the story but not all of it!

I have a reasonable collection of early ammunition catalogues and it seems Eley Brothers decided to call it the ".301 Savage" initially, as they were the first British ammunition makers to offer the round. This in itself must have caused confusion as the guns are marked ".303 Savage", whether for Britain or not.

The 1902 Eley catalogue lists it as the .301 Savage. The Eley 1910 lists it as ".303 (.301) Savage" and by 1912 they list it only as the .303 Savage.

Kynoch do not list the round until 1905 when it is the .303 Savage which it remaimed until the last (undated) Kynoch catalogue c. 1960.

If you like I can post pictures of the round compared to a .303 British.

Interestingly, Westley Richards took the opposite approach. When they sold the 7.63mm Mauser C96 "Broomhandle" pistol in the UK they deliberately called it the ".303 Mauser" and had this engraved on the backsight to stimulate sales.

Regards
TonyE

Interesting info. Thanks The .303 Mauser sounds a bit like how the 7x57 became the .275 Rigby in the UK

Dave

 

The HG is well-known as a source of all sorts of strange weaponry, but I was totally unprepared for this when I found it on the net:Home Guard Picture Library

The caption for the top center picture (click to enlarge it) identifies the French rifles as Model 07/15 Berthier, but from the shape of the bolt handle & receiver I think one is actually an M1886/96 Lebel. The other is certainly a Berthier, but I can't be certain that it isn't an M1916. (Perhaps other people are better at Berthier recognition than I am?)

Here is more on this very strange subject, particularly on French ammunition that is still being found in Britain:
International Ammunition Association {iaaforum.org} - View topic - 8mm Lebel Bullets

This refers to an article in Shotgun News, but does not give the issue:The Guns of "Dad's Army:" What Became of Them? - Gun & Game - The Friendliest Gun Forum on the Internet

And finally, a comment on another thread by TonyE:British Home Guard with Lebel & Berthier

I had another net reference to a "Camembert" magazine for the MAC M31 fortress/tank MG that had also turned up in the UK recently, but I can't find it now. Tony, if you're reading this, can you give any further information or references?