Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Barrels And Bayonets
#1
[A continuation of the "Beddiing and Rifles" post]



Subject: interesting snipet from an article - relates to your post

Posted By: David R - Registered User

Posts: 105

Posted At: (4/23/02 3:00 pm)

Reply | Edit | Del



Thank you ML, once again I see that I have A LOT!!! to learn!



Here is a snippet that I came across... goes nicely with what you were saying about hanging things off your firearm.



"The Model 1944 Carbine was designed with the earlier Russian Model 1938 Carbine as an official blueprint, with the only major deviation in overall design being the addition of some form of bayonet. Bayonet testing was undertaken in 1943, with a specimen designed by N.S. Semin becoming design of choice. The selected bayonet was a permanent side folder and seemed the perfect solution to the Soviet dilemma. The short length of the carbine would not be affected in normal use and the side- folding bayonet could smoothly be extended when necessity arose. The added convenience of a permanently attached 15.1 inch crucifix bayonet was that this was one less item the Red Army soldier would be forced to carry, or lose for that matter. The carbine can be fired with the bayonet folded in place or extended, ***but it is important to note that the M44 was designed to be fired with the bayonet in the extended position. This design fact means when the bayonet is not extended, the point of aim/impact changes. ***"



for the complete article:

[url="http://www.mosin-nagant.net/Russian-M44-Carbine.html"]http://www.mosin-nagant.net/Russian-M44-Carbine.html[/url]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Subject: Barrels and Bayonets

Posted By: ML - Registered User

Posts: 269

Posted At: (4/25/02 11:51 am)

Reply | Edit | Del



Once again, we see Mr. Roberts has been paying attention in class. Most commendable.



Here’s another example. In 1939, our friends across the pond (the English) adopted a new infantry weapon--the Rifle No. 4. Superficially, this looks much like the famous SMLE (Short Magazine Lee Enfield) or Rifle No. 1, Mk III, and indeed does use the same .303 British cartridge. In actuality few parts are common between the two. As an over-simplification, the British used the SMLE in the First World War, and the Rifle No. 4 (in various "Marks" or modifications)--supplanted by refurbished SMLE--in the Second World War.



Very early versions of Rifle No. 4 used an "L"-shaped flip-up twin aperture rear sight: One aperture was regulated to 300 yards, and one for 600 yards. Distances in between required the soldier to attach or detach his bayonet to change point of impact. (Alternate sources complicate this further, calling out the regulation of the 300-yard sight for use with the bayonet and the 600-yard sight for use without the bayonet.)



Unlike the SMLE Rifle No.1, Mk. III, the Rifle No. 4’s bayonet attached directly to the barrel, and caused the point of impact to shift about NINE INCHES at 100 yards (nine inches low).



Obviously, this was a very poor system, and subsequent "Marks" of the Rifle No. 4 used a more conventionally adjusted rear aperture sight; many of the twin-aperture rifles were later refit with this superior sight as well.



Another oft-overlooked issue concerns a forward sling swivel attached to the barrel itself. This is common practice with really big, heavy recoiling "African" calibers, so the weapon’s forward swivel stud doesn’t cut the shooter’s forward hand under recoil. But we also see it on a far-more-common arm--the M16 or its civilian counterpart AR-15. Here, the forward swivel is attached to the front-sight assembly (which of course is attached directly to the barrel).



If you use a tight sling when you are shooting from a supported left elbow (as you well should), sling tension may significantly bend the barrel, changing the harmonics and moving point of impact (usually down as well, although the amount of deviation depends on the tension of the sling). Similarly, resting the barrel against anything (a fencepost, a tree, or over sandbags or a log) will also change impact, although in these cases, as Mr. Hay states with his "pencil" example, the point of impact will usually move away from the direction of the rest’s influence.



--ML



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of all the things I've lost, I think I miss my mind the most.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)