Chris Hall

The gravity fed 30 round mag on a SLR is a bit of an old wives tale. The 20 and 30 round mags were designed to be interchangeable from day one. The design team of the L4 would have had a much easier time of it, if they didn't have to convert the .303 guns around the magazine design!

Just for interest, the Aussies had a 30 round L4 mag and a 30 round L2 mag, the latter being identified by their straightness compared to the L4 mag. Both came in modified .303 Bren MK1* mag boxes.

when we were driving these in Iraq, the majority didn't have any form of working A/C so the passenger used to hold his foot against the slightly open door to hold it open. Not to much but that small gap made a massive difference when we were in full body Armour in the summer months. We were ordered to stop doing it due to potentially losing a foot if we drove into an IED but we ignored that order except when in a built up area. They were sh*t days but I'll never forget them.

He would have been in the RFC in WW1 and then been taken into the RAF on its formation.

Webbing handles would indicate Canadian manufacture rather than being early. A Leather Handle would be early.

Was that Saunton sands?

In better condition they may have been worth about £50. See how it all cleans up.

I think your title has answered your own question, it's a Combat EOD Helmet. Look halfway down the page on this link http://www.armedforces.co.uk/releases/raq41a4818cee628#.VOuxqWdybIU

They're for the Mines Visor, I have them on my Helmet and had to carry the visor but its more hassle than any use.

From what I understand, it is illegal to manufacture a realistic imitation firearm unless you can prove it is for a re-enactment group, film work, exhibition etc. what is odd is that there was no mention of manufacturing something for your self, only manufacturing for a second party. However what I read suggests that if you paint in bright colours then it is no longer realistic and is legal. It then goes on to say that after manufacture this rule isn't applicable as a new owner can alter the colours. Very bizarre and pointless Act! [h=3]Definitions of "Imitation Firearms", "Realistic Imitation Firearms" and "Readily Convertible Imitations"[/h][h=4]Imitation Firearms[/h]An imitation firearm means "any thing which has the appearance of being a firearm (other than such a weapon as is mentioned in section 5(1) (b) of this Act), whether or not it is capable of discharging any shot, bullet or other missile." section 57(4). This means that an offence requiring "possession" or "having with him/her" a firearm or imitation firearm requires a "thing" which is separate and distinct from a person. Putting a hand inside a jacket and using fingers to force out the material to give the impression of a firearm falls outside the scope of such offences, as a person's bodily parts is not a "thing". (R v Bentham [2005] UKHL18.) R v Morris and King, 79 Cr App R 104, CA: when considering whether a thing has the appearance of being a firearm the jury should consider its appearance at the time of the offence and should also be assisted by the evidence of the witness who saw the thing at the time of the offence. Unlike with "Realistic Imitation Firearms", it is not always necessary to obtain evidence from the FSP on whether the thing is an imitation firearm. Evidence of the Firearms Officer will usually be sufficient expert evidence. An imitation firearm will be treated as a firearm to which section 1 Firearms Act 1968 applies if: it has the appearance of such a weapon and it can be readily convertible into a weapon from which a shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged (section 1 (1) and 1 (2) Firearms Act 1968). See readily convertible imitations elsewhere in this guidance [h=4]Realistic Imitation Firearms[/h]From 1 October 2007, section 36 Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 created an offence to manufacture, bring into or cause to be brought into Great Britain, or sell realistic imitation firearms. It also made it an offence to modify an imitation firearm to make it realistic. Section 37 relates to specific defences: this allows persons in the course of trade or business to import realistic imitation firearms for the purpose of modifying them to make them non-realistic. It also provides various defences if the realistic imitation firearm was available for: a museum or gallery; theatrical performances and rehearsals of such performances; the production of films and television programmes; the organisation and holding of historical re-enactments; or crown servants. Section 38 defines a "realistic imitation firearm" as "an imitation firearm which has an appearance that is so realistic as to make it indistinguishable, for all practical purposes, from a real firearm". As a result of "real firearm" (defined in section 38 (7)) imitations of pre-1870 firearms are not caught by the offence. Whether an imitation firearm falls within the definition of a realistic imitation firearm should be judged from the perspective of how it looks at the point of manufacture, import or sale and not how it might be appear if it were being misused. Section 38(3) provides that in determining whether an imitation firearm is distinguishable from a real firearm, its size, shape and principal colour must be taken into account. It is worth keeping in mind that the intention behind this measure is to stop the supply of imitations which look so realistic that they are being used by criminals to threaten and intimidate others. If it is not a realistic imitation firearm it may still be an imitation firearm.

I once advertised for an Enfield WD/CO left side toolbox and a guy came to my rescue and said he had everything I needed. I asked if the toolbox was the square one or the rare round one, now anyone who knows Enfields knows the WD/CO left tool boxes is the normal triangular one with the cut out for the brake rod. His response was " The Rare round one", well it was nice to see the guy was on the ball and honest!

That's a nice Enfield Made gun with it's gas piston. These pistons were quite often removed in the deac process.

As Snowdrop has said, they're nothing more than the markings and the fact that they were made to contract for the MOD. Your gun was a straight out of store gun sold on a commercial contract and could easily have gone to somewhere like Israel for the IDF. The later MOD purchased guns had no L9 markings but were still classed as the L9 in British service. It was the cost of buying replacement L9s and parts that pushed the MOD into purchasing Glocks. No one will admit it but the preferred replacement for the L9 was the Sig Saur but the Glock was cheaper so you can guess what happened.

If you do a Sankey 1/2 ton image search on google, quite a lot turn up so more than a one off.

Its a 1975 made Mk2 Commercial contract, the 2 marks are Belgian proof marks. Its doubtful you will find any L9s on the market, I've only ever seen 2 in the UK, I own one and the second had suspect markings from what I could see.

It dosnt look like it would last long as a gun mount.

Ive got an L9A1 Browning in my collection.

I'm not the seller and this could be a scam but for anyone who would like to make enquiries. http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=47087

Do you ever get a reply? when I handed over my hand guns I immediately bought 2 Lee Enfields I'd been after for a while. I even collected all the scrap shells and handed them in at £5 per 50.

This is the section (below) of the 'Guidance on Fire Arms Licensing Law' that I think you are referring to. It states that possession of a section 7 gun would be committing an offence, however the under lined sentence would in my opinion (And many others) allow a guest to use. My interpretation is, if a guest was shooting a Section 7 or 5 gun under the control of the owner (Possessor) at a designated range (Circumstances and Context), then no offence is committed. It's the same with section 5, re-enactors hire out section 5 guns for use in public displays and private skirmishes. The re-enactor rarely has section 5 authority but due to the circumstance and context, their use under supervision of the Sect 5 Auth holder is good reason. As a civilian in the UK I've had the luck to shoot a lot of prohibited weapons under section 5 supervision with no issues. 9.22. The certificate allows the certificate holder to possess the firearm, not other people. Therefore, if other people possess the firearm, they would be committing an offence under section 1 of the 1968 Act. Whether or not handling constitutes possession will depend upon the circumstances and the context. The cases of Hall v Cotton 1987 and Woodage v Moss 1974 provide some principles as follows: i. Possession can include having a firearm under your control without it being in your physical possession, or in your home e.g. if someone keeps a firearm in a locked cabinet in their relation’s house. ii. The concept of possession includes both proprietary and custodial possession i.e. both ownership/control and physical possession. There is a distinction between custody and possession, so proprietary possession and custodial possession are two different concepts. iii. A person can remain in "possession" of a firearm within the meaning of section 1 at a time when he is not physically in control of it. iv. The concept of possession has never been exhaustively defined in English law. Its precise meaning can vary according to the context and according to the Act of parliament in which the question arises.

I'm not in the UK at the moment, I'm in the USA doing weapon trials and development for the MOD. The comment was a side note and wasn't meant to be directly linked with club shooting in the UK.

The club I used to be in allowed guests to shoot any of the guns, after all, how do you know if shooting is the sport for you and which type of gun you would like to purchase. I just spent all day last Saturday shooting a No.4, SKS, Mosin, 2 x M4 carbine, Sig 1911 (Didn't know Sig made a 1911) Sig .40, Glock 9mm, Remington 700, Ruger .357 and a ton of ammo. I was bushed but I did win a trophy so I did OK.

Never saw them in use which is why there are probably so many NOS items for sale!

Id say trolley acc too, withams had one for auction recently.

I was with a friend when they left and we watched from the end of 41 Sqns pan. We were quite pleased when they taxied past us and my friend Ben was trying to zoom out and couldn't understand why his camera phone wouldn't. He soon understood when he looked from behind his phone to see VeRAs wing above our heads as she taxied past. I wish I could post the vid as we were so close we could smell the petrol and exhaust fumes.