Dischargers, smoke generator, 4 inch

[eddy8men]

for goes for me too. cheers

[Marc van Aalderen]

Rob,

Email received. Many thanks!

Cheers,

[tankbarrell]

Likewise, much appreciated Rob.

[Doug Lavoie]

To the man in black, Thank you for the info. as well as making it available to all.
Right on.

[rob love]

We were actually talking at work about possibly setting up a web page on our site where some of these PDFs could be held for download. The RCA museum webpage had not been updated in more than a few years, but our new director has undertaken the project himself. Having the PDFs may help bring more visitors to the site.

[Ron Pier]

Received Rob. Thanks a million! Ron

[Tim Bell]

Rob.

Also received my copy.

Excellent - many thanks for making the effort.

Cheers

Tim

[maple_leaf_eh]

Originally Posted by rob love

We were actually talking at work about possibly setting up a web page on our site where some of these PDFs could be held for download. The RCA museum webpage had not been updated in more than a few years, but our new director has undertaken the project himself. Having the PDFs may help bring more visitors to the site.

If it isn't on the internet, or discoverable with Google, it didn't happen.

[David Dunlop]

Michael.

Unfortunately, the documents I received from the EPR focused on design more so than production. The Ross Mk III design is well documented, the Canadian SMLE version is only mentioned. Perhaps a clone of the British SMLE design so no point in duplication of design references.

Hard to get a meaningful timeframe reference as well as any idea of production volumes. Going into WW2, it would stand to reason Canada still had a quantity of Ross rifles in storage somewhere, along with a large supply of SMLE equipment. Not sure when Long Branch production of the No.4 geared up, but it would seems possible when the decision was made to build Dischargers, the Ross would be the first consideration for conversion. If production demand exceeded the available supply of Ross Rifles, then SMLE's would likely have been called into play next.

Be interesting to find out if the Discharger was an active item throughout the war or perhaps went the way of the Boys Rifle at some point before the end of the war. From what I recall of Canadian vehicle production, only the Universal Carriers, Otter and Fox had provision for a Discharger, but there are a lot of photos out there, from all points in time during the war, where these particular vehicles have no Discharger installed at all. I think the Fox was even built for provision of two, one above the other.

The other bit of grey to the Discharger picture is the possibility two versions existed from another perspective: those built with residual wood furniture on the actions and those with all wood removed. It is possible wood furniture may only have been used on those Dischargers exposed to the elements. Metal only actions might have been intended for use in enclosed vehicles such as the Otter and Fox. Another unknown is if the mounting hardware was standard for all vehicles. The UC design suggests the discharger was a complete piece when fitted, but the Otter and Fox suggest the discharger had to be disassembled to be mounted.


David