WAB
AH ambassador
Speaking of history, it is a stretch to lay the blame for the Dardanelles fully at Churchill’s feet. If the army had advanced overland to take out the guns as agreed, the fleet would almost certainly have forced the strait.
don't start me on the earps, bat masterson, bill cody, or hickock, let alone custer , as human beings.
more legends that veer far from the truth.
bruce.
Six months as a infantry battalion commander (LTC) in the trenches. Nearly killed several times.And I may be mistaken, but I believe that that action resulted in his being removed as First Lord of the Admiralty and assuming the role of Lord of Munitions. I don’t recall that he served on the front, but again, I may have that wrong.
I confess that I am a soldier, but had Roebuck not taken council of its fears on 18 March, the Army would never have been needed. They had the Turkish shore defenses on the ropes and would have forced the straits in another 24-48 hours. It was this naval action that Churchill had strongly supported. Had it been successful, the subsequent martyrdom at Gallipoli would never have occurred.Speaking of history, it is a stretch to lay the blame for the Dardanelles fully at Churchill’s feet. If the army had advanced overland to take out the guns as agreed, the fleet would almost certainly have forced the strait.
Well said Canadian brother!I personally don't hold it fair to judge a man from a different time period by our standards. If one starts down that rabbit hole where does he then stop?
Tigris115
The reason why ( l personally believe that ) the under lever rifle never caught on , as a rifle for dangerous animals is because of a combination of a few reasons .
Firstly , the typical under lever rifle uses a tube type magazine under the rifle , which makes it imperative that the cartridges used , must have flat noses ( like Winchester's .30-30 cartridge ). . Otherwise , if one was using a conventional round nose or pointed nose nose munition , there would always be a chance that a sudden jolt could cause the point of one bullet striking the primer of the bullet before it ( as they are horizontally placed inside the tube type magazine ) . This essentially means that the bullets which can be used in such rifles ( with tube type magazines ) will ( on account of the shape of the bullet's nose ) lack penetration compared to conventional round nosed cartridges .
This is certainly problematic when the Shikari's intended quarry is a large , physically imposing , thick skinned and thick bones elephant .
Secondly , there are under lever rifles , with conventional box type magazines , which are capable of safely using pointed nose or round nose munitions .
This was my Nepalese gun bearer , Rishi holding such an under lever rifle , which belonged to my respected client.
View attachment 320795
The rifle was a model 99 made by the firm , Savage and it was calibrated for the .243 Winchester cartridge. The model 99 did not utilizing a tube type magazine , but rather a rotary type magazine or a box type magazine . Therefore , in such a design of rifle , pointed nose and round nosed bullets could be used safely .
The firm , Winchester did infact design the model 1895 under lever rifle calibrated for the .405 Winchester cartridge ( using a 300 grain bullet ) . At the time , l do believe ( unless l am very mistaken ) that the .405 Winchester cartridge was the largest calibre cartridge commercially available in a repeating rifle .
The grandfather of my learned colleague and fellow forum member , Major Poton Khan , infact did manage to kill a rogue Indian elephant with three solid metal envelope cartridges from his .405 Winchester model 1895 under lever rifle . Our late friend , Mohiyuddin ( who was a forest department officer , particularly assigned to shoot rogue elephants ) had to have a great deal of knowledge about the calibres ideal for killing elephants , on account of his profession. In a manual which he wrote ( to teach novice forest department officers how to shoot rogue elephants ) , Mohiyuddin states that the .405 Winchester and the 300 grain metal envelope bullets can kill an Indian bull elephant with a side brain shot , but that the penetration was too unreliable for a brain shot taken from the frontal position ( as the front part of an elephant's skull is the thickest compared to the side parts ) . Considering how many rogue Indian elephants l have seen him dispatch , l am inclined to believe him .
This would make the .405 Winchester a very poor calibre for facing a charging elephant ( which only affords the Shikari a frontal shot to the brain )
I do wonder if a a modern brass homogeneous bullet would ensure adequate penetration for the frontal brain shot on elephants .
Another reason why the under lever rifle is shunned for dangerous animals , is because some people have a view that under lever rifles are inherently less accurate than bolt operation rifles . Exactly how true this statement is , I reality ... I cannot say.
The final reason ( according to my observations ) is that under lever rifles are typically viewed as less reliable than a conventional bolt operation rifle. There may be some grain of truth in this , because l vaguely remember Poton's grandfather experiencing a jam or two , in his Winchester model 1895 under lever rifle on some of the occasions when we used to go hunting together . That traitor to the hunting community , Kenneth Anderson also documented some instances in his book of his Winchester model 1895 under lever rifle jamming . However , this was over five decades ago , and l do believe that modern manufacturing techniques have largely eliminated any potential jamming issues in under lever rifles .
This is how l feel about under lever rifled anyway .
On a related subject , President Theodore " Teddy " Roosevelt is , was and always will be my favorite of all American Presidents. I have also read his excellent Safari book " African Game Trails " as a child and if my memory serves me correctly , he only killed a single elephant with his .405 Winchester calibre under lever rifle . I remember reading his own words in the book that he considered the .405 Winchester calibre as perfect for lions , but not thick skinned animals .
In my humble opinion , he was the perfect combination of Shikari and conservationist . He is perhaps the world's most renowned example that hunting and conservation can ( and should) go hand in hand . Unless one can read minds ( that too , of people deceased long before their birth ) it is not possible to determine what went in his mind when he established national parks . However , it is an inescapable fact that those national parks aided in conservation. I also believe in the concept " innocent until proven guilty ". Therefore , unless otherwise proven , l choose to believe that his intentions for establishing conservation were noble and not selfish . Also killing a single elephant with a .405 Winchester calibre rifle , in an era when people were saying hundreds with the service .303 bore Lee Enfield rifles , does not make someone a bad man ( l believe ) .
@Major Khan , could you share some of the details about Jalaluddin Nana's Winchester model 1895 under lever rifle jamming , with these gentlemen ?
I certainly wouldn't press you to change your approach. We all have a way of judging the world that makes the most sense. I just think that in the past, personal standards really were different. When Churchill really screwed up over the Dardanelles, he not only resigned (something ministers did until quite recently), but he enlisted for the front in Western Europe, and served there. And as far as the rest of it goes, I covered some of it above. But just for instance, there is a distinction between shooting and hunting. In shooting the bags can be enormous and drives are common. It was just how it was.
Lever action rifles are also ambidextrous !