Martini-Henry or Lee Metford? |
Rob Dumelow
|
I suppose the question is how quickly the weapon would reach the battalions, for example the following were the stations of the two battalions in 1888:
1/RSF were on Home Service Duty in Birr, Ireland in 1888-91 2/RSF were on garrison duty in India from 1887-96 (including seeing action on the North Western Front). The time taken to get to India would probably have meant a delay in the uptake of the rifles and the 2nd batallion probably wouldn't have received their's until later. The 1st battalion may have, but i'd still go with a Martini Henry if the rifle didn't reach them until december as it covers most of the year. Unless you mean the tunic was dated as 1888 and later (as opposed to 1888 exactly) in which case you may want to go for the Metford. Though I hasten to add that I'm no expert in the field and these are just some guesses made by me with a little bit of research. |
||||||||||||
|
Sawubona
|
Thanks for your input, Rob. My query is actually more mundane than you make of it. The tunic is dated "1888" on the label and I've the "correct" helmet and QVC backing plate w/ center, but I've an '88 bayonet with frog on the ("correct with QVC buckle") belt right now and I thought it could use a '76 bayo and frog instead. And I'm ambivalent about whether to go with "Teenie" or .303 Metford ammunition pouches. All these questions and I'm not even sure if I should be looking for Black Watch tartan or Hunting Stewart tartan trews, although I pretty set on the former.
|
||||||||||||
|
Martini-Henry or Lee Metford? |
|
||
Powered by phpBB © 2001-2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Style created by phpBBStyles.com and distributed by Styles Database.
phpBB Style created by phpBBStyles.com and distributed by Styles Database.