WWI Sniper Scope Cases

[cplnorton]

By the way, the "Cody" documents you kept telling me about - don't exist at Cody. They aren't "Cody" documents at all. For everyone who might be interested, all military related WRA documents are located in the National Archives. This can be verified by contacting the Cody museum.

jt

Actually Jim, the researcher for Cody that told you that, Mr. Gdula. He is repeating to you, what I told him. He contacted me a week ago, asking me for help in finding the documents for you. Because he didn't really know where they would be located at Cody.

I told him simply that the A5 documents that Jim really wants, I did not find at Cody, they are located at the National Archives. I told him a lot of Winchester documents are archived at the National Archives. Which is the truth. So he told me thank you and said he would pass that info onto you.

In the grand scheme of things, I found pretty much everything replicated at the ARchives, that I found at Cody. So people would be far better off spending their money on a researcher for the archives, than they would be at Cody. Because the Archives has a lot more.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

[QUOTE=cplnorton;478111]Actually Jim, the researcher for Cody that told you that, Mr. Gdula. He is repeating to you, what I told him. He contacted me a week ago, asking me for help in finding the documents for you. Because he didn't really know where they would be located at Cody.

I told him simply that the A5 documents that Jim really wants, I did not find at Cody, they are located at the National Archives. I told him a lot of Winchester documents are archived at the National Archives. Which is the truth. So he told me thank you and said he would pass that info onto you.{/quote]

That was after he went through every WRA box at Cody at my great expense. What he told me was, that there were no documents whatsoever concerning any exchange with the military in those files. Of course, I am assuming he is being straight up with me. I find it incredulous that the people at Cody were unaware of that fact. I am also somewhat perplexed why you referred to the documents we were discussing in our email exchanges as the "Cody" documents, and why you didn't give me a heads up when I told you I was going to hire a researcher to go through the Cody files since you couldn't share the Cody documents due to copyright concerns and demands on the part of the Cody museum.

jt

[cplnorton]

[QUOTE=Marine A5 Sniper Rifle;478175]

That was after he went through every WRA box at Cody at my great expense. What he told me was, that there were no documents whatsoever concerning any exchange with the military in those files. Of course, I am assuming he is being straight up with me. I find it incredulous that the people at Cody were unaware of that fact. I am also somewhat perplexed why you referred to the documents we were discussing in our email exchanges as the "Cody" documents, and why you didn't give me a heads up when I told you I was going to hire a researcher to go through the Cody files since you couldn't share the Cody documents due to copyright concerns and demands on the part of the Cody museum.

jt

There are tens of thousands of WWI military documents at Cody. Not only the US, but foreign govts orders as well. I have thousands, if not tens of thousands of pages of US WWI documents from there myself.

Jim, When you initially asked me what I found at Cody back in the beginning. I told you the cliff note version of what I found, for Free. Even thought I spent a better part of a year pulling from there and more money than I could even keep track of, to figure it out. But I did not give you copies of the documents.

I told you I had hit Cody hard and I didn't think there was anything more from there to learn, other than what I had already told you the cliff note version of. If you chose to try to retrace my steps there, and hire a different researcher to try to find the actual documents, that is not my fault.

Cody is like every single archive place you go to. Everything is filed wrong, the filing system is utter garbage, and no one knows where anything is located or what you are even talking about. That is why it just takes a extreme amount of detective work to try to figure out where to even point your researcher to even look. And even then it's hit or miss and usually you will pull tens of thousands of documents to find the one you really want. And many times you will find nothing. It's very rare to find a researcher who is even willing to put the amount of hours into finding this stuff, even if you offer them boat loads of money.

There is nothing easy, or simple in finding this stuff and it is extremely expensive. That is why no one does this, and why so much is still left out there undiscovered. If it was easy to be found, it would already be published in a book.

If you don't believe me, you should talk to Andrew Stolinksi or Tim Plowman and hear how much stuff they go through to find one new document.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Steve, If you remember, I did offer to split the cost with you.

I am really confused. You are saying there are tens of thousands of WRA WWI documents at Cody, but you told my researcher there were none? My researcher claims to have gone through every WRA box at Cody (70 boxes at my expense) and says he found nothing. Not one single document. To be clear, I do not know, nor did you tell me, the contents of your documents. You told me the documents you found would change what is now accepted as fact about the whole WRA sniper issue. I was excited for you and definitely was curious and I told you I was going to do the same search since you were prohibited from sharing your documents with anyone due to copyright restraints, and asked you if you minded me using the same researcher. You told me she had worked for Cody and had quit. I called Cody, they had no idea who you were talking about (they told me that Cody employees did not do searches) and recommended Mr. Gadula. My search was for any WRA document connected to WWI. Nada. Nothing. Zip. But an invoice. I told Mr. Gadula what you had found, he contacted you, he told me you told him there were no WRA/Military documents at Cody, he then presented me with yet another invoice, told me there were no such documents at Cody (per you), and that is where it all stands. I find it all a bit confusing.

Have you actually been to Cody? Your knowledge of their filing system sounds very extensive.

I did thermophillic anaerobic digestion research for a living for 15-years, so I truly understand the nuances of document searches. It's a tough job.

jt

[clintonhater]

Cody is like every single archive place you go to. Everything is filed wrong, the filing system is utter garbage, and no one knows where anything is located or what you are even talking about...

What??? You were expecting museum staffers to be "experts" about whatever artifacts or history the museum is concerned with? I've been associated with two highly-rated regional history museums as a humble volunteer, and what characterized the staff of both was amazing ignorance about the subjects in which their facilities specialized, in part because they had absolutely no personal interest before landing the job.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Black 6-Loop Scope Case

The elusive Brophy described black 6-loop A5 scope case finally comes to light. Oh, oh. Where are the "Marine Springfield" bases? Are those, yes, I believe those to be Mann-Niedner bases!



All joking aside, This is the scope case that started this thread. The brown (russet) 6-loop A5 scope case also surfaced. So now we have the 8-loop "Penguin" russet scope case, the black 6-loop scope case, and the russet 6-loop scope case for the A-5, with only the 8-loop russet "Penquin" scope cases traceable to any WWI USMC Scout Snipers. I suspect the scope case issue is a bit more complicated than some would have us believe. At this point, I don't have the final answer, and I think no one else does either.

Please note that neither of the 6-loop scope cases had any marks that would link them to any snipers or the sniper program for that matter. Maybe we will find one in the near future as they seem to be coming out of the '03 woodwork. This issue is not resolved by any means.

Never say never!

jt

[cplnorton]

What??? You were expecting museum staffers to be "experts" about whatever artifacts or history the museum is concerned with? I've been associated with two highly-rated regional history museums as a humble volunteer, and what characterized the staff of both was amazing ignorance about the subjects in which their facilities specialized, in part because they had absolutely no personal interest before landing the job.

I run into a lot of College interns. I don't know if they get college credit for working in these places, or college kids just work cheap and that is why they are there. But either way the results are the same, they do the least amount of work as possible.

[cplnorton]

The Marines first order of leather cases from Winchester was for 650 leather cases. 500 for the WRA made snipers, 150 for the Mann Niedner rifles. So they ordered all the leather cases from Winchester, in the first shipment, for the 150 rifles Mann Niedner converted. So All Mann Niedner rifles should have had WRA leather cases that were in the Marines. Same as those Leather scope caps. They are Winchester, and they ordered extra to cover the Mann Niedner rifles.

The black on the leather I would say is more likely dye. I have a orders for certains Marine units, that dyed all their leather gear black, at several times in Marine Corps History. I would suspect that case was most likely dyed by the Marines, at a later date, and did not leave WRA like that.

[clintonhater]

I run into a lot of College interns. I don't know if they get college credit for working in these places, or college kids just work cheap and that is why they are there. But either way the results are the same, they do the least amount of work as possible.

The ignorance of an intern would be understandable, but I was talking about the curatorial staff.

[cplnorton]

The ignorance of an intern would be understandable, but I was talking about the curatorial staff.

Oh I know, its sad really.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

The Marines first order of leather cases from Winchester was for 650 leather cases. 500 for the WRA made snipers, 150 for the Mann Niedner rifles. So they ordered all the leather cases from Winchester, in the first shipment, for the 150 rifles Mann Niedner converted. So All Mann Niedner rifles should have had WRA leather cases that were in the Marines. Same as those Leather scope caps. They are Winchester, and they ordered extra to cover the Mann Niedner rifles.

The black on the leather I would say is more likely dye. I have a orders for certains Marine units, that dyed all their leather gear black, at several times in Marine Corps History. I would suspect that case was most likely dyed by the Marines, at a later date, and did not leave WRA like that.

I presume from your post that you continue to infer the WRA constructed sniper rifles did not have Mann-Niedner bases. I disagree. Further, I can prove you incorrect without any doubt whatsoever. Since neither of us is prepared to release to the public all our data, I suggest you and I pick a forum member we believe to be trustworthy and above board - and unbiased. We both must agree on the person picked. You present to this person your proof of your statements that the WRA rifles did not have Mann-Niedner bases, to include to where they were shipped and why, to whom they were shipped and why, when they were issued and to whom they were issued, to include pictorial proof of rifles and scope cases as issued to include serial number(s). A simple picture of a 1903 rifle in Marine Springfield bases won't cut it unless it is linked to an individual Marine with rifle serial number issued to him verified in some indisputable manner. Some vague document that can be interpreted a dozen different ways won't cut it. I, in turn, will send to this person proof beyond a shadow of a doubt that the first shipment of 350 WRA rifles had Mann_Niedner basis to include where they were shipped, to whom they were shipped, when they were issued, where they were issued, and to whom they were issued including pictures of the rifles along with their snipers, scopes and cases and other visual and documentary evidence to prove they had Mann-Niedner bases, and further prove the scope cases issued with the rifles were "Penquin" 8-loop scope cases.

The person we pick must agree to hold all data he receives from us as confidential and not to be shared with anyone at any time now or in the future, nor in any publication. That person will evaluate all the data we each send and make a judgement as to which one of us is correct; and we, in turn, will both agree to abide by his judgement to the extent the loser agrees to quit expressing his opinion on this matter on any forum.

Time to man-up.

jt

[1903fan]

Sounds like a fair idea for me, and much better than the Old West that would have seen y'all boys duel with pistols!

[cplnorton]

Jim,

lol, are you really serious? I have never had anyone try to challenge me to a "expert off." Which is sort of comical, but also sad at the same time.

If someone says something that I know is not correct, I'm going to comment on it. Because there are people out that read this stuff and don't know any better and I do want them to know there are different conclusions out there. So if you have a problem with me saying you are not correct. I'm sorry. But I'm certainly not going to stop commenting, because you have issues with me saying I don't think your research is correct.

And what your suggesting is dumb anyways. If you ask anyone who is the biggest expert of Marine Sniper rifles, everyone is going to say John Beard anyways. John has already weighed in on this topic. You just didn't agree with his conclussions either.

Look, I could care less what anyone thinks of me. If they want to believe me, that is fine. If they don't, that is their decision.

I know my research and I stand behind it. I have nothing to prove to you or anyone else.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

lol, are you really serious?

Absolutely.

No one is questioning your being an "expert", and I readily admit I am not an expert in anything. I simply want to settle the issue (amicably) of what bases were on the WRA rifles. No reason to be so sensitive about it. Heck, this is a forum, not a place to be tutored by anyone. But what the heck, it was worth a shot.

As for me worrying about you saying I am wrong - forget it. It ain't so, Joe. What I am concerned about is the dissemination of incorrect information. People spend money on these rifles, and sometimes it is a lot of money. I don't want to see anyone buy something thinking it is what it is not. I see Winchester A5 Grasshopper scopes for sale on eBay as WWI Marine sniper scopes, and there is not one iota of proof such a scope was ever used by the Marines in France. Judging from the prices some people pay for those scopes, some must believe those silly ads.

You just didn't agree with his {JB's} conclusions either.

Really? Plural? Unless you see something I don't, the only thing we disagreed on was whether WRA or Philly Depot mounted the bases.

I have nothing to prove to you or anyone else.

I believe anyone who gives advice as to what is correct, and what is not correct, owes their readers something; which is why I wanted to settle this issue once and for all.

jt

[clintonhater]

I see Winchester A5 Grasshopper scopes for sale on eBay as WWI Marine sniper scopes, and there is not one iota of proof such a scope was ever used by the Marines in France. Judging from the prices some people pay for those scopes, some must believe those silly ads....jt

Hey, would a dealer lie? They say it's a "sniper scope," what more do you need to hear? Hell, half the commercial Lyman Alaskans are described that way.