I dont know thats the first time I have ever seen a picture with the “prismatic” scope.
It is a telescopic sight, just with a prismatic dogleg. I did note that the scope is offset to the left, which is ergonomically terrible, and is a design feature brought about by fuzzy thinking by people who know nothing about sniping.
Typical old style Canadian Military, have someone that knows nothing about the task, make somting up for that task.
Hesketh-Pritchard, the daddy of sniping in the British Army in WW1, was totally bemused by the offset scopes. The only reason he could think for it was so that the rifles could be used in rapidfire using stripper clips – something you really don’t want to do with a sniper rifle, especially in an era in which the accuracy of a sniper rifle would drop off noticeably after a few hundred rounds. Bizarrely, though, the loopholes in the steel shield plates were cut as if the scope was mounted over the boreline! He had to have them specially modified!
When he asked the War Department to change the rifle design, he was told that they wouldn’t do it to avoid interrupting production…
The ergonomics of the offset scope are terrible – it’s marginally better if you can use your left eye, but it is still unsatisfactory in comparison with a centrally mounted scope. One theoretical advantage is that you can keep your head lower, but at the price of terrible ergonomics.
But if it had been offset to the right? I mean most people are right handed in the world, so they would use their right eye, right hand on the trigger.
PROWORD NOWAH:
You wouldn’t be able to see through it, because the stock would be in the way of your head. Unless you have eyes on stalks, that is…
Less significantly, it would also clash with the bolt handle (on a turn bolt). And with ejection. And will get in the way of your hand during the use of stripper clips, if this is indeed your intention (ridiculously stupid though it is). There is also boggrall metal on the right-hand side to mount a scope to.
Does that answer your question?
yep that answers it, thanks Man of Stoat. 
Regarding Warner and Swasey Model 1913 Prismatic Scope
Some comments by the U.S. Ordnance Board (First World War Era):
Without Warning - Canadian Sniper Equipment of the 20th Century, Clive M. Law, 88 pages, 140 ill. CDN$29.95 (approx US$22.50)
http://www.servicepub.com/sniper.html
Quote:
This long awaited book examines the many styles of sniper rifles and optics used by the Canadian Army. Starting with the Ross rifle of Great War fame, mated to the Warner & Swayze telescopic sight, the book examines issues and usage of a variety of sniper rifles. World War II saw a medley of equipment used in the early days. There is all new information on Small Arms Limited (Long Branch) and their experimental rifles as well as information on Research Enterprises Limited and the experimental scopes they developed for the Long Branch rifles. Post-war rifles used by the Canadian Army include Garand, Parker-Hale C3 and C3A1, The FN C1 and C2 (FAL) and the incredible MacMillan Bros Tac50.
The entire text is based on original research at the Canadian National Archives and the Canadian Department of National Defence
Sample Page:
The Model of 1913 Warner & Swasey Sniper Scope
http://1903.over-blog.com/article-330799.html
Quote:
This is a WW1 1903 Sniper rifle. These are VERY difficult to locate in original condition and this is a nice example of a carefully reassembled gun. Based on an original sniper rifle receiver (the gun had been sporterized but was easy to identify by the properly located holes for the mount), this gun has been rebarreled, the barreled action parkerized and the rifle restocked. The Model of 1913 Warner & Swasey sniper scope is all original with the exception of the reproduction eye-cup (the original is included but is too dried out for use). The scope mount is an original, not a reproduction. The scope comes the leather case that’s in good shape but does show some wear and tear (the straps are broken). The barrel is WW1 vintage, marked for Springfield manufacture and dated 6-18. The stock is nicely cartouched W.E.S. for Army Inspector W.E. Strong. The stock shows use with the usual dents and dings and has a repaired crack on the right side just below the serial number. The serial number of the rifle is 928230 and the scope is marked inside the mounting rail for rifle 632168 (they are commonly mismatched). Scope serial number is 2646. The scope has pretty good optics although there is some debris in the sight picture (see photo). The reticle is the correct type and intact. The windage knob works properly but the elevation knob appears to be frozen (I’ve not tried to work on it, it may be a relatively easy fix). The rifle appears to be in good shape mechanically and the bore is excellent. The front sight protector is a later WW2 vintage item.
SEE ALSO:
Model 1913 Warner & Swasey Scope
http://imageevent.com/badgerdog/unitedstatesservicerifles/1913warnerswaseyscope?
* Quite a number of detailed photographs of Warner and Swasey Model 1913 Prismatic Scope - close up.* (Right click disabled on webpage).
Model 1913 Warner & Swasey Telescopic Musket Sights
Serial # 3544
Weight 2 1/4 lbs.
5.2x power scope with 1 1/2" eye relief
c/w M1908 Pattern Leather Carrying Case (Mfg in 1917 by RIA - Rock Island Arsenal)
From: “Out of Nowhere: A History of the Military Sniper”, by Martin Pegler,Osprey, 2004, (pp 141-145)
From: “Fighting Gear of World War I: Equipment and Weapons of the American Doughboy”, C.B. Colby, Coward-McCann, Inc., New York, 1961, (p 16)
Nice Info as usual George, I would chose the Mauser stile Springfield M1903 over the Enfield everyday, I like his more strongh bolt action and his powerful .30 caliber cartrigde.
The accuracy in the Springfield was a little superior according some sources, what you think.?
Thanks Panzerknacker,
The Springfield M1903 and the Enfield M1917 both basically had modified Mauser style actions. They both fired the same .30 caliber cartridge.
The American Enfield M1917 was based on the British Pattern 1914 “Mauser style” rifle which was being developed prior to the First World War for the .276 caliber rimless cartridge. When England entered World War I development of the .276 cartridge was dropped and the action modified to handle the British .303 rimmed cartridge instead. Three US firms were contracted to make the rifle - Winchester, Remington and Eddystone. When the British found that they could manufacture enough Lee-Enfield rifles they cancelled the contracts in 1916. By the time the United States entered the war in 1917 there were three large plants already tooled up to make the rifle. It is believed that Remington initiated the conversion of the Pattern 1914 action to handle the US .30-06 cartridge. In 1917 new contracts were awarded to the three firms to make the new rifle officially called the “U.S. Rifle, Cal. .30, Model 1917.” I believe that I read somewhere that the M1917 action was used as the basis for Remington’s Model 700 bolt-action sporting rifles.
The M1903 Springfield was well designed and well built and had several features copied from the 93 and 98 Mauser actions. The United States had to pay Mauser a royalty on each rifle made which resulted in Mauser receiving $200,000 for infringements on the action and stripper clip patents. Some features carried over from the older Krag-Jorgensen such as the cocking piece and the round stem of the wing safety.
The Springfield M1903 had a 24 inch barrel and and the Enfield M1917 had a 26 inch barrel. The action of the Springfield M1903 cocks on opening, while the action of the Enfield M1917 cocks fully on closing the bolt. I have not fired the Enfield M1917, but have fired a Springfield M1903A3 (Remington Mfr 1943) which I used to own. Can’t say for sure which was more accurate, but the Springfield did get a lot of praise for it’s accuracy over the years.
The Springfield M1903 and the Enfield M1917 both basically had modified Mauser style actions. They both fired the same .30 caliber cartridge
.
He,he I was refered to the british SMLE Enfield, thanks for your opinion.
8)
SS officer using a scoped K-98, the sight is a 1,5x ZF 41.
Ckecking for aircrafts maybe ?
:roll:
Yeah he is their defense against air craft, that or hes going to shot a bird thats in a tree for dinner.
If he’s using 7.92 I hope he likes feather soup !
He will not going to shot down a Il-2 for sure.
Waffen SS snipers.
