Difference between revisions of "Talk:Ross rifle"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I've made corrections to the chart. I recognize the chart given, but the copy/scan/whatever they were reading must have been too blurry. The original poster has put down Mk II** in places where it should read either Mk II<sup>3</sup>*, <sup>4</sup>*, or <sup>5</sup>*. This was generally how the stocks were marked (3* rather than ***). | I've made corrections to the chart. I recognize the chart given, but the copy/scan/whatever they were reading must have been too blurry. The original poster has put down Mk II** in places where it should read either Mk II<sup>3</sup>*, <sup>4</sup>*, or <sup>5</sup>*. This was generally how the stocks were marked (3* rather than ***). | ||
| + | |||
| + | And, I've made further corrections to the chart. The original source <b>The Ross Rifle Story </b>, while the most extensive and authoritative source on the Ross Rifle that I know of, appears to have a corrupted chart printed in it. It is missing the Mk IIIB and has one incorrect number for the Mark III. The correct chart (originally by the Army Historical Branch) was also reprinted in <b>A Question of Confidence</b> without the apparent corruption. I also added reference footnotes for the chart next to its title. | ||
Revision as of 16:14, 14 June 2018
I've made corrections to the chart. I recognize the chart given, but the copy/scan/whatever they were reading must have been too blurry. The original poster has put down Mk II** in places where it should read either Mk II3*, 4*, or 5*. This was generally how the stocks were marked (3* rather than ***).
And, I've made further corrections to the chart. The original source The Ross Rifle Story , while the most extensive and authoritative source on the Ross Rifle that I know of, appears to have a corrupted chart printed in it. It is missing the Mk IIIB and has one incorrect number for the Mark III. The correct chart (originally by the Army Historical Branch) was also reprinted in A Question of Confidence without the apparent corruption. I also added reference footnotes for the chart next to its title.
