.38S&W WWII RAF issue revolver

I have been very lucky in purchasing a revolver issued to an RAF fighter pilot from WW2 and its what I would describe (without the exact model Mk knowledge !) as a pre Victory model M&P serial no. 700701. The RAF stamp is stamped over the Made in USA marks on the left side of the frame.

I know it was shot down twice whilst in a holster worn by the pilot once in North Africa and once in Burma but after close strip down and examination today I am amazed at what an excellent condition it is in. It was carried daily by all accounts in a holster in extreme weather conditions especially in the jungle but its bluing is perfect at about 70% with three rust corrosion spots. On the frame (where the RAF initials are stamped), one on one of the cylinder recesses and a spot on the barrel. There is minor holster wear at the end of the barrel but apart from that it all seems pretty perfect elsewhere.

I have a few revolvers that have been refinished (pre WWI and issue WWI Webleys) and they clearly have been re finished to the untrained eye, but this gun just looks original despite what hardships it must have faced. Is there any way I can tell for sure if it was refinished ?

There is no british military stampings on it at all surprisingly (apart from the RAF marks) - trust me I know how my country used to love stamping marks everywhere on guns but this has none !! I have the Webleys with unit marks and proof stamps everywhere and a S&W .455 MKII which has the expected proof, military broard arrow and decommission marks but the .38 has none of these apart from a Brit nitro proof mark.

The case hardening is crisp and there is no wearing off of the S&W logo on the right plate as you might expect with polishing. In fact the very fact the RAF stamp is rusted in the grooves of the stamp makes me think its original finish. Someone at one stage did use the left side of the frame to either hammer a nail or something similar (I like to imagine the pilot hitting a vital Spitfire instrument panel gauge in flight trying to make it work !) but I am sure it was something as simple as it being used as a tool with no hammer to hand !!

Also someone somewhere prior to it being issued to the pilot did a trigger job on it - the single action pull is a beautiful crisp 2lbs. The pilot is still alive and I have been in contact with him and one of his main recollections was when he remarked about how light the trigger pull was on the gun. I cant imagine this was a RAF armorer doing this - could this have been a factory trigger pull at that time for a war issue gun ??

I have to take and post some photos tomorrow as this gun fascinates me and now our gun laws ban us from owning such guns I know how lucky I am in having this !

Yes, absolutely want to see some photos of this one.

It likely shipped during the second half of 1939. I'd highly recommend you obtain a factory letter on it.

Check the mainspring strain screw in front of the grip strap. Be sure it's tight. If someone backed off that screw, that may account for the light trigger pull. It may also cause misfres, especially on ammo with British primers/caps, which are hard.

However, S&W trigger pulls are almost always lighter than on Webley and Enfield revolvers. That may easily account for the difference.

A No. 2 lead pencil may remove some of the rust. Oil it with some penetrating, protective oil like Break-Free CLP, if you can find it there.

Is the holster gray or light olive green? RAF holsters and belts were gray.

What planes did this pilot fly? Can he share some war experiences? We have members here very interested in the WW II air war, and I am especially intrigued with the British and Commonwealth end.

I've seen photos of pilots in Burma wearing revolvers. Some had Webley MK VI's, I think, and the rest .38's, many surely S&W's. One base where photos were taken hosted the famed "Ginger" Lacey. In one fight, he nailed a Jap plane with just nine 20mm shells. His armorer was amazed when he counted the ammo. Lacey was flying a Spitfire MK VIII at the time, I think.

I very much want to see photos of this .38, please.

Thanks for the replies guys - yes the pilot can recount his war experiences - thats why I ended up buying the gun. I will post the whole story when I get to my work computer on monday where its all stored.

In the meantime the 1st time he was shot down was when he was flying a Hawker Hurricane in a dogfight with a german fighter in North Africa, he crash landed and was picked up by his Wing Commander.

In Burma he was flying a MK IX Spitfire and he was shot down by friendly fire from a B29 flight.

Happy days !!

Now with photos - hopefully they will come out OK.

Some more...

Major Harry HOFFE and his Spitfire - the first aircraft is a Mk V he flew in Italy and the second is a Mk IX in Burma - 152 'Hyderabad' Sqn unit markings were 'UM' as the Wing leader his aircraft is marked 'T'. In Burma the Squadron adopted a leaping panther as their symbol and the incorporated it around the RAF roundel. Note how the RAF roundel doesnt have the traditional red circle in the centre. I didnt know why they changed the roundel design in Burma until someone explained it to me, and after that it seemed bloody obvious !!

Wow, way cool!!!!!!!

Nice photos, and a fascinating story!

As Texas Star mentioned above, tighten the screw at the bottom front of the grip frame snug; this will increase mainspring tension and probably make the trigger pull a little heavier.

This is one of the earlier guns in the British/Commonwealth contract, as it has a matte blue finish. The very early ones had a highly polished commercial blue finish, and soon after yours the "pre-Victory" series and beyond changed to the Black Magic finish, similar to Parkerizing.

I gather avoiding confusion with a certain other country's aircraft markings was the motivation to change the roundel, correct?

Yes, exactly that ! I cant believe why I didnt twig it myself. As I say its pretty obvious when you think about it !

This photo of Maj Hoffe it appears he is wearing a monocle, however I have other photos of him where he isnt wearing one - by other accounts by his men he was a bit of a hard drinking joker who loved a practical joke so it could well be he is messing about for the camera in this photo. I also doubt there were many monocle wearing pilots in WW2 !

The US had to do the same thing, the early war aircraft marking was a large white star with a small red dot in the middle...that changed pretty quickly!

Edited to add - it appears to have a 6" barrel? That is also unusual, the standard length is 5" but these are known to have been made, along with a few 4" originally designated for South Africa but diverted to Britain also.

That's the best condition RAF marked pre victory I've encountered, plus the history. Nice piece and thanks for sharing.

I think the reason it has little damage from British stamps is that he was actually issued it in North Africa when he joined his first operational squadron, he then kept it with him to the far east and then returned home to South Africa at the end of the war. Its very possible the gun never entered the UK at all and was simply shipped to a major Allied base in Africa so it neatly avoided the initial British broad arrow marks. Him taking it away after the war as a souvenir avoided the double arrow decommission markings and all the other rubbish they stamped everywhere - there is a modern UK proof mark under the barrel next to the serial no. when it eventually came to the UK and clearly the proof marker decided to go easy on the guns finish when proofing it.

I went to check to see if the grips had the serial no. pencilled on the flats and was pleased to find that the serial no. was actually stamped into the wood like its stamped into the metal on the gun - I have not heard of this before on this site so was wondering if that was a standard wartime feature ?

I think the RAF armorer was drunk when he stamped the RAF markings, either that or he had 300 to do before lunch and wanted to knock off early !

I think stamped stock panel numbers were standard by this time.

The English proof mark(s) under the bbl are interesting.
The one nearest the frame is the'Nitro Proof' from the London Proof House.
I really can't recall a firearm that was 'sold from service' there or otherwise put back into the private ownership market with London Proof House marks.

That job was left for the Birmingham Proof House, long considered the 'other proof house', a quiet dispute over bragging rights that goes back to the 1600's.

The mark itself on this revolver looks like it was punched with 2 separate stamps. One for the NP,,one for the arm w/sword. The London NP mark I've always seen has been a single stamp, everything centered and the single separation bar/line between the upper figure and the lower NP w/ perfect spacing up and down.
This mark is suspect in all of that.
Plus the other required proof marking(s) are missing.

The other mark I can't quite make out. It looks more like an Arsenal inspection mark than a proof mark.
If it's an 'IP'/D7 or O7,,it's nothing I'm familiar with as far as an inspection marking. There are many different ones though.
Longbranch (Canada) did use 'IP' for an inspection mark but it's placed at the bottom of the cross in their Crown & crossed pennants configuration. That certainly doesn't fit in here.
Ishapore used an 'IS' inspection mark, but it looks like an 'IP'/ to me.

The full set of London proof marks should also have a 'view mark' .
Crown/V if the proof was done after 1925 but before 1955,,,,Crown/GP if it was done after 1955.
AFAIK the NP and View mark should have each been stamped inside of a circle to indicate the proofing of a firearm not made in England. The same proof regs were followed by both London & Birmingham.
Also the 'Not English Make' would have been mandated to be stamped if proofed between 1925 and 1955.

I imagine the right person with the right connections could have gotten the revolver 'walked through' the proof process at the London Facility. Things seem to work that way no matter where you are.
That doesn't explain the two piece stamping for the existing NP mark nor the lack of the 'view' proof.

Very nice revolver though and it all just adds to the history when you consider where it came from and where it's been.

WOW!! is right. That's a fine looking firearm anywhere.
I'm glad you shared. The pilot's skill/luck in coming out of
that dark time, and, with the gun, is extraordinary.
Next time you see the pilot, tell him thanks for his service.
TACC1

Very interesting history. This gun, ser. # 700701, and may have been in a group of revolvers with 6 inch barrels, that included ser. # 701178, (also marked RAF in same fashion as 700701) that were ready to ship in Jan. 1940, but for reasons unknown now, did not ship until Sept. 1941. Ser. # 704824 is also stamped RAF ( and with the Flight Officer's name on the grips) and was shipped in Jan. 1940. Ed.

I picked up on him being South African when you gave his rank as Major, not as Squadron Leader or whatever is the RAF equivalent.

The gun seems to have come via the RAF, but there was also a separate South African Air Force, which operated largely in Italy. I am intrigued to see that he served in Burma, and that he had a MK IX Spit, not the MK VIII that was more usual there, and was actually a later variant, the MK IX being an emergency lashup of a MK V with dual radiators and a more powerful engine, to enable it to compete with the FW-190. Tropical usage of Hurries and Spits usually involved fitting a bulky air filter to the engine, diminishing its performance, to filter sand and excessive dust. The MK IX and later Spits had a trimmer filter in the engine. P-40's in RAF and other Allied use didn't seem to need the bulky filters. They had to operate below 15,000 feet, or the Allison engines lost power. But in the Med. theater and the far east, gave good service. A number of pilots became aces in those Curtiss planes, notably "Killer" Cain.

Far Eastern RAF planes had blue and gray roundels, to avoid any momentary confusion with red markings on Jap planes. In the Pacific, NZ and Aussie P-40's had blue and white roundels, and some had the rear half of the fuselage painted white, to hopefully keep USN fighters from attacking! I think they also went after USAAF planes, anything not US Naval. Dumb swabs...The problem was pretty serious for Allied fighters based on Guadalcanal. I guess the Navy couldn't confuse a P-38 with anything else, though.

Ask this guy if he was really RAF or SAAF. And can you post the photos so that we can enlarge them? They're pretty tiny. I especially want to see the panther marking on the Spitfire.

Did this pilot emigrate to the UK, or what? His name is Hoffe? Is he an Afrikaaner?

I have seen a photo of RAF pilots in North Africa, and they all had these six-inch barelled M&P .38's sticking out of their Pattern 37 webbing holsters. Only by leaning the butts of the guns way out could they close the flaps. The holsters are made for five-inch barrels.

The SAAF used Hurricanes, MK V and (maybe) MK IX Spitfires, and Mustangs as their primary fighters. I have a book on the SAAF and it shows many planes over the years and squadron markings.

My brother once owned a six-inch .38-200 like this one.

Texas Star,

I must admit you are entirely correct and I missed out on the detail that they were issued MK IXs in 1943 but reverted to MK VIII's in Dec 43 when posted to the far east.

Most of my research comes from their squadron website that you should find interesting: 152 Hyderabad Squadron

You will find details of the aircraft here and more photos of the panther symbol. Also the photos I posted are in the Gallery 2 1942 - 1946. Your observations about allied aircraft being mis identified and shot at by other nations aircraft is entirely correct but it was the USAAF not the USN that shot him down the second time !

Whilst he was a SAAF officer he was serving with an RAF Squadron, after the war he returned to South Africa, with this M&P and a captured Japanese Akrisaka rifle.

At work I have a large photo of him wearing his revolver in what is clearly a modified holster that has a single strap over the hammer securing it in place as compared to a flap - I had never seen this type of holster before and assumed it was something he had made up. Reading your comments about the fact the holsters didnt fit 6 inch barrelled revolvers this now makes a lot of sense.

Mike,

What a marvelous piece of history! From the thoroughness of your report, I'm sure that you have had Maj. Hoffe document his service. All of that deserves to be preserved for the future generations.

Please express our appreciation to Maj. Hoffe for his role in seeing that we all can study the German and Japanese languages as an elective if we choose. On this side, we can't forget that our Allies were also a part of the "Greatest Generation"!

Bob