The Schouboe Semi-automatic Rifle, created by Danish inventor Lt. Jens Schouboe
The rifle which was considered apparently the most promising of any fully tested before
1907 was a Danish model, the invention of Lt. Jens Schouboe, put out by the Dansk
Rekyl Riffel Syndicat of Copenhagen. A first test was conducted by the Board
of Officers convened at the Armory for that purpose in September 1903. The weapon,
a recoil-operated arm, functioned sufficiently well to result in the Board’s
requesting the inventor to embody a series of changes in the design and then
to resubmit the rifle.27 Report
of the test of the redesigned model was made on April 7, 1905.28 Tests
of further modifications were made in 1906, 1909, and 1911. “The most serious
defect noted was the overriding of the cartridge or the follower of the bolt,
and in the former case the consequent jamming of the cartridge at the front end
as the bolt moved forward.”29 The
difficulty lay in the pressure created by the 1903 cartridge, for, with the Danish
ammunition, functioning was satisfactory. So the rifles were returned for further
changes.30
The attempt
to adapt the Schouboe design to use with 1903 cartridges proved unsuccessful31 and
not until 1909 was another model, also unsatisfactory, submitted.32 Report
of the 1909 test has not been found. In April 1911 the Report of the Officers
testing the latest Schouboe model was emphatically condemnatory:
1) The magazine
could hold but 5 cartridges
2) The safety
feature were [sic] unsatisfactory
3) Rate of
fire, 45 rounds per minute, was insifficient [sic]
4) It was
not readily useable as a magazine rifle
5) In case
of misfire recocking necessitated moving the bolt to the rear
6) It was
not accurate, due to the recoiling barrel
7) Broken
parts were not readily replaced
8) Tools were
needed for dismounting and assembling
9) There was
no automatic indicator showing the number of cartridges in the magazine
10) There
was no device to show whether or not the rifle was loaded
11) The bolt
was in two pieces instead of one
12) There
was no adjustment for the retractor spring or the percussion spring
13) The arm
lacked strength and durability
The report concluded:
It is inferior to our service rifle in accuracy, and serviceability and in rapidity, except when used as a semi-automatic.33
By
that time, however, the competition had become much keener and each invention
showed the result of cumulative experience.
S.A. 111/c. O.O. 35921-28,
1st Ind.
S.A. 111/c, O.O. 35921-40,
6th Ind.
Ibid., Report of a Board
of Officers… Par. 39
Ibid., 8th Ind., June 29,
1905
S.A. 111/d, O.O. 35921-78,
1st & 2nd Ind., Report, May 26, 1906, 6th Ind., June 7, 1906
S.A. 111/h, O.O. 35921-123,
Nov. 23, 1909
S.A. 111/I, O.O. 35921-138,
April 11, 1911
|
