My First No. 4 Mk. 1T - Maybe??

[tj214]

Years ago I found the name of a gent online who worked during WWII for Unicam Instruments Cambridge (he still lived there IIRC) and phoned him him up out of the blue.

I'm perplexed about a couple of things as I learn more about what I acquired.

Surpmil's note seems to suggest the U.I.C. engraved on my Mk. 2/1 scope signifies Unicam Instruments Cambridge, but Peter Laidler's book Telescope Sighting No. 32 states on page 20:

"Vickers Instrument Company, whose telescopes are marked with the logo U.I.C., were invited to ..." [Note it's clearly a "U" and not "V" in Peter's book since he uses the U.I.C. identification in several places.]

Peter's chart of serial numbers ranges on page 32 lists "Vickers U.I. Co." as producing both Mk. 1 and Mk. 2/1 scopes.

Was Unicam a subsidiary of Vickers?

Back to page 20, again referring to the 2/1, Peter states:

"Those manufactured by Vickers with the serial numbers in the 0-1000 range carry the part number OS1400GA and are very rare and highly prized by collectors."

His serial numbers chart on page 32 lists:

"Manufacturer: Vickers U.I. Co.
From: 0 To: 1000
Mark: 2/1
Total: 1000
Remarks: Identified by figures OS 1400 GA"

My scope, as shown in the photos in my original post above, is marked:

TEL. STG. NO 32, Mk. 2.
U.I.C. O.S. 1650A.
No 21

Although my serial number (21) falls within the Vickers range (and none of the other manufacturers' ranges in Peter's chart), it has the 1650A nomenclature rather than the 1400 GA described in Peter's book.

Hence my confusion. It would seem I've got a Vickers manufactured Mk. 2/1 but the part number doesn't match what I would expect from the chart. Could it be I've got such an early tube the Mk. 2 part number was engraved but the later (?) part number was not added in place of the 1650A?

Am I missing something?

[Roger Payne]

This is what I suggested a bit earlier in this thread. Not all UIC Mk2/1 scopes were correctly marked with the 2/1 Optical Stores number of OS 1400GA, some were obviously assembled on existing tubes already intended to be assembled as Mk2's, with the relevant OS number of 1650A. Lance may be able to enlighten us from his data base, but logic would suggest that the earlier production scopes would most likely have been assembled on Mk2 engraved tubes, this being corrected as production of scopes went along.

It wasn't just Mk2 to 2/1 scope assembly where this occurred. I have a Mk2 scope that has the Mk1 OS number barred through & the Mk2 OS number added.

IIRC Peter wrote the book just over thirty years ago. A lot of additional information has come to light in the intervening years, particularly since we have had the internet. Peter might want to chip in himself, but I think when he was preparing the book he mentioned that he believed UIC may have been a subsidiary of Vickers, called the United Instruments Company. I am not certain how sure he was of this, & I know surpmil suspects it could have been Unicam. I honestly don't know which explanation is correct........UIC scopes are generally & loosely referred to as 'Vickers No32's', at least by me. It keeps life easier........I'm a big fan of that!

[tj214]

FYI, Lance & Peter et al addressed my exact questions in a very old thread I missed (https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=80499). Recap from that thread:

• Only 545 Vickers (UIC) Mk. 2/1s built (not 1000) (Per Lance)
• "Early Vickers Mk 2/1 scopes bear the OS1650A Mk II markings but are set up as Mk 2/1’s." And, apparently, the only manufacturer of 2/1s. (Per Lance)
• "On the subject of UIC, indicating United Instruments, it was a joint group of small independent instrument companies that usually worked as small-time sub contractors for the big TTH's, CTS's etc etc around the Country. A bit like Houghton Butcher, that came together for the war but UIC was 'controlled/directed' by the giant Vickers company. The Vickers archivist told me recently that the reason UIC didn't succeed as did HBM, was was that it encompassed so many small firms that each thought that they were missing out a bit on their chunk of the work..." (Per Peter)

What an amazing education this site offers us!

[Surpmil]

Unicam or United I have no stake in either. Could be just variations of the same name, in fact that is the most likely interpretation I suggest.

Clearly much remains in the Vickers archive, which IIRC has been passed on the Barrow Museum Service.

Just came across these photos of a U.I.C. Mk.2 incidentally.