2 pounder littlejohn mk 1 query

[SG500]

The photo shows a 2 pounder littlejohn.....with a difference. Its been turned out of a solid piece of metal except for the tracer which is fitted separately (the tracer being a metal tube and not of the correct tracer profile).
There is no stamping.
I am well aware that this is not a service projectile.
My query is what is it for? The "projectile" is well made and is the same profile as a real mk 1 littlejohn. My first impression is it was made to replicate a real one but it is obviously very old so is in my opinion unlikely to be made to complete a collection (until a real one came along).
Is is possibly a manufacturers model made to show the profile of the round prior the expensive production techniques required of a service projectile?
Dave.

 

[Burney Davis]

I don't have an answer for you Dave, but I have one that is identical. I believe I was told at the time I got it that four of these were found together some ten (?) years ago.

BD

 

[Chris 42 RQ]

Square or tapered ?

Nice that another has turned up (BD's post) as it now lokks like it was for a specific purpose.
Dave has that "Tracer" tube got a squared off end or is it slightly tapered towards the inside as from your picture it looks like it may be a piece of "Gas" barrel that has been cut with a hardened wheel
(the same type of tool as used to cut Copper pipe)????

 

[SG500]

Thanks both, yes it is good to know there are other similar ones.

Chris the tracer does look like a bit of cut off tube, its certainly not the correct profile of the tracer that goes in the Mk 1........but why go to the bother of making a tracer that is incorrect in the first place?

Dave.

 

[Chris 42 RQ]

Tester !

I'm beggining to think it may be a mounting "Spigot" for possibly something like a wind tunnel test ???
Especially now there are more than just yours about-I wonder if BD's is exactly the same ??????????

 

[racefiets]

I'm beggining to think it may be a mounting "Spigot" for possibly something like a wind tunnel test ???

But then the shape of the grenade should be as a fired example.

 

[Chris 42 RQ]

Odd scenarios ?

But then the shape of the grenade should be as a fired example.

Yes raciefites you are correct but not all of these items were fired with the correct "Littlejohn" adaptor fitted to the weapon-there is an earlier post that I cannot find by SG500 who shows a 57mm ? Littlejohn that has been fired from a standard gun without the appropriate adaptor in place !!
Strange things are done with ammunition as the makers have to take into account all sorts of odd scenarios !
i.e. I had a 40/60 projectile that was fired from a 2 Pounder A/T gun-that is not standard practice but done on a "what if" basis !

 

[spotter]

is this the post your looking for chris http://www.bocn.co.uk/vbforum/squee...iles-t36466.html?t=36466&highlight=littlejohn

 

[SG500]

Thanks all, yes Chris, that is an idea I hadn't thought of - good one!

I understand that when the littlejohn rounds were fired the tank crews didn't always want to go to the trouble of getting out of the tank and screwing the littlejohn adapter in place but just fired the round anyway so the projectile acted like an arrowhead round - good performance over a short distance but not so good over longer distances.

Attached a picure I posted elsewhere on the forum of the 17 pounder flat head proof littlejohn that has been fired through a normal barrel.

Dave.

 

[Chris 42 RQ]

Thanks Spotter

Yes thats the one Spot, thank you for locating it.

And I see SG500 has another one fired from a standard Barrel ???????

 

[SG500]

Yes thats the one Spot, thank you for locating it.

And I see SG500 has another one fired from a standard Barrel ???????

Well you know how it goes, when I see these things I just have to go for it.
The others in the picture are a 6pr6cwt and a 2pr mk 2 (for scale).

Dave.

 

[RichardB]

Dave, Chris, Burney

It seems either the same projectile that started the thread, or yet another has found its way to me and into a spare Littlejohn case I had knocking around. (..and there it will stay until, I find a real Mk1)
What is interesting, is the quality of manufacture, visually, it seem spot on but I don't have an engineering drawing of the Mk1 to measure it again.. so if anyone does have a drawing Id love a copy.

My view, is that it definitely seem strange that someone would go to such lengths to copy something with such detail and yet not give two hoots about the weight, which is miles off, and therefore would neer pass as an original if painted. It also is definitely old, and that seems to add weight (so to speak) to my first statement as I surely the older it is, the less likely its a fraud as it'd have been worth alot less than Mk1's are today, and therefore less incentive.

So what options do we have

1. Fake that someone has made to demonstrate the Mk1 or possible sell on for profit? - I don't believe this option based on paragraph above (..and the fact the other options are more valuable )
2. Engineering model for wind tunnel test - I'm not completely convinced of this option unless they compared data between shapes chose the most efficient and then tested empirically.
3. Combat round for use without littlejohn adapter - Not convinced as they'd have to have had separate ballistic tables for the round?
4. Proof round - No
5. Manufactures example - Possibly, but surely that would be a real Mk1??
5. Drill / Educational round - Well, thats my best guess, and I've placed it next to a Mk2 that I was told was an educational round when I got it (reliable source) as the case is filled will coil of sisal string to give accurate weight to the round. The argument to this is the fact the Mk2 is a real projectile as the 40mm sections are hollow and not solid

What does everyone think, my view is option 5 or possibly 2



Cheers
Rich

 

[SG500]

Rich it is exactly the same projectile, I've just sold it on SA through a friend. I'd go for option 5, easier to produce, cheaper to produce but fulfils the purpose i.e showing people what it looks like. With reference to your Mk 2, well, the Mk 1 came from the same guy and we both know the quality of the stuff in his collection.
Dave.