No.36 mkII?

[Fragman]

Then of course there's this MkII variant for throwing practice:tinysmile_cry_t2:. Cheers

 

[Snufkin]

See attached pics. First two, from left to right (and here I reference Darryl Lynn's "Grenade Recognition Manual, Vol.2 "):

(i) Grenade, Hand, No.36M Drill Mark I
(ii) Grenade, Hand, No.36M Drill Mark II
(iii) Grenade, .303 inch Rifle, Practice, No.36 Mark II

(i) and (ii) have 36 M MkI base plugs, but the Drill Mark II is distinguished from Drill Mark I by the additional wire to prevent loss of the lever when the pin is pulled during throwing practice.

(iii) is the true 36 Mk II as defined by the base plug - a reinforced plug for multiple rifle cup firings.

Note that the 36 Mk II is not a 36 M Mk II - it was hardly necessary to seal a grenade with holes in the body for tropical or hot climate (Mesopotamian) use. (However, the terms No.36M Drill Marks I and II are something of a contradiction as they also have five holes drilled into them!)

I'd argue that the fine discrimination between the different types of training grenade was perhaps somewhat irrelevant. My father did his basic infantry training at Lincoln barracks in August-September 1942. His grenade throwing practice commenced with 1/3 house bricks, progressed to weighted wooden carved facsimiles, and ended with throwing two live 36s on the throwing range by what was Lincoln racecourse. He, like many of his mates, never saw a 36 Drill grenade of any type, painted white, full of holes, extra bits of wire, or whatever...

Getting a bit off the subject of MkII nomenclature, I found a couple of pics (courtesy a long gone eBay listing) of a wooden, weighted 36 - very similar to what my father described as his throwing practice grenades.



Tom.

 

[Fragman]

One must always be ready to learn new tricks, that's for sure:nerd:. Without doubt the only people overly concerned about designations, dates, and designs are the collector. During the war years, if it fitted it would have been used. Attached is a photo of an early throwing practice grenade made in NZ (I've already posted it on another thread) and another throwing practice variation. With this one the hole in the base plug was drilled all of the way through, so that a small rod could be fitted internally to stop the plunger from going inside the body of the grenade. This made it very easy to reset the lever between throws. I've put it inside a sectioned mills for display purposes. Cheers

 

[dano1917]

One must always be ready to learn new tricks, that's for sure:nerd:. Without doubt the only people overly concerned about designations, dates, and designs are the collector. During the war years, if it fitted it would have been used. Attached is a photo of an early throwing practice grenade made in NZ (I've already posted it on another thread) and another throwing practice variation. With this one the hole in the base plug was drilled all of the way through, so that a small rod could be fitted internally to stop the plunger from going inside the body of the grenade. This made it very easy to reset the lever between throws. I've put it inside a sectioned mills for display purposes. Cheers

Well said Colin, hard and fast rules do not necessarily apply especially when at war. "If it fit it would have been used" pretty much sums it all up.........Dano

 

[Snufkin]

Kiwicolin, many thanks for the images! The solid (I assume it's solid) drill grenade is as simple as a 1/3 house brick, probably more accurate in weight and looks capable of being launched from a cup - unlike the brick!

Regarding the rapid recocking version (lovely sectioned job there), it's a descendent of the mechanism tried in the No.5 in 1916 - see attached pics of a nickel plated throwing practice example. Fascinating, as I've not encountered that done in a No.36 before.

Was Booth MacDonald a NZ manufacturer? Again that's a new one on me.

Thanks again.


Tom.

 

[Fragman]

Hi Snufkin. Thanks for the photo's. I assume the drill grenade is intended for use as a rifle grenade (has a machined base). It is also welded top and bottom, so I think it's made from a hollow pipe. BM was one of New Zealands larger manufacturers. It had foundries in a number of cities. The photo attached is the Christchurch one. Cheers

 

[Millsman]

Getting a bit off the subject of MkII nomenclature, I found a couple of pics (courtesy a long gone eBay listing) of a wooden, weighted 36 - very similar to what my father described as his throwing practice grenades.


Tom.

Tom

I actually saw that grenade for sale at Chatham dockyard a few months ago, I thought it was a fake. The guy wanted 60 for it.

John

 

[Bonnex]

Grenade, 303-in Rifle, Practice, No 36M (& other notations)

See attached pics. First two, from left to right (and here I reference Darryl Lynn's "Grenade Recognition Manual, Vol.2 "):

(i) Grenade, Hand, No.36M Drill Mark I
(ii) Grenade, Hand, No.36M Drill Mark II
(iii) Grenade, .303 inch Rifle, Practice, No.36 Mark II

(i) and (ii) have 36 M MkI base plugs, but the Drill Mark II is distinguished from Drill Mark I by the additional wire to prevent loss of the lever when the pin is pulled during throwing practice.

(iii) is the true 36 Mk II as defined by the base plug - a reinforced plug for multiple rifle cup firings.

Note that the 36 Mk II is not a 36 M Mk II - it was hardly necessary to seal a grenade with holes in the body for tropical or hot climate (Mesopotamian) use. (However, the terms No.36M Drill Marks I and II are something of a contradiction as they also have five holes drilled into them!)

I'd argue that the fine discrimination between the different types of training grenade was perhaps somewhat irrelevant. My father did his basic infantry training at Lincoln barracks in August-September 1942. His grenade throwing practice commenced with 1/3 house bricks, progressed to weighted wooden carved facsimiles, and ended with throwing two live 36s on the throwing range by what was Lincoln racecourse. He, like many of his mates, never saw a 36 Drill grenade of any type, painted white, full of holes, extra bits of wire, or whatever...

Getting a bit off the subject of MkII nomenclature, I found a couple of pics (courtesy a long gone eBay listing) of a wooden, weighted 36 - very similar to what my father described as his throwing practice grenades.



Tom.

Tom,

In view of your comments, and with nothing better to do in the warm, I thought I would look into the 'M' story.

WOLCs track the changes of course and its a pretty busy set of entries:
25114 - New pattern
25319 - Painting
A1139 - Spare parts
A8433 - Nomenclature "M" added
A9981 - Modification (this adds the holes)
B3654 - Nomenclature "Hand or"
B5994 - Drill substituted for Practice
C849 - 303 deleted
C7626 - Obsolete then Reinstated by amendment
C9720 - Store transferred in the vocab

So the clue is A8433 (7th December 1932) which says:

Consequent on the No 36 service grenade having become obsolete (A8434) the nomenclature of the above mentioned stores* [...] has been amended to read as shown.

Existing No36 practice grenades will be used up to represent the No36M service grenade without alteration to the markings, but in furure manufacture practice grenades will be stamped "No. 36M".


* refers to Practice detonators No36 grenade (Mks I & II), gaschecks, and Grenades, .303-inch Rifle, Practice No 36 (Mks I & II, Bodies, Levers, safety pins).

So it aligns the practice nomenclature with the prevailing service store. Makes you wonder why they didn't just drop the 'M' notation entirely.

Hope that is useful albeit pedantic.

 

[paul the grenade]

Hi Snufkin.
I live in lincoln and have spent many an afternoon field walking the old grenade range (about half a mile from the old race course) You never fail to find a handful of baseplugs and shrapnell.
If you want any bits let me know. It could be from the very grenades your father threw in 42.
You often find bits of 68's and 69's too.
heres some pics of my mk2.
Cheers, Paul.

See attached pics. First two, from left to right (and here I reference Darryl Lynn's "Grenade Recognition Manual, Vol.2 "):

(i) Grenade, Hand, No.36M Drill Mark I
(ii) Grenade, Hand, No.36M Drill Mark II
(iii) Grenade, .303 inch Rifle, Practice, No.36 Mark II

(i) and (ii) have 36 M MkI base plugs, but the Drill Mark II is distinguished from Drill Mark I by the additional wire to prevent loss of the lever when the pin is pulled during throwing practice.

(iii) is the true 36 Mk II as defined by the base plug - a reinforced plug for multiple rifle cup firings.

Note that the 36 Mk II is not a 36 M Mk II - it was hardly necessary to seal a grenade with holes in the body for tropical or hot climate (Mesopotamian) use. (However, the terms No.36M Drill Marks I and II are something of a contradiction as they also have five holes drilled into them!)

I'd argue that the fine discrimination between the different types of training grenade was perhaps somewhat irrelevant. My father did his basic infantry training at Lincoln barracks in August-September 1942. His grenade throwing practice commenced with 1/3 house bricks, progressed to weighted wooden carved facsimiles, and ended with throwing two live 36s on the throwing range by what was Lincoln racecourse. He, like many of his mates, never saw a 36 Drill grenade of any type, painted white, full of holes, extra bits of wire, or whatever...

Getting a bit off the subject of MkII nomenclature, I found a couple of pics (courtesy a long gone eBay listing) of a wooden, weighted 36 - very similar to what my father described as his throwing practice grenades.



Tom.

 

[Snufkin]

Tom,

In view of your comments, and with nothing better to do in the warm, I thought I would look into the 'M' story.

WOLCs track the changes of course and its a pretty busy set of entries:
25114 - New pattern
25319 - Painting
A1139 - Spare parts
A8433 - Nomenclature "M" added
A9981 - Modification (this adds the holes)
B3654 - Nomenclature "Hand or"
B5994 - Drill substituted for Practice
C849 - 303 deleted
C7626 - Obsolete then Reinstated by amendment
C9720 - Store transferred in the vocab

So the clue is A8433 (7th December 1932) which says:

Consequent on the No 36 service grenade having become obsolete (A8434) the nomenclature of the above mentioned stores* [...] has been amended to read as shown.

Existing No36 practice grenades will be used up to represent the No36M service grenade without alteration to the markings, but in furure manufacture practice grenades will be stamped "No. 36M".


* refers to Practice detonators No36 grenade (Mks I & II), gaschecks, and Grenades, .303-inch Rifle, Practice No 36 (Mks I & II, Bodies, Levers, safety pins).

So it aligns the practice nomenclature with the prevailing service store. Makes you wonder why they didn't just drop the 'M' notation entirely.

Hope that is useful albeit pedantic.

Norman,

That is extremely helpful - the point at which the M notation was adopted for the Practice No.36 is something I've been looking for. My limited WOLC references end in 1926, and I had thought it would have been before this date, certainly not as late as 1932.

At that date the practice No.36 grenade was as well sealed against moisture/humidity as the No.36 service grenade, so renaming it M was not anomalous; it is when they started drilling holes in them around 1937 that the M notation really lost its meaning. Re the drilling of holes, I don't suppose you have the relevent Change order...:tinysmile_hmm_t:

An interesting comment in A1139 regarding replacements for damaged and lost parts of practice No.36: "At least 75 per cent of the number of bodies and gaschecks requiring replacement are to be produced when applying for exchange. Any losses of such parts above 25 per cent will be dealt with under King's Regulations." It makes one wonder whether practice grenades were being appropriated at an excessive rate as souvenirs...


Tom.

 

[Snufkin]

Hi Snufkin.
I live in lincoln and have spent many an afternoon field walking the old grenade range (about half a mile from the old race course) You never fail to find a handful of baseplugs and shrapnell.
If you want any bits let me know. It could be from the very grenades your father threw in 42.
You often find bits of 68's and 69's too.
heres some pics of my mk2.
Cheers, Paul.

Paul,

Thanks, a great example of the No.36M Drill Mk II, with a No.36 Mk II base plug, a combination not described in the GRM.

I'll PM you regarding the Lincoln training ground as I have a few questions about it. It would be good to see a photo of your base plug and fragment treasure trove...


Tom.

 

[Bonnex]

Norman,

[...]
At that date the practice No.36 grenade was as well sealed against moisture/humidity as the No.36 service grenade, so renaming it M was not anomalous; it is when they started drilling holes in them around 1937 that the M notation really lost its meaning. Re the drilling of holes, I don't suppose you have the relevent Change order...:tinysmile_hmm_t:

[...]
Tom.

Herewith the relevant paragraph (attached).

 

[Snufkin]

Superb, thanks Norman. I believe a few people have expressed interest in that in the past.

The base plug is probably the best example of a Mk II I've ever seen, partly from its rarity and also that it is indeed an M Mk II, made by the Royal Labs. It couldn't get better than that... Thanks very much.




Tom.

 

[Bonnex]

[...]

The base plug is probably the best example of a Mk II I've ever seen, partly from its rarity and also that it is indeed an M Mk II, made by the Royal Labs. It couldn't get better than that... Thanks very much.


Tom.

It was on a body painted black with a yellow band (who has ever heard of that for a practice livery?). Anyway the owner gave it a good sand blasting and a coat of humbrol's best glossy white which soon sorted that out.

 

[paul the grenade]

hi Tom.
heres a selection of the bits that can be easliy found lying around when the plough has been over the field.
cheers, paul.

Paul,

Thanks, a great example of the No.36M Drill Mk II, with a No.36 Mk II base plug, a combination not described in the GRM.

I'll PM you regarding the Lincoln training ground as I have a few questions about it. It would be good to see a photo of your base plug and fragment treasure trove...


Tom.

 

[Snufkin]

hi Tom.
heres a selection of the bits that can be easliy found lying around when the plough has been over the field.
cheers, paul.

Many thanks for that, Paul.

Considering the No.36 body fragments have been in the ground for 65+ years, they appear to be in stunningly good condition. Clearly the Lincoln soil must be good for preserving ferrous items - which would explain why some of the Roman, Viking and Dark Ages finds from the vicinity have been so good.

Cheers, Tom.