British Ordnance Collectors Network
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Type 91 MT nose fuze cutaway
- Thread starter Mrfuze
- Start date
BOUGAINVILLE
Well-Known Member
A really superb job once again. I really appreciate seeing you fantastic work. Keep them comming.
Cheers,
BOUGAINVILLE
Cheers,
BOUGAINVILLE
Hi Erhard,
Another superb example - great job!
So they are made with chromed plated brass!
Do you why only this type was done this way and not other Japanese Navy fuses?
{Seems that these fuses were mostly used on the 12.7cm & 14cm projectiles which also accommodated the type 88 impact, which was just regular brass construction - perhaps higher reliability in corrosive/sea conditions - I noticed that the internal clock mechanism is also constructed with chrome plated brass parts. The type 88 impact is probably of a simplier design and more robust to exposure of the elements?}
(At one stage I though that it may have been stainless steel...yes expensive $$$.......don't laugh all the Japanese Navy machined made swords are made with stainless steel!)
Are you aware of any variations of this type, once again constructed with chrome plated brass? [I have an example of other variation, has a more pronounced ballistic top]
Thanks
Cheers
Drew
BTW - Using your cut-away I have successfully manage to "dismantle" my one after all these years!!!
Another superb example - great job!
So they are made with chromed plated brass!
Do you why only this type was done this way and not other Japanese Navy fuses?
{Seems that these fuses were mostly used on the 12.7cm & 14cm projectiles which also accommodated the type 88 impact, which was just regular brass construction - perhaps higher reliability in corrosive/sea conditions - I noticed that the internal clock mechanism is also constructed with chrome plated brass parts. The type 88 impact is probably of a simplier design and more robust to exposure of the elements?}
(At one stage I though that it may have been stainless steel...yes expensive $$$.......don't laugh all the Japanese Navy machined made swords are made with stainless steel!)
Are you aware of any variations of this type, once again constructed with chrome plated brass? [I have an example of other variation, has a more pronounced ballistic top]
Thanks
Cheers
Drew
BTW - Using your cut-away I have successfully manage to "dismantle" my one after all these years!!!
Type 91 MT nose fuze
Hi Drew,
There is the Type 91 MT nose fuze, as you have seen as a cutaway with the gear ring for automatic setting device, than there is the Type 91 without gear ring, than the type "0" for 12 & 20cm projos (outer appearance is the same as the Type 91, except the base assembly looks different) and there is the type 98 MT fuze with a longer cap and gear ring.
Mrfuze, USA
Hi Drew,
There is the Type 91 MT nose fuze, as you have seen as a cutaway with the gear ring for automatic setting device, than there is the Type 91 without gear ring, than the type "0" for 12 & 20cm projos (outer appearance is the same as the Type 91, except the base assembly looks different) and there is the type 98 MT fuze with a longer cap and gear ring.
Mrfuze, USA
Hi Erhard,
The four variations that you have kindly outlined above seem to align up to a vague 1945 reference stating four variations but all denoted under the "Type 91" banner:
{REMARKS -The model number of the projectile and that of the gun have not been determined. There are three known modifications of the Model 91 fuze giving four fuzes called Model 91, each varying only slightly from the other}
From your description, my second variation could be a Type 98, as it has the longer cap, gear ring, but slight difference in the base construction.
{I'll post some photos when I can "steal" my camera back from my Wife!}
I'll research the Type 98 as I currently do not have any photos of this type for IDing
I may start a new thread on this and hence not to "distract" the audience from your superb cutaway Type 91 example!
Thanks
Cheers
Drew
