What's new
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!

Leeming Grenade 1915

Millsman

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
By sheer luck I was able to buy a Leeming Grenade today. Sadly lacking a lever (any out there?) but otherwise in good condition barring a small chip out of one shoulder. Even seems to have the original ring and pin. A Mills lever does not fit.

Photo below.

DSCN0986.jpg
 
That's a completely new granade to me. Never even heard of....
Thanks for posting,
Regards, DJH
 
That's a completely new granade to me. Never even heard of....
Thanks for posting,
Regards, DJH


I don't think it got past the prototype stage.

Leeming was an interesting character. He worked for the government (War Office / Trench Warfare or similar) and was responsible for placing contracts for the Mills No 5 with all the large number of makers who started producing them in the summer of 1915. He was a civil engineer by trade and obviously had his own thoughts about the Mills. Anyway in August 1915 he put in a patent application for his own Mills Type grenade.
 
Last edited:
Alternative nomenclature for this private venture grenade is the Fraser-Brewerton or FB Hand Grenade - Frederick Albert Fraser and Frank Howard Brewerton being the other two names on the Patent No.11679 (of which a page is shown in the original post) along with Captain James Arthur Leeming, RE.

The design was developed (Provisional Patent 17703) into the FB Rifle Grenade, whereby the top fuze and igniter assembly was replaced by a "firing plug" with attached rifle rod. Some scant information attached.



Tom.
 

Attachments

  • FB page 2.jpg
    FB page 2.jpg
    172.5 KB · Views: 25
  • FB page 1.jpg
    FB page 1.jpg
    291.3 KB · Views: 31
Thanks very much Tom. I had no idea the design had been further developed into a rifle grenade. I quite like the straight line fuze arrangement in the first patent. I'll try to find the second.

John
 
Thanks very much Tom. I had no idea the design had been further developed into a rifle grenade. I quite like the straight line fuze arrangement in the first patent. I'll try to find the second.

John

John, I don't believe the Provisional Patent became a full Patent, so you'll be lucky to find anything more.

The fuze mechanism of the hand grenade looks a tad familiar.

Tom.
 

Attachments

  • DSC06892.jpg
    DSC06892.jpg
    113.7 KB · Views: 43
  • DSC06890.jpg
    DSC06890.jpg
    212.1 KB · Views: 42
Thanks - that shows the second drawing from the patent that shows the alternate cap. There is a reference in the patent to the grenade being used as a rifle grenade but the drawings are just referred to as a version and an alternate version.

Here's the two drawings together

DSCN0988.jpg

John
 
John, I don't believe the Provisional Patent became a full Patent, so you'll be lucky to find anything more.

The fuze mechanism of the hand grenade looks a tad familiar.

Tom.

Thanks Tom. Sadly the parts are not interchangeable with a Mills lever. So I'll have to see about making a replica lever. Worth it in this case.

I've searched for the 2nd patent and can't see it anywhere, so I assume it failed or they didn't pay the fee or just let the provisional patent lapse.

Great that you have a complete one.
 
Last edited:
John, the lever is a standard Mills channel lever, but with the pin holes drilled much closer to the striker. Just get a Mills lever, blank the holes by tapping and filling with 3.5 or 4mm diameter steel bolt or studding, then drill new holes. As you say, worth it in this case.



Tom.
 
Last edited:
I've fitted a Mills lever with new holes drilled. I'll treat this as a trial run until I can find a better lever.

The shape of the lever had to be modified to match the body shape of the Leeming which has a very different profile the the Mills No 5.

Thanks for the advice Tom

John

SSCN1041.JPGSSCN1040.JPG
 
John,

In the example I show the pin holes are located so that the lever lies clear of the body.

Edited to say you might have to apply a bit of heat from a blow lamp to slightly reduce the curve of the lever. The lever profiles can vary from one to another.

Tom.
 

Attachments

  • DSC01288.jpg
    DSC01288.jpg
    251.8 KB · Views: 20
Last edited:
Thanks Tom

Is your an original lever or one you have fitted yourself?

As with the Mills the first type levers seemed to fit differently all the time. So I'm not too bothered about it being close to the body. I'll have another go at this one but I see this as a trial run until I can get a better lever for the grenade.

John
 
The lever, pin, striker and spring are all original.

As for the Mills lever you have put on your example, it shows the original configuration and is in keeping with the condition of the grenade. It's enough.




Tom.
 
Some images of the fuze mechanism and body disassembled.



Tom.
 

Attachments

  • DSC01304.JPG
    DSC01304.JPG
    172.3 KB · Views: 25
  • DSC01302.JPG
    DSC01302.JPG
    141.2 KB · Views: 25
  • DSC01301.JPG
    DSC01301.JPG
    126.7 KB · Views: 26
  • DSC01297.jpg
    DSC01297.jpg
    170.8 KB · Views: 22
Last edited:
Thanks for the photos Tom.

When I first saw the patent drawings I was wary of the small spring and small striker. It does not seem to have a long travel and I thought the spring might be weak.

Do you think it was up to the job?
 
It is a strong spring for its size. Releasing the striker onto a finger held over the aperture - so about 15mm of travel - hurts. I feel sure it would fire a .410 centre fire igniter, and I imagine it was something the inventors confirmed up front.




Tom.
 
Interesting Tom. On that basis perhaps more efficient that the Mills which was certainly heavy duty by comparison. Do we know why the Leeming was rejected?
 
Amongst other things, having only recently got the supply chain up and running for the Mills, and ever increasing quantities finally being delivered by the manufacturers, the introduction of yet another grenade that would disrupt production, delivery, training and use, was unlikely to find favour, unless the advantages were overwhelming - which they most likely were not.






Tom.
 
Top