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!

Restoration of WW1 60 Pdr shrapnel (streamlined)

starshell

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Hi,

Does anyone know what screw size was used in fitting the head to a First war 60Pdr Shrapnel streamlined model.
Technical drawings of the day that I've found so far show 'Screw, A8, twisting pin B8.

Are these military designations for a standard Whitworth type of screw? If so what size is that screw?....


Many thanks in advance!
 
The drawing I have shows - 8 Steel Screws .25", 8 Twist pins .25" dia. As the fuze retaining grub screw is .25" x TPI, no information as to thread form is given, but one would assume Whitworth, making it 1/4" BS Whitworth, it is more than likely the screws and pins are 1/4 Whit.

TimG
 
Many thanks for that TimG,

Is there any chance you be kind enough to post an image of the drawing? I'd really appreciate it. Having taken the head off, I want to make sure it goes on at the correct height.
Also, having a drawing is pretty handy...

Cheers!
 
Hello TimG,
I understood starshell need information on "Streamlined" shell, different shape as MkII you show.

I know different models of 60pr shrapnel streamlined (found on ww1 battelfields).
Herewith documentation on Mk IV

60pr mk4 stream.jpg60pr doc.jpg
 
Last edited:
I have a WW2 era Mk IIID streamlined 60PR shell. Australian made and dated 7-39. I'll put some photos on later.
 
Here's a few photos of my WW2 era Australian made Mk IIID streamlined 60 PR. It was made at the Maribyrnong Ordnance Factory (MO) in Melbourne, Vic.
The base markings are: 60PR 56LB IIID MO (Lot)3 7-39.
The flash tube, pusher plate and powder cup are not from this shell, but perhaps a much earlier version. The tin cup is marked "5 IN B.L.".
 

Attachments

  • 01.jpg
    01.jpg
    102.5 KB · Views: 46
  • 02.jpg
    02.jpg
    85.6 KB · Views: 37
  • 03.jpg
    03.jpg
    87.7 KB · Views: 33
  • 04.jpg
    04.jpg
    101.1 KB · Views: 32
  • 05.jpg
    05.jpg
    180.6 KB · Views: 30
here's a few photos of my ww2 era australian made mk iiid streamlined 60 pr. It was made at the maribyrnong ordnance factory (mo) in melbourne, vic.
The base markings are: 60pr 56lb iiid mo (lot)3 7-39.
The flash tube, pusher plate and powder cup are not from this shell, but perhaps a much earlier version. The tin cup is marked "5 in b.l.".


mk3d :

60.jpg

Darkman, note the difference of head with brass adapter on the diagram
 
Thanks TimG and Minenaz16,
Just what I needed, so much appreciated.
Sadly, the head on my example has taken a bad knock and has a couple of the lugs pushed inwards about half and inch, so the head is out of true on one side. Trying to carefully hammer it out seems pretty tricky, the steel is very hard and prone to cracking, although a friend of mine is a skilled blacksmith and has said he'll heat it and reshape to original. Judging by the 'ring' of the metal when struck, this is either heat treated or top quality grade steel?
Either way the whole project has ground to a halt.....Bah....
Till then, I guess I'll look into finding a .25" x 20TPI Whitworth tap.

On another note, looking at Darkman's '39 dated Mk3, there doesn't seen to be a great deal of difference between a First war issue and a Second world war example, other than the driving band profile and a more 'angular' shell body profile. (First war examples seem to have a more sweeping radius on the shell body?).
Could be talking a load of tut, but just an observation.

Many thanks to all.
 
Could my 60pr be of a similar vintage ? it only has the markings I show.
 

Attachments

  • 60pr-2.jpg
    60pr-2.jpg
    248.7 KB · Views: 22
  • 60pr-1.jpg
    60pr-1.jpg
    153.4 KB · Views: 23
mk3d :

View attachment 155207

Darkman, note the difference of head with brass adapter on the diagram


Thanks Minenaz16, I see what you mean. The Mk IIID nose has a brass fuze adapter, but on mine the fuze screws straight into the steel nose like the Mk IV. Possibly I have a mismatched round with the bottom part of the shell a Mk IIID and the nose section from a Mk IV. I just assumed they were matching as the shell is unfired, but anything's possible.
Cheers, Graeme
 
Hi all,

Just to throw this into the mix if I may...
The shell nose I have is identical to Darkman's in that it has no Brass adaptor for the fuse. It looks identical to MINENAZ16's drawing of the MkIV. The shell body has a narrow driving band too.
I'm assuming this is the correct set up? What threw me off is that in the past I've seen a couple of examples with Brass adaptor sold as First war pieces? I'm hoping the head I have is correct before carrying out restoration and that this is a First war piece....
(I'll post pictures in the next day or two).
Cheers!
 
Herewith a picture of typical 60pr shrapnel found on ww1 battelfields (Mk1/Mk2 series and streamlined series without or with head brass adapter)

60PR SHRAPNEL WW1.jpg
 
In relation to British projectiles, especially those manufactured during the Great War, it should be noted that the incorporation or omission of a fuze adapter/bush, does not necessarily mean a change of Mark. Many projectiles had an 'alternative head' that incorporated an adapter/bush and vice versa. Also, for many projectiles, an accepted repair method if it had failed examination due to defective fuze hole threads, was to cut the nose off and replace it with it new nose, that might appear to be an adapter/bush, but isn't.

TimG

View attachment RL Shell Drawings.pdf
 
Last edited:
In relation to British projectiles, especially those manufactured during the Great War, it should be noted that the incorporation or omission of a fuze adapter/bush, does not necessarily mean a change of Mark. Many projectiles had an 'alternative head' that incorporated an adapter/bush and vice versa. Also, for many projectiles, an accepted repair method if it had failed examination due to defective fuze hole threads, was to cut the nose off and replace it with it new nose, that might appear to be an adapter/bush, but isn't.

TimG

View attachment 155259

Following on from TimG's post, I have 2 8" HE howitzer shells that are good examples of this; one has no Brass bushing, the other has. The drawings (copies) I have of the 8" HE show the fuze socket with no bushing as the 'alternative head'. Other than that both are identical.
 
Top