they still turn up! Victorian No.54

[Rrickoshae]

just goes to show, you do have to keep rooting about. This No.54 turned up recently and at 10 doean't seem unreasonable. A quick clean is all that is needed. DView attachment 104824

 

[Major]

Nice one mate. But could you tell me, what is this?

 

[Rrickoshae]

Nice one mate. But could you tell me, what is this?

its a time & percussion fuze (large domed), introduced in 1887 & declared obsolete in 1920. It would have been used on large calibre shrapnel shells. Its a lot harder to find than the the more common smaller domed fuzes seen on 10, 12 & 15pdrs. see attached for comparison. D

 

[ben2000]

Nice find, Victorian era ordnance is the best. though being 1904 dated this one is Edwardian :tinysmile_twink_t:

 

[Dronic69]

Dave,

Nice collection!

Can you please provide more details (photos) on the second one on the left (next to the No 54)?

Looks unusual.

Thanks

Cheers
Drew

 

[Rrickoshae]

Nice find, Victorian era ordnance is the best. though being 1904 dated this one is Edwardian :tinysmile_twink_t:

almost right - but totally wrong, its not an Edwardian design Ben! Actually, the 04 date was its reissue date not date of manufacture. But I'm glad I don't work in Milletts!! :wink:

 

[Rrickoshae]

Dave,

Nice collection!

Can you please provide more details (photos) on the second one on the left (next to the No 54)?

Looks unusual.

Thanks

Cheers
Drew

hi Drew, its a No. 55. Very similar to the 56 but having a nose exhaust port rather than a side port. Dave

 

[Dronic69]

Hi Dave,

I was aware of the No 55 but never seen one before until now - no doubt much harder to find that the No 56s.

Nice collection!

Cheers
Drew

 

[Rrickoshae]

Hi Dave,

I was aware of the No 55 but never seen one before until now - no doubt much harder to find that the No 56s.

Nice collection!

Cheers
Drew

hi Drew, yes, its the only one I've ever seen. It came with another 54, a 24, a 138 and several other uncommon fuzes from an old chap who was having to go into a home.

Dave

 

[ben2000]

its not an Edwardian design Ben!

I never said it was. Though I stand corrected on the date - I'd always assumed the date on them was a date of manufacture.

 

[Dronic69]

I also was under the impression that the date stamp was either the manufactured date or date of conversion(s) - not sure what a "re-issue" date is if it not the date of manufacture?

They seem consistent around that era stamping any modifications - the photo shows this original No 56 being converted twice:

1) Manufatcured as No 56 in 1901;
2) Converted to a No 61 in 1902;
3) Converted to a No 60c in 1904

Dave,
If it is not too much trouble, could you to please post some markings of your No 55, I'm especially interested in the "II"
Thanks
Cheers
Drew