Welcome to the Inert Ordnance Collectors.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1
    Ordnance Approved
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sarajevo
    Posts
    682
    Images
    17
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 344 Times in 118 Posts

    No. 37 long delay fuze w/o anti-removal device?

    Could left fuze on the photo be a No.37 fuze without anti-removal device? I have been reading about these fuzes produced since 1944. but I have never had the honor to meet an example.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    ordnance shown in my posts has been dealt with accordingly by EOD personnel

    Federal Civil Protection EOD Department

    my panoramio: http://www.panoramio.com/user/2050161

    my deviantart: http://vranax.deviantart.com/gallery/

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    1,778
    Thanks
    426
    Thanked 2,082 Times in 467 Posts
    A No.37 without an anti-removal device is called a No.53. It is recognizable by the white paint in the V groove.

    Here one for comparison;
    http://www.bocn.co.uk/vbforum/thread...l-pistol-No-53

    Regards, ,DJH
    Last edited by pzgr40; 7th March 2016 at 03:46 PM.

  3. #3
    Ordnance Approved
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    FRANCE
    Posts
    2,208
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks
    2,185
    Thanked 1,785 Times in 811 Posts
    Hello,

    I think al'saad already knows details of No53, maybe he talks about a fuze made with the body of a No37.

    Regards

    TailPistolNo53.JPG
    Last edited by MINENAZ16; 7th March 2016 at 03:56 PM.
    Any Live or Dug ordnance shown by me has been disposed of by EOD personnel .

  4. #4
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Baden-Württemberg Germany
    Posts
    947
    Images
    25
    Thanks
    61
    Thanked 403 Times in 168 Posts
    I would say that both are identical Fuze !!! Both models are average No 37 with expansion lock. Since no '53 is. The fashion color ring is wrong !!!
    Search always English and US Bomb Fuzes!

  5. #5
    Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Baden-Württemberg Germany
    Posts
    947
    Images
    25
    Thanks
    61
    Thanked 403 Times in 168 Posts
    Here the difference lies !!!!
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Search always English and US Bomb Fuzes!

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    19
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked 9 Times in 6 Posts
    In documentation(US navy bomb disposal school British bombs and fuze's 1944) I found; the MkI did not have anti-withdrawal device and was declared obsolete Mk II was also obsolete soon after introduction, no further information, Mk III incorporated anti-withdrawal and arming screw had left hand thread, Mk IV right hand thread, Mk IV* and V are the same as Mk IV but have blotting paper to indicate a broken ampule. So there was a No 37 (the Mk I version) without anti-withdrawal device!
    Last edited by Heod357; 8th March 2016 at 06:32 AM. Reason: aditional information

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    1,778
    Thanks
    426
    Thanked 2,082 Times in 467 Posts
    I think I do not really understand; so the left one on the top picture is an official and existing type; It's not a normal No.37 with the Spring and locking balls removed and a different bottom screw, but a factory manufactured type.
    Why was it not replaced by a No.53 straight away.

    Regards, DJH
    Last edited by pzgr40; 8th March 2016 at 06:50 AM.

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    19
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked 9 Times in 6 Posts
    DJH, I think you make a crucial thinking error. It is not the locking-balls, rubber friction-band and spring and so on were removed but they were added later in the Mk III and further. when you take this way of thinking in account it makes more sense. And the Mk I and II were declared obsolete before 1944!

  9. #9
    Ordnance Approved
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Sarajevo
    Posts
    682
    Images
    17
    Thanks
    52
    Thanked 344 Times in 118 Posts
    I am familiar with both 37 and 53 designs, and essential difference between these two types is in the length of the delay. No.37 6-144 hrs, No.53 30-60 min. Generally due to much shorter time of delay No.53 did not require anti-removal device. My question was whether anyone can confirm that No.37 was produced w/o anti-removal device or modified in such way.

    I did some homework last night and found Sir Arthur Harris's notes on these fuzes.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    ordnance shown in my posts has been dealt with accordingly by EOD personnel

    Federal Civil Protection EOD Department

    my panoramio: http://www.panoramio.com/user/2050161

    my deviantart: http://vranax.deviantart.com/gallery/

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to al'saad For This Useful Post:

    Sapper6 (9th July 2019)

  11. #10
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    19
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked 9 Times in 6 Posts
    Al 'saad, read my post.

 

 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back to top