Early No5 Mk1 Mills Grenade Cutatway Dated 4/15

[roller63]

A recent find. An early dated No.5 Mk1 Mills Grenade cutaway. Centre cast, small ring, un-slotted striker, raised side lever with Reg. No. alloy centre tube, filler plug and base plug. The base plug is very thin, slightly domed, and clearly dated 4/15 and Mills patents etc. I believe this is a very early date for a No.5 ?
It is a nice sleeper, was grubby when I got it, and I have given it a gentle clean with fine wire wool and WD40. The body has black paint on it under the lever and traces elsewhere.
I can see why this design of base plug was not used for long. It is very thin and fiddly to put in and take out without the tool. Also, it won't stand up on it.

 

[Snufkin]

It is not often to see anything particularly novel or remarkable regarding Mills grenades, but this is truly a rare and stunning find. The base plug alone is a gem, - it is the same style of base plug that Mills designed for his copies and developments of the Roland grenade that he made in January-February 1915, and that he equipped the trials batches of his prototype Oval and Cylindrical grenades which went to France.

The first informal order for 50,000 grenades placed by the War Office with William Mills Ltd at the end of March 1915 - to be delivered from mid-April - were equipped with this base plug, and as the order was transferred across to Mills Munitions Co when that company was set up in April 1915, this base plug (and likely the whole grenade) is from this production run. An amendment to the 50k order in mid-May 1915 required the supply of grenades with a new base plug as early as possible, at an extra charge of 1d each - this was the classic thicker solid aluminium plug with flat obverse and reverse faces.

A fantastic find. Thanks for showing it.




Tom.

 

[Bonnex]

Tony,

I cannot help but agree with Tom that the base plug is an incredible find and of great historical value. Plugs of this shape exist on some of Mills early work on the Roland and I have seen four examples on the Cylindrical steel-bodied designs but this is a first for an actual No 5 despite our long-held view that early issues were made using this style of plug. Just one more feature (to do with the shape of the casting) left to find an example of!!

 

[Millsman]

An incredible find and the plug is unique in my knowledge. I've never seen a 4/15 plug. Certainly never seen another like it. I thought the curved (Roland style) base plug only existed for the trials grenades in France and that the request for the revision of the plug came very early in the production cycle with the first flat base plugs appearing in May 1915.

Tom "The first informal order for 50,000 grenades placed by the War Office with William Mills Ltd at the end of March 1915 - to be delivered from mid-April - were equipped with this base plug,"

Are you sure? If there were 50,000 I'm sure other examples would have survived. Mills only received the order for the 50,000 on the 27th March 1915 and I doubt if Mills had the means, or the staff or the expertise to deliver 50,000 from mid April with that first batch spilling over into May when flat based plugs were fitted.

John

 

[Millsman]

"Just one more feature (to do with the shape of the casting) left to find an example of!!"


I suspect they are in bits in a French field or on Shoeburyness somewhere!

John

 

[roller63]

Many thanks Tom, Norman and John respectively. I am even more pleased with this now than I was a couple of hours ago. I thought I had seen pics of the base plug before, but not on a No5. I will put this grenade next to my smooth Mills one piece. Now I have one of the first batches of Mills Grenades made and issued, and also one of the last (1972)

 

[Millsman]

Here's a Roland base plug for comparison. Note similarity to the French Pear Grenade base plug.

John

 

[Millsman]

Thanks for updating your post Tom - John

 

[Snufkin]

Tom "The first informal order for 50,000 grenades placed by the War Office with William Mills Ltd at the end of March 1915 - to be delivered from mid-April - were equipped with this base plug,"

Are you sure? If there were 50,000 I'm sure other examples would have survived. Mills only received the order for the 50,000 on the 27th March 1915 and I doubt if Mills had the means, or the staff or the expertise to deliver 50,000 from mid April with that first batch spilling over into May when flat based plugs were fitted.

John

John, in my haste I wrote "were equipped", whereas I should have put "were to be equipped". However, in the next sentence, I stated that in mid-May (15 May to be precise) the same 50,000 order was amended to supply modified base plugs as early as possible.

From 17-30 April around 4,000 Mills grenades had been despatched from William Mills Ltd works at Grove Street, Birmingham at the behest of the newly formed Mills Munitions Co. From 1-14 May, 2,988 grenades had been shipped from the Mills Munitions works at Bridge Street West, the factory having taken over sole production at the beginning of May - a cropped portion of the relevant part of the actual delivery schedule attached.

The figures suggest that a total of around 7,000 of the thin, domed aluminium base plugs dated either 4/15 or 5/15 and stamped Mills Munitions Co. were made before a change to the familiar flat faced solid aluminium base plug.




Tom.

 

[Millsman]

Thanks Tom. I'm amazed that there are still no other 4/15 plugs around if those are the numbers (unless you have some).

John

 

[millsbomber]

Fantastic find Tony, just to link to another thread about whats mentioned here.

http://www.bocn.co.uk/vbforum/threads/94402-Roland-Grenade?highlight=roland+grenade

 

[roller63]

Thanks Dave, I'm very happy with it I can see the similarity with this base plug and the Roland etc.

 

[Millsman]

Another thought.

The first Mills Contract was for the Mills Grenade - Filled. Contract for 50,000 grenades was completed 7 Aug 1915

2nd Contract was for the Mills No 5 Mk I - Filled - contract from 15 May 1915 which as Tom says included the request for the new plug at 1d per plug extra which was approved on the 7th June 1915.

Roller's plug is marked No 5 Mk I.

Question. If this plug was made in April 1915 how is it marked No 5 Mk I when that nomenclature did not officially exist until 15.5.1915 with the 2nd contract and the request for the revised plug from the same date?

Mills only put in a tender for 150,000 grenades on the 8th May and was given a contract for 100,000 on the 15th.

So if Rollers plug was made between in April 1915 A window of just 2 weeks from start of production, how is it marked No 5 Mk I?

This raises a question as to when Mills was informed for the 'official' name of the new Mills Grenade.

John

 

[Snufkin]

The first Mills Contract was for the Mills Grenade - Filled. Contract for 50,000 grenades was completed 7 Aug 1915

2nd Contract was for the Mills No 5 Mk I - Filled - contract from 15 May 1915 which as Tom says included the request for the new plug at 1d per plug extra which was approved on the 7th June 1915.

John

John,

No, I as stated in Post #2, it was the very first order for 50k grenades that was amended for revised base plugs as quickly as possible.

As for the April date there is no mystery. War Office List of Changes introduced the No.5 MkI on 10 May 1915, but that was just a formality. LoC entries were invariably retrospective, written days, weeks, months and even sometimes years after a store was introduced or removed. Don't take quoted dates so literally as the day some event happened.

In the case of the Mills grenade, the No.5 MkI nomenclature was almost certainly decided well before the date the first order was placed by telegram, 27 March 1915.



Tom.

 

[Millsman]

John,

No, I as stated in Post #2, it was the very first order for 50k grenades that was amended for revised base plugs as quickly as possible.

As for the April date there is no mystery. War Office List of Changes introduced the No.5 MkI on 10 May 1915, but that was just a formality. LoC entries were invariably retrospective, written days, weeks, months and even sometimes years after a store was introduced or removed. Don't take quoted dates so literally as the day some event happened.

In the case of the Mills grenade, the No.5 MkI nomenclature was almost certainly decided well before the date the first order was placed by telegram, 27 March 1915.



Tom.

We are close on this Tom. The letter regarding the plugs dated 15 May had the original contract reference of 94/G/66.

I agree about the LOC.

However if the nomenclature for the No 5 MkI was decided before the first order was placed on the 27th March, why was the first order for Mills Grenades-Filled and not Mills No 5 Mk I Filled?

Military stores orders normally have to be precise. That is the question. Piccy but relevant.

John

 

[Bonnex]

At the risk of blocking the vent hole on this burning fuze I add a few broadly related comments:

Any discussion on nomenclature and LoC attracts my interest for some inexplicable reason. have a cold wet flannel ready.

The remarks about the value of dates in the margins of LoC paragraphs, or the dates of issue with Army Orders are generally accepted. The marginal dates attempt to show the dates of significant files references associated with the LoC paragraph; for instance a Naval Ordnance file number 22190, dated 10th October 1914 contributed to LoC 17122 which introduces the numbered nomenclature for grenades ( and consumes Nos 1, 2, 3 and 4). So, it would seem that Grenade No 5 was the next number to be plucked out of the hat in late 1914. But the LoC 17122 was not issued (in the form of "issued with" Army Orders) until 1st March 1915; worse the printer's imprint on the pamphlet shows it was not actually printed until April 1915. Oversimplifying it, an interpretation of what's going on here is that the nomenclature No 5 was not ready for allocation until April 1915 by which time there is a queue of grenades ready to be numbered (and just maybe the Mills is on the top of the in-tray).

A reasonable way to establish the 'earliest date' of a munition or a nomenclature is to look on the engineering drawing. Unfortunately you have to be sure that it is the right drawing without changes to the very thing that you are trying to date. In the case of drawings for the No 5 Grenade William Mills provided a 1 to 1 scale drawing and a specification to CIW which, no doubt, were reformatted into the Woolwich style and they would have added the formal nomenclature. I cannot get to the copy I have of the CIW drawing (CIW1968) but I doubt my copy will be dated as early as April 1915.

In searching drawing registers for No 5 Grenade drawings of an early date, the series 'TW' provides and interesting tease. Four drawings TW40, TW43, TW45 and TW49 each have in their title Grenade Hand No 5 Mark I. The tease is that the register does not date them but TW65 (Bomb, ML, HE, 2-inch Howitzer Mark I/L/ iron) is dated 27th April 1915 - and the TW numbers were issued sequentially.

Lastly, on the 4th May 1915, Mills wrote to The Director of Army Contract in connection with the invitation to tender for 150,000 "Grenades, Hand, No 5, Mark I (L), Mills Pattern". Since he uses this nomenclature in his letter I think it highly likely that the ITT uses it too and also likely that the ITT was sent out in April 1915.

The bottom line on these ramblings is that I think the Grenade No 5 Mark I nomenclature was available in April 1915, it is just a question of pin-pointing the day!

 

[Millsman]

Thanks Norman, very well explained. I'm happy with that. As Tom said the first order was by Telegram (I don't know if there is a copy anywhere), and it may have said 'Please supply 50,000 of your new product'.

The thing about the drawings is that we have dates for when Mills supplied his drawing to CIW which was the 7th April 1915 for the famous two types of body scale drawings. I assume CIW copied these and added appropriate references. So if these were completed and approved a set would have been sent back to Mills sometime in mid April with No 5 Mk I on them. It's starting to come together. Drawing may be the key.

John

 

[Snufkin]

Thanks Norman for that clarity.

The earliest date I can find on a June 1915 CIW1968 is 23-4-15; accompanied by the initials FHW under the subtitle "Full size except where stated".




Tom.

 

[Millsman]

FWH must be CIW staff not Mills team. As I say Mills finalised his drawings on the 7th April. So we have a very narrow window for this nomenclature. Anyone got a time machine?

 

[Bonnex]

In looking for the earliest use of Grenade, Hand, No 5 Mark I on a drawing I have reminded myself that it is not just the grenade manufacturing and filing drawings that are of use. Gauge drawings and packaging drawings might throw up some interesting data. Gauges would have had to be made to support early manufacture and it would make sense (to me anyway) that they were correctly annotated (with Grenade Hand etc) and dated as early as March 1915).