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!

Fuze ID Required

peteblight

Ordnance Approved
Ordnance approved
Can anyone ID the fuze in these pictures?
It was found in Belgium attached to a 4.7" projectile and is believed to be a British No 4 fuze.

I didn't take the pictures and have no additional information.

Cheers

Pete

20171016_103338_resized.jpg20171016_103619_resized.jpg20171016_103605_resized.jpg
 
Pete, I think it is a No. 4 which was a Boer War 'flop', introduced 1899 and made obsolete in 1901. It was however re-introduced in the early part of WW1 and had lots of problems with 4.7in and 60pr guns and was then withdrawn. This all ties up with the stampings on the nose, although I didn't know there was a Mk I*. Regards, Depotman p.s. I guess you have the No. 4 fuze diagram?
 
Whilst it certainly shares a lot of similarities with the Fuze, Graze No. 4 the diagram I have, shows some it doesn't. The diagram shows the peg spanner holes as part of a cap that screws in flush with the top of the fuze, there doesn't appear to be any such arrangement on this. Also, from the diagram there appears to be two flats milled either side of the top of the main body. With the screwed cap it may be that the join line is obscured by corrosion/dirt etc.

The dates fit in with a No.4 having been manufactured in what appears Jan. 1900 and modified Dec. 1914.

TimG
 
Hello,

We already found this fuze identified as no4 (unscrewed).
Head is different from diagram (no screw for needle) but exactly the same for the rest of body.
DOCTOR showed an example on this forum but I can't rmember the thread.

Regards
 
Last edited:
IMG_0015.jpgOnly for you :=) this internal N°4 . Caution: This fuze is very dangerous to cut because because detonation transmission channels are filled with sensitive explosive compositions.
 
Doctor, Minenaz16 or anybody else for that matter,

Have you ever encountered the fuze with a 'screw in cap' as per the plate (diagram)?

TimG
 
View attachment 138139Drawing found on BOCN
J-Paul

After spending ages trying to find the No 4 diagram for Doctor I found this in the Annual Report of the Ordnance Committee (1898/9). Note the design number 9000N.

The Royal Laboratories made about 200,000 of these fuzes before they were declared, as Depotman puts it, a 'flop'. Presumably the remaining fuzes were put into store in the personal care of the officer, equipped with a tin of Brasso, who authorised their manufacture.

There was also another design 9000M of which a small number (5,200) was manufactured in 1900. Actually there were two or three variations of the 9000M.

Late in 1914 there was a shortage of No 17 fuzes and alternatives were sought. The No 4 was an obvious candidate but it needed improved safety arrangements. OB procs describe one modification as the 'fitting of a new detent pellet and spring'. It also suggests that the modified fuze was suited to 4.7-inch HE Shell.

So I think it is fair to say that the actual 'No 4' fuzes sent to France may differ from the drawing shown above.
 
Norman,

Does your documentation state the fate of the fuze at the turn of the century? Unofficial documentation I have states it was declared 'Obsolete' in 1901. I was discussing this recently and informed that it would be most unusual for such a store not to be recycled or destroyed within 2 or 3 years of being declared obsolete. If the fuze was declared 'Obsolete for further manufacture' or 'Obsolescent' it could explain it surviving a further 13 years.

TimG
 
Norman,

Does your documentation state the fate of the fuze at the turn of the century? Unofficial documentation I have states it was declared 'Obsolete' in 1901. I was discussing this recently and informed that it would be most unusual for such a store not to be recycled or destroyed within 2 or 3 years of being declared obsolete. If the fuze was declared 'Obsolete for further manufacture' or 'Obsolescent' it could explain it surviving a further 13 years.

TimG

Tim,

That is my understanding too. Once 'obsolete' the store should normally be returned to 'Ordnance' for disposal/reduction to salvage/etc. In a document by Hogg on Numbered Fuzes he states "the Number 4 Fuze was therefore declared obsolete by 10707 of 28 Aug 1901". Where 10707 is the List of Changes paragraph. In fact the particular paragraph does not use the term Obsolete at all. It has the unusual sentencing as shown below:

10707.- Fuze, graze, No. 4. (Mark I.) /L/ Metal.
To be withdrawn and replaced by "Fuze, percussion, D.A., with cap, No. 1, Mark II." for service, and "Fuze percussion, D.A., impact No. 13, Mark II." for practice.

The use of the above-mentioned "graze" fuze will be discontinued.

Officers concerned having fuzes of this description on their charge, will return them to store for transmission to Woolwich and demand "Fuzes, percussion, D.A., with cap, No. 1, Mark II," in lieu....

That might seem like Obsolete to you and me but I guess it is List of Changes speak for something just short of Obsolete (but not OFM or Obsolescent which also have particular meanings). Curious indeed.
 
What I can add from the reality of the field is that the mechanism shown on the diagram of the N° 4 is identical to the Fuze that I present in section,
the only difference residing in the screwed cap holder striker.
The primitives projectiles charged in lyddite primed by this fuze are rightly sometimes initiated fuzes N°1 (date observed 8/00 3/1902) and 13 (date 2/03 to 7/14)but also 17 ( date 1/1911) and 44 Mk 1(date 12/14 ).
The closest date on the observed on N°4 is 12/1914 ( modified model 5/00 RL I)
 
IMG_0014.jpghere is the drawing I 've made from the cuted fuze to confirm the disign of what I have identified at the time as a missing fuze in the chronology of the fuzes observed on the olds shells
 
Top