Welcome to the Inert Ordnance Collectors.
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    502
    Thanks
    497
    Thanked 520 Times in 217 Posts

    Australian Sectioned Depth Charge (M)

    I am re-posting this thread which appeared 21-8-16 by my friend Darkman to hopefully get new information.
    The pistol belongs with the depth charge as both have official tags with matching numbers.
    Marked: On Her Majesty's Service 643 N1V Depth Charge "M" .
    Pistol is tagged: 643 N1V Pistol Depth Charge Mark 13X.
    Stamped on the body is: DCM MO AN 0000. That is Maribyrnong Ordnance. ME is Maribyrnong Explosives Filling Factory.
    Pistol has settings for SAFE, 100 and 150.

    Dimensions: 280mm Diam. (285 at flared top). 360mm long. 90mm Pistol hole. Dated 6/11/43. Weight 18.5kg (41lb approx).

    3jc0fgHoT0O7OH8sNJMeSA_thumb_1fa.jpg6VpLMNkXTsKkeJGixtFm5g_thumb_1fb.jpg7nqv0Oj3QYCA0jowOA4Etg_thumb_1fc.jpg3G+TJiaMQcC%Xrn8xh62Gw_thumb_202.jpg3x6S1nwIR7avbteamkmEWg_thumb_1fd.jpgAlcmMxpFTzGL%Fk4hMCCSQ_thumb_201.jpg

  2. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to ron3350 For This Useful Post:

    apfsds (11th June 2018), Big Dave (11th June 2018), doppz92 (11th June 2018), Ivashkin (11th June 2018), pzgr40 (11th June 2018), TimG (11th June 2018), Yodamaster (11th June 2018)

  3. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    1,888
    Thanks
    487
    Thanked 2,357 Times in 515 Posts
    Excuse me for asking, but are you shure this is the right pistol for this depth charge?
    It seems strange to me that the detonator (picture 5 right side of the picture) stiks out into the water, and is not placed in the explosive charge. With pictures 2 and 3 it is removed from the pistol as not to damage it. A booster charge should be placed below the detonator, that is pushed over the detonator by increasing waterpressure as the depth charge sinks in the water. With this construction there is no room for that.
    I am aftraid that this fuze does not belong to thius depth charge which is -looking at the slotted holes- meant to be thown overboard manually when passing over the suspected position of a submarine.

  4. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    502
    Thanks
    497
    Thanked 520 Times in 217 Posts
    pzgr40
    I think you may be correct. The detonator does look a bit long and was bent. It came with the item I just assumed it was correct.
    I know little about depth charges and pistols. Comments are mainly about the small size.What charge suits this pistol?
    I want to learn anything about it and appreciate your comments. Thanks. Ron.

  5. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    502
    Thanks
    497
    Thanked 520 Times in 217 Posts
    Further to the above reply. I see the tag is Her Majesty's and later than the 1943 period so was put together or tagged at some later date.
    As a question, how is the bottom of the pistol channel sealed? Item came from a military museum when sold to me. Mis-matched it seems.

  6. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    1,888
    Thanks
    487
    Thanked 2,357 Times in 515 Posts
    Still no problem that they do not match. They sold you a very nice Depth charge pistol and a very nice depth charge, both good quality cutaway models. The DCP for this one has to be shorter to fit, so I would suppose the shorter Mk6.
    http://michaelhiske.de/Allierte/USA/...er02_04_01.htm

    Regards, DJH
    Last edited by pzgr40; 11th June 2018 at 09:37 AM.

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    new zealand
    Posts
    496
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 345 Times in 142 Posts
    here are some pictures from an original 1930s catalogue(this depth charge is dated 1931)
    your markings should be similar to these
    obviously restored by a museum for intrest/display
    if the tag is genuine(more than likely not)it would be HIS majestys for that period
    Attached Images Attached Images

 

 

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