4.7" Naval Shell - ID help please

[steve rb]

Had already posted this but it vanished into the ether so trying again!

Been trying most of the morning to get a fix on this - I *think* it's a 4.7" naval shell, definitely solid shot, no markings whatsoever and sadly debanded. I want to find some pics as I'm planning on getting some bands done and want to get the shape as close as poss. Closest I could find in the 4.7" SAP but it's not that for sure as it's solid!

Dimensions are 118mm dia, 375mm long.

any ideas at all or further info?

cheers
Steve

 

[steve rb]

I've cleaned up the base, and there is some marking on there.

Confirmed as 4.7", dated 1941. I can't really make out the rest, some info after the 4.7 which is what I want!! Also the letters C H I P and something \ N it looks like.... and LOT 30

Not a very good photo as v hard to see....

 

[TimG]

CI - Cast Iron
HP - Hurry & Partners Ltd, or H. Patteson Co, Stanmore.

TimG

 

[AE501]

I am interested in the circle just below the I for Iron. This is the fairly traditional location for manufacturer's codes. Might it have - starting from the top and going clockwise equispaced - RGBM.
This is a P for practice shot and in that case H could mean a heavy shot.
At times naval projectile marks were shown e.g. Mk N VI say, but this was more WWII.
Before that time many were marked as yours is - Mk ?\N.
I do not know TimGs makers, but Stanmore does not seem to be a likely place for a foundry capable of mass producing solid shot or shell, assuming that is Middlesex.
I hoped someone would know some makers because I could not find anyone who seemed feasible to me. The only H makers I have are Hoover (vacuum cleaners), Winchester Repeating Arms Co. (USA) and Hingham, Massachusetts, USA.

 

[TimG]

Having just consulted O.U 5267 Ammunition Pocket Book 1924, Cast Iron projectiles were for practice which would confirm AE501's P for practice. Would a projectile of this calibre be weight graded? If H is the maker, Hadfields of Sheffield would be a good contender, post WWI they were one of only three companies entrusted to manufacture piercing shells for the Navy.

TimG.

 

[AE501]

That certainly sounds like a very feasible maker with that pedigree.
I do not know if the circle contains anything of interest.

 

[TimG]

AE501,

What monitor are you using? I can only just see the circle and only because you mentioned it! Can't even see the markings therein. I don't have access to my lists at the moment but will check RGBM in the morning.

TimG

 

[steve rb]

Thanks so much for the reply guys - I've had a better look in the bright sun, it's definitely MK VI \ N
Also, the circle is really hard to make out but I've taken the best close up I can :

 

[AE501]

I have an Apple Mac Book Pro 13" with Retina.
Whatever is in the circle appears to be linear rather than equispaced round the outside.
It is a good thing to know the Mark. Perhaps a 4.7" specialist may know something.

 

[2pounder]

re the 1945 handbook 4.7in shell are noted and stencilled H for heavy and MK VII A so is there an A before the /N, defo. an A on my shot. as to the circular mark or what is in it I cant add anything again mine has the marking but cant deciffer it.

 

[steve rb]

2pounder - do you have one?? Any chance you could post a pic ? Need it for the reband! Thanks

 

[AE501]

In view of what was said about the H being for heavy, I am inclined to believe that the circle contains the empty makers mark which could possibly be R at the top of the circle with A diametrically opposed at the bottom, then R on the left and L diametrically opposed with a vertical broad arrow in the centre pointing upwards.
I wonder if Steve rb could find any way of chipping or by Nitromors, verifying this?

 

[2pounder]

mine is a reband, based on the standard HE driving band, its a heavey shell so would need the same sort of band to drive it, in my opinion, and most practice have the usual service band.

 

[steve rb]

bit of handiwork later....