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!

ID Project 11

US-Subs

ORDNANCE APPROVED/Premium Member
Ordnance approved
Premium Member
At 39.5mm diameter I first thought that this was just possibly a larger variant of a French Losfeld subcaliber. Unscrewing the fuze however makes me think that this is a fully functiong item. Anyone recognize it? The fuze looks UK, but not the markings.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2343.jpg
    IMG_2343.jpg
    939.3 KB · Views: 33
  • IMG_2344.jpg
    IMG_2344.jpg
    542.3 KB · Views: 30
  • IMG_2274.jpg
    IMG_2274.jpg
    979.2 KB · Views: 30
  • IMG_2275.jpg
    IMG_2275.jpg
    590.5 KB · Views: 29
  • IMG_2276.jpg
    IMG_2276.jpg
    1,004.6 KB · Views: 33
2274/5/6. Whilst on first appearance it appears to be a No. 117 or direct descendant. However, the threaded portion appears too short (might be angle of photo) to be a detonating fuze. If it is an igniferous fuze, it's most likely to be a No. 230.

As Minenaz16 states "AN" in the right context would be Australian Navy, however the markings here don't follow accepted practice. No. xxx Mk xx N (if Naval). With the exception of Bofors fuzes I don't recall ever seeing any Australian Navy fuzes, if Ron or Graeme have any in their collection I would be interested to know if the Mark Number is suffixed with just an "N" or "AN"

@US-Subs - could we have a photo of the base and also, of all the markings?

TimG
 
Certainly
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2346.jpg
    IMG_2346.jpg
    888.9 KB · Views: 12
  • IMG_2347.jpg
    IMG_2347.jpg
    605.7 KB · Views: 10
  • IMG_2348.jpg
    IMG_2348.jpg
    1.4 MB · Views: 10
  • IMG_2349.jpg
    IMG_2349.jpg
    1.4 MB · Views: 10
  • IMG_2350.jpg
    IMG_2350.jpg
    1.4 MB · Views: 10
  • IMG_2351.jpg
    IMG_2351.jpg
    1.5 MB · Views: 11
Thanks.
It would appear to have been manufactured by "MF" Footscray, Melbourne. The length of the threaded section is indicative of an igniferous 'British' fuze, such as a No. 230. I would think this is a 230 or an Australian variant. To the best of my knowledge the 230 was only for naval service, this would confirm Minenaz16 comment of "AN" being Australian Navy. I assume by 1974 Australia was breaking away from the regulations set by Woolwich, hence the format of the markings. @pedro might be able to shed more light on the matter.

TimG

p.s. The 230/230P were apparently obsolete in British service by 1959. They were used on the larger calibre naval guns. If this is a 230 replacement, presumably the Australian Navy still had some large warships in its fleet in the 1970s.
 
Last edited:
Having done some more research it transpires that nothwithstanding the 230 had a short intrusion, the same as a igniferous fuze in was in fact a detonating fuze but had to be used over a gaine! The only reference I can find to an Australian AN2 fuze, which was a proximity fuze is here https://navalinstitute.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/headmark-033-9-3-Aug-1983.pdf (page 39 onwards) interesting article on the Australian Proof and Experimental Establishment at Port Wakefied.

TimG
 
Top