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!
Nose pistol No 27 and No 42
- Thread starter Antoon
- Start date
This is really surprizing. Apparently a decision that remained "on the paper" due to the events, as the Pistol No.27 was the usual standard pistol of British GP bombs during the first half of ww2, and, in fact, it appears in the various wartime British and allied ordnances as a standard equipment till at least 1944.
The No. 27 pistol was used on the GP 250lb MkI-III & MkIV, 500lb MkI-III & MkIV, GP 1000lb MkI &II, GP 1900lb, GP 4000lb, and was even used on late war HC bombs. It could also equip MC bombs (except the MC 500lb MkX) but was less frequent on these bombs than on the GPs.
The No27 nose pistol was still an official standard equiment in 1943, at least for the RAAF:
More over it was used extensively by them in the Western desert as a basis for the rod extended bombs dropped by Wellingons and Kittyhawks.
The following lines appear in the proceedings of the seminar of conventional weapons of Royal Air Force Historical Society, Oct 22nd, 2008:
"RAAF 3rd Sq. Curtiss Kittyhawk I during the Battle for El Alamein were reported to be equipped with bombs having "nose rods". Similarly, RAF 108 sq. Wellingtons in Action over Fayid in 1942 used to drop a mix of 500lb. tail fused H.E., 250lb. nose fused H.E., and one 250lb. "extension red" - the "extension red" designating an extended nose rod attached to the nose fuze, aimed at producing a (slight) air-burst effect. (BTW, on British bombs, delay pistols were often painted red, but were generally Tail fuzes)
The rod was screwed onto the male thread on the pressure plate of the No 27 or No 42 Nose Pistol; the No 42 certainly had one when it was installed in the 60 lb Infantry Training Bomb. Both the No 27 and No 42 were used in a number of GP and MC bombs."
And in the Britrish National Archives you may find this, dated 1943:
AVIA 16/87
Description:
Fragmentation effect on water of G.P. bombs fitted with No. 44 Mk. I and No. 44 sensitive pistols and No. 27 pistol with rod extension: trials
Date: 1943
Held by: The National Archives, Kew
Former reference in its original department TDU/13/43
and this from 1942
AVIA 6/12091
Description:
Pistol No.27 with mechanical arming delay
Date: 1942
Held by: The National Archives, Kew
Former reference in its original department: TN Arm. 83
The No.27 appears also as standard RAF/RAAF equipment in the TM-9-1984 Disposal of American and Allied Bombs and Fuzes from 1942
Furthermore the US Bombs and Fuzes from 1944 writes:
"(3) the No.42 is now replacing the No.27"
More dfinitively, the British AIR PUBLICATION 1661B ("Prep ared by direction of the Minister of Aircraft Production, Promulgated by order of the Air Council") incluydes the "appendix issued with A .L . No. 66 August, 1943" where the Pistol No27 figures as standard for GP bombs
The same document includes an "Relevant amendments up to A .L . 72 incorporated in this reprint January, 1944" where the Postol No.27 appears as standard for MC bombs:
Last edited:
Obsolescent is not the same as obsolete.
Current - Obsolescent - Obsolete.
Generally speaking an obsolescent store would be available for use until stocks exhausted/declared obsolete, not for further production. It is possible that the Air Ministry subsequently rescinded the declaration (the details of which have been lost in the mists of time) and there was further production. However, from what I can see the only real difference between a 27 and a 42 is whether or not the striker is pointed or blunt, thus continued production would be pointless.(unintentional)
There are numerous instances of obsolescent and even oboselete stores getting a new lease of life.
TimG
Current - Obsolescent - Obsolete.
Generally speaking an obsolescent store would be available for use until stocks exhausted/declared obsolete, not for further production. It is possible that the Air Ministry subsequently rescinded the declaration (the details of which have been lost in the mists of time) and there was further production. However, from what I can see the only real difference between a 27 and a 42 is whether or not the striker is pointed or blunt, thus continued production would be pointless.(unintentional)
There are numerous instances of obsolescent and even oboselete stores getting a new lease of life.
TimG
Yes, indeed, it's probably what has happened with this pistol.
There was one main difference between the 27 and the 42 that entered in consideration: the cost! the body of the no.27 was made of brass, while the body of the no.42 was made of zinc, a metal of lower cost and greater availability than brass in wartime.
Last edited:
Although the American "british bombs and fuzes" records the No27 and No42 bodies are being indentical, in brass, Henry Belot in Deminest article "Amorçage percutant des bombes explosives à oeil de 35 mm" p.755 to 766, reports that most No42 pistols and even the late series of the No27 Pistol had a cast zinc body.
He also emphasize that, it to his mind, is the reason why the n42 pistol is scarce in collections as its zinc body was less attractive than the brass of the n27 and the surviving example were most often damged ones while lots of unused n27 captured in 1940 were available.
Peter Voss in his Britische Abwurfmunition shows shows both version for the pistol n.42
He also emphasize that, it to his mind, is the reason why the n42 pistol is scarce in collections as its zinc body was less attractive than the brass of the n27 and the surviving example were most often damged ones while lots of unused n27 captured in 1940 were available.
Peter Voss in his Britische Abwurfmunition shows shows both version for the pistol n.42
Last edited:
"British Bomb and Rocket Pistols and Fuzes 1914 - 2007" by David Andrews and Alan Swan, list both and all marks as having brass bodies. Furthermore, the photographs show brass bodies. The description of the 27 states that the vane is of aluminium or brass, there is a photograph of a 42 vane and although painted would appear to be of aluminium or diecast construction. The utilisation of aluminium/diecast vanes would fit in with the conservation of brass. In early 1940 consideration was given to a 27 with a plastic body (bakelite) due to the brass shortage.
TimG
TimG
Just to muddy the water, see pictures below. No 27 mkII dated 1941. Note the manufacturer.
