WW1 Grenades both British and Enemy.

[calibre792x57.y]

I was just coming to this grenade. A small number of which were manufactured by Roburite & Ammonal.Ltd. in 1915, and a great number more recently by I.F. Akem Unlimited! I once had a copy of the notes which accompanied the early grenade collection in a National museum. In it the author, who clearly had experience of the bombs he was describing, said of the 'hairbrush' that one was kept in most bombing posts, largely because of the morale effect of it's appearance, and that if all else failed it was useful as a bludgeon!. Here is my example of the bomb as shown in the IWM and I'll make no further comment. - SW

[calibre792x57.y]

The box contained a 16 ounce tin of ammonal sandwiched between two segmented steel plates all enclosed in a fabricated tin box. The screwed cap of the ammonal tin projected thro' the end of the case and contained a cylindrical holder for a No.8 detonator. Into this was inserted a length of safety fuze, the other end, tipped with a percussion cap, being pushed into a percussion igniter Number 1 Mark 1 or Mark II. Shown on my example is the Mark II. Pulling the brass safety pin released the igniter striker, firing the percussion cap and igniting the five-second fuze. This was not an operation to be undertaken lightly as the bomb weighs 3 pounds and produced considerable blast from the heavy charge. In addition it was not unknown for the powerful igniter cap to explode the detonator bypassing the delay fuze. The grenade is lightly shellacked overall and the 'strap' holding the igniter is zinc. I have seen on-line dissertions on how to tell a real bomb from a fake, mostly involving the way the box was fabricated. However as each box was made by individual artisans there was no set way of assembling these grenades. Most fakes are very clumsily made, particularly in relation to the igniter set. This one has been in my collection for thirty-five years. - SW

[auchonvillerssomme]

Well if it is a reproduction/fake they haven't made the obvious mistakes seen in other places, they used slotted screws and square nuts.

[calibre792x57.y]

Although the Number 12 grenades were artisanal made, and the way the box is assembled can differ, lap or mitred jointing of the soldered seams at the corners for example,they were still made to standard dimensions. That, and the igniter set is what defeats those trying to reproduce the bomb without access to the real thing. There were about 8,000 Number 12s produced and an indeterminate number of Lotbiniere bombs, some of the latter turning up in a pond at Peronne years ago. These were in remarkably good condition and two distinct models were present, one with a large cylindrical body and the other a metal box with hinged flap at the front end. Some contained chopped lengths of heavy iron wire or coach nails and others stones. The igniters also varied either percussion or friction types. In all cases however the bodies seemed to have been made in a workshop with machines to form the sheet steel. It may be that these were 'kit' bombs made in an industrial unit and shipped to the front for completion with whatever materials were available. The wooden 'bat' handles were still in excellent condition. Seemingly the mud at the bottom of the pond had excluded oxygen and protected these survivors. At the time I believed them to be German. but now they are said to be British. - SW

[calibre792x57.y]

Here are a two of these grenades I once had in my collection. - The percussion igniter on the large cylindrical model is identical with a British No.1 Mk II, so I must accept that this British made. The charges appeared to be a loose powder with lumps of T.N.T. and nails mixed in. The ends of the cylinder were closed with thick discs of wood.- SW

[Gunner Bailey]

Must say the woodwork in the photo in # 602 does look squeaky new. Are you saying it's original or a post WW2 fake SW ? Is the one in the IWM a fake in your opinion?

Regarding the line 'recently by I.F. Akem Unlimited'; can you say how recently this was? I've not seen any fakes on the market in recent years in fact I've not seen a No 12 for sale at a military fair in the last 10 years, even in France.

John

[calibre792x57.y]

John, - The wood isn't actually as neat as it looks in the photo, the grip has acquired a polish over the years from being handled, despite having spent thirty-odd years on display. I make no further comment on it. The description I used for the reproductions was 'more recently' (than 1915!). I have seen them Militaria Fairs, within the last two or three years but I do not claim that those vendors were trying to pass them off as real. The most well known appearance was when several turned up along with some No.44 A/Tk rifle grenades with a claim that workmen doing building alterations in France had found them all in a box in the cellar. So we have two very rare and desirable grenade types which were in service respectively at the beginning and at the end of the War being found together in a box in the 21st Century! I have no reason to suppose the IWM exhibit is a fake, although I think it is an unfinished specimen. Mine shares the fault. Go and look at it. -SW

[Gunner Bailey]

Thanks SW. Your tale is reminder to all that when you buy at a fair, buy the item not the story. 44s are ULTRA rare, I've seen a couple but never one for sale, despite attending more fairs than most.

You never know what will turn up in cellars though. A few years ago in a house near Canterbury there was found a loaded Webley .38, three full crates of primed Mills 36's and about 25lb of TNT with detonators. EOD had a good day.

There's also a No 12 in the Birmingham Museum of Technology.

John

[calibre792x57.y]

John - I agree that if you go back, say twenty years or so, then I was often surprised by what turned up in private houses and other places. I recall a member of the IWM staff telling me about a German MG'08, a set of trench armour and a couple of Gew 98s turning up beneath the stage of a village hall in the not too distant past and donated to the IWM. They were originally part of a War Bonds drive exhibit. - SW

[calibre792x57.y]

To continue with the rarer finds: The Hales rodded rifle grenade was subject to modifications of the pattern throughout the War to improve performance, reliability and ease of production, but it's basic layout as a inertia fired bomb remained i.e. when the grenade struck the striker pellet ran forward to fire the detonator set. If the going was soft and the grenade slowed then the striker's inertia was insufficient to overcome the anti-creep spring and fire the detonator's cap. The The Steuart grenade was introduced as the No.39 in the final year of the War to overcome this problem. It was fitted with a direct action impact fuze which reversed the Hale's arrangement. The fuze had a domed headed striker with small cutting blades on either side. The striker was held back from the detonator set by a anti-creep spring and a slotted safety collar, and a safety pin which was removed before firing. On launch the weight of the striker overcame the creep spring and the shearing blades cut the safety collar apart. The spring reasserted itself in flight, returning the striker to it's extended position and allowing the cut segments of the collar to fall away. On impact the striker was forced back, firing the detonator. This grenade was heavily promoted by it's makers George Beaton & Sons. About a million were produced by the end of the War although they are rarely seen today. Here the No.39 is shown with the last of the Hales, the No.35, with a close up of the dome head of the striker set. - SW

[IanA]

I do get irritated when I see artifacts in museums which are wrongly labelled and I think I've just spotted one. Before I make a fool of myself, can I just check that the item in the illustration is NOT a 'Mills grenade'? (I'm no sort of expert on grenades!)

http://collections.historic-scotland.gov.uk/search.do?view=detail&page=1&id=2838&db=object

[wainfleet]

I do get irritated when I see artifacts in museums which are wrongly labelled and I think I've just spotted one. Before I make a fool of myself, can I just check that the item in the illustration is NOT a 'Mills grenade'? (I'm no sort of expert on grenades!)

http://collections.historic-scotland.gov.uk/search.do?view=detail&page=1&id=2838&db=object

You're absolutely right, it is not a Mills grenade but a Number 19 percussion grenade. There is a superficial resemblance - if you take away the stick, and the mushroom cap, and alter the shape.... Perhaps someone who works here thinks Mills is a generic term for any grenade with a segmented body, who knows?

[IanA]

Ta for that. I was pretty sure but am happy to get confirmation. I will let them know.

Ian

[auchonvillerssomme]

Talking of segmented bodies, oh no I can hear you shout, is there any evidence, apart from the instruction manuals that specifies the 36 is designed to segment evenly along the segments, bearing in mind the explosive force follows the line if least resistance it is unlikely that it would segment evenly.

[Terry_Reeves]

The 36 grenade was inefficient in terms of fragmentation. Whole segments tended to come from the centre portion of the grenade but large parts of the body were just small particles. It was this unpredictability that led to the introduction of the L2A1 and L2A2 notched coil grenade in the British Army, which was essentially a copy of the M26 US grenade. The other problem with the 36 was the danger to the thrower of the larger fragments and also that of the base plug.

TR

[calibre792x57.y]

For even fragmentation the grenade body needs to be segmented internally, as in the case of the British No.16 grenade and the French VB rifle grenade. The segmentation of the Mills was mainly to provide a firm grip by muddy hands when throwing the bomb. That said, the L2A1/M.26 was hardly a success in the Falklands where the Argentinian troops were heavily clad in winter clothing - I was told that this led to the British using W.P. grenades and eventually led to the introduction of the current hand grenade about which I am pleased to say I know nothing! - Cheers - SW

[Ogilwy]

SW,

You are correct the new L109 Grenade is excellent and the most effective Grenade we have ever had.

The Americans discovered that the fragmentation from their MkI and II grenades was not very good and that this was down to the HE reducing the cast iron casing to dust and not fragments. This was rectified by the use of a detonator into Gunpowder instead. The use of low explosive gave a violent deflagration that was less powerfull than the HE and resulted in considerably improved fragmentation.

Rod

[auchonvillerssomme]

Rod, given the range isn't any different to the L2A1/L2A2 and like those it is designed for use in relatively enclosed spaces, what makes the L109 better from the user point of view?

Mick

[Ogilwy]

The fragmentation is supeurb. Where the old L2 was relatively ineffective at only a short distance, this one works exceptionally well. As is obvious, the reasons for this are not for open discussion, but it is a fact that when you throw one of these you DO get your head down and make sure you have decent cover!

It's purely down to advancments in technology leading to more effective and efficient munitions I would say.

Dragging this back somewhat, I have a 1980's No36M that was manufactured for an Indian contract but never filled. So the old design remained in service for nearly 70 years, (somewhere in the world)! Apart from SAA I can't think of anything that remains that unchanged for that long, possibly the No 117 fuze is closest but still only about 50 Years.

Rod

[wainfleet]

Dragging this back somewhat, I have a 1980's No36M that was manufactured for an Indian contract but never filled. So the old design remained in service for nearly 70 years, (somewhere in the world)! Apart from SAA I can't think of anything that remains that unchanged for that long, possibly the No 117 fuze is closest but still only about 50 Years.

Rod

The folding wire cutters introduced in 1916 were still in production in the 1980s, and they may even still be. There's still an NSN for them: 5110-99-783-9037. The GS spade was also virtually unchanged in 1990. I found one with that date in the shed when I bought my house, and apart from the wooden handle having slightly less of a curve where it joins the blade, the design was the same as in WW1.

[auchonvillerssomme]

In Iraq in 2004 Cpl Jason Dunham USMC was wounded and later died when he covered a 36M grenade with his body to protect his colleagues. He threw himself on the grenade dropped by an individual he was tackling and tried to use his helmet to shield himself and others from the explosion. He was quite rightly awarded the Medal of Honour.

[The Dugout]

Great pics John, thanks for sharing!

[Gunner Bailey]

The 36 grenade was inefficient in terms of fragmentation. Whole segments tended to come from the centre portion of the grenade but large parts of the body were just small particles. It was this unpredictability that led to the introduction of the L2A1 and L2A2 notched coil grenade in the British Army, which was essentially a copy of the M26 US grenade. The other problem with the 36 was the danger to the thrower of the larger fragments and also that of the base plug.

TR

I would add that the main reason the Mills 36 was replaced in the 1970's was that i) It was always difficult to produce (30% rejects for the cast bodies) and ii) with reduced order numbers it was increasingly expensive to produce. Something much simpler to make was needed.

The Mills bomb always fragmented into fragments ranging from a tiny spec to pieces up to 20% of the body plus the the plug. I have one of William Mills own reports on fragmentation and the tests he carried out. They were always good enough for the Army.

However it was a lethal grenade throughout its whole service life and the fact that the design was unchanged from 1917 to 1972 shows how good it was.

John

[Gunner Bailey]

Dragging this back somewhat, I have a 1980's No36M that was manufactured for an Indian contract but never filled. So the old design remained in service for nearly 70 years, (somewhere in the world)! Apart from SAA I can't think of anything that remains that unchanged for that long, possibly the No 117 fuze is closest but still only about 50 Years.

Rod

Quite correct Rod.

Imagine if the RAF was still flying SE5A's in 1972?

It's thought that India and possibly Pakistan may still be making the 36 as a rifle grenade. They were still in an Indian Arms catalogue a few years ago.

John

[Terry_Reeves]

John

I agree with much of what you say, but by the 1970's the doctrine had also changed. The 36 was seen as more a defensive weapon where the thrower needed more cover to protect himself from heavier fragments. The lighter notched coil was more in line with modern doctrine which required an offensive weapon which proved less danger to the thrower but could still disable the enemy.

TR