Gunner Bailey Posted 13 September , 2016 Share Posted 13 September , 2016 This might be helpful Fake (left) and Original plugs side by side. Best match I can do with my collection. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWF1967 Posted 13 September , 2016 Share Posted 13 September , 2016 3 hours ago, Gunner Bailey said: This might be helpful Fake (left) and Original plugs side by side. Best match I can do with my collection. John Thanks for posting John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 13 September , 2016 Share Posted 13 September , 2016 (edited) Here's a larger version. Earlier I had upload problems. Hope this is easier to enlarge. Note the key differences in the Morum & Co plug. John Edited 13 September , 2016 by Gunner Bailey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Finneran Posted 14 September , 2016 Share Posted 14 September , 2016 Super thread. Would love to know an expert expand on the use of the lewis in connection with 'bombers'. It might be the 1917 Employment of MGs manual, but for flank protection and/or boxing off the selected part of the trench, the lewis MG was the preferred weapon? - for trench raids/capture prisoners and/or bombing raids? Excellent info nonetheless. Does anybody have info on the German equivalent in their trench raiding efforts? Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 14 September , 2016 Share Posted 14 September , 2016 The Lewis was an excellent weapon, but barely portable, Have you ever lifted one? Heavy as hell. I'd have said it was unsuitable for trench raids where speed and mobility was the key. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trenchtrotter Posted 19 September , 2016 Share Posted 19 September , 2016 John I disagree. Yes it's a heavy beat but not too much of a burden for a lightly equipped soldier. TT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trenchtrotter Posted 19 September , 2016 Share Posted 19 September , 2016 I have potentially had a good week. Aquired a very good non relic No 20 Mk1, 11/16 WEC Ltd. Mising cap and bras sleeve but otherwise mint. Postman bringing me a good 1917 pattern German stick grenade tommorrow hopefully. Again very good condition. Pics to follow. TT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 20 September , 2016 Share Posted 20 September , 2016 On 19/09/2016 at 18:53, trenchtrotter said: John I disagree. Yes it's a heavy beat but not too much of a burden for a lightly equipped soldier. TT Well I suppose it depends on the soldier. Most WW1 soldiers were about 5 ft 4ins and weight 9 stone. Carrying a 28lb Lewis plus personal gear on belt and possibly small pack seems a lot to ask. Add a full mag 4.5 lbs and possibly a spare in a pouch? That's a hell of a lot to carry on a flat road, let alone over uneven ground strewn with barbed wire and much more. I'd like to see it for real. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 20 September , 2016 Share Posted 20 September , 2016 Going back to basics, here's a nice one. Dated 1909 on the handle. Introduced 1908. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trenchtrotter Posted 20 September , 2016 Share Posted 20 September , 2016 36 minutes ago, Gunner Bailey said: Well I suppose it depends on the soldier. Most WW1 soldiers were about 5 ft 4ins and weight 9 stone. Carrying a 28lb Lewis plus personal gear on belt and possibly small pack seems a lot to ask. Add a full mag 4.5 lbs and possibly a spare in a pouch? That's a hell of a lot to carry on a flat road, let alone over uneven ground strewn with barbed wire and much more. I'd like to see it for real. John But on a raid surely he would not be so equipped and also his colleges would carry the spares. Perhaps the gunner was choosen from the larger chaps. As you say all speculation as we were not there and have different physiques. TT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 21 September , 2016 Share Posted 21 September , 2016 Mark and TT I've looked through the Instructions for Grenade training and bombing parties that I have and there is no reference to the Lewis being involved in the trench clearing itself. The Lewis is brought in where a Lewis detachment (team of five) accompanies a bombing team to suppress any fire from German machine guns that may attack the bombing group. I take this to be that they set up in no mans land with a better view of the German lines than from the British lines and opened up if a German gun team got going. This is in the British and Australian training literature This makes sense as a heavy machine gun operating within a trench would negate the need for the bombers or the bayonet men. I've never read a single reference to a Lewis gun team doing trench clearance work though I'm happy to be pointed in the right direction. . In the last year of the war the Americans used the shotgun as a 'Trench Broom' and the Germans used the sub machine gun for the same purpose. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 21 September , 2016 Author Share Posted 21 September , 2016 4 hours ago, Gunner Bailey said: Mark and TT I've looked through the Instructions for Grenade training and bombing parties that I have and there is no reference to the Lewis being involved in the trench clearing itself. John is correct. In my copy of the official H.M.S.O.manual ' The Training and Employment of Bombers ' ( dealing with Trench Raids/Bombing Parties ) dated September 1916, page 26 ( copy attached ) under the heading ' Equipment of Bombers ', it refers to men being ' as lightly equipped as possible ', and the weapons to be carried included rifles, bayonets, revolvers, stabbing knives, axes and knobkerrys and of course, grenades. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wainfleet Posted 23 September , 2016 Share Posted 23 September , 2016 On 20/09/2016 at 19:55, Gunner Bailey said: Going back to basics, here's a nice one. Dated 1909 on the handle. Introduced 1908. VERY nice. Not many of those around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trenchtrotter Posted 27 September , 2016 Share Posted 27 September , 2016 Pics of my latest. Stick grenade has faintest remains of stencilling. Head filled 5/5/18 and stick fused 18/1/18. Maker APC marked after 51/2 Sek or NCB by fuse date and on canister? Anyone know for sure? TT BTW both 100% inert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 27 September , 2016 Share Posted 27 September , 2016 Nice grenades. Does the stick also have the more normal stamped letters for maker and 5 1/2 sec ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trenchtrotter Posted 27 September , 2016 Share Posted 27 September , 2016 46 minutes ago, Gunner Bailey said: Nice grenades. Does the stick also have the more normal stamped letters for maker and 5 1/2 sec ? Yes 51/2 SEK. A.P.C Below NCB 25.1.18 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 27 September , 2016 Share Posted 27 September , 2016 1 hour ago, trenchtrotter said: Yes 51/2 SEK. A.P.C Below NCB 25.1.18 Even nicer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Haselgrove Posted 27 September , 2016 Share Posted 27 September , 2016 Trenchtrotter, Excellent examples - thanks for posting. By coincidence, I too have in my collection a No. 20 Mk.1 made by W.E.Co.Ltd. dated 11-16. Your stick grenade has me wondering because I have in my collection a very similar grenade. However, the stick and canister are both marked A.P.C. and, in addition, the stick is marked faintly with what looks like N.C.B. 1.8.17. I'm afraid we don't seem to have a list of the manufacturers of grenades and the initials they used. Anyway, I attach a photo in case it is of interest. Regards, Michael. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trenchtrotter Posted 27 September , 2016 Share Posted 27 September , 2016 Michael, you could not improve on yours. That said my example is very, very good and to say I'm pleased to get it is an understatement as I've been after a good one awhile. Next the search for 15 and 16 types!! TT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 27 September , 2016 Share Posted 27 September , 2016 2 hours ago, Michael Haselgrove said: However, the stick and canister are both marked A.P.C. and, in addition, the stick is marked faintly with what looks like N.C.B. 1.8.17. The IWM has a near identical stick recovered from Hill 60. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 28 September , 2016 Share Posted 28 September , 2016 Referring to G.B.'s post on the Training and Employment of Bombers which mentions the 'special stabbing knife'. For those whose curiosity is aroused the IWM has examples of several originally received from Weedon in the Twenties, with this classification. Excuse the French F2 grenade; - the photo was taken in a different context but the knife is the real thing. - SW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 28 September , 2016 Author Share Posted 28 September , 2016 2 hours ago, calibre792x57.y said: Referring to G.B.'s post on the Training and Employment of Bombers which mentions the 'special stabbing knife'. For those whose curiosity is aroused the IWM has examples of several originally received from Weedon in the Twenties, with this classification. Excuse the French F2 grenade; - the photo was taken in a different context but the knife is the real thing. - SW SW, The French F2 grenade actually matches with the French stabbing knife known as a ' French Nail ' ( Clous Francais ), The ' box ' it is on was it's wooden scabbard, the IWM has an example and here is their description :- " The specialized nature of trench warfare, as it developed during the First World War, spawned a variety of new weapons. Many of these, such as clubs and knives intended for close quarter fighting, recalled more primitive eras of warfare. This crude dagger is of the type known as the 'French Nail' (Clous Français). They were apparently produced at a number of French front-line 'parcs d'artillerie', utilising steel salvaged from the reinforced concrete of German field fortifications. First World War period unofficial fighting knife. Stephens describes WEA 641 as 'a stabbing weapon made from the metal posts which carried German barbed wire. The upper loop formed a handy grip, and the stem was sharpened'. (Reference: Stephens, Frederick J, 1985, Fighting Knives, Arms and Armour, London, pp 22-23 and 26 (refs 75-76 and 86) Crude one-piece stabbing weapon fashioned from a steel rod - possibly the upper portions of a screw picket or a section of reinforcing rod from a concrete field work. The 'grip' of the weapon is a simple loop providing loose and unsatisfactory handling and the minimum of protection. The blade is fashioned from beating the forward extension of the rod flat. The end product is a long leaf-shaped double-edged blade with prominent medial rib. " Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 28 September , 2016 Author Share Posted 28 September , 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 28 September , 2016 Share Posted 28 September , 2016 3 hours ago, calibre792x57.y said: Referring to G.B.'s post on the Training and Employment of Bombers which mentions the 'special stabbing knife'. For those whose curiosity is aroused the IWM has examples of several originally received from Weedon in the Twenties, with this classification. I actually had a real one of these with provenance. My Grandfather was a sapper and probably made it himself. I inherited his toolbox when I was about 25 and for years puzzled about this strange scribing / marking tool in the box. In the end I had a clear out and it was taken with certain other redundant tools to my local skip. It was only 20 years later I found out what it was AAAAAAAAAAGGGHHHH ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calibre792x57.y Posted 28 September , 2016 Share Posted 28 September , 2016 (edited) Provenance. I bought it for £5 from a chap whose Great Uncle picked it up from a mine crater on the Loos battlefield. He thought it was German and kept it as a souvenir. He also used it to stir paint!. They were issued to British 'Bombers' for the battle and one of the IWM's on display was once labelled with a brief description which mentioned this. I was aware they were also used by the French which why I photographed it with the F.2, but the use by the British is less well known. Most of the steel rod used in German fortifications is much thicker, and probably rather later, more likely the ubiquitous steel pickets were utilised. Thanks for the IWM's description. LF - SW Edited 28 September , 2016 by calibre792x57.y Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now