ANZAC weapon used in Lone Pine area

[michaeldr]

On a thread in the Book Review section, Trajan has asked about a Turkish officer's use of the word which has been translated into English as 'dumdum'

Lt Mehmed Fasih wrote his diary while serving at Lone Pine/Bloody Ridge in November & December.

In fact most of his references to this form of bullet refer to the sound they make and the echo which they produce. He does however also have three specific references to soldiers being wounded or killed by this type of ammunition.

 

The Turkish soldiers in his company seem to think that this particular form of fire came from Gültepe/Rose Hill (though on other occasions it may have been from elsewhere.)

Because of Lt Fasih's more frequent references to the noise, I was wondering if the ANZACs were using a Pom-pom here?

Can any of our friends from down-under tell me what likely weapons were being used in this area at this time?

 

These are some of the quotes from Lt Fasih's diary

 

Page 50: “Dumdum fire as active as ever”

 

Page 52: “... hushed from time to time by exploding dumdum bullets and the echoes they produce.”

 

Page 55: “But dumdums continue echoing in the gullies”

 

Page 57: “Dumdum bullets continue ringing in the valleys”

 

Page 58: “Occasionally, a dumdum explodes”

 

Page 59: “The odd dumdum bullet continues to ring out in gullies”

 

Page 88: “...exploding dumdum bullets produce echoes, which reverberate in the gullies.”

 

Page 108: “His right shoulder was grazed by a dumdum bullet, but he was not seriously wounded.”

(Does this ref to a grazed shoulder preclude the wound actually being from what would normally be termed in English a 'dumdum'?)

 

Page 119: “Am informed one soldier killed by bullet which smashed his skull. Go over. My God! Dreadful sight. Top of skull and brains are gone. Inside of head, completely empty. Part of spinal cord visible. Blue veins dangle. Roots of eyeballs exposed. Poor soldier's black eyes half open. His teeth gleam. Scalp hangs in strips. The sight boggles the mind. This is the damage a single bullet can cause when it is a dumdum! Ordinary infantry round might still have killed him, but injury would not have been that horrible.”

 

Page 122: “A soldier from 5^th Company hit in head by dumdum bullet. Still alive, poor fellow rattles.”

 

Page 128: “Occasionally, a dumdum explodes in our sector. My soldiers report these come from Gültepe (Rose Hill).”

 

Page 184: “While a most pleasant period of quiet continues at the front, from time to time it is violated by bitter snap of exploding dumdum bullets.”

 

Page 204: “A dumdum bullet explodes to our left.”

 

Thanks in advance for any enlightenment

Michael

[gilly100]

Interesting Michael.

I am only aware of Australian claims of being fired on themselves by explosive bullets and dum dums by the Turks. Not aware of any pom poms being used by them. The NZers in August captured, I think, a Nordenfelt weapon from memory in the August breakout attempt. I shall have to go through my books, but I think this weapon was sent back to NZ as a war trophy. Captured somewhere at northern Anzac. Am sure someone will know more on your query.

Cheers

Ian

[michaeldr]

Ian,

Thanks for your interest here

I now realise that I have omitted to give the title of the book in question
It is 'Bloody Ridge (Lone Pine) Diary of Lt Mehmed Fasih'
translated & edited by Hasan Basri Danişman
ISBN 975-92686-2-0

[gilly100]

Japanese or Garland Mortar is all I can think of Michael, although the trajectory might be wrong.

Ian

[Guest]

Mate,

 

At the same time the Turks were firing what we call "Broom stick" bombs into the works along this front. These when checked look more like a Torp then what he believes the weapon is?

 

As to Dum dums, mate what can I say, if he could guess that the bullet fired at him was a DD and not some other type, then he had very good ears?

 

Unless he captured a soldier with bullets who's noses had been cut, then how would he know?

 

We also make the same types of comments, not only about bullets, but other weapons, that if looked at more closely would not be what they are seeing or hearing?

[gilly100]

Steve

Broomstck bombs sounds possible. They were used at Hill 60 as well as a catapult structure to lob bombs as well. Dum dum bullets appear to be claimed as used against both sides. How true I do not know.

Cheers

Ian

[michaeldr]

On 3/3/2017 at 14:37, michaeldr said:

Page 52: “... hushed from time to time by exploding dumdum bullets and the echoes they produce.”

Page 55: “But dumdums continue echoing in the gullies”

Page 57: “Dumdum bullets continue ringing in the valleys”

Page 58: “Occasionally, a dumdum explodes”

Page 59: “The odd dumdum bullet continues to ring out in gullies”

Page 88: “...exploding dumdum bullets produce echoes, which reverberate in the gullies.”

 

Most English readers will associate the word 'dumdum' with a bullet tumbling upon entry and thereby causing a devastating wound

However here, most of Lt Fasih's observations concern the noise and echo which this ammunition produces.

I have never come across such a thing before and, though by no stretch of the imagination an ammunition expert, I have my doubts as to whether what is normally understood as a 'dumdum' could be identifiable by its noise as it passes through the air.

It seems to me that Lt Fasih is most likely describing something else other than what we know as a dumdum.

 

Thanks for your ideas gentlemen

 

Edited 5 March , 2017 by michaeldr

[Guest]

Mate,

 

There was a tactic used later by the Germans against our tanks in France, but I sure we must have known about it. That was the reversing of the bullet in the cartridge so as to penetrate metal plate.

 

Tests prove that this type of bullet had armour penetrating powers, unlike a normal bullet.

 

While a dum dum would just flatten against any object it hit, where as a reversed bullet could hit men behind steel plate used for OPs at Gallipoli?

 

But I have not hear of this in use by us or the Ottomans at Gallipoli, so I maybe way off base here.

 

S.B

[michaeldr]

Thanks Steve

11 hours ago, stevebecker said:

But I have not hear of this in use by us or the Ottomans at Gallipoli, so I maybe way off base here.

 

Apparently the practice of reversing bullets was indeed known at Gallipoli;

Sea Jane has posted the following on the 'Book Review' thread which originated this topic and discussion

 

quote:

I have been reading Sir Arthur Gaskell's History of the Medical Unit of the Royal Naval Division from its inception to the evacuation of Gallipoli in the Journal of the RN Medical Service, and in Vol. 12 (1926), pp. 135-136 came across this report from Surgeon A.A. Ballance:

 

"It was remarkable that a large number of stretcher cases were suffering from very large lacerated wounds. The patients attribute these wounds to “explosive bullets”, but I have not been able to find any reliable evidence of the truth of this statement, though I have often enough picked up clips filled with bullets reversed."

 

regards

Michael

[trajan]

For what it is worth, Storz, in his Gew.98 rifle book, p. 420, quotes a German military surgeon, Fritz Bruning (but without a proper reference) who was serving with the Ottoman army on the common belief among Turkish surgeons that destructive wounds were caused by dum-dum bullets, but how he then demonstrated that POW's shot by the Turkish S bullet displayed the same type of wounds. As I understand it, the shorter the range the worse the wound, as the greater the impact when the bullet - still rotating around its point. - hits flesh. Indeed, Storz also shows a photograph of how a S bullet fired into a 34 cm wide piece of pine wood had toppled three times after initial penetration before it stopped, although he does not state what the range was.

 

This has no bearing on the main topic, I know, that Fasih was stating his belief on the use of dum-dums from the sound of bullets passing by him, but his belief in the use of dum-dums at Lone Pine may have been influenced from seeing destructive impact wounds from very close combat (the ANZAC and Turkish lines were incredibly close, remember!).

 

Julian

[seaJane]

For what it's worth other comments on the size of bullet wounds in the JRNMS article also mention the close range of firing.

[Jeff Pickerd]

Michael,

 

The use of 'Dumdum' bullets by Lt Fasih is quite a mystery; from the search of unit war diaries of the 6th Australian Infantry Brigade for an indication as to what Lt  Fasih's 'Land Torpedo' might be, it is quite clear that the only ordinance fired at the Turkish lines at Lone Pine were standard .303 ammunition, Jam Tin and Cricket Ball grenades, and the Garland trench mortar bomb, on top of artillery and Navy shells.

As far as I can make out the Australians did not have, nor fire, explosive bullets, as suggested by Lt Fasih, so he must have ment some other form of ordinance. To that end, the only thing that seems likely is the Garland grenade. The shape of the grenade if found unexploded could best be described as a large bullet.

 

If that is not the answer to this riddle, I can offer no further suggestion, for there seems to be no other ordinance fired that could match his description of explosion, sound and echo. 

 

 Jeff

[michaeldr]

Surgeon Ballance's comment that he had 'often picked up clips filled with bullets reversed'

suggests to me that these were Turkish clips that had been left behind on the battlefield as they withdrew;

I am presuming that the Surgeon was behind the British lines and that full clips of British ammunition would be too useful to be left lying around like that.

This is not to suggest however that Tommy Atkins or his Digger pal would not have easily picked up the idea from similar battlefield finds themselves.

Does anyone know the physics involved here – ie most of Lt Fasih's references are to the noise of these bullets – does reversed ammunition have a different sound signature?

Edited 10 March , 2017 by michaeldr

[Guest]

Mate,

 

My recollection from a History Channel program some years ago, showed the differences when firing ball ammo against an armoured target, and that of the reversed bullet when fired at a Tank.

 

They were compering the two, as German records stated they fired these at our tanks, where normal bullets would not penetrate, these reversed bullets would, until AP ammo arrived at the front.

 

From what I saw there was no differences between the two, in that both sounded the same, only the effects were different.

 

But then again I was not under there fire so I maybe mistaken, but having been under AK fire I couldn't tell any difference if they were firing some other type?

 

S.B

Edited 11 March , 2017 by stevebecker

[bob lembke]

Quite a mystery.    

 

I have heard this reversed bullet theory for probably decades, and never understood it. To present my credentials, I have been

interested in all sorts of weaponry since I was a child, I have the full training of a US infantry officer (I did not accept my commission

because I could not get a commission in a combat branch, due to poor eyes.), I did serious handgun target shooting for a decade,

and I possess weapons and "carried" habitually (and legally) for many years. And I am a mechanical engineer with seven years of

university training in the field.

 

One problem is jamming. reversed rounds put in a clip is a short path to a serious jam. I used to put US manufactured hollow-point

9 mm ammunition in a US manufactured Smith and Weston Model 39 9mm handgun, both manufactured by top manufacturers in

the same time window, and this modern factory-made dum=dum ammunition frequently jammed the gun when firing. In a bolt-action

rifle, would a reversed bullet, probably done in the back of a dugout by candlelight, chamber properly? I see the sleek nose of a

normal round guiding the round in the chamber.

 

The other question is what Lt. Fatih was experiencing. I read the book about 10 years ago, and have been offered my own copy 

in a souk in Istanbul. (My wife's library of 8 million volumes has it. Nice having a spouse who has worked at a major research library

since she was 17.)  Don't remember this issue from my reading, but it seems that he is referring to several phenomena. I don't 

understand the exploding bullet reports, from both sides. I was discussing the Nordenfeldt weapons at Gallipoli. The Turks had a few

of one of the two models, the 20 mm, I think, none of the 37 mm, I believe. These odd weapons were sometimes described as "volley

guns", and I believe that they both fired explosive rounds. By the international law of the period, an exploding round under (the weight

of the) 20 mm was forbidden. And to what purpose? The head damage that Fatih described might be consistent with a dum dum round.

 

The weapon that some Pals seem to have described is the spigot mortar. The Germans and the French had them, I don't recall a

British weapon of that sort. But I don't think any sort of mortar fits the various phenomena described.

 

Can you hear a different sound from a dum dum? I have fired them from my 9 mm, but not at myself, and while wearing good ear

protection.

 

There could be a question of interpretation. As I remember from the forward of the Lone Pine book, the gentleman who found Fatih's

journal had to look for three months, before he found a man able and willing to translate the lieutenant's handwritten Ottoman Turkish

in the Arabic alphabet into English. And that was in Istanbul.  What was this elderly gentleman's knowledge of firearm terms in Ottoman

Turkish and in English? What is the Ottoman Turkish word for "dum dum"? Was it a borrow word? In the text provided, it seems to be

being used incorrectly some of the time. 

 

 

 

[Garwood]

High velocity bullets make a sharp whipcrack sound as they pass you if they exceed speed of sound.Subsonic would be different ,as would anything that had richoceted off stone etc.A tumbling bullet would make a whirring sound at low speed.

Hth.

[bob lembke]

Thanks, Garwood. Useful information to use sorting out the various reports.

 

I was incorrect above. The smaller Nordenfeld were usually described as "25 mm", but someone, in the thread on Nordenfelds on

this same Gallipoli topic, pointed out that they actually were 1" caliber, so should also be described as 25.4 mm. If you go

to that topic there is a lot of useful discussion and a few pictures. These were volley guns, not machine guns or automatic cannon, 

and usually  had 4 to 10 barrels, usually, firing shells out of a small hopper set atop the gun. If everything went well you could briefly

attain very high rates of fire. the 37 mm Nordenfeld fired slowly, possibly about one shell a second. I understand the 37 mm a lot less.

There also may have been .50 caliber volley guns from the same manufacturer. At 1915 these were probably considered obsolete,

some were still mounted on warships to fight off torpedo boats, and at that time were either not being made or were being made

by a differently named firm. Go to the Nordenfeld site if you want to get confused. I once actually touched one, but it was a single-

barreled gun, I think, on the armored cruiser Olympia in Philadelphia harbor. Don't remember the caliber, possibly a 37 mm single

barrel, if memory serves.

[grantmal]

Michael,

Sorry, I can't help with the dum-dum conundrum, but as for 'reversed bullets': during the 24th May Anzac armistice one of the 3rd Field Ambulance stretcher bearers picked up a few souvenirs in no-mans-land including a 'Turk's bayonet and scabbard and various bullets, find some reversed in cartridge cases.' Captain A G Butler, MO 9th Bn AIF at Gallipoli, mentions the following orders received:

"Prisoners who have improper ammunition must be tied up and reported at once and man to retain bullets which have been reversed or filed at the point. Hands tied behind their backs." [AWM 41/17 53] Both of these accounts were originally posted in this thread:

 

 

Ross, the NZ correspondent, describes head wounds similar to that seen by Lt Fasih, and adds to the evidence of reversed rounds: 'Most of the head wounds received in the trenches were at short range and very severe. In a large number the whole calvarium and contents were blown right off, just as if they had been removed with a saw. In nearly all cases of long-range bullet wounds, when the bullet lodged it was completely reversed -- that is the point was towards the wound of entrance. Some clips of Turkish cartridges were discovered with the bullets reversed, though in the majority of cases the bullet apparently turned over immediately on striking.' [Otago Daily Times, 10.3.16]

 

Delorme, in his 1915 book 'War Surgery' wrote, 'At the outbreak of every war there are always questions raised with regard to the employment of dum-dum bullets. It is so to-day. We have seen wounded men in the present campaign concerning whom this old error has been brought forward. The terrible injuries that have given rise to this mistake differ so greatly in character from those usually observed that it seems impossible to attribute them to the action of a bullet which causes but very small apertures of entry and of exit. This, however, is not so. In such cases it is a question of explosive shots due to projectiles of very high velocity becoming more or less broken up in their course through the tissues. The fury with which our soldiers have many times fallen on the enemy, and the fact of their being hit by bullets from very short distances, sufficiently account for these wounds that need no further explanation.

Systematic use of explosive bullets would show a want of common sense, because we rely on the effects of ricochetted bullets, a ricochet occurring in the proportion of 1 in 3 of bullets discharged; besides, an explosive bullet can no longer hit a man if it has touched the ground, however slightly.'

[michaeldr]

It's great to hear from you again, and thanks for those most useful insights and references 

 

best regards

Michael

 

[tatmattd]

Hi, I think I have the answer. The Australians installed a QF 3 pounder Hotchkiss gun next to Rose Hill in Hotchkiss gully, later mounting it on Rose Hill. (Being berated for moving it in view of the enemy). It was used for sniping (yes, sniping) at steel loop holes and snipers posts, apparently when occupied. It was run by the Brigade Machine gun officer, a captain, a lieutenant and about 6 ORs. It was installed in Late October and ran until 0200 on the 19th of December when it was disabled by the Engineers. (They ran 2 or 3 of these plus a 12 pounder Hotchkiss for AA). To get an idea of how it sounded in action search YouTube for "Hong Kong noonday gun" . I don't think I'd like to be on the receiving end of it. Cheers, Matt

 

Edited 18 August , 2017 by tatmattd
More info

[michaeldr]

Thanks Matt

There were Naval 12-pounders used in the trenches at Helles

eg: The 29th Divisional Artillery records that on 28th June one was used in "a support trench to enfilade a 'fort' in the enemy's front line"

there is anther example recorded on 14th July when was taken up to the front line trenches and fired at a range of 200yds "laid by Bombr. Cook laying through the bore" - 'immense damage' is recorded.

But this is the first time that I recall 3-pounders being mentioned as used in the trenches

Thanks again

Michael

[alantwo]

Michael

 

The 3 pounder gun is mentioned a few times in the 2^nd Australian Field Artillery Brigade War Diary around the end of August beginning of September.

 

29^th Aug 1915

Two 3 pounder Hotchkiss guns were taken over & placed under control of Lieutenant SEXTON, with instructions to emplace same on RUSSELL'S TOP.

 

30^th Aug 1915

The CO in the morning visited the position being prepared for the 3 pounder Hotchkiss gun on RUSSELL'S TOP, same being not yet complete.

 

1^st Sep 1915

Today was again quiet. In the morning the CO visited RUSSELL'S TOP but found the 3 pounders not yet ready to fire. He expects that they will be ready tomorrow.

 

3^rd Sep 1915

The 3 pounder Hotchkiss fired for first time from RUSSELL'S TOP. 4 rounds fired by it were considered to be of more moral effect than destructive against GERMAN OFFICERS trench.

 

10^th Sep 1915

3 pounder in action again but has not fired today.

 

Hope that helps. My transcription, apologies in advance for any mistakes.

 

Regards

Alan

[alantwo]

Michael

 

It's not terribly important in this context by I think the 29th August entry should refer to 2nd Lieutenant SEXTON, he had recently been commissioned in the 1st AFA Brigade and transferred to the 6th Battery, 2nd AFA Brigade. He was discharged following a bomb wound in November 1915, but re-enlisted and later became a Major though he died of wounds in France in September 1918.

 

Kind regards

Alan

[michaeldr]

Many thanks Alan; it's always good to have the references

Looking at the size of the 3-pounder shell, I would say that it's a good suggestion for the weapon involved here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QF_3-pounder_Hotchkiss

 

regards

Michael

[Creafield]

I am rather hesitant to enter this discussion as I feel I am stating the bleeding obvious about ballistics and bullets fired from rifles and pistols, as well as the study of bullet wound trauma.  I have noted a few a few misconceptions aired here.  I am quite ready to be contradicted, however much of what I say comes from several years rifle shooting, both Queen's prize(.303 & 7.62mm) and sporting caliber target shooting & hunting quite a few years ago.

 

1. The barrel of any rifle and I would imagine virtually every artillery piece used in WW1 had rifling, or grooves cut into the barrel in a slight twist.  The rifling, about I rotation per 12" of barrel, causes the bullet to rotate longitudinally before exiting the barrel.  This is called 'twist'.  This gives the bullet gyroscopic balance and whilst this is happening the bullet can be accurately fired to a distance of, nowadays, 2,000metres. Accuracy in target shooting is determined by the size of a 'group' of say 5 shots fired at varying ranges.  A .303 can fire 5 shots, with an experienced shooter, into a 2" circle at 100metres.

 

2. Once the bullet loses its gyroscopic balance it will start to tumble and then it will become uselessly inaccurate as air mass takes over.  This is NOT the cause of a dum dum bullet.

 

3. The 'art' of ballistics is to get the rifling and barrel length correctly proportioned for ultimate accuracy, the caveat is that it has to be a manageable length for soldiers .... not so for target shooters.  This is why pistols are so inaccurate .. the barrel length is way too short.  Other aspects that affect soldiers using rifles include how well the action works under ALL circumstances (ie when wet or dirty), how many bullets in the magazine etc.

The Canadian designed Ross straight pull rifle was an inadequate rifle for war use, as it was too well designed , very fine tolerances but a little bit of dirt and it was stuffed!!

 

4. Bullet construction for WW1 was a full metal jacket.  Offically I have never heard why .. I think the 'rules of war'.  The standard bullet was a 174 grain bullet (about 11gram, .4 of an ounce) at about 2500feet per second (fps) muzzle velocity.   So it could be inferred that a 303 bullet was spinning about 2,500 revolutions per second at the muzzle, or about 150,000 revs per minute (compare to your car!!!).  So the bullet has to be made very accurately to prevent a wobbling, hence inaccurate, bullet.   

 

 5.  My reading of a dum dum bullet was a bullet that had its nose tampered with so that rather than going clean through soft tissue (ie. muscle), the bullet broke up quickly and caused massive soft tissue trauma.  This was because the bullets softer inner core (lead) was exposed and the metal jacket 'peeled' off the bullet, increasing the surface area.  However cutting the nose off a bullet will mean that it is not longitudinally accurate in weight, so when it leaves the muzzle the twist will instantly make it unstable and hence inaccurate.  Many years ago on my family's farm one of the stockmen decided to do that to shoot Kangaroos.  He used a file, cut the nose off and then proceeded to not even be able to hit a kangaroo at 100m.

 

6.  What I would call 'true' dum dum bullets are hollow point bullets.  These used be seen in very high velocity calibres (.243 etc) and had a very small 'cavity' or hole in the nose that was manufactured in.  They were extremely accurate to 300m. and caused massive trauma when they hit.  The bullet 'mushroomed as it hit and the great increase in frontal area meant that it stopped very quickly, releasing all the kinetic energy in the target.  The sound of the bullet hitting it's target was obvious.  Nowadays the art of bullet design is such that it has to be very stable up to 500m., very accurate and have a controlled expansion so that it stays within the animal and all the kinetic energy is released there.

 

7.  As a Veterinarian who has worked in Canada, UK and Australia I have seen may domestic animals shot by various means.  A solid (FMJ) bullet will pass through muscle and exit, sometimes with surprisingly little trauma.  Abdominal injuries, because of the high water content will slow a bullet down disproportionately and release a lot of kinetic energy, hence trauma.  As soon as it hits solid tissue (bone or cartilage) then it becomes extremely destructive, it's path, and that of the bullet fragments is in the hands of the gods.  Most of the gunshot injuries I have seen have been with .22 cal bullet, usually solid construction, and usually at close range (<50m).  This is because of the slow speed (1100fps), light, solid bullet not causing anywhere near as much wound trauma as a very high velocity bullet - which I probably only saw a dozen or so.

If a hollow point bullet, or a .303 with the nose extensively removed, hit a person in the skull (as described above) at a range of <50m then the injury would be most likely as described.  

 

8.  As to whether a 'Dum Dum' is a 3lb small artillery shell I cannot say, however if it hit a person in the head (as above) it would do a similar injury, but it would have kept on going and done the same injury to many others if they were in the line of fire.  As for 'reversed' bullets - I'm glad I didn't fire the rifle ... twice!!!!!!

Edited 25 August , 2017 by Creafield
spelling correction