What type of handguns did officers carry?

[laughton]

I am fortunate in that I had my grandfather's COLT 45 from Vimy Ridge circa April 1917 (26th Northumberland Fusiliers, 34th Division, British 3rd Army). Not sure if he carried that over from his days as a Canadian (32nd Battalion CEF), perhaps he did as an officer. I had the opportunity to fire it twice back in 1964, along with my fathers S&W 38 and my CT 22. The 45 had more kick than my 12 gauge as I recall! Once you fire one, you never forget!

[TonyE]

Mik

I mainly loaded my own .455 for my Webley Mark III but occasionally shot Fiocchi when I needed cases. As you rightly say, it more or less duplicates the original loading.

As for the suggestion that a "parts" gun would increase the recoil, I am afraid that idea is a non starter, as is the idea of a "reject". All British military pistols have to be accepted at each stage of manufacture and then proofed with an over pressure round before issue. That is the meaning of the crossed pennants stamp on the pistols. Added to that, once in the civilian market in the UK the guns must be proofed again by either the London or Birmingham Proof House.

Regards

TonyE

[MikB]

As for the suggestion that a "parts" gun would increase the recoil, I am afraid that idea is a non starter, as is the idea of a "reject".

Well, yes - even if a substandard gun did get put into use, by far the most likely result would be inaccuracy from shaved bullets caused by poor chamber alignment, slightly reduced velocity and 'spitting' of lead, lubricant and propellant granules through excessive chamber/barrel gap, or binding cylinder or inability to close the gun properly - there's a load of things you can think of, but it's hard to imagine any of them increasing the recoil - though they could make it uncomfortable to shoot in other ways.

Regards,

MikB

[Stanley_C_Jenkins]

If anybody is sufficiently interested, the "other site" that I mentioned is "Encyclopedia Titanica" - a large site with a lot of traffic. It appears that 45 Webleys were carried on the Titanic, and would therefore have been the ones fired to deter people from rushing the lifeboats (most of the ship's senior officers were naval reservists). Some users of the Titanica site are convinced that Webleys were "difficult" to use.

[MikB]

Some users of the Titanica site are convinced that Webleys were "difficult" to use.

Doesn't sound like they ever handled one. The double action is usually pretty smooth, and the single action has a long, easy cocking stroke and a decently-clean break. The handle is comfortable to hold and at a sensible angle. The simultaneous extraction of all the spent cases and unobstructed exposure of the cylinder face for reloading is very substantially more ergonomic than the solid frame and sideswing cylinder almost universal today, which is awkward and fiddly by comparison.

Very many knowledgeable folk would say the Webley design - at least with authoritative rounds like .455 - is one of the very best and most usable, anywhere, ever.

Regards,

MikB

[auchonvillerssomme]

This is a .455 round 90 years on. I spotted it in the Ancre Cemetery this morning. And for those Health & Safety wallahs, I chucked it in the bushes.

Mick

[TonyE]

Some users of the Titanica site are convinced that Webleys were "difficult" to use.

I have just had a look at the thread about Webleys on this site and it is sadly misinformed. Comments saying that firing the Webley one handed was to be avoided because of the recoil etc. simple show that the posters have little or no experience of firing a Webley. The post asking why the Titanic should be carrying "military" pistols also shows a great lack of understanding of the period, let alone the weapons themselves.

Also as a minor aside, the Titanic sank in 1912 but the Webley Mark VI was not introduced until 1915...

Regards

TonyE

[auchonvillerssomme]

In fairness they are a heavy weapon especially if you aren't used to firing one, although in using one to kill yourself hopefully you would only need to fire it once.

Mick

[albert]

What was the WWI .455 loading?

[MikB]

What was the WWI .455 loading?

Mk.II ball, a 265-grain lead roundnose hollowbase conical ball at about 610 ft./sec., giving about 219 ft.lb. energy. Before WW2, some officers expressed anxiety that the lead bullet might violate the Hague convention, so an FMJ with similar ballistics was developed, the Mk.VI ball.

It is not recorded (AFAIK) whether any victims ever noticed the difference. Either could spoil your whole day.

Regards,

MikB