Tracer rounds.

[centurion]

The following extract from an American soldier's letter home may be of interest:

"You are soundly sleeping when suddenly there comes a terrific riot from the anti- avion (anti-aircraft) guns right beside you, everybody jumps out of his tent in pajamas and helmet usually wearing beside that a blanket and sabots (wooden shoes) to see the fun. The air becomes full of search lights, rockets, bursting shells, tracer shells and the ground all around makes the most terrific noise. The bursting of the bombs, the anti-aircraft guns, all the mitrailleuses (machine guns), etc. After a little while it is all over and we go back to bed for another few hours. Needless to say they never hit the avions but they have a tremendous amount of fun trying to and likewise the Dutchman never does a great deal of harm. "

Suggesting that tracer was mainly an AA weapon

However I have seen an (unsubstantiated) reference to the KuK using it in some quantity in a ground attack on British troops on the Italian front.

[gew98]

There's a saying in the U.S. armed forces that tracer works both ways: one can see where one's rounds are going and the enemy can see where they are coming from. Some years back I saw something on the internet to the effect that U.S. tracer rounds used during World War II weren't always ballistically similar to ball, so where the tracer rounds went was not necessarily where the ball rounds also went. If I recall correctly the statement was in reference to ball and tracer ammunition in 5-to-1 ratio belts used on fighter aircraft. Like so much that is on the internet, I don't know how true that statement was or whether it was qualified or nuanced in some way.

As for flash suppressors, I don't believe any of them can attenuate the flash to be seen if one is downrange looking at the muzzle end of the weapon. They may help to mask the flash as seen from the side. One explanation I read is that flash suppressors are for preserving the night vision of soldiers fighting in the dark.

Pete ' The "flash suppressor" at least in german parlance was used for the very reason of very very noticeable muzzle flash of their Kar98a's. The S patrone ball loading that was standard worked as intended withthe approx 5" longer barrel of the gew98 rifle. When used in the 98a carbines the muzzle flash was excessive. So the germans devised a flash hider that attached to the barrel of the 98a and was locked in place by using the front sight base's muzzle cover attachment point in conjuntion with a rotating band clamp w/screw. It was effective , but though mad ein quantity seemingly few were bothered to be used by german troops issued these.

As for the Tracer use in the great war my understanding is that the expensive cost of this type of small arms ammo made it's use restricted primarily to those whom needed it most - the air forces.

The germans went far enough to post orders to that effect given the high manufacturing cost of these and armor peircing bullets.

[green_acorn]

Can I offer another reason why tracer was probably limited to air-to-air and anti-aircraft use: uneven quality and distribution of the phosphor in the bullet base would lead to inconsistent ballistic trajectory, a danger to ground troops and counter to the purpose of target indication.

I take this from experience with .303 Vickers ammunition manufactured in India. In the late 1970's the Australian Army (8/9 RAR) re-recognised the need for a MG that could provide safe and consistent over head fire for battle inoculation training, at the time the Army had a large number of Vickers guns in storage, but not the ammunition. The Army purchased a large amount of 1 in 5 trace belts from India in 1979, on the first practice shoot the tracer was heading left-right-up-down at anywhere from the barrel to 800m's out, ie: on trajectory the go left-right etc at say 400m, not something you wanted with friendly troops advancing/attacking under the fire. All the tracer was pulled and replaced with ball, no trajectory problems but usually a stoppage at one of the hand filled rounds on the belt as they weren't all pressed in properly.

I would imagine manufacturing standards would have been similar during the Great War.

The MG Platoon fired the combined tracer as a series of full belts, I just wish I hadn't left the film at the Chemist, it was spectacular!

Cheers,

Hendo

[Keith Woodland]

I can't believe, I started one of the most sensible and fascinating posts that I have read in a long time! I must be slipping! What a super thread this has turned out to be and confirms my suspicions all along. Thanks guys!

Chris.

When firing .30 Browning from a variety of Armoured veicles we had 1 tracer to 4 ball. At 400 yards they all went into the target but at 800 yards the tracer would be aimed to go about 4feet over the target as by then they would be lighter and fly higher. With7.62mm GPMG it was 1to 1 so we just used to put the tracer into the target. I seem to recall being told all tracer was by then illegal under the Geneva convention, although that may have just been flannel by an Instructor who didnt know the answer. Keith Woodland

[TonyE]

Now that this thread has come back to the fore again, here is some data I meant to post back in August when discussing the additional cost of tracer.

Figures are from the Min. of Munitions Priced Vocabulary, 1917, actually published in 1918.

.303" ball ammunition, £7. 16s. 3d. per 1000

.303" SPG Tracer, £12. 5s. 0d. per 1000

.303" Buckingham Incendiary (Smoke trace), £15. 0s. 0d. per 1000

Regards

TonyE

PS Tracer rounds are not against the Geneva Convention.

[Keith Woodland]

Now that this thread has come back to the fore again, here is some data I meant to post back in August when discussing the additional cost of tracer.

Figures are from the Min. of Munitions Priced Vocabulary, 1917, actually published in 1918.

.303" ball ammunition, £7. 16s. 3d. per 1000

.303" SPG Tracer, £12. 5s. 0d. per 1000

.303" Buckingham Incendiary (Smoke trace), £15. 0s. 0d. per 1000

Regards

TonyE

PS Tracer rounds are not against the Geneva Convention.

Just to clarify by all tracer I was referring to a belt of all tracer rounds with no ball and not tracer in general.

Keith Woodland

[TonyE]

Whether one in four or all tracer, neither is illegal, and anyway, why wouldone be legal and the other not?

Regards

TonyE

[Keith Woodland]

Whether one in four or all tracer, neither is illegal, and anyway, why wouldone be legal and the other not?

Regards

TonyE

As I said in my earlier post that is what I was told way back and i always doubted its truth.

Keith Woodland