Shrapnel

[truthergw]

Keith has put his finger on an important point. Field artillery was for support of the infantry to be used in direct fire against visible targets of infantry and cavalry. Shrapnel was the best ammunition for this purpose.

[nigelfe]

I don't think HE for 18-pr was actually 'invented' until after the outbreak of war, but I guess it's possible they had a design available but I'm not convinced because introduction of HE in Sep 14 led to a new design of shrapnel to maintain ballistic compatibility, which suggests the HE design really was 'new'. (But they might have had both available)

The RFA and RHA had been officially committed to indirect fire since 1906. However, the process of 'cultural change' was not really completed until the experience of Le Cateau. Nevertheless to state that inf and cav were supported by direct fire hence shrapnel is nonsense. Shrapnel was best suited to inflicting casualties on 'troops in the open', and this is what the targets were expected to be. Digging holes changed that, but shrapnel turned out be very effective to neutralise troops in prepared defences, this is why throughout WW1 shrapnel was around 50% of ammo expenditure for 18-pr.

Field howitzers (4.5) equipped one of the four div arty 'bdes', the div heavy bty (60-pr) had only 4 guns. The problem was while the original BEF was fully equipped to scale with modern equipment, the next two regular divs basically emptied the stores. On my calc roughly 7% of arty ammo in a BEF div in 1914 was HE.

[Rockdoc]

The History of the Ministry of Munitions, Volume X, Part II, Chapter 1, pp 2 onwards, gives some reasons why Shrapnel was produced in greater quantity. To summarise:

• 1 The Army wanted at least 50% of all 18-pdr shells to be Shrapnel. They also considered Shrapnel useful in shells up to the 60-pdr.

2 Shrapnel was found to be very effective against wire and HE almost useless

3 A number of accidents had turned some officers against HE

4 HE use had been forbidden at Loos as it was feared it would disperse the gas

5 Shell shortages had led to hoarding so that HE was kept back more than Shrapnel, limiting experience of its use

6 The bursting charge in British 18-pdr HE shells was 13 oz (later increased to 21 oz), while the French shell was lighter - it was hardened - and had a charge of 29 oz. The French used much more HE than the British.

7 British fuzes were not as good as the French ones, the latter reliably bursting on graze. Shells burying themselves before exploding or bursting too high were almost ineffective

8 Shrapnel was effective against counter attacks.

Keith

[centurion]

Shrapnel was ineffectual against wire in dead ground. Once grazing fuses were perfected the chosen combination was HE for directly observable wire, blast from toffee apple mortar rounds for wire in dead ground relatively close to the front line, HE from howitzers for wire in dead ground further away (this latter not liked as it left shell holes which could also be a hindrance to progress). We've had this debate before but it seems that shrapnel was only very effective if laid down by very experienced gunners who could achieve a high degree of accuracy otherwise it could be very ineffective (I've seen contemporary accounts of wire being left virtually untouched) - as the war progressed and artillery numbers increased (diluting the corps of old professionals) maintaining such a high pitch of gunnery must have become difficult.

The accidents referred to may be the tendency for early HE rounds to explode at the muzzle due to manufacturing defects.

[Rockdoc]

What do you mean by "dead ground", Centurion?

Using artillery against wire was certainly not a simple process, as you say. As I understand it, the shell had to burst a few tens of feet above the wire for maximum damage, which could not have been an easy task given the inevitable variations between batches of fuzes and shells. The Army was well aware that variation existed but apparently did everything it could to maximise it by deliberately mixing batches at the supply depots. Logic would suggest the reverse would have been the better policy since it would have allowed gunners to make a more consistent correction.

Keith

[centurion]

What do you mean by "dead ground", Centurion?

Ground which cannot be covered by direct fire, often in a dip or hollow or in the lee of a ridge or berm. The Germans became quite skilled at locating wire belts taking advantage of the terrain to use such features (or course it would usually only be dead from the allies view - German mg etc would be able to sweep it). In some places where they were able to preprepare the ground wire was laid in ha has. The attackers would often know of its existence through patrols, aerial observation etc. Even quite a shallow feature can often create dead ground which can only be swept by dropping fire (say from a howitzer or mortar. Mg Barrages were often employed against dead ground (although not as wire cutters).

[johnreed]

On the 23rd October 1914 near Aubers 49th Battery fired the first 18 Pr. HE shell sent to the front for trials.

John

[nigelfe]

For maximum effect shrapnel needed to burst short of the wire on the flattest possible trajectory, not over it. Obviously a flat trajectory and wire behind a ridge were a difficult combination, but not necessarily impossible. It depends on angle of descent, depth of the valley and the slope angle of the ground in front of the wire.

A flat trajectory also meant the effectiveness of shrapnel was a lot less vulnerable to variation (round to round) and fuze inaccuracy (wrong fuze length). With steep angle of descent if the fuze length was too long then shells went into the ground before the time fuze functioned. At this distance in time its difficult to know how accurate predicted fire was, given the data they were using, my guess is that at the short ranges involved it was probably OK. However, there's not much doubt that for best effect shrapnel should be ranged (adjusted in modern terms), this did need a bit of skill but it was the observer not the gun detachments that were the key. Use of the corrector (which was what was applied to the fuze indicator at each gun) meant that the ranged data acquired on one shoot could be used for another in the same area at about the same time.

Incidentally 'graze' fuzes were not designed to function instantaneously, 'direct action' fuzes were. The word graze can confuse because it might imply great sensitivity and hence instant function, this is not what they were designed to do.

[Rockdoc]

I'd certainly assumed that a graze fuze was one that was triggered on first contact, which is what you appear to be calling a direct action fuze. Would you mind explaining how a graze fuze worked and their intended use, please?

Keith

[johnreed]

Comparison between Graze and Direct Action Fuzes. Owing to the interval of time taken by the pellet to compress the creep spring and move forward on to the needle, the graze fuze is distinctly slower in its action than the Direct Action Fuze. Since Graze Fuzes depend for their action on the checking of the forward velocity, and not on direct blow blows on the nose, there is less liability of blinds occuring at low angles of arrival than with Direction Fuzes.

John

[RodB]

On the 23rd October 1914 near Aubers 49th Battery fired the first 18 Pr. HE shell sent to the front for trials.

John

Hello John, was this used in action or trials ? The earliest date I've come across for HE actually used in action is 31st October, by 70th and 54th batteries on the Ypres front.

Rod

[muckandbullets]

Henry Shrapnel (1761-1842)

Much is credited to Shrapnel's shells used in 1815 at Waterloo on the retaking of La Haye Sainte for the Allies. The French were decimated and many an expert believe Ney's gain at the farmhouse would not have been lost back to the Allies if not for the terrible weapon.

Hence used thereafter into The Great War.

[johnreed]

RodB

I'm sorry not to reply to your post, according to Farndale's book "western Front 1914-18" I quote from page 73. I would image the round was fired in anger.

John