Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Dum Dum Bullets


susan kitchen

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

It does seem ironic to me that in a war that utilised the Machine Gun, The Tank, Flamethrowers, saps packed with explosive & Poison gas, that either side was overly concerned about the use of Dum Dum rounds.

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard somewhere that if a captured soldier was found to have 'dum-dum' or any other illegal ammunition he was liable to be executed using that same ammunition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that it does seem a little odd, but even then there was the concern about negative publicity, particularly in America.

However, when the Royal Navy purchased the Winchester Model 92 rifles in early 1915 there was some discussion because Winchester only had lead bulleted ammunition in stock and it would take about three months to manufacture the necessary quantity of jacketed ammunition. The Admiralty said that as we were using lead bulleted revolver rounds they were happy to take what was available.

There was concern though when .303 inch Brock and Pomeroy explosive bullets came into use for anti-Zeppelin work in aircraft, and the decision was initially taken that this ammunition was not to be used in France or Belgium and was to be confined to Home Defence squadrons. Later when the Germans began the use of similar types of bullets the restriction was eased.

Another case was the Maxim Automatic Buckshot gun. This was a device designed to fire multiple rounds along a trench if it was captured by the enemy. The army purchased one but refered it to the Adjutant General who deemed it contravened the Hague Convention and should not be used.

Strange what was considered humane or not.

Regards

TonyE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as I'm on the subject of the origin of words, the English word cartridge came from the French word "cartouche," meaning something which surrounds or encloses something else. The term goes back to when black powder and ball cartouches / cartridges were wrapped in combustible paper. Today cartouche jewelry usually means a medallion of some sort which has a box or border surrounding the image in the center.

In Egyptian hieroglyphics, a royal name is always surrounded by a loop and the same is true in hieratic script. This was a valuable clue when deciphering the Rosetta Stone. Ptolemy was one of the names and recognizable in the Greek. The Royal signature is known as a cartouche because it is enclosed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi All,

It does seem ironic to me that in a war that utilised the Machine Gun, The Tank, Flamethrowers, saps packed with explosive & Poison gas, that either side was overly concerned about the use of Dum Dum rounds.

Cheers

Not to defend the notion of humane or inhumane weapons but I think there was propaganda to be made from the fact that Dum Dums were prohibited. There were attempts to sidestep the convention against gas, I forget the actual arguments but it was to the effect that the gas as used did not contravene any convention. Flamethrowers I do not know about. Perhaps Bob Lembke or Tom W could enlighten us on the legal position. I believe there were protests at the use of shotguns as trench clearers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Generically any bullet modified to spread or mushroom on impact this increasing the severity of the wound. Specifically British jacketed rounds in which the tip has been removed so that on impact the lead core explodes into the wound making it very nasty indeed. Produced by the arsenal at Dum Dum - hence the name. Banned by the time of WW1

I cant see what the issue is.. lets worry about what extra damage a bullet will do (you are trying to wound or kill the enemy remember)

But Shells,gas,flamethrowers are ok .In total war the means justify the result.IE you win the war.You cant really be humane by controlling bullets,but using any other means of horror of killing the enemy is ok

MC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "standard" British .303 round of WW1 was rear-weighted due to the composition of the head and did, indeed, perform much as you describe (although I wouldn't describe it as "unstable" - it was a deadly accurate projectile in the SMLR); yawing upon deceleration and producing a wound much as an old dum-dum would have done. Antony

This post by Antony made me go & dig out me Dremmel;

303001.jpg

The jacket on this 1915 VII is a lot thicker than I'd thought & very tough. 6 or 7 cutter discs later;

303002.jpg

The lead is badly poured but I don't know if this would affect flight stability or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And another,same vintage;

303004.jpg

It's quite a sizeable lump of alloy.

303005.jpg

Dave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your welcome,Tom.

Try & pop in to her's when your over next week.

She's got a new cawfee machine..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave - I am surprised the core is damaged like that. The lead is swaged from wire, not poured, so should not have any faults like that. Also, I have sectioned dozens of cupro-nickel bullets and they never seemed that tough!

Cheers

Tony

Tom - I would not trust that driver if I was you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hiya Tony.

As I've said on another thread,these are dug rounds but,the only thing that's got into them is moisture so,is it a reaction to that wee cardboard cap thingy?Or does the lead go 'off' over time?

When I shot one of my Gerry helmets,the round just shredded itself after impact.It must be the lead.

Each round I've payed attention to has had this chalky stuff.See here;

303008.jpg

Bit of verdi from the brass but,you can see the same thing inside the bullet I cut in half which lead me to think that the lead had been poured.It just looks like that.

Have you a photo of one of your bisected ones,please? I will do a better one when I get the bench set up.

Any ideas for me?

Dave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave - I am surprised the core is damaged like that. The lead is swaged from wire, not poured, so should not have any faults like that. Also, I have sectioned dozens of cupro-nickel bullets and they never seemed that tough!

Cheers

Tony

Tom - I would not trust that driver if I was you!

The "ill poured" lead is a good example of "lead cancer" that many collectors of toy and model soldiers are only too familiar with. Seems to happen even when the lead was sealed away from the air, for example by layers of paint

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom - I would not trust that driver if I was you!

That should be 'if I were you' ... and the next time we go fishing, you can walk ... :P

Nice carpet, Dave ... :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll admit to being pretty ignorant about ammunition & know even less about ballistics, so please excuse any 'faux pas' in the following, but, having been reading in The Times archive about the hunt for, and death of, Percy Toplis (the so called 'Monocled Mutineer'), I would be interested in thoughts on a 'dum-dum' said to have been found on his body after he was shot by the Police.

The Times, Thursday, Apr 29, 1920 - on the inquest into the death of Sidney Spicer a taxicab driver whose body had been found hidden in roadside undergrowth near Andover (Headlined as the 'Motor-Car Murder')

...There were scratches on the left cheek and bruises on the head and nose, and a round wound in the scalp half an inch across, but the hair was not singed. At the post- mortem examination he discovered a bullet with a flattened nose embedded in the brain. From the position of the wound and the direction the bullet had taken he thought the shot must have been fired from behind possibly by a person sitting in the back of the car and on the left side of the deceased. The wound could not have been self inflicted. Death was due to a gunshot wound

The Times, Friday, Jun 04, 1920 - referring to the shooting of a policeman & farmer in Banffshire (at the time, although Toplis had been deemed responsible for the Andover shooting, it had still to be established that he had been involved in these shootings)

The revolver he used appears from the wounds inflicted to be of an Army Pattern

(an earlier report had given that Toplis was in the habit of carrying a loaded six-chambered revolver, and in a later one it was named as a 'Webley')

The Times, Wednesday, Jun 09, 1920 - How Toplis died

'...The Inspector added that when the body was searched a monocle, a pawn ticket, and three more cartridges, including a modified 'dum-dum' were found in the pockets'

His revolver it was reported had, on examination, contained four good cartridges and two spent (Toplis had fired two shots at the police before he'd been shot)

My queries are:

As he was believed to have been shot at close range, as it didn't exit, is it likely that a dum-dum was used by Toplis for the execution of Sidney Spicer, and, even if it wasn't, would this type have bullet have, for lack of a better way of putting it, been the most suitable for this type of killing?

Were dum-dum bullets ever officially produced for use with revolvers or would, assuming it actually was a dum-dum that was found on toplis's body, it have been homemade; if this was the case, although presumably against Army Regs, is it likely to have been common practise at the time for whatever reasons?

NigelS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My queries are:

As he was believed to have been shot at close range, as it didn't exit, is it likely that a dum-dum was used by Toplis for the execution of Sidney Spicer, and, even if it wasn't, would this type have bullet have, for lack of a better way of putting it, been the most suitable for this type of killing?

Were dum-dum bullets ever officially produced for use with revolvers or would, assuming it actually was a dum-dum that was found on toplis's body, it have been homemade; if this was the case, although presumably against Army Regs, is it likely to have been common practise at the time for whatever reasons?

NigelS

There were no jacketed bullets available for the standard service revolver round, .455" Revolver, during this period. The roundnosed conical lead ball of the then-standard Mk.II round might have flattened its nose somewhat on striking bone, but the size, weight and velocity of the bullet are such that there isn't much you could do with bullet design that would make much difference to its effectiveness. It always did offer extremely good balanced stopping-power without excessive penetration, and the later switch to jacketed hardball made little change to that.

There were various cup-point, hollow-point and more-or-less wadcutter bullets produced, at least some of them at Dumdum, known as 'Manstopper' bullets. Some of them had official WD Mk. nos., and TonyE probably has a good deal of detail on them. However, going back to the previous point, whether they would actually have expanded at 600 ft/sec or so, and whether any such expansion would actually have made them more effective, is a matter that might be debated at length. Since the report on Toplis' body describes the Dumdum as 'modified', it seems most likely to me that it was a standard Mk.II ball round carved about with a pocketknife into some shape considered by the folklore surrounding this subject to be likely to promote expansion. A cross cut in the nose would be typical.

Regards,

MikB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree entirely with Mik that what was being reported was probably a standard Mark II bullet "modified" by Toplis into some sort of so called "Dum Dum".

As far as official bullets are concerned, the .455 inch Mark III bullet had a hollow nose with a cup shaped depression, the Mark IV was comletely flat nosed and the Mark V was similar, but intended only for target shooting. In the attached picture one can just see the hoolw nose of the Mark III bullet (they are in order left to right Marks i to VI)

Dave - I will dig some pictures of sectioned rounds out and post later.

Siege Gunner - we can argue the grammar later. Would one say " I were...."?

Regards

TonyE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This post by Antony made me go & dig out me Dremmel;

303001.jpg

The jacket on this 1915 VII is a lot thicker than I'd thought & very tough. 6 or 7 cutter discs later;

303002.jpg

The lead is badly poured but I don't know if this would affect flight stability or not.

It's the heavier lead at the rear end (as compared to the lighter material in the nose) that rear-weighted the bullet and caused it to yaw heavily upon deceleration. As said, I would not hold that it was unstable while in flight. Antony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An extract fromn Cpt Henderson's report (full report can be read on "Your Archives";

At about 11 a.m. an officer who spoke English came and interviewed me. He was very vehement about “dum-dum” bullets and showed me an English cartridge with the bullet broken off at the end. I was interested, as, naturally, I had never seen this before. He also brought a rifle (British) and the following conversation took place:-

German Officer (pointing to “cut-off”). “What is that?”

Myself. “The cut-off.

G.O. “Ah to cut off the ends of the bullets.” (this seemed to be a wide-spread belief among the Germans.)

M. “No! Will you trust me with the rifle and the cartridge?”

G.O. “All right; show me!”

I then proceeded to explain the use of the “cut-off” to enable rifle to be used as a single loader.

G.O. “That may be, but why is there a hole in it which exactly fits the point of the bullet?”

He then inserted the cartridge in the hollow and broke off the point.

M. “Naturally, it is made hollow; it is a steel stamping to save weight. I have never seen a bullet treated that way. I suggest, to satisfy yourself, that you take three cartridges treated like that and fire them off, but do not do it near me.”

G.O. “Why?”

M. “Because the rifle will assuredly burst a the third shot, if not before, owing to the bullet stripping.”

This seemed to impress him, but not to convince and he went away. It was not, however, by any means the last I was to hear about “dum-dums”

Shortly after this an N.C.O. came up and demanded my “Burberry” for purpose of disinfecting. This seemed a reasonable request at the time, but immediately afterwards I was taken away and on asking for my coat was told I could not have it; This was the first thing stolen from me. I was then taken some distance in an ambulance wagon to. I think, the outskirts of Warneton and placed in a barn with several wounded soldiers, German and French, but no officers except myself, and no English. We were left there until dusk, when I heard a train arrive outside. All the wounded were carried out, and eventually I was left alone. A German N.C.O. came in and asked why I was not taken, too; he answered roughly that I was under arrest, and proceeded to search me again (I ought to mention that I had been searched already many times). He even took a letter from my wife and one from my little girl, and informed me I was to come before a field court in the morning for being found with “dum-dum” ammunition, and explained that a cartridge of that description had been found on the stretcher on which I had been carried to the barn. I pointed out that this was about the fourth stretcher I had been on, and that I had been searched several times. This was of no avail, and I was taken to a small harness-room and put on a straw mattress under a guard.

Sometime afterwards an inspector who talked English really well came and talked to me for about half an hour. I explained again to him the absurdity of the charge, but mostly he talked about other things, and as far as I could judge, and as I think now, wished to find out all about me and to make me talk for the benefit of some others (officers) who were listening outside. Naturally, he got no information of any use to him, but as he went out the others came in and informed me that I should be released and go to hospital in the morning. In my conversation I mentioned that I had been picked up by Ober-leutnant Graucher, and I have since thought that they may have considered it unsafe to do away with me, knowing that this officer had searched me, knew my name, and had no charge against me.

These Dum Dums were almost certainly caused by the clip presenting the cartridge nose first into the breach which jammed the rifle and broke the tip off the cartridge, a problem which was very evident in 1914. I would suggest that all the Dum Dums found were discarded cartridges and I have seen somewhere, probably on this forum, a photograph of a complete clip with the first cartridge having the nose broken but still hanging on. Clearly no fired dum dums would be found.

Doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first magazine cut-offs were on Spencer carbines made fot the U.S. Army in 1865, then called the Stabler cut-off after its inventor. The Spencer rifle and carbine were the first magazine-fed arms in U.S. martial service, and apparently when the U.S. Army Ordnance Department insisted that the carbines be made with magazine cut-offs it was because it was perturbed by what magazine-loading arms implied for ammunition resupply. To exaggerate a bit, in the blink of an eye the world had moved from Brown Bess-type muzzle-loaders to the M1 Garand rifle. The incorporation of magazine cut-offs on Enfield rifles was probably one of the earlier cases of Britain copying an American idea, instead of the other way around. Spencer rifles and carbines had tube-feed magazines. The inventor, Christopher Spencer, also invented the pump-action shotgun after the Civil War.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These Dum Dums were almost certainly caused by the clip presenting the cartridge nose first into the breach which jammed the rifle and broke the tip off the cartridge, a problem which was very evident in 1914. I would suggest that all the Dum Dums found were discarded cartridges and I have seen somewhere, probably on this forum, a photograph of a complete clip with the first cartridge having the nose broken but still hanging on. Clearly no fired dum dums would be found.

Doug

Doug - you might be interested in this relatively recent thread.where I tried the German claim. Very significant force would have to be used to break the tip off the bullet in the cut-off. More than I was prepared to use on my nearly 100 year old example!

I am not sure I understand what you mean in the section I quoted above. When you say "clip" - do you mean magazine? or charger clip? If the former then the cartridge has to be presented "nose first" (Bullet first) into the breech. A misfeed (caused by bent or poorly adjusted magazine lips OR the use of MkVII rounds in an unmodified magazine - possible in 1914) might cause the round to misfeed and ramming the bolt forward might well cause damage to the tip of the bullet (I have a P14 which is prone to do this if you are not careful). You may also be right that most of the "Dum Dums" found (we don't really know how many actually were) were damaged and discarded rounds but I see no way that you could bend a round still in the charger if that is what you are describing, not even the most violent thumb pressure stripping the rounds down into the magazine could do that, surely?

BTW to what are you referring when you say that the problem described was "very evident in 1914?" I would be interested in the source of this. There were feed problems with the mix of MkVI and MkVII rounds in unmodified magazines but these largely resulted from the change from a round nosed to pointed bullet (there were also differences in sighting requiring modification) but I am not sure these were particularly widespread. I have gathered bits and bobs on this over time and am always looking for more refs.

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I concur with Chris's comments with respect to misfeeds in Lee-Enfield rifles.

In 1914 and 1915 the British regular army was armed with SMLE Mark IIIs which were sighted and adjusted to feed the spitzer Mark VII round. The Territorials, Indians and Australians were armed with either long rifles or SMLEs made prior to 1910 which were sighted and adjusted for the round nosed Mark VI ammunition. There are plenty of references in contemporary accounts of feeding difficulties due to the wrong ammunition being used.

However, in fifty years of shooting L-Es and using countless different rifles either from the armoury or owned by myself and friends I have never had a misfeed where the bullet was bent, let alone the tip being bent so far back as to break off the aluminium tip filler. I cannot see how the mechanics of that would work.

How else is the cartridge to be presented to the breech if not "nose first"?

Regards

TonyE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...