Attention all artillery experts! Help!

[Tom W.]

I'm helping a Russian army officer write a book on incendiary weapons of World War I.

We've got every weapon covered except for incendiary artillery shells.

Can anybody-everybody-somebody either help me compile a list of all the models of incendiary shells used in the war, or can you direct me to some Websites or books?

Thanks very much.

[TonyE]

Well here is a start for you, the 1.59 inch Crayford "Rocket gun".

Regards

TonyE

[nigelfe]

There was an 18-pr incendiary shell, can't help with details, apart from production data in the Min of Mun history..

[squirrel]

Thermite?

[Tom W.]

Thermite?

Anything! I've been looking for days and can find only generic descriptions, not model numbers.

[Rockdoc]

From Hogg & Thurston, it appears that incendiary shells were only used for AAS work in WW1 and were given the tag AZ for Anti-Zeppelin. Those listed in the ammunition table at the end of the book are:

75mm AA: weight 15.75lb; filling incendiary compound; filling weight 5lb 1oz (2.29kg); Fuze time & percussion 30/55

3in 5cwt AA: 12.7lb; incendiary compound; 16.3oz (462grm); time 180

3in 20cwt AA: 12.2lb; incendiary compound; 10.3oz (292grm); time 185

There's a huge difference in the weights of the filling that doesn't make a lot of sense to me but that's what the book says!

No incendiary shell is listed for either the 18pdr field or AA guns, just Shrapnel, HE, Smoke, Star and Gas.

Keith

[centurion]

I have a feeling that, apart from anti balloon and airship work (and of course Liven's early efforts) there really wasn't much call for such. Incendiary bombs of the aerial variety are well documented in an Air Ministry booklet of 1918.

[squirrel]

Tom W. - if you search Thermite there are a number of previous threads on the GWF.

Also have a look on the Long Long Trail link at the top of the page.

[Tom W.]

I have a feeling that, apart from anti balloon and airship work (and of course Liven's early efforts) there really wasn't much call for such. Incendiary bombs of the aerial variety are well documented in an Air Ministry booklet of 1918.

Everything I've read so far indicates that you're right.

[centurion]

Just after I logged off last night I remembered something that slightly contradicts what Keith and I have said, incendiary rounds were manufactured for the Stokes mortar (3 and 4 inch) and the Americans certainly had some of these in 1918. A number of live Stokes gas and incendiary rounds were uncovered in a park at St Louis relatively recently and a subsequent enquiry determined that they dated from 1918

[centurion]

Further to the above I checked the ammunition available for Trench mortars (Allied and German). Certainly up to the beginning of 1918 none of the other types of mortar in use fired an incendiary round being limited to HE, gas and smoke (and in the latter two cases not all had this capability). One can see the logic of developing an incendiary round for the Stokes as the weapon was relatively portable and as fighting moved out of the trenches in the latter part of 1918 being able to lob incendiaries into otherwise fairly intact buildings in a house to house fighting situation might be seen to have a certain utility. The only exception could be the Livens which could fire canisters of inflammables but these would be for anti personnel use rather than true incendiary functions.

[nigelfe]

According to the Min of Mun history, in May 1916 Haig wrote seeking 'miscellaneous shell and bombs'. These included incendiary for use against woods and villages. He recommended incendiary for 4.5 H, 6-in G and 9.2 in G. Shortly after 9.2 G was dropped from the requirement but noted that 9.2 in and 18-pr incendiary shell will probably be sunsequently included.

Both 4.5 and 18pd thermit filled incendiary went into production, and it seems 6 in did as well although 6 in and 9.2 production subsequently stopped.

My understanding is that 18-pr at least was a shrapnel type configuration. Fze No 82 seems to have been favoured for the low airburst effect which seems to have been the preferred method. 4.5 incendiary seems to have been notably effective.

Incidentally chemical was classed as either 'lethal' or 'lachrymatory'.