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

Remembered Today:

Any Ideas what T. In's could be?


Guest Simon Basketter

Recommended Posts

Guest Simon Basketter

Working my way through a as yet unpublished set of diaries and came across this -


"In the Left Group we had a combined bombardment on the Givenchy front, T. In’s, 4.5”, 18 pounder and 6” All went off well and the T. In’s fired 430 bombs, which was good work."


Any ideas what T.In's could be?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Simon Basketter

No he uses T.Ms in other places. I hoped it was T. Ln's (Train Lines) but it's not that either... Just makes no sense and it's used three times in this entry. I think this could be a personal abbreviation and I may never know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the diarist simply wrote capital T small ms. Given the nature of the 'groups' there might be an indication of the range of weapons available.

Old Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ten inches? Two inches?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ten inches? Two inches?

Ten inches fired 430 bombs ?

A pound to a pinch of hokum that it's T.M.s, despite the fact it appears more clearly elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two inch (Toffee Apple) would make sense - they fired a bomb and as medium TMs were under RA rather than Infantry control (unlike the 3 inch Stokes which was controlled at Battalion level )

Giving us a little more context couldn't have hurt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two inch (Toffee Apple) would make sense - they fired a bomb and as medium TMs were under RA rather than Infantry control (unlike the 3 inch Stokes which was controlled at Battalion level )

Giving us a little more context couldn't have hurt

Mmm . . . . why give an alphabetic abbreviation for a number when all others are given conventionally (numerically)? No, doesn't sound anything like right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mmm . . . . why give an alphabetic abbreviation for a number when all others are given conventionally (numerically)? No, doesn't sound anything like right.

Its a diary man - he doesn't have to be consistent but everything else fits

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...