303 machine gun belt - how much did one weigh?

[centurion]

I know how much a Maxim and tripod weighed but how heavy was the ammunition? What did a loaded canvas belt weigh? And what was the standard provision per gun in 1914? I've got figures for the no of belts per gun later in the war but something in my mind is nagging that it had increased by then. I'm trying to get an idea of what the impact on the BEFs mobility would have been if McMahon's recommendation to increase the number of guns per battalion from 2 to 6 had been accepted.

[Khaki]

According to what I have read, a loaded .303 belt (250 rounds) with wooden ammo box weighed 22lb, I imagine the box weighed about two lb, so a reasonable guess would be 20lb alone for the loaded belt.

khaki

[Beerhunter]

To get the ball rolling, I just weighed a single Mk.VII - 0.9oz.

So 0.9 X 250 / 16 = 14ib 6oz. (ish)

Now who has a belt that they can weigh?

Edited 26 August , 2014 by Beerhunter

[centurion]

According to what I have read, a loaded .303 belt (250 rounds) with wooden ammo box weighed 22lb, I imagine the box weighed about two lb, so a reasonable guess would be 20lb alone for the loaded belt.

khaki

Thanks I'll go with 22ibs as the box would also need to be transported. Now how many boxes per gun anyone? I've already worked out how many extra guns and then I can estimate how many wagons, horses etc would be needed

[Michael Haselgrove]

Centurian,

The No. 7 Mark I box empty weighed 5 lbs 12 oz. With one belt of 250 Mark VII ammunition it weighed 21 lbs 12 oz. The standard ammunition box in service at the start of the war was the No.3 Mark III which was a metal-reinforced wooden box. I'm afraid I don't presently know the weight of that box and thus can't say whether it weighed more or less than the all metal No 7 box which was introduced in late 1915 or early 1916.

Regards,

Michael.

[centurion]

Centurian,

The No. 7 Mark I box empty weighed 5 lbs 12 oz. With one belt of 250 Mark VII ammunition it weighed 21 lbs 12 oz. The standard ammunition box in service at the start of the war was the No.3 Mark III which was a metal-reinforced wooden box. I'm afraid I don't presently know the weight of that box and thus can't say whether it weighed more or less than the all metal No 7 box which was introduced in late 1915 or early 1916.

Regards,

Michael.

Thanks I think I'll stick with 22 ibs as close enough for practical purposes (I'm not trying to land a probe on a comet! So a few ibs isn't really going to make a material difference) Just need to know how many belts!

[Khaki]

Reference, Vickers WW1, 32 belts for a two gun section were minimum issue and reserves of 15000 rounds in the ammunition cart.

khaki

[Doug504]

How true is it the saying " the whole 9 yards" was derived from the length of a Vickers machine gun belt?

[centurion]

Reference, Vickers WW1, 32 belts for a two gun section were minimum issue and reserves of 15000 rounds in the ammunition cart.

khaki

Thanks but as I said I have this data but believe that this may not have been the situation in 1914 as I understood that there was an increase in provision during the course of the war and I need to find out what it was in August 1914

[303man]

How true is it the saying " the whole 9 yards" was derived from the length of a Vickers machine gun belt?

2 belts 500rds is roughly nine yards. So myth busted.

[4thGordons]

Off topic but the version I have often heard RE "Whole 9 yards" was in reference to the belts for Browning .50cal belts in US fighter aircraft in WWII. However, "SNOPES.COM" suggests this too is erroneous but leaves the origin uncertain.

[Guest]

Thanks but as I said I have this data but believe that this may not have been the situation in 1914 as I understood that there was an increase in provision during the course of the war and I need to find out what it was in August 1914

A reference point that might be useful: When the 14 Yeomanry regiments deployed to Gallipoli dismounted in the Infantry role, the 1/1st Sherwood Rangers recorded they took 200 rounds of ammunition per man plus 44,200 rounds for the pair of machine guns. This obviously equates to 22,100 rounds per MG.

Before the assault on Scimitar Hill each pair of MGs had to be man-handled at night across the dry Salt Lake some 2 miles. The diaries record it took 50 men per Regiment to do this. The MG Section had been reduced to just 16 men, so another 24 men were involved in carrying the ammunition.

This website states the GS wagon for MG carried:

"Belts ammunition, Maxim .303 (250 rounds in belt boxes, filled) Qty 14 weight 271 lbs". ...[which equates to just over 19 lbs per box. 14 boxes each of 250 rounds is 3,500 rounds]

"Belts ammunition, Maxim .303 (spare empty).............................Qty 2 weight 4 lbs 2 oz

Also one of the two wagons would carry an extra Ammunition Box (filled) Weight 20 lbs.

So, two wagons each with 3,500 rounds plus an extra box with 250 equates to 3,725 carried on the wagons.

A limbered GS wagon could carry 1,114 lbs. Assuming a limbered GS wagon was used for carrying ammunition, and each box was 20 lbs, this might suggest the limbered wagon could carry 56 boxes per limber, so 112 in total. or 28,000 rounds. 2 x ammunition wagons would be 56,000. My speculation as I know there were specific (non-limbered) ammunition wagons. I am assuming scales of ammunition would be multiples of wagon loads.... MG

[centurion]

Thanks - looking at the 1914 Field Service Manual a limbered Maxim wagon appears to be carrying 1,200 ibs including the gun and tripod

[Guest]

Thanks - looking at the 1914 Field Service Manual a limbered Maxim wagon appears to be carrying 1,200 ibs including the gun and tripod

The GS Limbered wagon with 1,200 lbs included the gun, tripod, tools, kit etc plus the 14 boxes of ammo (1,114 lbs according to the website for Infantry GS limbered Wagon so only 6 lbs difference)..... Immediately in support of this I would assume there would be at least one full GS limbered wagon of MG ammunition. I note that the Shire publication page 60 indicates "Most SAA carts were made obsolete after about 1908 by the increase use of limbered wagons for the same purpose and were gradually phased out." This would suggest a GS limbered wagon was used for the reserve ammunition and therefore the ammunition would be limited to the 1,200 lb per limber. A GS limber would therefore carry 2400 lbs. Divided by 20lb per box equates to 120 boxes of ammunition or 30,000 rounds. This feels quite low and I would therefore assume increments of 30,000 would be more likely.

I am trying to resolve this with the Yeomanry's very specific 44,200 which does not readily divide by 250.

MG

[Guest]

Another anecdote that might provide a loose reference point: When 11th Div landed at Suvla Bay on 6th Aug 1915 each of the motor lighters (three per Brigade) carried 400 boxes of SAA. As each of the 750 men would be carrying 220 rounds on his body, this gives some idea of the amount of SAA: 165,000 rounds on the men of each battalion plus 1200 boxes for 4 battalions or 300 boxes per battalion or 75,000 rounds - total 240,000 rounds per battalion. I have no idea what the split between loose rounds and MG ammunition was but it at least the 75,000 rounds provides a reference point for the Yeomanry who landed 12 days later with their 44,200 rounds of MG ammunition.

The lighters of the 11th Manchesters loaded their SAA towards the stern, which made it ground 200 yards from the shore. They only managed to get one MG ashore - the other went into the drink. One can only imagine the logistic challenge of trying to handle 70 lbs of MG and tripod through 6 feet of water with no flotation aids, hanging onto a rope under fire in the darkness. The diaries don't record quite how the SAA was landed. Despite the scales they ran out of ammunition within a few hours.

[centurion]

I'd rounded the figures actually slightly more than 1200 lbs. From the details of what's stowed where I think the gun and Tripod are stowed outside of the limber and the spares, tools ammo and other gear are inside according to the FSM there are slight differences in what a cavalry Maxim Limbered Wagon and an Infantry Battalion one contained so there will be variations in weight . The various sources I have suggest that a Maxim weighed 60 lbs and the tripod 48 lbs. I think one source of discrepancy could be that the water in the jacket weighed about ten pounds so when ready to fire it was 70 lbs

[Guest]

Trawling the battalion War diaries for Aug 1914 the number of SAA carts varied from 4 to 6. I would lean towards 6 carts as these are mentioned on disembarkation. I suspect one for each Coy and 2 spare.

Also I guess there would be a weight difference between a Maxim and a Vickers Mk 1, allowing for more ammunition to be carried - all other things being equal. Not sure if the Cavalry had Maxims of Vickers. Yeomanry certainly had Maxims in Aug 1914.

[Guest]

I'd rounded the figures actually slightly more than 1200 lbs. From the details of what's stowed where I think the gun and Tripod are stowed outside of the limber and the spares, tools ammo and other gear are inside according to the FSM there are slight differences in what a cavalry Maxim Limbered Wagon and an Infantry Battalion one contained so there will be variations in weight . The various sources I have suggest that a Maxim weighed 60 lbs and the tripod 48 lbs. I think one source of discrepancy could be that the water in the jacket weighed about ten pounds so when ready to fire it was 70 lbs

Here is the return for the 2nd Bn Northants showing the number of SAA carts etc..

[reese williams]

Somewhat off topic, but on the "whole nine yards" thing. The standard load for a cement mixing truck in the US is approximately nine cubic yards. Hence a pour that requires the entire truckload takes "the whole nine yards".

Edited 5 September , 2014 by Reese

[centurion]

Somewhat off topic, but on the "whole nine yards" thing. The standard load for a cement mixing truck in the US is approximately nine cubic yards. Hence a pour that requires the entire truckload takes "the whole nine yards".

One of but many unproven explanations

[MikB]

One of but many unproven explanations

The most credible I thought was the standard day's digging work for a navvy back in the days of canal construction - 9 cubic yards to shoulder height per day. But there are plenty of others as you say, and little prospect of definitive proof of any of them.

Regards,

MikB