Body Armour WW1

[trajan]

Stumbled upon this one - needs a wider audience! Helmets and body armor in modern warfare

by Dean, Bashford, 1867-1928, at: https://archive.org/details/helmetsbodyarmor00deanuofthelmetsbodyarmor00deanuoft.pdf

 

Julian

[GRANVILLE]

Thanks for posting this. I've seen extracts from this work in the past but never had access to the complete work. Excellent.

David

[MikeyH]

Julian,

Thanks for the link, a very well illustrated book.

Mike.

[petestarling]

Picked up a book in the National Archives bookshop, Saving Lives, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and the Campaign for Body Armour 1914-1918. By Philip Abbott. Quite interesting with lots of illustrations.

[alantwo]

The attachment which may be of interest, is from The Times, 30 December 1915 p4. It appeared alongside several thousand Expeditionary force, Mediterranean and Australians casualties.

 

Kind regards

Alan

[GRANVILLE]

6 hours ago, alantwo said:

The attachment which may be of interest, is from The Times, 30 December 1915 p4. It appeared alongside several thousand Expeditionary force, Mediterranean and Australians casualties.

 

Kind regards

Alan

 

I wonder how many of these body shields were actually sold and made use of for any length of time?

David

 

[HenryTheGerman]

Many thanks, @trajan for posting the link.

Obviously in WWI the usage of body armour was a very exception. The armour of those days was not very protective. Even steel helmets were punctured by pistol ammo projectiles. - I remember that Ernst Jünger had written in "Storm of Steel" that during a trench raid a British soldier who wore a Body armour ("Panzerhemd") was killed by a pistol bullet because one of the armour plates had been driven into the man's body by the pistol bullet impact.

[alantwo]

2 hours ago, GRANVILLE said:

 

 

Thanks David I had thought the same. Henry indicates it was quite the exception and I'm sure the cost was probably out of the range of many Other Ranks. The interesting point for me was the 'Double Shield' i.e. front and back was extra.

 

Regards

Alan

Edited 12 March , 2018 by alantwo

[trajan]

There is a set of BEF body armour originally issued to F.E.A.Taylor, 23rd Middlesex, on display at the Royal Armouries in Leeds, illustrated and described on pp. 138-139 of Arms and Armour of the First World War by J.Ferguson, L.Traynor, and H.Yallop (2017).

 

The Museum also has an example of the Dayfield body armour, as above, post no. 5, and that made by Wilkinson - illustrated and discussed in the same book, pp. 77-79, and, naturally, one of those medieval-looking Belgian 'casques' and, of course, a Sappenpanzer suit, also illustrated and descbride in that book. 

[Gunner Bailey]

Seeing as artillery was the main battlefield killer they may as well have put on an extra jumper.

[Terry_Reeves]

Thought these might be of interest:

[GWF1967]

32 minutes ago, Terry_Reeves said:

Thought these might be of interest:

 

He doesn't look like he enjoyed the experience. 

 

[robins2]

Just now, GWF1967 said:

 

i would hope they tested on dummy first and then he put on the armour

BTW what is the definition of a shrapnel bullet (steel jacket, lead ???)

Edited 16 January , 2019 by robins2

[Terry_Reeves]

Waste of time me posting this methinks.

 

TR

[clk]

33 minutes ago, Terry_Reeves said:

Waste of time me posting this methinks.

 

Not at all Terry.

 

Fascinating stuff. Thanks.

 

Regards

Chris

[Dave66]

2 minutes ago, clk said:

 

Not at all Terry.

 

Fascinating stuff. Thanks.

 

Regards

Chris

That goes for me also..thank you.

 

Dave.

[GRANVILLE]

Can anyone identify which rifle is being used to take aim with and presumably fire? It's clearly not a service SMLE which I suspect would have gone straight through the armour at that range. 

David

Edited 17 January , 2019 by GRANVILLE

[trajan]

9 hours ago, Terry_Reeves said:

Waste of time me posting this methinks.

 

TR

 

Not at all! Highly informative! Quite an interesting read on the company here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadfields_Limited Seems that they invented a manganese steel and specialised in armour-piercing shells and the like. Not seen one of these suits, though - I had previously only heard of the Wilkinson, etc. versions. Anyone know of any surviving examples? Is that what was usd in the BEF body armour? Whatever, I assume that this was cloth-covered for active service, unlike the German versions.

 

I know the Meadowhalls shopping Centre, bult over the site of the old factory, as I do a shopping run there whenever I am in the UK... - So I'll raise a glass to Hadfields when next there!

 

[Radlad]

4 hours ago, GRANVILLE said:

Can anyone identify which rifle is being used to take aim with and presumably fire? It's clear not a service SMLE which I suspect would have gone straight through the armour at that range. 

David

The rifle being used is a Martini actioned sporter or target rifle. It actually looks like a Greener 'Cadet' model to me. The ballistics don't make sense. Whilst bullets weighing 41 to the pound would be about the weight of a .303 Mk VII bullet , the velocities must be residual or long range ones as the muzzle velocity of a MkVII is about 2500 feet per second.

 

I suppose that a .310 cadet cartridge could be loaded with a MkVii bullet to give the stated velocities but it's only guess work on my part, as I've never tried it or heard of that bullet weight being used.  

[Michael Haselgrove]

12 hours ago, Terry_Reeves said:

Waste of time me posting this methinks.

 

TR

Terry,

Not at all;  I have not seen the photographs you posted before and, in the circumstances, your time and effort in making the post is much appreciated.

12 hours ago, robins2 said:

i would hope they tested on dummy first and then he put on the armour

BTW what is the definition of a shrapnel bullet (steel jacket, lead ???)

Robins2,

Interesting question and I stress I am no expert on the subject. 

There is lots on-line about shrapnel shells and how they work but not much, after an admittedly brief search, on the actual shrapnel bullets.  Most comments are along the lines that  they are spherical, made of lead (hardened with antimony) and are 41 bullets per lb.  That appears to be the most common size in use for British shells, at least as far as the number of shells fired. 

However, as always, things are not that simple.  As far as British shells are concerned the above size is, it appears, the most used, but some shells contained mixed size bullets (for instance B.L. 7.5-inch to 15-inch guns for naval service) and occasionally the bullets were made of steel.  There is an interesting six page table at page 186 of Treatise on Ammunition War Office 1915 giving the size of the bullets which varies from 48 per lb. for the 10-pr. B.L. to 12-oz. steel shot used in the 12-inch B.L. (Heavy).   

Regards,

Michael.   

[Radlad]

4 minutes ago, Michael Haselgrove said:

Terry,

Not at all;  I have not seen the photographs you posted before and, in the circumstances, your time and effort in making the post is much appreciated.

Robins2,

Interesting question and I stress I am no expert on the subject. 

There is lots on-line about shrapnel shells and how they work but not much, after an admittedly brief search, on the actual shrapnel bullets.  Most comments are along the lines that  they are spherical, made of lead (hardened with antimony) and are 41 bullets per lb.  That appears to be the most common size in use for British shells, at least as far as the number of shells fired. 

However, as always, things are not that simple.  As far as British shells are concerned the above size is, it appears, the most used, but some shells contained mixed size bullets (for instance B.L. 7.5-inch to 15-inch guns for naval service) and occasionally the bullets were made of steel.  There is an interesting six page table at page 186 of Treatise on Ammunition War Office 1915 giving the size of the bullets which varies from 48 per lb. for the 10-pr. B.L. to 12-oz. steel shot used in the 12-inch B.L. (Heavy).   

Regards,

Michael.   

Interesting! I missed the shrapnel bit. Surprisingly enough , a 41 bore lead ball will fit and fire out of a .455 webley cartridge case and can be used in a standard British service revolver. the velocities quoted would then be about right, it would be quite easy to achieve both velocities quoted as the ball is about 1/3 lighter than a standard .455 bullet. The ball could also be fired from a .577/450 martini rifle but very careful loading would have to take place to achieve such low velocities. There is a lot of space in a .577/450 case and detonation would be a big consideration. Much easier and safer to use the .455 webley.

 

I am now thinking the rifle in the advert is a bit of kidology

[zuluwar2006]

MY COLLETION FROM WW1 ARMORROM  WW1 GERMAN BODY ARMORS

[eairicbloodaxe]

Amazing collection! Thanks for sharing

 

regards

 

 

ian

[zuluwar2006]

16 hours ago, eairicbloodaxe said:

Amazing collection! Thanks for sharing

 

regards

 

 

ian

thank you Ian

regards, D.

[Gunner Bailey]

An exceptional collection - many thanks for showing the photos.