Mountain batteries at Anzac

[kevinrowlinson]

Hi Scott,

You could send a personal message (PM) to Mike Morrison, who posted above, who has researched these units. You haven't given his service number, which given how many John Macleods served with the 4th High. Mtn Bde would be necessary to really start your research. I am assuming you may mean 4360/301422 John Macleod who received the DCM and MID. His MIC indicates that he later became an officer which may mean his records have survived but a visit to the Nat. Archives would be necessary. This John Macleod was living at 4A Garenin, Carloway, Stornoway

LG for DCM http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/30624/supplements/4412

LG for MID http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/30746/supplements/7051

Kevin

[CSMMo]

Is there a chance that he was also known as "Toodles"? In my research of the Ross (And Bute and Argyll) Battery there are quite a few John Macleods. My information is that the John Macleod known as Toodles was from 4 Garenin, Lewis. There's a lot known about him. If he's the right man, I can point you in the right direction(s). Toodles won the DCM was MID and commissioned.

If your Macleod is someone else, I still would like to know as I am researching his battery and Brigade.

Mike Morrison

[Phil Eyden]

I have recently come across these two photos of an artillery piece at Gallipoli, clearly smashed and buckled. It almost certainly dates from the attack by ANZAC troops on the 4th August as four other photos came with it that can be dated to the aftermath. Can the gun be identified? I don't think it is a 10 pounder and wondered if it was Turkish, yet some of the debris in the trench has British writing on it. Thank you. 

[Jeff Pickerd]

Phil,

The gun is an English QF 18 Pounder, the type used by the Australian Field Artillery. A search of the Australian Artillery War Diaries for August1915 should be adle to identify which Battery the gun belonged to, the gun position at Anzac,and the circumstances of the damage inflicted to the gun.

 

Jeff

[alantwo]

6 hours ago, Jeff Pickerd said:

Phil,

The gun is an English QF 18 Pounder, the type used by the Australian Field Artillery. A search of the Australian Artillery War Diaries for August1915 should be adle to identify which Battery the gun belonged to, the gun position at Anzac,and the circumstances of the damage inflicted to the gun.

 

Jeff

 

Jeff and Phil

 

Using the term 'Hit' I did a quick search of the various War Diaries and came up with the following references which may be of interest. A smashed wheel is mentioned by 4th Battery AFA but it's on 5th Jul and may not be relevant. Hope it helps. Apologies in advance for any mis-interpretation of the handwriting in the diaries.

 

Alan

 

2^nd Battery AFA

15th May 1915

One of our guns was hit by a 4 inch shell from the enemy & put out of action permanently no casualties to personnel occurred.

5^th Jul 1915

Hit but no damage done.

4^th Battery AFA

29th May 1915

 

5.40am No.3 gun out of action (head cover hit).

7.35am No.3 again hit with HE.

30th May 1915

No.1 gun received direct hit with HE. Gun damaged.

5th Jul 1915

A sub gun hit with a 6" shell. Smashed off wheeled & bent axle & few small fitting. Also damaged shield.

5^th Battery AFA

1st May 1915

Gun shield of 'A' subsection penetrated by direct hit

21st May 1915

Brought fire of Battery to bear. One gun was dragged out quickly, the other received a direct hit.

6th Aug 1915

4th Battery gun later when firing received a direct hit which killed the No.1 & layer.

6^th Battery AFA

1st Aug 1915

a Turkish shell hit No.4 ('D' subsection) gun smashing through the shield & tearing off the range gear also (?) the slide & spring case. One man (JOHNSON) was killed outright the case of the shell hitting him on the head. The gun was sent to Ordnance at the Base for repairs which should be completed in a few days.

7^th Battery AFA

3rd May 1915

In the morning & afternoon we were again shelled & although they landed one percussion in the parapet of No.1 gun no one was hit.

8th May 1915

Our No.2 gun was hit direct & put out of action.

12th May 1915

The enemy guns  replied putting No.2 gun Hughes Battery out of action by a direct hit on shield.

16th Jun 1915

Battery on GUN RIDGE was engaged by No.2 gun which after firing (?) rounds was put out of action by a direct hit on right side of shield damaging spring case of cradle & carrying away ranging gear & No.2's seat.

9th Aug 1915

0915 No.1 gun received direct hit on shield but gun uninjured.

21st Aug 1915

2 guns on GUN RIDGE replied & put No.2 gun out of action by a direct hit

19th Nov 1915

Enemy's gun firing from direction of SCRUBBY KNOLL square 80 Z2 engaged our No.3 gun & succeeded in obtaining a direct hit before the gun could be withdrawn damaging shield, spring case & locking bar sights. The gun was withdrawn for repairs & a dummy gun substituted at dusk.

20th Nov 1915

1430 Enemy's gun firing from direction of SCRUBBY KNOLL opened fire on dummy gun in No.3 pit obtaining direct hit thereon.

8^th Battery AFA

10th May 1915

I was unable to fire longer as the enemy had my range and put a direct hit on my shield & lodged 3 shells in the gun pit we were particularly fortunate in not having any casualties (dial sight was shot away).

19th Jun 1915

A direct hit on No.2 gun pit our strong parapet saved our gun.

17th Jul 1915

Several hits on parapet and direct hit on No.1 gun shield.

9^th Battery AFA

14th Jun 1915

5.40am Six guns from GUN RIDGE shelling 7th, 8th, 9th & Mountain Battery & Infantry trenches, range 2200, firing battery salvoes, knocking parapets about & getting direct hits on 1 gun of 7th & 8th Batteries.

 

 

 

[Phil Eyden]

I just wanted to thank Jeff and Alan for their most interesting replies and thank them for taking the time to look into this for me. It is possible that these photos were taken in July and could be the gun mentioned in the War Diary. I, possibly unwisely, assumed the date from the other four photos, three of which I have managed to date to the August offensive. I am sure I have read that the only guns that supported the ANZACs were two Indian Mountain Batteries so I was not expecting to see an 18pdr. Back to the books! 

[alantwo]

18 hours ago, Phil Eyden said:

I just wanted to thank Jeff and Alan for their most interesting replies and thank them for taking the time to look into this for me. It is possible that these photos were taken in July and could be the gun mentioned in the War Diary. I, possibly unwisely, assumed the date from the other four photos, three of which I have managed to date to the August offensive. I am sure I have read that the only guns that supported the ANZACs were two Indian Mountain Batteries so I was not expecting to see an 18pdr. Back to the books! 

 

Phil

 

I thought the attached gun pit layout from the end of June 1915, may be of interest.

 

Alan

[Phil Eyden]

That is amazing Alan - you have it. That's identical to what I have in my photo, thank you so much. I see the adjusting wheels have been bent out of position too as when as the carriage wheel smashed. It must have been a hit just a yard or two away. Incredible. 

[Jeff Pickerd]

Phil, just to follow up on your photograph, and Alan, thanks for your leads to the war diaries.

 

From the AWM web-site another photograph of the damaged gun is found (photograph ID - PO1251005). The gun is identified as belonging to the Western Australian 8th Battery, Australian Field Artillery, 3rd Field Artillery Brigade, under the command of Major Bessel -Browne. The AWM date the photograph to June 1915, and identify the photographer as Horace Warner Lynch. The description states “Damage from Turkish 8 inch Howitzer shell.” This description is an under statement, the damage to the gun is far greater, the gun shield is shot away, as is the gun sights, as well as the damage you have noted.

The 8th Battery War Diary gives  the date to gun damage as dated 20th June. Entry reads “ No. 1 near gun wheel was shot away.”

There is another photograph (ID - CO3389) which looks very much like the same gun position, and it is an 8th Battery gun.

A search of the Australian Official History, Volume 2, page 343, relates the Turkish shell fire from the 8 inch Howitzer from behind Scrubby Knoll firing 20 shells onto the Pimple, this is the site of the No 1 gun pit.

there is another photograph of the same damaged gun, taken from a slightly different angle at the AWM. The damage to the gun and scattered bits and pieces is identical to the other two photographs. The trouble is I can no longer find the image on the AWM’s hopeless  search system, it is there somewhere, but just where is beyond me.

 

Hope this puts an end to our usurping of the original topic

 

Jeff 

[alantwo]

Jeff

 

I hope I am permitted one more comment, just to say thanks for your invaluable expertise not just on this subject but on this forum in general. Great stuff. Clearly if I had used the search term 'shot away' rather than 'hit' I might have found it. Presumably the photograph can also now be given a precise date as the War Diary goes on to say that the damaged wheel was replaced the next morning. It must have been taken on the afternoon/evening (ish) of the 20th June.

 

Kind regards

Alan

[gilly100]

On ‎01‎/‎10‎/‎2007 at 00:42, michaeldr said:

Rod,

In the 'No.85 - Winter 1997' edition of 'The Gallipolian' (the journal of The Gallipoli Association) there is an article, first written in 1916, by Major A. C. Fergusson (later Colonel and CMG, DSO.) describing his service on Gallipoli with the 21 (Kohat) Mountain Battery

His following story suggests that they (and the Turks) were both using 10 pounders

"In the early days we were often told we were firing at our own troops. Sometimes these allegations were wrong but investigation proved bodies of our own 10 pounder shell sometimes in places where our own guns could have put them, but also in places where they could not possibly have put them.

One day Campbell was walking along a trench when an Australian told him to hurry as Turks were shelling it, and pointed to the body of a shell which had just fallen. Campbell went and looked at it and found a shell with marks to show that it had been made at Cossipore and filled at Rawul Pindi, and the scoop of the shell showed that it had come from right outside our line. He phoned down to me and I went and satisfied myself that it could not possibly be ours."

[Fergusson then goes on to give the same story as you do, about the old 10 pdrs guns sent to New Zealand from the UK, the BGRA refusing to accept delivery and NZ then selling them on to the Turks.]

Surely there could only have been this confusion if both were using 10 pdrs?

There is another bit here

which ties in with your "the shrapnel they fired was useless in the circumstances..."

Mike Morrison aka CSMMo is the forum's expert on the Highland Batteries and this will no doubt catch his eye very soon

regards

Michael

A cursory glance over this occurrence at Anzac early in the proceedings gives rise to the thought that the Ottoman Order of Battle is not completely up to scratch, unless someone can point out these 10 pounders? Just another area that requires further research and assessment. Unless of course these IMB blokes had no idea about the shells they fired/used?

It's not all cut and dried like so many think. And the MG thread should be opened back up. Let the information flow. Not all snowflakes are we?

Ian

[michaeldr]

5 hours ago, gilly100 said:

Unless of course these IMB blokes had no idea about the shells they fired/used?

 

 

Ian,

I doubt that very much indeed

Col. A. C. Fergusson CMG DSO comes across as a consummate professional soldier of long and wide experience

 

regards

Michael

Edited 18 July , 2019 by michaeldr

[Guest]

Mates,

 

While some British and other Allied nations weapons were with Ottoman Forces, these were all to rare, as German and Austrian and some French guns were the main weapons.

So when you see strange shell types for the Ottomans their guns can be checked against what they did have.

 

The Ottomans did not use the British system of identifing guns, so 10 Pdr was not an Ottoman weapon?

 

This is a known list of the Guns brought or captured by the Ottomans during the years 1861 to 1914

 

1861 : 1 - 9cm (9,15cm L/22) Krupp FK
1863 : 48 - 9cm (9,15cm L/22) Krupp FK
1864
48 - 8cm (7,85cm L/25) Krupp FK
12 - 9cm (9,15cm L/22) Krupp FK
1867 : 48 - 9cm (9,15cm L/22) Krupp FK
1868 : 127 - 8cm (7,85cm L/25) Krupp FK
1870
78 - 8cm (7,85cm L/25) Krupp FK
10 - 9cm (9,15cm L/22) Krupp FK
1871
8 - 8cm (7,85cm L/25) Krupp FK
170 - 9cm 9,15cm L/22) Krupp FK
1873
214 - 8cm (7,85cm L/25) Krupp FK
120 - 9cm (9,15cm L/22) Krupp FK
120 - 12cm Krupp RK L/24
50 - 15cm Krupp RK L/14
230 - 15cm Krupp RK L/26
28 - 21cm Krupp RK L/22
50 - 24cm Krupp RK L/22
10 - 26cm Krupp RK L/22
12 - 28cm Krupp RK L/21
1874
178 - 8cm (7,85cm L/25) Krupp FK
1 - 8cm (7,5cm L/27) Krupp FK C/73
52 - 9cm (9,15cm L/22) Krupp FK
1875
100 - 7,5cm L/27 Krupp FK C/73
100 - 8,7cm L/24 Krupp FK C/73
1 - 35,5cm L/22 Krupp K 
1885
39 - 7,5cm L/27 Krupp FK C/80
389 - 8,7cm L/24 Krupp FK C/80
20 - 12cm L/6,3 Krupp Ms
20 - 15cm L/6,4 Krupp Ms
20 - 21cm L/6,4 Krupp Ms
22 - 24cm L/35 Krupp K C/80
7 - 35,5cm L/35 Krupp K C/80
1886
20 - 7,5cm L/27 Krupp FK C/80
404 - 8,7cm L/24 Krupp FK C/80
2 - 10,7cm L/20 Krupp sFK
10 - 24cm L/35 Krupp K C/80
4 - 37cm L/35 Krupp SK
1893
6 - 7,5cm L/13 Krupp GbK
72 - 12cm L/11,6 Krupp FHb
1896
2 - 3,7cm L/20 Krupp Revolver-K
2 - 15cm L/40 Krupp SK
1897 : 12 - 10,5cm L/35 Krupp FstK C/80 [war trophies, taken during the War against Greece]
1898 : 1 - 7,5cm Krupp L/30 
1901
1 field gun, 1 mountain gun, and 1 - 10,5cm light howitzer were ordered to the French firm St.Chamond for experiences, but the order was not accepted because it was judged "insignificant"
1902
6 - 5,7cm L/40 Krupp SK
7 - 12cm L/40 SK Krupp C/00
15 - 15cm L/40 Krupp SK
4 - 21cm L/40 SK Krupp C/00
1903
2 - 7,5cm L/6,4 Krupp GbMs
96 - 7,5cm L/30 Krupp FK C/03
1904
10 - 3,7cm L/20 Krupp Revolver-K
6 - 4,7cm L/40 Krupp SK C/97
30 - 5,7cm L/40 Krupp SK
8 - 7,5cm L/14 Krupp GbK
18 - 7,5cm L/40 Krupp SK C/97
5 - 10,5cm L/40 Krupp SK 
1905
12 - 3,7cm L/20 Krupp Revolver-K
12 - 5,7cm L/40 Krupp SK
462 - 7,5cm L/30 Krupp FK C/03
138 - 7,5cm L/14 Krupp GbK
18 - 10,5cm L/30 Krupp Belagerungs-K
18 - 15cm L/14 Krupp Hb
1906 : 4 - 3,7cm L/20 Krupp Revolver-K
1907 : 4 - 3,7cm L/20 Krupp Revolver-K
1908 : 108 - 7,5cm L/16,7 Schneider-Canet GbK MD2 T
1910
8 - 5,7cm L/40 Krupp SK
90 - 7,5cm L/30 Krupp FK C/09
4 - 7,5cm L/16 Rheinmetall GbK M. 1910 (trial guns)
8 - 7,5cm L/50 Krupp SK
1911
88 - 7,5cm L/30 Krupp FK C/11
2 - 10cm L/12 Krupp GbH zarlegbare (two trial guns of different model)
19121 - 7,5cm L/28 Krupp BaK
1 - 7,5cm L/30 Krupp BaK
52 - 7,5cm L/31,4 Schneider-Canet FK PD 2 [Serbian guns seized in 1912 at Salonika]
4 - 15cm L/14 H
1913
18 - 10,5cm L/12 Krupp Hb
36 - 15cm L/10,5cm Krupp sFHb
1914
54 - 7,5cm L/30 FK 
12 - 10.5 cm L/18 Skoda FHb M.14 T

According with GENELKURMAY HARP TARİHİ BAŞKANLIĞI : Türk Silahli Kuvvetleri Tarihi III Cilt, 6 Kisim (1908-1920), Ankara : Basimevi 1971, p. 444, in late the Turkish Arsenal (Tophane) manufactured :
450 - 7,5cm L/13 GbK
130 - 8,7cm L/24 FK
100 - 12cm L/11,6 FHb
20 - 15cm L/14 Hb
12 - 7,5cm L/30 FK
16 - 7,5cm L/14 GbK

They were all replicas of Krupp guns. I think the number is too hight expecially for QF guns/howitzers, since Jonathan GRANT, “The Sword of the Sultan: Ottoman Arms Imports, 1854-1914”, The Journal of Military History, Vol. 66, No. 1. (Jan., 2002), pp. 25-26 says that : "In the years 1902 and 1903 the Turks attempted to manufacture six quick-fire field guns on the Krupp model presented by the Kaiser [1898], but Tophane’s production proceeded rather slowly owing to want of funds”.
According with Das Militärwesen in seiner Entiwickelung während der 25 Jahre 1874 – 1898 als Jubiläumsband der v. Löbell’schen Jahresberichte. Berlin: Ernst Siegfried Mittler und Sohn 1890, Erster Theil, p. the Arsenal manufactured 96 – 7cm GbK system Krupp, but it supposed that 200 more mountain guns had been manufactured.
According with the Bulgarian official history of the Balkan War I, p. 262 the Arsenal manufactured, besides the mountain guns, only 69 - 12cm L/11.6 howitzers (instead of 100).

 

Cheers

 

S.B

[michaeldr]

Steve, 

 

I note your remark that 

8 hours ago, stevebecker said:

The Ottomans did not use the British system of identifing guns, so 10 Pdr was not an Ottoman weapon?

and I have tried withiout success to find in your listing the guns referred to by Fergusson:

"Long afterwards the mystery was cleared up. The BGRA New Zealand had long before the war ordered a battery of "new mountain guns" for New Zealand. England sent our old 10 pdrs and BGRA refused to accept delivery. After a lot of correspondence England told him to sell them and credit them with the proceeds. New Zealand sold them to Turkey and here they were being used against us."

 

Can you point them out for me please?

 

regards

Michael

 

[gilly100]

No doubt about it. Fergusson and his IMB mates were hanging round the Aussies too long, probably had a few too many rums and jotted down any old tall tale.

Sorry about that, can't see any other alternative, got me blinkers on!

 

Ian

 

[michaeldr]

Steady the Buffs

[Guest]

Mate,

 

yes I remember we discussed this in the MG area so years ago.

 

Ferguson maybe right, but not mentioned in Ottoman records?

 

I depends on what date these guns were sold?

 

If before 1914 then they may have been lost during the Balkans wars?

 

But since these guns are not mentioned in any ToS of Ottoman Artillery units then there use by the Ottomans is open to question.

 

Is his understanding that the shell is a 10 Pdr can't be questioned after all this time, then we are left was it fired by an Ottoman gun?

And was it one of the NZ guns sold to the Ottomans.

 

The whole question is open here, and not closed, no matter how much rum you drink.

 

But to add two other lists I have

 

a] bought before WW1 - numbers lost during Balkan Wars
7.5cm Feldkanone L/30 Krupp M 03 (648 guns) 
7.5cm Feldkanone L/30 Krupp M 10 (88 guns - 40 of a lighter model for horse artillery) 
7.5cm Gebirgskanone L/14 Krupp M 05 (146 guns) 
7.5cm Gebirgskanone L/16 Rheinmetall M 10 (1 battery for test) 
7.5cm Gebirgskanone L/16.7 Schneider M.P.D. (108 guns) 
15cm Haubitze L/14 Krupp [1905] (18 howitzers) 
10.5cm Belagerungskanone L/30 Krupp [1905] (18 guns) 

 

At the beginning of 1914 there were:  In the Book "Top ve Topçu Atış Okulu 150nci Yıl Hatırası 1795-1945, s. 128" (150th Anniversary of Artillary and Artillary War School 1795-1945, p. 128) I found this information about guns in Turkish Army 

Number trademark fire per gun 
344 7,5 30 Krupp field 900 
52 7,5 30 Schneider field 900 
92 7,5/14 Krupp mountain 867 
18 10,5 field obus 1147 
2 10.5 Krupp obus 466 
2 10,5 Austrian obus 229 
12 15 Heavy obus 
1 5.7 armoured motorized with tower ( This one is the first motorized gun and served at Erzurum.) 
total : 523

b] German guns delivered during WW1 - 559 in total 
7,5cm-Gebirgsgeschütz M 1914 L/16 Rheinmetall (18 guns) 
7,7cm Gebirgskanone M 1915 L/17 Rheinmetall (7 batteries) 
7.7cm Feldkanone 96 n/A L/27 Krupp/Erhardt 
7.7cm Feldkanone 16 L/35 Rheinmetall 
10.5cm leichte Feldhaubitze 98/09 L/16 Krupp 
10.5cm leichte Feldhaubitze 16 L/22 Rheinmetall 
10,5cm-Gebirgshaubitze L/12 Krupp (2 batteries) 
15cm schwere Feldhaubitze 13 L/14 

c] Austrian guns delivered during the WW1 
7,5cm M. 15 Gebirgskanone Skoda (144 guns) 
7cm M. 99 Gebirgskanone Skoda (20 guns) 
10.5cm M. 16 Gebirgshaubitze Skoda (40 howitzers) 
15cm Feldhaubitze M. 14 Skoda (12 howitzers) 

d] old guns 
12cm Haubitze L/11.6 Krupp M. 1892 (72 howitzers) 
7.5cm Feldkanone L/27 Krupp M 1873 
87mm Feldkanone L/24 Krupp M 1873 
7.5cm Gebirgskanone M 1873 
7cm Gebirgsgeschütz M 1890 

e] captured guns 
many Russian and British guns and some French guns were captured: some of them were used by Turkish Army 

 

Purhaps Emre can check his Turkish sourse to confirm some of the details here on Ottoman guns on the Anzac Front?

 

S.B

Edited 19 July , 2019 by stevebecker

[Rockturner]

Steve,

I am beginning to understand how this Gallipoli thread works. If the Turks make claim or say it was so, it is absolute, no questions asked. If the Turks say it wasn't so, or refuse to open their records to check their facts, it just didn't happen. If the ANZAC's or Brits make a claim or say it was it was so, it's still open to further forensic investigation.

How could I not have seen this before now.

Keep up the great work.

Rockturner

[Guest]

Mate,

 

 Sorry, but you got it back to front.

 

If we make a claim, then it is not questioned, but if the Turks say something, then its always questioned.

 

I am just trying to reverse this so the Ottomans get a foot in.

 

But we are left with poor records form both sides trying to match up 100 years after the fact.

 

S.B

[gilly100]

 

Well done Murray Ewen on the countless hours of research, trips overseas digging into archives no one else has bothered to look at, the thousands and thousands of dollars it has cost to do all this in the pursuit of the truth. Because as sure as …. (you know what, petals and snowflakes in abundance here), it currently makes no difference here, unfortunately.

The considerable evidence and contradictions in records of opposing sides WARRANTS rigorous scrutiny AND debate. If it gets a bit heated, all the better to continue the search. Fire in the belly and all that. As I said before and elsewhere, the definitive book on the Landing at Anzac has yet to be written, although I suspect yours will be the closest when complete.

Just like your epic book on the 2/4th Machine Gun Battalion - Colour Patch, accolades (rightly or wrongly) mostly go only within the purple circle club, in Australia especially. I just read a book on the fighting in Java in WW2 and Blackforce, aka Blackburn VC. It never once referenced your work and the awesome detail and maps within. Not one map in the book yet many will buy it, and be poorer for it in knowledge. So many books published on the POW experience in SE Asia that would have done so much better utilising your work. That's the protected system that operates, much to the detriment of the wider pursuit of truth and knowledge in military history. The ones who are considered the definitive gurus deserve the closest of scrutiny, alongside the respect in which they are more widely held. Period.

 

Ian

 

[michaeldr]

 

7 hours ago, stevebecker said:

If before 1914 then they may have been lost during the Balkans wars?

Yes, see my post No.39 above: sold on to Turkey  long before the war

 

7 hours ago, stevebecker said:

But since these guns are not mentioned in any ToS of Ottoman Artillery units then there use by the Ottomans is open to question.

 

Is his understanding that the shell is a 10 Pdr can't be questioned after all this time, then we are left was it fired by an Ottoman gun?

Yes, the shells were 10-pdr and at least one example was closely examined

"Turks were shelling it, and pointed to the body of a shell which had just fallen. Campbell went and looked at it and

found a shell with marks to show that it had been made at Cossipore and filled at Rawul Pindi,

and the scoop of the shell showed that it had come from right outside our line."

 

If the gun(s) firing these was not one of those sold on by NZ long before the war

then exactly which Ottoman gun in your lists above, would have been able to fire such 10-pdr shells? 

 

Edited 20 July , 2019 by michaeldr

[Guest]

Mate,

 

I agree, its so long ago we can't be sure.

 

10 pdr Mountain gun should have been listed if on the Ottoman side, but not?

 

But to say it maybe a gun sold by the Kiwi's years before, is still a long shot.

 

There's no right answer here as are many questions asked, but to just say it was a 10Pdr gun sold by the Kiwi's to Turkey is also no answer.

 

S.B

[michaeldr]

1 hour ago, stevebecker said:

10 pdr Mountain gun should have been listed if on the Ottoman side, but not?

But to say it maybe a gun sold by the Kiwi's years before, is still a long shot..

 

There were cleary marked shells coming from behind the Turkish lines

Unless they were thown by someone, then they must have been fired by an artillery piece of the matching calibre

If such a gun is not found in an Ottoman list today then yes it's a long shot as you put it

But perhaps the pre-war sale to Turkey by NZ explanation is also the only shot!

 

1 hour ago, stevebecker said:

but to just say it was a 10Pdr gun sold by the Kiwi's to Turkey is also no answer.

 

I honestly don't know how you can say that?

[alantwo]

This is recorded in the Headquarters 2nd Australian Field Artillery Brigade War Diary for 29th November 1915.

 

'At 1214 the Turks were observed massing opposite South East angle of LONE PINE - but no attack eventuated (shells varying in size from 11 inch to 10 pounder & innumerable were poured in on this position)'.

 

Alan

[gilly100]

From Bean's Gallipoli Mission page 379 - Hotchkiss Tepe - Hotchkiss Hill - Foothill of Gun Ridge - NE of this.

 

I suppose it would be a LONG SHOT firing a Hotchkiss shell from there - Ottoman territory the whole campaign.

 

Always a long shot eh Steve when we dare challenge the Ottoman Gallipoli narrative? It's just too much of a long shot to think they might have a few holes in their records.!

 

Perhaps the moderators can realise the MG thread should be opened back up. More info still out there you know!

 

Ian

Edited 20 July , 2019 by gilly100
add more