27 replies to this topic

[centurion]

In 1871 the Turkish Army in the person of Colonel Mehemed Bey took delivery of a number of Burrell 12 HP Road Locomotives that had been specially built to Turkish specifications. [Smaller 8HP machines were built for the Russian Army] These were the first traction engines built by the company with a horizontal locomotive type boiler

In 1915 Corporal Roderick McCandlish (NZ Mounted Rifles) serving in Gallipoli records in his diary "(Wed 9 June) – Very windy. Nothing doing; saw six inch Howitzers fired; could see shell travelling. Reported shooting at a traction engine shifting a Turk gun. Monitor firing over our field guns, all putting it in. We shifted into fire trench, no place to lie down too sleep. Robbie shot."

Could this have been a surviving (by the sound of it not much longer) Burrell?

[michaeldr]

Centurion,

Have you thought about raising this on the Axis Forum? When we were discussing (here on the GWF) the German Navy's machine-gun parties which were used in August at Anzac and Suvla, I recollect that some useful information was found over there

Alternatively, you may wish to try and PM some of our Turkish Pals to draw their attention to this thread.

Good luck
Michael

[bob lembke]

This topic came up on this Forum a few days ago in another thread. For 12 years I have been reading everything I can find on the Turkish/German/Austrian side of Gallipoli (as my father fought there with the Turks), in multiple languages (My one venture into Turkish, however, was extremely painful; Turkish is a monster language), and I am always amazed at what soret of resources people attribute to the Turks at Gallipoli, where they barely had shoes, and could not maintain sand-bags, as the Turkish soldiers, many wearing rags, would cut up sandbags and make improvised uniform bits out of them as fast as sandbags could be delivered. The Allies memoirs (I have read many) constantly refer to weapons and equipment that the Turks did not have. We had an interesting discussion about a supposed Turkish armored train at Gallipoli dueling with the Allied fleet, despite the fact that the railroad did not come within 100 miles of Gallipoli. People argued that you could have armored trains without a railroad. The Turks did not even have shells that exploded, and were taking 200 year old mortars out of museums to use in combat.

But it is fascinating to hear that the Turks received a few steam tractors in 1871. The record of the Turkish attempts to modernize in the era is interesting. I was (fairly recently) at the Turkish Naval Museum in Istanbul on the shore of the Bosporous, and Whitehead established a torpedo factory in Constantanople about 1875, and the garden was littered with lots of interesting very old torpedoes.

The Turkish artillery prime mover at Gallipoli was oxen.

Also consider the very limited access to Gallipoli, no rail, poor road or two, weak bridges. And the Turks did not have big guns, except for the old fixed guns in the forts, mostly installed in the 1870's. They had a few batteries of 15 cm howitzers. Allied sources constantly mention calibers that they did not have.

Bob Lembke

[centurion]

bob lembke, on 13 February 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

This topic came up on this Forum a few days ago in another thread. For 12 years I have been reading everything I can find on the Turkish/German/Austrian side of Gallipoli (as my father fought there with the Turks), in multiple languages (My one venture into Turkish, however, was extremely painful; Turkish is a monster language), and I am always amazed at what soret of resources people attribute to the Turks at Gallipoli, where they barely had shoes, and could not maintain sand-bags, as the Turkish soldiers, many wearing rags, would cut up sandbags and make improvised uniform bits out of them as fast as sandbags could be delivered. The Allies memoirs (I have read many) constantly refer to weapons and equipment that the Turks did not have. We had an interesting discussion about a supposed Turkish armored train at Gallipoli dueling with the Allied fleet, despite the fact that the railroad did not come within 100 miles of Gallipoli. People argued that you could have armored trains without a railroad. The Turks did not even have shells that exploded, and were taking 200 year old mortars out of museums to use in combat.

But it is fascinating to hear that the Turks received a few steam tractors in 1871. The record of the Turkish attempts to modernize in the era is interesting. I was (fairly recently) at the Turkish Naval Museum in Istanbul on the shore of the Bosporous, and Whitehead established a torpedo factory in Constantanople about 1875, and the garden was littered with lots of interesting very old torpedoes.

The Turkish artillery prime mover at Gallipoli was oxen.

Also consider the very limited access to Gallipoli, no rail, poor road or two, weak bridges. And the Turks did not have big guns, except for the old fixed guns in the forts, mostly installed in the 1870's. They had a few batteries of 15 cm howitzers. Allied sources constantly mention calibers that they did not have.

Bob Lembke

None of which rules out the possibility of one of the old road locoa being around in 1915 and an attempt being made to use it

[michaeldr]

centurion, on 13 February 2012 - 01:11 PM, said:

None of which rules out the possibility of one of the old road locoa being around in 1915 and an attempt being made to use it

Possibilities are infinite
Evidence would help shorten the process

[centurion]

One of the three Burrell's supplied to Turkey

 Burrel3.jpg   32.37K   0 downloads

In addition at least three other traction engines would have been available to the Turkish government (as they are currently preserved in Istanbul)

1890s Fowler
1910 Aveling & Porter
pre WW1 Malden


Any of these might account for the engine reported in Corporal Roderick McCandlish's diary.

[michaeldr]

Quote from post #1:
Reported shooting at a traction engine shifting a Turk gun. Monitor firing over our field guns, all putting it in


Perhaps a look at the log of the Humber might help. She 'arrived on 4th June and shortly afterwards was sent to Gaba Tepe to deal with a large number of guns concealed in the Olive Groves along the Axmah ravine south of Gaba Tepe...'

edit to add: could this be the Humber's log?
http://www.nationala...&accessmethod=5

The next monitor to arrive was the Roberts on 15th July, which was after this alleged sighting
(info frm Naval Ops., Vol.III, page 73)

Edited by michaeldr, 13 February 2012 - 07:24 PM.

[michaeldr]

Corporal Roderick McCandlish (NZ Mounted Rifles) serving in Gallipoli records in his diary "(Wed 9 June) – Very windy. Nothing doing; saw six inch Howitzers fired; could see shell travelling. Reported shooting at a traction engine shifting a Turk gun. Monitor firing over our field guns, all putting it in. We shifted into fire trench, no place to lie down too sleep. Robbie shot."

Looking at this quote as a whole, there's a bit of everything in it isn't there; in its way it's a typical soldier's diary
When he says 'Reported shooting at a traction engine' he's repeating a rumour isn't he. He's not actually saying that he saw the thing himself and reported it to someone.

[centurion]

michaeldr, on 13 February 2012 - 07:35 PM, said:

Corporal Roderick McCandlish (NZ Mounted Rifles) serving in Gallipoli records in his diary "(Wed 9 June) – Very windy. Nothing doing; saw six inch Howitzers fired; could see shell travelling. Reported shooting at a traction engine shifting a Turk gun. Monitor firing over our field guns, all putting it in. We shifted into fire trench, no place to lie down too sleep. Robbie shot."

Looking at this quote as a whole, there's a bit of everything in it isn't there; in its way it's a typical soldier's diary
When he says 'Reported shooting at a traction engine' he's repeating a rumour isn't he. He's not actually saying that he saw the thing himself and reported it to someone.

Don't dismiss everything you disagree with as a rumour ( there is a tendency to do this)- he might have been told 'officialy' by his officer.

[Martin G]

Centurion - any idea of the specs of these traction engines? What pulling power they had and what gradients they could climb. The reason I ask is that I think the elusive steam contraption on another thread might have been near Tekke Tepe which is high up but we know it was a place where Turkish Artillery was located. It is also bang on the line observed by the Gunner Fwd Observation Officer: NE of Scimitar Hill (Hill 70)   - The Turkish maps (Sevki Pasha) and British 1:10,000 scale maps both show a redoubt near the top of Tekke Tepe and I always wondered how the hell they dragged the guns up there. There were certainly primitive tracks up to the location and (my speculation) I wonder if the steam contraption and your Traction engine are one and the same? MG

[michaeldr]

centurion, on 13 February 2012 - 07:50 PM, said:

Don't dismiss everything you disagree with as a rumour ( there is a tendency to do this)- he might have been told 'officialy' by his officer.

However, it is possible to interpret this as being a rumour. Is there anything else to back this up? Where was this chap positioned on that day? Could he see the Olive Groves south of Gaba Tebe from there?

[michaeldr]

Martin G, on 13 February 2012 - 08:03 PM, said:

I always wondered how the hell they dragged the guns up there. There were certainly primitive tracks up to the location and (my speculation) I wonder if the steam contraption and your Traction engine are one and the same? MG

Martin,

Kannengiesser describes “The bringing of the heavy guns into positions on the heights proved extraordinarily difficult owing to the bad roads. Twenty-four buffaloes were insufficient, because they did not pull equally. Hundreds of soldiers had to accomplish this with long ropes.”
see his page 237

As Bob said above, oxen were the preferred method

Michael

[michaeldr]

The map below gives some general indication of the area, referred to in the Naval OH, where the monitor Humber bombarded some guns during the period in question ['arrived on 4th June and shortly afterwards was sent to Gaba Tepe to deal with a large number of guns concealed in the Olive Groves along the Axmah ravine south of Gaba Tepe...']

The map is taken from the back end-papers of 'Grasping Gallipoli' by Peter Chasseaud & Peter Doyle, Spellmount, 2005, ISBN 1-86227-283-2.
The notes describe it as “Extract from Survey of Egypt 1915 1:40,000 enlargement of the 1908 1-inch map, with additional information, prepared for the landings in April 1915 with Naval squaring, showing the area across the Peninsula from Gaba Tepe to Maidos and the Narrows.”

[bob lembke]

Yes, anything is possible, but the only land route to Gallipoli was about 150 miles on a bad road. What sort of an adventure that would have been. How much fuel? Where obtained? Travel by sea would be problematic as valuable material was lost that way (ie, one or two 15 cm guns from the Goeben, taken out, weakening the firepower of the ship, and then, with ammo from the Goeben, sunk by a Brit sub.) Getting something that heavy and clumsy off of a ship at the Gallipoli harbor would have been a problem.

Incidentally, I understand from a good source that in 1915 the Turkish Army did not possess a single piece of bridging equipment, every bit having been lost in the Balkan Wars.

Centurion, I am swept away by the wonderful photos that you are always able to provide.

Late in Gallipoli the Austrians wanted to send a battery of their excellent 30.5 cm Motor Mortars (motor transport designed by Dr. Ferdinand Porsche), and they sent an advance party of two artillery officers, to survey the route, but they reported that the route was awful, especially the weak bridges, and instead recommended that the Army send the lesser-known 24 cm Motor Mortar, as lighter and more agile. My father saw them in action at ANZAC, and thought them splendid, really decimating the ANZACs.

Bob

[ianjonescl]

centurion, on 10 February 2012 - 03:01 PM, said:

Reported shooting at a traction engine shifting a Turk gun.

He sent a situation report (sit rep) and because it was an unusual sight he recorded it in his personal diary.

Not much misidentification between a traction engine and oxen one would think.

[michaeldr]

ianjonescl, on 14 February 2012 - 07:06 PM, said:

He sent a situation report (sit rep) and because it was an unusual sight he recorded it in his personal diary.

Not much misidentification between a traction engine and oxen one would think.

Ian,

Do you have definite information on this? Or are you giving us your personal interpretation of what  Centurion has quoted in his post #1?

If the former, then please complete the picture: Can you tell us
[i] where he was when he saw this
[ii] where was the gun and whatever was pulling it

Facts are like hens' teeth round here and speculation too easy

Someone must know where this chap was positioned that day
That would be a start

Thanks in advance for any further light you can throw on this

regards
Michael

Edited by michaeldr, 14 February 2012 - 08:25 PM.

[michaeldr]

On the Richter scale of Rumour, the traction engine doesn't hold a candle to the woman sniper. The latter was even mentioned by a retired senior officer in his correspondence with the Official Historian, long after the war was over.

For the present at least, I am prepared to go along with Centurion's thoughts that an 1871 traction engine may have somehow survived working in Turkey until 1915

But, to establish that this 44 year old engine was actually used to move artillery on Gallipoli we need some facts. The brief and ambiguously worded diary entry of a single New Zealand corporal will not stand on its own.

[michaeldr]

michaeldr, on 14 February 2012 - 07:10 PM, said:

Facts are like hens' teeth round here and speculation too easy

Someone must know where this chap was positioned that day

Funnily enough, the information is actually given together with the diary; it's on the web

The diary entry can be found here  http://www.nzmr.org/...cCandlish2.html
The New Zealand corporal was at Russell's Top at the time that he made the entry in question

quote:
The NZMR relieved the Australian Light Horse in the front line at Russell’s Top. The 2nd and 9th Squadrons in the forward trenches, with Roderick and the others from the 6th in the reserve trench behind.
Dugouts were makeshift holes cut into the ground usually along a terrace on a hillside. The troops tried to make them as comfortable as possible and at the same time bullet, and shrapnel proof by using sandbags. A direct hit was fatal, as was sitting outside when a shell came over.
They improvised by using old grain bags for lining the walls; wood collected from wreckage of boats was used as rafters, with spare oilcloth stretched over the top. This was covered with as much soil as required to stop a bullet. Furniture consisted of shelves and cupboards of biscuit boxes with a large bully-beef box as a table. Where possible the opening faced out to the coast with its beautiful views
(Tue 8 June) – Fine day. Was on fatigue carrying water up hill - two and half gallons to five men. - 2 o’clock on fatigue in afternoon carrying water for disinfecting purposes to trenches left in bad state by Australian Light Horse. Had a bathe in evening, helped to carry sandbags up hill. At stand too, troops shifted into fire trenches, was on sentry duty. Got a letter from home. Saw a Monitor fist time
A Monitor was a class of ship designed to give close support to troops ashore. They had minimal exposure above the waterline, making it harder to hit. They had extra armour plating, revolving gun platforms and were protected from torpedo attack by chain mesh around the hull
(Wed 9 June) – Very windy. Nothing doing; saw six inch Howitzers fired; could see shell travelling. Reported shooting at a traction engine shifting a Turk gun. Monitor firing over our field guns, all putting it in. We shifted into fire trench, no place to lie down too sleep. Robbie shot.

The same web page also has a map to illustrate where Russell's Top was and this can be compared with the map given earlier in post #13.
Some idea of the topography of the area can be gained from these aerial photographs: see http://cas.awm.gov.a...ograph/G01534AT
&
http://cas.awm.gov.au/ephemera/RC04278

To me, it looks as if the first part of the diary entry is one whole; as in
Nothing doing; saw six inch Howitzers fired; could see shell travelling. Reported(ly they were) shooting at a traction engine shifting a Turk gun. Monitor firing over our field guns, all putting it in.

If the guns bombarded by the Humber were 'concealed in the Olive Groves along the Axmah ravine south of Gaba Tepe' and if these were the same guns seen by someone being 'shifted', then I have my doubts as to whether or not that observation could have been made from the reserve trenches of Russell's Top.

As I suggested in post #7, the Humber's Log may help, as might the WD for the “six inch howitzers”

Good luck
Michael

[ianjonescl]

Picture from Axis Forum - Turkish Artillery 1908 to 1923
http://forum.axishis...09440&start=105

 caterpilarar9.jpg   20.42K   0 downloads

[bob lembke]

Interesting photo, but absolutely certainly not 1915, probably not WW I, but later, and are we sure that it is Turkish? Note that the troops are wearing French helmets. Nor does the heavy gear look German or Austrian. I would suspect that the picture is post 1923. (My father ran guns to the Turks in 1922.)

Bob Lembke

[michaeldr]

I agree with Bob. I don't think that it's 1908, so perhaps it's 1923, but it may very well be even later
Look at the uniforms of the soldiers and in particular at their headgear
Note the camouflage paint scheme on the tractor and gun
Also have a look at the style of dress of the civilians in the background

If it is Turkish, then I  would hazard a guess that it was probably taken at a parade marking the establishment of the republic, or a later  anniversary of that event

It would be helpful to have the comments of one of our experts on the year of manufacture of the tractor. It seems too modern for the Great War

Michael

[michaeldr]

I put this on another thread the other day, but there's no harm in repeating it here

Whilst looking for something else and in the process dipping into 'Five Years in Turkey' I came across the following from Marshal Liman; see his page 73
quote – 'The railroad station in Usunköpri (Uzun Kjupru) in Thrace was seven marches distant and the means of transport were very limited. In those days the armies in Turkey had no auto trucks and it was with much difficulty that the columns of camels, pack animals and Turkish ox wagons managed to get a few tons to the front.'
(my emphasis)

regards
Michael

[truthergw]

The Gallipoli experts will know that there is a Facebook page on Gallipoli with lots of input from Turkish fellow enthusiasts. Today a couple of pics were added of a large gang of men using ropes and wooden skids to move the barrel of a naval gun. No sign of a traction engine or oxen. That is not to say they were not used somewhere else or on another day. The gun came from a ship and was re-assembled inland. For what it is worth, I think that interpreting the corporal's diary entry as him having reported firing on a steam engine makes the least assumptions.

[michaeldr]

truthergw, on 09 March 2012 - 05:15 PM, said:

For what it is worth, I think that interpreting the corporal's diary entry as him having reported firing on a steam engine makes the least assumptions.

and the quote from the New Zealand corporal at Russell's Top
(Wed 9 June) – Very windy. Nothing doing; saw six inch Howitzers fired; could see shell travelling. Reported shooting at a traction engine shifting a Turk gun. Monitor firing over our field guns, all putting it in. We shifted into fire trench, no place to lie down too sleep. Robbie shot.

Following your path of "least assumptions" Tom, the corporal fired on the steam engine before he shifted into the firing trench

[truthergw]

michaeldr, on 09 March 2012 - 07:27 PM, said:

and the quote from the New Zealand corporal at Russell's Top
(Wed 9 June) – Very windy. Nothing doing; saw six inch Howitzers fired; could see shell travelling. Reported shooting at a traction engine shifting a Turk gun. Monitor firing over our field guns, all putting it in. We shifted into fire trench, no place to lie down too sleep. Robbie shot.

Following your path of "least assumptions" Tom, the corporal fired on the steam engine before he shifted into the firing trench

I am just reluctant to interpolate anything into a record. Once we venture down that slippery slope, it is hard to stop.  I could make a very thin case for the corporal observing the fall of shot but I wouldn't.
I think I would simply adopt the stance that the diary entry is ambiguous and leave it at that. A common result when dealing with diaries, memos and minutes of meetings.