40 replies to this topic

[T8HANTS]

Trying to research the Garland mortar on line is not a very satisfactory activity, there are a few contemporary photos, and one and half surviving examples.  Even the complete’ish one is thought to have a short barrel.

 800px-GarlandMortarAWM2005.jpg   58.02K   3 downloads

Looking at the one photo available on line it would appear to have a simple L shaped handle to the rear which may have been used for traversing the piece.  Closer inspection however shows there is what appears to be a single leaf spring underneath it.  It then appears to pivot at the base, with a small arm running up and into the top part of the mounting block, and may even end in some form of a pointer, or so it would seem.  Clearly this arm is doing a lot more than just being fixed to the base block.

The description states that the barrel is fixed at a set angle; however there is a range plate in yards on the top.  In order to change the range, you either change the angle of the mortar.  (This can be clearly seen in one of the contemporary photos of the piece being fired, off a couple of crates with a large wedge visible under the wood block). Or you alter the quantity of the propellant charge.  Was the propellant used just ordinary black powder, and if so where was the touch hole, or how else was the charge fired, and did it fire ‘Jam-tin’  bombs .  One Wikki source states it fired a bomb with a “white calico tail”, any suggestions as to what they might have been.

Is there an Australian Pal out there who would be  kind enough to  take me a couple clear photos of the mortar, including what was on the range plate?  I would love to make a replica as the War Diary of the 8^th Hants state they were issued with two.  It could then go with my leach catapult, but this will have to be non-working replica.

Gareth

[centurion]

This has been discussed before and I think it was concluded that part of the barrel is missing on that one,
 GarlandMortarQuinnsPost1June1915.jpg   76.03K   4 downloads
 au-mortar.jpg   70.59K   4 downloads

[munster]

Hi Gareth there was a post today or yesterday re rifle grenades at loos one that was mentioned had a rope tail to enable it to be thrown when used manually i wonder is this the reason for the calico tail you mention.john

[DavidB]

T8Hants. Is there supposed to be one at the AWM ? Also where was the photo of your taken ? If that was from the AWM collection I don't know whether it would be

possible to get a shot of the other side as it looks as if it is hard up against a cabinet wall.

[DavidB]

T8Hants,
  if you go to the AWM web site and key in Garland mortar in the search box (and WW1) you will find a number of photos of the mortar.

I am not certain whether these would suit your requirements or not but it is a start.

Cheers

[Sommewalker]

There seems to be two Garland mortars at the AWM.  One seems substantially complete but the barrel has been shortened, and the other, a 1919 battlefield find, consists of a barrel and a rod. The bomb seems to have been a cylinder (probably based on the ubiquitous cigarette tin) with a percussion igniter and a tail streamer to ensure it falls nose first.  It is described as simple and powerful in the report of Lt. Col. Pridham R.E. the Divisional Engineer at Anzac in his report dated 3 July 1915. See Rick Landers 'GRENADE'  British and Commonwealth Hand and Rifle Grenades. SW

[centurion]

Garland as distributed by the Royal Marine Cyclists Company. I think that's a round in front of it

 galland2.jpg   28.03K   3 downloads

British improvised pipe mortar also distributed by same

 Pipe Galip.jpg   37.91K   2 downloads

Japanese mortar also used on Gallipoli

 Japanese_Mortar_Gallipoli_1915_AWM_P01850_004.jpg   69.96K   1 downloads

[GRANVILLE]

T8HANTS, on 06 August 2012 - 09:06 PM, said:

Trying to research the Garland mortar on line is not a very satisfactory activity, there are a few contemporary photos, and one and half surviving examples.  Even the complete’ish one is thought to have a short barrel.

800px-GarlandMortarAWM2005.jpg

Looking at the one photo available on line it would appear to have a simple L shaped handle to the rear which may have been used for traversing the piece.  Closer inspection however shows there is what appears to be a single leaf spring underneath it.  It then appears to pivot at the base, with a small arm running up and into the top part of the mounting block, and may even end in some form of a pointer, or so it would seem.  Clearly this arm is doing a lot more than just being fixed to the base block.

The description states that the barrel is fixed at a set angle; however there is a range plate in yards on the top.  In order to change the range, you either change the angle of the mortar.  (This can be clearly seen in one of the contemporary photos of the piece being fired, off a couple of crates with a large wedge visible under the wood block). Or you alter the quantity of the propellant charge.  Was the propellant used just ordinary black powder, and if so where was the touch hole, or how else was the charge fired, and did it fire ‘Jam-tin’  bombs .  One Wikki source states it fired a bomb with a “white calico tail”, any suggestions as to what they might have been.

Is there an Australian Pal out there who would be  kind enough to  take me a couple clear photos of the mortar, including what was on the range plate?  I would love to make a replica as the War Diary of the 8^th Hants state they were issued with two.  It could then go with my leach catapult, but this will have to be non-working replica.

Gareth

Hi Gareth

I can't say I've seen one of these mortars before, but looking at the photo you've posted I think you'll find that the barrel is fixed into the wooden base at the set angle and the ironwork running up the sides of the barrel there to lock the barrel onto the base. The ironwork bracket underneath the barrel is similarly helping to fix the barrel at the set angle. I think the pivoting lever with the spring is the firing mechanism, the sping being there to ensure a degree of resistance so it can't be fired off too easily etc. The same lever has a drilled hole towards the end of it and I think this will be for the purpose of fastening a lanyard/rope to it to extend the firing distance away from the device. In the other picture you've posted, the mortar is mounted on a box to raise it up a bit and I think the makers envisaged it would be raised well up to aid the projectile clearing a trench wall, which would make the firing rope idea very helpful. The white calico tails were as already stated to aid the flight of the projectile, plus (being white) to enable an observer to note the flight better.
Dave

[T8HANTS]

Hi All

Thanks for the replies.  The thought that the sprung lever might be part of the firing mechanism did go through my mind, but that just makes it more intriguing.  What was the propellant charge and how was it fired, percussion cap perhaps?
The bomb requiring a calico streamer is part of description given by Bean so must be correct.  This then raises the question, what sort of fuse was used, as I thought a streamer was always used on an impact percussion type detonator.  If employed it must have had a degree of sophistication in order to avoid being set off by the shock of firing.  With the quantity of mortars made, and reports that bombs “were plentiful”, this implies a much more sophisticated set up than an ad-hoc, on the beach, jam-tin bomb factory.  I am very surprised the whole thing isn’t better documented.

Gareth

[GRANVILLE]

As the charge has to be in the base, I can't see that the streamers will be attached to the bottom of the projectile in the base. I can only think it will be fastened onto the nose so that it streams out behind in flight and I still think they might just be more intended for spotting purposes rather than aiding flight.
If you've not come across this blog site, you may well find the information here of interest: http://www.standingw.../?currentPage=2 scroll down to read about Major Herbert Garland OBE, MC FCS
Dave

[centurion]

GRANVILLE, on 07 August 2012 - 08:31 PM, said:

As the charge has to be in the base, I can't see that the streamers will be attached to the bottom of the projectile in the base.

Most improvised mortars used a separate charge loaded before the projectile.

[Sommewalker]

Re the IWM photo posted by Centurion, although the projectile is actually leaning against a catapult, I must admit that it is a likely candidate for the Garland bomb.  It
seems to be a cigarette or ration tin with a tail boom having the streamers coiled around it, like the percussion grenades of the period.  Certainly Lt. Col. Pridham does emphasis the need for a vertical descent from height to ensure the percussion igniter mechanism operates. First time I've noticed it in the photo. - SW

[centurion]

This diagram is based on descriptions of improvised percussion fuses used with locally made mortars in the South African war. It's possible that something similar was used with the Garland
 fuse.jpg   47.76K   1 downloads

[GRANVILLE]

Here's a similar sized French mortar. Apparently known as crapouillots (spelt correct) or 'little frogs'. I asume they lept on being fired. Muzzle loaded and lit by lengths of fuse as you can see these chaps about to do with their cigarettes I presume.

Dave

Attached Files

•  SANY6793.JPG   77.46K   0 downloads

[centurion]

GRANVILLE, on 08 August 2012 - 01:38 PM, said:

Here's a similar sized French mortar. Apparently known as crapouillots (spelt correct) or 'little frogs'. I asume they lept on being fired. Muzzle loaded and lit by lengths of fuse as you can see these chaps about to do with their cigarettes I presume.

Dave

These are in fact a later variant of the Taupia mortar  which were basically a tube on a block of wood. the first ones used cut down cartridge cases from Captured German heavy artillery pieces. Technically speaking not  crapouillots - little toads which was the name given to ancient Cohorn type mortars of the Crimean period rescued from French army stores and put back into service. These looked like squatting toads and tended to somersault backwards when fired. The name eventually got applied to any French trench mortar indiscriminately

[Sommewalker]

Centurion - looking at the above photgraph I suuggest that the mortars are improvised using shrapnel shell bodies rather than cases; either German 7.7cm or French 7.5 cm. Probably the latter.  One can see the cannelure where the driving bands have been removed. GRANVILLE: As for the fuze there can be no doubt that it was a percussion type which exploded on contact.  Don't forget the inertia forces on firing would hold a striker to the rear, only impact would cause it to run forward to strike the cap in most inertia fuze designs;except for the most primitive direct action design shown in Centurion's drawing.   The most interesting bit is the covers on the helmets! - SW

[centurion]

I did say  a later variant of the Taupia mortar which were basically a tube on a block of wood. the first ones used cut down cartridge cases from Captured German heavy artillery

In the first instances they used a time fuse, initially lit by the flash from firing. Can you explain why there is no doubt that they were percussion?

[GRANVILLE]

Sommewalker, on 08 August 2012 - 06:04 PM, said:

Centurion - looking at the above photgraph I suuggest that the mortars are improvised using shrapnel shell bodies rather than cases; either German 7.7cm or French 7.5 cm. Probably the latter.  One can see the cannelure where the driving bands have been removed. GRANVILLE: As for the fuze there can be no doubt that it was a percussion type which exploded on contact.  Don't forget the inertia forces on firing would hold a striker to the rear, only impact would cause it to run forward to strike the cap in most inertia fuze designs;except for the most primitive direct action design shown in Centurion's drawing.   The most interesting bit is the covers on the helmets! - SW

I presume the fuse is the firing mechanism and that the detonation takes place when the projectile hits the ground?

Dave

[T8HANTS]

I am still trying to work out how the charge on the Garland was fired.  I have tried enhancing the photo of the section with the lever, and it still seems to end in some kind of pointer rather than a firing mechanism that I can reconise.  It also seems to end way short of the barrel, but there is no touch hole apparent, I'm stumped.

Gareth

Attached Files

•  garland2.jpg   34.22K   1 downloads

[centurion]

I think the problem may be exacerbated by the one in the museum being incomplete

[GRANVILLE]

It certainly would help to have some more photos at different angles. I can now see what you call a pointer and I can only think its designed to pull back on something presumably to do with the igniton arrangement of the mortar. The metal bar to the right of the 'pointer' doen't help matters as I suspect there has to be an access point behind it where presumably a detonator was placed to fire the device?

Dave

[centurion]

The 'barrel' being shorter than those seen in photos in the field (and possibly too short for the projectile) and having no touch hole nor any other means of ingress at the breech end would suggest that this is not the original barrel which would also suggest that parts of the firing mechanism are also missing.

[Sommewalker]

Centurion - there can be no doubt that the firing mechanism of the bomb was percussion because when Lt. Col. Pridham did his report on improvised bombs he stated that although the Garland was a simple and powerful bomb it had to be thrown or shot right up into the air to ensure ' it falling on the percussion arrangement'.  You appreciate that I am speaking of the system of exploding the bomb, not of launching it from the mortar.- SW

[centurion]

Sommewalker, on 09 August 2012 - 10:33 AM, said:

Centurion - there can be no doubt that the firing mechanism of the bomb was percussion because when Lt. Col. Pridham did his report on improvised bombs he stated that although the Garland was a simple and powerful bomb it had to be thrown or shot right up into the air to ensure ' it falling on the percussion arrangement'.  You appreciate that I am speaking of the system of exploding the bomb, not of launching it from the mortar.- SW

In the context of your post it looked as if you were referring to the Taupia mortars

This photo on the National Army Museum site shows a Garland mortar about to be loaded. The projectile matches the one leaning against the catapult in a previously posted shot.

 72670.jpg   56.77K   6 downloads

However if we look at the mortar itself and compare it with the one at Quinn's Post

 garland4.jpg   20.89K   3 downloads

There is a marked absence of the ironmongery present on the QP mortar. It's possible that the QP was a one off and the others used a simpler way to fire the mortar - possibly the traditional piece of fuse cord and a cigarette.

[GRANVILLE]

I don't know if this helps or hinders as I'm not entirely sure it’s correct, but this is how I interpret the visible ironwork of what I think is the firing mechanism. You'll see how it pivots and how the spring already mentioned offers resistance so that firing it becomes quite a deliberate act as you might expect. What Gareth describes as a pointer is all part of this lever and rather than a pointer I think the upright has had a twist put in it at the top, so that what you see is the ironwork sideways on to camera if you get my meaning? Quite why I'm not yet sure, except that if you look at the last photo above which Centurion posted, you can see what looks like a length of cord passing over the wooden block beneath the bottom of the barrel. It’s just possible the end of this cord goes to the ironwork I've just referred to? Bit of a long-shot, but in the absence of better photos or information it’s all guess work. You can clearly see the side of the wooden block is carved out to make way for the ironwork as it pivots back and forth with the lever, so it’s all done for a purpose even if it’s not yet clear what.

The piece of flat bar you can clearly see is in my opinion also riveted to the lever arrangement so that it too will move back and forth. Again why, is not clear to me. Possibly affording some protection to whatever goes on behind it?

Dave

Attached Files

•  Garland ironwork.jpg   15.55K   3 downloads