.303 MkVII Aluminium Tip Myth or Reality

[JW251]

Hi all,

I hope the knowledgeable collectors out there can help me. I’ve always believed and read (e.g https://talesfromthesupplydepot.blog/2017/09/20/mk-vii-303-rounds/0) that one purpose of the Aluminium tip of the Mk VII bullet was to encourage it to tumble when it hit a target. I’ve searched the Small Arms Committee records (thanks to the wonderful work by the Vickers MG research group) but I haven’t found anything that explicitly says that. Can anyone point me to a primary source that backs it up - or is it a myth?

 

[BMG50]

I think when most long shape bullets like .303 hit a target, they tend to tumble especially if you mean the target being a human torso. You only need to hit heavy webbing , buckle or anything in a pocket for a bullet to tumble onwards. I dont think the essence was to cause a more serious wound but more for stability for better accruacy with the weight of the bullet at the back.

 

[Snufkin]

Can anyone point me to a primary source that backs it up - or is it a myth?

A myth.

The construction of the .303-inch bullet was for ballistic reasons, and both aluminium and fibre (paper) filled tips were used, the latter as an economy measure later in the war (Great War). The British were keen to show the bullet went reasonably cleanly through a body and the attached report records the performance of both aluminium and paper tipped rounds on a target corpse (mule). A tumbling bullet would be much more liable to break-up, particularly on hitting bone, and the report shows that fragmentation - and thereby prior tumbling - was not a desired objective. Note that it is stated that German bullets fragmented badly on hitting human bodies.

I understand the German government had complained through the ICRC in Switzerland that the British fibre tipped rounds were made to deliberately break up and cause infection within the wound - hence the British conducted tests to have the evidence if necessary to disprove such claims. That the performance of a paper tipped bullet was cleaner than an aluminium tipped bullet was incidental; the report gives the lie to the claim that any .303 ball was designed to fragment and cause enhanced wounds.

 

[JW251]

A myth.

The construction of the .303-inch bullet was for ballistic reasons, and both aluminium and fibre (paper) filled tips were used, the latter as an economy measure later in the war (Great War). The British were keen to show the bullet went reasonably cleanly through a body and the attached report records the performance of both aluminium and paper tipped rounds on a target corpse (mule). A tumbling bullet would be much more liable to break-up, particularly on hitting bone, and the report shows that fragmentation - and thereby prior tumbling - was not a desired objective. Note that it is stated that German bullets fragmented badly on hitting human bodies.

I understand the German government had complained through the ICRC in Switzerland that the British fibre tipped rounds were made to deliberately break up and cause infection within the wound - hence the British conducted tests to have the evidence if necessary to disprove such claims. That the performance of a paper tipped bullet was cleaner than an aluminium tipped bullet was incidental; the report gives the lie to the claim that any .303 ball was designed to fragment and cause enhanced wounds.

Hi Snufkin, Thanks. That's what the SAC notes suggest to me. There's a good summary (and refutation) of the German claims here: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k57386306/f75.item