Sounds likely!
British Ordnance Collectors Network
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Sea recovered ordnance
- Thread starter peteblight
- Start date
Mustard gas
In reference to the 25 pdr that was blown up on the beach in Wales contaminating the EOD operators, these pictures show what the contents of a mustard filled 25 pdr looks like when opened.
The first picture shows a 25pdr that doesn't have a build up of pressure.
The second shows the result of a pressure build up.
Because the mustard is weaponised it contains a thickening agent, hence it looks like treacle. As you can see it's not in fact a gas, but a thick, sticky liquid.
In reference to the 25 pdr that was blown up on the beach in Wales contaminating the EOD operators, these pictures show what the contents of a mustard filled 25 pdr looks like when opened.
The first picture shows a 25pdr that doesn't have a build up of pressure.
The second shows the result of a pressure build up.
Because the mustard is weaponised it contains a thickening agent, hence it looks like treacle. As you can see it's not in fact a gas, but a thick, sticky liquid.
Pete,
I really enjoyed the photos you posted of the mustard coming out of the two projectiles that were cut with the saw.
Do you have any other photos that show other CW agents in similar handling procedures, that would show the colors of the agents, the consistency, etc.?
I really enjoyed the photos you posted of the mustard coming out of the two projectiles that were cut with the saw.
Do you have any other photos that show other CW agents in similar handling procedures, that would show the colors of the agents, the consistency, etc.?
Chemical warfare agents
I'll sort through my stuff and see what i can find.
The pic below is of thickened mustard during hydrolysis. This was a method we used to dispose of H on a small scale. Basically it involved adding H to water, boiling the mixture and agitating until it broke down into it's component parts. In the case of H it broke down into Thiodiglycol and Hydrochloric acid. Once it had reached this stage we added Sodium Hydroxide to bring the ph to neutral and then we drained it into bio reactor and added "bugs" to digest the Thiodiglycol. The end result was an inert liquid. The guy in the pic is checking with a CAM before removing the mesh grill.
Enjoy
I'll sort through my stuff and see what i can find.
The pic below is of thickened mustard during hydrolysis. This was a method we used to dispose of H on a small scale. Basically it involved adding H to water, boiling the mixture and agitating until it broke down into it's component parts. In the case of H it broke down into Thiodiglycol and Hydrochloric acid. Once it had reached this stage we added Sodium Hydroxide to bring the ph to neutral and then we drained it into bio reactor and added "bugs" to digest the Thiodiglycol. The end result was an inert liquid. The guy in the pic is checking with a CAM before removing the mesh grill.
Enjoy
Damn, Pete, you're back in the Game! Wilfried and I were beginning to think that they had retired this thread! Megan was even talking about bringing you back some actual CW photos so you would have something to post!
We've decided to take pity on you and throw you a bone anyway, just to remind you what its like on-site and to keep them from retiring your avatar. We managed to see a couple interesting pieces, I've attached a couple of photos -
I've seen hundreds of these early US manufactured 75s over the years, this one is mustard filled. This is the first time, however, that I have ever seen the pull-tab plug over the hex fuze adapter. I'll have to dig through some books when I get home, but I don't remember seeing it in references either. Let me know if you've got anything on it.
We're back in early tomorrow afternoon, otherwise see you Monday if you're in.
We've decided to take pity on you and throw you a bone anyway, just to remind you what its like on-site and to keep them from retiring your avatar. We managed to see a couple interesting pieces, I've attached a couple of photos -
I've seen hundreds of these early US manufactured 75s over the years, this one is mustard filled. This is the first time, however, that I have ever seen the pull-tab plug over the hex fuze adapter. I'll have to dig through some books when I get home, but I don't remember seeing it in references either. Let me know if you've got anything on it.
We're back in early tomorrow afternoon, otherwise see you Monday if you're in.
Attachments
Jeff,
The projo you have shown has double crimping grooves which are characteristic of 2.95 inch (75mm) projos and 3 inch projos. I'm not familiar if there were CW fillings for either of those guns. Typically the French 75mm family don't have 2 grooves, if any. What do you think?
The projo you have shown has double crimping grooves which are characteristic of 2.95 inch (75mm) projos and 3 inch projos. I'm not familiar if there were CW fillings for either of those guns. Typically the French 75mm family don't have 2 grooves, if any. What do you think?
Thanks guys, Mad, that shows the ring, I guess I'd seen the photo before, but never considered that the ring in the diagram was actually connected to anything (I do that sometimes).
John, we see the MKIIs with CW fill in the US and one other country, they made it into production (with CW) too late to be found on the WWI sites, though they are occasionally seen as smoke in France in Belgium. The CW pieces however, were held onto into mid WWII. We carried them with our forces as part of the policy of "retaliation in kind". If they were not near the front, how could we retaliate? Of course this means that in some areas a few (or a lot) were lost. Google the John Harvey at Bari and you'll see what I mean.
Partway through the war the MKII CW was replaced with the much more modern M64 75mm, at this site we see quite a few of each of them, both normally mustard or WP filled.
The WP presents a bigger problem than the mustard, as if you think its mustard and open a WP by mistake - you get my drift. Charcoal and rubber suits are not especially flame retardant. The folks at this site have come up with a pretty cool solution, the have built a heater into their demil area, they heat all of the US 75s to around 60c. At this point the WP is liquified, and it separates! In x-ray you actually get two individual fill lines - instant ID of WP. Of course at 60c you are forcing any fill material out of the cracks, but you are prepared for destruction regardless.
John, we see the MKIIs with CW fill in the US and one other country, they made it into production (with CW) too late to be found on the WWI sites, though they are occasionally seen as smoke in France in Belgium. The CW pieces however, were held onto into mid WWII. We carried them with our forces as part of the policy of "retaliation in kind". If they were not near the front, how could we retaliate? Of course this means that in some areas a few (or a lot) were lost. Google the John Harvey at Bari and you'll see what I mean.
Partway through the war the MKII CW was replaced with the much more modern M64 75mm, at this site we see quite a few of each of them, both normally mustard or WP filled.
The WP presents a bigger problem than the mustard, as if you think its mustard and open a WP by mistake - you get my drift. Charcoal and rubber suits are not especially flame retardant. The folks at this site have come up with a pretty cool solution, the have built a heater into their demil area, they heat all of the US 75s to around 60c. At this point the WP is liquified, and it separates! In x-ray you actually get two individual fill lines - instant ID of WP. Of course at 60c you are forcing any fill material out of the cracks, but you are prepared for destruction regardless.
Jeff and Jack,
I'm on board with the U.S. having CW projos. What I'm wondering, is if the projo shown by Jeff is 75mm or 3 inch because it has two crimping grooves?
All of the U.S. 75mm CW stuff I've seen had no crimping grooves, as can be seen in the two 75mm projos on the left of the attached photo.
The U.S. 3 inch field gun used two crimping grooves as shown in the third projo in my photo, and the 2.95 inch mountain howitzer and the 2.95 inch subcaliber gun also had double criping grooves as shown on the shrapnel projo.
Jeff, do you know of CW fillings for the 3 inch field gun and/or the 2.95 inch?
I'm on board with the U.S. having CW projos. What I'm wondering, is if the projo shown by Jeff is 75mm or 3 inch because it has two crimping grooves?
All of the U.S. 75mm CW stuff I've seen had no crimping grooves, as can be seen in the two 75mm projos on the left of the attached photo.
The U.S. 3 inch field gun used two crimping grooves as shown in the third projo in my photo, and the 2.95 inch mountain howitzer and the 2.95 inch subcaliber gun also had double criping grooves as shown on the shrapnel projo.
Jeff, do you know of CW fillings for the 3 inch field gun and/or the 2.95 inch?
Attachments
Last edited:
Over here a lot of ammo was dumped after WW2 not only in sea but also in shallow lakes and ponds. Since several years army EOD are now diving them up from shallow water for demolition.
Not so may decades ago different kind of hazardous and poisonous chemicals were dumped in Baltic Sea, not only military origin but also civilian. Now we slowly pay the bill:tinysmile_angry2_t:
Not so may decades ago different kind of hazardous and poisonous chemicals were dumped in Baltic Sea, not only military origin but also civilian. Now we slowly pay the bill:tinysmile_angry2_t:
John,
I had this conversation with Jim O'Brien one time, and as I recall, he told me at that time that the two grooves were most often found on the 3-inch, but not only. At that time he advised me that the better indicator is the height of the rotating band from the base. The high band was 75mm, the low band the 3-inch. His refs were always much better than anyone elses, I guess the research is now up to you up to you.
Of course I didn't have a scale in the photo, I've been having problems finding good metric scales for my photos, and when I do I don't want to get them contaminated and give them up.
I'll check a couple refs and see what I can find on the 3-inch fills, Prentiss should have some good info.
In the meantime, here are a couple photos given to me by the site. They did a lot of good work figuring this out. The first is a mustard filled projo, the second is WP. Both were heated as described earlier. Note the double fill level on the WP. Well done boys.
Attachments
MoragTheHag
New Member
Hey Peteblight
Having read the post by US-Subs and noting your avatar, I thought you might like a couple of x-rays of the US 75mm MKII. You can see in the first picture the polymerised thickened material makes it harder to identify the liquid fill level. Turning the shell upside down will sometimes solve the problem as in the second picture. X
Having read the post by US-Subs and noting your avatar, I thought you might like a couple of x-rays of the US 75mm MKII. You can see in the first picture the polymerised thickened material makes it harder to identify the liquid fill level. Turning the shell upside down will sometimes solve the problem as in the second picture. X
Attachments
Nobody seems to be sure. My first theory was that since many of the earlier munitions were loaded with WP under water, it was the water vs the WP that we were seeing. But why only at temps around 60C? The site just blows them up after identification, as long as they know its WP, they don't care why. You need somebody better at chemistry and with a stronger background on pre-46 WP loading practices than me to answer that question.
Hey MTH, welcome to the place where we pick-on-Pete. Glad you were here to help save his post from obscurity!
John,
I checked my refs, I wanted to look for the "Handbook of the Gun", for the 3-inch, the 2.95 and the 75mm, but it looks like they are all at home. Normally these have very detailed pull-out plates in the back, which includes both the ammunition and the fuzes. So unless you can find copies of them in Jim's stuff (I'm sure he had them) that part (crimping grooves vs band height) of the subject may have to wait.
I do have my copy of Prentiss here with me, however, and it may help on the subject of CW loadings.
Augustin Prentiss was a CW officer during WWI, he wrote a technical summary of CW usage after the war, called Chemicals in War. Its a really good book, not perfect, but well researched and with an excellent explanation of the CW weapon development process, country by country, weapon by weapon. I consider it must-read material for pre-25 CW, and recommend it to all my new inspector students.
I've attached a couple of pages that might help, check the stuff you got from Jim, again I'd be very surprised if he didn't have a copy.
Attachments
Here's a another pic of sea dumped/recovered ordnance.
A number of 25pdrs covered in sea scale - Note 4 have plaster of Paris wrapped around them, this was to stop base plates coming off if they looked unstable during recovery.
A number of 25pdrs covered in sea scale - Note 4 have plaster of Paris wrapped around them, this was to stop base plates coming off if they looked unstable during recovery.