Weapon Technical Intelligence in 1855

I’ve found a very interesting print of a Russian Infernal Machine (i.e. an “IED”) from 1855 from the Crimea, with an interesting back story, demonstrating once again that technical exploitation of IEDs as part of “Weapons Technical Intelligence” in nothing new.

The print is shown below.  It was drawn by a British Naval artist, Oswald Walter Brierly who was attached to the British Naval fleet at Crimea as an artist in residence.

In May 1855 British forces, assisted by Turkish and French contingents, conducted a large scale raid to seize the Russian held port of Kertch.  They destroyed several magazines, seized weapons and found this IED in the Dockyard.  The Dockyard was clearly being used to manufacture a number of devices, ammunition and other munitions.  The device was recovered and examined carefully along with other material.

From a military perspective the raid turned into something of an embarrassment – although it achieved its aims, the behaviour of the Turkish and British troops was appalling as they committed rape, pillaged the town and destroyed everything they saw.   From a technical perspective the device is interesting as it shows, I believe, an evolution from the designs of Immanuel Nobel and Professor Jacobi found in the Baltic and seized earlier by the British

a. The Jacobi Fuze (designed, I believe, by Immanuel Nobel, father of Alfred Nobel

b. Improvised Sea mines from the Baltic – 1854

c. American WTI in the Crimean War 

From a separate source I have the following description of the device shown in the image above, which consisted of six of the charges shown, operating in a chain:

It consisted of six vessels of wood, shaped like two cones placed base to base, each 21/2 feet long by 11/2 feet in diameter at the base, and of several similar vessels of a conical form, and of equal dimensions, loaded to float with the apex downward, the base being provided with a cover to fall on a prepared fuse and ignite the charge upon contact with any floating object.  These vessels were attached to each other by wires, and hen placed in the water would look like a line of buoy; but the wires were carried to the poles of a galvanic battery within the Russian magazine on shore.

The diagram above shows an electrical initiator in the upper part of the device and describes a “gutta percha” seal system to protect it from water ingress.

I think this then is an evolution of the devices seen before – using a “Jacobi fuze” as a contact initiator in the same manner as the devices described in the links above, but having a secondary, electrical initiation system as an alternate. Thus, they are one step more sophisticated in combing the two.

Parisian Infernal Machines from about the time of Les Miserables

I’ve posted articles before about IED attacks on Napoleon Bonaparte in 1800 and on Emperor Napoleon III, in 1858, both attacks on their carriages as they went to the opera, along predictable routes in Paris.

There was however another famous “terrorist” attack between these dates on the French King Louis-Philippe, on 28 July 1835, but on his way to a parade in Paris, and not with an IED – here’s the story and the device used to attack him.

The attack occurred on the Boulevard de Temple in Paris. It was mounted by a Corsican terrorist/criminal/rebel, Giuseppe Mario Fieschi.  The device that he built with two accomplices from the Société des Droits de l’Homme is interesting. Reports at the time called the device a “machine infernale” which is the phrase often used to describe IEDs of the time. But this was no IED.  An image of the actual device, now in a french museum is shown below.  It consists of 25 gun barrels mounted on a wooden frame with the 25 barrels pointing slightly downward . The “machine’ was placed at the open window overlooking the route to be taken by the King and fellow dignitaries as they went to inspect a parade of troops.

The barrels were over charged with powder and it is thought up to three musket balls per barrel. As a result there were a number of cases of the breech exploding during the attack – I think you can see this on barrels 2, 14 and 20, numbered from the left.  One of these caused injury to Fieschi as he initiated the device.  I’m not sure of the exact initiation technique, probably Fieschi using a naked flame and swiping across the fire holes at the rear of each barrel. The injured Fieshci was arrested as he fled the scene, his wounds tended, and then after his trial his wounded head was removed from his body by the infamous guillotine.

In terms of target effect, the King was not killed but only slightly wounded. However the 75 musket balls caused carnage and 18 people were killed including Marshall Mortier.  Reports of the time make much of the dastardly deed and the ingenious machine (note that there were seven other plots against the king discovered that year alone – however it was not perhaps such an innovative attack as it might first appear. There are many references to multi barrel firearms going back to the 14th Century.  Around 1500 Leonardo da Vinci had designed similar systems for use in battle, and they were used on a number of occasions in the 17th century. They are referred to as an “orgue” – or organ, given the similarity to the multi-barrel and an organ.

Leonardo Da Vinci’s designs for multi barrel weapons

The mystery of “the man with no history”, other spies and Emmet’s rockets and IEDs

I’ve been on the trail of a mystery and found some interesting descriptions of Emmet’s IEDs from (see earlier posts).   In the attempted uprising in Dublin in 1803, Emmet designed some “exploding beams” as referred to as “Emmet’s infernals”. Here’s a description of how they were made:

Mr. Emmet had several square beams, twelve feet long, sent to the depot at Thomas Street, which he intended to have got bored with a small pump auger, not in the centre but nearer one side, and the hole was to be perforated to within one foot of the end, and then filled with powder till it came to a foot from the mouth. The hole was then stopped with a plug a foot long, of the same diameter, well spiked to prevent it from coming out. A touch-hole was to be perforated in the middle of the beam on the side which the bore approached the nearest, and a pivot set on each end on which common car wheels were placed and turned. Two cases five feet long each, filled with small stones and combustibles were to be placed at the top of the beam. The explosion of this machine placed as an obstacle before the enemy must have a terrible effect.

I’ve also found a description of how the rockets were constructed in the concealed workshops behind false walls.  There is no mention of the exploding “warhead’ which I also assumed was present.  Perhaps I might reassess that assumption – at least some Rockets used by Tipu Sultan in the Mysore campaign a few years earlier relied on blades attached to the front of the rocket, and maybe didn’t have an exploding warhead.

Emmet assigned to a Mr Johnstone the task of preparing the rockets and left him very detailed instructions.  Mr Johnstone is described as being some sort of expert – crucially it is said that he had previously served with the East India Company and perhaps made rockets for them – this would have been about the time that The East India company was fighting the Mysore wars against Tipu Sultan, who were using rockets against the Company.  Perhaps Johnstone was involved in making copies for the East India Company and brought his expertise to Dublin.

Here’s the description from a primary source:

There was a man who went by the name of Johnstone who had spent several years in the East India service, where he had frequently been employed in preparing fire-works. Perhaps this man with Robert Emmet were the real inventors of those rockets, latterly universally known under the appellation of Congreve rockets — be that as it may, I think it only right to relate here all I know of the matter. At Mr. Emmet’s request I called on Mr. M. the gunsmith, and showed him a strong piece of paper shaped in a certain way, which was to serve as a model to have tubes twenty inches long, two and a-half inches diameter, cut out of strong sheet iron; as soldering would be liable to melt with the fire, they were to be clasped and well hammered on the joints, which would render them quite solid. The sloped shape at one end formed a point like an arrow. The gunsmith soon brought me a tube made after the model with which both Mr. Emmet and Johnstone were well pleased. Consequently I had to tell him to have several hundreds of the same description made as soon as possible.

Johnstone set to work mixing the ingredients to fill those tubes, composed of powder, nitre, sulphur, etc., and when this stuff was prepared, it had the appearance of wet mortar. But everything was done according to Mr. Emmet’s instructions; he consulted a scientific work respecting the way such materials should be prepared, and even the way the tubes were to be filled, the size of each portion to be put in at a time, the weight of the hammer, the plug to drive it down, the number of strokes to be given before another portion was put in.  An iron needle was placed in the centre of the tube around which the mortar was tempered, and when the needle was drawn out, the hole was then filled with powder. Thus prepared, they were to be fastened with strong wire to a slight pole about eight feet long at one end; and from the other end a cord prepared as a fuse would convey the fire to the mouth of the tube. A small trestle four feet high was provided on which the pole was to rest to be poised and sent off in the direction of the enemy.

Here’s a description of a trial firing

Johnstone, who was making the rockets, brought one of them ready prepared, so we all went into the fields; that is, Mr. Emmet, Russell, Dowdall, Hamilton, etc. The rocket was made fast to a pole with wire, and rested on a trestle ; the match being put to it, it went off like a thunderbolt, carrying the pole along with it, and throwing flames and fire behind, as it advanced, and when it fell, it went on tearing up the ground till the last of the matter with which it was filled was completely consumed. Mr. Emmet and Johnstone were quite satisfied with the effect it produced, and they decided that all the rockets or tubes should be prepared and filled in the same manner; the cord which was placed along the pole to serve as a train or match did not communicate the fire quick enough, but that was easily remedied at the depot by preparing others with stronger liquid, etc.

Now Johnston is an interesting character and aside from his supposed service with the East India Company is described as “a man with no past”. According to one report Johnstone was working in one of the rocket making workshops when an “accident” occurred and it blew up, blowing the roof off the building. This caused Emmet to launch his rebellion prematurely.  He then disappears from the scene.  Emmet’s associates accused him of being a British spy who blew up the workshop on the orders of British spymasters, citing his lack of history, his disappearance and the fact that the British did not investigate the explosion as significant factors.

Another, conflicting, report says that the explosion as caused by a Michael McDaniel – who was drinking at the time and accidentally initiated a fuze he was preparing. This report suggests that after the explosion he was tasked by Emmet with buying blunderbusses for the rebels. Emmet gave him “60 guineas” for the purchase, but McDaniel disappeared with the money never to be seen again.

Another of the rebels involved Pat Fenerty became a “super-grass” and gave evidence against the rebels, before ending up working Woolwich on the British Congreve rockets.

Complicated, but certainly indicative of a disastrous rebellion riven with incompetence and British spies.

The Russian Jacobi Fuze – 1854

I’ve written before about the “Jacobi” fuze, used in Russian sea mines and early land mines in the Crimean War in the 1854s. Although called a “Jacobi” fuze, they were I think actually designed by Immanuel Nobel (father of Alfred Nobel).   I’ve found some clearer diagrams of the sea mine and the fusing mechanism.

Confederate IED organization

Careful reading of the excellent book “The sinking of the USS Cairo” by John Wideman, has allowed me to piece together some of the Confederate “IED” organization in the US Civil War and pull together some threads of incidents I’ve previously blogged about. Here’s a simplified summary with a series of links to the relevant posts

The leader of many such IED activities was Brigadier Gabriel Raines. Raines’s interest in IEDs went back to the Second Seminole Indian war in Florida, where he deployed IEDs against the Seminole Indians in 1840.

Gabriel Raines

Later, when the US civil war began he rapidly proposed the use of similar devices, and used them successfully in the retreat after the Battle of Williamsburg in 1862.

This book is a reprint of Raines technical notes about a number of munitions and IEDs.

Raines oversaw the Confederate use of such devices from the Confederate War department’s Torpedo Bureau (“Torpedo”) being a term that then covered a range of land and sea explosive devices).  At the beginning of the war, Raines’s devices were very much improvised, but eventually volume requirements and industrial processes evolved such that eventually many can be considered manufactured munitions.  Within the confederate forces the use of explosive devices was broad ranging and what follows is not the sum total, but there appear to have been two units.

The first was the Confederate States Navy submarine Battery service, under Hunter Davidson which appears to have been responsible for coastal defence sea mines and the like, often electrically initiated.  In  particular this unit had significant success on the James River. Later in the war attention turned to spar torpedo boats (boats with an explosive charge attached to a long spar which were used to ram enemy boats) . Hunter Davidson is an interesting character who I’ll write about in the future.  Here’s an angry letter he wrote in 1874 when some impertinent Brirtish Engineer officers claimed to have invented electrically initiated sea mines

The second unit, was commanded by the one-armed perpetrator of the sinking of the USS Cairo on the Yazoo River, Zere McDaniel

Zere McDaniel was responsible for

  •  Riverine IEd operations such as the sinking of the Cairo
  •  “Land torpedoes” in defence around Richmond, that used artillery shells adapted to detonate when stood upon (designed by Raines)
  •  “Behind the lines” IED and associated sabotage and intelligence operations.

The latter enterprises were as head of a Confederate secret unit “ Company A, Confederate secret service. The unit was formed in 1864 according to instructions that can be seen on this web page – a lovely document!

Some examples of the “behind the lines” operations included the explosion at City Point by Maxwell who reported directly to McDaniel and who used a time bomb or “horological torpedo”

Attacks on trains by Zere McDaniel himself using an IED which I’ll discuss in a future blog once I have found more detail.  Suffice to say that the initiation mechanism appears to have been an improvised wire hook which protruded from under the track and “hooked on” to the front of a passing train, probably pulling a friction initiator.

The confederate use of IEDs appears to have been positively encouraged and a secret law was passed awarding a bounty to confederate supporters who designed IEDs and used them to attack Union forces, awarding the designer 50% of the value of the target. McDaniel himself tried to claim for his attack on the Cairo, but failed in his appeal.   In 1864 McDaniel reported that his unit were engaged in continuous active operations , with elements operating “behind enemy lines” in Kentucky, Virginia and elsewhere

I see interesting parallels between the innovative use of munitions and explosive devices in the US civil war and the remarkable inventiveness of Syrian opposition forces in today’s Syrian civil war.

Close Me
Looking for Something?
Search:
Post Categories: