Some of my best friends are Sappers… (Sappers, Doctors, explosives and smoking dope)

My last post about the evolution of detonators involved digging around in some interesting history. I came across two fascinating reports about a British military engineering operation on the Hoogly River in Bengal in 1839 and 1840. The crucial piece about this story is that it straddled the invention of sub-aqua electrical initiation of gunpowder charges as used by Pasley with the earlier much less reliable igniferous technique, in this case using tubes of lead filled with gunpowder, soldered together.  The reports are found in the professional papers of the Royal Engineers, 1840 and Volume 8 of the Journal of the Asiatic society of Bengal, 1840. Go google if you want to read the originals.

The circumstances were that a ship, the Equitable, had sunk on a sandbank and was posing a hazard to shipping. So a young British military engineer, Captain Fitzgerald serving in the Bengal Engineers and some colleagues decided to blow it up, as is the wont of young Engineer officers.  In this case (and not for the last time), they were accompanied, encouraged and assisted by a young medical officer

So, this was a complex operation in a fast flowing and murky river. The Equitable had sunk in October 1839 in the middle of the shipping channel.  It was decided to use large gunpowder charges to break up the vessel.

Attempt 1, Igniferous – Failed.

The first attempt used a large waterproof cylinder full of gunpowder, ignited by means of a linen hose protected by lead piping.  The charge was an enormous 2400 pounds of powder.  The cylinder was an oak cask, bound with iron hoops, and plates of lead were carefully soldered onto it to seal it. The lead pipe protecting the powder train in the hose was made from four 15 feet lengths, soldered carefully together. The hose, one inch in diameter and containing gunpowder was then inserted into the pipe.  I have a description of the explosive chain between the main charge and the gunpowder hose, but have not yet found an associated diagram. so I can’t yet make head or tail of it.  The characteristics of a loose filled gunpowder hose clearly gave rise to challenges, in terms of transmission of the igniferous process in a vertical pipe. To manage this the hose was knotted every 6 inches, and held in place by fastening to a pewter wire inserted down the length of the pipe.

The seal between the powder hose in the pipe and the “primer cylinder” appears to have been achieved with brass fittings and leather gaskets.

The first attempt took place on December 6 1839, and the charge was lowered from a boat onto the deck of the sunken ship.  A “portfire” with an estimated burning time of 10 minutes fastened to the top of the gunpowder filled pipe, and the boat rowed away.  However the portfire failed to ignite the gunpowder train. A second portfire was set, and after a few minutes a muffled small explosion was heard, which was assessed as being the pipe rupturing. The main charge failed to ignite, and the pewter wire was ejected from the lead pipe. The pipe was raised and the rupture found at 25 feet from the top.

Attempt 2. Timed, electrical, using a watch – Successful

For the second attempt the Egineer team, encouraged by a medical doctor William O’Shaugnessy, and no doubt hearing of the success of Pasley, used an electrical initiation method.  O’Shaugnessy “read up” on electrical theory and designed and built his own galvanic battery, a description of which can be found in the reference. O’Shaugnessy conducted several experiments with his battery and platinum wire or platinum foil filaments, making the foil white heat with its electrcial resistance.  Working the physics, O’Shaughnessy established that with some careful design he could initiate the platinum filaments through bare un-insulated wire, under water, provided he kept the “legs” sufficiently far apart and the battery powerful enough.  He also designed a highly ingenious system for holding the filament in a sealed container using a breech of a gun.  Furthermore O’Shaugnessy then designed a remarkable timing initiation using a simple watch, copper “arms” and mercury filled tubes that the copper arms of the watch swept through that automatically “made safe” the firing circuit four minutes after initiation, so it would be safe to recover if the initiation failed.  It is clear from O’Shaugnessy’s report that he had no actual reports of Pasley’s successes other than newspaper reports, and so was working on first principles.

The second attempt took place on 14 December 1839, using this electrical mechanism, the battery and timer being in a small fishing boat above the charge. After setting charge, the demolition party consisting of Capts Fitzgerald and Debude, and Lieutenant Smith, accompanied by O’Shaughnessy and his assistant Mr Siddons, rowed quickly away.  Here’s O’Shaugnessy’s description of the subsequent explosion:

At the thirteenth minute a slight concussion was was felt in our boat, a sound like that of a very distant and heavy gun at sea was heard, and a huge hemispherical mass of discoloured water was thrown to the height of about 30 feet. From the centre of this mass there then rose slowly a and majestically a pillar of water, intermingled with foam and fragments of wreck , and preserving a cylindrical form till it reached an elevation of at least 150 feet. The column then subsided slowly, a wreath of foam and sparking jets of water following its descent, and rendering the spectacle one of indescribable beauty.

O’Shaughnessy later also significantly improved the manner in which the heated platinum filament ignites the charge. Previously the heated filament was embedded directly into gunpowder but O’Shaughnessy found that by embedding the filament in cotton which had been soaked in a solution of “purest saltpeter” effectively lowered the temperature that the filament was required to reach to cause ignition.

Attempt 3, Electrical using an improvised timing mechanism involving portfires and “string” – Failed

A third operation occurred a month later to remove a large part of the sunken wreck still remaining, and this too used a timing mechanism and electrical initiation, however the system failed to initiate due to damage to the priming charge where it was fastened to the main charge.  The sapper officers revised the mechanical timing mechanism of an adapted watch used by O’Shaughnessy and used portfires burning string at timed intervals to make and then break a circuit if detonation had not occurred – I see in the different reports of Capt Fitzgerald and Dr O’Shaughnessy a little irritation from the good doctor as to the contrived nature of this measure, which he regards as crude an unreliable, but which the sapper officers are very proud of (it saved the expense of a watch).

Attempt 4. Electrical using an improvised timing mechanism involving portfires and “string” – Successful

A fourth operation took place on 28th January 1840.  A successful explosion took place, breaking up the remaining part of the wreck and also killing two porpoises.

O’Shaughnessy went on to an interesting career where he was involved in pharmacology, the electric telegraph, encryption and most famously the introduction of cannabis to the UK for “therapeutic use”.

Blowing Up Railway Bridges in Virginia

I’ve found more fascinating US civil war stuff on IEDs.  General Herman Haupt was a Union general and engineer with specific responsibilities for both repairing and destroying railways as the operational circumstances demanded.  His reminiscences can be found in Archive.org.  Here’s a description he makes of how to make and place an IED, (a torpedo, in the parlance of the time) and a picture of the said IED.

 

 

Here’s another interesting extract:

The Curious Death of Louis Lingg

Louis Lingg was a self confessed German anarchist, found guilty of his involvement in the Haymarket bombing in Chicago in 1886 that killed a number of police officers. Lingg was one of a number of agitators charged and found guilty. It appears in retrospect that the charges against the other six conspirators were weak to say the least, but against Lingg I think there was some degree of convincing evidence that he built the IED. Not least because of witnesses who testified that they were given IEDs by Lingg, and further, that IEDs were discovered in Linggs lodgings.

Here’s two pictures of an IED discovered in Lingg’s apartment.

The Haymarket bomb is thought to have been of a similar spherical design, but slightly smaller in diameter. The devices were lead spheres filled with dynamite, and initiated by a detonator/blasting cap attached to a burning fuze, inserted into the sphere.

There’s an image here of other devices, all generally filled with dynamite with a burning fuze.

Between the trial and the planned execution two strange things occurred in Linggs prison cell in Cook County jail.

Firstly during a search of his cell on December 6th four IEDs were discovered hidden under his bed. From the description of the devices they appear to have been pipe bombs.  How the IEDs got into his prison cell is not known, but visitors to the prisoners had plenty of opportunity, reportedly, to hand over gifts.

Secondly, four days later, in the same cell, Lingg died. It’s the circumstances of his death that is intriguing.   His death is described as a suicide, but frankly I think that explanation is unconvincing.  The official story is that Lingg obtained a blasting cap, held it in his teeth and initiated it.  He died in some agony six hours later from his wounds, his jaw having been blown off.  It is believed that the blasting cap was smuggled into the jail by an accomplice, Dyer Lum, who hid it in a cigar.

Here’s my doubts and explanation:

Blasting caps can kill of course, but one could not be certain of death by initiating a detonator or blasting cap in one’s mouth.  In a sense this is proven by Lingg’s painful death.  Lingg probably knew that a detonator in his mouth would be an uncertain way of committing suicide.

Lum has been accused of planning to break the anarchists out of jail. Could the pipe bombs discovered 4 days earlier have been part of such a plot? Could this detonator have been associated with an attempt to break out of prison?

Crimping.  Detonators/blasting caps need crimping onto the fuze.  A crimping tool or pliers wouldn’t have been available in Lingg’s cell. Lingg wouldn’t have been the first person in history to resort to using his teeth to crimp a cap onto a fuze. He wouldn’t be the first person, either, for that simple action to go dreadfully wrong.

So, I am not convinced as to the intended suicide.  Was he instead preparing an IED in his cell, perhaps big enough to blow the lock on his cell door in an attempt to escape?  The truth is we will never know.

Ripples from Iran

Two IEDs in the last 24 hours, one detonating in India and one rendered safe in Georgia, both allegedly linked to Iran or possibly Hezbollah. In both cases the targets appear to be Israeli diplomatic officials and their families.  A colleague over at IMSL Insight discussing possible plots in Azerbaijan in a post a couple of days ago points out that the knee-jerk response of blaming Hezbollah, even on the anniversary of the assasination of Imad Mugniyeh, may be incorrect and suggesting the plot in Azerbaijan was directly the work of the Iranian regime.

The Georgian attack sounds as if it was simply a grenade fastened to the underside of the diplomats vehicle with, at a guess, a simple string to a wheel to pull the pin or the grenade from an enclosure.   The Indian attack could very well be the same sort of incident, looking at the damage to the car. (But note I haven’t yet the details to confirm this assessment). Both seem a little amateur for either Hezbollah or Iran.

Last month Gen. Masoud Jazayeri, the spokesman for Iran’s Joint Armed Forces Staff, was quoted by the semiofficial ISNA news agency last month as saying that Tehran was “reviewing the punishment” of “behind-the-scene elements” involved in the assassinations in Iran in the last few months, so a motive – retaliation- is clearly present.

Note that the vehicle attacked in India was bearing “diplomatic” plates.

100 years since British suffragettes used IEDs

The public perception of the suffragette movement, some 100 years ago, tends to see it as somewhat non-violent, all “handcuffing to the railings” and ladies throwing themselves in front of horses.  But a deeper dive into history shows that the suffragettes made use of IEDs between 1912 and 1914. Perhaps my wife who regards my blog with disdain as being “boring and irrelevant” : -)  will appreciate these stories.

A small number of the IEDs contained dynamite rather than gunpowder.  Here’s a selection of a the few dozen or so that I have found records of:

  • In 1913 suffragettes planted a 5lb gunpowder IED in a house at Walton Heath in Surrey belonging to politician Lloyd George, severely damaging it, and the components of a second IED were discovered in the house. The device was believed to have been very crude and initiated by a candle burning down to a metal can of gunpowder, surrounded by nails.  A similar device was used at a house not far away Walton-on-the-Hill three weeks later.
  • Also in 1913 a dynamite IED was planted in St Paul’s Cathedral, but it failed to detonate.  An EOD team from the Chief Inspector of Explosives led by Major Cooper-Key of the Royal Engineers dealt with the device (after it had been placed in a  bucket of water (!!).  It contained ¾ of a pound of nitroglycerine, in a metal case. A small adapted watch and a battery were connected to an electric detonator.  However the electrical connection was faulty and the device failed.
  • On April 14, 1913, a small timed device was found attached to railings outside the Bank of England.
  • In January 1914 two IEDs with burning fuzes were planted in the Kibble winter botanical gardens in Glasgow. A night-watchman, came across one device with the fuze burning. He bravely cut the fuze off with a pocketknife.  Seconds later a second device exploded causing considerable damage.
  • On 11 June 1914, an IED hidden in a lady’s handbag was placed on the back of “King Edwards chair” or the coronation throne  in Westminster Abbey , the throne built around the historical “Stone of Scone”.  The device exploded causing minor damage and reportedly contained steel nuts as shrapnel.

The suffragettes also used letter bombs (and acid devices) posted to intended victims, as well as a significant series of straightforward arson attacks.

 

 

Update there’s a later post containing a more comprehensive list of suffragette explosive devices.

Close Me
Looking for Something?
Search:
Post Categories: