Re: (TFT) Guns and Armour Penetration.

["Charles Gadda" <cgadda@earthlink.net>]

> Rather hard to do since this work has been out of print since 1919 (!)
Fancy
> that...
>
> An Amazon search turned up nothing. A Yahoo and Google search (+"helmets
and
> body armour in modern warfare" bashford dean) turned up exactly two
> references (his name is Dean Bashford, not Bashford Dean apparently) --
>
> Bashford, Dean: Helmets and body armour in modern warfare, Defense
> Intelligence Agency, 1919.
>
> I am unable to find a copy of this ancient tome, but it is no longer
> protected by copyright (it probably never was, since it was apparently a
US
> government publication). Therefore, please feel free to scan the relevant
> sections and email them to me. Alternatively, you could perhaps suggest a
> more modern work that supports your apparent contention that armor offered
> considerable protection from firearms through 1730-ish.
>
Actually, the copy I have is a 1977 limited edition reprint (with some added
material over the 1919 release) that I got on eBay, mostly by accident. I
had thought it something else, was inititially disappointed when I realise I
had won (the book was not cheap, $75, I think) but was plesantly surprised
when I received it, since it discussed in detail a number of topics on
ballistic considerations that I was, at the time, looking for. The book was
published right after WWI and was a detailed technical treatise on armour
used in WWI (with an introduction to early armour) and was really an
investigation into improving body armour and helmets for modern warfare.
Which makes it a great work since it talks about all sorts of real,
controlled tests of guns vs. various armours, along with armour thickness
and metallurgical analysis. As for my contention, this admittedly late date
comes from a footnote in the text of Dean's work, pg 44:-

"As late as 1734 the bullet test was still in use for proving both back and
front plates, as shown in the inventory of the Armory of the Chateau de la
Rocca: breastplates bear the marks shown in testing bullets, in the second
half of the eighteenth century, as in the armour museum in Turin, of Charles
Emmanuel III (d. 1773) and Victor Amadeus IV (d. 1796)"

Further, pages 51-63 are particularly illuminating, essentially stating that
armour was discarded mostly owing to changes in military tactics, which
neccesitated manuever over long distances. Indeed the author cites evidence
for armor even during the American Revolution and Civil War! Finally, the
chapter closes out with a mention of the Australian bandit Ned Kelly, who
had improvised a crude bullet proof armor for shooting it out with the law.
In the end, his suit was never penetrated, but his unarmoured legs were shot
out from underneath him.

As for availability, I must say, and I apologise in advance, but you do not
look very hard, I am afraid. If you go to www.bookfinder.com and type in the
title, you will find over a dozen copies available. It is by no means as
rare as you think - and you can pick it up for under $50.

By the by, the author's name really is "Bashford Dean" - it not only says so
on the cover, but I even read the introduction signed by the author, who was
curator of the Department of Arms and Armour at the Metropolitan Museum of
Art, which clearly states his name.
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"