Military forensics: a reader’s query

I have frequently noted my pleasure in regularly receiving “out of the blue” comments and e-mails – I find myself in contact with all kinds of people from around the world with whom I would never have otherwise intersected, on an amazing range of topics, many of which are completely new to me. All of this because of a mutual interest in all things arenaceous.

Here’s a case in point – together with a question for anyone who might be able to shed light on this. The unique nature of any particular family of sand grains from a specific location, be it a river sand bank or a coastal beach, has long provided forensic science with a tool for location identification. This has not only been applied to any number of cases of criminal forensics, but also, for example, to archaeological and military investigations. I described the classic military example in Sand:

In late 1944, balloons 9 meters (30 ft) in diameter appeared in the skies above the United States. Landing from the West Coast to Michigan, they carried a deadly cargo: incendiary bombs. Although the only casualties over the following months were, tragically, members of a Sunday school group attempting to retrieve one that had landed, the potential danger to life, towns, and forests was considerable. It was apparent that the weapons had blown in from the Pacific, but where had they been launched? The devices had an automatic altitude-regulation system, releasing hydrogen or ballast to maintain height. The ballast bags were filled with sand. The U.S. Geological Survey’s Military Geology Unit, established in 1942, was tasked with identifying the sand. The family of grains was consistent from one retrieved ballast sample to the next, and unique. Distinctive forams and other microscopic shells, together with small amounts of unusual mineral grains in among the granite debris, correlated precisely with beach sands described in prewar geological reports from two locations on the east coast of Japan. Air photographs identified hydrogen production plants at these locations, which were then targeted and destroyed.

Recently, a reader of this blog, a self-confessed “WWII history buff” sent me a series of photographs and asked for my views on whether there was any chance of figuring out the provenance of the sand grains shown at the head of this post. And where did these grains find themselves used as a military application? As camouflage on a German helmet:

The military unit would seem to be a naval artillery group, and France would be the likely origin. But does anyone have any ideas as to a more specific location? SIGNATURE

Comments

Karen (2011-08-01):

Mmmm, interesting premise – though I don’t have anything useful to add.
No Sunday Sand post? Must feed the addiction, you know…

Sandglass (2011-08-02):

Thanks, Karen and apologies for failing to sustain you! My schedule at the moment is somewhat chaotic and, try as I may, keeping up the postings presents a bit of a challenge. However, my high-powered digital microscope has now arrived and I am working on making best use of it - results will be forthcoming…
Also, there’s a major post on the mineral sands of Bangka Island coming up that is taking a fair amount of work - your patience and dedication continue to be appraciated!

Alastair Ruffekk (2011-08-11):

I am a forensic geologist and yes we provenance sand regularly. we need to have the sample in our hands, as the photos could be of a path, a beach, anything. I’d be happy to take a look. I have some nice articles I can send, and our methods as well as the Japanese incendiary balloons story can be found in our book ‘Geoforensics’ by Ruffell and McKinley. Geology and topography are key to many military campaigns, from planning desert invasions around oases, to the strength of beaches taking armour, to plotting defensive positions in Ypres or at the Battle of Hastings. in fact I am hard put to think of any terrestrial battle where geology and geography were not significant. possibly Moscow where it was the weather not the land!

Sandglass (2011-08-16):

Alastair - many thanks for your comment. I have e-mailed the helmet owner to make sure he is aware of it. I am, not surprisingly, in full agreement on the fundamental link between geology and military battlegrounds - Gettysburg is one of the classic examples.
And I have consulted your book on many occasions!
Thanks
Michael

Richard Bready (2011-08-17):

The fusen bakudan balloons later gave rise to another classic anecdote of (nongeological) research:
John McPhee recalls a paragraph in one of his articles that posed a challenge for a “New Yorker” researcher. Physicist John Wheeler had told McPhee about a Japanese balloon landing on a nuclear reactor at the Hanford nuclear site in 1944 or 1945. If Wheeler’s story could be confirmed, it would appear in the magazine. If not verified, the story would be removed from the article. After calling sources across the U.S., the researcher located a Hanford manager whose first reaction to the question was, “How did you know that?” He then corrected the story: the balloon had actually landed on a power line to the reactor.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/02/09/090209fa_fact_mcphee#ixzz1VGubA7VL
also reprinted in McPhee’s “Silk Parachute”

Andrew Statezny (2011-09-08):

Really crurious to hear the story behind that helmet. The metal looks pretty awesome, after these years.

Originally published at: https://throughthesandglass.typepad.com/through_the_sandglass/2011/07/military-forensics-a-readers-query.html