punko as much as it galls me to say, at the north of the peninsula (ie at Gallipoli), the command was actually Australian. The British commanded the campaign overall, and most of their troops (my great grandfather included) fought in the southern end of the peninsula, around Suvla Bay. Overall strategy was determined by British high command, and it's convenient for Aussies to blame them for the problems that occurred up north at ANZAC on the Brits, but in fairness, our generals were, for the most part, just as clueless as theirs. As an Aussie I often hear criticism not only of the generals, but of the British troops as a whole; there is a myth and a misconception that British soldiers sat around drinking tea whilst AU and NZ troops were dying....which isn't really the case, and, as a first gen Aussie (my parents emigrated in the mid 60's, about 9 yrs before I was born) I always point out that there was only one beach in the British sector that had unopposed landing. The others were slaughterhouses, with incredibly heavy casualties. Thankfully my GGF was not in the first wave; if he was, I would not likely be here. He was a reinforcement, sent in shortly afterwards. (my gran was born in Feb '16, and he wanted to call her 'Dardenella'. LOL. She ended up with the much more sensible name 'Mabel'. )

mrsnowmeiser Your thinking of hollow points and full metal jacked rounds are used just because they don't fragment so much, causing more survivable wounds. (yes I know that's oxymoronic)  

mrsnowmeiser In World War II only about 1/3 of Germany was mechanized, more horses died in WWII than solders.  

mrsnowmeiser Well, I was doing a quick bit of research on this. From what I saw, the expert consensus is that the bullets did collide but, due to the absence of rifling marks on the lighter bullet, that bullet probably wasn't in flight. Some suggested that it may have been in a soldier's ammo belt when hit. An amazing battlefield find nonetheless.