Been play a lot of Sid Meier's Gettysburg! recently and have a question about the muzzle loader black powder guns. I remember reading somewhere the quick swab done during the average loading drill is insufficient to clear all the fouling and residue in the weapon. Over time this builds up and the weapon becomes less accurate (and I assume non-functional at a certain point). My question was did soldiers have a drill to fall back from the main line after so many shots so they could give the weapon a good cleaning? If so, how many shots was optimal before fouling really effected the weapon?
I realize this cover a large time span and many possible countries, so there can be a wide variety of answers due to technology and doctrine.
Not sure, but I would think they'd just keep firing until they had a misfire.
Haven't played that game in ages, but I still remember the Southern dude saying "This is yo' best brigaaade." :)
The average soldier probably didn't carry enough ammo to have to worry about it. I have no idea though.
Quote from: derspiess on May 17, 2011, 04:42:05 PM
Haven't played that game in ages, but I still remember the Southern dude saying "This is yo' best brigaaade." :)
THANKS A LOT. Now I want to play.
MEW.
Muzzle loader blackpowder rifles aren't really that accurate anyway. I have fired them but not more than like 2-3 times at once so I don't know how quickly black powder residue builds up or at what point it becomes a problem. I would assume they probably cleaned it between every engagement. I clean my rifle after every shoot even though I probably don't need to... it's always pretty damn dirty tho.
Quote from: Caliga on May 17, 2011, 05:13:03 PM
I clean my rifle after every shoot even though I probably don't need to... it's always pretty damn dirty tho.
Raz, should be swabbed after a few shots. BP is dirty and accuracy will fall off even more without a swab after every couple of shots. Real BP is dirty and highly corosive. Complete cleaning of the weapon after an engagment would have been a must.
Cal, I hope your throughly cleaning after BP shooting, unless you are using certain BP dirvetives that are non-corosive nowadays.
Oh, and rifled civil war muzzleloaders could be acceptionally accurate. Dont confuse a rifled muzzleloader in the hands of a recruit to one being handled by a well trained soldier.
Minié bullet
Also, pay attention to lead fouling. The "patch" did have a use. Read about the "Paper patch bullets" and "lubed bullets" and why.
I believe they even used a swipe of animal fat concoctions over the cylinders of a BP cap and ball revolver. I know I use crisco instead of the knewer lubed wads.
Forgtive my spelling I just woke up.
I think a swab or two was part of the standard reloading drill, but I was led to believe that wouldn't be enough. The gun can lock up or worse after repeated usage. I was wondering if after say 10-20 shots a line would fall back and perhaps another one take it's place. Or maybe just charge (especially in earlier eras).
Probably something Grumbler would know.
Quote from: Razgovory on May 17, 2011, 08:11:31 PM
Probably something Grumbler would know.
He was with Earl Van Dorn when he got shot.
Quote from: Razgovory on May 17, 2011, 08:11:31 PM
I think a swab or two was part of the standard reloading drill, but I was led to believe that wouldn't be enough. The gun can lock up or worse after repeated usage. I was wondering if after say 10-20 shots a line would fall back and perhaps another one take it's place. Or maybe just charge (especially in earlier eras).
Probably something Grumbler would know.
There's not that many moving parts on a Civil War rifle. They were perecussion ignited also.
"The British army adopted it in 1834 after comparing the results of 6,000 test rounds fired from flintlock and percussion firearms. The flintlocks misfired 922 times (15 percent of the time), while only 36 (0.6 percent) of the percussion weapons misfired."
If that helps
I was just reading about this, in a Bruce Catton book. He mentions it in a couple of places. One of the citations is "The History of the 24th Michigan of the Iron Brigade", which is available on Google Books, and says on page 243, about the battle of Spotsylvania Court House:
QuoteStanding in deep mud and keeping up a constant fire for hours and till after midnight, the men's muskets became so foul that details were made to clean the guns while their comrades kept up the fire. The men were so weary (having been under fire night and day for week) that some lay down in the mud under the enemy's fire slept and soundly amid the thunders of battle, despite all efforts to arouse them During the night the remnant of the Twenty fourth used 5,000 rounds of cartridges at this spot.
Quote from: 11B4V on May 17, 2011, 07:45:21 PM
Cal, I hope your throughly cleaning after BP shooting, unless you are using certain BP dirvetives that are non-corosive nowadays.
I don't own a blackpowder rifle, I've just fired them a bunch of times. It was like a dude handed me one and said "load it and fire" and then I handed it back.
I am an honorary citizen of West Point, Kentucky and member of the Order of Kentucky Rifles because I loaded and fired a Kentucky rifle in less than some time limit (forget what it was) and hit a target at 30 yards. :cool:
Quote from: Caliga on May 17, 2011, 08:50:42 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on May 17, 2011, 07:45:21 PM
Cal, I hope your throughly cleaning after BP shooting, unless you are using certain BP dirvetives that are non-corosive nowadays.
I don't own a blackpowder rifle, I've just fired them a bunch of times. It was like a dude handed me one and said "load it and fire" and then I handed it back.
I am an honorary citizen of West Point, Kentucky and member of the Order of Kentucky Rifles because I loaded and fired a Kentucky rifle in less than some time limit (forget what it was) and hit a target at 30 yards. :cool:
Cool beans. I havent had anytime to do any shooting lately. Havent even started reloading any BP pistol rounds this year. BP loading process is a little different than loading with smokeless powders.
In addition to the Kentucky rifle replica, I've fired a repro Springfield 1855 and one other one at another Civil War reenactors event (might have also been a Springfield), and then one out in New Mexico that was at like a recreated fur trappers' camp... no idea what model it was.
Generally speaking I think I prefer firing my moden smokeless semiautomatic with 25 round magazines. :)
Someone writes about men peeing into the musket barrels to loosen up the gunk and allow them to keep firing. Can't recall the book or circumstances though - could have been Napoleonic. At a guess, Swords Around a throne, which has those kinds of details.
Quote from: grumbler on May 17, 2011, 09:06:57 PM
Someone writes about men peeing into the musket barrels to loosen up the gunk and allow them to keep firing.
Ewww. :x I wouldn't want to be shot by that musket.
Is there a musket you would want to be shot by? :hmm:
Quote from: Caliga on May 17, 2011, 09:15:44 PM
Is there a musket you would want to be shot by? :hmm:
:whoosh:
Quote from: grumbler on May 17, 2011, 09:06:57 PM
Someone writes about men peeing into the musket barrels to loosen up the gunk and allow them to keep firing. Can't recall the book or circumstances though - could have been Napoleonic. At a guess, Swords Around a throne, which has those kinds of details.
Doesnt sound to far out there. Battlefield expediants.
Quote from: Caliga on May 17, 2011, 09:01:06 PM
and then one out in New Mexico that was at like a recreated fur trappers' camp... no idea what model it was. :)
Was that at Philmont by any chance?
Quote from: citizen k on May 17, 2011, 10:15:28 PM
Was that at Philmont by any chance?
Correct. :alberta:
Quote from: DGuller on May 17, 2011, 09:10:26 PM
Quote from: grumbler on May 17, 2011, 09:06:57 PM
Someone writes about men peeing into the musket barrels to loosen up the gunk and allow them to keep firing.
Ewww. :x I wouldn't want to be shot by that musket.
:lol:
I remember reading how an average soldier, doing the time of muzzle loading rifles, rarely firer more than 5 shots doing a battle as they usually would try and force an end to most engagement with a bayonet change...
In the English Civil War Society we'd clean out our muskets after a battle. There's simply no time during. But for misfires and blockages you use a corkscrew device called a worming rod to root out unfired black powder and wadding.
BTW, in a rapid-fire situation, you simple bang the end of the musket down to ram the ball home. Less powerful but keeps the shot rate up.
Quote from: Brazen on May 18, 2011, 09:23:24 AM
BTW, in a rapid-fire situation, you simple bang the end of the musket down to ram the ball home. Less powerful but keeps the shot rate up.
Probably not possible with a rifled musket though.
Quote from: Brazen on May 18, 2011, 09:23:24 AM
BTW, in a rapid-fire situation, you simple bang the end of the musket down to ram the ball home. Less powerful but keeps the shot rate up.
I learned that watching "Sharpe's Rifles" when he trains the raw recruits with their smooth bore muskets. :blush:
Quote from: Berkut on May 18, 2011, 09:24:27 AM
Quote from: Brazen on May 18, 2011, 09:23:24 AM
BTW, in a rapid-fire situation, you simple bang the end of the musket down to ram the ball home. Less powerful but keeps the shot rate up.
Probably not possible with a rifled musket though.
Apparently it could be done if you left off the patch of greased leather that the bullet was wrapped in.
At least, if the Sharpe series counts as an authority. :D
Quote from: Berkut on May 18, 2011, 09:24:27 AM
Quote from: Brazen on May 18, 2011, 09:23:24 AM
BTW, in a rapid-fire situation, you simple bang the end of the musket down to ram the ball home. Less powerful but keeps the shot rate up.
Probably not possible with a rifled musket though.
Definitely not possible with a pre-1850s rifled musket. It took a lot of effort to push the tight-fitting round ball down the barrel. Also I guess not possible with Minie balls, since they were still somewhat snug, though not nearly as tight.
Quote from: Razgovory on May 17, 2011, 08:11:31 PM
I think a swab or two was part of the standard reloading drill, but I was led to believe that wouldn't be enough. The gun can lock up or worse after repeated usage. I was wondering if after say 10-20 shots a line would fall back and perhaps another one take it's place. Or maybe just charge (especially in earlier eras).
Probably something Grumbler would know.
how many shots did they fire before charging with bayonnettes, or before the ennemy lines in front of them collapse?
Presumably, they'd fire 3-4 times each (with 3 ranks, let's say, 9-12 volleys). You fire 9 times, concentrated fire, at a distance where you can see your opponent and people still close in on each other. I don't think they would fire for 1hr or so.
Quote from: viper37 on May 18, 2011, 09:53:46 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on May 17, 2011, 08:11:31 PM
I think a swab or two was part of the standard reloading drill, but I was led to believe that wouldn't be enough. The gun can lock up or worse after repeated usage. I was wondering if after say 10-20 shots a line would fall back and perhaps another one take it's place. Or maybe just charge (especially in earlier eras).
Probably something Grumbler would know.
how many shots did they fire before charging with bayonnettes, or before the ennemy lines in front of them collapse?
Presumably, they'd fire 3-4 times each (with 3 ranks, let's say, 9-12 volleys). You fire 9 times, concentrated fire, at a distance where you can see your opponent and people still close in on each other. I don't think they would fire for 1hr or so.
Uhh, I can think of quite a few civil war battles where battle lines fired at one another for more than an hour. Obviously this would be in some kind of cover, but it certainly could (and did) happen. In fact, I would guess that most ACW civil war battles had tactical engagements decided by weight of fire/morale, not by a melee. IIRC, most of the time when attacking you would not charge until you had already broken the enemy line by weight of fire.
Quote from: Berkut on May 18, 2011, 10:04:18 AM
I would guess that most ACW civil war battles had tactical engagements decided by weight of fire/morale, not by a melee. IIRC, most of the time when attacking you would not charge until you had already broken the enemy line by weight of fire.
IIRC it was similar in Napoleonic warfare. Melees were less frequent than Hollywood would make us think.
Quote from: Berkut on May 18, 2011, 10:04:18 AM
IIRC, most of the time when attacking you would not charge until you had already broken the enemy line by weight of fire.
Correct... unless you were commanded by John Bell Hood. :Embarrass:
Quote from: Caliga on May 18, 2011, 11:22:25 AM
Quote from: Berkut on May 18, 2011, 10:04:18 AM
IIRC, most of the time when attacking you would not charge until you had already broken the enemy line by weight of fire.
Correct... unless you were commanded by John Bell Hood. :Embarrass:
A lot of Squee in that one.
Quote from: Berkut on May 18, 2011, 10:04:18 AM
Quote from: viper37 on May 18, 2011, 09:53:46 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on May 17, 2011, 08:11:31 PM
I think a swab or two was part of the standard reloading drill, but I was led to believe that wouldn't be enough. The gun can lock up or worse after repeated usage. I was wondering if after say 10-20 shots a line would fall back and perhaps another one take it's place. Or maybe just charge (especially in earlier eras).
Probably something Grumbler would know.
how many shots did they fire before charging with bayonnettes, or before the ennemy lines in front of them collapse?
Presumably, they'd fire 3-4 times each (with 3 ranks, let's say, 9-12 volleys). You fire 9 times, concentrated fire, at a distance where you can see your opponent and people still close in on each other. I don't think they would fire for 1hr or so.
Uhh, I can think of quite a few civil war battles where battle lines fired at one another for more than an hour. Obviously this would be in some kind of cover, but it certainly could (and did) happen. In fact, I would guess that most ACW civil war battles had tactical engagements decided by weight of fire/morale, not by a melee. IIRC, most of the time when attacking you would not charge until you had already broken the enemy line by weight of fire.
At the corn field in Antietam didn't the two lines hammer each other for half an hour in the open? And from a ridiculous short range too IIRC. (Been a few years since I read Sears excellent book on the battle)
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 18, 2011, 11:32:00 AM
Quote from: Berkut on May 18, 2011, 10:04:18 AM
Quote from: viper37 on May 18, 2011, 09:53:46 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on May 17, 2011, 08:11:31 PM
I think a swab or two was part of the standard reloading drill, but I was led to believe that wouldn't be enough. The gun can lock up or worse after repeated usage. I was wondering if after say 10-20 shots a line would fall back and perhaps another one take it's place. Or maybe just charge (especially in earlier eras).
Probably something Grumbler would know.
how many shots did they fire before charging with bayonnettes, or before the ennemy lines in front of them collapse?
Presumably, they'd fire 3-4 times each (with 3 ranks, let's say, 9-12 volleys). You fire 9 times, concentrated fire, at a distance where you can see your opponent and people still close in on each other. I don't think they would fire for 1hr or so.
Uhh, I can think of quite a few civil war battles where battle lines fired at one another for more than an hour. Obviously this would be in some kind of cover, but it certainly could (and did) happen. In fact, I would guess that most ACW civil war battles had tactical engagements decided by weight of fire/morale, not by a melee. IIRC, most of the time when attacking you would not charge until you had already broken the enemy line by weight of fire.
At the corn field in Antietam didn't the two lines hammer each other for half an hour in the open? And from a ridiculous short range too IIRC. (Been a few years since I read Sears excellent book on the battle)
Sounds right. But even just looking at Gettysburg you saw several examples of ranged combat that lasted much more than a few volleys each way.
Quote from: Syt on May 18, 2011, 10:08:00 AM
Quote from: Berkut on May 18, 2011, 10:04:18 AM
I would guess that most ACW civil war battles had tactical engagements decided by weight of fire/morale, not by a melee. IIRC, most of the time when attacking you would not charge until you had already broken the enemy line by weight of fire.
IIRC it was similar in Napoleonic warfare. Melees were less frequent than Hollywood would make us think.
The same's true of Eighteenth Century battles; and even late seventeenth century affairs. Battles decided by shock action (melee) pretty much ended when armies dropped pikemen after the invention of the ring bayonet. Battlelines stood and blasted away at each other for hours sometimes.
French columns were actually supposed to reintroduce decisiveness by forcing shock action in battles (they're famous from the Revolutionary and Napoleonic eras where they were used as an expedient for making use of a mass of undertrained recruits, but the basic tactical evolutions and theories were actually a product of French military theorists of the old Royal Army of the 1770s and 1780s.)
Just as British and Dutch platoon fire was supposed to maximise the effect of fire reducing the need for shock action (which lines were not really suited for) even though people now have this image of the fire being nothing but a precursor to the bayonet charge of the Redcoats.
Quote from: Berkut on May 18, 2011, 10:04:18 AM
Uhh, I can think of quite a few civil war battles where battle lines fired at one another for more than an hour. Obviously this would be in some kind of cover, but it certainly could (and did) happen. In fact, I would guess that most ACW civil war battles had tactical engagements decided by weight of fire/morale, not by a melee. IIRC, most of the time when attacking you would not charge until you had already broken the enemy line by weight of fire.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking. But if rifles can easily get clogged up you need some mechanism where the soldiers could have a break to clear their guns. Maybe they just stood there and scrapped the fouling out of the gun right on the battle line. Probably not ideal.
Quote from: Syt on May 18, 2011, 10:08:00 AM
IIRC it was similar in Napoleonic warfare. Melees were less frequent than Hollywood would make us think.
The reason why melees were rare was not because charges were rare, but because charges seldom went home into a melee; one side or the other would give way before the melee started.
In the Napoleonic wars, musketry was used defensively and as part of a pinning attack. Preps for the major attack would be by artillery fire, not musket fire.
Skirmish fire, obviously, excepted. But even skirmishers seldom fired more than a dozen times or so in a battle.
By the ACW, infantry fire was heavy enough to decide battles without massed artillery. As Berkut and you noted, a charge was really not an attempt to melee, but rather to break the wavering enemy's line, just like in the Napoleonic era.
Quote from: Razgovory on May 18, 2011, 04:32:10 PM
Yeah, that's what I was thinking. But if rifles can easily get clogged up you need some mechanism where the soldiers could have a break to clear their guns. Maybe they just stood there and scrapped the fouling out of the gun right on the battle line. Probably not ideal.
If you allowed soldiers to leave the ranks, you'd never get them back.
Quote from: grumbler on May 17, 2011, 09:06:57 PM
Someone writes about men peeing into the musket barrels to loosen up the gunk and allow them to keep firing. Can't recall the book or circumstances though - could have been Napoleonic. At a guess, Swords Around a throne, which has those kinds of details.
Who knew rifle barrels got athlete's foot? Amazing.
Quote from: grumbler on May 18, 2011, 07:21:25 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on May 18, 2011, 04:32:10 PM
Yeah, that's what I was thinking. But if rifles can easily get clogged up you need some mechanism where the soldiers could have a break to clear their guns. Maybe they just stood there and scrapped the fouling out of the gun right on the battle line. Probably not ideal.
If you allowed soldiers to leave the ranks, you'd never get them back.
That is an excellent point.