18th Century Rifle Accuracy

[Artificer]

Going back to the Hanger’s quote: “A rifle-man passed over the mill-dam, evidently observing two officers,”

OK, so how did the Rifleman know they were Officers, when in Green Uniforms trimmed in Black that would blend into the woods behind them? Hanger does not mention whether it was sunny or overcast that day or how the Rifleman would have known they were Officers. The answer comes from portraits of Tarleton and Hanger painted in those uniforms, though probably after the war.

Earlier I mentioned their Uniforms were trimmed in Silver, but that was from an original miniature portrait of Tarleton. In fact, their uniforms were trimmed in Gold and that was the same REAL Gold Bullion Thread British Officers used for trim and not just gold or yellow colored tape/cloth used on Enlisted Uniforms. So UNLESS those Officers were perfectly still, that Real Gold Trim would have shined or at least glinted with any movement at all. This makes it an entirely different sight picture from a green and black uniform that would have blended into the background of the woods behind them.


Portrait of Tarleton: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Banastre-Tarleton-by-Joshua-Reynolds.jpg

A Non Colourized Engraving of Tarleton: http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw57793/Sir-Banastre-Tarleton-Bt?LinkID=mp56253&role=sit&rNo=0

Portrait of Hanger: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:4th_Baron_Coleraine.jpg

Gus

 

[George]

Well, I think my speculation is better than your speculation, although not as complicated.

Hanger didn't know what the rifleman was seeing, or that he recognized officers, that was Hanger's speculation. It happens in the best of families.

Spence

 

[Artificer]

My speculation is based on the facts of the actual uniforms Tarleton and Hanger wore, including the Gold Lace that gave them away as Officers.

I do have one question, if you consider Hanger wrong when he speculated from facts, then how could he have been completely right when he reported heresay evidence on the abilities of Riflemen he never actually witnessed?

Gus

 

[tenngun]

The fact that it is remembered and commented on makes me think it was out of the ordinary.
We have, not just from AWI but from the WTBS and war of 1812 stories of these outstanding long shot hits. A thread not long ago was about Indian riflemen making hits at four hundred yards during the Semonle wars. My gut feeling is to believe the folks on the ground that saw an event rather then modern myth busters. That said the ballistics of a round ball haven't changed. I doubt that eye sight was better. I would bet that barrels today are better then hand made iron back then.
One sees some officers a horse back way out of range, aims at a tree top high over them and take a shot, after all what have you got to loose. You know your safe from counter fire. Low and behold someone goes down. Do you say ' well gee, that was luck? ' Or do you say ' it takes a might of practice to do that boys'?
On the other side do you look at your dieing horse and say ' well that was bad luck,' we can stay right here they couldn't do that again' or do you say ' get down them boys are shooters' ?

 

[Artificer]

Of course the heresay evidence I refer to, that Hanger wrote about, was from the earlier quotes you supplied:

“I have many times asked the American backwoodsmen what was the most their best marksmen could do”

And

"I have often asked American riflemen, what was the most they thought they could do with their rifle?

From this post: http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showpost.php?post/1570403/

This is not even speculation on Hanger’s Part, it is pure heresay evidence that he reports and gives no examples he ever saw them make such shots.

What he does give an example of is a MISSED shot at 400 yards, where the Rifleman missed all three British Soldiers.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

There is no doubt the example of the 400 yard MISS (a close miss to be sure, but a miss nonetheless) stood out in Hanger's mind. He would not have gone into all that detail, had it not. Hanger reported it in all its exactitude according to his belief at the time.

That is a far cry from him reporting heresay evidence in other quotes.

Gus

 

[Gene L]

The English Baker rifle was supposed to be accurate at 200 yards most of the time. However, a rifleman named Plunkett shot a French General at (estimated) 600 yards, and then shot his aide who went to help him, suggesting it wasn't a fluke.

But that was excellent shooting. I suspect this fact was recorded because it was not common.

The Baker rifle was short and to my longrifle eyes, ugly. Not because it was short, but the furniture lacked any grace. Trigger guard was awful, patchbox serviceable but looked like it had been added on as an after thought. But it apparently worked.

 

[ravenousfishing]

Thanks Tenngun. I've been patiently following this thread and waiting to reply and you beat me to it. I'm sure these people saw what they say they saw. With all the millions of rounds fired its bound to have happened, and more than once.

Did they have ballistic tables back then that said x cal round ball will drop y inches at 400 yds? If so, I doubt most were familiar with them. But, if I aim halfway up the treeline and I happen to hit someone or something standing a short distance in front, I have a point of reference for the future.

How many of you that say it can't be done are willing to stand still and let me take a shot at you at 400 yds? How about a second shot? :wink:

 

[Artificer]

There were three large advantages the Baker Rifle had over AWI period American rifles.

1. The Rifling was highly tested from different makers to give the best accuracy.

2. The caliber of the Baker was much larger than the period American Rifles and larger bore size of a PRB gives better long range accuracy.

3. The Baker had a flip up long range rear sight to better hit at longer range. This type of rear sight was not completely unknown on American AWI Rifles, but it was extremely rare.

Actually, the British learned more from their mistakes about rifles during the AWI than we did. We had nothing that good, as far as military rifles went, until long after the Baker was used.

The 600 yard shot supposedly made with the Baker rifle actually happened at around 460 -480 yards according to most sources. Now that STILL was one heck of a shot, though.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Thanks Tenngun. I've been patiently following this thread and waiting to reply and you beat me to it. I'm sure these people saw what they say they saw. With all the millions of rounds fired its bound to have happened, and more than once.

Did they have ballistic tables back then that said x cal round ball will drop y inches at 400 yds? If so, I doubt most were familiar with them. But, if I aim halfway up the treeline and I happen to hit someone or something standing a short distance in front, I have a point of reference for the future.

How many of you that say it can't be done are willing to stand still and let me take a shot at you at 400 yds? How about a second shot? :wink:

Let's see, you will also be shooting a "period correct" flintlock rifle of .50 caliber or less without a sling, from a prone position on a place that is unfamiliar to you, like the American Rifleman, correct? No special target range, spotting scope or anything the American Rifleman did not have, correct? You also need to be in the same condition as the Rifleman most likely was, I.E. not well fed, a long time from home, probably mentally and physically tired of war, concerned about other enemies in the area as well?

How much money are you offering when you lose on the first shot? :wink:

Edited to add: How much MORE money are you offering when you miss the second shot?

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Oh, I also expect a troop of cavalry 30 yards back in the woods behind me, to run you down while you try to reload, just as in the original example.

Now of course I am being silly because there is almost no way we can duplicate everything that period Riflemen had to deal with during the AWI and most of us would not be willing to try to even come close.

Gus

 

[19 16 6]

I, my little self can consistently ring a 28" gong at 400 yards with an Armi San Marco Sharps replica in 45-120. Shooting a 500 grain bullet over 120 gr of 2F. Folding ladder peep rear sight & aperture front.
I have tried to shoot my 54 muzzle loader at the same target with a 120 gr load by walking the ball in. We soon lost track of the dust puffs as the barrel angle increased to something akin to a mortar & elevation overcame distance.
The 45-120 is boom----------ding
The 54 RB is Kabooom-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------flop
O.

 

[RAEDWALD]

Another question is, if really a round ball was used for these further shots, as a hollow base projectile was used in Jaeger rifles before 1700 and is documented in a translation of a document from Russian into German in 1735.

Tecum, have you a copy of that translation one could see please?

 

[Rifleman1776]

there is almost no way we can duplicate everything that period Riflemen had to deal with during the AWI and most of us would not be willing to try to even come close.

Amen, Bro. And that pretty much sums up why I admire the Rev. Rifleman so much. atriot:

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Gus some things you don't consider about a black powder rifleman using a tree as a shooting position....

The riflemen may be doing that to rid themselves of mirage from heat coming off the field over which they are shooting....

The signature of a rifle when firing alone at a distance might not attract attention, until the rifleman starts scoring hits. Firing from inside the surrounding branches of a tree will help dissipate that puff of smoke, though it does elevate you where it might also be more easily spotted.

If your rifleman was a deer hunter, using a tree to hunt deer would have been known to them, and they may simply have thought it a better position to not only fire from but to also see the battle and pass information down to commanders on foot.

LD

 

[Rifleman1776]

The 54 RB is Kabooom-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------flop

Maybe ye were shooting the wrong direction. :wink: :rotf:

 

[tecum-tha]

https://books.google.com/books?id=b...NAhVjGlIKHYaaBukQ6AEIKzAC#v=onepage&q&f=false

try paragraph nine pf thre second sript. On the side it says "elongated ball with conically hollowed base". I need to get a copy from a university library which sells it as a CD.
I need to have Jeff Tanner make me a mold for my original Jaeger and I will try...

 

[Artificer]

Interesting thoughts, Dave.

Gus some things you don't consider about a black powder rifleman using a tree as a shooting position....

The riflemen may be doing that to rid themselves of mirage from heat coming off the field over which they are shooting....

I can’t disagree they might have thought that, but I am not sure that would have done any good at what would have been middle to long range for them, around 200 yards distance and beyond. At those distances, the heat mirage comes from the ground closer to the target than what you could climb up in a tree to avoid. I take this from having shot at ranges where the shooting line berm was elevated above the ground as high as one might normally try to shoot from a tree and a very small number even higher than one might normally climb up a tree to shoot.

The signature of a rifle when firing alone at a distance might not attract attention, until the rifleman starts scoring hits. Firing from inside the surrounding branches of a tree will help dissipate that puff of smoke, though it does elevate you where it might also be more easily spotted.

If you mean firing from a tree with branches and maybe some leaves will disguise his position for a shot or two, I would agree. However, in my experience from reenacting, I’ve found when there is vegetation around you, it actually breaks up the wind that otherwise would blow away the smoke from the shots and slows down the dissipation of the smoke. So the smoke stays longer there around vegetation than in the open. Of course if the breeze is strong enough, that won’t matter.

If your rifleman was a deer hunter, using a tree to hunt deer would have been known to them, and they may simply have thought it a better position to not only fire from but to also see the battle and pass information down to commanders on foot.

LD

Yes, that would be another advantage to having the rifleman up in a tree, to report on the battlefield movements, along with watching for where missed shots landed.
Gus

 

[nkbj]

Hollow based bullets.
If German engineering did it first would anyone be surprised?

 

[Artificer]

That is an interesting report. Thank you.

Gus