Burnt faces of British Troops ???

[Skychief]

When British troops (and Patriots for that matter)lined up and fired their flintlocks, did the soldier to their right not get his face/head burned with gases?

This question came up amongst some friends recently. It had to happen time and time again with their style of engagement.

If a guy didn't have a flinching problem to begin with, he easliy may have acquired one after getting "gased" a time or two! :shocked2:

Was this a problem for the soldiers or prevented in some way?


Mods: if this belongs elsewhere, please move. I almost put it in the Revolutionary War section of the Reenacting area....but thought the question had nothing to do with reenacting. :idunno:

Skychief.

 

[Stumpkiller]

No doubt they did. But when you're waiting for the cruel sting of a 3/4" ball tearing through your chest the minor annoyance of your neighbors flash was hardly something noticable.

 

[Zonie]

It's an excellent question.
To the best of my knowledge there was nothing used to prevent the vent blast from hitting the guy standing to the right.

I admit I haven't read any of the Military training manuals written during the age of Flintlocks so I would like to hear the answers from those who have studied them, especially the British. Did they teach the new soldiers to "stand and take it like a man", or did they arrange the line so the side blasts didn't hit the fellow to the right?

IMO, the rules for modern reenactors don't have much to do with the real answer here because as we all know, they are usually required to put some piece of non-HC baffle on their guns.

I suspect that Stumpy is right though. "Stiff upper lip. When you hit the battle field that will be the least of your worries."

 

[outdoorman]

I don't have an answer to this question, and I don't want to take away from the time period of the question, but I remember a scene in "The Mountain Men" where Tyler shot at the Indians and the pan blew gas and smoke right into Henry Frapp's face.

The scene cut away pretty fast after that, but the guy playing Henry (stunt man or Brian Keith) took it full in the side of the face. So it had to be a problem for soldiers who used flintlock guns.

Outdoorman

 

[JV Puleo]

This is a verbatim excerpt from my 1783 edition of "Advice to the Officers of the British Army". There are dozens of reprints of this available anyone who is interested in the 18th century British Army really ought to read it - not so much for the facts, but for a sense of 18th century soldiers as real people.

The book is a famous piece of tongue-in-cheek 18th century Army humor. It was so popular that it went through many printings... The first edition was in 1782 - the 6th in 1783! The author was Captain Francis Grose but the work was published anonymously at the time. It also included various bits for enlisted men as well. In the section addressed to privates we read...

"In the firings always be sure to fill your pan as full of powder as possible; it will cause much fun in the ranks, by burning your right-hand man: and on the right wing it will also burn the officers; who, perhaps to save their pretty faces, may order the right-hand file of each platoon not to fire, and thus save them the trouble of dismounting their firelocks, and washing the barrel, after the exercise is over."

 

[Leatherbark]

They alternated short soldiers with tall soldiers. This way you burnt the hat on the short guy to your right and the the tall guy got his left shoulder burnt by the short guy to his left........All theory of course

 

[mr.flintlock]

This could be where the command DRESS RIGHT DRESS originated from. For those not familer with close order drill, when this command is given a solder looks to his right while raising his right arm and moves arm distance from the man on the right.I have wondered if this was a result of solders being burned from other solders flash.

 

[RickD]

Seems their faces would have been etched with powder residue

 

[jderrick]

Would having some sort of shroud around the pan help at all, like on this example? http://geology.com/rocks/pictures/chert-flintlock.jpg

 

[JV Puleo]

They were. Its sometimes mentioned in descriptions of soldiers... I have seen it in descriptions of men charged with crimes in London and brought up in the Old Bailey.

The shield on the pan is a modern "reenactorism". They were not used by the British Army in the 18th century. I suspect they just accepted this. They were not anywhere near as obsessed with "safety" as modern folks are.

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

One feature of descriptions of thieves and other law breakers was a burn mark on the left cheek caused by pan flash received when the man was a soldier. It is not a common mark but will be found in such descriptions.

As far as mr. flintlock's statement, while an interesting theory, it doesn't wash. In linear tactics, the line was formed with elbow to elbow contact - the soldiers were that close together. Distance from your pan flash to the check of the man on your right was about 18 inches, maybe 2 feet, so the guy to the right did occasionally get a burn or embedded granules of unburned powder depending on the size of the touch hole and the amount of powder in the pan.

 

[TFoley]

One feature of descriptions of thieves and other law breakers was a burn mark on the left cheek caused by pan flash received when the man was a soldier. It is not a common mark but will be found in such descriptions.

As far as mr. flintlock's statement, while an interesting theory, it doesn't wash. In linear tactics, the line was formed with elbow to elbow contact - the soldiers were that close together. Distance from your pan flash to the check of the man on your right was about 18 inches, maybe 2 feet, so the guy to the right did occasionally get a burn or embedded granules of unburned powder depending on the size of the touch hole and the amount of powder in the pan.

British soldiers of the day, and most others too, wore a high leather collar called a stock - this took the major part of the porce of the ejecta from the touchhole immediately adjacent to the soldier.

tac
Supporter of the Cape Meares Lighthouse Restoration Fund

 

[peter hawbaker]

I dont believe the amount of powder in the pan would make a bit of difference, it is the high pressure of the main charge blowing through the vent that is the issue.

 

[boom]

Maybe thats where the name came from Black and Tan
:rotf: :haha:

 

[Hammerhead]

patriot1: "are you ok man did you get hit why are you crying"
patriot2: " i aint hit your darn smoke got in my eye."
:haha: .
Good Question

 

[pargent]

no to the dressright. rolling vollies was abritish tatic,dont know when it was first introduced though. it was still in use during the civil war.

 

[Many Klatch]

I participated in a reenactment of the Battle of Carillon at Ft. Ticonderoga. There were a couple of thousand of us on the field. The French were behind barricades and the English were standing out in the open.

I was in the Highlander ranks. For our first several volleys, the front rank lined up shoulder to shoulder and then the second rank laid their barrels over our shoulder for the first volley. I was very glad that everyone in the line had a pan shield.

If it had been a real battle, I don't know that I would have noticed the sting of my neighbors firelock. The Highlanders had over 50% casualties that day and that sort of gets your mind off of minor pains.

Many Klatch

 

[TFoley]

I dont believe the amount of powder in the pan would make a bit of difference, it is the high pressure of the main charge blowing through the vent that is the issue.

Sir - please read what I wrote - 'British soldiers of the day, and most others too, wore a high leather collar called a stock - this took the major part of the force of the ejecta from the touchhole immediately adjacent to the soldier.'

It is the jet of hot gas from the main charge blowing out sideways from the vent that I'm talking about - Just look at what comes out of the vent of a cannon and imagine that going sideways.

tac
Supporter of the Cape Meares Lighthouse Restoration Fund

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Tac, you are correct.

 

[wallgunner]

A lot of research shows that at least during the American Revolution, the British started using open order drill, or extended order. This put you farther from the man next to you. I've been blasted even with the frizzenguard in place. My favorite is when the man next to you has a flint that decides to come apart, and ends up in your face. Just like all the other aches and pains we try to escape today, they just accepted it, and moved on.