Closed eyes during flash

[Raider2000]

I don't own a Flintlock but I have shot a friend or two piece a few times & this last time I shot a friends flintlock GPR & I swore that I had flinched the shot because I did see the flash in the corner of my eye but my shot at 50 yards was right on but just slightly left of the X.

I bet that if I had more time with it I wouldn't notice the flash in the pan & would be hitting X's all day.

 

[musketman]

I'm New to muzzle loading and want to by a flintlock. I notice on tv on reinacments that the shooters of flintlocks sometimes close thier eyes just as they pull the trigger. Is this to protect thier eyes from the flash? Is it supposed to be shot like that? Is it common to get flash burn?

You will notice the flash less and less as you shoot your flintlock, it is human nature to close your eyes when a small explosion is inches from your face. Wearing shooting glasses can help you gain confidence until you get use to the ways of the flintlock.

They make flash guards for flintlocks, but that is mostly to protect the person to your right from the hot expanding jet of gas that the burning powder produces.

If you think about it, a caplock rifle's ignition source is closer to your eye than a flintlock's. (excluding underhammers and mule ear locks) A flinter's is to the right of the barrel whereas a percussion's in closer to the top flat of the barrel, closer to your eye.

The TV reinactors may do this for a couple of reasons, if they are all firing at once they could have been instructed to close their eyes to "protect" them or the camera could have just caught their personal habit on film.

 

[wvbuckbuster]

When the flint bug hit me a few years ago I would catch myself looking for the flash. Then a friend told me to remind myself that there is going to be this flash beside my head. It helped and now when I get ready to shoot I tell myself flash beside the head,hold tight and look at the front sight.I haven't spent the time shooting flintlocks as long as most on here but this is just something that has helped me and now I don't pay any attention to it.

 

[bajabuc]

Welcome to fffflinters...If you do a lot of range shooting it helps to tell the guy standing next to you that you're shooting a flinter...I like to make sure it's the same guy each shot...then...for the first few shots I speak up right smartly "FLINT!"...after that he's on his own hook. I've actually had people duck at the word "FLINT!" But the only time I ever wounded anybody was when a flint broke and hit my neighbor on the cheek...that was scary. I don't think I've ever seen the panflash in 10 thousand rounds. I'm not looking at it...I'm down range in my head.

 

[cowpoke1955]

I have read and did a lot of research on the American Revolution. I was the drill instructor for the Sons of the American Revolution color guards in Ca. To kill went against all morals of the day. When you kill in war or not, it becomes very personal. A lot of soldiers would turn their heads as they fired so they would not know if they killed someone or not. They did not want to carry that guilt. This mind frame carried into the Civil War (or to honor my new home state " the war between the states"). Croppy Boy is right on the money :thumbsup: .

 

[mike alexandre]

Added to which I'm told that soldiers of that era were not trained to aim - only to point and fire. so it didnt matter if you closed your eyes.

 

[temple]

i've been shooting them for almost ten years now and have only been flashed twice. once while firing volleys in line formation. the other was at my first reenactment and i was just hopped up on adrenaline and dumped way to much powder in the pan. so there was powder everywhere and when i touched it off i lost a little bit of eyebrow. as long as you're loading right should be no problem.

 

[redwing]

That has always been a question in my mind. I got my first flintlock in 1965. I have always used shooting glasses while firing any fire arm. When firing the flinter for sure. For anyone who has fired the flint lock they have felt the sting of a broken flint and maybe even a blood speck or two. A few years back while shooting a match at Saratoga, Wyoming the flint cut my hardened shooting glass in the right lens.
With all that being said. Have you read about any of the old timers being blinded or hurt from the flint or pan? :hmm: Yes the cap can hurt all so. The soldiers were taught to look away when firing musket vollies so it must have been a problem. :hmm:

 

[tg]

"You mean silk patches won't get me another 40 yards?
Guess I ruined the good sheets for nothing."

no but you might be able to shoot a hotter load without burning the patches...

 

[Twisted_1in66]

Added to which I'm told that soldiers of that era were not trained to aim - only to point and fire. so it didnt matter if you closed your eyes.

Depends upon which side you were on. The British manual of 64 (drill manual) uses the commands: make ready, present, Fire! There is no command to aim in the British manuals. The flintlocks they were using were .75 cal. muskets shooting .69 cal. balls. Accuracy was not part of the equation. Getting a lot of lead downfield quickly and repeatedly was their goal. There is not even a rear sight on the musket and what looks like the front site is really the bayonet lug.

On the Continental side, the Von Steuben drill manual was developed during the winter of 1777 at Valley Forge and used by the entire army the rest of the war. The commands here were: make ready, TAKE AIM, fire. The Continentals were primarily using muskets (mostly French muskets after 1777), and they didn't have any real sights either, but they very definitely aimed them at the opposing soldiers.

THEN, perhpas we should talk perhaps about the riflemen and rifle companies during the revolutionary war. They were deadly accurate and very effective when used to their strengths. They absolutely didn't turn their head. They picked off the officers and the artillery crew, typically from 200-300 yards. Can't do that closing your eyes or turning your head.

I've seen the reenactorism about turning the head when they fire many times at many events, but have never seen any primary documentation of such a practice. Nobody can ever come up with it when you ask them why they are doing it either.

Twisted_1in66 :thumbsup:

 

[Twisted_1in66]

I have read and did a lot of research on the American Revolution. I was the drill instructor for the Sons of the American Revolution color guards in Ca. To kill went against all morals of the day. When you kill in war or not, it becomes very personal. A lot of soldiers would turn their heads as they fired so they would not know if they killed someone or not. They did not want to carry that guilt. This mind frame carried into the Civil War (or to honor my new home state " the war between the states"). Croppy Boy is right on the money :thumbsup: .

I would thoroughly be indebted to you if you could provide me with one verifiable primary documentation of that practice. Been looking for it for years and have never found it.

I don't pretend to be an historian, but certainly have done a lot of research on the Revolutionary War too because I belong to the Virginia 7th Rev War reenactment group and there are a lot of people there who are very serious about presenting an historically accurate representation of the regiment and camp followers.

I belong to the rifle company of the Virginia 7th which is based on Daniel Morgan's Rifle Company. Most of this company came from the frontiers of Virginia and many of these soldiers had served, or their fathers had served in the French and Indian War. To infer that these people were pacifists or squeamish about seeing if they hit their man is stretching it....a LOT!

Death was a part of life for them on the frontiers of Virgina. They were victimized by Indians under French command during the French and Indian War and had numerous clashes with various tribes between the wars. They had no compunction at all about killing someone who was trying to kill them, their family, or steal their livestock and supplies. It was definitely NOT a kindler, gentler, time.

Murder was still murder and abhorant at that time as it is now, but war was WAR! If you really want to get into the barbarism and atrocities of the Revolutionary War in the Southern Colonies, pick up a copy of one of Patrick O'Kelley's books. The series (5 books in all if I remember correctly) is titled "Nothing but Blood and Slaughter", and is full of primary documentation about what went on. A lot of it was VERY personal.

Twisted_1in66 :thumbsup:

 

[cowpoke1955]

I know about the Indians on the frontier. My 4th great-grandfather was 15 when he was capture by Indians, led by Simon Gurdy, as the rest of the family of 11 were killed in the Blue Ridge of Virginia. After 3 years he escaped to join the Contenetial Army under Washington. Several documents are within the SAR library. You are right, not all had these christian morals. The frontier was rugged. "Rifle" companies were not the norm. By order of Washington, rifle companies could only operate along side of regular army units armed with muskets. This was mainly due to their slower reload time and lack of bayonet. Many would use plug bayonet you could place in the muzzle after firing or a hanger (short sword).

 

[tg]

It would seem to be rather dufficult with all the noise, smoke and commotion to know whether your ball was the one that killed aan enemy soldier or someobe elses, that to me causes some doubts about looking away so you don't know if you killed some one, and once the bayonet charge begain such a mind set could be rather unhealthy.

 

[Twisted_1in66]

I know about the Indians on the frontier. My 4th great-grandfather was 15 when he was capture by Indians, led by Simon Gurdy, as the rest of the family of 11 were killed in the Blue Ridge of Virginia. After 3 years he escaped to join the Contenetial Army under Washington. Several documents are within the SAR library. You are right, not all had these christian morals. The frontier was rugged. "Rifle" companies were not the norm. By order of Washington, rifle companies could only operate along side of regular army units armed with muskets. This was mainly due to their slower reload time and lack of bayonet. Many would use plug bayonet you could place in the muzzle after firing or a hanger (short sword).

An interesting piece about the rifle companies is that George Washington ordered a bunch of folding spears for them at the beginning of the war, since they didn't have bayonets. There are a couple of examples where they were ordered, but no documentation of them every being used. My guess would be that they were too cumbersome to carry and if they were ever really issued they were discarded. All riflemen were required to carry a tomahawk for close quarters protection. That's not much protection, but perhaps some.

Washington's intent with the rifle companies was to use them as light infantry troops or with light infantry troops that were armed with muskets. It actually worked well when done properly, especially as a rifle company and musket company working together. The rifles would engage the enemy troops at around 300 yards (or farther) and target the officers first. They would continue to cause enemy casualties until the Brits got within about 100 yards. Then the rifles would skedaddle back behind the light infantry and head for the high ground or the flanks and continue to snipe at the Brits while the light infantry muskets engaged them in the classic volley fire and perhaps bayonet charge. This was done to great effect at Saratoga and a version of it was done at Cowpens too. If anyone knew how to use rifles it was Morgan.

The bad news about that method was that it was typically very hard on the musket troops. At Saratoga, Morgan's riflemen suffered the fewest casualties while the light infantry they were operating with during part of the battle suffered the highest casualties.

Twisted_1in66 :thumbsup: