Historical black powder smoked less than modern.

[Darto]

36:45 He believes this: battles in previous centuries did not produce the great clouds of smoke as the same number of soldiers firing modern black powder would produce today. Because the powder smoked less back then.

 

[Darto]

Off topic because the video topic pertains to rifled muskets and not black powder in general, but the part about less smoke pretty much pertains to antique guns in general.

 

[Wildrangeringreen]

Glazing with graphite didn't really start until the 1870's or 1880's. That graphite, since it doesn't contribute to the reaction, hinders the conversion of solids to gas. This lowers the efficiency, and like an old inefficient diesel... it blows smoke.

All BP smokes but my experiments with making it (not really a topic for this forum), if you are really choosy with your materials and production methods, it doesn't produce nearly what the commercial stuff does (aka: you are making it for yourself or are producing it in a time when BP is all that is available for powder, and competition is fierce). Shoot, some of the powders offered as small arms powders today are also sold unscreened as cheap blasting powder lol, and that application has a very different standard of performance to small arms powder. Paper Cartridges is well researched on this stuff, plus he's an Ordinance officer, and has access to a lot of writtrn materials on the subject. Now blasting stuff, that was more my game when I was in lol (engineers, if we weren't building stuff haha)

 

[tenngun]

Hoffman reproductions released some good vids on home made powder. Not something discussed on the forum. I will only note he didn’t add graphite. And his powder seems to smoke as much
When the British Warship Sovereign of The Seas was being planned many old navy men thought it a bad idea. Most warships of the time mounted fifty guns or so on two decks. The Sovereign was twice as big mounting a hundred guns on three decks. Fifty on each side. And it was complained that firing that many guns would blot out what they were shooting. Contemporary drawings seem to show a lot of smoke

 

[tenngun]

I would hazard though upgrades in the technology of guns was not a Great Leap Forward in killing power
Blenheim, Waterloo, Gettysburg, DDay, all had same ball park of men involved and similar casualties from the dawn of flint lock musketry to the peak to the beginning of wide spread rifle use to machine guns

 

[hanshi]

I remain quite satisfied with the smoke from the bp used in my rifles. It doesn't bother me that I can't see the critter I shot at until the smoke clears. It's the nature of the beast.

 

[cornstalk]

And then there are the brush/grass fires that start as a results of all the gun, grenade and canon fire- which can be substantial. I know cause I burned up all the brush on an entire mountain training the National Guard decades ago. It's okay, it was in Arkansas, nobody noticed.

 

[Johnny Tremain]

If memory servers me, (which it rarely does) Dixie Gun works had rev was and civil war powder for sale decades ago and they tested it and documented in the catalog.
I have not had a catalog in 20 years or so.

 

[toot]

so history is all wrong? I don't think so!

 

[Robby]

The guy is full of crap.
Robby

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Robby, you are absolutely correct. Sadly, too many people believe everything they see on YouTube

 

[DuncNZ]

Waterloo was fought in 1815 ,From the various Princes and Generals involved down to the lowest infantry man on both sides, each had difficulty with powder smoke obscuring his view during the battle

 

[Rifleman1776]

Without the smoke I would find another avocation.

 

[Cattywompuss]

Say we cut the volume of smoke in half: still incredibly smokey compared to smokeless powder. The drastic increase in power by volume was not why it we call smokeless powder smokeless. It's the lack of smoke. Sure, it was called some other things in the late 1800s, but the world settled on "smokeless". Except Britain where folks persist in referring to all gun smoke as "the smell of cordite".

 

[nhmoose]

Artist paintings are NOT photos. Then think who would pay for the paintings if everything was obscured by smoke?

 

[Okie Hog]

he's an Ordinance officer,

Ain't being picky but it's a very common misspelling. He's an Ordnance officer.

 

[Wildrangeringreen]

Ain't being picky but it's a very common misspelling. He's an Ordnance officer.

yah, wrong homonym lol

 

[DuncNZ]

My first CF rifle was given to me when I was 10 , it was a 1861 Tower 2band Enfield converted to a Snider action . It came with several cases of the original brass and paper cased ammo . I shot all but two rounds in the next 10 years , The smoke it produced was considerable , easily equal to Goex , I shot deer with it and had to have my mate off to one side to see if I hit it or not .

 

[tenngun]

Pretty tiny amount of graphite in a charge, I just don’t see how it could add much smoke.
In a seventy grain charge I’m hard pressed to think there is a grain of graphite there

 

[deerstalkert]

in a pound of powder i add less than 1 gram of graphite. many pounds of powder i made i never added any graphite. i have not seen any difference in smoke .
different types of charcoal will make more smoke , but that is the only time i have noticed a difference.
some of the first battles fought with bp people died of smoke inhalation vs being shot!
the Chinese used bp to hide troops attacking.
OH yeah! and BS smells worse today than it did back then.