How did American forces reload in battle?

[cjgregory]

Bayonets

My understanding is that the purpose of disciplined volley fire was to set up the bayonet charge.
The British troops should not be underestimated. They were highly disciplined and extremely effective.

As the continentals never won a single engagement in frontal volley fire against the British it reflects the level of training as compared to the British veterans who had fought the French. The British were pretty tough. The American terrain and landscape was their greatest obstacle.

Fortunately Washington wisened up and decided to stop frontal engagements on open ground and the recruited frontier riflemen.
It retrospect, the British European tactics from the napoleon order of battle was ill equipped for American’s fighting with rifles.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

My understanding is that the purpose of disciplined volley fire was to set up the bayonet charge.
The British troops should not be underestimated. They were highly disciplined and extremely effective.

As the continentals never won a single engagement in frontal volley fire against the British it reflects the level of training as compared to the British veterans who had fought the French. The British were pretty tough. The American terrain and landscape was their greatest obstacle.

Fortunately Washington wisened up and decided to stop frontal engagements on open ground and the recruited frontier riflemen.
It retrospect, the British European tactics from the napoleon order of battle was ill equipped for American’s fighting with rifles.

Actually Washington introduced riflemen along with the initial formation of the Continental Army. Pikes were also recommended for use in the rifle regiments. A folding Pike was to be introduced, manufactured, and issued to the rifle regiments. This folding version didn't really appear.

Aug.26th, 1775
..., the Use of Pikes in one or two Rear Ranks is recommended to the Attention and Consideration of our [rifle] Battalions. Every Smith can make these, and therefore the Country may soon be supply’d with Plenty of them. Marshal Saxe’s Direction is, that the Staff be 14 feet in Length, and the Spear 18 Inches, thin and light; The Staff to be made of Pine, hollowed for the sake of lightness, and yet to retain a degree of Stiffness; the whole to weigh not more than 7 or 8 pounds. ..., The Committee of Safety will supply Samples, to those Battalions who are dispos’d to use them. Each Pikeman to have a cutting Sword, and where it can be procur’d, a Pistol....

After two years, the riflemen were removed from the main army and sent to the Western Department, while the Continental Army, now devoid of rifles, faced the British Army regulars.

The British during the first years of the war, to save money AND because it was unnecessary, would perform bayonet charges without prior musket fire. (see With Zeal and Bayonets Only by Matthew Spring). When the army eventually corrected its lack of having bayonets, AND coupled that with Von Steuben's retraining of the army, THEN the Continentals were able to go toe-to-toe with the British regulars, and the war became a war of attrition.

LD

 

[cjgregory]

Actually Washington introduced riflemen along with the initial formation of the Continental Army. Pikes were also recommended for use in the rifle regiments. A folding Pike was to be introduced, manufactured, and issued to the rifle regiments. This folding version didn't really appear.

Aug.26th, 1775
..., the Use of Pikes in one or two Rear Ranks is recommended to the Attention and Consideration of our [rifle] Battalions. Every Smith can make these, and therefore the Country may soon be supply’d with Plenty of them. Marshal Saxe’s Direction is, that the Staff be 14 feet in Length, and the Spear 18 Inches, thin and light; The Staff to be made of Pine, hollowed for the sake of lightness, and yet to retain a degree of Stiffness; the whole to weigh not more than 7 or 8 pounds. ..., The Committee of Safety will supply Samples, to those Battalions who are dispos’d to use them. Each Pikeman to have a cutting Sword, and where it can be procur’d, a Pistol....

After two years, the riflemen were removed from the main army and sent to the Western Department, while the Continental Army, now devoid of rifles, faced the British Army regulars.

The British during the first years of the war, to save money AND because it was unnecessary, would perform bayonet charges without prior musket fire. (see With Zeal and Bayonets Only by Matthew Spring). When the army eventually corrected its lack of having bayonets, AND coupled that with Von Steuben's retraining of the army, THEN the Continentals were able to go toe-to-toe with the British regulars, and the war became a war of attrition.

LD

I understand. However my assertion stands as is. British troops were far superior to colonial troops in European theater volley formation tactics. And far more disciplined. They were professional soldiers. I give credit where credit is due.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

I understand. However my assertion stands as is. British troops were far superior to colonial troops in European theater volley formation tactics. And far more disciplined. They were professional soldiers. I give credit where credit is due.

Nobody disputed that.

LD

 

[cjgregory]

Nobody disputed that.

LD

I quoted the “bayonet” post. The reason for volley fire was to set up an eventual bayonet charge. Discipline and the ability to receive volley fire won out every time.
I didn’t go into a couple of paragraphs of history. Haha. It served.

The advent of the rifled musket changed everything. I remember ready about Stonewall Jackson and how that mindset was still prevalent and being taught at West Point. He would go into tirades about the importance of bayonets. He even tried to get shipments of pikes brought in.

 

[oldschoolhunter55]

Bayonets

bayonets. ugh. just thinking about how it felt to have one pushed in. that gives me the Willys that would be a terrible way to die

 

[SOLANCO]

bayonets. ugh. just thinking about how it felt to have one pushed in. that gives me the Willys that would be a terrible way to die

The rifle or musket is a long arm. Loaded with a bullet it can keep an enemy at a considerable distance. Unloaded it is still a long piece of work and can ***, shove or club an enemy. With bayonet fixed it becomes a lance or spear. Small wonder repeating cartridge arms were quickly adopted when they became available. And yet the bayonet was retained. I wonder to what effect over time?

 

[smoothshooter]

Both. You have implied throughout your posts rifles were used in many battles and in large numbers.


All you have done throughout your posts is speculate. There is no place for that in historical discussions.

Speculation can be an important factor in defining the truth. Especially when lack of surviving documentation is sparse or non-existent. In those cases we have to consider human nature and practicality, which doesn’t change over the centuries.
The use of rifles would have depended to some degree where militia units were from and where they were deployed, and how desperate the need was for additional men.
No militia commander in his right mind would have turned down a volunteer that brought a rifle when they were needing additional bodies quickly and no muskets were available for issue to the new guys, at least initially.
Granted, muskets were by far the most commonly used arm for military service, and for good reason. But sometimes there just weren’t enough to go around.

Speculation often precedes enlightenment.

 

[Anvilboy]

With the talk about pikes, I thought I would show this one - a retractable pike that a friend brought me to duplicate the missing catch on one side. Have you guys seen or know about them? My friend thinks it is from the War of Northern Agression. I don't know.

 

[cjgregory]

With the talk about pikes, I thought I would show this one - a retractable pike that a friend brought me to duplicate the missing catch on one side. Have you guys seen or know about them? My friend thinks it is from the War of Northern Agression. I don't know.
View attachment 367349View attachment 367353View attachment 367354View attachment 367350View attachment 367351

That’s really cool if it is a pike. It’s stands to reason that it could have seen action. Depending upon how old it is, it could have been the revolutionary war. Some of the British lancers carried them. Of course those are from paintings. That would be an awesome find.

 

[kipcarter]

My understanding is that the purpose of disciplined volley fire was to set up the bayonet charge.
The British troops should not be underestimated. They were highly disciplined and extremely effective.

As the continentals never won a single engagement in frontal volley fire against the British it reflects the level of training as compared to the British veterans who had fought the French. The British were pretty tough. The American terrain and landscape was their greatest obstacle.

Fortunately Washington wisened up and decided to stop frontal engagements on open ground and the recruited frontier riflemen.
It retrospect, the British European tactics from the napoleon order of battle was ill equipped for American’s fighting with rifles.

The British at Cowpens certainly got defeated by the Continentals

 

[oreclan]

I understand. However my assertion stands as is. British troops were far superior to colonial troops in European theater volley formation tactics. And far more disciplined. They were professional soldiers. I give credit where credit is due.

COWPENS !

 

[cjgregory]

COWPENS !

Reinforced by RIFLEMEN!
Every stand up musket volley fight with the British didn’t end well. Musket, meaning smooth bore.

 

[Coinneach]

The rifle or musket is a long arm. Loaded with a bullet it can keep an enemy at a considerable distance. Unloaded it is still a long piece of work and can ***, shove or club an enemy. With bayonet fixed it becomes a lance or spear. Small wonder repeating cartridge arms were quickly adopted when they became available. And yet the bayonet was retained. I wonder to what effect over time?

Armies are still issued Bayonets as a last ditch defence in the case of Ammo shortages, and for close quarter combat if necessary.

In the 1966 night battle of Long Tan (South Vietnam) the Australian Delta Coy 6RAR had run out of ammo, they fixed bayonets and waited for another attack, fortunately visibility was very limited in the heavy rain and darkness and our Diggers would have taken a lot of the enemy with them at close quarters.

To this day Bayonet fighting is still taught and practiced in the Australian Army.

 

[SOLANCO]

The whole rifle, empty of ammunition, remains a formidable weapon. Particularly if the bayonet is affixed. Anyone else remember practicing the vertical butt stroke for hours?

Of course, that was with the M1 and M14. The M16 is 2 pounds lighter, and 4 inches shorter. Handier and easier toted. But less of a bludgeon or lance.

 

[cjgregory]

The whole rifle, empty of ammunition, remains a formidable weapon. Particularly if the bayonet is affixed. Anyone else remember practicing the vertical butt stroke for hours?

Of course, that was with the M1 and M14. The M16 is 2 pounds lighter, and 4 inches shorter. Handier and easier toted. But less of a bludgeon or lance.

I do. Haha