How Far Is “Musket-Shot”?

[ncmtmike]

http://allthingsliberty.com/2013/08/how-far-is-musket-shot-farther-than-you-think/ :thumbsup:

 

[robert reed]

Thanks Mike. Very interesting.

 

[JonnyReb3]

Sure is, i never had any idea they volly'ed shot at those kinda ranges. Guess a big lead ball at 3-400fps still packs a heckuva wallop.

 

[stantdm]

Thanks, quite interesting to think about.

 

[54ball]

Very interesting Mike and no doubt true but we are talking volley fire by groups of men, not individual marksmanship.
Col. Hanger had this to say about some field tests in 1814.

Colonel George Hanger wrote, “A soldier’s musket, if not exceedingly ill-bored (as many are), will strike a figure of a man at 80 yards; it may even at a hundred; but a soldier must be very unfortunate indeed who shall be wounded by a common musket at 150 yards, providing his antagonist aims at him; and as to firing at a man at 200 yards with a common musket, you may as well fire at the moon and have the same hope of hitting him. I do maintain and will prove”¦that no man was ever killed at 200 yards, by a common musket, by the person who aimed at him.”

Read more: http://www.rifleshootermag.com/rifles/featured_rifles_bess_092407/#ixzz3QfbiLRXV

A quote from Vietnam fits here.

Everybody say they be worried about the bullet with they name on it. I'm not worried about that one, it's the one that say "To whom it may concern!"

If I recollect correctly, Hanger set up a series of large sheets to test individual marksmanship. His results proved what a lot of smoothbore shooters know. At a certain range the ball starts to waver. It may go up, down, right or left at an arc.

Recently there was a discussion about heavy charges in excess of 100 grns charges used in 18th Century muskets. I am not convinced that 18th Century powder was as poor as some theorize.

Even a undersized naked ball will shoot true at least for a short distance before it starts to waver. I've done that with bare balls in a rifle and smoothbore. 25 yards or so, the target is dead meat and this with just powder and undersized ball.

I also doubt the common theory of the undersize ball bouncing to and fro in the bore. The power of the gas alone would stabilize it.

I believe it's all about velocity and mass. An object in motion remains in motion until acted upon by an opposing force. A smoothbore's ball will fly true until the outside forces act upon it. A rifle ball spins on it's own axis so it is somewhat immune to those outside forces or the demon that lurks out there.

Higher velocity, especially in a smoothbore will give greater range. What gives higher velocity? A tighter seal and a heavier charge. At higher speed the ball goes further until it wavers. At 100 2fg grains a Bess is 100 fps below sound barrier. So the heavier 18th Century charges I mentioned earlier put the Bess supersonic. I find it ironic that Chuck Yeager mentions the demon in 1947 when he broke the barrier in the Bell X1. It's the same demon those 18th Century gunsmiths knew about. Those guys were not as far fetched as you would think, were they? So a supersonic ball will go further and fly true until it wavers. That waver could very well be the demon that Yeager knew as the ball drops below the sound barrier.

In the 18th Century, redoubts, and forts were common as time went on you have more flank and maneuver. This corresponds with the reduction of heavy charges. So for greater musket range from a redoubt, the muskets needed the heavier charges for the longer effective range in volley fire. While still lacking in individual accuracy volleys at 300 yards would be very effective indeed.

 

[Many Klatch]

I have had a chance to shoot my Bess Carbine at a man sized target at 238 yards. We were on top of a bluff and the target was below us. The distance was measured by a surveyor using modern laser equipment. The match was three shots. I double charged with 240 grains of 2f. Patched the ball with .010 muslin. For the first shot I aimed high and saw the ball hit above the target. For the other two shots I aimed at the head. I got one hit in the foot. That big punkin ball would have taken someone out of the fight.

If I was in a fort and I was shooting at troops moving about on the ground, I could make it very uncomfortable for anyone 200 to 300 yards away.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Ah but you were firing in a manner not used in the 18th century....

Even the men in the marksmen companies rolled cartridges in paper, not with a cloth patch. The British military of the 18th century understood that with carefully crafted loads, the musket could easily reach out and strike a single, man sized target at 100 yards. Beyond that distance, would depend on the skill of teh shooter. You were also lucky to have a backstop that allowed you to note your aiming error...I wonder if you could've been as successful at a target with nothing but sky behind.

The problem was giving the marksmen time to swab their bores during combat the way a rifleman would have to swab his bore, so that the carefully crafted cartridges could continue to be used. IF they couldn't clean, they would have to switch to standard ammunition, with its inaccuracy.

I think the article's premise is faulty. I have never heard anybody say the Bess or other muskets of the AWI (French, Dutch, German, Spanish, Comittee of Safety) weren't lethal at 200-300 yards... the discussion has always been about directed or aimed shots, plus the ammunition they were using.

Thus, Musket Shot, meant out of the possibility of being struck by a round from a volley or the age old "lucky BB". Quite different from "maximum effective range" which means both lethal and accurate when aimed.

54Ball wrote:
I am not convinced that 18th Century powder was as poor as some theorize.

I also doubt the common theory of the undersize ball bouncing to and fro in the bore. The power of the gas alone would stabilize it.

Well that's sort of a contradiction. If the gas is coming around the ball then a lot of the velocity of the large charge may be lost. I'm not sure that the paper of the cartridge didn't form a partial seal if not a full seal. In that case the ball being off center, would stay off center as it exited the bore....granted it might not zig zag approaching the muzzle, but one round might be off center of the bore left, the next down, the next up, the next left, etc etc

LD

 

[Artificer]

To go along with what Dave wrote, we know the balls used in British Cartridges were supposed to have been .69 caliber in musket bores that ranged from .760 - .780 in diameter, though many excavated and unfired balls ran as high as .700 - .710. The fact the balls varied that much would have made 200-300 yards shooting hopeless at individual targets.

Further, the way the cartridge paper wrapped around the balls made it so the ball could not sit centered or even more importantly in uniform position in the bore from shot to shot. The wrapped paper would have been thicker in some places because it overlapped in some areas. It was not like a paper patched bullet of a later period where it was of uniform thickness around the ball. So like Dave mentions, it would have seated in different spots in the bore and thus come out the muzzle in different spots and throwing accuracy off at the muzzle.

The force of the wind affects muzzle loading bullets more than modern bullets and a somewhat windy day would have thrown Bess Balls all over the place at 200 or more yards.

I have no doubt that a Company sized unit (or more) firing in Volleys would have done SOME damage to a Company or larger size unit at 200 yards, but it was far beyond the effective range of aiming at one man and actually hitting him with an 18th century musket and firing paper cartridges.

Gus

 

[Many Klatch]

It appears that the main reason for the original authors to say that Musket range was 300 yards was for use in designing fortresses. Then we have to assume (dangerous word there) that they knew that during a siege, someone or many someones would be on the parapets carefully cleaning, loading, aiming and firing at the attackers.

I haven't loaded and fired at a distance with my Bess with a standard paper cartridge, if I did I think that I could hit a body of men at that distance with some regularity and some very unlucky person often enough to keep at it regularly.

I have messed about with my flintock .54 rifle and hit mansized targets at 400 yards using a standard 75 grain charge of 3F and patched round ball. Once I figured out far to hold over the target (12 feet) to allow for the drop I was able to keep the ball in a 6 foot group.

If you are walking 300 yards from a fortress and 72 caliber punkin balls start kicking up the dust around you, it will make you consider your alternatives.

 

[Artificer]

BTW and FWIW, during normal Volley Firing, a soldier has to at least somewhat jerk his trigger after the command to fire and so that the Volley of Muskets firing sounds sort of like one musket going off. That was exactly what 18th Officers right up to the 1860's so dearly loved to hear. "Ragged" sounding volleys, where the shots sounded like they came in groups, were just not deemed "of Proper Military Bearing."

Of course that meant that Volley Firing often went over the tops of the heads of opposing soldiers. So that would have somewhat aided a large group of soldiers firing at another large group of soldiers in formation at 200 yards, because the bullets were already shot high thanks to having to jerk the triggers.

Gus

 

[ncmtmike]

I for one will not stand at 300 yds an let some-one draw a bead on me with a BESS,I thought this thread an interest mainly because of all the modern day talk of musket effective range of 50 yds. I grew up around some fine woodsmen,and learned real quick; It's not the weapon it's the shooter.
I have seen guys with production stuffers,shooting the eyes out of custom stuffers round here,so it ain't the gun's fault :nono:

 

[19 16 6]

Still not gonna catch me standing at the 300 mark.
With a volley there is a lot of lead in the air at once. Some ****** high, others pulled, flyers left right & centre. Accuracy would not even come into it & that is the reason for a volley, a hail of lead.
Forget about trajectory because when it's raining your gonna get wet.
After all king Harold Godwinson was shot in the eye by a Norman archer. That arrow had a rainbow arc trajectory & would have come down at an angle over the shields. It was also part of a volley & it would be impossible to identify the archer.
So we cannot say beware of this Norman for he can shoot your eye out at 400 paces. What we can say is beware of the volley of shots at 300 yards.

 

[Artificer]

Got a real chuckle out of your post above. Good humour! :grin:

However, a full Company of Musket Armed enemy soldiers would not nearly so concern me at 300 yards as the same Company at 100 yards.

Now at 300 yards with trained English Long Bowmen as an enemy force, THAT would scare me HUGELY more than a company armed with muskets at that range and especially more so if they were within 100 yards. I met some English Archers who use Long Bows whilst in the UK in 1996 and 1998. I would not want to be an individual target (standing still) for them at ANY range out to 250 yards!!

Gus

 

[Loyalist Dave]

the bullets were already shot high thanks to having to jerk the triggers.

Not to mention the second rank had to level on the shoulders of the men in front...which might help a lot, OR...if the guy in front is just a tad taller than the guy in the back, or the guy in the back is standing in a teeny tiny depression (they're not fighting on soccer fields after all)... then the muzzle when leveled by the rear man could be forced slightly upward too.

mtmike wrote:
I for one will not stand at 300 yds an let some-one draw a bead on me with a BESS,I thought this thread an interest mainly because of all the modern day talk of musket effective range of 50 yds.

Well first, it's not just "modern talk", as 54ball demonstrated with his source. We must remember that "effective range" means both lethal and accurate. We must also remember that it is possible that some of the early sources quoted in the article misunderstood "point blank".

The proper definition is (imho) "That distance up to which a shot may be taken at any object without allowing anything for the rise or the fall of the projectile". [ Forsyth 1867 ] With a .690 ball, you're talking about no more than a 1.5" rise or fall along the flight path of the projectile. Some of the sources quoted in the linked article from the period thought, quite in error, that the "point blank" of the musket was 300 yards. :youcrazy:

Do I want a guy taking pot-shots at me at 300 yards with a Bess? Nope. Taking cover would be prudent and evolutionary...there is the theory of "the lucky BB".

LD

 

[spudnut]

Never tried 300 but I don't doubt it,I knocked a clanger off the chains at 175 yds, with a 90 gr load cartridge held about a foot over the target

 

[Many Klatch]

The Bess with a trained shooter and a proper fitting load is a fearsome weapon. With mine I can hit a 36" gong 3 out of 5 times at 100 yards. But then I'm not being shot at, trying to load and fire 3 or 4 times a minute, fixing bayonets or worrying about when those cannons across the way are going to shoot again.

 

[Artificer]

the bullets were already shot high thanks to having to jerk the triggers.

Not to mention the second rank had to level on the shoulders of the men in front...which might help a lot, OR...if the guy in front is just a tad taller than the guy in the back, or the guy in the back is standing in a teeny tiny depression (they're not fighting on soccer fields after all)... then the muzzle when leveled by the rear man could be forced slightly upward too.

LD

Excellent points! They were not fighting on the cultured, cut and manicured lawns or parks that we often find ourselves re-enacting on today.

When they were in three ranks, the third rank firing would have at least the same problems as you mentioned with the second rank, but with the additional consideration they had to aim their muskets around an additional rank of fellow soldiers ahead of them.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

The Bess with a trained shooter and a proper fitting load is a fearsome weapon. With mine I can hit a 36" gong 3 out of 5 times at 100 yards. But then I'm not being shot at, trying to load and fire 3 or 4 times a minute, fixing bayonets or worrying about when those cannons across the way are going to shoot again.

A good friend from Fort Wayne,IN back in the 70's often demonstrated the POSSIBLE accuracy of a musket by firing Offhand at a plastic milk jug at 100 yards. I write "possible" as he used a patched round ball and powder charge carefully chosen for accuracy in his repro Navy Arms "Charleville" Musket, but not a period reproduction paper cartridge. He missed the milk jug less than 10 percent of the time and when he did, he most often said the fault was his shooting error, though a very few times it was the musket. This man was a VERY good Offhand shot in his prime, so I believe this information accurate.

I don't know how good his accuracy may have been with an undersize ball in a paper cartridge and a "standard" powder charge that may or may not have caused the musket to shoot more or less accuracy than his preferred accuracy powder charge. I do know he did not believe he could have matched the number of times he hit a milk jug at 100 yards with a repro paper cartridge load, though.

Gus

 

[tenngun]

I for one will not stand at 300 yds an let some-one draw a bead on me with a BESS,I thought this thread an interest mainly because of all the modern day talk of musket effective range of 50 yds. I grew up around some fine woodsmen,and learned real quick; It's not the weapon it's the shooter.
I have seen guys with production stuffers,shooting the eyes out of custom stuffers round here,so it ain't the gun's fault :nono:

:hatsoff: I can think of a lot of reasons a paper wraped ball is limited past 50 yards. 100 yards the tops against a single target. But...I would not want to stand 300 yards in front of the greenest cheapside recruit :surrender:

 

[Grumpa]

With a volley there is a lot of lead in the air at once. Some ****** high, others pulled, flyers left right & centre. Accuracy would not even come into it & that is the reason for a volley, a hail of lead.
Forget about trajectory because when it's raining your gonna get wet....
What we can say is beware of the volley of shots at 300 yards.

+1.
We're not talking aimed fire here, it's a "shotgun blast" at a known distance, against groups or masses of men.

Quoting Lochee: "when attention is paid to the loading". Aiming/trajectory would have been predetermined. Larger balls could have been provided for the first volley or two, if the accuracy consideration was even thought important. Then the troops would have resorted to usual loading practices.

"Beware the volley of shots at 300 yard."