I doubt that seriously.Perhaps, but the northern snipers were all target shooters from the northeast, and overall were much better shots than those from the south.
I doubt that seriously.Perhaps, but the northern snipers were all target shooters from the northeast, and overall were much better shots than those from the south.
I am not trying to be a troll but If you educate yourself about target shooting in the US at that time you will likely have no doubt.I doubt that seriously.
Only a very small group of them were target shooters. The rest was chicken chokers. Really no joke, and bad chicken chokers at that. Don't take my word on it, look it up.I am not trying to be a troll but If you educate yourself about target shooting in the US at that time you will likely have no doubt.
Adjusted for the greater numbers of troops involved and higher numbers of battles, the Casualty Rate per man in the Civil War was nearly identical to the American Revolution and Napoleonic War.That seems off a bit to me. Balls are lousy projectiles, bullets although heavier have better sectional density and retain their velocity better. Would be interesting to see the trajectories of .69 balls and bullets on a graph. Maybe someone here can offer real world experience comparing both. YMMV
One Third of the soldiers in the Federal Army were immigrants who had only recently arrived in America . Most probably hadn't ever fired a rifle or had very limited experienceFirst thank you for one of the most informative posts I've read on TMF. I've ordered a used copy of "The Rifled Musket in the Civil War: Myth and Reality ". It is a fascinating subject.
If I may ask a follow up question: Was this lack of understanding about bullet trajectories limited mostly to city and town residents, or was it common across the entire eastern U.S.
The reason I ask is, most rural born and raised men I've known (north, south and west) were at least adequate marksmen. Some were exceptional. Plus, 80% of the U.S. population was rural in 1860.
I was given a BB gun about age 4 or 5. After instruction on lining up the front and rear sight I was on my own. Watching those little copper balls arc and drift into, or past, my target was my shooting instructor. Same for slingshots, bow and arrow. I knew about trajectories even before I knew the names or causes.
Again, the question above is sincere. I'm really puzzled.
This was not true in 2007-2010 when I was an active duty Army Infantryman and I don't think it was all that true in 1861-1865 either. Guys from the South or Texas were not better shots and it was me, a weird guy who was way too into guns from NJ, who was my platoons Designated Marksman because I did nothing in my entire early 20s but shoot rifles, basically. Lots of the Southern Boys that grew up hunting didn't do as well hitting the plastic Ivan's from 25-300m with an M16 with Iron Sights.Generally speaking, the southern soldiers were more familiar with rifles and were overall better shots. A high percentage of northern soldiers were from the city and probably never even held a rifle before entering the service, the south being more rural had more hunters, people who relied on their skills to feed the family. Specialized units in the north however, like Berdan's sharpshooters, had very strict requirements to get in and were comprised of some of the best shots in the country.
My nephew in the 101st would make you think twice. He's a good ole boy from the Tarheel state and yeah, the kid can shoot. If you're going to shoot for money with him, just save your ammo and give him the cash cuz he's going to get it anyway. Better not to get embarrassed at the same time. The guys in his outfit call him "Hillbilly" for that reason and he seems to be the only one who knows how to read a map and compass and build a fire and shelter in a driving rain storm. I guess he listened pretty well when we had him in Scouts.This was not true in 2007-2010 when I was an active duty Army Infantryman and I don't think it was all that true in 1861-1865 either. Guys from the South or Texas were not better shots and it was me, a weird guy who was way too into guns from NJ, who was my platoons Designated Marksman because I did nothing in my entire early 20s but shoot rifles, basically. Lots of the Southern Boys that grew up hunting didn't do as well hitting the plastic Ivan's from 25-300m with an M16 with Iron Sights.
This goes along with the "Southern troops were better at riding horses " thing
Geographical location had nothing to do with skill with a rifle, especially a Rifled-Musket which had only been developed in the early 1850s. Shooting a .36 long rifle at squirrels does not equate to hitting a man at 300 with an 1861 Springfield or P53 Enfield . I believe this is more of a Reenactorism that has found its way into Fact over the last 60 years.
The Federal Snipers skill has often been inflated as stories are told and distances get farther each time an account is written down. California Joe Head "hitting a Confederate Sharpshooter at a mile or more " or the "7 footer Confederate soldier " that was taunting the Federal Sharpshooters and they hit him at 1000 yards. It was probably more like 300.....
In reality, even scopes back then were rudimentary but seeing and hitting an individual man at any range past 300 with any kind of sight was most likely extremely rare. All this skill with a rifle on either side would have been rarely if ever a factor. Even Sharpshooters were in the flanks conducting area fire to break up Artillery crews at 500 or shooting at point targets at 2-300. If you missed 50% of the time it didn't matter. It's a skill most likely 95% of any of us possess just from occasional range shooting . Hitting people at 700, 1000 yards plus, is a whole different skill set.
As Ricky used to say to Lucy, "splain".a .58 Minie which is very hard to effectively aim and many went over the heads of the enemy.
The .58cal minie is not hard to "effectively" aim. The problem is with the issue sights and lack of marksmanship training in the ranks. The issue sights do not lend themselves to precision shooting. If you're aiming at the big crowd of guys in blue suits over yonder, different thing. Picking just one out, different story.As Ricky used to say to Lucy, "splain".
As Ricky used to say to Lucy, "splain".
Still don't get your point with out a comparison of the two projectiles at point blank range. At 100 yards a smoothbore is pretty much a slow spray and pray weapon on an single target. Volley fire into a group would be something akin to spray and pray. YMMV
I've fired my .69 Smoothbore at 100 yard targets and it's fully capable of hits on a man sized target. There's no spraying and praying at all. Add in Buck and Ball and you really can't miss. Hits at 200 yards with a smoothbore musket are about 25% on a man sized target based on what I've experienced. There were exhaustive studies done in the 1850s on this .Still don't get your point with out a comparison of the two projectiles at point blank range. At 100 yards a smoothbore is pretty much a slow spray and pray weapon on an single target. Volley fire into a group would be something akin to spray and pray. YMMV
I've fired my .69 Smoothbore at 100 yard targets and it's fully capable of hits on a man sized target. There's no spraying and praying at all. Add in Buck and Ball and you really can't miss. Hits at 200 yards with a smoothbore musket are about 25% on a man sized target based on what I've experienced. There were exhaustive studies done in the 1850s on this .
Factoring in the skill of largely conscript soldiers, the .69 Smoothbore is actually the more effective choice. Commanders waited until "smoothbore range" to engage anyway. Why did the Federal troops watch Picketts Division advance across a half mile of open field before engaging? By all logic they should have been using their .58 rifles to engage as soon as they left the woodline.....because the Officers in charge knew the bullets would fly far overhead of the Confederates or land short. And repeated volleys would just break down fire order and command and control.
The data compiled on the performance of Minies at long ranges was data compiled by the US Ordnance Dept when very skilled Ordnance Officers were firing the rifles in testing, not Pvt Joe Snuffy
View attachment 184711
Basically , in a nutshell, there's not much of a difference with .58 rifles vs .69 Smoothbores to 200 yards, in practical terms of Civil War combat.
Past 200 yards is largely academic because very few engagements began at longer ranges.
There's a reason why the original plan was to continue to issue. 69 Smoothbores to line Infantry and use the new .58 rifles for special Rifle regiments, like in the Mexican War.
Smoothbores are also faster and easier to load and are less ammo sensitive. Minie sizing was a constant issue with the .58's
But it was decided to standardize on
the .58 for logistical reasons which didn't work out anyway
By 1865 the US was already moving to converting all these surplus rifles to Trapdoor and by 1867 the British had gone to the Snider, so the .58 Rifled Musket had a brief service life and was only really used to its potential in large scale combat by the British in the Crimean War. Who actually trained their soldiers extensively, unlike the US and CS.
The tactics of the day didn't allow for that on either side. Would have been interesting if it had. In a morbid sense.If marksmanship was so common in the CSA than entire Divisions of Confederates would have stayed in the wood lines and poured accurate fire into Federal Troops at 500 yards and won every battle.
Napoleonic Tactics were still trained at West Point at this time, long range rifle volleys weren't even integrated into the "training culture " of American Officers yetThe tactics of the day didn't allow for that on either side. Would have been interesting if it had. In a morbid sense.
Still don't get your point with out a comparison of the two projectiles at point blank range. At 100 yards a smoothbore is pretty much a slow spray and pray weapon on an single target. Volley fire into a group would be something akin to spray and pray. YMMV
Enter your email address to join: