tha act of war

[dios]

OK heres the question. upon recently being drawn into the particular sport and having a friend fire approx 14 shots down the range we found that due to fouling the projectile was getting jammed halfway down the barrel, upon quizzing my local dealer he had informed me that every 6 shots or so they need to be quickly cleaned to prevent this.

Now although there in all likelihood is a myriad of different circumstances around my situation the question is: during times of battle how did troops continue to fire without cleaning the barrels?

Was there a technique or something specific which not only prevented fouling but allowed consistant shots during a battle?
:hmm:

 

[gmww]

I believe the bullets were undersized to account for the fouling.

 

[sledgemeister]

was lucky they had bayonets eh!
duno how i would go ducking shrapnel and remembering if i had stuck powder down the barrel let alone the projectile.
makes ya feel sorry for the poor buggers.

 

[faw3]

And maybe that is why they found some rifles after battles with up to 10 loads in a barrel never fired. :rotf: Fred :hatsoff:

 

[jtmattison]

I believe the bullets were undersized to account for the fouling.

They did use bullets that were undersize to achieve fast loading in battle.
I believe they also would shoot a ball with no patch for the same reason.

The history buffs will jump in and give you a solid answer.

HD

 

Yep, undersized bullets and no patching for military muskets--that is why they were notoriously inaccurate. The French called "windage" the difference between bore size and ball size, and stipulated it. A military musket was loaded from a paper cartridge, which acted as the "wad" as well. Riflemen of the era also would load "bare ball" at times of need (battle, quick hunting follow up shot), relying on the fouling from preceding shots to "hold the ball" well enough...at close range, which most hunting and fighting was done at back then, this worked well enough. Those folks didn't worry about how many shots they could get in a row with some magic lube formula without wiping...

 

[musketman]

Now although there in all likelihood is a myriad of different circumstances around my situation the question is: during times of battle how did troops continue to fire without cleaning the barrels?

Was there a technique or something specific which not only prevented fouling but allowed consistant shots during a battle?
:hmm:

Depends on which battle you speak of, during the American Civil War there was the Williams Cleaner bullets, type I thru III...

Williams Cleaner Type III - unearthed at Kennesaw Mountain Battlefield, Georgia

These bullets contained a zinc disc that would expand and scrape the grooves when fired...

 

[Norskie]

You hear tales of soldiers urinating into their barrels for a quick cleaning. I guess that gives a new meaning to 'muzzle control' :hmm:

 

[hawkeye1755]

Harold L. Peterson has written that a .69 cal musket would have fired a ball closer to .63 caliber, while the larger .75 caliber British “Brown Bess” would have fired a .69 cal. ball. Mansberger and Stratton, note 20, correctly observed that “the smoothbore muskets in use during this period would have allowed a much wider tolerances in ball size (windage) than contemporary rifles arms (rifles).” Indeed, such tolerances would have varied more or less than the 0.04 standard generally applied by these investigators.
Link
:hatsoff:

 

[Toomuch_36]

Yep, undersized bullets and no patching for military muskets--that is why they were notoriously inaccurate. The French called "windage" the difference between bore size and ball size, and stipulated it. A military musket was loaded from a paper cartridge, which acted as the "wad" as well. Riflemen of the era also would load "bare ball" at times of need (battle, quick hunting follow up shot), relying on the fouling from preceding shots to "hold the ball" well enough...at close range, which most hunting and fighting was done at back then, this worked well enough. Those folks didn't worry about how many shots they could get in a row with some magic lube formula without wiping...

Also most battles of the day were fought by two opposing lines both loading and firing at close to the same rate and usually lasted for only four or five shots (per man) before the outcome was determined.

Toomuch
...........
Shoot Flint

 

[CrackStock]

You hear tales of soldiers urinating into their barrels for a quick cleaning. I guess that gives a new meaning to 'muzzle control'

Gee, there's a good one for those fellars that want to blow down the bore. We know where that muzzle has been!

:rotf:

CS

 

[grant]

I was watching "Sharpe's Battle" the other night. The main character is Richard Sharpe a Captain in the English "Green Jackets" that used the Baker rifle. This was during Wellington's Spanish campaign against the French. Anyway his riflemen were assigned to train some green Spanish troops. There was a good scene when they were teaching them how to load their muskets. The first step after they got a cartridge was to bite the ball off the top of the cartidge and hold the ball in their mouth. After they primed and dropped the powder down the barrel they were told to spit the ball into the barrel. It looked like the ball was still wrapped in paper which resulted in a spit lubed paper patched ball. Might have helped with fouling. Of course I don't know how historically accurate this was.

 

[MSW]

i am given to understand that if you'd fired more than a half dozen shots, you'd been in a fairly long gunfight. remember that the primary casualty producing weapon (up to civil war era) was edged, and held at the end of a handy gadget already in the hands of the infantry. "You can do anything with a bayonette except sit on it." (Napoleon) also remember that while much is made of the innacuracy of muskets, their goal was to hit a target about four and a half feet tall and as wide as a football field.

 

[grant]

During the Napoleonic wars, I believe the main purpose of the bayonet was to protect against cavalry. Unsupported infantry could not be in the open when cavalry was a threat. Upon sighting cavalry the infantry would form a square with bayonets pointing outward. Horses don't like to charge into a bunch of bayonets. The square protected you from the cavalry but made you a perfect target for artillery. You could fire away at the cavalry but they would just go out of range. If you didn't have any cavalry to drive away the other guy's cavalry you were stuck. Which is what happened to Wellington at Waterloo, until the Prussians showed up.