the winner, by a nose

[nchawkeye]

I don't know if they could see the nose but if it's in the center of the board, they don't have to... :thumbsup:

Hanger's accounts are eyewitness, not later paintings or literature...That would make them more reliable than others...He was also a man that knew firearms and how to use them...

Remember, he was impressed enough that he sent several riflemen with their guns to England where they gave demonstrations...That's how some of our long rifles ended up in the Tower of London...These are probably the best kept flintlocks from that era...

In addition to bringing in German riflemen for the War England also began making long rifles themselves, to be used in later wars...

 

[wulf]

I get a kick out of the guy sitting and working on
his over/under pointed at the other guys butt..
Certainly no range rules here...

 

[Artificer]

The British Army/German troops used Jaeger rifles here in the French and Indian War and the Revolutionary War. Now they did not use LOT of them especially in the French and Indian War, but they had them and did some good shooting as well.

Hanger's accounts were not all "eye witness." The one in the story is, but if you read the story closely, other stories of the American Rifleman's prowess were what he got from people telling him about the accuracy, not what he actually saw.

However, the British Army learned the lessons of war, as far as rifles go, MUCH better than we Americans. They fielded a .62 caliber Baker Rifle that was much better for shooting at long range than most of our Long Rifles. It also had flip up sights for long range shooting.
Gus

 

[Semisane]

A few questions to consider.
Concerning the statement that "then sixty odd hit the object", is the object referred to the nose, or the board. If it was the board, how big was the board?

Here's another thing to keep in mind when reading that newspaper account. The Patriot leaders (especially guys like shrewd old Ben Franklin) were very astute in the use of propaganda. They were know to spread tall tales concerning the fantastic shooting abilities of the Colonists so as to strike fear in the British troops. One must wonder if that article had just such a purpose.

 

[Artificer]

Here is a period quote many people have never heard of and gives us a much better account of what Riflemen could do in the Revolutionary War. It is taken from a letter from Colonel Lee (who was an early proponent of Riflemen in the Revolutionary War) and who knew their limitations - to Colonel William Thompson during the siege of Charleston.

"It is a certain truth that the enemy entertain a most fortunate apprehension of American riflemen. It is equally certain that nothing can diminish this apprehension so infallibly as a frequent ineffectual fire. It is with some concern, therefore, that I have been informed that your men have been suffered to fire at a most preposterous distance. Upon this principle, I must entreat and insist, that you consider it as a standing order, that not a man under your command is to fire at a greater distance than one hundred and fifty yards, at the utmost; in short, they must never fire without almost a moral certainty of hitting their object. Distant firing has a doubly bad effect; it encourages the enemy, and adds to the pernicious persuasion of the American soldiers, viz; that they are no match for their antagonists at close fighting. To speak plainly, it is almost a sure method of making them cowards. Once more, I must request that a stop be put to this Childish, vicious, and scandalous practice”¦"

General Charles Lee to Colonel Thompson, Charleston, SC, June 21, 1776, quoted in Peter Force, ed. American Archives. Series 4, volume 5, 1776, Washington, DC: M. St. Clair Clarke and Peter Force, 1839, 99-100.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

OK, so why was Lee so adamant about not shooting beyond a distance "it was a moral certainty of hitting" the enemy? He speaks to some of the reasons, but not specifically to the accuracy of the rifle itself and certainly not accuracy in war time.

They did not use fractional caliber size to describe their rifles, but from the number of balls to the pound normally mentioned, it seems that .45 to .52 Caliber was a general norm with some rifles using larger calibers than that.

We also do not know for sure how the Riflemen normally sighted in their rifles, though speculation is they most likely sighted them in at around half a furlong or 110 yards.

By checking modern ballistics charts, we find that sighting in a rifle in that caliber range at 110 to 120 yards, allows one to shoot point of aim point of impact on deer and other medium or large size game out to 150 yards!!

Now further checking of ballistics tables on rifles in that range of calibers AND actual range shooting tells us something else that is very interesting. IF a Rifleman aimed at the TOP of the British Soldiers forehead or better still at the hat on top of the British Soldier's Head, the ball would drop down into about the center (or slightly below) of the torso on a British Soldier of the period - considering the average height of a British Soldier. So they actually had a really good aiming point at 200 yards to hit an enemy soldier.

However, the above information also requires NO wind to be blowing OR the person to be a GOOD judge of the wind blowing, how it would affect the strike of the bullet and holding off enough to properly compensate for the wind. IOW, if a good breeze/wind was blowing, it would be easy not to hold off enough for wind and miss a soldier at 200 yards - even in the best of circumstances. These physical facts were as true then as today, so it goes to give us further information on why Colonel Lee forbade his troops from firing beyond 150 yards.

Finally, it is one thing to shoot on a range when there is little or no stress on a shooter during practice. Even the BEST shooters do their best to equal how well they shoot in practice as when they shoot in competition, BUT no one is shooting at them when they have that level of stress. The level of accuracy in war time falls off due to combat stress, lack of good food and rest, and a number of other physical and psychological factors.

So taking these things into account, it is not hard to understand why Colonel Lee ordered his Riflemen not to fire beyond 150 yards.

Gus

 

[bpd303]

that not a man under your command is to fire at a greater distance than one hundred and fifty yards, at the utmost

A year earlier... "Don't fire till you see the whites of their eyes." Bunker & Breed's Hill.

 

[Artificer]

A year earlier... "Don't fire till you see the whites of their eyes." Bunker & Breed's Hill.

Well, that was with musket armed American troops, rather than Riflemen, though. British Accounts put the distance at no more than 60 yards when they stopped to fire on the Americans at Breed's Hill and 50 yards was more likely the actual distance they fired from.

However, the American General Stark (who had been an Officer in Roger's Rangers) had Aiming Stakes driven into the ground only 40 yards from his position during the battle and absolutely forbade his musket armed troops from firing before the British crossed that line. He and his troops actually drove back a British Flanking Movement by adhering to the Aiming Stake Range.

Gus

 

[Turtle Creek]

depends on the shooter and weapon. With a modern weapon I've hit a 1/2 silhouette at 800 meters iron sights. 40 out of 40 with pop ups out to 300 meters iron sights.
Hitting a mark on a board at 150 wouldn't be an issue if you have decent vision.

 

[nchawkeye]

Charles Lee was a Brit and a pompous fool, trained in warfare in Britian...He wanted Washington's job, was captured by Tarleton, was a womanizer and had low moral character...

I wouldn't trust him to tell me when to take a shot with a rifle...

 

[Artificer]

Charles Lee was a Brit and a pompous fool, trained in warfare in Britian...He wanted Washington's job, was captured by Tarleton, was a womanizer and had low moral character...

I wouldn't trust him to tell me when to take a shot with a rifle...

I agree Lee wanted Washington's Job, but so did other Continental Officers. Washington made some pretty foolish mistakes, himself, but he had the opportunities and took advantage of them to turn that around. As to womanizing, well..... that was a common factor in many of the founding fathers..... and even a good many of the founding mothers looked the other way when their husbands strayed, as long as such affairs were discreet. In an age when so many women died in child birth, some women kept these secrets for their own purpose of survival.

Had Benedict Arnold died from earlier wounds, he would have been one of the greatest American Hero's of the Revolution today.

Lee's downfall came from his horrible handling of our troops later on in the war during the Battle of Monmouth. It does not change the fact that Lee was a strong proponent of Riflemen early in the war, nor does it change physical facts about the rifles that can be closely documented today.

Gus

 

[Alden]

I can't see a nose, not even a Roman one, at 150-feet no less yards.

 

[George]

You guys are selling your guns short, as well as yourselves. Hitting a foot-square board at 150 yards in no big deal. You talk as though its some sort of miraculous shot that only Hawkeye could pull off. 'Tain't so.

I went mule deer hunting in Nevada many years ago, and I worked up a long range load and practiced with it a fair bit in the weeks before the trip. My .54 gives me about 1750 fps at the muzzle with that load. Calculated trajectory when zeroed at 100 yards is 3.6" low at 125, 9.5" low at 150. A mule deer is about 16" from top line of the back to bottom line of the brisket, so I reasoned if I held on the line of the back I would hit 6" up from the bottom line, right on the major vessels and the heart. I set up appropriate targets to test that out and with a little practice found that I could consistently do just that from a rest. Of course I had to try it offhand, even though I would never shoot at a deer that way. I could kill the target in a high percentage of the shots.

Anyone interested can prove this for himself, but you'll have to sight your gun for greater than 50 yards and stop thinking that's the max range for any muzzleloader. Might have to give some thought to the trajectory, too, so... Houston, we may have a problem. :grin:

Spence

 

[Artificer]

About the Colonel George Hanger quoted story: Part 1

There is little or no doubt that the quoted story by then Major Hanger is the best documented story (and known so publicly) of what the American Riflemen could do in a VERY unique set of circumstances.

Major Hanger was none as one of, if not THE Best Rifleman in England prior to coming to America and eventually winding up serving with Tarleton. (Period accounts state this to be true, though I am sorry the quotes I had on that were lost when my old computer crashed last October.)

Even if one wishes to take the devil’s advocate position, it is hard to imagine a reason why Major Hanger would exaggerate or make up Pro American Propaganda, as he was a serving British Officer. Though Major Hanger was a well-known Rifleman in England at the time, there is nothing to suggest he may have been pushing for expanding the use of the rifle in the British Army for other than the special support weapon the Army was already using it for at the time. When such a rifle experienced Officer on the opposing side of the war makes such statements, I very much agree it begs special notice be taken of his comments.

A note of caution is germane, to not infer too much of this one situation and examine it more in depth. So may I suggest we break the story down into parts to examine them in detail?

First of all, the quote earlier in the thread leaves out some information in the original quote:

“The words were hardly out of my mouth, when the bugle-horn man said, “Sir, my horse is shot.” The horse staggered, fell down and died. He was shot directly behind the fore-leg, near to the heart, at least where the great blood-vessels lie, which lead to the heart. He took the saddle and bridle off, went into the wood, and got another horse. We had a number of spare horses led by negro lads.

Now, speaking of this rifleman's shooting, nothing could be better, but, from the climate, he had much in his favour. First at that time of the year, there was not one breath of wind, secondly, the atmosphere is so much clearer than ours, that he can take a more perfect aim.”

What where the Environmental Conditions when the shot was made?

1. Visibility. Hanger commented “ the atmosphere is so much clearer than ours, that he can take a more perfect aim.” This sounds like the visibility conditions were ideal.

2. Wind conditions. Hanger commented, “First at that time of the year, there was not one breath of wind..” WOW, zero wind conditions for a 400 yard shot!! You could not ask for better when shooting a firearm with a patched round ball!!

3. Terrain and obstructions to the shot. Hanger commented, “It was an absolute plain field between us and the mill; not so much as a single bush on it.” Now there is nothing about how flat the “plain field” was between the Rifleman and the British Officers, but clearly there were no obstructions for the Rifleman’s shot.

My comment. It seems that on that day, the environmental conditions were as close to absolutely perfect as possible.

What about the condition of the Rifleman who made the shot?

1. We do not know if the Rifleman was in basic good health, though that seems to be a given.

2. We also do not know if the Rifleman was tired. If he was, that would have made the shot more difficult.

3. It MAY be that the Rifleman was a bit malnourished considering the food supplies of the Continental Armies in those days. That would have made the shot more difficult.

4. Hanger wrote, “A rifleman passed over the mill-dam, evidently observing two officers, and laid himself down on his belly; for, in such positions, they always lie, to take a good shot at long distance.” So, the Rifleman was not distracted when he lay down to take up the best prone position for firing. No one was shooting at him and at that range with no other troops in sight, the Rifleman had little or nothing to fear from the three British Cavalryman. That was a decided advantage in making the best shot.

Also, we do not know how Hanger came to the conclusion the Rifleman was shooting at two Officers. Tarleton and Hanger’s uniforms were trimmed with narrow bands of silver and that MAY have caused the sunlight to reflect off the silver trim and give them away as Officers. Otherwise, it would have been very difficult to determine they were Officers at 400 yards and not just Cavalry Scouts.

5. Here is a point that is easy to overlook. Hanger wrote: "Colonel, now General Tarleton, and myself, were standing a few yards out of a wood, observing the situation of a part of the enemy which we intended to attack.” I freely admit it took five or six times reading the quote before it dawned on me what that meant. Major Hanger does not say whether there was a tree behind he and Tarleton, but there could have been and that would have made all the difference in the world if the Rifleman had a solid aiming point above the heads of the British Officers. Even if that aiming point was to the right or left of the Officers, it still would have been a decided aiming advantage rather than aiming up into open sky. If you have something that is close to the right elevation to aim at, you can aim to the right or left of it much more precisely than holding over the target.

6. What has not been discussed much is bullet drop at long range with muzzleloaders. Bullet drop between 200 and 300 yards is 6 FEET, which is as tall or taller than the man one was shooting at. I have forgotten what the bullet drop would have been at the 400 yard distance mentioned in Hanger’s quote, but it would have been WAY over the heads of the British Officers.

OK, so with virtually ideal visibility and ZERO wind deviation, lowest possible stress conditions in war time and many things going for the Rifleman shooting at the two British Officers, what happened?

The Rifleman completely MISSED either British Officer he was aiming at!

Not only that, but the Rifleman completely MISSED either horse the two Officers were mounted on!!

Ok, OK, I know that is pretty rough. I spent 23 of my 26 years in the Marine Corps building or being in charge of building NM, Sniper Rifles, and special purpose weapons. Perhaps a little too much of the Sniper Ethos has rubbed off on me. Grin.

Considering where the “Bugle- Horn Man’s Horse” was shot, the Rifleman was not far off on windage or elevation considering how much 400 yards distance would cause a deviation in flight of a patched round ball. Actually when we take into account that the Rifleman may or probably had not done any ranging shots and that was the first round out of a cold barrel, it was indeed an example of very fine marksmanship with the equipment he had.
Gus

 

[Turtle Creek]

I put a target at 50 meters and a target directly behind it at 100 meters.
The near target had the bull chest high and the later waist high.
If properly lined up you will know at what load your ball will drop within that distance with no allowance for aim.
That's as far as our little range has for distance otherwise I'd a kept on going.
I'm going to do the same at 25-50-100 next time no one is around.
Oh yeah, bring a tape measure.

 

[Pete G]

IF a Rifleman aimed at the TOP of the British Soldiers forehead or better still at the hat on top of the British Soldier's Head, the ball would drop down into about the center (or slightly below) of the torso on a British Soldier of the period - considering the average height of a British Soldier. So they actually had a really good aiming point at 200 yards to hit an enemy soldier.

However, the above information also requires NO wind to be blowing OR the person to be a GOOD judge of the wind blowing, how it would affect the strike of the bullet and holding off enough to properly compensate for the wind. IOW, if a good breeze/wind was blowing, it would be easy not to hold off enough for wind and miss a soldier at 200 yards - even in the best of circumstances.

He may very well miss the man at which he was aiming, but stands a good chance at hitting the man standing in formation just downwind.

 

[Artificer]

That's true, Pete.

Had the rifleman been shooting at an British Officer and it was a junior Officer in a battle line, there is a good chance the shot would have hit the enlisted soldier next to him. However, had the target been a more senior Officer on the right of the formation or behind the formation, the shot more likely would have missed when the wind was blowing.
Gus

 

[kaintuck]

:haha:
I witnessed a 60something gentlemen, tell me he will shoot the head of a crow out in the hayfield, then, taking his buggy breakdown 30-30 Winchester, flip the #2 leaf up, STAND and shoot......I paced it off to 150 long paces, dead crow, no head.

:shocked2:
Beware of the "one gun man".......

Marc

 

[Artificer]

Here is another problem about long range shooting for both the French and Indian War and Revolutionary War time periods. When did Riflemen practice shooting at 300 or more yards in that time period? Rifle matches were just not done at that range in that time period.

OK, so what about hunting? Well, if rifles were "zero'd" at around 110 yards to give the "Point Blank Range Firing Technique" as we call it today, this means one could have taken larger game by holding over the animal at 200 yards. HOWEVER, with the bullet dropping another 6 FEET between 200 and 300 yards, how often would they have taken that long range shot? I don't know if there is any documentation for shooting at game at that distance because there is just too much of a chance of missing the game animal even the rare times there is no wind blowing. Far better to sneak closer to an animal to be more certain of hitting the animal than taking a shot from too far off that misses and scares away game that could be or is closer to you.

What about practicing at longer ranges during the Revolutionary War when the Riflemen were part o the Army? Well, maybe, but powder was often way too hard to get to waste it practicing at 300 yards or more. And if they actually did that, it would seem it would have been documented somewhere as that would have been considered a fantastically long range to shoot.

So with the bullet drop of the average rifle having been 8 FEET total or more from their normal aiming point, what did they use to aim at? Well, if there was a hill or tree behind the target, that would have given them an aiming point. BUT, what happens when there was no such hill or tree to aim at above the target?

In modern sniping, about the stupidest thing a sniper can do is climb a tree to take a shot, BUT there are documented examples of Riflemen climbing trees during the Rev War. Why was that? Well, the most often cited reason was to see over the clouds of smoke in front of the enemy forces. However, there were other good reasons for a Rifleman to climb a tree. The first was the Rifleman could probably pick out a spot on the ground behind the target to aim at. The next was he MIGHT be able to see the impact of his shot if he missed and thus be able to adjust his aim. The third reason is that when shooting downhill or uphill, you aim LOWER on the target to hit it than you would on flat ground. This may have helped aiming at longer ranges with the serious bullet drop between 200 and 300 yards.

Please note this discussion is still only talking about 300 yards and not the 400 yard shot mentioned by Colonel Hanger. Perhaps one can argue that some long range practice was done during the Revolution from this account? Or maybe it was just that the Rifleman who fired at Tarleton and Hanger had already ranged a shot there before the Officers and Bugle-horn Man came out of the woods? Unfortunately, we may never know.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Here is something else to consider. At what ranges did Musket Armed Troops stop their advance to fire in the 18th century? I know it is often said they stopped at 100 yards, but is that really true?

The British stopped their advance on Breed's Hill between 50 and 60 yards before they began firing. In the same battle, the American General John Stark had his troops fire their muskets when the British passed the 40 yard Range/Aiming Stakes Stark had ordered placed in the ground prior to the battle.

I may be completely wrong about this, but it seems the British normally advanced a good deal closer than 100 yards before they stopped to fire their muskets as a general rule?

If 50 to 60 yards was the distance they normally stopped to fire, then the effective range of the American Longrifle was three to almost four times that distance. I think that real/demonstrable distance advantage of the American Longrifle was the more realistic ranges they normally fired - IOW, at or more likely under 200 yards. Then when the stories got told and exaggerated on, because the actual range was so long for the time period, then we get the accounts of most of the 300 yard plus myths that were written down.

Gus