I give Herb a lot of credit for going through all he did to shoot the rifles at the ranges he did. That is some fine target shooting. By using a modern spotting scope and other modern equipment, he was able to demonstrate what it took to shoot a really good group at 300 yards and with 20 shots, what it took to hit four times at 400 yards on a specific target, at a specific place with aiming points at that place to hit those 4 times out of 20 shots.
Earlier in this thread I already mentioned I have seen good shooting done at 500 yards on a target range with a Flintlock Longrifle that had a set of fine vernier style sights mounted on it. The shooters also used modern spotting scopes, had other shooters spot for them, there were range flags along the course of fire and shooting was done in prone and reverse prone. In that case, the target was placed on a standard military target frame that I think was 6’ x 6’, if I remember correctly. The idea was to be able to see where the PRB went when the wind came up a little.
To put it simply, I do not argue what a Longrifle is capable of with modern round balls carefully matched to the bore size with precision measuring instruments for both the ball and patch, using a short starter, loaded carefully and exactly as possible for every shot and having at least a 20 X spotting scope and shooting from a bench rest in a target setting. OH, and the rifle used by Herb was a percussion gun that gives even the best shooters a slight edge over a flintlock.
But what has this got to do with 18th century technology and Warfare, let alone 18th century Warfare?
If we are to believe that American Riflemen commonly shot this well at 300 yards during the Revolutionary War, then were are the documented cases of them mowing down significant numbers of British Troops in formation at those ranges? Note: I am not asking for significant numbers of individual soldiers having been shot at those ranges, but rather formations in which a missed shot is often likely to hit the Soldier next to or a couple men down from the Soldier aimed at. IOW, I am only asking for effective combat accuracy and not what we call sniping today.
SURELY in a time period when most literate soldiers knew the effective range of a musket was no more than 60 to maybe 80 yards, that such astounding combat accuracy would have been noted and used time and time again, would it not? For example, IF such 300 yard accuracy of the Longrifle was the norm and an understrength company of 60 Riflemen with their carefully loaded FIRST charge in their gun barrels and “laying down as to take the best aim” (to poorly paraphrase Hanger) or take up the best supported position they could; would have hit at least 50% if not 75% percent of their targets and killed/seriously wounded/taken out of action at least 30 if not 45 British Soldiers, no? OK, so where are the documented examples?
Such examples of shooting into formations would not have to be on the battlefield, BTW. A marching column offers the same kind target scenario. If one aimed at the leading soldiers on the flank of a marching column and the soldiers kept marching, the hits would be on the soldiers behind them in marching formations.
Now as opposed to what American Riflemen could do on a Target Range or Dog and Pony show in the Revolutionary War Period, let’s look to an example of what they actually DID in combat. I apologize for the sites used, but I lost my better links when my computer crashed last October. These linked descriptions are all of the same Skirmish/Battle, but are interesting in the details.
6 March 1781 Battle of Wetzel’s Mill at Reedy Fork in Guilford County
Williams was alerted to Tarleton's approach, and managed to withdraw most of his men across the ford, where they established a defensive line. Tarleton's men then drove the last of Williams' light infantry across the river. Tarleton sent a company of men from the 23rd Regiment under James Webster to storm across the ford. Williams' riflemen were ordered to target the officer, and Henry Lee reported that they "discharged their rifles at him, one by one", but "himself and horse were untouched".[1] The British eventually succeeded in crossing the creek, and after several miles of pursuit, Tarleton gave up the chase and rejoined the main army.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Wetzell's_Mill
Light Horse Harry Lee, in later years, recalled that on Reedy Fork he had posted twenty five of Campbell's sharpshooters in an old log schoolhouse with chinking gone. These men could split an apple held on the point of a ramrod by a comrade 150 yards away. They were to fire on 'particular objects'. An important looking officer, later found to be Colonel Webster, was spotted on a fat horse, making slow progress in deep water. All the marksmen had a shot at him, seriatim, some reloading for a second try, all seeing, not believing, as horse and rider passed the stream unhurt.
http://rockbridgeadvocate.com/odell/marches.htm
On the south bank of the creek Williams left the Botetourt Riflemen under Preston. When the British vanguard arrived and began to cross the ford, the Botetourt Riflemen fired a volley that sent them fleeing in disarray. The riflemen then crossed the ford themselves and waited for the larger British attack they knew would follow. Cornwallis sent about half his infantry under Col. James Webster. Seeing the reluctance of his men to cross the creek in plain view of the riflemen, Webster slowly crossed on his horse ahead of them while Campbell’s riflemen fired 32 shots at him. Amazingly, Webster reached the other side unscathed. In the face of the unwavering advance of the British line, followed by the arrival of Tarleton with cannons, the American rearguard retreated. In this skirmish the Americans are believed to have lost eight killed, all Botetourt Riflemen. British losses are unknown, but there is little doubt that some of the American riflemen hit their targets.
http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~vaboteto/clappsmill.html
Now, maybe this is the case of the worst recorded accuracy by American Riflemen in the Revolutionary War, but it indeed shows why Colonel Lee ordered American Riflemen to not fire beyond 150 yards about 4-5 years earlier.
Gus
