Clue me in on Civil War Cannon loadings!

[H&R Glock]

Ken Burns makes some great documentaries about wars and other interesting topics, but he did not get too technical when it comes to cannon fire.
Apparently cannon can be loaded with shot or shell. Shot is solid and shell is hollow with a bursting charge.
Nobody seems to know a lot about how the shells were fused. All those dramatic civil war movies show cannon balls exploding, but neglect to tell if they are Boxer or Berdan primed.
How do you put a primer into a cannon ball?
From the standpoint of a modern reloader, how were the shots from a civil war cannon exploded on target as we see in the movies?
Oh yeah I seem to remember grape shot or cannister shot which I think was something like shotgun shells and did not explode. Or did they explode??? Maybe all this information is still classified "Top Secret" from the civil war. There seems to be no interest in the subject except those with prying minds.
Right now I picture Wiley Cayote throwing an Acme bomb with flaming fuse.

 

[Mike OTDP]

At the time, there were several rounds available...not all for all types of artillery.
1. Solid shot
2. Shell. Explosive charge, had a fuse to set it off. The flame from the firing would light the fuse. Fuse length was dependent on range...you cut to suit, then adjusted.
3. Canister. Tin can full of iron balls. Shotgun.
4. Shrapnel. Like a shell, but only a small bursting charge and a lot of iron balls. Long-range shotgun.

Smoothbore cannon of the Civil War era could fire everything. Rifled guns were pretty much limited to solid shot, maybe shell. It's why the 12-pounder Napoleon was the most desired cannon...it shot everything.

As for Hollywood, they get it wrong every time. The really deadly way to use artillery was in enfilade, shooting across the enemy line instead of straight at it. What you used depended on what you were shooting at, and at what range. Solid shot was good against other cannon, or columns of troops. Shells were also good. Shrapnel was good against deployed infantry at longer ranges, Canister close in.

 

[Slamfire]

How do you put a primer into a cannon ball?
From the standpoint of a modern reloader, how were the shots from a civil war cannon exploded on target as we see in the movies?

I don't have any good fuse pictures. The period fuses look like mushrooms. Fuses were screwed into the cannon ball. They were real primitive, they were not contact fuses, instead, a powder train was ignited during firing. The time of burn was adjusted prior to ramming the shell down the barrel, I don't know how they did it. But, since it was a guess, a lot of shells blew up before and after the target. And a lot of shells did not explode.

Something that has been forgotten is just how dangerous those cast iron cannon were to their gun crews. On average, a Parrot gun, blew up after 300 rounds. These pictures are from Fort Morgan Alabama, not a Parrot gun, but still, a cast iron cannon, that blew up during testing.



Lt. Col Stewart CSA, his head was blown off, when the cast iron cannon blew up.You can read an eyewitness account here

Fort commander dies in accident during Civil War
http://ww.heraldtimesonline.com/stories/2010/08/21/outdoors.qp-5416821.sto



Any way, when a cannon blew, it pretty much killed everyone in the area, probably up to a 25 yard radius. Maybe more, after all, a 200 lb chunk of metal is very heavy and will kill anyone as long as it is in the air.

 

[Jenrick]

Fuses were originally reeds or quills that we're filled with powder, and then stuck into the shell. These were also measured and cut by eye and the best estimate (guess) of the gunner. You can imagine this was not particularly accurate in regards to fusing time. Shrapnel when correctly fused could be devastating to troops in the open, and shell wasn't to shabby in this regard either. Shell was primarily used against fortifications and troops in cover to try and blast them out (it didn't work all that well for it truthfully). Canister had the advantage of being devastating period, if the target was in range. Solid shot as noted was great for picking out specific targets like artillery batteries. If you could engage troops in enfilade, or directly into a column, it could cut a bloody swath as well.

As an aside, canister was just that, an actual canister loaded with basically large musket balls or similar. The shock from firing would rupture it as it went out of the barrel and it would spray the contents out in a fan shaped pattern. Grapeshot wasn't really an official type of loading in the civil war on land. True grape shot was a naval loading, that used round shot (small compared to cannon balls, massive compared to musket balls), of sufficient size to punch a hole through the upper works of ships hull to strike the crew on the other side. Grapeshot for the army in general meant any kind of shorter ranged canister (so a linen bag full of musket balls, etc) that was improvised as a final line of defense range loading.

Also if you got a civil war military focused forum, you will learn more about the subject than you will probably want to. I'm not sure if baseball fanatics or civil war weapons fans are more into esoteric statistics and data.

 

[ThomasT]

In the other thread on cannons I mentioned the Time-Life Civil War series of books. One volume has a section on cannon loads used and it is several pages of photos of the different shells they had and of the fuses used. It was impressive. They were not at all primitive in their thinking when it came to killing people. And since they all went to the same schools and trained on the same weapons each side was equal in knowledge but maybe not in equipment.

I have that whole series of books and have read every word in then but it would take a while to find that one section. And I am not allowed to scan it in since its copyrighted. But the whole series is a good read. Once.

 

[H&R Glock]

I'm still confused as to why a fuse, stuck thru a hole in the cannonball, could be lit and fired safely. The fuse had to be behind the ball or in front of it while in the bore. If behind it, the red hot gas from the powder would get into the fuse hole and blow the thing up in the bore. If in front of the shell somebody would have to light it.
Nobody seems to have a picture of the "mushroom shaped" device that was used as a fuse.
I figured a fuse device had to be screwed into the cannon ball to seal it and somehow lit itself with the acceleration down the bore.
Some of youse guys must have survived the civil war to know the skinny about cannon fusing? I'd appreciate your 2 cents on this. Confederate money accepted.

 

[Slamfire]

Take a look at this:

How Artillery Fuzes Worked

http://civilwarartillery.com/fuzes/default.htm

Some fuzes were more "mushroomy" than others.









And, I was wrong, they had percussion fuzes.

 

[WestKentucky]

Confederate money accepted.

Why bother, it’s all considered fake these days anyway.

 

[kBob]

Time fuze in the nose was lit by blow by in the cannon bore. Most of the time, though it sometimes failed to happen.

The Brits about the time of the ACW did have some base fuzed time rounds lit by the propelling charge. These were in a wooden tube that was placed in a special cutter that cut a hole at the proper point for a given time.

There were a number of percussion type impact fuzes.

The proper term for a hollow round that contains prefragmented bits (generally round ball) that simply explodes casting bits in all directions is CASE

Shrapnel is a round that directs the prefragmented bits forward and is essentially a flying shot gun. I have not seen or read of any such round being used by either side in the ACW. I have read reports where what was CASE was reported as shrapnel. They are different rounds.

One of the issues with case is being omni direction in burst pattern some the subprojectiles are actually slowed down when the case round bursts, thus reports of victims that they were mearly bruised while the man next to them was shot through are likely true,

The round was great as long as you knew the exact range and had your fuze cut correctly. Unfortunately attacking Infantry tend to not stand still so gunners had to cut fuzes short and then wait for the enemy to step into the expected kill zone. Many commanders (and the troops being supported) that we not themselves artillerymen failed to understand why their gunners were not firing as fast as possible

Shrapnel which was largely dropped before WWII was replaced by flechette rounds in the 1960s. Depending on the weapon it is used in it can be much like cannister or a sort of combination of Case and Shrapnel as it is directional. MUCH better than any of the previous bursting rounds for APERS use against "Infantry in the open" Such a round caused me to have a stern "good talking to" at Ft Bragg one sunny summer day.

The issue with firing whatever is available as cannister is called bridging. This is where say that bit of iron work that slid down the bore easily before firing gets cross wise in the bore on firing and can damage or even burst the gun bore. Multiple chunks can combine to form a bridge across the bore and cause pressure problems or drive material into the metal of the weapon. Shoving whatever down the bore and firing it is the artillery equvilent of an Infantry man picking up a Big Fine Rock or Big Fine Stick as the enemy closes with bayonets.

Despite what the Nation Park service expects of reinactors most ACW muzzle loading cannon ammunition was a projectile, on a sabot, with a powder bag attached or in the case of the rifled guns a projo and bag with no sabot or separate loading projo and powder bag. Loose powder was only for emergency touch hole use if there were no friction igniters available ( or an attempt at an extremely accurate shot at a non moving target) and that was basically a pistol powder flask per gun. Not sure where the extra powder that folks were supposedly shooting junk down range came from.

-kBob

 

[4v50 Gary]

By the time of the Civil War, cannon balls didn't need long fuses like they once did. If you really want to learn about artillery, pick up John Gibbons' The Artillerist Manual. It is the book by which artillerymen were trained in the Civil War. See if you can get it via interlibrary loan.

John Gibbons fought at Gettysburg as the brigade commander of the Iron Brigade (nickname given to the midwestern unit that was the 1st Brigade, 1st Division, 1st Corps).

I posted elsewhere, but the Confederate fuses were faulty and the Union had superior fuses.

 

[Jim Watson]

I went to a reenactors' live fire practice. They used aluminum foil cartridges which meant the gun had to be wormed as well as sponged every shot. This slowed the rate of fire which was ok for plywood targets but would not have been good against enemy troops and batteries.

A good fuze cutter was a treasure to the artllerist and a devil to the enemy.

Fuzes are never 100%, especially in wartime mass production. In 1997, my last involvement, they were still digging up WW I UXO in France and Belgium. Some explosive, some gas. Farmers scrounged pieces of armor plate to put under their tractor seats. I expect it is still going on.

 

[H&R Glock]

Yes I have a good understanding of how modern, WWI and later, fuzing worked, but it was the primitive civil war type cannons that I was totally ignorant of.
Thanks Slamfire for the picture of the fuse. I have never seen anything like that and have seen nothing like that in the movies (hollywood). All they show in movies is cannon balls exploding.
Cutting one of those before screwing it in would be time consuming tho. Maybe that's why there were 3 or 4 guys manning each gun. I assume that the fuse held some gun powder mixture with an appropriate burning rate.
I know that firing an exploding shell or Case (thanks Kbob) in any gun is not legal (destructive device) so maybe that's why us civilians are in the dark about fusing of the civil war stuff. Re-inactors can't use it so we don't see it.
All the old cannon fire I have seen in person consisted of firing wadding to get the boom.
I tried to get the book Artillerists Manual, but there are no copies available through the Michigan library system. (MEL.ORG) They also list "The artillerist's manual, and British soldier's compendium"
also not available.

 

[Jenrick]

Good thread, learning a lot. My interest has lain towards naval guns, which is a whole different set of issues. Regarding the "Artillerist's Manual," if you don't mind reading on a screen or are willing to pay to print it out:

https://archive.org/details/artilleristsman00gibbgoog - this link has the ability to download it in most common ereader formats, read it on screen there and download a PDF.

http://www.artilleryreserve.org/Artillerists Mannual.pdf - this is cleaned up PDF version, that would probably work better for printing

I certainly have some reading to do.

 

[loose noose]

I too was ignorant of how the cannon balls exploded, well now I know. Very interesting if I do say so myself. I always thought that cannon balls were just big perfectly round balls that went thru the air with out little or no resistance, unless they hit someone, or something, now I know.

 

[CANNONMAN]

There's a lot more to what and how they shot cannons! Those that are hinting around what other nations in other histories did are excellent studies. But think about some of the posts in and around this topic that deal with the civil war. With what we know now with what they had then, how could we,they have built a better cannon ball? The length of fuse thing is correct. And there were those who were darn well versed and accurate. Now how about a better fuse, fused with better math? [pardon the pun] The rate of travel of the ball with the rate of the fuse burn can be much more accurate with a better fuse. One of the problems as I see it is the need for constants. The math always changes as do the so called constants. Now days you can buy fuse that burns at any rate you desire. fast enough and it's primacord. And the BP they had changed from manufacture to weather conditions and everything else. I'd like to get there but for now its going to be solve the impact constant then the timing. How to do this without fuse or bp constants.

 

[H&R Glock]

Thanks Jenrick. I spent over an hour just reading about the production of black powder. I was blown away the the level of education in the 1800's concerning chemistry, math, and general engineering. Havent got to the fuzes yet-
Boxer was 50 years late getting to the war!

 

[CapnMac]

I always thought that cannon balls were just big perfectly round balls that went thru the air with out little or no resistance, unless they hit someone, or something, now I know.

And some were.
Rather a lot, really. Artillery was meant to be applied at long ranges, around a mile. Canister and case were reserved for when enemy infantry had closed to 200 or 100 yards--long rifle shot.

Contemporary accounts are replete with accounts of cannoners aiming short to "bounce" round shot through massed infantry or cavalry. And the military of the time put great stock in massed, close, formations. Which had some legitimate validity as a way to overcome the slow rate of fire of ML muskets.

 

[CapnMac]

One of the interesting things about artillery in the 1860s was that the projectiles were significantly larger bore than the shages propelling them. Science and machining were beginning to converge around then. Windage was much reduced from just 50 years' prior. Powder was chemically more standardized, and more uniform in grain size than in decades or generations earlier.

A twenty-four pounder (artillery firing a nominal 24# projectile) might hae a powder charge of only 10 or 12 pounds, sometimes less. But, that varied per the piece and its bore. Some of the "gallopers" and other light field pieces did not have separate chambers, mostly as an aid to loading.

It's all fascinating stuff.

 

[JeffG]

Here is a book written as practical thesis by Admiral John Dahlgren. "Shells and Shellguns" It by no means covers the entire scope of Civil War era ordinance, but it gives the reader an idea of the complicated, and fascinating subject matter.
https://archive.org/details/shellsandshellg01dahlgoog

 

[kBob]

Rodman, as in Rodman gun, was playing with different shapes of powder kernals, even some work with discs of powder that had holes in the discs in an attempt to keep the area burning more even and so pressures up over a longer period of time. His work was interrupted by the war. Aparently the Navy did use some of his ideas (just like them squids stealing the good stuff from the grunts every chance they get!) during the ACW.

one of the important things about listing guns by weight of round shot (and then came conicals and they were still listed by weight but it no longer gave you an idea of bore diameter) So you are reading and it says Colonel Swathebottom-Smyth had a battery of 12 pounders, what does that mean?

Well folks assume this means a "Napoleon" Gun/Howitzer US 12 pounder 1857.

Come on military guys you know what "ASSUME" does to you and me.

There were a lot of the older patterns on the field in 1861.

A 12 Pound GUN from the 1836 patterns has a heavier barrel and longer barrel than a Napoleon and so weighs a good bit more. It can take about the heaviest of the 12 pound charges.

A 12 pound howitzer is shorter, the tube walls thinner, and as has been pointed out is a straight back tube with no smaller firing chamber it is shorter and lighter than the GUN but must use a smaller charge to fire the same projectiles and so does not have the range or velocity of the GUN. It shoots at a higher angle to reach the same range as a GUN.

Basically the "Napoleon" has both names 12 pound GUN/HOWITZER because it replaced both and actually weighed less than the old gun yet could take the full charge through better design.

Also still floating around from the 1836 series was the 12 pound Mountain Howitzer. It was a pack howitzer that could be broken down and carried on pack saddles by mules or assembled be towed by a single animal with ammo on pack boards on other animals. It was so light in construction that it could not fire solid shot and was restricted to reduce propellent loads with Spherical CASE and SHELL and had a canister round that carried only half what the others did. These were found mostly in Southern State militia units and out west, but saw some Union use, Some states actually mounted the guns on basically the 1836 six pounder carriage modified for the larger diameter tube.

Confussed yet? Think about being responsible for ammo supply.

Think for a moment what a battery of six cannon for a single Infantry Regiment in the field is like.....want to try to keep 210 plus horses fed, watered, tacked, and groomed? Imagine the vet bills today!!!

-kBob

 

[H&R Glock]

JeffG- you civil war experts must have a private library system. All I get while searching the state library system for these books is:


Shells and shell-guns.

16, 436 pages :
ISBN/ISSN:



No copies currently available

1856

I did however download the Artillerist's book and it it a treasure of good info..
Generally I can order any book that is registered in Michigan libraries sent to my local library for free. This book might be available in the next few weeks so I will keep trying.
So far I believe my round cannon balls were fuzed with a wooden tube or paper tube fuse that could be cut to the time needed and pounded into the cannon ball. Sounds like a Rube Goldberg way of obtaining a hit.

 

[JeffG]

Try this... I get a downloadable PDF (??) They have to be downloaded or viewed on line. I have a printed copy in my library.

https://archive.org/details/shellsandshellg01dahlgoog

or

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=miun.adh3011.0001.001;view=1up;seq=5

In the late 1850s, the arsenal began producing shells and spherical case shot fitted with Bormann fuses. This waterproof pewter fuse screwed into the iron ball. It featured a sealed powder channel that could be exposed by the gunner, who used a chisel to punch a small hole through a number (between 1 and 5) cast into the face of the fuse. The numbers corresponded to how many seconds the gunner wanted the fuse to burn. When the cannon fired, the flame of the propelling charge wrapped around the ball and ignited the exposed powder train, which in turn sparked the bursting charge after burning for the selected number of seconds.

Contrary to Hollywood films and popular lore, these cannonballs did not explode on contact. Percussion fuses were not used on spherical projectiles. These shells and spherical case shot were designed to explode only when a flame reached the interior charge.
Here's an example of a spherical shot fuse. It's roughly timed, not burst on impact.

 

[H&R Glock]

Thanks JeffG- I saw the chisleable fuse in the Artillerist's book, however, they failed to indicate the year in which the fuses were used. Slamfires picture showed a date code of 1861 which blew away my beliefs in fuze technology development in the CW years. I had no idea the fuze was also the bursting cfharge. I assume the punching of the fuze was done prior to the insertion to the shell?

My poor understanding of the 1850's advancements in warfare have been corrected. Those G.I.s (both sides) were on the cutting edge of science.

The books mentioned in this thread were published way back in the 1800's and are now collectors items. That's why I can't borrow one from anywhere! It took a while for that to dawn on me! Sorry, I'm learning.

Who'da figured the flame from the propelling charge would get around the wadding and around the projectile and ignite the fuze train. Someone must have been responsible for learning this the hard way. Any ideas? I picture a ka-boom barrel happened to someone.

 

[JeffG]

Early fuses of the Gabriveau system were just thick dowels with a powder center. Sometimes they burst in the gun. Previous to that, they lit external fuses like the Coyote and Roadrunner, and tossed them into the gun, hoping the cannon would fire first!! I’m guessing in the heat of battle, somebody threw an unlit one into a gun, and it lit anyway, and they figured it out. One of the big concerns was getting the shell well away of the gun before it exploded. A lot of gun crews were killed early on. There is great reading by an author Ian Hogg, if you can find them. Most larger libraries have acces to his books , if you request them.

 

[JeffG]

Another good book,
Round Shot and Rammers: An Introduction to Muzzle-Loading Land Artillery in the United States