How to build a better civil war era cannon ball - wanna help?

[CapnMac]

You will need a rifled bore and that will require a breech loading gun.

Actually not. The European powers built RML (rifled muzzle loaders) in the 25-50 ton range. Rather famously, Armstrong built four 100 ton guns, two for Gibraltar and two for Malta, specifically ro answer the 50ton turreted rifles used by the Italian Navy.

(The superstructures of those ships was unique, the turret trained around to a casemate through wich powder and then shot were rammed down the muzzles, before being trained back onto target; possible on a ship for having available steam power for the rammers, etc.)

 

[Officers'Wife]

You know, There are about eight one liners in the same vein as Rodney Dangerfield I can come up with for that line and each one could get me banned from here. So I won't. I have 6 pounds of Mercury. But its not enough to float a very big ball.

I have the full set of Time Life Civil War series books and of them has a section on cannon shells. Its impressive what they had invented for the war. It seems like they had several fused shells but I don't remember the details of what they had.

OK, I had my curiosity kick in... (one of my many failings I'm afraid) so I ran some numbers. Assuming a cylinder 3 and a quarter inches in diameter you would need over 13 pounds of metal to fill the cylinder. Since the lead ball is going to displace most of the volume your six pounds would be enough to float the ball. Until the lead dissolves and then you are going to have a hazardous waste alloy.

 

[JeeperCreeper]

Sabot round? Maybe outta iron and wood?

I don't know, I was just daydreaming with no knowledge

 

[kBob]

Most round ball of the ACW era did have a sabot. This was a wooden (gee like a wooden shoe, a "sabot" in French) plug some fitted with a greased bit of rope in a grove around them to better seal the bore. The round cannon ball sat in a semi spherical hole in the front of the sabot and was attached to the sabot via wire or metal strapping. This arrangement for shell, a powder loaded hollow ball or case shot a hollow round ball with powder AND round ball pre made fragments mixed in; had a ring at the nose to allow the projectile to be fuzed with a time fuze.

Notice that this sabot being made of wood and waxed or greased and sometimes having a grease band of greased rope on it sounds suspiciously like that wonderful new idea of placing a tail on a round ball discussed up stream.

While modern cannon sabot are multiple pieces that house a subcaliber projectile these round balls that gave us the term used a solid piece that often stayed with the projectile until impact, but not always.

The sabot also served as something to tie a powder bag to so one could do one ram loading. The system is often credited to Karl Gustav of Sweden around 1620 and used in the 30 years war and through the end of muzzle loading artillery.

This is real basic stuff.

Stand off fuzes almost as long as the actual shell were common in the French 75 and US copy of 1917 as this allowed them to have some chance of detonating above ground.

This is why the OP needs to get off line and into the library.

-kBob

 

[entropy]

Your correct! Well, sort of. Much of this is going to be theoretical. But! I plan on building the thing. What I don't plan on doing is putting an explosive charge inside.

I'm guessing that you propel your cannonballs with BP, correct? Does the phrase 'constructive possession' ring a bell?

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

I have 6 pounds of Mercury. But its not enough to float a very big ball.

Might be plenty, if you had a bowl which conforms to the shape of the ball.

 

[CANNONMAN]

Dear Retired, Thank you Sir for your service! And... Points for an idea worth looking into. The bad news. It's in my longer range plans to get some rifled barrel that I can make a cannon out of. And yup! I'm gonna put a breach on it. Hey Look! OW's tapping her foot and I think she's got a finger up in the air. Probably checking air speed... But for now. This project has to be done with smooth barrel. Anyone know what was known about flechette use during this era?

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Flechette use?

Not as such, no, though pretty much anything they could stuff down the barrel was used. However, some impressive munitions have been used to devistating effect. Flechettes, per se, would likely have been seen as a very labor intensive, and therefore costly, form of munitions for their effect.

Chain shot, or split shot, would have been quite deadly. Imagine two round shot attached by a length of chain or metal bar, for example.

Spider shot is a modification of chain shot, only with more chains.

Just a cannonball itself, fired downrange such that it bounced along the ground, was capable of going THROUGH fourty people and still retain enough energy to knock men, animals, and equipment out of the way before it came to a stop.

Grapeshot was used, too, either in the form of an exploding projectile (called cannister shot) or like a giant shotgun.

Now, in Naval warfare there was a particularly nasty shot used to damage sail and rigging, and probably people, too, called "langrage". Likely it wasn't used except as a last resort kind of thing, because it could mess up the bore of the cannon. Imagine loading up a cannon with long bolts and nails, perhaps tied together in bundles and you've got it.

If you wand tonexperiment with fleshettes, I'd say you need to consider loading them in some kind of shot cup (similar to those used in shotgun shells) to minimize barrel damage.

 

[ThomasT]

OK, I had my curiosity kick in... (one of my many failings I'm afraid) so I ran some numbers. Assuming a cylinder 3 and a quarter inches in diameter you would need over 13 pounds of metal to fill the cylinder. Since the lead ball is going to displace most of the volume your six pounds would be enough to float the ball. Until the lead dissolves and then you are going to have a hazardous waste alloy.

Naw. I am not using my mercury for anything that might contaminate it. I like playing with it. Besides I don't think I can get anymore. And where did I get what I have? Why right off the internet many years ago. I really don't know why I bought it. I just found it for sale so I bought it. Cost me about $80 IIRC.

Besides who would shoot away 13 pounds of lead in a cannon ball? Thats why they used iron and others materials for cannon balls. I am sure at some point they shot lead but figured out there had to be a better way.

 

[kBob]

OK field artillery of the 1860s fired

Shot....solid projectile
Shell....hollow projectile fairly thick walled filled with powder fuzed for detination
Case.... hollow projectile relatively thinner walled willed with multilple round ball and a bursting charge fuzed for detination
Cannister..... a tin can on a sabot filled with smaller round shot used for APers like a shot gun muzzle actuated and no fuze

These same names also were used for projectiles of more streamlined shape in rifled guns.

All those naval junk charges were very effective against sails and rigging at close range. A stand of grape used relatively few HUGE balls for the most part compared to the more numerous smaller ball per bore size in canister.

Chain and such was rapidly abandoned on the battle field as it really did not work uniformly against troops.

Naval cannons and ammunition and Field Artillery equipment are not the same.

Some time back there was a group that used a old 40mm Bofors AA gun barrel to make a Whitworth breech loading cannon. They turned cartridges from aluminum for it and the shot was of two piece construction. The originals use pre engraves rifling on a brass rotating band.....just as does much modern artillery.

After the ACW shells were created that combined the characteristics of the case shot and cannister, shrapnel, which rather than a thin walled can used a thicker walled cylinder with a charge at the bottom and time fuze. The shell itself became a flying shotgun that deployed round balls down range.

-kBob

 

[RecoilRob]

Just had a thought and this probably doesn't need to be said....but BE CAREFUL with a cannon!!! Solid shot of great weight can penetrate an amazing amount of stuff and keep on going. One video of a Napoleon fired end for end through a car....including motor....and buried itself into the berm about 6 feet deep. Remember the Mythbusters cannon oopsie?

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Besides who would shoot away 13 pounds of lead in a cannon ball? Thats why they used iron and others materials for cannon balls. I am sure at some point they shot lead but figured out there had to be a better way.

Actually...the started off shooting round shot made from dressed stone, and then went to cast iron in the 15th century due to its capability to bring down stone walls of forts.

 

[Officers'Wife]

Remember the Mythbusters cannon oopsie?

Okay, I'm going to hate myself for asking this but…

Was Trump to blame or the Russians?

 

[ThomasT]

You can blame me. I seem to get blamed for everything else around here.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

You can blame me. I seem to get blamed for everything else around here.

That's why I quit doing certain things.

Like the last desktop we got, I refused to do ANY routine maintenance stuff on it. I'd never update anything, never back anything up on it, never clean crapware off it. Because I got tired of everything that went wrong with the computer being my fault.

 

[CapnMac]

There are a number of problems with fin stabilizing BP cannon shot.
For one, having material stout enough to withstand the launch forces--bending the fins or their supporting shaft before leaving the barrel in not likely to improve performance. Same issue applies if you apply wadding to the base of the fins.

This also applies to folding fins. Which have an additional issue of needing to be balanced so that the center of drag remains aft of the center of gravity.

Which then leads to a projectile with a long cylindrical skirt. So, you are really just changing the ballistic coefficient. And an ogive nose hollow base round is much easier to create in bulk. If you make a military commitment to the external shape, you can then commit to a fully hollow casting (which has some metallurgical efficiencies) with an internal threading. Solid shot just needs a solid plug to fit; shell just needs a base.

 

[CANNONMAN]

OOhh! Lots of points for these. Shoot. I get blamed for my posts! I like fins and cones. Lead cylinder with hole in butt. I can machine this mold. And folding fins made out of...?

 

[CapnMac]

And folding fins made out of...?

The classic materials would be galvanized metal; cartridge brass; and copper.

Rotary fins, which wrap around the projo, have am issue in that you need a way to get their hinges flush to the lands diameter, or they might get sheared off. They are relatively simple once the geometry is worked out. Bend them out of something "springy," set them in the projo, slide in the pins, then bind with a cord or band in a grove. They "stack" around the projo based on number; three would encompass a 120º arc (less a bit for the hinge); four, an arc of 90º, and so on.

Axial fins are a bit different. They fall into two rough categories, front hinged and back hinged. Axial fins sit in a matching longitudinal groove in the projo, or along a reduced diameter portion of the projo (proportionate to the width of the fins). The front hinge versions usually have a spring portion cut into or as part of the fin. The front edge of the fin is usually profiled so that it provides a stop when the fin hinges open. As with rotary fins, a band or cord holds them closed until launching.

The rear hinged fins are similar, with the back edge of the fin typically being the mechanical stop to hold them in the open state. US FFAR (folding fin aircraft rockets) work in this way, the fins pop open and index against the flare around the base of the rocket nozzle.

Now, a neat thing about rear-hinged fins. you can actually link the fins to the base of the projo and allow that base to slide a distance up the length of the end of the projo. Once free of the muzzle, the fin pop open, and air drag will keep them there. This is slick, as you don't need springs, per se.