"Austrian artillery 6lb range" Topic

The rules we play recognise different ranges depending on calibre and nation. Ranges from similar calibre cannons are similar for most nations, with one exception.

That for the Austrian 6lb is significantly less than that for other nations. The books I have never say why.

So – two questions

1. Why the difference?
2. The Bavarians also used Austrian 6lb according to my book. So were they similarly handicapped?

The only post on the TMP I found on ranges dated to 2007 and went down different paths.

It could well come down to the composition of the gunpowder and projectile weight. i.e. the laws of physics

Looking at Summerfield, Dawson & Dawson page 237, most of the main countries used a higher per cent of saltpetre and sulphur and a lesser percentage of charcoal. Austria used 66.7 per cent saltpetre, 14.3 per cent sulphur & 19 per cent charcoal. This compares with others ranging from 70 to 75 per cent saltpetre, 10 to 12.5 per cent sulphur & 12.5 to 18.5 (the latter is Russia) for charcoal.

Page 127 gives comparative projectile weights – you will note Austrian cannon projectiles were lighter than others:

Austria
3pdr 1.3kg; 6pdr 2.7kg; 12pdr 5.0kg; 7pdr howitzer 7.2kg & 10pdr howitzer 12.3kg.
Bavaria
3pdr 1.4kg; 6pdr 3.0kg; 12pdr 6.1k; 7pdr howitzer 6.6kg.
Prussia
3pdr 1.4kg; 6pdr 3.0kg; 12pdr 5.9kg; 7pdr howitzer 6.4kg & 10pdr howitzer 12.3kg.
Russia
3pdr unicorn 1.0kg; 6pdr 2.9kg; 12pdr 5.7kg; 10pdr unicorn 3.88kg & 20pdr unicorn 8.1kg.
Britain
3pdr 1.4kg; 6pdr 2.7kg; 9pdr 4.1kg; 12pdr 5.4kg; 4.4inch howitzer 3.5kg & 5.5inch howitzer 6.8kg.
France (I have mixed the various systems to avoid an overly long entry)
4pdr 1.8kg; 6pdr 3.0kg; 8pdr 4.0kg; 12pdr 6.1kg; 7pdr howitzer 6.6kg; 10pdr howitzer 14.6kg & 24pdr howitzer 6.1kg.

I have also looked at the tables for gun calibres & shot diameters – not much difference between them.

Thanks Prince, this is exactly what I was looking for. This means our range sticks for Bavaria can be similar to those for France which is a relief as our recent battle caused some debate on this.

FYI. We use range sticks (to determine whether the shot can hit) and then dispersion grids for where a successful hit actually lands and these vary in size according to range. The Austrians had to get quite close to actually hit anything and their batteries were also smaller.

If have it correctly, Carnage and Glory often gives hores and foot artillery different ranges, yet as far as I can tell Prussian and Russian 6pdrs are the same in foot and horse artillery, no idea if Austria is different

I suspect that these technical differences between different nations' cannon of the same notional calibre were less significant than the effect of their tactical employment and training yet that rarely seems to be included in the rules.

I think BillyNM is correct. After all, the Austrian artillery, when deployed well, was effective.

Cheers,
John

My goodness,the good Prince is literally an almanac of brilliant information.

I am most grateful for his recent assistance.

I would respectively suggest that the real range of artillery is the ‘effective range' rather than the specification range.

A gunner of the period has to firstly observe the target, probably through gun smoke and then make a decision as to whether it is worth the effort from an ammunition point of view.

With this in mind, similar calibres would be similarly affected.

However I did read once that troops did on occasion fire off their stock as quickly as possible in order to be withdrawn from the danger area.

Original thinking perhaps?

Best wishes,

Chris

To Chris. Our range sticks use effective ranges from some charts we found. These charts however only listed the major players so we had to make assumptions concerning the artillery of the Bavarians and Saxons. Prince filled in the Bavarian gap.

Agree effective range is the one to use – but you may also wish to think of doctrine/tactical employment e.g. French tended to fire canister at longer ranges…

For info:
Saxon artillery weights (combining the 2 systems)
4pdr 1.0kg; 6pdr 2.8kg; 8pdr 3.74kg; 12pdr 5.6kg; 4pdr granatstuck 1.9kg; & 8pdr howitzer 7.3kg.

Comment from the book:

"Generally, France used shot of the largest calibre & weight, its greater kinetic energy giving superior penetration of targets. Britain used the smallest shot but with the highest density, because the shot was hammered more; when the lower drag is taken into account, it probably had a similar effect upon the target to French shot. Austria & Prussia were unable to use French ammunition, but Russia could. The French in an emergency could use captured British 6pdr ammunition, but there was a large windage. However the British were unable to use captured French shot unless it was undersized. Just as ammunition that would not fit down the gun tube was useless, ammunition that gave too much windage imposed a severe reduction in both accuracy & range."

Davout reported that at Wagram the Austrian and French artillery had differing 'bracketry'. The net result was that the French were generating more effective fire than the Austrians. I have some better detail and will post it shortly.

My compliments too for "The Prince of Essling" for his past well researched replies!

The chemical reaction for a gunpowder explosion is: –
2 KNO3 + 1 S + 3 C >>> 3 CO2 + 1 N2 + 1 K2S
If you take the atomic weights of the elements and do the maths you get a perfect ratio of:-
74.81% Potassium nitrate
13.33% Carbon
11.85% Sulphur
Deviation from this simply wastes the surplus material so yes Austrian powder is ~11% less effective than the perfect mixture. It will also produce more fouling from the unused materials, needing more worming and wet mopping to fire safely.

One last practical point, my wife was a black powder gunner for may years in her youth. Ramming is a skill, there is a sweet spot, you can over ram as well as under ram and reduce the efficacy.

I would however agree with BillyNM, there is a lot more to good gunnery than a bit of chemistry. Also gunpowder attracts water and damp gunpowder doesn't fire as effectively. If you're going to get hung up on the chemistry side you need to factor this in.

Interesting since many captured guns, especially light ones, were sent to Spain. Several books cite German and other troops having to turn in their guns and take these replacement guns into Spain. The turned in guns were given to French units.

@TimePortal

Probably done to simplify logistics i.e. more standardised calibre.

You do not want to end up with cannons that you cannot use or only use inefficiently because ammo of the wrong size is all you have available!

The Austro-Bavarians found out to their cost at Hanau in 1813 – the Bavarian ammo train was quite some distance from the battlefield (120km), so when they ran out of the correct size round shot they had to use smaller sized Austrian ammo.

David Hollins having seen the above exchange has commented on napoleon Wars Forum:

"I have seen the comment on TMP about Austrian artillery ranges. It confuses two things: a) the maximum range and b) the range to first bounce at zero elevation.

The maximum range is how far roughly a cannon can fire a ball after a few bounces. This not actually very important as smoke on the battlefield and lack of accuracy, wind, etc. will not result in much effect beyond the first bounce.

The first bounce at zero elevation is affected by the weight of the projectile and the charge, but Austria's powder was considered to be among the most powerful. However, the cannon ball will fly in a parabola, due to gravity at the end, the Bernouli effect (which causes a spinning ball to rise), but above all, it depends on the dispart. The dispart is the angle implied to the bore when the barrel is at zero elevation and arises from the rear end of the barrel being thicker than the front end of the barrel. French barrels were too thick and created a dispart of 1 degree, compared with the Austrian 1/2 degree.

So, a French ball will travel further to first bounce, but that means it will go over some targets than an Austrian ball would hit. Indeed during exchanges at Aderklaa during Wagram, both sides were too close to the other and firing over their targets."

It's interesting what David Hollins has to say.

I think rules writers often amplify minor, or irrelevant, differences that show up in weapons tests. I see little advantage in differentiating greatly between different nations' artillery beyond overall quality assessments.

It's not like we're talking about the difference between a WWII US 75mm L31 and a German 75mm L70.

Cheers,
John

Didn't Napoleon say 'the morale is to the physical as three is to one', yet some people spend ages obsessing over minor technical physical differences while completely ignoring the things that really scare a soldier s**tless.

Prince of Essling
Thanks for new tip of a podcast, caught a few already.

Maybe room for a poll, "What do you think really made Napoleonic soldiers run away".