"6 pounder guns useless?" Topic

I'm reading "Autumn of Glory". In one place, Lee's artillery general Pendleton inspected the Army of Tennessee's artillery and found it had 111 guns, but only 69 were reliable. The rest were 6 pounders, which Pendleton labeled as useless, and 12 pounder howitzers, which he considered as scarcely more effective.

I know that 12 pounders were considered medium guns in the ACW since tube and carriage were as light as medium guns of yore. Is that what made 6 pounders negligible? In 1815 they were fine.

Can some artillery mavens out there comment on this?

If 6pdrs are all you have, they suddenly become useful.

Not an artillery maven as such, but…

1) Age – The 6 pdrs were largely Mexican War vintage and older. Many had a seen a fair amount of service by the start of the ACW and did hard campaigning once the war started. Not sure what percentage were iron versus bronze, but I recall reading that the iron 6 pdrs were on their last legs in late '62/early '63.

2) Ammo – 6 pdrs had shot, spherical case and canister, but no shell.

3) Range – Strictly speaking I don't think it's theoretical maximum was much below that of the 12 pdr Napoleon, but it was far, far below that of the 10 pdr Parrot and 3" Ordnance Rifle, of which the Union had an abundance.

4) Hitting Power – Particularly detrimental in the West, where the battlefields were often cut up with heavily wooded areas. At Stone's River, for example, the dense cedar brakes could effectively blunt relatively close range fire from 6 pdrs. Fire from Napoleons or various Rifles, however, would tear through even thick woods, subjecting sheltering troops to splinters much like an Age of Sail naval battle.

One of the problems that artillery now faced was the increased effective range of rifle-muskets. Where, in the Napoleonic period, a musket was accurate to about 50 yards, now a rifle-musket was accurate to 300 yards. That meant that many skirmishers could close to within effective range of a 6lb battery and begin to engage it, something virtually unheard of in earlier times.

The 6lb gun's problem was it's inability to throw sufficient weight of shot against infantry targets before they could close to a range where they could begin to endanger the battery. 12lb guns, and 3" rifled guns could throw both weight of shot and shell, and in the case of the latter, accurate ranged fire, against formed infantry, and also had very deadly cannister available. Although cannister was also available for the 6lb gun, again, it was weight of shot, to include volume of fire, that was problematic for these light guns.

As the OFM said, a six pounder is useful if your other choice is no gun at all. Otherwise, they had too short a range and threw too little weight to be useful on a battlefield dominated by rifled muskets and 12 pounders. The Confederates were in the position where they had no choice and so they were stuck with what they could get, and what they could get early in the War as 6 pounders. The armies in the West deployed lots of these "useless" guns for most of the War. If you are fielding a Confederate army, sorry, you are stuck with being undergunned.

The 6lb gun was designed to be used in concert with the 12lb howitzer in an organization similar to that used in the Napoleonic Wars- 2 sections of 2 6lb guns, with one section of two 12lb howitzers, I may be wrong but I thought that the 6lb gun could fire shell or spherical case, but the relative small size of the projectile negated the effect of the explosion. What the 6lb was best at was throwing canister – but where as in the Mexican War a 6lb gun could part itself outside musket range and be effective – the rifle musket changed the equation.

As others have mentioned – if its all you have – then a 6lb gun is better than no gun at all. Considered it just another cross for the the Army of Tennessee to have to bear.

The western Union armies also had to make do with 6-pdrs in many cases. The AotP always got top priority.

Howitzers fired cannister and shell, the old 6lbs fired solid and cannister rounds. The relatively new Napoleons were designed to fire at a lower velocity and this allowed both solid and shell. Shell couldnt be fired from high velocity guns at this time.

By the 1860s new metalurgy allowed shell to be fired from the high velocity rifled cannon now being used. Once you could fire shell from any gun you didnt need howitzers and you wanted the largest shell you could get, so cannon size increased.

A lot of the scenarios we play here have western Confederates with large and very large 6lb Gun batteries. Were they trying to make up for lack of range and size in sheer numbers of guns?

By the way didn't Lee say once that all the 6lb guns should be melted down and turn into 12lb Napoleons?

The inspection I'm talking about was after Chattanooga, when many of the heavier guns had been lost in the rout.

So basically, the 6 lb guns were old and outclassed by Napoleons and rifled guns.

The ANV did have almost all of their 6pdrs replaced before Gettysburg. Many bronze 6pdrs were melted down and recast as 12 pdrs.
The 6pdr was not useless, it was just the least useful weapon available. The Napoleon was 1/3 heavier, but fired twice the payload, at the same muzzle velocity and the same distance. The 10pdr Parrot and the 3" Ordnance Rifle were the same weight and had much greater range and accuracy (and could even fire more canister close up). The 12pdr howitzer(also outmoded) weighed the same but was more versatile. The 24pdr howitzer fired a much bigger payload for the same weight as a Napoleon.
6pdrs had been retained as light or horse artillery, but by 1861 the new light rifled guns provided better performance with a lighter barrel. So, why waste the horses and carriage on a 6pdr if you could get your hands on anything else?

A lot of the scenarios we play here have western Confederates with large and very large 6lb Gun batteries.

Are these historical battery strengths or those assigned by the scenario designer? I ask because one often finds 4 gun batteries in the western CS forces and it's possible that the scenario designer has grouped two or three together. That being said, it's also common to find batteries with two or three different types of ordnance*. If the batteries you mention are historical, perhaps in one of the reorganizations they tried to streamline things by keeping to one type of ordnance per battery wherever possible.

*one of the best I ever saw was 2x6pdr guns, 2x3" Rifles & 2x24pdr howitzers, i.e. "something for every occasion"

" (and could even fire more canister close up)."

Can someone clarify that comment, versus 6 lber or smooth bores in general? My understanding is that the smooth bore round is a superior canister round over the rifled round.

The ANV did have almost all of their 6pdrs replaced before Gettysburg.

Yes, Lee's army had only 1 6lb gun at Gettysburg.

Can someone clarify that comment, versus 6 lber or smooth bores in general? My understanding is that the smooth bore round is a superior canister round over the rifled round.

The bore diameter for a 12 lb Napoleon was 4.62" and for a 6 lb gun 3.67"

Rifled guns were 2.9 to 3.0" diameter (Parrots and Griffin guns).

Since canister works effectively like a large shotgun, the larger bore diameter is like a larger shotgun.(the larger the bore the more projectiles) Also, the rifling tended to cause the projectiles to rotate and hold a tighter patteren instead of being more dispersed like the smootbore guns that made their shots more effective, especially with double canister.

Kim

Here's a nice site that shows all types of Civil War ammunition. aaamunitions.com They're for sale!

Also, the rifling tended to cause the projectiles to rotate …

I don't see how that could be, since the projectiles are small and don't fit the rifling.

However, your other point is valid. The larger bore of the 6-pdr (compared to the 10-pdr rifles) means the canister balls spread more. On the other hand, the 3-inch canister held more, smaller, balls (49x .96"), which might have made up for that. Hard to say. A round for a 12-pdr held 27 balls of almost 1.5" diameter; don't have data on the 6-pdr canister.

It isn't clear whether Pendleton was commenting on the condition of the 6 and 12 lbers, or their inherent qualities. Perhaps the shorter barrel 12 lb howitzers were what Pendleton was talking about. The Napoleon was a 12 lb howitzer and this is the first I have heard that it was useless.

As Don L. says, A 6 lb gun threw a ball that was wider than a 3" shell and about 1/3 lighter. It had a greater muzzle velocity than a 3" and a larger charge, so at least using canister, it was a better weapon. The Canister for a 6 lber had 24 balls of a smaller size than the 12 lber.

Even so, Lee sent all his 6 lbers back to the Traeger Works to be melted down for bronze 12 lbers.

Bill

Don,

The entire projectile would start to rotate in a rifled gun because the balls were held in a tin canister that was strapped to a wooden sabot, which, in turn, was strapped to the cloth powder bag.

The expansion of the propellant gasses would cause the wooden sabot to move forward quickly against the heavy mass of the tin canister and the weight of the lead balls.. This would cause the container to distort outwards and engage the riflings, even as the container began to disintegrate.

You would have some rotation of the canister and the balls within, plus the resulting detritus of the sabot, tin container and metal strapping as those parts came apart during it's travels down the bore.

High-speed film of live firings of smoothbore and rifled guns shows the tight patterns that rifled guns firing canister maintain versus smoothbore guns.

Some of these used to be on youtube. I'll see if i can dig them up.

*one of the best I ever saw was 2x6pdr guns, 2x3" Rifles & 2x24pdr howitzers, i.e. "something for every occasion"

Or…. as the Rebs often found out, not enough of what they need in every fight. In many battles these mixed batteries were hampered by what they needed for the moment and what was at hand. If range was needed you were playing with half a deck and if short range canister firing was needed you were hampered again.

Need more problems? A very bad problem was one of supplying ammo to batteries. You send the caissons back for more ammo and often every gun in the battery could not be replenished because what they needed was some place else. It was a supply nightmare.

Another problem as happened at Benner's Hill at Gettysburg, a battery in Lattimer's Battn. had a 10 lbs. Parrott and a 3" rifle. In the amazing artillery duel with East Cemetery Hill on July 2nd the action was hot. In the smoke and confusion one runner was given the wrong type round for the tube. The crew never noticed the difference and tried loading the round. It got about a foot in and jammed the tube. It had to be withdrawn from the fight. Two days later they managed to dislodge the round AFTER the battle.

Mixing tube types within a battery was a huge mistake.

Don

actionfront.blogspot.com

"Who ever saw a dead cavalryman?"

Oh… I forgot another situation in which the mixed tubes hurt. When firing in counter battery actions the crews almost always fired solid shot. Howitzers do not fire solid shot and their range is not as good as a "gun" or rifled piece.

Don

actionfront.blogspot.com

"Who ever saw a dead cavalryman?"

***rifled guns many times used their case shot without punching the time fuse. This replaced the solid shot when firing counter battery. Not punching a fuse would not allow the shell to burst. I suppose the slightly lighter round travelled further than solid rounds thereby getting an extra reach.

Oh, I agree. When I said "best" I was being a bit tongue in cheek, as it was the most disparate grouping of ordnance I can recall. Besides being poorly and somewhat haphazardly equipped from the start, CS forces in the West relied heavily on captured Federal ordnance to make good their deficiencies. It led to a lot of odd combinations.

d effinger

They should travel less far, as they have less mass, but the same air resistance. And, they dont get much extra Muzzle velocitry by being lighter, the wave front of the propellent can only go so fast.

Or at least that is what happens in modern artty. Perhaps Blackpowder changes things, but not sure about that.

However, with the ranges so short, the MV differences and lose of velocity are not going to make that much difference, but perhaps enough to cause a miss the fiorst few times you try it. Then again, considering what passed for quality contriol in some of the gun worksd, they may not have even noticed.

Owen

Remember, it wasn't just the Confederates in the west that had a lot of 6 pdrs. The Army of the Cumberland had a huge percentage of 6 pdrs, as well as James rifles made from 6 pdr tubes. All the way through Chickamagua and Chattanooga.

The Rebs mixed batteries for two reasons. 1. If you captured the gun (or your brigade did), you kept it. 2. A general lack of tubes caused a mixed battery to at leaast be of some use long distance (the provence of the rifles) and at close range (the provence of the napoleons). ANd overall it was more important for the confederates to keep the smoothbores for their superior cannister ability as the usually were on the receiving end of a charge. Smoothbores could also double shot cannister more easily than rifles.

ANd overall it was more important for the confederates to keep the smoothbores for their superior cannister ability as the usually were on the receiving end of a charge.

Assumes facts not in evidence, as the lawyers on TV say.

"If you captured the gun (or your brigade did), you kept it"

That assumes poor staff planning, a proper staff would collect distribute guns on the Army Commander's order rather than a loot regime.

There were a number of different smoothbore 6pdrs cast in different materials by several different manufacturers but if we take the 6pdr bronze Model 1841 smoothbore as representative of its kind then we are not dealing with a poor weapon but one that had been overtaken by technology.

At a time when your prospective opponent was equipped with similar pieces then the 6pdr was perfectly adequate. The light 12pdr Model 1857 or ‘Napoleon' performed the same role as the 6pdr gun and 12pdr howitzer, firing shot, case and shell, and out-performed both.

Bill

Who ever ( CSA ) captured a cannon from the USA did NOT get to keep it for themselves. They had folks (at higher command levels) who decided where and to who any captured arty went ! Mixing gun types was part historical part experimental at battery level! As the war continued on, the arty Btn became more and more the basic unit and the mixing was more by btry type (SBN or 3"/10lb Pt) rather than within the battery itself. This took time and the CSA never really got it done as well as the USA. The AOT replaced a lot of 6lb and 12lb How with USA types after Chickamaugua! They then soon lost a whole lot of their more modern pieces at Missionary Ridge , and had to get the old ones back if they could! CSA arty was trouble in the ANV and double trouble in the AOT!

It should be noted that even the Union Army of the Cumberland at Chickamauga had around 75% of its batteries with mixed ordinance.

This included a wide variety of gun types that included 14 – 6lb guns, 16 – 12lb howitzers, 4 – mountain howitzers, 62 – Napoleons, 2 – 24lb howitzers, 38 – Rodmans, 28 – Parrotts and 36 – James Rifles.

Of all these different gun types, the Confederate Army of Tennessee had some of each of these in their organization as well. It is quite likely that many of these guns had changed hands from one army to the other, perhaps several times! In contrast by Gettysburg the Army of the Potomac had only 3 gun types (Napoleons, Parrotts and Ordinace Rifles).

Kim

Of course, mixed batteries were the norm in the pre-war Regular army. The standard being 4x 6-pdr guns and 2x 12-pdr howitzers, with a few batteries having 4x 12-pdr guns and 2x 24-pdr howitzers.

Odd thing about timing,start the war 5 years earlier and 6lb and 12lb How would be normal for both sides! Start 5 years later and the new stuff would be common to constant, maybe with small arms too to a lesser degree!