"muzzle-loader load times" Topic

One aspect which nobody has mentioned is that the duration of firing at maximum speed was rarely very long because, unless there was a good breeze blowing, two formed bodies of infantry blazing away quickly became enveloped in dense clouds of drifting powder smoke, so that nobody could catch more than a momentary glimpse of whether a target was still there. Also, prior to the introduction of the rifled musket, effective battle range for line infantry was no more than 100 yards. Unless there was difficult terrain, either side which wished to "cross bayonets" could charge home in a matter of a few minutes. Actually, I just paused to time 120 paces, which should roughly equate to 100 yards; it took 1 minute & 49 seconds. Even under battle conditions it surely could be done in less than 5 minutes at a walking pace, given good level terrain. Also, if both sides were firing at maximum rate, a very few minutes were usually enough to cause one side or the other to break.

Regarding the limits of the possible, the famous frontiersman Daniel Boone and at least one other similar type (sorry, I forget the other identity) trained themselves to reload a long rifle within one minute WHILE AT A DEAD RUN! The Prussian infantry of Frederick the Great were probably the most rigorously drilled soldiers of the horse and musket era. Their goal was seven rounds per minute under drill conditions from smoothbore muskets, but they were not supposed to even attempt aiming (indeed, some of the Prussian muskets were designed with a stock so straight as to make it physically impossible). The rationale was that muskets were so inaccurate that aiming was a waste of time.

I am a black powder shooter using a replica long rifle and patched ball. Using actual black powder, rather than one of the modern substitutes, the fouling problem is acute. From a practical point of view, with that type of weapon, ten shots without pausing to swab out the bore is about all that is advisable; once I pressed beyond that and got a ball stuck partway down the barrel for my trouble--which would have rendered me effectively unarmed in actual combat for several minutes. I have no experience shooting smoothbore muskets, so I do not know when the fouling problem becomes a serious problem for them.

One other thing. I have no wish to offend, but the experience of modern re-enactors is of limited value with regard to the upper limits of what is possible. The typical re-enactor is a graybeard with a substantial beer belly. What they can work up to in off hours is hardly the same as what a young, fit man can do after training several hours a day under the impetus of ferocious, bellowing sergeants. This can be attested to by anyone (including me) who has been through basic training in any service.

As an over-aged and over weight reenactor, I agree that your last paragraph would indeed apply to me. However, I know a whole bunch of reenactors who are the same age, shape,stamina, and weapons handling experience as the soldier of that era. And their knowledge and enthusiasm is great. Oh, mine is not a beer belly. Canadian Club maybe but not beer.

Attila the Pun wrote:

I am a black powder shooter using a replica long rifle and patched ball. Using actual black powder, rather than one of the modern substitutes, the fouling problem is acute. From a practical point of view, with that type of weapon, ten shots without pausing to swab out the bore is about all that is advisable

A long rifle with patched ball is hardly a good comparison for a military weapon of the time, besides, if you are having that much trouble after 10 rounds then the problem is probably what you are putting in the rifle, rather than an inherant problem with that type of arm. Ball too large, patch too thick, patch insufficiently lubricated, bore like the inside of a stovepipe – these will all create problems after a few rounds.

Daniel Boone and at least one other similar type (sorry, I forget the other identity) trained themselves to reload a long rifle within one minute WHILE AT A DEAD RUN!

Lew Wetzel was the other one.

The comment about smoke is interesting. As a reenactor I've been in more "battles" than any real Civil War soldier ever was. And no, it's not real, but a solid battle line with thousands of men in it firing muskets produces the same amount of smoke whether it's real or not (actually in my experience blank rounds actually produce a bit more smoke than live rounds). In all the hundreds of battles I've participated in only twice has the smoke ever gotten thick enough to truly obscure visibility. These two times it was early on a foggy morning and the smoke combined with the fog and the visibility indeed dropped to zero when we fired a volley. All the other times, hot or cold, windy or still, humid or crisp the smoke never got thick enough to have any real effect. And I can't recall reading many (any?) first hand accounts where the smoke got thick enough to have much effect either. I don't doubt that it did happen from time to time, but it would have been the exception rather than the rule.

WELL, I've never had anyone shooting back at me but yes I can fire four rounds a minute with a flintlock and ball ammuntition and have kept it up for 22 rounds. Remember there is a fair amount of windage in the bore. Also ball cartridge tends to scour a lot of the crap out of the barrel that blanks don't. Fiddling with the pan and frizzen are no problem if you've been drilled senseless! However, the length of the barrel has an effect. I find the 42 inch barrel most satisfactory. The 46 is too long and my current 27 inch weapon is too short.

With a percussion cap weapon the caps are hard to handle without special loading aids and they never come out the right way up, and they fall out of your pouch when running. For a couple of speed competitions I've kept them in my mouth. I was sure I had ten caps in there…

Hello to Spontoon,

Your comment refers both to flintlocks and percussion caps. So what exactly were you referring to when you said you could keep up four rounds per minute for 22 rounds. That part seems to refer to a flintlock, but was it a smoothbore musket or a rifled arm? And were you firing live rounds or blanks? I'm not attacking your statement, I just want clarification.

ScottWashburn's comment is interesting.

I recall from the Spanish American war in Cuba, that they told that the negative factor from the US firing black powder 45/70 guns against the Spanish Mauser smokeless powder guns was that the positions were given away- not that they US guys were blinded by their cloud of black powder smoke.

These were quicker firing breech loaders. It suggests that in a lot of situations, the cloud of smoke was not an issue.

Maybe in napoleonic times, with clumsier units and thicker soldier densities it was different.

Just with blanks,I was told by some of my reenacting buds,I kept a steady fire rate,using about 20-25 rounds in a 15 minute "fire at will" sequence.

Loading on the run? Guess the LAST OF THE MOHICANS film wasn't that far-fetched then…

SHARP PRACTICE: TERRIBLE SHARP SWORD has rules for smoke build-up

If you have ever reenacted a battle in the Summertime on a fairly still day in the woods, you'll notice a lot of smoke obscuration. The sun shining down through it also makes for a blinding glare. The other condition that inhibits visibility is fog.

to those who mention the Sharps books , they are FICTION.

Sharps books are fiction???? …….

NOT!!!

Flashman has also been shown, by independent historical records to be absolutely, completely factual and true!!!!

Where's my bottle of Scotch?

I think reference was not to the Sharpe books but a set of wargame ACW rules. Have not played them nor seen more than mention.