"Scale of our "25 mm" models of Napoleonic artillery pieces?" Topic

Scale of our models of Napoleonic period artillery pieces in 25 mm.

At Lancashire ranges, all types of artillery pieces of all nationalities have 26mm diameter wheels.

Their Russian "unicorn", all parts combined, is very beautiful and is exactly like the one illustrated on page 24 of the M.A.A.#96.

It is designated as Russian 10 pdr. Unicorn, which is odd because in articles about Russian artillery of that time there is talk of 10pdrs "unicorns"and of "20pdrs", but never 12 pdrs "unicorns".

It's the same with the factories that sell our models, they are either 10 pdrs or 12 pdrs…

Which caliber of "Unicorns" has never existed? The 10 pdr one or the 12 pdr one.

Now before going further in this topic, I would like to know how is measured the length of a barrel of artillery piece of the time, with the "Button of Breech" or without the "Bouton de Breech"?

I have the impression that the "Unicorns" of 12 pdrs. never existed?

Thanks for your help

Not sure what you mean by "at Lancashire ranges".

There is no answer to the question posed, unless the manufacturer you are considering has said what they mean by 25mm, 28mm etc.

The Hinchliffe Handbook of 1976 said that their "25mm" figures were to a scale of 5mm = 1 foot. Their 30mm range was therefore presumably 6mm = 1 foot. Hinchliffe 25mm should therefore logically all have been about 28mm tall, and some were. They were markedly taller than 25mm Minifigs.

Hinchliffe 30mm RHA figures are 100% compatible height and heft-wise with modern 28mm from say Elite or Eagle. The wheels of the Hinchliffe 30mm 9-pounder then scale out accurately, but the track and gun barrel length are both off, i.e. it is a different scale in each of the x, y and z axes.

If the manufacturer has not stated what 28mm or whatever means, the only way to know is to take an item of known dimensions on the figure, measure it, and work out the scale. As with the 30mm gun example the problem is the scale may be inconsistent and even with one-dimensional things like muskets or Baker rifles you often find they're a different length from one figure to the next in the same range.

"Not sure what you mean by "at Lancashire ranges"."

Presumably the 25mm ranges of Lancashire Games – link

Not an answer as such but related. I collect the older 20-25mm figures and the dimensional accuracy and look of artillery models was often not great at that time. I built a comparison spreadsheet for British 6 and 9pdrs which is shown here (not my blog).

link

@ GurKhan

I'm none the wiser – Lancashire sells Hinchliffe and contrary to the claim in the OP the wheels aren't 26mm. I have a Hinchliffe 25mm Prussian 6-pdr and a French 8-pounder in front of me. The wheels of both are 22mm.

The wheels of all the Napoleonic guns sold by Lancashires games in its "Lancashires games 25mm" range are all identical and in all senses of the term (26mm in diameter), whatever the type of artillery piece and its nationality:

link

"Lancashire Games" does not sell 25 mm "Hinchliffe" Napoleonic references :

link

Not even 30 mm references. (No products found.):

link

In conclusion we cannot calculate the scale of these pieces of artillery, it is understandable.

I had thought of using the length of the tubes of these models to know their scale, but I do not know if those who measure the lengths of the real tubes count the "breech button" or not?

And you?

I am waiting for other models from another maufacture to see what scales they will be…

Now if one of you can help me, I am looking for the smallest Napoleonic cannons that can be found in 25 mm for Austro-Hungarian, Russian and Prussian artillery …

According to the models of "Old Glory", it seems that the Russians had 10 and 12 Pound "Unicorn"???

No 12pdr unicorns, 10 and 20pdrs, a lighter 3 prd? but that got dropped quickly

the 30mm Hinchcliffe Artillery are up, we will released pictures of those pieces are due prob Thursday, the crews are already up on the site

the licorne argument is right see 14bore,

I suspected that there was no 12pdr unicorn but 10pdr…

Yet "Elite Miniatures" sells the reference AE16 Russian 12pdr Unicorn :

link

and "Old Glory" the product IDRXE-04:

link

Moreover "Old Glory" sells a incredible mass of Napoleonic Russian guns and I bet that some of them did not exist at that time, they are from before or after the Napoleonic wars?

Well I now know that for the French artillery of the time we do not count the breech button when we measure the length of the tube of a piece of artillery.

But for the other nations it may be different?

So since the length of the tube of the Napoleonic 6-pdrs artillery piece was really 1778 cms (on page 15 of the M.A.A.#96.)and that of the "Lancashire games 25 mm" model measures 34mm without the "breech button", the "Lancashire games 25 mm" representing this piece is at 1/52.29 th.

So a figurine representing a man of 1m76 would be 33.6 mm!

It is therefore a very large model and certainly not a "pure" 25 mm model.

If the sculptor counted the "breech button" in the length of the tube of his model, (the barrel then measures now 39mm), the scale of the model is therefore 1/45.58 th.

So a figurine representing a man of 1m76 would be 38.96 mm!

It is therefore still a very large model and certainlynot a "pure" 25 mm model.

@ marmont1814 – I've just sent 23 photographs of the painted 30mm RHA to Simon at h'liffe.co.uk. Hopefully useful for the website.

@ Paskal – what you are discovering is that scale is a very vague concept in the world of metal figures. Three hard points of data relating to a gun are the length of the barrel, the width of the track and the diameter of the wheels. As you've noted, determining how the barrel was measured is important, and it is not always the obvious way. Another hard point is the width between the wheels, and this isn't obvious either, since the wheels leaned outwards. So the width between rims was less at the contact point with the ground than at the tops of the wheels 180 degrees away. I bet you will find that, measured at either point, the scale of your guns as implied by the wheels is different to that implied by the gun length. Both these will be different again to the scale implied by the wheel diameter.

The same issue affects figure width. We know that the width of a British file was supposed to be 22 inches, and we can also say that an average soldier was about 66 inches tall. Logically, then, a 25 to 28mm figure should be able to be fitted into a frontage one-third of its height, i.e. 8 to 9mm wide. This is actually impossible; the minimum is about 11mm, and 13mm is more common – so once again, our 28mm models are a different scale vertically versus horizontally.

You see that I understood everything, but I don't let go and I measure models of artillery pieces from different manufacturers to be able to find what will best correspond – piece by piece – to models of artillery pieces for Napoleonic armies formed with 25 mm minifigs, because in artillery for the different Napoleonic armies they offer, 25 mm minifigs are not very generous. At what scale can 25mm minifig figures be considered?

Paskal

It is all pretty much as 4th Cuirassier described- 25mm is a size rather than a scale. If you take the height of the average man as 1.70m (5 foot 7 inches) in 1800, them 25mm is 1/68. The original ranges were slightly smaller but may have assumed a taller average height so were probably supposed to be 1/72 (in line with aircraft models). As pointed out, this is only the height, in terms of the other dimensions, Minifigs are proportionately too broad so would be a bigger scale.

The current Minifigs range is nearly 50 years old and at the time they were sculpted, there was little accurate information about artillery dimensions. If you look at books in English on French Napoleonic artillery from the 1970s, the most common gun (the 6pdr) is never mentioned- everything is about the Gribeauval 8pdr. I think that the sculptors tried to create the impression of the selected gun but had little to work with.

If you really want accurately scaled figures and equipment, then you should consider 1/72 plastics. These are often developed from CAD drawings directly used to produce moulds. I appreciate that this may be too big a step. If it is, then why not consider getting 3D printed models scaled to say 1/68 scale?

Thank you, Trockledockle but now what is the manufacture that currently offers the smallest artillery pieces that would be "compatible" with 25mm minifigs, except the 25mm themselves?

Now where will I be able to find documentation where will be indicated the length of the Gun carriage of the guns of the various armies of the time?

Difficult to advise when I don't know what scale you want, what nationalities you collect and what is available on the market. As said before, it is unlikely that you will get something that is to scale in all dimensions. My approach is that the wheel (5 foot diameter for British guns) should be just below the shoulder of the gunner (5 1/2 feet) and the barrel length should be about right. The width and length should look right.

Regarding scale drawings, this book is probably the best single source but doesn't have everything.

link

I think that scale drawings are available from Dr Summerfield but it sure where.

Kevin Kiley's book on Napoleonic Artillery (volume 1) also has quite a few scale drawings particularly of Gribeauval equipment. Remember that a French inch is not the same as a British inch. You can also find more on the internet.

Terence Wise's Osprey has a few. The Russian drawings are not exact but more are available if you search through the Wargamers Newsletter which can be found online.

For British Artillery, Franklin's book has everything. He made drawings from period carriages.

Although not drawings, some dimensions can be found for Russian and French carriages in the Journal of Smoothbore Artillery on the Napoleon series website.

PDF link

This Dining Table Napoleon site does comparisons of what is available for 15mm French artillery and you can extract dimensions from it.

Thank you Trockledockle, I am looking for the smallest Napoleonic cannons that can be found in 25 mm for Austro-Hungarian, Russian and Prussian artillery …

The French inch of the Ancien Régime was of a different value from the British inch, i.e. 2.707 cm.

It had the symbol p. The English inch, abbreviated as po

Was it still used by the French under Napoleon?

And the lengths of the 'P' of the Austro-Hungarian, Russian and Prussian and of the other nations of the time, what about?

Now the measurements given by Terence Wise in the M.A.A N°96 are all in In. whatever the nations, so I deduce that he made the converts.

And one Prussian inch = 26.15 mm

Officially the metric system was used in France but the Gribeauval system predated the Revolution and the drawings I've seen have pieds and pouces. The Dawson/ Summerfield book has all the conversion factors for the different measurement systems. I haven't checked the Wise conversions but I understand that they are not correct in the Chartrand Osprey on French Artillery.

This manufacturer has a fairly wide range of artillery for the nations you want and they have a good reputation. However, they are 1/72. The figures tend to be very slightly tall so the artillery may fit with your needs. I suggest you contact and ask for dimensions. I understand that they prefer communication in German.

schmaeling.de

This may be helpful.

mojobob.blogspot.com/2022/04

The unicorns of "our" era (1796-1816) were all characterized by having a length of the barrel (without the button of the cascabel) of 10x to 11x the diameter of the bore :
--- The "1/4-pud" unicorns were in the field artillery.
--- The "1/2-pud" unicorns were in the field and fortress artillery.
--- The "1-pud" unicorns were in the fortress and siege artillery.
--- The "3-pounder" unicorns were (by 1798) intended as regimental artillery for Jäger – but by 1806 (if not earlier) they had been relegated to use mostly in defense of smaller outpost forts such as found on the the Caucasian Line (where they did good service until 1840 !).

During Catherine's reign, there had been previous unicorns with relatively shorter barrels (7x to 9x the diameter of the bore), with "8-pounder", "1/4-pud", "1/2-pud", "1-pud" and "2-pud" sizes being the most common.

The "3-pounder" and "8-pounder" were so named because their bore was essentially the same as canons of these sizes. This applied also to the "1/4-pud" being called "12-pounder", and "1/2-pud" being called "24-pounder".

The "pud" was an ancient measure for stones and rocks. It was divided into 40 "stone-weight" pounds. This led to the "1/4-pud" being called "10-pounder" (stone-weight), and "1/2-pud" being called "20-pounder" (stone-weight).

If you want dimensions for period artillery for most nations
(French) : link
(Russian) : link

If you want more on dimensions for period artillery for Russia
(Russian) : link

"with the "Button of Breech" or without"
Either way, so you have to find it being specified along with the number. Even more "interesting" : "calbre" for most nations was the diameter of the bore. For the French, it was the diameter of the round. And of course, everyone had a different "inch" and "pound" – sometimes more than one in the same nation.

  Common Local Measures in Millimeters	"foot"	"inch"
France, Baden, Spain			324.8	27.07
Austria – Vienna			316.1	26.34
Bavaria, Denmark, Prussia, 
	Low Countries, Hesse		313.9	26.15
England, Hanover, Russia		304.8	25.40
Sweden					296.8	24.74
Austria – Nürnberg			292.8	24.40
Württemburg				286.5	23.87
Saxony					283.3	23.61
Spain (18th century)			282.7	23.55

The inference from the above is that, as a French foot was 6.6% bigger than an English foot, we should add about four inches to the height requirements for the various units – cuirassier, grenadier etc – where these are expressed in French feet and inches. 6.6% of most heights around 5'6" is four inches. Napoleon's reported height of 5'2" is thus 5'6".

Quite correct 4th Cuirassier, Napoleon was close to average height for the period. Wellington was 5'10" and Nelson was 5'4" which was probably convenient for avoiding banging you head on a ship.

@Trockledockle:
Thank you, now I know thanks to you that I need 1/68 th, finally I hope…

@Michman:
Thanks too, the book of Tomás de Morla looks nice if I could find it on paper…But the measurements given in the tables of the M.A.A. number 96 in another (because there are many other ospreys on the artillery) are indicated in the inches of each nation? Or are they all in British ins?

@4th Cuirassier:
Yet Jean-Roch Coignet, better known as Captain Coignet, born in Druyes-les-Belles-Fontaines on August 16, 1776 and died in Auxerre where he was buried on December 10, 1865, Grenadier then French non-commissioned officer in the first grenadier of the Imperial Guard, then an officer in the Imperial General Staff, under the First Empire was nicknamed "rase-motte"…

Does rase-mottes mean he was very tall or very short?!

"M.A.A. number 96"
I am sorry. I have never seen this.

==============

--- "un rase-motte" : a short person (rather perjorative) – as was Coignet compared to the nominal height requirement for the grenadier guards – but I am not sure it was an idiom of the early 19th century *
--- "en rase-mottes" : at very low altitude or level, nape of the earth
--- "faire du rase-mottes" : to act without much thought or intention, to lightly skim or easily pass along
--- "rase la motte" : remove hair from a certain private female body part – Rétif de La Bretonne puns on this in L'Anti-Justine (1798), alluding to monks taking the tonsure

* Coignet remarks that on joining up he needed to draw in the required moustache of a guardsman, as he could not yet grow one. I fear that barracks humor linked his bare upper lip with a bare female body part – and this reference was later "revised" to allude to his height.

And they made him put decks of playing cards in his stockings before he was put on the height chart.

Otherwise, he would have been refused in the Imperial Guard.

But the advantages granted to Coignet were not a generality…

@Michman: I think the measurements given in the M.A.A.96 are in british inch. since the author does not give the length in. continental, then that the author does not give the length of the continental in.

Page 15 of the M.A.A. No. 96, The author explains that the measurements they give are approximate, as they are translated from various national forms.

Like that, we are fixed.

I dont know who Paskal is but he didn't look hard, the 30mm artillery crews are available and the guns will be next week here at the Lancashire Games site, we hve been selling the crews for weeks?