"Howitzers" Topic

Did the British/Hanoverian forces use large numbers of field howitzers like the Russians, in the SYW or the wars of the 1740s?

Were the Russians really the only army of this period so enamored of the howitzer that they massed them?

Sam when will your be meeting again?

You mean the next club meeting? I think it's Feb 11th, but I didn't see anything listed on the calendar yet.

link

Ok, I would like to try and make that one if you guys have the room for another player?

Sam I have Petersens books on artillery and will check it for you tommarow and see if he says anything about it.

PHP

Irish: definitely come. I have no idea yet what the games will be, but there will always be at least 2-3 different ones.

PHP: thanks!

On the original question: Frederick II really liked these guns. He wanted them to follow the attacking regiments to continue shelling the enemy lines before his troops fell onto them…The Russians used a lot of Shuvalov guns (technically a Howitzer), but mainly as a canister gun. They also had the unicorns, a mix of gun and howitzer, which gave good performances!

About the Prussians and not the Anglo-Hanoverians, but I believe that all of the battalion guns for the regiments in the second line of Frederick's field army were howitzers by the second half of the SYW; and that all of the grenadier battalions were eventually equipped with them as well. I don't know about their use in the field artillery batteries.

And I'll take a look around and see if I can find anything about the redcoats use of howitzers.

Ioannis, if by "Shuvalov guns" you are referring to the sekretni gaubitze (the one with the oval bore), it's whole purpose was to fire cannister. They were evidently mostly handed out as battalion pieces.

AFAIK, it wasn't even provided with shells. The oval bore was supposed to cause the charge to spread horizontally rather than vertically. It didn't, but every Russian SYW army should have a bunch. Mine does.

In Muller's Treatise on Artillery (1757,1780) there is the total composition of a British Artillery Train – no date given, but probably from the 1740s-50s. The sum total of howizters is TWO, out of dozens of guns. If this indicative, the British probably didn't consider them part of the field army's artillery train, but perhaps part of a specialized "seige train" along with the mortars?

rmaker, I recall Duffy's book on Russia saying that Shuvalovs were able to fire other shots (solid and shell) in addition to canister, but it was SOOO difficult to load such shot that they were used mainly as canister guns…The other shots were a 3-pdr solid ball and a shell in the shape of the oval barell…Really weird stuff, right?

I thought the Russians massed their Shuvalovs at Kunersdorf and actually landed some shells right around Fritz's entourage.

Yes. That's right…They learned to make batteries at of them because they were not so worthy parcelled out!

On the Russian How I have recieved a book from Russia on the Army and goes into detail on this gun. The solid ammunition was designed to fit the bore tightly to cut off all gas from ecsapeing. This worked well to a point when the bore had to be cleaned out. But like said it was designed to spread out the case and canister.

On the Hanavarion issue I can not seem to find anything in my library at this time. But will keep looking for I have loads of books on artillery and cavalry.

P

Frederick loved howitzers and he spends many pages in his "Instructions to Generals" manual talking about their use.

The Austrians were loaned some Shuvulovs and didn't like them at all. They politely parked them away somewhere where they wouldn't get in the way.

I wonder what sort of noise twas mad by the shot in a Shuvalovs.

Being in the process of researching British ordnance of the SYW just now, I'm quite well into the subject. From what I could gather, howitzers played a rather minor role in the Allied Army's field artillery. The Hannover and Hessian artillery supplied pieces were more often 20 to 30 pounders (7 to 8 inch class). Most of these were distinctive heavy battery pieces that could be used in a stationary envirorment only. Of little use in an moving engagement. The Brits supplied six 5.5 inch howitzers (7-pdrs) in 1759, but they were not fielded before 1760. Each 3 in the 2 Brit light arty brigades of the line (9 pieces each incl. 3 lt 6 & 3 lt 12-pdrs). One brigade was lost at Korbach 15 July. The regiment of Navarre overran it and captured 8 of the British 9 guns in action on this occaison. In 1761 there was only a single Brit light brigade of the line composed of 4 lt 12-pdrs & 4 5.5 inch howitzers. Same composition in 1762. These few 5.5 inch pieces were effectively the only field howitzers around in the Allied army. Plus a few Hannoverian 20-pdrs that are said to have been designed for use in the line of battle rather then as a heavy battery piece. Other Brit howitzers were heavy 40-pdrs. That should be a 9 inch class piece. A battery of 6 pieces was fielded in 1761 & 1762. Again, this being also a heavy battery piece for siege work, not a field gun.
See also my article at
crogges7ywarmies.blogspot.com

Cheers,
Christian

I need to correct myself. No British 5.5 inch howitzers were with the Army in 1761. It was 4 British "14-pdrs". That should have been a 6.5 inch class piece. Light enough to serve as a field gun, to my understanding. The Army's June 1761 artillery also lists 2 Buckebourg 8-pdr howitzers. This should have been a field howitzer as well. In all no more then 6 to 10 field howitzers out of a total near 150 position guns.

Andygamer, could you please tell me where you read or heard of the Prussians giving grenadiers battalion guns. And as to your comment that later in the war all battalion guns in Frederick second line were howitzers? Where did that come from? Not Duffy, Greenwood and Ball, Kronoskaf, or anyone else that I have ever read or heard.