Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Rifled muzzle loader

A rifled muzzle loader (RML) is a type of large artillery piece invented in the mid-19th century, characterized by a rifled bore that imparts spin to the projectile for enhanced accuracy, range, and stability, while retaining the traditional muzzle-loading mechanism for charging powder and shot from the barrel's front end.^[1] Unlike earlier smoothbore cannons, which relied on spherical shot and offered limited precision, RMLs employed elongated shells or bolts, often with explosive fillings or armor-piercing designs, making them suitable for engaging ironclad warships and fortified positions.^[2] The development of RMLs stemmed from rapid advancements in naval and land warfare during the 1850s and 1860s, driven by the need to counter emerging armored ships and rifled infantry weapons. In Britain, initial experiments with rifled breech-loaders by Sir William Armstrong in 1859 proved innovative but suffered from sealing issues in larger calibers, leading the Royal Navy to revert to muzzle-loading designs by the mid-1860s; key innovations included the Palliser process, patented in 1863 by William Palliser, which converted existing smoothbore guns by inserting a steel rifled liner and reinforcing the breech with wrought-iron hoops.^[3] In the United States, Robert Parrott designed his famous RMLs starting in 1861, with the 100-pounder Parrott rifle becoming iconic during the American Civil War (1861–1865) for its use in sieges like that of Morris Island in 1863.^[2] These guns ranged from light 10-pounder field pieces to massive 12-inch naval calibers weighing up to 38 tons, and were produced in wrought iron or steel, often with three or six rifling grooves to stabilize projectiles weighing from 6 to 300 kg.^[1]^[4] RMLs offered significant advantages, including ranges exceeding 5,000 yards and the ability to penetrate iron armor with hardened steel shot, but they were plagued by safety concerns such as barrel bursts due to high pressures from black powder charges—incidents like the explosion of a 100-pounder Parrott on USS Juniata in 1864 and a catastrophic failure on HMS Thunderer in 1879, which killed 11 sailors, highlighted these risks.^[2] By the late 1870s, improvements in breech-loading mechanisms and metallurgy rendered RMLs obsolete, leading to their phased withdrawal from service in favor of more reliable rifled breech-loaders; nonetheless, they represented a crucial transitional technology in the evolution of modern artillery, influencing designs in conflicts from the American Civil War to colonial campaigns.^[1]^[3]

History

Origins and Early Development

The rifled muzzle loader originated in mid-19th-century France as a response to the shortcomings of smoothbore artillery revealed during the Crimean War (1853–1856), where limited range and accuracy hampered effectiveness against fortified positions and evolving infantry tactics. General Jean Ernest Ducos de La Hitte, president of the French artillery committee, spearheaded the development of the La Hitte system in the 1850s to address these deficiencies by incorporating rifling into muzzle-loading guns, enabling greater projectile stability and extended reach without shifting to more complex breech mechanisms. Building on earlier experiments with rifled designs dating back to the 1840s, including those by Captain Tamisier and concepts from Italian engineer Cavalli, La Hitte's innovations focused on practical implementation using studded projectiles that engaged shallow barrel grooves for rotation.^[5]^[6] The cornerstone of the system was the Canon de 4 rayé de campagne modèle 1858, the first practical rifled muzzle loader, which debuted with a bronze barrel of 86.5 mm calibre designed to fire 4 kg projectiles. This gun featured six rifling grooves, with projectiles equipped with copper studs—typically two rows of six—to ensure stable engagement and flight without relying on expansion, resolving prior issues with inconsistent rotation seen in experimental designs. Adopted in March 1858 following rigorous trials that validated its superiority over smoothbores, the system marked a foundational shift in artillery engineering.^[5]^[6] Early testing in 1858–1859 included field evaluations in France and preparations for the Kabylie expedition in Algeria, where modifications refined loading procedures and projectile fit to enhance reliability under combat conditions. The rifled muzzle loaders saw their first major combat use during the Second Italian War of Independence in 1859, with French batteries deploying the Canon de 4 rayé against Austrian forces equipped with outdated smoothbores. The French guns' enhanced precision and range provided a decisive edge in engagements like the Battle of Solferino, contributing to Allied victories and demonstrating the system's battlefield viability.^[5]^[6] This muzzle-loading approach would transition to breech-loaders in subsequent decades as artillery demands intensified.

Adoption and Global Use

Following the French introduction of rifled muzzle-loading artillery in the late 1850s under the La Hitte system, other nations rapidly adopted similar technologies to enhance projectile accuracy and range against emerging ironclad defenses.^[7] In Britain, initial enthusiasm for breech-loading designs by William Armstrong, introduced in the early 1860s, waned due to operational challenges including precise loading requirements and limitations on propellant charges, which conservative officers criticized as unreliable.^[2] This led to a reversion to rifled muzzle-loaders in the late 1860s to accommodate larger calibers for penetrating ironclad armor, culminating in the adoption of the RML 9-pounder gun in 1871 for field artillery service.^[2] These guns remained in use until 1885, serving as a transitional design before full breech-loading dominance.^[2] The United States extensively deployed rifled muzzle-loaders during the American Civil War from 1861 to 1865, particularly the Union forces' 3-inch Ordnance Rifle, a wrought-iron piece weighing 820 pounds that fired 9-pound projectiles with improved accuracy over smoothbores.^[8] Complementing this was the 10-pounder Parrott Rifle, Model 1861, which used wrought-iron construction reinforced with a cast-iron band and was produced in significant quantities for field artillery roles, enabling effective long-range fire in battles like Antietam.^[9]^[10] Both guns exemplified the tactical advantages of rifling in mobile warfare, with the Ordnance Rifle becoming the most common light rifled piece of the conflict.^[10] During the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–1871, French forces relied on La Hitte system rifled muzzle-loaders, including 4-pounder field guns, which suffered from slower reloading compared to Prussian innovations.^[7] Prussian artillery, equipped with Krupp C/64 steel breech-loaders, achieved superior mobility and firing rates, contributing decisively to victories like Sedan by outpacing French muzzle-loaders in sustained barrages and revealing tactical vulnerabilities in mixed loading systems.^[7] Other nations pursued limited but notable adoptions; Italy armed its ironclad battleships Duilio and Dandolo, launched in the early 1870s, with large-caliber Elswick (Armstrong) 17.7-inch rifled muzzle-loaders, the 100-ton guns representing the pinnacle of such designs for naval penetration against armored hulls.^[7] Russia experimented with the French rifling system by 1864 before shifting to Krupp breech-loaders in 1867, while Austria converted existing smoothbores to rifled muzzle-loaders using French plans and Armstrong shunt grooves in the 1860s, though these remained experimental and did not see widespread combat deployment.^[7]

Design and Technology

Barrel and Rifling Features

The barrel of a rifled muzzle loader was designed to impart rotational stability to projectiles through helical grooves cut into the bore, known as rifling. These grooves typically featured progressive depth to facilitate engagement with expanding or studded projectiles, allowing the shell to conform to the rifling during firing. In the French La Hitte system, introduced in 1858, the rifling consisted of three grooves that matched lugs or studs on the projectile for guidance and spin. Twist rates varied but commonly ranged from 1:30 to 1:50 calibers to optimize stability for elongated shells without excessive torque.^[11] Barrels adopted a stubby, bulbous profile—often described as soda-bottle shaped—with a reinforced breech tapering toward the muzzle to manage the stresses from black powder combustion. Construction materials included wrought iron coils or cast steel, selected for their ductility and strength to endure internal pressures up to approximately 15,000 psi generated by black powder charges. For instance, British RML designs post-1870, such as the 64-pounder, utilized a coiled wrought-iron inner tube inserted into a cast-iron exterior and secured with shrunk-on iron bands for reinforcement.^[12]^[13] Caliber sizes spanned a wide range to suit field, siege, and naval roles, from compact 3-inch field guns weighing around 1 ton to massive 17.7-inch naval pieces like the British 100-ton gun, which tipped the scales at over 100 tons. Manufacturing techniques emphasized forging multiple wrought-iron layers or coils, followed by heat-shrinking additional bands around the breech for hoop stress containment, as exemplified in Armstrong-pattern RML guns. These methods ensured durability under repeated firing, with the 100-ton gun's barrel comprising a thick steel A-tube enveloped by successive wrought-iron coils, totaling 27 rifling grooves with a progressive twist from 1:150 to 1:45 calibers.^[13]

Ammunition and Propellants

Rifled muzzle loaders primarily utilized ammunition designed to engage the barrel's rifling grooves for stability and accuracy, with projectiles featuring mechanisms to expand or attach in ways that prevented slippage during firing. In artillery applications, elongated shells replaced spherical shot, often incorporating sabots to center the projectile and ensure rifling engagement; the Parrott shell, for instance, employed a wrought-iron ring sabot at the base to drive the shell forward while the body followed the grooves, enabling effective use in guns like the 10-pounder Parrott rifle. Propellants for rifled muzzle loaders consisted of black powder charges, typically measured in cloth bags or cartridges to facilitate loading and minimize residue buildup in the rifled bore. For field artillery pieces, charges ranged from 1 pound in lighter guns like the 10-pounder Parrott to 2 pounds in the 20-pounder variant, with heavier field or siege guns using up to 5-20 pounds depending on caliber and desired velocity. These silk or flannel bags contained granular black powder, which burned rapidly to generate gas pressure, propelling the projectile while the bag's combustion reduced fouling compared to loose powder. Key innovations in ammunition enhanced the rifled muzzle loader's versatility against fortifications and armor. The French developed percussion-fused explosive shells in the 1860s, such as early impact-detonated designs that burst on contact for anti-personnel or structural damage, improving over time fuses by ensuring reliability at rifled velocities. The British Palliser chilled-shot, patented in 1863, featured a hardened cast-iron head chilled during molding for penetration, paired with a ductile body to withstand rifling stresses; this armor-piercing projectile proved effective in rifled guns against ironclad ships, achieving perforations up to several inches thick. To ensure safety and compatibility with rifled bores, wooden sabots were sometimes employed in early or experimental designs to center projectiles and avoid direct metal-on-metal contact, which could damage grooves or cause erratic flight; these wooden bases, often layered or reinforced, expanded slightly under pressure to seal the bore while protecting the rifling from wear.

Operation and Performance

Loading and Firing Procedures

The operation of a rifled muzzle loader required a coordinated team effort, typically involving a crew of 5 to 8 members for field artillery pieces, with larger naval or siege guns employing up to 35 personnel.^[14]^[15] The process began with the gun positioned out of battery, allowing access to the muzzle for safe loading. A designated powder handler, often called the powder monkey in field units, retrieved a pre-measured black powder charge encased in a fabric bag (such as wool, flannel, or paper) from the limber chest or caisson.^[16] This charge was inserted into the muzzle by the loader (crew position No. 2), followed by ramming it firmly to the breech using a wooden rammer staff by the sponger/rammer (No. 1). Next, the projectile—typically a cylindrical shell or bolt with a wooden or metal sabot to engage the rifling grooves—was placed atop the powder charge and rammed home, ensuring tight contact without excessive force to avoid damaging the rifling.^[14]^[15] The crew then ran the gun forward into battery using handspikes and ropes, aligning it for firing.^[16] Firing commenced after priming the vent hole at the breech. The gunner (crew chief) or assistant (No. 3) used a priming wire to pierce the powder bag through the vent, exposing the charge to ignition. A friction primer—a small copper tube filled with black powder and fitted with a rough wire—was inserted into the vent and attached to a lanyard.^[14]^[15] Alternatively, percussion locks were used on some pieces, where a hammer struck a percussion cap to ignite the primer. The gunner sighted along the barrel or used rear sights for elevation and traverse, adjusted via handspikes and elevating screws on the carriage. Upon command, the assistant pulled the lanyard sharply, detonating the primer and igniting the main charge to propel the projectile.^[16] For heavy guns, such as 100-ton naval pieces, this cycle allowed trained crews to achieve reload times of 1 to 2 minutes per shot, though field guns could sustain faster rates under ideal conditions.^[17] Crew roles were strictly defined to maximize efficiency and safety. The gunner oversaw aiming, commanded actions like "Load" and "Fire," and often sealed the vent with a thumbstall during loading to prevent premature ignition. The sponger/rammer (No. 1) handled bore cleaning and ramming, while the loader (No. 2) managed charge insertion. The vent tender/primer (No. 3) covered the vent, pricked the charge, and prepared the primer. The firer (No. 4) pulled the lanyard, and additional members (Nos. 5–8) handled ammunition supply, gun movement with handspikes, and trail positioning. In smaller detachments, roles overlapped to maintain tempo.^[16]^[15] Post-firing maintenance was essential to clear residue and prevent misfires, especially given the fouling from black powder and the tight rifling that could accumulate debris. Immediately after recoil, which naturally drew the gun out of battery, the sponger dipped a sheepskin-covered staff in water and swabbed the bore with several full strokes to quench embers and remove unburnt powder. A worm—a screw-like tool on the staff's opposite end—was then used to extract any remnants of the fabric bag or wadding. For rifled bores, additional scraping of grooves might be needed after every 6 to 10 shots, particularly with lead-sheathed projectiles, to ensure subsequent loads seated properly. The vent was cleared with the priming wire, and the entire process repeated, emphasizing the labor-intensive nature of muzzle-loading operations.^[14]^[15]

Range, Accuracy, and Limitations

Rifled muzzle loaders markedly enhanced the ballistic performance of 19th-century artillery over smoothbore designs, primarily through the gyroscopic stabilization of projectiles imparted by barrel rifling. Maximum ranges for field guns reached 4,000–6,000 yards, with effective ranges of 1,500–2,500 yards at typical elevations, compared to about 1,000–1,500 yards for equivalent smoothbores.^[18]^[19] This improvement stemmed from the spin that prevented tumbling, enabling elongated shells to maintain stability in flight and achieve flatter trajectories. Accuracy likewise increased by a factor of 2–3 times, as the stabilized projectiles experienced reduced dispersion, permitting precise fire against fortifications or troop formations beyond the capabilities of smoothbores. Performance varied by design; for example, the American 10-pounder Parrott achieved effective ranges of about 2,000 yards, while British 9-pounders reached up to 3,500 yards maximum.^[20] Key performance metrics underscored these advantages. Muzzle velocities typically ranged from 1,200 to 1,500 feet per second when using black powder charges, providing sufficient energy for long-range delivery while accommodating the heavier, aerodynamically efficient projectiles.^[21] Penetration capabilities were particularly notable with specialized ammunition like Palliser chilled-iron shells, which could penetrate several inches of wrought iron armor depending on range and conditions.^[22] The rifling features enabling this accuracy involved a progressive or uniform twist in the grooves, which imparted rotational motion to the shell upon firing. Despite these gains, rifled muzzle loaders faced inherent limitations tied to their design and propellants. Initial rates of fire could reach 1–2 rounds per minute, but sustained rates were typically 10–20 rounds per hour due to the challenges of reloading elongated projectiles and clearing fouling.^[23] Black powder fouling accumulated rapidly in the rifled bore after just 3–4 shots, hardening residue that increased friction, complicated ramming, and degraded accuracy by altering the projectile's engagement with the grooves.^[21] Additionally, repeated firing led to barrel overheating, risking structural stress in the wrought-iron construction and further exacerbating fouling, which necessitated frequent swabbing and cooling periods. The physics of stabilization can be quantified through the spin rate equation. The angular velocity \omega (in radians per second) of the projectile is derived as \omega = \frac{2\pi v}{t}, where v is the muzzle velocity and t is the rifling twist length (distance for one full revolution). This arises because the rifling forces the projectile to rotate at a rate of v / t revolutions per second, multiplied by $2\pi for angular measure. The resulting gyroscopic precession resists aerodynamic perturbations, maintaining orientation and enhancing stability for the flight duration.^[21]

Military Applications

Land-Based Artillery

Rifled muzzle loaders played a pivotal tactical role in land-based artillery during mid-19th-century ground warfare, enabling extended-range fire support for infantry advances and defensive positions while emphasizing mobility in field engagements and precision in sieges. Their rifling imparted spin to projectiles, enhancing accuracy and range over smoothbores, which allowed batteries to engage enemy formations from positions less exposed to counterfire. In field applications, these guns facilitated counter-battery duels and indirect support, transforming artillery from close-range infantry adjuncts to standoff weapons that could influence battles at distances up to several thousand yards.^[24] During the American Civil War, Union forces employed 3-inch Ordnance Rifles extensively for counter-battery fire at the Battle of Gettysburg in 1863, deploying 28 such guns from positions on Cemetery Hill and Culp's Hill to neutralize Confederate batteries on Benner's Hill. This engagement inflicted significant casualties—9 killed and 30 wounded—on the Confederates after 90 minutes of converging fire, forcing their withdrawal and demonstrating the rifles' effectiveness in long-range duels. The lightweight design of these wrought-iron guns, weighing around 820 pounds, provided mobile long-range support, allowing rapid repositioning to bolster infantry lines across the battlefield, where 141 of the Union's 360 guns were 3-inch Rifles.^[25]^[26] In the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–1871, French 4-pounder La Hitte rifled muzzle loaders were positioned in defensive roles, such as around Sedan at Givonne and Floing, to shield infantry against Prussian advances. However, these bronze guns proved inferior to the Prussian Krupp steel breech-loaders, which outranged them and delivered higher rates of fire, systematically silencing French batteries—for instance, neutralizing 8 French batteries at Floing with 72 Prussian guns. The La Hitte system's limitations in range and reloading speed hampered French tactics, contributing to defensive collapses despite static emplacements intended to maximize their flat-trajectory fire.^[27] Rifled muzzle loaders also excelled in siege operations, echoing their use in the Crimean War's bombardment of Sevastopol (1854–1855), where British 68-pounder Lancaster rifled guns fired 68-pound shells from batteries to breach Russian fortifications over extended periods.^[28] Similar applications appeared in Italian unification campaigns, including the 1859 Second Italian War of Independence, where Sardinian forces utilized La Hitte rifled guns for field and siege support against Austrian positions. By the Siege of Gaeta (1860–1861), Piedmontese artillery, incorporating rifled systems like the Cavalli and La Hitte, methodically shelled Bourbon defenses, with guns capable of bombarding fortifications at ranges up to 4,000 yards to weaken walls and disrupt supply lines without close exposure.^[29]^[30]^[24] The adoption of rifled muzzle loaders prompted significant organizational shifts in artillery, transitioning from brigade-attached batteries to divisional structures that enhanced infantry support at greater distances. In the U.S. Army during the Civil War, this led to General McClellan's implementation of four batteries per division under Major Barry's plan, reducing reliance on centralized reserves and allowing rifled guns' extended ranges—such as the 3-inch Rifle's 3,972 yards—to provide coordinated fire from defilade positions. European armies followed suit, with Prussian reforms emphasizing divisional batteries for mobile infantry support, as seen in the Franco-Prussian War, where increased ranges necessitated integrated command to avoid overextension while amplifying close-support capabilities. By the late 19th century, this evolution solidified artillery as a divisional asset, enabling sustained fire at 1,500–3,000 yards to protect advancing troops.^[31]^[32]

Naval Artillery Service

The Royal Navy initially experimented with rifled breech-loading guns developed by Sir William Armstrong in the late 1850s, but persistent mechanical failures, including frequent blowouts of the vent pieces and erratic performance, led to a rapid reversion to rifled muzzle loaders by the early 1860s. During the Bombardment of Kagoshima in August 1863, Armstrong 40-pounder and 110-pounder breech-loaders on ships like HMS Euryalus demonstrated severe unreliability, with one accident occurring for every 13 rounds fired and projectiles landing unpredictably far from targets, prompting their withdrawal from frontline service. This shift back to muzzle loaders, which were simpler and more robust for naval use, dominated Royal Navy armament until the late 1870s, as seen in the construction of ironclads armed with progressively larger RMLs. However, the system faced its own catastrophic setbacks, such as the explosion of a 38-ton 12-inch RML on HMS Thunderer during gunnery practice in the Sea of Marmara on January 2, 1879, which killed 11 crew members and injured 34 others due to accidental double-loading, underscoring the vulnerabilities of loading procedures in confined turret spaces. This incident, described as a pivotal catalyst, accelerated the Navy's return to breech-loaders by 1881, coinciding with advancements in sealing technology. One of the largest RMLs deployed by the Royal Navy was the 80-ton 16-inch gun, introduced in the 1880s to match foreign naval developments and mounted in twin hydraulically powered turrets on HMS Inflexible, an ironclad battleship commissioned in 1881. These guns, weighing approximately 80 tons each and firing 1,700-pound projectiles with black powder charges, represented the pinnacle of muzzle-loading naval artillery, providing significant penetrating power against armored targets but at the cost of slow reloading times of about two minutes per round. Similarly, Italy adopted massive RMLs through the Elswick Ordnance Company (part of Armstrong's works), equipping the Duilio-class battleships Duilio and Dandolo, laid down in 1873 and completed by 1876, with four 100-ton 17.7-inch guns each in echelon turrets. These Armstrong-designed weapons, with a bore length of 30 feet 6 inches, fired 2,000-pound shells at muzzle velocities around 1,400 feet per second during trials at Spezia in 1877, where they shattered thick iron plates, demonstrating their role in ironclad warfare but also highlighting logistical challenges in handling such immense projectiles on deck. Shipboard adaptations for RMLs addressed the unique demands of maritime operations, including vessel motion, corrosion from saltwater, and the need for protected mounting in turrets or broadside batteries. Trunnions—protruding journals on the gun barrel—were heavily reinforced with additional wrought-iron hoops and steel bands to support the extreme weights (up to 100 tons) and absorb recoil forces without deforming, allowing secure attachment to hydraulic recoil slides or wedge systems that absorbed up to 50% of the energy by sliding the gun rearward along the deck. These recoil mechanisms, often powered by hydraulic cylinders, prevented structural damage to the ship during firing and enabled faster repositioning amid rolling seas, as employed in ironclad engagements like those envisioned for the Mediterranean Fleet. Coastal batteries occasionally paralleled these naval designs for fixed defenses, adapting similar trunnion-supported mountings for stability. Despite these innovations, RMLs suffered from operational hazards, particularly obturation issues where hot propellant gases escaped through the priming vent if not fully cleared by the rammer-sponge, leading to flashovers that ignited premature powder loads and caused severe crew injuries from burns and explosions during reloading. Such incidents, exacerbated by the confined spaces of naval turrets and the rapid firing cycles demanded in battle, contributed to mounting safety concerns and the ultimate transition away from muzzle loaders. By the 1880s, the Royal Navy re-adopted breech-loaders, incorporating the French-invented de Bange system—which used an expanding asbestos pad to seal the breech against gas escape—on new guns like the 6-inch and 12-inch BL marks, resolving obturation flaws and enabling safer, quicker loading from within protected enclosures.

References

[1]
64 pr RML - British 64-pounder Rifled Muzzle Loading - 1871-1898
A rifled muzzle-loader with three bore grooves acting as the rifling, being a conversion on the Paliser principle from an 8in smooth bore which, originally was ...
[2]
Back to the Drawing Board: Rifled muzzle-loading artillery (RML)
Oct 26, 2020 · The mid 19th century saw a revolution in naval weapons technology – smooth-bore muzzle-loading artillery, which had changed little for over 300 years.
[3]
RAAHC - Artillery Register - Garden Island, NSW - RML 64 Pounder ...
The RML gun is a step in the evolution of artillery. In 1859 William Armstrong introduced the rifled breech loading gun. This gun was a major break through from ...
[4]
The Development of Artillery - Gibraltar National Museum
... in 1865 adopted his design for a new Rifled Muzzle Loader, or RML. His system was to take a strong central steel tube, then shrink onto it hoops of wrought ...
[5]
2- Les matériels d'artillerie vers 1860 - Système de La Hitte
Canon de 4 rayé de montagne Mle 1859, 86,5, 11, 4, 237, 2700, 218. [7]. Les pièces rayées ont un tir réglé pour 3000m et trois sortes de projectiles : l'obus ...
[6]
La Hitte - Museum für historische Wehrtechnik
Erste klare Erfolge erzielten die Franzosen im Feldzug 1859 gegen die Österreicher in Oberitalien. ... Canon de 4, rayé, de campagne (Feldkanone) Canon de 4, rayé ...
[7]
The Development of Rifled Ordnance | Proceedings - 1877 Vol. 3/1/3
Gentlemen:—With the introduction of the 8 inch converted rifle, the United States Navy has taken its first decided step in the practical development of a ...Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
[8]
Artillery at Antietam - National Park Service
Confederate: 36, Union: 42. 3-Inch Ordnance Rifle 3in. Ordnance Rifle. Fires 10 lb. projectile; Wrought-iron construction; Weight: 1720 pounds; Range: 1830 ...Missing: pounder | Show results with:pounder
[9]
Civil War Weapons in the Shenandoah Valley - National Park Service
May 25, 2023 · Although not quite as popular as the Napoleon or 3-inch Ordnance Rifle, the 10-pounder Parrott Rifle was bought in quantity by both the United ...<|separator|>
[10]
[PDF] USE AND MANUFACTURE OF FIELD ARTILLERY IN THE ...
Looking at the weapons themselves, the IO-Pounder Parrott and the 3-lnch Ordnance Rifle are fairly similar. They could fire the same type of ammunition, had ...
[11]
[PDF] Spanish Naval Ordnance in the Second Industrial Revolution
The rifling in the Spanish muzzle loading rifles was the La Hitte system of three grooves matched by two rows of 'buttons' on the shells. This type rifling, ...
[12]
Ordnance, 64 pr RML Gun - dated 1875 - Royal Armouries
British, 64 pr cast iron Gun, Rifled muzzle loading (RML). Cast by the Royal Gun Factory (RGF), Woolwich in 1875. Probably a converted Millar Pattern piece.Missing: construction | Show results with:construction
[13]
The 100 Ton Gun | Proceedings - 1876 Vol. 2/1/2 - U.S. Naval Institute
It has a tensile strength of from 16 to 17 tons per square inch and is very hard. The targets were placed in front of a bluff, on the left of the harbor ...
[14]
[PDF] How Does a Cannon Work? - NPS History
These guns are muzzle-loaders. leased when the gun fired). The with guns since the invention of. Everything entered and left them tube and carriage rested on ...
[15]
[PDF] Artillery Through the Ages. A Short Illustrated History of Cannon ...
A number of bronze French guns were brought in later. The mobile guns of Washington's army ranged from 3- to 24-pounders, with. 5j/a- and 8-inch howitzers.Missing: Tissot | Show results with:Tissot<|separator|>
[16]
[PDF] National Park Service - NPS History
This manual sets forth the procedures that must be followed by persons demonstrating 19th century field artillery to the public in areas administered by the ...
[17]
The Largest Muzzle-Loading Artillery Piece in English History
Jul 2, 2019 · The Armstrong 100-ton gun is the largest muzzle-loading artillery piece in English history. Made by the ordnance division of Armstrong Whitworth.Missing: Elswick 1872 rifled
[18]
RIFLING - NPS Interpretive Series: Artillery Through the Ages
Sep 11, 2003 · Rifling, by imparting a spin to the projectile as it travels along the spiral grooves in the bore, permits the use of a long projectile and ...Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
[19]
Cannon Range Tables | Civil War Artillery - Historical Publications LLC
Jun 6, 2022 · Tables for Cannon & Artillery Projectiles. Information obtained from The Confederate Ordnance Manual pages 367-369 and The Artillerist Manual pages 455-462.
[20]
Some Notes on Old Guns | Proceedings - May 1937 Vol. 63/5/411
The outstanding naval ordnance expert of our Civil War period was Rear Admiral John A. Dahlgren, U. S. Navy, designer of the various types of guns which bear ...
[21]
[PDF] Determination of the Spin of the Projectile - DTIC
Let ~ be the spin proper, impressed by the rifling; we have: Q = 2jV0 /a;. V0 is the initial velocity on the trajectory, a is the diameter of ...
[22]
Armor for Ships: Its Uses and Its Nature - U.S. Naval Institute
The 6-inch 100-pounder is capable of perforating nearly 10 ½ inches of iron armor at 1000 yards range, and with steel shell can just get through 9 inches of ...
[23]
[PDF] a history of field artillery target acquisition by boyd l. dastrup, ph
... yards, rifled field artillery could engage targets out to 4,000 yards. This range was well beyond human eyesight that was around 1,700 yards. To take ...
[24]
John Griffen's Ordnance Rifle at the Battle of Gettysburg
The First “Parrott Cannon”. Two rifled guns became ubiquitous in the Union army. One was the 10-pounder Parrott, and the other was the 3-inch Rifle.Missing: 1861-1865 | Show results with:1861-1865
[25]
[PDF] Artillery Employment at the Battle of Gettysburg - DTIC
Jul 1, 2025 · effective counter-battery fire on the Union batteries by requiring them to constantly reaim their guns. This no doubt reduced the Union guns ...
[26]
The Battle of Sedan: Snared in a Prussian Trap
The French army's La Hitte muzzle-loading cannons made of bronze, however, were substantially inferior to the Prussian army's Krupp breech-loading guns made of ...Missing: pounder outranged
[27]
Crimean war cannon hi-res stock photography and images - Alamy
RM H049Y4–A 68-Pounder Lancaster gun in the battery. It was a British rifled muzzle-loading cannon of the 1850s that fired a 68-pound shell. The cannon was ...<|separator|>
[28]
The Second War of Italian Unification 1859–61 - dokumen.pub
In 1858, the Army introduced the Lahitte rifled artillery system. By April 1859, all artillery batteries with the army in Italy possessed these guns. Although ...<|separator|>
[29]
Castelfidardo, the Volturno, and the Siege of Gaeta - War History
Dec 13, 2024 · The city, garrisoned by 12,000 men, was methodically shelled, day after day, by Piedmontese artillery, now using for the first time the Cavalli ...
[30]
[PDF] The Evolution of American Field Artillery Doctrine, 1861-1905 - DTIC
Jul 21, 1999 · The paradigm of direct-fire field artillery support for the maneuver army was still very much in effect. Any major change within the ...
[31]
Notes on Artillery Organization - Emerging Civil War
Sep 5, 2019 · Evolution of weapons and tactics contributed to the need to have artillery independent and still supporting the infantry. As tactics became more ...