Brian

 

Try Bill Baldwin he has helped me through the stacks of information in the
archives.

 

 

[log in to unmask]

 

Ken

 

From: The Listserv that makes holes in Manhattan schist for free!
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brian Robinson
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 3:17 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BP] Working on artillery accuracy question

 

Bruce, 

You bring up a couple of good points and I will look into your questions
further. 

My instinct tells me that by the mid 19th century, cannon technology had
become pretty well established as far as charge sizes. These guys were not
the Chinese from the year 800 just figuring this stuff out by trial and
error. Sure, in the heat of battle errors could occur like multiple charges
being stuck in the gun or multiple projectiles being loaded. This was a very
common error on the civil war battlefield. It is not uncommon for muzzle
loading shoulder arms to be recovered in archaeological digs with several
powder cartridges and minnie balls in the barrel. Given that Pulaski was a
seige with the Federals being able to fire at will without fear of being hit
by accurate return fire, I would think that human error of this type would
be minimal. Endless training in artillery drill techniques also reduces the
chance of error. I will keep digging. Anyone know any teachers at West
Point, VMI, or the Citadel who might be able to assist?

Brian
-- To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html 


--
To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
<http://listserv.icors.org/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>