Jump to content

Lieste

Members
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. According to Boudriot among others, the French carriage was breeched through the cheeks about midway back, the gun was only secured by a preventer. The British used a Breeching afixed to the Cascable, using either a spliced loop, or a thimble above the neck. According to your source the early thimble was a separate part resting on the top of the neck, and the later thimble was cast into the gun (or indeed carronade). This cast thimble was easier to use with a wide traverse angle without placing undue imbalanced stress on the breeching, especially compared to the c#nt splice.
  2. For working pumps in action. IMO Working pumps on exposed weather decks is very probably costly when enemies have a definite preference for musquetry and grenades, and grape or case firing espignoles, perriers and obusiers/carronades. Taking men from the gun crew according to their station bill for 'pumping and fire fighting' is normal, with upper deck likely to be called on for fire-fighting most often, using pressurised hoses, while those on lower and middle deck (where present) are more likely to be called on to reduce or control flooding - with water rising in the well by six fee
  3. As with most other contexts of firing practice I believe that the standard is 3 shots *in* five minutes, from loaded and pointed to an unloaded state. (i.e. discharge to discharge) That is a rate of fire sustained of around 2.5 minutes between rounds, which gives the number of shots alluded to in the Vade Mecum for the first 20-25 minutes, before heating forces the rate of fire to drop to one in 5 minutes for the next hour. (roughly - 10 rounds in the first period, 20 rounds in the first 90 minutes). Musketry also starts the infantry platoon exercises with a loaded musket, and standards r
  4. For the inhaul tackle, for bringing a gun inboard without firing (either because it is unloaded, or because it has suffered a misfired/been doused).
  5. With the much higher recoil energy of a 32lb gun, I seriously doubt the correctness of a mocked up carriage and gun with '24 lb' trunnions and carriage to be representative of her wartime fit. Also the proportion of the carriage look wrong, the fore axeltree is too narrow - contemporary diagrams of carriages show a different config for fore and hind axletrees, with the cutout for the cheeks in the fore-tree being closer together, but the width overall is extremely close if not identical and there is a noticeably wide "set" of the trucks 'out' from the cheeks. If nothing else, they sh
  6. According to "Aide Memoire d'Artillerie Navale", the momentum of recoil is somewhat higher than the momentum of the shot. I'm (in the current version of the calculation - subject to error correction if I find that I have implemented the windage correction improperly) seeing a velocity for the C18th/C19th 32lb gun of 87% of the 'zero windage' case for half way between high and low guage, with recoil at zero windage 37% higher than the momentum of shot and wad. With the windage present, the total recoil is lower, but is 47% higher than the momentum of shot and wad. That said, with gun weigh
  7. The area of the hold immediately inboard of the inner planking near the waterline was provided with a 'carpenter's walk' to give access to the carpenter and his assistants to stop up shot holes. Not sure whether the Victory's hold is low enough that access on the Orlop alone is needed, but the presence of a carpenter's walk on Frigates is definitely confirmed... and it appears from context and image that this is a carpenter's walk in Victory's hold today, though it may be a later modification: https://andyandjudi.com/2017/07/10/hms-victory-portsmouth-historic-naval-dockyard/37portsmouth
  8. Is that for 24lb? To fit around the 5.82" trunnion (assumed same as bore, as this is normally what is quoted). The 32lb should thus be suited to house a 6.41" trunnion. (12lb 4.62") The thickness of cheeks is also described as one bore.
  9. The 24lb Vasa cannon (a light piece, half the weight of the gun of the period, or of Napoleonic era pieces) was tested at 360m/s using powder 'suitable in quantity and quality' for artillery of the early C17th) For late age of sail period gunnery and the 32lb gun of 55cwt: Distant charge gives approximately 1489 fps or 454m/s (according to available numbers for dimensions, plus the estimated internal ballistics from "Aide Memoire d'Artillerie Navale"), this is sufficient to drive the ordnance alone backwards at 3.83m/s (using the augmented recoil according to AMAN), which is immediately
  10. I am going to offer an alternative risk, that of the gun in loading condition has a casualty from the heated bore setting off the powder charge, during loading or after the shot is rammed. The worm and sponge are supposed to pull and extinguish any embers from the wad or cartridge, but they can't do much against the heating of the gun over time. The Vade Mecum suggests that the first 20 rounds can be fired in just under an hour, but the prolonged engagement cannot safely exceed 5 minutes between rounds (12 rounds per hour). In the run out position, the gun recoils, losing some energy to a
  11. You have side tackle mounted to the frames forward and aft of the port, in conjuction with handspikes (the pieces of wood seen in your photo), the crew would haul and shift one side of the carriage closer to the block on the frame, with the breastpiece of the carriage riding on the portsill. The range of traverse is limited (by the width of the port, the breadth of the muzzle and the thickness of the hull at the port). It should be at least a couple of points fore and aft for most properly sized ports, though the work of traversing is much harder than of pointing for range or merely runni
  12. The Robbins formulae are a little simplistic**, don't account (except by a 'guessed' parameter) for windage and were reputed to overestimate both the effect of changing charges and increasing barrel length more than matched with observed values. Plus when I attempted to replicate worked examples I didn't get the same results, so something appears to have been confused in the setting/printing of the method. I didn't follow up on getting agreement as contemporary discussion indicated they had limited accuracy off the narrow band of parameters they were tuned to suit. The 'form' used in eith
  13. While a 32lb carronade is only using 1/4 of the powder charge of the 'distant' charge of the 32lb gun, it is also considerably lighter. A consequence of this is that recoil velocity is higher than for the gun, and the recoil distance available/required is less. Recoil energy for the 17.25cwt carronade is a *bit* lower than the maximum for the gun, but is similar to that of the 'middling' charge of the 55cwt gun. All this combines to give a much 'sharper' check on the breeching, elevation screw and carriage than the large guns. Compared to the small calibre guns, which have much more metal per
  14. The maximum range would be found at ~35-42 degrees depending on initial velocity and shot density. However, even with the beds and quoin removed, the carriage won't permit more than ~16 degrees (and this is in practice limited, by portsills to ~9-11 degrees). Earlier guns and their carriages were limited more (the Vasa cannon was capable of being elevated to 3.5 degrees according to notes from the recent test programme), and with some the quoin and beds present later carriages have a lower useful (and controllable) range of elevation as well (probably more than 5 degrees, but I'd hav
×
×
  • Create New...