Brooke Varieties

[CarlS]

Here are some images of the Brookes from Steve's collection.  These really had me drooling!!!!  I'm sure he'll chime in with details on them including where we can all go to find our own.   

10 Beauties:


Unfinished Brooke from Selma:


Base of unfinshed Selma Brooke:


Bases of some "common" 10-lber Brookes:


Bases of 10-lber and a 20-lber Brooke:


Picture of some noses with the Brooke time fuse:


Closeup of a nose with the fuse:


A wrench found that fits the nuts:

[John D. Bartleson Jr.]

Carl I am having a difficult time seeing all the shells.
JOhn

[divedigger]

I could see them just fine,made me jealous.

[John D. Bartleson Jr.]

Carl,
    They are fine.  just the they were framed in the camera.
What calibre are they.  Did you know that Brooke copied A Blakely design for the ratchet base? Below photos taken at the Blakely Ordnance Company.
John

[Dave the plumber]

                       wow  !!                 
       I wonder why Brooke used a slotted time fuze adaptor when basically all the rest of the confedercy used a typical spanner system ??  I understand that loosing the spanner wrench would be a bad thing for the artillerist, and alot of substitute 'tools'  could be used to run a fuze in and out of a slotted adaptor. So a slotted adaptor makes sense.   But, to be most effective in the supply chain, everyone should use the same system.  Was he ahead of everyone and trying to change the standards ??

[joevann]

On the slot vs spanner.  This is not common knowledge, but the reason most ordnance designs require specialized tools is to keep knuckle-dragging privates from taking explosive shells apart to "see how they work".  Even this slot would require a slotted spanner to avoid damage.  This is another tool not usually found in a carpenter's kit.

[Selma Brooke Gunner]

     Dave you are right on when you asked if Brooke was trying to change standards. One of Brooke's ideas for the Confederate Navy was to standardize the ordnance, so that the supply would been simplified and better quality control could be used through out the south in manufacturing rounds for the cannon. So yes he was ahead of his time in trying to set those standards.
     Two very good books to read on John Mercer Brooke are John M. Brooke Naval Scientist and Educator and Ironclads and Big Guns of the Confederacy. Between the two books a lot can be learned about him.

[John D. Bartleson Jr.]

Gordon,
   What notes do you have concerning Brooks and Blakely working together?
John

[CarlS]

John:  They are all 10-lber (2.9-inch/3.0-inch) except for the largest one which is a 20-lber (3.67-inch).   Yes, I did know that about the rachet sabots due to the knowledge shared on this forum.  There was a thread early on about this and I saved the image someone provded which is below.  The sabots at the bottom are rather clearly rachet.  Although given the date shown on the display in the image perhaps Blakely copied Brooke?   

The specialized tool makes sense to me when selling to the government and during drills and test firing.  In the heat of battle it sure doesn't make sense to rely on some specialized tool that might be dropped or misplaced leaving one unable to do what the want/need to do.

[John D. Bartleson Jr.]

Carl,
   Blakely's patent for the shell was A.D. 1863, 8th DECEMBER. N° 3087.
Regards,
John

[CarlS]

I would have guessed the ratchet patent by Blakely to be much earlier than 1863 given British advances in artillery which is why my smiley face as I thought I was being humorous.  But perhaps it did come from Brooke.  I'm pretty sure some of Steve's shells came from the September 1864 battle of Sulfur Creek Trestle which would be a quick time to get them manufactured and then get to the field.  I have found two at Kennesaw Mountain and I know of at least a couple others from the area which is June of 1864 so that would be quite soon after December 1863 unless the Confederates had an inside to Blakely and knew of this design early on.  Does anyone know of any field caliber Brookes found from engagements prior to June of 1864?

Charleston was the summer of 1863 so there are certainly large caliber ratchet base shells there used before December 1863.  Jack Bell states in his book that Brooke first designed and tested the ratchet sabot in October 1862 and put it in service in December 1862.  This is a year ahead of Blakely!  Did Blakely obtain the design from Brooke?

[CarlS]

Steve,

A question I have for you (or anyone else who might know) is why the rebate on the bottom half of the unfinished shell?  You mentioned that it had not been drilled and tapped for the bolt on the bottom and thre was only a lathe dimple that we see.  Is the recess on the bottom half of the shell from lathing?  It also seems to have a groove at the top of the recessed area.  It doesn't appear to match any typical pattern.

[Selma Brooke Gunner]

John,
     I have nothing pointing to Brooke and Blakley working together but Brooke was well read on artillery of the French and British. He had much information and material sent to him from the agents in those nations. Knowing that I would say that it would be safe to say that Brooke used ideas from abroad to design his guns.
     Now that I said that above the British and French were also very interested in the developments that took place here during the war. I would guess that it is very possible that some ideas went back across the pond as well.

[John D. Bartleson Jr.]

Gordon,
     I am surmising that Brook and Blakely were in discussion together.
Look at Brook's banded rigle.  From Blakely's?
 It makes for interesting thoughts.
Regards,
John

[Selma Brooke Gunner]

John,
     It does make for some interesting thought there. I just can't connect any dots between the two. I have for a while now thought that there was a lot of similarities in the Blakley's an Brooke's (the banding and the rifling, especially). I just haven't been able to put the two communicating with each other.
     There is mention in Ironclads and Big Guns where Brooke wanted as much information on the guns being made abroad. I would not be surprised to find out that the Brooke Rifle is a collection of the best of all features that worked well. If I had a very short period of time to design a Naval Rifle that had to be able to do the job that was required at that time I would have done the same thing.