Bullet and Shell Civil War Projectiles Forum
Relic Discussion => Artillery => Topic started by: CarlS on October 22, 2012, 10:46:24 AM
-
Hello,
Relicrunner had an image in his collection of a CS naval cannon on carriage and apparently on a ship. He noticed a clamping device on the carriage which didn't have an apparent use. Note in the full image below the device on the right side of the cannon below the rope. I've also included a close-up. Anyone have any idea what was the function of this clamp?
Full image:
(http://i1147.photobucket.com/albums/o556/Sitherwood/Forum_Images/CS_Naval_With_Shell.jpg)
Closeup of clamp:
(http://i1147.photobucket.com/albums/o556/Sitherwood/Forum_Images/CS_Naval_Clamp.jpg)
-
yes, that is the compressor.the compressor were use to hold the carriage in place and to add friction between the carriage and slide during recoil. There would be two of these, one to each side.
-
Thanks for the quick reply. I can't tell from the image due to the pulley hook being in the way but what is it compressing the top beam onto? The bottom part of the clamp looks empty. Can you point me to an image that has a better view?
-
Glad i could help. The part that the compressor is on it part of the carriage. now look at the close up picture on you will see that a portion of the compressor hooks under the slide. so when the compressor is tightened it is pulling down on the carriage and up on the slide.
-
I have one of the compressor screws almost exactly identical to the one pictured.
If anyone needs one for their carriage.......... let me know !!
I wonder what sighting device that is sitting on the breech and cascabel of the cannon. I also have not seen that type of vent cover over the vent before.
-
Selma Brooke Gunner: Thanks. I guess I'm missing the obvious as I don't see what might be called he slide. But at least I now understand it's function.
Anyone know what size gun this is? I am guessing it to be a rifled and banded 8-inch but am not sure. I looked in Ripely's book but didn't see an exact match. The shell next to it is most likely to be a Read.
Dave: I think the vent cover is similar to some they have on display in the Cairo museum. It covers one of the hammer primers. I am guessing the sight attached to the breach slides up to be sighted onto the blade sight midway up the barrel and is kept in position with the thumb screw.
-
Gentlemen -
Selma Brooke Gunner is on top of this one.
To help Carl & Dave better visualize how the friction brake works I've included a photo of the one on S-111 at the museum in Columbus.
Also, by design most of the carriages were built with an incline in the rails of the carriage to incorporate gravity in the braking process.
-
Thanks Bill.
The slide is what the carriage rides on. In the case of the picture of S-111 it is a pivot. The set up that Bill has pictured there is what the corner pivots of the CSS Jackson were like. A slide was simular to a pivot except that it was fixed and did not move except to to allow training of the gun, which is small movements of the piece to the left or right (broadside mounted guns are examples) to aim the piece on the target.
-
Excellent info! Thanks. Amazing the knowledge spread amongst the people here.
Anyone know or can guess on the size?
-
Carl,
My guess is if that carriage is made of 6 inch stock then that shell should be a 6.4 inch caliber. ::)
Regards,
John
-
with the flared muzzle and the band that are on it I will have to say that is a rifled and banded 32pdr. It most likely started life as a naval smoothbore and was rifled and banded during the war. Now that being said, there is no way to be 100% sure with just this picture to go on but I do believe that it is a rifle and banded 32pdr.
-
Thanks. That had been my initial guess I gave to Relicrunner but I kept looking at the shell and he thought it looked bigger as well so I wasn't sure. It just looks too big to me to be a 6.4-inch but perhaps it is. Or maybe it's to a gun we can't see in the image.
-
While dissecting the picture I noticed the multifunction cascabel. In addition to it being a protrusion for a rope to lift with, it also has a notch for a recoil rope (there is probably a more correct term that I don't know). It is made with a notched body that has a fill piece held in place with a pin. Does anyone know if it's made this way or was the original 32-lber smoothbore's cascabel modified when the rifled and banded it?
(http://i1147.photobucket.com/albums/o556/Sitherwood/Forum_Images/CS_Naval_Cacabel.jpg)
-
The area that holds the rope is called a breeching block and it holds the breeching rope. As for it they were modified or not I am not sure, yet, but I will do some digging on that for you.
-
Gordon, since you seem to be the ' go to man' on naval guns and carriages, I have a question. Do you think the line or rope coiled on the breech goes to a cannon lock ?? Do you know where they were mounted on the gun ?? I looked closely, and I see the rope end without a typical pull handle for firing the lock. Maybe they did not have a wood pull handle. I have a few cannon locks, but none of them have a rope or handle....
Also, anybody know how that breech sight operates or have ever seen one before ??
-
Dave -
The rope/lanyard coiled at the breech is very definitely a lanyard, IMHO. Numerous other photos exist of similar arrangements on CS tubes. The lack of a "T" handle doesn't change that at all. The gun lock cover in this case seems to be a modified bowl or basin hammered out to serve a purpose otherwise unfulfilled.
Your question as to where they were mounted on the gun is best answered by a look at the several "extra vent holes" so often seen near the actual lined vent hole - these were for the mounting screws for the gun lock.
The breech sight is a simple set screw arrangement used as the rear sight in conjunction with the "reinforce" sight as the front sight. On the large guns the frequently see muzzle sight was somewhat redundant and used only in setting the gun up as I understand it. These big guns, when set in a fixed position (i.e. on land) had to be "trued" [my term] like a surveyors transit. There were several accoutrements used in that process including something called a "sight bar". Sight bars and reenforce sights were typically "numbered to the gun".
Andy, your thoughts?
-
Gordon: Thanks for the info. It's pretty amazing what they could make with largely steam power back then.
Dave: Here is a close-up of the lanyard:
(http://i1147.photobucket.com/albums/o556/Sitherwood/Forum_Images/CS_Naval_Lanyard.jpg)
-
Bill, I dont think I could have said it better myself.
-
thanks Bill !! I guess the lanyard for the lock didn't need a T handle. My cannon locks all are spring latched like on a musket. So not alot of pull like a friction primer requires is needed to use a cannon lock. As for the sight on the breech, I wonder where the recess or step or whatever would be for it to set on for consistemncy and accuracy. It looks like some framing square type tool - I'm gonna keep my eye out for one of those at the flea market !!
-
Concerning the breeching block I did some research tonight and have some info for you on that. The breeching block matches one that I was able to find in Artillery and Ammunition of the Civil War by Warren Ripley, it is a 32pdr of 57cwt with a 6.4in bore. With this example being banded it to would also be rifled so this would explain the round that is sitting near the cannon in the photo. If your interested and have Ripley's book check pg 39 fig I-48 this is a good photo of the unbanded tube. On pg 31 fig I-28 is a photo of a simular gun banded and rifled except the muzzle has been cut back and the muzzle flare is gone.
As for the lanyard in all propability it is attached to a lock and the handle could just be under the lock cover.
-
All -
Note in the close up that the raw end of the lanyard is visible to the right of and about midway down the breech sight "shaft". No handle doesn't mean they didn't use a peg or stick and simply wrap the lanyard around it for use. Do recall that the first and preferred method of ignition for naval guns aboard ship was the quill primer, which was fired by the fall of a cam driven hammer on the lock. Spring operated locks had been largely abandoned during the period of this war due to a number of issues. Quill primers looked roughly like a golf tee and were percussion/concussion fired versus the metallic friction primers normally used on field guns. Some metallic "quill-type" primers were used but only in situations where the overhead was open vs. between ships decks or in the confines of flank defense batteries of a fortress.
As far as any recess or step for the breech sight is concerned it is my observation that on the big guns like the Brooke there is a "left-right" hole through a block or protrusion that secured the sight to the tube on the ogive of the cascabel. Other examples such as the gun tubes off of the CSS Alabama at the Museum of Mobile and in the CSS Hunley/Lasch Center have "trunnion" sights. These sights are offset and the "front" sight is usually set/screwed into a hole near the base of a trunnion.
The sight bars are as rare as hens teeth. I called every US navy museum/Archive I could identify when I first learned that there was such a thing and finally Carl recalled seeing one (or more) at the Cairo Museum in Vicksburg. The Vicksburg bars are apparently the only remaining examples that are on display anywhere in the US for ACW period naval guns. FWIW, I have a true copy of a three page explanation that was written before the war (J. A. Dahlgren was the author as I recall) explaining how they worked - likely from some of his notes prior to an official printing of some sort. The sketches help a lot. From what I can tell they (at least some) were made as a brass bar on a wooden base.
As for steam, the other great power supply was water driven. An amazing amount of work was done in factories using overhead shaft systems that spanned not only entire floors of those buildings but multiple levels of floors. The torque generated must have been enormous.
FWIW, on a thread that goes back to the initial forum that brought many of us together 5-7 years ago I will attempt to re-state my opinion regarding the spelling of "Fuze" vs. "Fuse". At the time I referred to multiple period-original sources (encyclopedias, military dictionaries, gazettes, ordnance manuals, etc.) in my conclusion that the proper period spelling was/is "FuZe" versus the commonly encountered "Fuse". I don't care what Microsoft, AOL, etc. spell checking thinks, in fact the proper spelling is with a "Z". After all of the fuss and flying feathers, expressions of opinion and any modern sources have been examined I would invite the attention of anyone who actually gives a hoot to simply look that the side of a time fuZe for a spelling lesson. The cover of a fuZe package also provides some enlightenment to us too slow to pick up on the obvious hints.
'Nuff 'bout that!
-
Gordon (?),
Sorry, but I cannot resist a bit of tongue in cheek humour here, after reading your well written post - see above! We conserved a 6" smooth bore Fawcett & Preston cannon from the CSS Alabama a few years ago, that was an interesting project to say the least. She had been underwater for some 150 years, and there was lots of concretion, so we had to drill the bore . . . yeah, she was loaded. Anyway, reading your description of the British offset trunnion sights, made me think of our cannon (now on display somewhere up in Washington, DC), and of one of our saved digital images. Here is the last color photograph taken from the CSS Alabama, looking down the barrel of the F&P smooth bore cannon.
(http://i1273.photobucket.com/albums/y420/crltamuedu/CSSAlabama-LastPhoto.jpg)
The image really is of the actual cannon, with a color painting of the USS Kearsage photoshopped into the background.
Is there any chance that I could get a copy of Dahlgren's explanation for the sight bar - Please!
I understand your feelings on the issue of spelling, but it has unfortunately come into "common usage". I checked my Oxford English dictionary, which is my reference when in doubt, and the word "fuse" reads . . . designed to detonate explosive charge, and the word "fuse" reads . . . see fuse !!!
Jim J.
-
Jim,
That is an awesome photo. I am Gordon, the one who posted about the sights "Selma Hunter" is Bill. If there is anyway to get a better photo of the actual sights themselves trust me I would love to see it.
To actually work with on of the Alabama guns is an honor IMHO. If you could share with us what kind of round was loaded in the 6in (was it shot or shell) that would be awesome.
I get to work with a surviving Brooke 7in rifle from time to time and also have access to 4 other Brooke survivers. The museum that i do volunteer work with from time to time has a lifesize fiberglass repro of the Blakely that was recovered from the Alabama, that was cast off of the original.
Thanks for sharing the info and the photo.
-
Hello,
In case no one has noticed, I've really gotten into looking closely at these old photographs. And as much as it pains me to say something good about government, they have lots of them scanned in high resolution that they have made easily accessable that I can explore. I was able to find a couple big versions of the CSS Teaser so I'll be adding a few images from it here.
My first one is a better view of the breach of the tube. You can see the rope end clearly and the vent cap.
(http://i1147.photobucket.com/albums/o556/Sitherwood/Forum_Images/CS_Teaser_Breach_32lberRifled.jpg)
-
Amazingly, we can see most of the year date on the trunnion. It seems to say 185x. I can't see the last digit.
(http://i1147.photobucket.com/albums/o556/Sitherwood/Forum_Images/CS_Teaser_Trunnion_32lberRifled.jpg)
-
Gordon,
Thanks. You are absolutely correct that the guns on page 39 of Ripley are this type of gun. Markings match and everything. One thing I see that's different is the breaching block on the Teaser gun has a removable section on the back held in place with a pin. The one Ripley shows has a solid ring with no removable parts. But the drawing at the top of the page showing the parts and markings of a gun from Fort Fisher do show the breaching block with a removable piece. Thanks. Great info.
Another thing that the better image did was clearly show how the compressor clamp worked. Just as you described. Thanks.
-
Ok; last one for today. Below is the bow gun for the CSS Teazer. It is a 2.9-inch Navy Parrott with Brooke hook/slant rifling. This actual gun is currently located in the Washington Navy Yard, DC. Note the lack of trunnions and the belly mounted pivot device. Also note the rear site is similar to that on the rifled and banded 32-lber. This one appears to be missing it's thumb screw.
(http://i1147.photobucket.com/albums/o556/Sitherwood/Forum_Images/CS_Teaser_Bow_Gun.jpg)
-
ok, how does the elevating screw work on the new photo ?? It looks like the handle part is seperate and sitting forward of the screw itself. Shouldn't it be under the area where the screw passess through the cascabel and against the wood to actually make it turn ??
Carl, maybe you want to start a new post with this and each new photo as we tear into them, analize them and blow them up to mega pizels !!
-
Dave,
what you see the 2.9 CS Parrott mounted on is a boat carriage. It is very simular to a boat carriage for a boat howitzer (the CS Parrott is made like a boat howitzer by the way) except larger. The elevation screw is worked by the wheel on the screw next to the carriage (bottom of the elevation screw). The handle that you see under the tube is the compressor handle, this one works different than the other compressor as it places the tension on the bottom of the carriage instead of the sides but it serves the same purpose.
-
okay, I can see that now . But what tool is used to turn that small wheel ?? That is alot of weight \ tension on the screw to make it turn, especially with such a course thread on the screw. I don't picture it being turned by hand, as I would figure the wheel would have a bigger diameter firstall, and flats or some type of gripping surface - not a smooth small wheel
-
Here is a closeup of the bottom. It's quite stylish for such a utilitarian device. The bottom of the elevating screw either sits in the elongated hole or goes through the carriage wood; it's not clear.
-
Looking at the photo it looks like it goes into the carriage instead of just sitting on it. I looked the larger picture over hoping to see a pin that goes thru the carriage to anchor the elevation screw but i dont see one. So, I am really not sure about this, LOL something new to research; I love it.
-
I understand that the whell is for turning the screw, but what I was asking is; with the weight of the barrel and the tension created on the wheel resting on a bearing surface, and such a small diameter wheel that would be hard to get your hands around, and no flats or protusions for gripping , and such a course thread where each minute turn would effect the movement and the weight , and the grooves pictured in the brass wheel, and such and such and such - I just can't understand why they did not use either a tool to turn it and get leverage to make it so much easier, or have a winged wheel like on your standard land gun carriage............ that's all I was asking !!
-
lDave,
without a bar at the top of the threaded stock to turn it , there must be some type of a two pin spanner to furn such a small wheel.
John
-
Dave,
I am not really 100% sure how they turned it. I have used a simular sit up on a boat howitzer field carriage and you would be amazed at how easy it is to set elevation, granted that is only a 750lb tube.
The tube in question is probably about 6500lbs or better so in the light of that I would tend to agree with John in that they may have used a spanner type of device to set the elevation. Note the holes on the inside of the wheel and that would seem feasible.
-
that's what I have been saying all along......... I was hoping someone would know for sure.
-
Being only a 10-lber and back when men were men I don't think they'd have any problem turning it by hand. That was time when there wasn't any carpal tunnel issue from too much time blogging on forums! ;D
-
Any of you boys ever heard of a "cheater pipe?" Any farm boys here? I used one today out at the farm. I suspect that's what they used -- not that complicated. But then again, I ain't a smart guy!
-
unless you have a spanner wrench there is nothing to hang the cheater pipe on.
-
With my background (millwright) the wheel looks like a pulley for two ropes being turned by hand or some other external source. The holes in the wheel are for weight reduction. This seem like a very elaborate way of adjusting a tube with a weight of only 890lbs. When you take into consideration all the facts, 890lbs (on a pivot), adjusting screw with a large pitch (less rotation for a lot of movement), square threads (no radial pressure, easier turning, minimal wear on the cascabel threads), I feel that turning the wheel by hand would not have been that difficult. A little lubrication would have helped. Having a larger wheel with handles (built in cheater bar) would have been faster and easier.
Dan
Did anyone notice the second compressor at the front of the recoil slide?
-
All -
I tend to agree with 6lbgun that the preponderance of the gun would not have been so great as to make the operation of the elevating screw/wheel that difficult.
The first 7" Brooke Gun tube that Brooke shipped to Jones for use on the CSS Virginia weighed about 14,000 pounds and had a preponderance only 300 pounds, or 2.07% of the total tube weight [less charge, projectile, lock, sights, etc. - WEL note] (from an unpublished article by "Selma Brooke Gunner" excerpted from George M. Brooke, Jr.'s book of John M. Brooke's letters - "Ironclads and Big Guns of the Confederacy", University of South Carolina Press, 2002). All you really wanted to do was keep the breech of the gun "seated" on the screw rest so that it wouldn't bounce around and send hot projectiles off into places not intended. In this case if we assume a similar ratio of tube weight to preponderance (always a dangerous thing - the making of assumptions!) with a crudely assumed [again, by WEL] tube weight of 600 lbs then the weight on the screw rest would only be about 12 (and a fraction) pounds. Employing the "inclined plane" of the screw this would reduce the perceived load to a pittance at anything near this low number. IMHO & FWIW.
Also, did anyone else note the significant split in the carriage timber (base) aft of the elevating screw? Must'a been a heck of a load to open a crack up like that!
-
I noticed the split in the wood. The arraignment of the block and tackle on the sides of the gun may have something to do with that. Looks like the eyelet on the rear of the slide is part of a piece of sheet iron covering the side. Using the block and tackle to return the gun into battery or to help in recoil control would not only pull the slide forward but would also exert force to the sides stressing the weak part of the wood where the hole for the screw is. The sheet iron plate would prevent this some what, but it still cracked.
Dan