Bullet and Shell Civil War Projectiles Forum
Relic Discussion => Artillery => Topic started by: emike123 on December 12, 2011, 08:10:24 PM
-
David's post about "real" artillery implements led me to photograph some I have for folks to see. Dave and others, please post up some others so folks can see these super cool implements so they can see what the real deal looks like.
(http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff458/emike123/DSCN2045.jpg)
-
how much and where can you find the three prong spanner wrench's. ??? yes post more, I had no idea
-
Mike,
Can you tell us what each tool is used for. In the 3 way wrenches, what do they fit?
John
-
Those 3-way wrenches are the exact same ones shown on pages 146 and 150 of Jones' book. One is for use in the Schenkl fuse and the other for use with USN watercap fuses.
Alan, they are difficult to find but I guess the market for each is in the high 3 figures. David would know better as he is the "tool man."
-
Guess I'd better watch for a gimlet or vent pick. not seeing a 3 way wrench in my future:( but I'll keep my eyes open. anyone ever seen any original stamps for sale? US, Ames, or any for the fuses etc?
-
Here is a Parrott fuse that Mike's U.S. Navy combination wrench fits. This would have been for the brass bodied Parrott percussion fuse for the navy Parrott shells but I have a zinc bodied for an example. The tiny prongs would fit a watercap fuse.
-
This is the combination wrench for the Schenkl percussion fuse.
-
Jack,
Great illustration of the tool use. Fantastic images. Thank you.
Regards,
John
P.S. Do you have the Water Cap tool?
-
Brother Dave's U.S. Navy Watercap fuse wrench.
-
THANK for the illustrations. very good info
-
Thank you Jack. Will these be in your new book?
Regards,
John
-
Here is a Parrott fuse that Mike's U.S. Navy combination wrench fits. This would have been for the brass bodied Parrott percussion fuse for the navy Parrott shells but I have a zinc bodied for an example. The tiny prongs would fit a watercap fuse.
Below is the brass Parrott percussion fuze that Jack mentions:
Regards,
John
-
whats this?
-
Thats a vent pick used to puncture the cartridge bag via the vent hole after the round has been loaded
-
if it looks good, what would be a "good deal " to pay, its on an auction. 5 3/4" long , unmarked, and no providence. starts at $25 with shipping. Might make me a good starter tool. You fellas keep sHowing your stuff, and my want list keeps getting bigger:)
-
Uh-oh. Are there any markings on that vent-pick? I'm asking because there are lots of 1866-to-1917 Muzzleloader artillery tools, sites, and other artillery accouterments still hanging around ...and some of them have wrongly been sold as civil war era.
For example, among the frequently seen Postwar artillery tools is a vent-pick for a US 12-inch caliber Mortar. That cannon did not exist in 1865. The vent-pick for it is usually (but not always) marked "12M".
Markings -- and knowledge of what they actually mean -- are very important for accurately time-dating many kinds of relics ...and especially, artillery tools, sites, and accouterments.
Regards,
Pete
-
no completely unmarked as far as I can tell. are different length's indicative of different cannon? (because of the tube diameter). back to, how do you tell CW vs something else?
-
$25-$40 would be just fine for that piece.
-
actually, that is not a vent pick pictured. I am told it is a tool used when a friction primer broke off in the vent of a gun. It was used to push the broken brass primer tube down into the guns chamber, which then it could be removed with a scraper. The tool could be hammered on to push it down, if necessary, hence made of steel. And, the hole in the middle of the top is there so if the tool gets stuck in the vent, possibly from burnt powder residue jamming it or the broken primer, another tool could be used to slide through the hole and create a 't' handle to pull it up and out or twist it back and forth to work it loose.
These tools came in two different head styles, a hex head and an octagon, by the way.
A true vent pick for puncturing a powder bag had flutes on the shaft because after the powder bag was punctured, the artillerist was supposed to twist the pick opposite the flutes upon removal that way drawing up some of the powder into the vent hole, helping to insure ignition of the friction primer.
This is what I have been told from others, I wasn't there in '65 !! David
-
Ok let me see if I have this straight. this is a knockout tool for a friction primer, which makes sense because of the flat bottom. Puncturing a powder bag would be better for a pointed tool . do we have any idea if its CW or post war? A list of tools would be nice for info. sooooo
1. we have a knockout tool for the primer
2 powder bag puncture, so was that what the 2/10 inch gimlet was for?
for fuses we have
1. Fuse wrench IE spanner or slotted
2. Fuse punch iE Borman
3. Hammer
3 Fuse cutter for paper fuses
5 Lanyard
This of course is only related to the fuse hole, I know there were more tools for sighting and the tube
could someone make a complete list, would be nice to see what the artillerist had to have for tools. I would assume not every tool was for every battery, since some guns would not accept some fusing? or was everyone equiped similar, since after I wrote that kept thinking of exceptions for fuses for most shells
In the movies, they stick in powder, a ball, and touch a wood stick to the fuse hole lol
Has anyone actually seen a movie using a parrot, james or schenkl type shell, or any rifled shell at all. all I ever remember was round balls?
-
Thanks David for the info. I like being corrected when I learn something like this.
-
The following websites are good places for artillery-equipment collectors to increase their knowledge of modernday Reproductions:
http://www.regtqm.com/SearchResults.asp?Cat=22
http://www.historicalordnanceworks.com/implements.htm
At those website, you'll notice that the dealers (Regimental Quartermaster, and Historical Ordnance Works) are selling several varieties of Reproduction artillery tools ...and at both websites, one of the tools appears to be an exact duplicate of the unmarked vent-punch posted by Alwion. A year in the ground is all that's needed to make it look "old."
Please take the time to closely examine all of the various tools/implements at the two websites ...and be sure to click the "larger photo" option for viewing them.
I should mention that the Regimental Quartermaster and the Historical Ordnance Works are not nearly the only dealer/seller of Reproduction artillery implements & tools.
I should also mention that various makers have been manufacturing Reproduction artillery tools & implements for use by the NSSA (North-South Skirmish Association) reenactors & Competition Shooters ever since the early 1960s. So, that old Repro equipment is now "naturally" old-looking, without any artificial aging being applied to it.
And please keep in mind Emike's recent posting about Reproduction wood-handled fuzewrenches with a US marking which is burned into the wood handle.
I don't mean to be a spoilsport. My only intention is to share the Knowledge, to help collectors protect themselves.
Regards,
Pete
-
anything once made can be made again. used to be only high end items, when you could pick up an original for a couple bucks, nobody bothered with a repro, now they seem to reproduce everything :'( I feel at a loss without hands on class's from someone to ever tell originals from repros. so sad.
-
No better teacher than exposure and experience. Arrange to see museums, collections of those that will share them, and go to shows. There is a bit of everything at the shows.
-
c. Drew & co was a known ww2 Fuse wrench maker, did he make any as early as CW? ebay 250960607955 is an example. Looking at it, it looks too early to be ww2, but a simple spanner is a simple spanner and theres only so many designs
-
That fuse wrench is a POS...see what Pete has to say about the wood handled ones above.
-
Gentlemen (well, almost) -
Greetings & Happy New Year. Just a few notes for the record from an amateur observer. The vents on many guns were actually machined copper inserts that had a short section of thread near the top of the insert (think 'top of a Schenkl fuze stock with a tube about a foot long out the bottom'). These inserts were made so as to be replaceable when the vent became too eroded. When installed the vent tube would be soldered in (silver or platinum) and this ensured that the gun tube would achieve a longer service life. The NOMINAL diameter of the vent hole was .20". As per the specifications of the day the NOMINAL maximum diameter of the Quill Primers and Friction Primers was .18" max. Otherwise you have a situation wherein the guy priming the gun has to force a .20 priming device into a .20 hole - hmmmmmmm - a tight fit for sure and not exactly conducive to function under combat conditions. So, with a "windage" of .02 the gunners had a little wiggle room. Recall that while a friction primer would ostensibly clear the vent as a result of the gas discharge in firing there was always a problem with residue just as in the bore of a musket (cannon powder was really coarse stuff compared to rifle/musket powder). Even gun crews fighting on open decks would find themselves black with soot after an engagement of any consequence. The firing of large guns was normally and usually undertaken with quill primers - not friction primers - as a first choice. Friction primers were specified as "backup" for applications afloat. Army applications may or may not have defaulted to friction primers as a first choice based on availability of quill primers. Dahlgrens' treatise of 1853 on gun lock and priming devices is a great "go-to" on this whole topic. I've shown a gun lock (w/Dahlgrens improvements) for reference. In the following photos note the three distinctly different "styles" of quill primers then in use. Also, you will see the obvious outline of the vent liner in a Selma DB Brooke rifle (S-5 - a 7") with a coin for comparison. Lastly, one rare if not unique metallic quill primer - a loaded Selma metallic. Questions? I'll try my best to answer timely if able.
-
Bill,
Very informative, thank you. Any details of how the Navy lock operated?
Regards,
John
-
Howdy, Cuz -
Happy New Year to you both!
The locks were totally manual - no springs or tension devices whatsoever. Beyond the camming action produced by the pulling on the lanyard there is no other "power" involved. The officers regularly drilled the gun crews on the operation of the gun locks with much attention paid to the "feel" of the pulling of the lanyard. It was a matter of practice/drill and when you actually handle a lock the function becomes obvious and amazingly simple. There is a photo of a Dahlgren lock recovered from Mobile Bay attached here. It may be a little easier to see than the drawing from the Dahlgren treatise.
I'm not sure that I've answered your question but the function is really simple.
Bill
-
Great thread guys. I am a bullet collector and this information is interesting and fantastic reading. Jack those are great photos of the wrenches in use. Keep this kind of posting up and Mike will have an easier time at converting me to artillery. Great job and great info.
-
Bill,
Yes, just two questions. Did the hammer strike a removable percussion cap? How was the assembly attached to the gun?
John
-
Here are some images of a couple different forms of hammer strikes than the one shown above. These two were recovered from the USS Cairo and are on display with the boat in Vicksburg. Note that one is a side mount. Unfortunately I haven't seen a picture of how it gets mounted on the gun. Perhaps Bill (Selma Hunter) or one of our other members know how these are are attached to the tube. The boat had primarily 8-inch smooth bore and rifled 42-pounders (7-inch) cannon so presumably these hammers were for one of them.
-
I also thought I'd post these images I took at the museum for the USS Cairo as it pertains to this discussion. The first image is a small grouping of cannon tools. Of note in this is the two long brass tubes mounted on a wooden block just above the number 9. This is a sighting tube and sat on top of the cannon for the artilleryman to look down for general sighting. I don't believe they were used for precision when firing long range trajectories.
Below those and just above the number 13 are two vent picks. The top one is the typical long wire with a ring handle at the top; basic and quite functional. The one just below that is a fancier version. The wire is nearly as long but at the top is a brass cap and mounted on that was a leather 'pillow' (missing in this example). I guess this made it less bruising for the gunner to drive it down into the powder bag.
The other image is from this same display but was something I had not noted before. The two items to the left and right of the number 17 appear to be fuse wrenches but are of a different form with the ring top. This seems like a good design in that it's easy to hold onto and they can be kept on a tether near the cannon so they'll always be in easy reach. I don't see any like this in Chuck Jones book. Has anyone else seen this style? Perhaps they aren't fuse wrench at all. They look very much like a key.
-
I ran across these images of some high end devices for the cannon I took at took at the Marietta Show some years back and thought I'd share them too. Note the first one is a caliper and is marked "SHACKLOCK & CO. COLUMBUS.MISS.". The second one is a cannon level and is marked "Selma Arsenal 1863". These are some incredibly rare and nice items.
-
Bart, Carl & All-
The gun locks struck the quill primers that were inserted into the vents - that is why I posted the photos for you to see the different variations. The tops of the quills were filled with a compound of mealed musket powder, mercury fulminate and ground glass - the glass providing the friction when compressed by the hammer. Gun lock hammers were frequently brass, but the "nose" was made of case hardened steel or iron for obvious reasons. The problem that they had with the earlier locks was to get them clear of the vent - the heat & pressure of the gas jet was like a cutting torch. I think that Dahlgrens' improvement of Hiddens' patent called for the slotted hammer which allowed it to slide clear at the time of firing. Depending upon the type of gun, these gun locks were bolted or pinned to a bolster or "lump" cast into the top of the gun tube (Dahlgren) or screwed into holes drilled and tapped for that purpose (Brooke).
There are some photos here that will help you understand better what I have stated. In addition, I have included photos of the reinforce sight from S-65 - a piece recovered from Mobile Bay. The reinforce sight was mounted on a "mass" that was situated about even with the trunnions at the top of the tube. The photo of the banded 32'lb'er bow gun on the CSS Teaser really shows a lot about the working end of a large gun. Note the reinforce sight, elevating sight, improvised gun lock cover (dishpan?) and lock lanyard & toggle looped and ready for use.
Questions?
-
Further to the above and primarily due to image size restrictions here are a few more photos. The reinforce sight masses vary somewhat on the Brooke guns with several very interesting examples among the 15 surviving gun tubes.
The gas jet venting from the breach of the heavy 32'lb'er being fired at Ft. Gaines offers much to explain the need to remove the lock from harms way, not to mention encouraging the use of proper safety equipment when servicing these beasties. And this was a reduced load!
-
Bill and Carl,
Thanks so much for expanding on this subject, which is not normally presented in our current books.
You refer to the term 'quill' certainly not a feather quill? I assume the blast pressure coming out the vent hole would eject the quill or friction primer.
John
-
John -
The term "quill" specifically refers to feathers. There are very special guidelines set out for choosing certain feathers and describing the methods and procedures for making "quill primers". You should ask your library to get a copy of Dahlgrens Treatise an inter-library loan. I would hope that your equipment would allow an "audio-scan" - neat stuff to investigate.
Bill
-
Bill,
I found this article on the internet. Although a commerical site it clearly shows how the goose quill and straw quills are made. It also shows the construction of a mountain howitser.
John
http://www.buckstix.com/HowitzerFuse.htm
-
http://www.ebay.com/itm/dalgren-navel-lock-artillery-cannon-civil-war-10lb-parrott-12lb-napoleon-3-ordi-/150735804381?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item23188dd7dd
What do you think of this? seemed like it pertained to this conversation
-
I've been talking back and forth with the fella with the cannon lock mentioned above. I believe he is a re-enactor or NSSA shooter, as every thing else he has for sale is marked reproduction also. He states he is not sure of it's age - which typically is a 'signal flag' that it is modern made. Plus, he used to have a cannon and he used it on his cannon when he fired it. Personally, I would not use an original rare piece when there are other ways to fire his Parrott rifle. I talked with the Paulson Brothers up in Wisconson and they used to make firing mechanisms too for Parrotts. A typical case of 'buyer beware ' and roll of the dice.
-
I wouldn't know if I had it in hand, would have to send it to one of you guys:) Is there anythingthat hasn't been reproduced .dare you to name one thing lol
-
More tools, this is supposed to be for a 10" rodman? $110 asking If thats correct, whats the M88 mean? model 1888?
-
I wouldn't know if I had it in hand, would have to send it to one of you guys:) Is there anythingthat hasn't been reproduced .dare you to name one thing lol
The 13 inch mortar ball.
-
Scott, well, I got you on that one [ replica \ reproduction 13 inch mortar balls ]. While talking to Bruce Paulson yesterday about his video of live firing a 13 inch mortar, he gave me some facts.
They cast their own 13 inch mortar shells. They used a wood time fuze adaptor with a paper time fuze. Twelve pounds of powder inside the shell. twenty pounds for the propellant charge. Flight time of the ball was 18 and 1\2 seconds downrange one mile.
They have shot about 40 rounds out of it through the years. Interestingly, they were having about a 50 % success rate getting the paper fuze lit and the shell exploding. They devised their own ' McEvoy' style fuze igniter, and now they have 100% success rate on their shells.
Bruce also said that the lesser the caliber of mortar, the higher percentage of having the paper fuze light. He said the 24 lb Coehorn's always lit, 100 % of the time. But the 8 and 10 inch respectively had a poorer fuze ignition rate. Interesting....
Do you all think that the distance the fuze is from the edge of the windage with barrel where the flame would be more concentrated is the problem that the flame can't reach it ??
Do you think the shear blast of 20 lb's of powder would just blast that ball out of the short barrel before the flame reaches it ??
Any other ideas ??
Make sure to go to youtube and type in Paulson Brothers 13 inch mortar to view this video. And you can check their other video's to see a whole assortment of life cannon firings. Maybe someone can link it on here.
-
Paulson Brothers 13 inch mortar
The link Dave requested:
That’s far too cool! Especially the second shot
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v7bLf2ipmA
-
On the down range shot the sound goes all funky when the shell explodes. I am told that is because the microphone on the camera couldn't process\ handle all the frags whizzing through the air !!
Could you image being on the recieving end of that thing coming in !!?? It sounds like a jet motor spooled up.
Again, my hat's off to you folks here on the forum that have endured combat; us lessers can not, nor will we ever, be able to understand what you all put on the line for us. David
-
side note: I had "heard" that the reason fired 10" shells and shot are so uncommon dug, was they could penetrate 10+ ft into the ground, and are most commonly dug when doing a commercial building, since a home foundation is usually only 9 ft. That explosion in the vid makes me believe!!!. My son and I then watched some of the related vids. Really scary:( how much "better" we have gotten at distruction
-
Scott, well, I got you on that one [ replica \ reproduction 13 inch mortar balls ]. While talking to Bruce Paulson yesterday about his video of live firing a 13 inch mortar, he gave me some facts.
They cast their own 13 inch mortar shells. They used a wood time fuze adaptor with a paper time fuze. Twelve pounds of powder inside the shell. twenty pounds for the propellant charge. Flight time of the ball was 18 and 1\2 seconds downrange one mile.
They have shot about 40 rounds out of it through the years. Interestingly, they were having about a 50 % success rate getting the paper fuze lit and the shell exploding. They devised their own ' McEvoy' style fuze igniter, and now they have 100% success rate on their shells.
Bruce also said that the lesser the caliber of mortar, the higher percentage of having the paper fuze light. He said the 24 lb Coehorn's always lit, 100 % of the time. But the 8 and 10 inch respectively had a poorer fuze ignition rate. Interesting....
Do you all think that the distance the fuze is from the edge of the windage with barrel where the flame would be more concentrated is the problem that the flame can't reach it ??
Do you think the shear blast of 20 lb's of powder would just blast that ball out of the short barrel before the flame reaches it ??
Any other ideas ??
Make sure to go to youtube and type in Paulson Brothers 13 inch mortar to view this video. And you can check their other video's to see a whole assortment of life cannon firings. Maybe someone can link it on here.
Dangit!
-
In his post which showed artillery tools from the sunken USS Cairo (ironclad gunboat) CWArtillery wrote:
> Has anyone else seen this style? Perhaps they aren't fuse wrench at all. They look very much like a key.
Your guess is correct, that style is not a fuze wrench, and is a key. Specifically, a key to the very special kind of lock on a Navy artillery fuze storage box. I currently cannot recall that special lock's name ...but like shells, it was named for its inventor. Note, the lock was not separate from the box, like a padlock, but was built into the box's wooden side. They are extraordinarily rare, because the Army Field Artillery seems to have never used them. A couple of that special type of Navy fuze-box lock, and several keys for it, were found where the 7" Mullane and Brooke shells were dumped off of the CSS Richmond into the James River below Richmond VA.
Perhaps somebody here whose brain isn't as elderly as mine can recall the name of that special lock for Navy fuze-boxes.
Regards,
Pete
-
Thanks for the info. Good to know! I wonder how many have been dug by people and discarded as some old key.
-
While trying to find the name of this key ( no luck) I did find this site with alot of pictures of items recovered from the Cairo.
http://www.americanheritage.com/category/collection-keywords/uss-cairo
some artillery items
-
http://www.ebay.com/itm/dalgren-navel-lock-artillery-cannon-civil-war-10lb-parrott-12lb-napoleon-3-ordi-/150735804381?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item23188dd7dd
well this finally sold for over $1000. Someone decided it was real or repros are very rare
-
it was not real. Paulson Brothers produced them for awhile, as did others. Everything the guy has sold artillery wise, has been repro, and he admitted it. He just was non-decisive on this piece, probably knowing he could get good money for it. And he started it out with a buy it now for $ 450. auction fever...........
-
Curious, since they would be rare either way, what would a Paulson repro bring? I would think it would have run $400-$500 new, would take some money and time to produce. and yes auction fever can be a bad thing, I've had it hard to cure :'(
-
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rare-Antique-Civil-War-Pa-Estate-Bormann-Cannon-Ball-Fuse-Punch-Not-Dugged-NR-/230738919023?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item35b91c7e6f
Pretty good pictures, not sure if it's real. curious why the steel stem goes through the brass where it could be struck? Is this normal for the design?
-
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rare-Antique-Civil-War-Pa-Estate-Bormann-Cannon-Ball-Fuse-Punch-Not-Dugged-NR-/230738919023?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item35b91c7e6f
Pretty good pictures, not sure if it's real. curious why the steel stem goes through the brass where it could be struck? Is this normal for the design?
Of course, "not dugged" means having no tits. Which is pretty usual for a Civil War relic.
-
I am not sure why people pay so much for these wood tools. I am sure that some of them were used to punch fuses but they same could be said for nails, file ends, etc. Would you pay $150.00 for a nail? :o
-
They are a dual use tool. Most of them available on the market are just that - wood working or etching tools. But, I have seen multiples of these dug in different artillery positions [ supposedly ] and that gives them a credence of being Civil War used, hence they are collectable. I do not believe they were ever an issued item, just an item put to use.
You can see a true Bormann fuze punch pictured in Jones' book on page 155, or come visit my collection to really see it !!
-
from what I have been able to reseach, this listing looks like a original rough borman punch. Do they reproduce (fake) them, and why would the shaft of the punch extend through the brass? I have never seen a woodworkers punch with a brass head, too much work and cost for too little gain. I would love to see someones personal collection, but everyone is sooooo far away from hickville where I live lol
-
Alwion, the brass hilt of swords is typically attached to the blade's iron tang the same way as the Bormann fuze-punch's brass handle is attached to the iron blade's tang.
Note that a "distinguishing characteristic" of the Bormann fuze-punch's circular handle is that it has a flat cutout on one side of its rim. I've been told it was manufactured that way so that it wouldn't easily roll off the limber chest's top if a gunner set it there while it was in use.
I haven't heard of any Bormann fuze-punch Reproductions being made ...possibly because Originals were plentiful and cheaply-priced until recent years. That being said, it's possible that somebody is now making Reproductions because an Original one has gotten to be a good bit more costly than a Repro would be.
Regards,
Pete
-
thanks again, they seem to have creeped up to about $200. this ones a little rough but still under $100. Interesting thing about the shape and flat for anti rolling, makes sense.
-
Repros were made. The same fellow who commissioned the reproduction fuses and Bormann wrenches from a fellow in Utah, commissioned some of these. A distinguishing characteristic is that on the repros the iron blade doesn't protrude through the brass handle and show as a small rectangle. The one on eBay has this mark and so presumably it is not a reproduction, but I cannot be absolutely certain.
As a result of these repros showing up and confusing the market, the price for legitimate ones has fallen to more like $150, and they are tough to sell at that.
-
actually, I sold one this weekend at Dalton for $ 190.
-
Hey, tell us about Dalton. Any finds?
-
Scott, artillery was pretty weak there. Nothing of any signifigance walked in that I am aware. I sold a bunch though. And a few to first time buyers, which is good for the future of collecting. Carl handed out a bunch of cards for the website, so maybe they will join us here someday.
-
sold for $155, but was really rough
-
I'm not sure, since I cannot see the 'pointy' end of that tool, I think it is really a 'vent punch' used to clear the vent ( usually a stuck friction primer ) so that the gun can be loaded for the next shot, and be able to insert the primer to fire the gun. The vent pick ( prick ... take your pick ... :) ) was longer, had a pointed end to make punching the powder bag easier, ( mine has a wooden 'T' style handle ) unlike this one which has an almost solid 'disc' style head which had to be able to withstand smacks from the artillery hammer if needed to punch the stuck primer on down into the tube. For what it's worth, that's what I think. Dave G