Bullet and Shell Civil War Projectiles Forum
Relic Discussion => Artillery => Topic started by: emike123 on May 07, 2013, 04:55:20 PM
-
The 3.3" bolt on the left showed up at Mansfield and I Hoovered it up. I already had the one on the right, but finding these with their sabots is very difficult. In fact the one shown in D&G on page 140 doesn't even have its sabot.
(http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff458/emike123/DSCN1725_zpsbbfc34b3.jpg) (http://s1236.photobucket.com/user/emike123/media/DSCN1725_zpsbbfc34b3.jpg.html)
Bottoms:
(http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff458/emike123/DSCN1726_zps3367e7d2.jpg) (http://s1236.photobucket.com/user/emike123/media/DSCN1726_zps3367e7d2.jpg.html)
-
Super cool and super rare. It seems I've seen one before with a sabot but I'm not even sure of that. Congratulations on a great acquisition.
-
I read the description in Pete's book. The shell has a history..... Since it was written in 1993 [ the last century !! ], has any new info come out on it ??
-
We can be pretty sure that it is not a "Burton" as called previously because we have some of Burton's drawings now that show his projectiles resembled a cross between what we call an Archer and an Armstrong.
This 3.3" projectile was found in Fairfax, Virginia. I used to live near there and the action up there was early war. Others have been found in that area down to Manassas. I am sure more will come out concerning these little devils in the future.
-
U.S. Dyer bolts for the new members.
John
-
I understand the Dyer name, but for us older members, at least this one would be interested to know what Yankee guns were on the field in Fairfax, Manassas, or anywhere for that matter to fire 3.3" bolts with 12 lands and grooves.
-
very nice thanks for sharing
-
The answer to THAT question MAY be found on page 115 of "Field Artillery Weapons of the Civil War" by Hazlett, Olmstead, and Parks.
-
Joe = Well, please tell us since we can't afford that novel.
John
Mike are you saying it is not a Dyer bolt?
-
There you go, Joe.
I am under a restriction as to how much I can reveal at present, but what you have pointed out comes down to a short answer of "no 3.3in rifles used on the field by Yankees" However, as your source notes, some very early 3.3in rifled tubes MAY (Joe's caps copied) have been produced North of the Mason Dixon line.
Definitely not a Burton...
-
Mike,
My references show that Dyer bolts were made in 3, 4.5, 6.4, and 7 inch diameters.???
John
-
Can't quote, John. Copyrighted material. But apparently there are three known Parrott rifles of unknown lineage and provenance in current existence in that caliber with that rifling.
-
Joe, the last ref I sent you states only the Dyer calibers I quoted above were in service. So we have additional sizes? Oh you can quote from a book as long as you place it in quotations and site the source.
John
-
Forget it.
-
I'm not on here ALL the time, but what I THINK is being said here is some guns produced in the North after the beginning of hostilities may have been used by the South, and this is a projectile from one of those guns. Now, whether the projectile was produced in the North or South, I have no idea, but it does have a lead hollow sabot cast on the base.... If I am completely off base, someone please correct me before I make a complete fool of myself.
-
I like your reasoning. Not sure what to call the shell or where it was manufactured -- others who have the time may be able to sleuth those elements out -- but these were definitely fired by the South. There is no record anywhere of the Union using 3.3in guns but we know the Confederates had 3.3in guns engaged at the sites discussed above.
-
Measured the bolts and the sabotless one is 82mm dia at the bottom and the one with the sabot is 82.2mm across at the iron just above the lead sabot. 82mm = 3.23" so definitely for a 3.3" rifle.
-
The 3.3"-caliber rifled cannon which fired Emike's bolt can only have been in Confederate hands. The book referenced by JoeVann says the 3.3" Parrott rifles do not bear the "US" marking of acceptance by the US Ordnance Department. And, as Emike already posted, there is no record of the yankees ever having fielded a 3.3" rifled cannon during the civil war.
I can't envision US Army Captain Dyer designing projectiles for an extremely rare Parrott Rifle that the yankee army never possessed.
Also of consequence is the fact that this 3.3"-caliber BOLT weighs a mere 10 pounds 3 ounces. That seems unaccountably lightweight to be a 3.3" Parrott Rifle projectile, because the 2.9"-caliber Parrott Bolts weigh only 5 ounces less, at 9 pounds 14 ounces.
The Parrott Rifle's distinctive characteristic breech-reinforcing band makes it capable of firing much heavier projectiles than a non-banded rifle of the same caliber. Seems like a 3.3" Parrott Rifle, being midway between a 2.9" (10-Pounder) and 3.67" (20-Pounder) Parrott Rifle, would fire a bolt weighing 14 or 15 pounds... not these stubby little 10 pound 3 ounce bolts
The 3.3" Selma-sabot Bolts, made for use in the CS 3.3" Rifles, none of which were breech-banded, weigh 11 pounds 1 ounce. That would seem to strongly indicate Emike's stubby 10 pound 3 ounce bolt was also manufactured for use in a CS 3.3" Rifle.
It should be mentioned that the clearly profit-minded entrepreneur Mr. Parrott was quite zealous in providing his own design of projectile to accompany each caliber of the rifled cannons he produced.
Also, it was known that a lead sabot was unsuitable for the Parrott Rifle's destinctive gaining-twist rifling ...which is why Captain Dyer's projectiles were not fired from Parrott Rifles -- and there is no 2.9" Dyer for the 10-pdr. Parrott, nor for the 20-pdr, nor 30-pdr.
-
http://markerhunter.wordpress.com/2010/01/10/3-3-inch-parrott-rifles/
-
Do any of the Confederate made rifles you mention have 12 grooves?
-
The bronze 3.3-inch rifles from Leeds of New Orleans had only 5 lands and grooves
-
Pete, I don't think anyone is trying to infer that this round is anything but Confederate and fired from a gun in the control of Confederate forces. A.B. Dyer got his idea for lead sabots after visiting England and seeing Bashley Britten's projectiles. However, the base of this shot more resembles what was used on large caliber Dyer projectiles than on Britten. Four foundries produced Dyer projectiles for the Union forces and there is no evidence that he received any compensation from either the founders or the government. He didn't have a patent. I don't see what would prevent any foundry, North or South, from copying his design. I don't believe the Confederacy was much concerned about copying whether a patent existed or not. What I find fascinating is that this shot could have been fired by the Confederacy from a gun made by West Point Foundry in Cold Springs, NY after the commencement of hostilities. How in the world did the Confederates get their hands on these guns? Therein lies the mystery and possibly a fascinating tale of intrigue, deception, and maybe treason.
-
U.S. Dyer bolts for the new members.
John
John, it may be based on Dyer's ideas via a Britten, but it is definitely NOT a U.S.-fired projectile.
-
So is everyone sayhing that this is a C.S. Dyer mutant? I guess our identification system just went down the drain. I thought the 3.3 inch Parrott rifle you linked in your previous posts was a Federal, Union, Yankee Parrott rifle.
so please tell me why a bastard 3.3 inch Dyer could not be possiblly be made to fire in the 3.3 Parrott rifle you linked to us????? I give up.
Best Regards,
John
-
Exactly, John. These 3.3-Parrotts were used by Confederates, not the Union Forces, although they were manufactured in the North. Whether this projectile came with the guns or was manufactured in the South is just not known positively. All I know is it appears to be a Dyer pattern, but fired by the Confederates and there is no record of the U.S. government ever purchasing Dyer pattern bolts or any other ammunition of this caliber, so how can it be U.S.?
-
Then what shell was normally used in this 3.3 Parrott rifle? To me this is a most confusing post.
John
-
No idea. We are all a little confused.
-
All of yhu said there was no such thing as a 3.3 Parrott but you showed us one in your link.
May I ask just one more dumb question. Why is everyone convinced that it was being used by confederates? Was anyone there??? Why couldn't it have been used by Union forces.???
John
-
Because all 8 of them so far found have been recorded as captured Confederate pieces when placed in their current locations.
-
Hmmmmm. John Bartleson maybe right after all, although this doesn't mention shot:
Transcript:
Sir,
I learned that Mr. Wm. Kemble has written to you respecting the outfit for certain guns & projectiles purchased of me by the Union Committee of the City of New York.
The guns are made to fit the 6 Pdr. Field Carriage & have a Calibre of 3.3 ins. & Have made for them a large number of projectiles of the kind known as Captain Dyer’s.
The agreement which these gentlemen assumed contemplated the use of the “Boorman Fuse”— but in consequence of this fuse being only arranged for 5 seconds & under, it is not applicable to projectiles of so great a range as to require fuses of 10 or more seconds.
In consequence Lt. Benet who was ordered to inspect these articles recommended that the shells should be fitted with plain fuse holes for the wood plug & paper fuse. These when tried answered perfectly well, and he was able moreover to put the balls in loose & burst the shell. The recommendation of Lt. B. has been adopted by the Committee & the shells admit of being used either with a suitable bursting charge of powder or one mixed with the bullets.
I have nothing to do with the matter beyond supplying the guns and projectiles to the Committee, but as you have been addressed on the subject, am induced to give the foregoing explanation. No fitting is required about these shells, more than others.
I am getting on well with the Rifled Guns & projectiles for the Ordnance Dept. as well as the other work. One half of the order for the 10 pdrs & the complement of projectiles are ready & the whole will very soon be done. The 30 Pdrs are all cast & we are making good progress with them.
I have constant evidence of the reliable character of the guns & projectiles which I am making for the Department; but shall not fail to test them fully and to advise you of all important particulars.
With much respect
I am respectfully
R.P. Parrott
http://artillerymanmagazine.com/Archives/2009/parrott_sp09.html
-
Joe,
thank you, but why do you say 'maybe'? Why are we so quick to name a projectile 'confederate' when it doesn't immediately fall under known Union use.????? ::)
Cheers,
John
-
Because we know for sure it's not Mexican. Now we have established that it was a Northern founded gun that fired it, and that it is likely a Northern made projectile and we have battlefield recovery, we have to figure out from the position found which side fired it and when. Conversation is taking some strange twists, isn't it?
-
Joe,
You have proven that the 3.3 inch Parrott rifle was Union made and supplied with Dyer ammunition, no matter who was using it, then by established identification methods, it is a rare 3.3 inch Federal Parrott rifle and Dyer ammunition. So Mike you have a rare piece in your collection. Congrats.
So what did the contributors to this thread learn by the strong evidence produced by Joe Vann?
John
-
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
-
Not to my satisfaction. We still don't know if this bolt is one of the Dyer 3.3 bolts, or if the Rebs made their own versions after capturing the cannons. Capturing a cannon does not necessarily mean capturing a supply of ammo.
-
scott,
Read the Artilleryman again. In the second paragraph it states that Dyer projectiles were also provided with the 3.3 inch Parratt. ?? Of course you are free to continue to speculate on any situation.
John
-
My conclusion is not due to misreading the article. It is that we still do not know if this bolt is one of those made by Parrott.
-
We will probably never have that answer. Usually when orders were placed for ammunition both shells and bolts and sometimes case shot and cannister were also supplied. I guess the only way to prove it would be for Mike to remove the sabot and see if the sabot retention pattern matches.
John
-
Mike does have one without the sabot, so maybe he can shed light on the base. Also, a careful examination of the shells looking for either lathe marks or sizing grooves, lathe dog remnants would lend weight to either argument.... lathr
-
The image that started this thread shows one with and without the sabot. Sure looks very similar to a Dyer's style to me but that doesn't mean the Dyer style wasn't copied leading to it looking like a Dyer although the US Government is not likely to issue a knock off to the field.
-
I agree with Scott not to be too quick to consider this mystery entirely solved.
Despite some confusing comments to the contrary, early on in this thread several folks acknowledged some things
3.3" Parrott rifles were made in NY
The bolt looks to be made in the Dyer form, now confirmed by the letter
Some of these tubes were ordered by the state of NY
Other points not sufficiently addressed:
The Union Army had no 3.3" rifles on the field at First Manassas (or any known battle.) But the Confederates had several 3.3" guns in use
Serial number on one remaining gun (serial #s not legible on other two remaining tubes) is past the dates referenced in the letter
Missing 13 Parrotts shipped to Virginia before the start of hostilities (discussed in the book reference mentioned by Joe)
Lack of acceptance marks on the 3 3.3" Parrott barrels extant, one at the Citadel and two at other Southern locations
One of the barrels referred to in that initial NY state order letter is for sale on our commercial site! A friend of Carl and mine used to own another one and both were stamped "SNY". These 10pdrs are believed to have never left the State of NY. (Similarly the Delafield projectiles never left the state). The 3 extant 3.3" Parrott tubes do not have "SNY" marks either.
-
Mike,
What are we trying to do with this post? Identify the rifle or the bolt? I thought, initially, the discussion was about your bolt otherwise why did you post images? So is the bolt a Dyer pattern or not? I don't believe we can say with any assurance, who made them.
Regards.
John
-
Well, John, I admire you for sticking to your 'guns'. But emike raises some valid points. The letter doesn't mention bolts, so it COULD be a Southern made copy OR a round captured with the guns, OR a couple of other possibilities. Now, how it got where it was found is a mystery, I think all we've solved is that it was fired from a gun cast at West Point Foundry and that it was fabricated on Dyer principles. Am I correct so far, folks? Unless I've missed something in this thread, no other identified tubes match this caliber and rifling. To be honest, my D&G is still packed in a box with my other office supplies, so I don't know what this bolt has been called by others.
-
Joe,
A quote from your Artilleryman referendce:
"& Have made for them a large number of projectiles of the kind known as Captain Dyer’s."
It doesn't say shells either but they usually are provided together.
I don't believe Parrott made Dyer projectiles for his rifles It would appear to me that the rifles were made by one manufacuter and the Dyers made for the 3.3 rifles by whoever made the Dyers normally.
Why would the confederates obtain the Parrotts by whatever means then tool up to cast a Dyer bolt which they normally didn't have in stock when they could have re-tooled and cast a 3.3 Read or some other existing designs.
John
-
Mike, I can't find that 3.3 rifle you say is for sale.
-
The 2.9" Parrott is the SNY one I meant.
-
John, that's not true. It specifically mentions shell and describes how instead of a Bormann as the Committee initially wanted they were fitted to take a plain wooden plug and paper fuze and could be loaded with either a plain bursting charge or charge mixed with balls.
-
You win. ::)