Bullet and Shell Civil War Projectiles Forum

Author Topic: 3 inch Mullane  (Read 10303 times)

alwion

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 583
    • Email
Re: 3 inch Mullane
« Reply #15 on: January 21, 2012, 11:51:21 AM »
Point I didn't show, which doesn't have anything to do with the discussion, but the sabot pins enter the diameter of the wood sabot, in what appears to be a 1" x 1/4" concave cut. 2 are very rough, looked like just knocked out with a chisel, but the 3rd appears to have been smooth done with  a cutter of some kind
« Last Edit: January 21, 2012, 11:53:00 AM by alwion »

John D. Bartleson Jr.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
    • Email
Re: 3 inch Mullane
« Reply #16 on: January 21, 2012, 02:42:31 PM »
Allen,
  Wood Sabot?,   The wooden block looks like it has recesses cut out to go part way around the stud, thereby getting it closer to the outside edge of the brass sabot.
   the flame groove you see in the image above is cut or ground into the sabot .  That sabot looks fired to me. I don't see whyh anyhone would beat around the sabot to bend it rearwards. That would make it useless to fire in the cannon as it would not take the rooves at all.
     Regards
     John

alwion

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 583
    • Email
Re: 3 inch Mullane
« Reply #17 on: January 21, 2012, 03:27:41 PM »
Sorry misnomer, technically the wood is not a sabot, but parts of the system holding the sabot. I agree with all the rest in the previous post, even the usage for holding the thin copper straight makes sense to me. I see no indication it was fired, the rest of the copper sabot is even, no indications of rifling, the wood sabot would split from the force of firing and be gone usually,and there is a line of "damage " right above the bent down area, but its recessed back enough that I would think the shell would show other damage if it was from firing, sorry can't photo it. Its a 2" curved wavy shallow line, U shaped profile, not V and appears to be the reason for the down push of the copper sabot.  If it was fired, I would expect a very light charge or undersize sabot, since it didn't take any rifling ands is perfectly smooth. was entirely speculative for a additional flame groove and 99% sure it wasn't, but we have seen some unusual field mods of hatchet and saw cuts on sabot for that purpose before, was just throwing out ideas. I really don't know why its bent, just that it doesn't look like that line was caused by impact. could have been stuck in the shipping container and pried out with a crow bar from the look of the damage, but we will never know for sure:) If it was found later with a detector, I would have said shovel hit it, but know thats not the case

acwbullets

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
    • Email
Re: 3 inch Mullane
« Reply #18 on: January 21, 2012, 06:22:37 PM »
Alwion,

Is the inside of the fuse hole threaded. I was going to bid on this shell as an Antietam piece but the ebay seller never answered my question. If it is threaded for a fuse it would post date Antietam. There are several 1863 engagements around the area that this could have come from.

alwion

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 583
    • Email
Re: 3 inch Mullane
« Reply #19 on: January 21, 2012, 07:10:13 PM »
Threaded, He did state the tags were loose and not specific to the shells, , another tag was South mountain, I think he had 2 antietum tags and one S mountain tag, but 4 shells. Maybe this one wasn't there. For the time period I would guess it was from the area though, as the three tags were same area

John D. Bartleson Jr.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
    • Email
Re: 3 inch Mullane
« Reply #20 on: January 21, 2012, 07:21:04 PM »
Allen,
Perhaps you are right about the sabot not being fired due the lack of rifling marks.
Here is one that does have very slight mars and still almost flat.
John
P.S. I didn't stick fuse in it either. :)
« Last Edit: January 21, 2012, 07:22:24 PM by John D. Bartleson Jr. »

alwion

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 583
    • Email
Re: 3 inch Mullane
« Reply #21 on: January 21, 2012, 10:52:12 PM »
I have this identical type shell, with original wood fuse holder, I got from Pete years ago.( no fuse:) the sabot didn't take the rifling very deep, but the copper is bent almost in the U shape from the firing pressure. I didn't think to compair it conciously, but the idea was there in my mind.
wood absorber to help hold sabot flat, but pressure on the wood would split and throw it when fired.Too weak to be really effective, would have worked better if it had been designed cross grain rather than with the grain, less strength in the wood that way.  Sabot should have, at least faint rifling, but doesn't. I think you were right on on the way it worked together, but if memory serves this was early war type, and there were later design changes, probably because it lost too much distance with the weak sabot

alwion

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 583
    • Email
Re: 3 inch Mullane
« Reply #22 on: January 21, 2012, 11:02:08 PM »
John, see what looks like little grooves on the top  the sabot around the outside edge. Mine looks a little like that, only on one side. On the pictured shell, do you think its from firing? Is the sabot now bigger in diameter than the shell? With the lube area still intact, I don't see how the one on mine could be from that. it's just on one side, and then the lube area is not collapsed and the sabot not flattened. also, it would have had to slip to the side alot to have contacted the base of the shell right. could thoses upper sabot groove be from manufacture on that shell?.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2012, 11:05:08 PM by alwion »

John D. Bartleson Jr.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1786
    • Email
Re: 3 inch Mullane
« Reply #23 on: January 22, 2012, 07:37:41 AM »
Allen,
  I believe those are rifling marks, Very dim aren't they? sometimes Dyer shells had slight engravings.
John