12 pd Case Shot Cut in Half

[6lbgun]

The War of Rebellion, O.R.A., Series I, Vol. XXV, Part II, 151

Special Orders, Headquarters Army of the Potomac,
NO. 79. March 21, 1863

"........ In the batteries of light 12-pounders, it is very important that the the fuse be screwed down tightly, so that the horseshoe on the bottom may be supported by the shoulder of the fuse-hole.  If this is not done, a premature explosion may result.  The fuse-wrench furnished with the battery stores, is used for this purpose, and, when practicable, the fuse should always be screwed down just before firing.
By Command of Major-General Hooker
S. Williams
Assistant Adjutant-General"

[John D. Bartleson Jr.]

Sir:
  An excellant reference.  Thank you.  Were there any orders relating to unscrewing enemy fuses.
Regards,
John

[Pete George]

  That Official Records eport is excellent info, 6lbgun!  Thank you for posting it so everybody here will know about it.  Among other interesting information, it provides proof-beyond-doubt that the yankees were indeed experiencing premature detonations when firing Bormann-fuzed shells.  (Obviously, the yankees felt the order needed to be issued to prevent the premature detonations from continuing to happen.)

  And of coure, the order also proves that Bormann fuze-wrenches were issued to cannon-crews.

Regards,
Pete 

[John D. Bartleson Jr.]

Dear Pete,
    I meant to type "extra wide" gasket!  Perhaps their 'thicker" gaskets is causing the fuses to protrude.
 I was unaware of Hooker's orders to tighten the Bormann fuse before loading.
 a box of 12 pdrs were recovered from the USS Cario (sp) which had Bormanns installed  and were transported down rivfer and intended for delivery to a shore battery.  The ship did not have a 12 pdr.
Pete, how were the shells kept moisture proof without the fuse installed?
  As for your remaining comments, thank you for the posts and I will have to yield to your years of experience.
Any idea on my last question about finding a Bormann in a shell with a side loading plug?
Regards,
John

[Pete George]

John D. Bartleson Jr. wrote:
> Does anyone have a 12 pdr C.S. shell having a side loading plug and a Bormann fuse installed in it?

  Yes.  A photo of a CS-Bormann-fuzed 12-pounder Sideloader Case-Shot will appear in the soon-to-be-published book "Lee's Thunderbolts", which I am writing with Keith Kenerly.

Regards,
Pete

[6lbgun]

This is referring to my previous post concerning Hookers order.

This quote is found in the after action report of Col Charles H. Tompkins, 1st Rhode Island Artillery, commanding the Right Center Division.
 Dated December 21, 1862
Opposite Fredericksburg

This may be the reason behind Hookers order.

   " I would respectfully call your attention to the fact that no reliance can be placed upon the Bormann fuse.  Many of them burst immediately after leaving the gun.  I would suggest the immediate inspection of all ammunition using this fuse be ordered, that it may be ascertained whether the fault is in the construction of the fuse or in the manner in which it is placed in the projectile."

Dan

[John D. Bartleson Jr.]

Dear 6lbGun,
   Now that is the sort of references I enjoy reading about.  I guess Pete's Positive I.d. for a C.S. Bormann is the rebate section of the fuse hole, however a bad I.d. feature unless you have a radiograph machine or cut all your finds in half.
  Regardss
  John

[Pete George]

  As I said in a previous post, a significant number of Bormann roundshells have been dug with no fuze in them.  I've been distributing the gasket rebate/groove clue to diggers and collectors for decades in order to help them accurately ID their missing-fuze Bormann shells as being US-made or CS-made.  Until recent years, you'd see a lot more missing-fuze Bormann shells than sawed-in-half Bormann shells.

  The gasket-rebate/groove ID clue works as long as the CS-made Bormann shell isn't from 1861.

Regards,
Pete

[6lbgun]

     Going through some notes I've made on fuses, Bormanns etc.  Not to organized.  Post them when I find, if relevant.

This one's about removing a Bormann.

This from a report by Major General M. L. Smith a CS divisional commander at Vicksburg.  They were trying to make incendiary shells for their water batteries.

".......My Ordnance Officer was directed to prepare shells as above (incendiary composition), but found it impossible to extract the Bormann fuse without destroying it so much that could not be replaced"

Looks like he came across a tight one or was using a screw driver.
Dan

[John D. Bartleson Jr.]

Pee, touche' on the fuse Wrench being in the battery.
Dan, Were trhere any follow ups on what the U.s.  War Dept. discovered about the Bormann prematures?
Thanks,
John

[6lbgun]

John,
     Nothing "official" but i did find some complaints from the field.

    This is from a report by Capt. Peter Simonson, Chief of Artillery, 1st Div, 4th Corps, Army of the Cumberland, Atlanta campaign.
".....No attention appears to have been paid to putting Rubber gaskets under the Bormann fuse, and many of them exploded prematurely....."
   I read another early war report but can't find just now, so I can't give you a reference.  He was complaining that when the Bormann was punched for 5sec it was going off at 1/2 sec or less.  He attributed this to bad milled powder in the powder train, thin internal channel walls burning through, or the base plate burning through.

This one probably doesn't belong in this thread, but here it is.
   I read a lengthy letter from Col. Ambrosio Jose Gonzales to President Davis on Sept 4, 1861.  Gonzales was in command at Edisto Island in NC.
   In the letter he requests shells for his 24lb rifled guns.  He wanted a percussion fuse at the apex and a Bormann fuse on the side so that he could quickly us it against naval vessels or attack by troops.  I wonder if they made him any.

That's all for now
Dan

[callicles]

6lbgun,

Thanks for all this information -- well done!!!

[CarlS]

I am confused which probably won't surprise many who know me but riddle me this.....

If the fuse had firing shock which cracked the fuse and allowed the flame to bypass the threads resulting in the belief that a "thicker gasket would prevent premature detonation in the cannon's bore or at its muzzle " then how did they get away with firing the Bormann shells with no fuse as a substitute for case shot canister as shown by historical quotes in the "Requesting Bormann Fuse Interpretation" thread?  Those two situations seem at odds to each other to me but I'm probably missing the obvious.

[callicles]

CW,

You bring up a very good point.  I read and re-read your post, then went to the other thread.  Question: did you mean to write . . . as a substitute for "canister," instead of "case shot"?  You said case shot. I think the process was used to replace "canister."  But I don't want to muddy up the topic, and Lord knows I do not have the experience to even speak here.

Is it possible that the point is that when gunners were desperate, firing a no-fused shell to mimick canister, was a risk worth taking, regardless of the consequences?  Wasn't there a risk of firing "double" canister?  I'm not sure, but I suspect that the regulations did not recommend the firing of "double" canister in a normal manner, as there was a risk of blowing the barrel. Perhaps, though, double canister was suggested as a "last result."  I guess what I'm suggesting is that "firing shock" was a fact that had to be dealt with within the normal confines of artillery operations, but when it came -- excuse my language -- to the nut-cutting, then chunking a shell towards the enemy with no fuse was a risk worth taking as weighed against an artillery position being captured.

Anyway, just uneducated thoughts that I dare to share!!

[CarlS]

Callicles,

Good catch!  Canister was correct and I have corrected it above.

That could be.  Given the references mentioned having fired fuseless and, at least in the quotes provided in this forum, there was no mention of it being an issue so it seems to have worked and not caused detonation within the tube.