Belton Repeating Flintlock: A Semiautomatic Rifle in 1785
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- All the best firearms history channels streaming to all major devices:
weaponsandwar.tv
In 1785, Joseph Belton (an American inventor) and William Jover (an English gunmaker) sold 560 repeating flintlock rifles to the British East India Company. The guns were a very remarkable design which used a detachable magazine tube of 7 rounds stacked in series with a seven sequential touch holes. When the first round was fired, the flintlock ignited a piece of "portfire" slow match that would burn for about one minute. Pulling the trigger would move the portfire rearward one touch hole at a time, firing each in sequence as long as it remained burning. In this way, Belton advertised the gun as being able to fire 21 rounds in a single minute (using three preloaded magazine tubes). If the portfire burned out, it could be replaced and the flintlock reprimed and recocked. This was a truly impressive technological feat in 1785!
Belton had been working on firearms designs since 1758, and he actually got an order for 100 roman-candle-type repeaters from the American Continental Congress in 1777 - but there were pricing disputes and the order was never fulfilled. The British military examined the guns, but declined to purchase any. The 560 guns made for the East India Company (200 muskets, 160 carbines, and 100 pairs of pistols) were shipped from England in 1786, half to Madras and half to Bengal. Unfortunately, no further record of their performance has been found and we don't know how well they worked in practice. This example is one of the muskets, with a .665" bore and a 39 inch barrel.
Many thanks to the Royal Armouries for allowing me to film and disassemble this amazing early repeater! The NFC collection there - perhaps the best military small arms collection in Western Europe - is available by appointment to researchers:
royalarmouries...
You can browse the various Armouries collections online here:
royalarmouries...
utreon.com/c/f...
/ forgottenweapons
www.floatplane....
Cool Forgotten Weapons merch! shop.forgottenw...
![CWC 4th Listening Session with Speaker Prof. Dr. Ilia Delio OSF [ENGLISH]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/w49_TcqaCeU/mqdefault.jpg)
He was living in 2077... My guy leapfrogged cartridges and went straight to case-less ammo.
Dude you're right! 😲
The ammo was all caseless back then dude
@@perryborn2777 🤯
Black powder isn't what we would call case-less in 2024. They would probably have used a cartridge to load each shot, so you're not having to measure or eye ball how much black powder you're applying to each shot
@@mattfaulk8724pretty sure it was a joke
"What makes a good soldier?"
"Ability to fire off 3 rounds a minute in any weather, sir!"
Belton getting an idea:
And of course, Sharpe cheated when demonstrating the speed he could fire a rifled longarm... What a scamp.
8 not so good soldiers sit around eating beans, farting and scratching whilst one good soldier aims the Belton
@@bobskool”Blazing Muskets”
“That’s soldiering.” 😁
But you need one huge Irishman to carry all the ammo
The different solutions for "shoot fast" from back in the day are always interesting to watch
oh because in 16th century (1500s) a german or swedish commander said ideal rate of fire from musketeers
is 30 shots per HOUR.
"muh 2a only protected muskets"
the musket in question...
@@jalpat2272 Sounds lame now, but imagine just 100 soldiers armed with muskets (back then, most soldiers were still using pikes). That's 3000 shots per hour or 50 per minute. You can do a lot of damage that way - not to mention the psychological effect on the enemy.
Armies were also able to train and get these musketeers battle-ready in just a few days, whereas it took at least several months to get halfway competent archers, which was the most significant and often overlooked advantage of early firearms in military use.
Considering 3 rounds per minute for single shot flintlocks at this time was considered rapid. This is positively lightning speed.
@@no1DdC I can only imagine the common soldier whose only ever used bows making the switch to firearms reaction.
This is probably the single coolest, most ingeniously designed piece of firearms history you have brought us. Just wow.
Right up there with the Guycot chain gun from a little under a century later. 40 shot pistols and 80 shot rifles are still impressive today, even if they are a bit weak.
I was just about to comment almost the exact same thing. This thing is remarkable.
Seriously!
It really is. It's complex, but only as complex as it needs to be, and in concept there doesn't seem to be any obvious flaw/etc with the design. Heck, it even has those blowout screws; not required, but as such certainly helps show he knew what he was doing.
The kalthoff 30 was almsot 100 years odler and had 30 rounds continous fire with a turn of a lever nothing more needed no repriming no cartridge pre loading just 30 rounds put in and the gunpowder into the stock....
You had me at "semiautomatic flintlock".
* fully semi-automatic flintlock *
You had me at "semi......."
it sounds like a hannah barbera joke.
Clickbait of legitimate interest. Highbrow clickbait for the discerning.
He had me at "touch hole" 😂😂😂
Ian has been doing these for 11 million years now and still brings us new stuff. The guy is awesome.
I found out about these Belton guns a few years back due to a short "impromptu" video that I believe Johnathan Ferguson did. But other than that video and a few pictures I couldn't find hardly ANY info on it. Well several months back Johnathan went and made a more in-depth video on them that I absolutely loved, and now we have Gun Jesus covering it as well!
Human beings have been trying to kill each other with gunpowder for almost as long as gunpowder has existed. One day he's going to find a tiny gunpowder cannon made out of Elk jawbones.
@@AshleyPomeroy more likely there's going to be some obscure european royal family ladies pistol adorned with the foreskin of a deers member as the handle material.
@@AshleyPomeroy I'm now imagining a live elk running around firing bullets out if its mouth
Well, new info about old stuff, in this case.
"Say hello to my little chum, you scoundrels!“
I understood that reference.
But also;
'I say, you rapscallians are awfully bothersome this lovely day, tally ho!'
If you don't know what they're referencing, go talk to Al Pacino...
Tally-ho, tally-ho, chaps.
Brilliant!
@@GRIZZLYSGEAR Albert Pachinnington
"Doth this gun chainfire often, good sir?"
"Aye, it'll blow your wig back!"
After some modifications: "And now it'll only blow your socks off."
I'm just waiting for the aftermarket multi-touch ignitor that will touch off every [round? literally?] front to back a split second apart
@@RyTrapp0 Bold plan with slow-burning black powder.
@@no1DdCpressure will be a mite high
High-capacity flintlock 👍
STANDARD capacity ...
@@kaboom4679 idk man, I think by flintlock standards, this does count as high capacity since the majority of flintlocks had a capacity of, well, one
fully-manual repeating high-capacity assault flintlock
It even has a shoulder thing that goes up on it!
Fully semi automatic too
This is the most warhammer fantasy shit I've ever seen
Now I want an Empire unit in Total War: Warhammer called "Belton's Handgunners" which fire off 7 rounds quick before reloading, but are super expensive.
I was thinking the same thing. This is by far the most absolutely wild and out of the box firearm that has ever been on this channel.
There's DEFINITELY an Empire Master Engineer running around with one of these things 😂
Nuln Ironside flips fire selector to "black powder-3 ball burst"
@@coltpiecemakerand longer reload time, due to having to load 7 cartridges and maybe the impossibility of using the rod on the seven of them at once, having to hammer them down the barrel one at a time to ensure good pressure.
Still an excellent unit for dealing burst damage.
I was thinking that they would still be muzzleloaders, but they have REMOVEABLE MAGAZINES! Such fascinating firearms!
Someone should take up the challenge to reproduce a functional modern replica.
If you wish to put the money up to cover the research et cetera, we would be delighted. You will find that all the social media funding platforms won't allow it so telephone your buddies or write them a letter.
@@TheWirksworthGunroom Now that Congressman Herrera has answered the question "When AK-50?" maybe you should see if he wants one of these for his wall.
would 100% buy
I can't imagine the amount of liability something like this would open you up to though. I own a manufacturing company, and that's one of the first things I think of.
@@daltonwammock7098 We already have liability insurance.
A semi automatic, flintlock, matchlock, magazine fed, muzzle loader. Nice.
The most gun to be gun
It's a breech loader tbh. Sorry to be the boring person, but you aren't putting anything down the muzzle of this.
@@guypierson5754 watch the video bro it's literally a muzzle loader too.
all it needs now is a pistol grip and a folding stock
This is great. A genuine forgotten weapon that must have seemed half magic at the time.
Well, I bet he'll find Hellriegel somewhere eventually...
I heard that many people thought firearms were magic back when they were still pretty new and being worked on because of how secretive the various manufacturers were about gunpowder recipes or something like that.
idk why you come with magic, the revolver was invented in the 16th century, a technological marvel kinda, but one that was reproducable
It's intriguing to think how innovative minds like Joseph Belton were pushing the boundaries of firearms technology centuries ago.
imagine showing up to a muzzle loading competition with one of these bad boys
Anyone want to make a reproduction? should cost between 3,000 and 30,000 USD.
This is technically a breechloader, though
@@FPSNecromancerBob would be much cheaper to make nowadays since it doesn't have to be handmade like back then
It would be fun to see a modern commercial reproduction of these guns.
Yes!! I’d love to see this working! Such a wonderful and unique design
It would be cool, but they would likely be to dangerous for a company to make. I imagine a chain fire would not feel great.
And they would be priced exactly in 3-30k £ range😅
It would likely be a jam-o-matic due to dirt n sand. It would probably work great on a controlled range but iffy in the wild.
@@earlahmer5528 not every battlefield is trenches of WWI. In fact muskets wouldn't even exist if such conditions were involved in all black powder era wars as firearms in general would be seen as unreliable. As well as bows and crossbows due to wood and strings rotting away in all the dampness and mud. It'll be a war of shivs and shovels:D
Not really much more complex then early revolvers, but only really useful for cavalry, who can't really reload reliably on the move.
I imagine those blowout holes on the East Indian version were added after someone did the 1780s version of loading the M60 with the bolt forward. I guarantee someone at some point fired a tube, left the port fire to the rear, then swapped tubes and fired the last round first.
Reading your comment made me think of the old Beetle Bailey comic strip 😂
Yeah, the design probably should have included a pop-out dog that would force you to return the slide to the forward position before you could put in a new tube.
Nuln armory at it again, praise Sigmar!
“Summon the Elector Counts!”
Faith, Gunpowder and Steel!
Ah, I see you are a fellow Sigmar Male as well. 🗿
@@NCRVeteranRanger yes-yes fellow man-thing 🐀
Is that warpstone dust, mixed with sewage, I smell? @@goredine
Now this is what im talking about when I click forgotten weapons
Yeah this needs to be seen on FOSSCAD to give those autistic second amendment heroes some cool new ideas about what was possible back then and what we could do today , so we can make a 3d printed version of this so everyone can celebrate history
Heck yeah! I absolutely love old, semi-unknown black powder guns! You'd think that back then they were less creative, but in reality they were just limited by inadequate technology.
Good minds have always been with us coming up with ideas that sometimes worked well...or failed due to lack of adequate materials. Looking through engine patents it's amazing that almost everything we consider 'modern' today had been thought of and patented before the end of the 19th century. They just didn't have steel strong enough to make 4 valve pent roof overhead cams, fuel injection ect work at the time.
A lack of technology and scientific knowledge. Almost everything we have today has been built off of the concept of "making a better mousetrap." The mobile phone is all based off of improvements made to the telegraph. Television is based off of improvements to the radio.
If this show has taught us one thing, it's that people have had the idea for what we consider "modern weapons" far earlier than they had the technology to make it realisticly useful.
@@KR-hg8be Tbh even the basic concept of a laser has been around since the beginning of recorded history. A ray of death shot out by Old-Testament God, a demon, Ra, whatever, it's all still a death ray/laser. People have always been limited by their technology, resources, and sometimes over-Conservatism regarding new ideas, but never their imagination/ingenuity.
Technology advances, in part, by people making small alterations of existing ideas. As Newton put it, “If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants”
All that custom hand work without machine tools. Just amazing.
A lot of hand tools were used , however at the time most arms producers had belt driven " power tools " available. In fact their was a breed of puppy 🐶 used exclusively for powering wheel driven implements , think 🤔 gerbil wheels 🛞 like those cat wheels 🛞 with a dog 🐕 😅
@@samparkerSAM oh I know how the did production, but this is before Eli Whitney and the Industrial Revolution. It just amazes me all the small hand work that had to go into that action.
@@larry648 Is this your homework Larry?
@@atenachos6282 homework, he’ll, I’m 60 and retired.
@larry648 Fair, I restored several different types of Muskets both pre- and post Industrial revolution. The ingenuity always make me surprised. In fact a hand file is my #1 implement because it interfaces with the original workmanship...
"The founding fathers never thought of the existence of a repeating firearms"
Belton in 1777: *slaps gun* This baby right here can fire 8 shots in rapid succession and I'm working on a burst fire version.
Hell, even if they had not! The gun-amendment was ment to give civilians access to military grade firearms because the US at the time wanted to easily form militias for defense and frankly the only thing that changed since then is that the US is now the dominant military power on the planet - but the law itself didn't change! No, the guys in charge are simply violating it by prohibiting true access (meaning full auto guns!) to military arms!
Also somehow overlooked: When the Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment, the OG Gatling gun exists.
@@dreamingflurry2729They did that because they also didn't want the USA to have a standing army... but the US has the largest standing army in the world, making the 2nd amendment entirely redundant as to its original purpose.
I doubt they also wanted 10s of thousands of citizens murdered or killing themselves every year.
@@RavenAdventwings Gatling gun was 1860s, your timing is off by about 4 score.
no bod, that was first made in 1862@@RavenAdventwings
Oh yeah, the founding fathers *definitely* could have predicted semi automatic rifles
You do know that this kind of argument is a disingenuous smokescreen intended to poison the gun debate, right?
Yup.
It would be amazing to see this presented to Congress.
@BurmaJ Congress did initially approve for the purchase of about 100 of roman candle style beltons but backed out after hearing the cost, so yes, Congress did actually see repeating firearms
Timestamp 14:34 is when he mentions it
Lets see Jerry Miculik set a speed record with this.
Anin: "Was that the "Roman Candle" selector?"
Jerry: "There's was a feature like that? All I heard was a "beep.""
😄😄😆
he already made a hot-swap chamber preloaded with powder and ball, that would already be considered a miracle, but then he made it into this monster
kinda does seem like a facepalm moment to not use the removable chamber as a quick reloading cartridge.
@@DoitForTheLolz1 eventually some guns did use these; Wall guns. Ian did a video on them, they're basically the .50 bmg of the 1900s (1862 in the example im referring)
it was the Belgian .75 Caliber Percussion Wall Gun video.
@@DoitForTheLolz1 It adds more complexity and need to be precise in manufacture. Heck you might have to even get new replacement chambers custom made to the gun depending on how good they were with tolerances (variability of the dimensions of the parts).
All this adds more to the price of the gun and this is still the era of "throw more bodies(people) at the problem, they are cheaper than the equipment".
Depending on prices you might just be able to field more people with the simple muskets and get similar or more firepower for the same or less money as something more complicated.
The East India Company was probably the best shot at a customer since they were limited on the number of people they could throw at the problem and needed to keep the natives in line while severely out numbered.
@@wolffang-vz2ty I would buy it just for the logistics of it.
less men same firepower.
less food i have to transport less men I need to train and lead.
I think it would cost less in the end.
@@jebkermen6087you would probably get some naysayer generals who wouldn't issue these to troops because they didn't want them to waste ammo
The cost of state of the art weaponry has ALWAYS been exorbitant .
There are 2 reasons to not buy the newest thing: 1. High cost 2. Still working the bugs out.
@@tenofprime Always respek society's beta testers. They may have more money than you, but they're also eating the high costs and problems of the new tech for you also lol.
@@tenofprime 3. Retooling and logistics etc
And their makers usually get fabulously wealthy.
@@tenofprimewhich is why the Union Army stuck to muzzle loaders instead of rearming with repeaters.
0:27 William Joever? its so joever
Guess Ill be working ogretime tryna joverclock my Flintlock
A modern working version could be a new project for a certain AK Guy.
Belton-50 ?!
@@xSergisXIronically, .50cal balls are probably a downgrade in size.
@@7hart2it'd definitely be much safer with lower powder loads
A future Congressman if you will
So the only real advancement we've made is we now move the bullet to the striker instead of striker to bullet
Well tolerances and accuracy has increased a bit :)
@@magnemoe1Im not so sure about tolerences. Im not sure the modern concept of tolerence or precision even applies to anything older than Ford Motor company (Who sponsered Carl Johansson who invented the tools to allow for the modern concepts; where as prior eveeything was lapped to suit and lapping is still how we make jo-blocks and the tightest tolerenced parts)
But accuracy for certain, allowing exchangable components.
Really we where an understanding of light and interfearance bands, as well as metal sciences away from decent mechanical modernity for a good few thousand years its very bizzare to think about but honestly true, and makes sense when you think about the question of "why would anyone care?" Without modern chemistry why would anyone care?
Gun cartridges are actually even older than this, although examples are rare.
Who is that lady in your pfp??? :3
I can't seem to find it, but I can so vividly remember a video of a flintlock with an automatically refilling flash pan, and I can't stop thinking about how such a mechanism added onto this might have been the final bit of tech that turned it from a expensive piece of showmanship into an effective force multiplier. I don't know if it would actually work, but the thought of it excites me (edit: Found it! I was thinking of the Collier Flintlock Revolvers' system of automatically priming system)
There were a number of these from various makers.
The two that immediately come to mind are the Lorenzoni system and the khaltoff repeater
@@xskyhawkx7821 I think those systems would be more of an alternative to the one in use on these rifles, (after some more looking I found what I was thinking of) I was thinking more of something like the Collier Flintlock Revolvers. This way the primer would automatically reset and you could fire all the shots only having to move the lock when firing, and then reload the primer on the lock at the same time as reloading the bullets. (Link to Ian's video on the Collier Flintlocks ruclips.net/video/i9Km5KaeO7I/видео.html)
I get the general vibe that "the semi-automatic musket" was a very doable concept at the time, but the end-result was difficult for the layman to use and very dangerous in the event of any serious malfunctions. Such designs were expensive as well, and depending on the system they can be quite difficult to repair, especially when compared to a conventional flintlock.
It's still surprising that we didn't see more of these oddities being fielded by the super-rich militaries of the era, these types of weapons seem like they would be especially good shock troops on a rank-and-file battlefield or commendable fortress/trench-fired weapons. Imagine being flanked by a platoon of 5-7-shot muskets, they would destroy most firing lines within the time it takes them to fire and reload once. Proper usage of such a weapon could've dominated the battlefield if artillery doesn't wipe them out first, which could've changed conventional tactics of the era entirely. They'd have to retire more quickly from the battlefield in order to keep their rifles well-maintained, but then again they'd have to do that anyways to reload by the time their rifles have fouled-up, since these weapons would be firing so much more rapidly. It would be a worthwhile trade-off if the mechanisms weren't prone to breakages.
But then again, each of these flintlocks would be firing their rounds with less powder behind each shot versus a single-shot rifle right? So they would have inferior range in theory and that would have to be planned around by the commanding officers of a given battle. It's definitely an interesting thought though, if the world could've been changed by such a design or not.
"The founders could never imagine weapons that fire multiple rounds"
Show them this 😂
Yeah, it's not like one of them was a famous inventor.
@@davidfrench3657 This flintlock was made 1 year after the creation of the usa. Based on that, we don't know if the founders could imagine weapons that fire multiple rounds.
The Bill of Rights, that thing that has the first 10 ammendments incliluded the "shall not be infringed one", was ratified in 1790, 5 years after this gun dropped.
Besides, there were girardoni air rifles that were somewhat popular, even issued in the Austro-Hungarian army.
@@ThZuao Good to know about the bill of rights. I am not american. I need to research that. Otherwise I already knew about the girardoni air rifles, the point of my first comment was to provoke.
Portfires are actually a pretty neat invention in their own right, consisting of a tube made of layers of stiff paper containing a slow-burning gunpowder mixture. You'd light it and it'd burn from one end like a road flare. They had holders which were basically a wooden handle with a split hollow end and a metal tensioning ring; you'd stick the portfire in the end and slide the ring up to hold it in place. Artillerymen often preferred them over slowmatch as an ignition source, since they'd stay burning even in a storm of rain; supposedly, even plunging one into a bucket of water wouldn't extinguish it.
Go check out Tod's Workshop's video on fire arrows if you want video of something with similar wet-weather performance.
This could have been scaled up as a crew served weapon and been a real game changer.
ruclips.net/video/rCuVMx5h1x0/видео.html
I'm genuinely impressed that I've been watching this channel for so long and Ian keeps bringing out amazing forgotten gems
That inventor had a itch, and scratched it hard. A real effort to get a result. Only on Forgotten Weapons do I get educated like this. Ian, if you could do a presentation on the first cap and ball rifle or pistol, development of the cap, and dropping the flint etc.would be another step closer to understanding the evolution of firearms. Thanks,.
missed opportunity to have a Jörg Sprave moment "let me show you it's features"
Now that's the colab we need!
Read this in his voice lol
Don't forgot the heartfelt german laughter.
This is what Jörg sprave would fo if he was born in america
@@harripursiainen5420 note that Sprave never laughs in his German-speaking videos...
"In 1777 he actually demonstrated [semi-automatic] guns to the US Congress, they knew about this..." You don't say? What a fascinating historical factoid, of no relevance whatsoever to modern controversies.
Underrated comment
Wait a goddamn minute... history is funny isn't it
Surely there would be examples floating around India and that region somewhere. They must of been useful because of the amount of wear and tear of these guns.
Either that or two and a half centuries of people showing the cool mechanism off to anyone interested, but rarely ever using it for fear of breaking the fragile thing.
That the weapons disappeared without a trace upon reaching India certainly heightens the mystery. As there are no other traces of the weapons that leads me to suspect that a senior EIC armorer who wasn't progressive arranged for both shipments to become lost in transit. Perhaps dumped offshore in the middle of the night.
£5 at this time (1785) was probably the price of a small house. My ancestors bought a modest house in England for £100 in the early 1900s.
No. You only started to see stupid levels of inflation in 1979 when the gold standard was ended
@@alexanderhowarth6460 you forgot the hyperinflation of the Napoleonic wars.
@@alexanderhowarth6460 house price inflation was huge LONG before 1979. You are talking from ideology not facts.
@@gilgamecha no
@@alexanderhowarth6460 and you seem to believe the UK went off the gold standard in 1979. Also incorrect. Sterling was delinked from silver (not gold) much earlier. Only the dollar was delinked in 1979. Pretty much all other currencies were delinked long before.
Send this to the next genius who says "nobody in the 1700's could have imagined repeating firearms."
And also send the Girardoni Model 1780 air rifle video. It was adopted by the Austrian army as their standard issue rifle from 1780-1815. Lethal out to 150 yards and has a 20 round fixed tubular magazine. The Lewis and Clark expedition (1804-1806) used them for hunting and protection.
ruclips.net/video/2dZLeEUE940/видео.htmlfeature=shared
@@joenull5945 Agreed.
They were rare oddities far outside the ability of the average person to afford, and saying the founding fathers probably couldn’t have anticipated how firearms would develop over the next 200 years is perfectly logical. You are making a dishonest argument because it suits your political beliefs.
Oh, so you think they knew but it doesn't count because they thought the poors would able to afford one?
🤡
Just stop.
@jacksonmiller9331 The argument has frequently been that semi-automatic firearms could not be covered by the second amendment because the founders weren't aware that repeating firearms existed. These types of firearms show that they knew firearms technology would continue to advance beyond their time - making the principles timeless.
I suppose the legal Implications of this and Bruen involve the prevention of challenges to firearms de-regulation on the basis of what was available back then.
I think we can surmise a clue as to how well they worked by the subsequent development of an explosive safety feature on later models.
and yet the parts are worn down enough to show that they were used incredibly often. Once the safety feature was implemented i can imagine these being very useful.
1780s with full belton kit with extra mag tubes crammed into random pockets
High capacity extended magazine assault flintlock
At least its not a short barreled rifle.
Ah the Royal Armouries. I have heard they house thousand of iconic weapons from throughout history.
"Now, let's hand it over to Johnathon..."
Wild stuff. Just the idea of having a replaceable magazine and burst fire in 18th Century is nuts.
It shows how profitable the Indian trade was that the EIC was willingly to spend so much on experimental firearms.
I'd love to see a recreation made and a firing demo
Between this and the french cased ammo experiments of early 1800's(can't recall the name of the guy, Ian has episode on his break open twin barrels), Napoleonic Wars could have taken some very weird turn in some other reality.
Jean Pauly.
@@allangibson8494 yeah, him.
Somewhere out there there is a reality where Belton repeaters met Pauly speedloaders in battle.
@@TheArklyte Pauly rifles were double barrel weapons - the most glaring flaw to modern eyes is the lack of extractors for the cartridges when the breech is broken open (it is very similar to a double barrel shotgun).
Steampunk. Wonder how many rounds you can get down it before black powder fouling stops it working?
Honestly, with smoothbore guns, more rounds than you're likely to be carrying.
20 rounds in a single session from a flintlock musket is do-able- after all, there's a reason you see cartridge boxes holding 20, 24, even 30 rounds. (12-20 was more typical for the period, but that was as much the fact that you'd rarely fire more than that in an open field battle before going for the bayonet charge).
With this gun, each magazine only holds 7, and you aren't having to load past fouling until all your magazines are exhausted (and that presumes you're still in combat and thus can't boil out the magazines before reloading).
The pan and hammer ("frizzen" in modern terms - that thing most folks call a hammer is actually a called a "cock") will likely benefit from a quick swipe with a rag between each magazine, along with a stab with the touch wire to the flash hole, but that's like 5 seconds or so, if you've set your kit up smartly so you don't have to fish around in the bottom of your box (under the wooden cartridge block) for the wire.
You'd probably be able to get at least 5 full magazine tubes out before fouling in the barrel would become a noticeable problem (recoil will progressively get stiffer), and you might be able to get more out before it becomes dangerously fouled. Each mag tube should be able to be loaded and fired *at least* 3 times before becoming so fouled they are difficult to charge, more likely 4 times.
So, a typical soldier will end up running out of ammo before he runs afoul of fouling in a single battle. 😉
More like sailpunk.
@@geodkyt nice
a heap i reckon. all the moving parts are on the outside, and you change your chamber when you change magazine. plus smoothbore. no rifling fouling, no touchhole fouling. only place that might is the cone where the magazine seats, but you can easily wipe that every seven shots. while it may have other reliability issues, i really dont see fouling troubling this gun.
Wrong century for steampunk.
So there were Assault Flintlocks available, eh? Interesting debate fodder.
Ha, ha. Now (in addition to wanting to see a faithful modern reproduction) I also want to see the meme version reproduction of this assault flintlock. Stick on an anachronistic (but still wooden) pistol grip, picatinny rail, and have all the metal and wood stained/painted black :D
yeah, it's certainly put a whole lot of skub in here of people arguing about what a buncha white dudes who died 200 years ago may or may not have thought about this really fucking cool gun right in front of us.
A mechanical engineer's solution to a chemical engineer's problem.
I just watched Ian's _"Kaltoff"_ video. Now I am watching this one.
It AMAZES ME repeating weapons like this existed THAT LONG AGO.
“The founders couldn’t have imagined repeating firearms.”
Meanwhile, the founders tested a 7-shot repeater with a detachable magazine that would later be refined enough to obtain a contract for 500 to the EITC by 1785; 2 years before the Constitution was even ratified.
The East India Company armed to the fucking teeth is such a terrifying concept. Good lord.
Great video Ian! Even if they worked as advertised, it was probably more militarily effective to have a few men with ordinary flintlocks than 1 man with a Belton gun which is why no subsequent order
Having just one or two guys sending rounds off while the firing line is reloading would probably have been devastating
But that's a very expensive piece of equipment to give a simple soldier, and it's quite an ungentlemanly way to conduct warfare
@@Grouuumpf I would guess (though I certainly don’t know as I’m not privy to any special info) that these were destined for fortifications. With how much they spent and how complicated and intricate these were (which they had to be well aware of) they knew basic infantrymen weren’t getting one.
@@Dominic1962 I was thinking deck-sweeping on ships, which is why I'm surprised the East India Company sent these to India and kept them there instead of using them on their ships.
@@no1DdC That could be too, yes, but I’m guessing they figured it was too complex for use in the salt spray environment on ships.
The EIC had its “Presidency Armies” based in Madras, Bombay and Bengal.
@@Dominic1962 Thinking on that, what about monsoon season? Rather difficult to keep things that venture outside dry.
I am guessing it worked well due to it being worn out and not broken
Could also be rust that was removed.
12:00 hang on a sec, what you're saying is they built a select-fire rifle? Theoretically you could simply slide the fuse-port all the way down and salvo the gun. Does this mean assault muskets are real!?!
This thing seems like a chainfire explosion waiting to happen.
*Surprise machine gun
Tbh I think I can understand why the founding fathers weren't concerned with restrictions on firearms. Ian is sitting there telling me how that rifle is supposed to of been a game changer if it wasn't expensive. Nah mate congress may of bought some but there is a very specific few reasons repeating firearms were never adopted. Even up to the Civil War the US Army still was mainly using simple one shot muskets because they are simple, reliable and easier to train soldiers on and that isn't even mentioning soldiers can carry more powder and ammo for a musket than any overly complicated repeating musket. Weapons like the Belton just never got far because again, they are two things any army hates. Complicated and fragile. A good service weapon should be simple, reliable and easy to remember how to use. I'm surprised Ian did not point that out.
@@jarinmartin2858one of the big reasons the us army stayed with single shots long after they were obsolete in the late 1800s had more to do with the desire to not have to spend money on ammunition. They were still hoping that somehow a solider could fight an entire battle with fewer than 20 rounds of ammo carried on the belt.
@@jarinmartin2858 That's not really a good point to make when the same founding fathers were totally cool with people operating their own warships. The founding fathers put no restrictions on firearms very deliberately. They knew what they were doing.
@@KR-hg8be people always leave out the most important factor. Money.
You could even say it was Belton Fed
If the locking teeth was worn does it mean this rifle was well-used?
So this is the fully semi automatic firearm that can be shipped in the mail they were telling us about
My favorite new fact i learned:
Remember that when people try to pull out that old and tired :
"The founding fathers never intended, couldnt have foresaw, and would be against xyz"
*The founding father's included the right for the common people to not just own cannons but full on warships.*
*-[NM things like the picklegun !¡!]-*
"America's Founding Fathers couldn't have foreseen semiautomatic firearms!"
Founding Fathers getting in a payment dispute with Belton over semiautomatic flintlocks before the Bill Of Rights was written...
I notice that Greener was complaining fifty odd years later that Lovell should not have dissuaded the Russians from ordering a Brunswick rifle copies being made in England (the Belgians obliged them) as they could not be made well for the Russian budget yet Greener was certain the British trade could have done the job for £5 a rifle and possibly even £3. So a 1785 £2,200 order for 100 would make the Belton a very expensive gun indeed.
Gun-Control Advocates: “You don’t need semi-autos because they didn’t exist when the Constitution was written.”
Gun-Rights Advocates:
The flintlock equivalent to the M1 Grand. Awesome!
Without worrying about your thumb!! 😄
"The forefathers could never conceive...."
"Just shut up for a few minutes and watch this video. As a bonus I'll send you info about the air rifle used by Lewis and Clark.... which held 20 rounds and was semi auto."
two notes: forget converting currency and just compare the cost to the per unit cost on Brown Bess contracts that year.. second thought is on why they disappeared after arrival. Millitreuse: no provision was made for instructors or instructions and/or these were considered an emergency secret super weapon.. so secret that the people who might have used them never got instruction or even knew they were there (?) Thanks again for a look into this TRULY forgotten weapon..those have got to be harder and harder to come by...but allof your works.. even on the major developments are fascinating studies in an evolutionary chain of ingeniuty.
I wanted to say the same thing. The reasons it "disappeared" were: 1. Cost - definitely better to compare it to what was already in use and how much that cost at the time. 2. Difficulty to use - this beast looks like it would take a lot of instruction to be able to operate it and a lot of practice to use it well (this also has to be factored into the cost). 3. Risk - we have no proof of its use so, we have no idea how often it would chain-fire or even explode. Weapons that go 'boom' in the wrong way tend to not be very popular with the people who have to use them.
Your point about secrecy is also valid but, given the number purchased and where they were meant to be used, I'm inclined to believe secrecy wasn't a high priority for the British East India Company in this case. As you suggested, they may not have come with someone well trained in the use and maintenance of the weapon because of oversight/incompetence. This would have relegated the guns to a mere curiosity to be left in boxes somewhere, to be later sold as scrap metal.
A formation of 100 soldiers wielding these could put a lot of lead down the field, then fall back and reload the magazines. Could be useful, but I imagine the finicky nature of the mechanics were prone to failure and very expensive...
Bro, if this gun was percussion, holy shit. I am absolutely stunned that someone out there pulled this off and it wasn’t just another strange prototype, the fact that this weapon was made in the hundreds is more than impressive. It kinda makes you wish that it could have been adopted in higher quantities and it could have had a chance of receiving technological support like converting them to percussion in the 1820s. Its almost frustrating that it didn’t receive that amount of admiration because the conversations and design changes could have been as simple as changing the hammer and changing the design of the magazine tube to take the percussion system, making it way more of a semi auto or the perfect muzzle loading rifle.
I wouldn’t have believed that this work of art existed, had I not seen it with my own eyes.
And this right here disproves any argument for US gun control. Congress had a contract for them, knew they existed, just like the Puckle Gun, and chose not to regulate it, reaffirming that "arms" in the 2A means more than just single shot weapons.
The first video I've ever seen on this channel was the Puckle Gun - "wow, the Founding Fathers had machine guns (or at least repeaters)!" I've been a HUGE fan ever since and have watched religiously over the past 7 years. This is the sort of video that gets me extremely excited.
Imagine firing an 8-burst black powder rifle. Enemy cant return fire if they CANT SEE YOU.
Manual of arms for this is much more complex than a musket. So only a few soldiers of the period would be 'qualified' to use these I expect. But great option for East India and a few trained soldiers.
Imagine this thing in the hands of skilled marksmen who didn't drool on themselves when seeing the word "the".
I'm sure at least one person was poppin off with one while the guys around him were jealous AF.
I think having a few to a unit would significantly increase unit effectiveness
Hope you can collab with Cap and ball, a black powder you tuber
Ye olde "assault weapon"
With east India not ordering a lot of them i wonder if they where just handed out to bodyguards or other specialists. My thoughts being that the operations and maintenance of them looks a little complicated for rugged field use.
Assault flintlock with high capacity .556 caliber and bump stock
Very intriguing?
Oh Gun Jesus, please tell us about the Kalthoff Repeater, the first repeater in the military service.❤
I have a video on the Kalthoff posting next month.
@@ForgottenWeaponsawesome!!!! 🎉
@@ForgottenWeapons no way, you finally found one?
@@ForgottenWeapons Would a video on the 1908 Perino Machine Gun be possible?
There's one in the "Museo Storico Italiano della Guerra" in Rovereto, Italy.
These guns are by far the coolest you've had on the channel and I've seen damn near every episode. These were made by a genius
I have a feeling those safety screws were put there as a reaction to something...
I own a Belton Flinklock because that’s what the founding fathers intended….
Four Reddit mods break into my house….
I'm amazed they have the strength to get your door open. (The Reddit mods).
@@kalashnikovdevil who said they used the door?
So our founding fathers WERE aware of detachable magazine, full auto firing arms and did NOT pass laws against them!
Correct, now we can collectively have a brainstorming and get the NFA rid of
The only service branch I can see those actually paying off if they worked is in "Churchill case" ie overseas services of young british nobles in cavalry units. Winston Churchill wrote that his Mauser pistol was the reason why he survived unlike many of his comrades. So even EAC is a bit of a miss.
The HEIC was a commercial army and short on nobles other than local ones and youngest sons. 100 arms would be for ordinary soldiers. I suspect that they disappeared into a garrison store as a species of quick firing wall gun and stayed there. On the other hand the RUSI example here has been used a lot to wear so much. Very much a high risk high gain career army that was very Indian in culture until steam ships brought in wives etc.
Perfect for any relatively wealthy force liable to be heavily outnumbered.
@@johnfisk811 the problem is that those guns won't be "justified" with local conscripts. To sell such a gun, the user should price their own life as 10 times its value AND have means to either procure it themselves OR have enough pressure on higher ups to demand to be supplied with them.
RUSI didn't exist back then yet so I guess the window of opportunity was never there for these guns to have a place in history.
P.S.: EIC, not EAC, sorry.
@@TheArklyte In John Company’s army you got what the Directors chose unless you were with the Irregular cavalry when you bought your own arms and horses for yourself and the Sowars from the Colonel’s regimental funds. Often the Sowars brought their own arms, horses and followers. There were no conscripts. The Indian army, right up to the present day, has always been a volunteer army. The largest volunteer army ever in the world.
Someone should build a replica and test it. I'd pay money to see it in action
Awesome rifles. Great video as usual.
Vampires, werewolves and witches at the time were nervous.
It would have been interesting to see how much bullet speed decreases from the first shot to the last one due to the fact previous touch holes would turn into vent holes. Price and that reasoin made it quite impractical.
Anyway great vid as usual and a beautiful interesting piece of engineering
It'll never cease to amaze me how genius people were back in the day. Hell, Casanova spoke like 7+ languages & used to study astronomy etc etc. Granted the average person wasn't nearly as educated but still! Fantastic video Ian, found this one especially interesting to learn about
"B-b-b-but the 2nd Amendment wasn't written with semi-automatics in mind! They only had single shot weapons back then!"
Belton Flintlock: 1,785.
The U.S. Constitution: 1,787.
Yes, it was written with them in mind :^)
hahaha, its a blackpowder, flint lock METALSTORM! I love it.
This was one of most interesting episodes I've seen in awhile. Kind of a steampunk style weapon system. Very cool.
the Key is Gold value in 1785 (£ 4.24 an oz) £ 5 = 1.179245283 oz to 2024 =£ 2166.38 for cost. The rest is antique value.
You prove yet again that our fore fathers knee that there would someday be fast firing weapons like an ar 15. 😆
The East India Company adopted the 39" barrel Brown Bess in 1790 ( later the India pattern ), I magine the cost of them was a fraction of the Belton. and manpower is never a problem in India. The Belton was very clever, probably too clever, and at a high cost! It just slipped into the shadows...........
Me thinks this is the most fascinating video of yours. Thanks!
Very cool!
Judging only by the amount of wear on those trigger slides, I'd venture a guess that they were used quite a lot.
And lots of use implies that they worked at least reasonably well in practice. But that's all conjecture and my $0.02...
Oh so, semi automatic rifles are older than the United States... somebody let the "2nd amendment only applies to guns that existed back then" crowd.