Firing a musket - Four rounds a minute - Sharpe myth busted
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 окт 2024
- Was it possible to fire four rounds a minute with a musket, like it was claimed in Sharpe? We put the myth to test with re-enactor Liam Telfer.
#history #battlehistory #historyfacts #historical #napoleonicwars #epicbattlesnapoleonic #francehistory #waterloo #militaryhistory #warof1812 #warzone #war #musketeer #musket #gun #fire #firing #myth #myths #mythsbusted #mythsvsfacts #mythsandfacts #sharpe
The line of dialogue in "Sharpe's Eagle" was the "ability to fire 3 rounds a minute in all weather". Private Dobbs manages to fire 4 rounds but then collapses. Sharpe also instructs the South Essex in the way of "tap loading" and not use the ramrod. However in "Sharpe's Battle" he teaches the Irish Company how to load and fire muskets the traditional way.
Nice work. This is the only other demonstration of the correct footwork I have seen. I wouldn't hasten to put too much weight on this, modern experience regarding misfires though... Reproduction muskets may have poorly harden hammers, or bad flints may shatter... Misfires certainly are a factor in the case of general flintlock practice, but "conclusive" observations based on a somewhat flawed foundation need to be taken with the necessary grain of salt. Of course, we don't see the larger picture of how his firelock functions 'normally' and this might have been a case of the muzzleloading gods being cantankerous.... It wasn't shown in the video, but was the flint knapped once it ceased to function properly? It's hard to tell, but is the flint held in leather or lead?
Thanks for the comment, I’m a huge fan of your work and have used it a lot in training. It was the first time firing this firelock so it was taking some time to get used to its nuances, it is an Indian made reproduction. The muzzleloading gods have since become much less fickle when using it. The flint was indeed knapped but it didn’t want to spark at all. The hammer itself was newly hardened. The flint was in leather, although I’ve toyed with the thought of using lead I haven’t yet. What’s your experience of the difference, if any?
@@LiamTelfer1985 glad to hear the gods’ fickleness was fleeting! I use leather for the flint and never had issue to change. What did you use to harden the hammer? Great to see a well put together demo with good turn out and soldierly handling of the weapon! If you haven’t already had a chance to fire live, make all possible arrangements to do so! Even more take aways! Great job.
The hammer was hardened for me by the gunsmith Peter Dyson and now that I rectified the flint issue sparks very well indeed. Thanks again for the feedback, as you know it’s a lot of commitment to build a solid impression and praise from someone I hold in such high regard is greatly appreciated.
@@LiamTelfer1985 Glad to hear things worked out. Don't mind me though, I'm just some silly plonk who likes shooting.....
I thought it was 3 rounds a minute in Sharpe not 4?
Either way, it is nonsense as British doctrine was a single volley followed up with the bayonet, not extended firefights
@@stuartjarman4930 For attacking an opposing line or position yes. But not always. Defending positions wouldn't bayonet charge out fortifications. There are plenty of scenarios where extended firefights took place.
@@stuartjarman4930 not always, platoon fire decimated the French at Waterloo
This was great. I have no doubt professional soldiers at the time were able to accomplish things that we today would think of as impossible. With dedicated practice incredible feats can be achieved, especially when your life depends upon it. Just look how insanely fast modern gun enthusiasts in the USA can shoot - for anyone who doesn’t regularly do that activity you would genuinely think some of the modern speeds are impossible if you couldn’t see it with your own eyes. Obviously not saying that wellington had an army of John Wicks 😂 but logically the same principle applies to historians and reenactment enthusiasts trying to compete on the same level as professionals. Just as the same logic applies to amateur/professional athletes.
Exactly. I guess most soldiers were slow but few elite could fire really fast.
Not read the books or seen the TV, but my dad was a fan.
He said Sharpe was a 'rifleman' hence the green jacket.
The rife was loaded and fired carfully to engage long range targets accurately from cover ...the greenjackets were akin to today's snipers and recon units.
They only fired twice a minute at most...half the rate of a musketeer.
Absolutely right. The leather-wrapped ball was harder to ram down the barrel due to the rifling. In the scene we refer to though, Sharpe fires off four rounds while using a smoothbore musket, which is why we did the exercise this way.
Really nice work on this. Good idea with slo-mo to show each step.
Glad you liked it!
Just fyi, the phrase "lock and load" came from the way one loaded a flintlock musket from a cartridge: first priming the pan(the "lock"), then pouring the rest of the powder and the bullet down the barrel(load)
"...in any weather".
What impressed us was that Liam got through this without calling anyone a 'BASTARD!'
@@thenapoleonicwars Should have told him that if he couldn't do it he'd be flogged. I hear that's a motivator.
@@onehairybuddha Tbh though, he was the one with the gun, so he had more leverage! 🤣
I used to shoot as a member of the Vintage Arms Association. Rifle shooting at Purfleet Ranges, Gravesend, UK. Brown Bess flintlock musket. .75 cal. Best I could do was 3 rounds per minute. If it was warm and dry.
Brilliant - nice to see the full firing sequence broken down and explained - great slow motion work as well.
Cheers Craig. Glad you enjoyed it!
Don't shoulder the musket between loading and firing and you'll save 6-10 seconds in the sequence. Also, the ramrod can be stuck in the ground rather than replacing in the stock. Not typical practice but can save a lot of fumbling in a stationary engagement.
Yeah, part of the point of the exercise (which we didn't explain in the video because it would have made the narration tedious) is that we did everything in line with the drill manual, hence why we didn't cut corners. Tbh I think even I could have done 4 rounds with the ramrod in the ground.
fumbling ramrod is avoided with right technique
Ramrod in the ground frowned upon, even a slight change of position and you’re in danger of leaving it behind.
@@thenapoleonicwars The first thing any soldier does in the heat of battle is throw the drill manual away!
Any sergeant would have been "upset" seeing a ramrod stuck in the ground, and would have made his displeasure known to the offender. The musket is pretty much useless without the ramrod. yes, one could possibly have tap loaded a couple of rounds, but bear in mind the drill was designed for battalion sized elements firing in a line formation. The idea was that everyone does the same thing at the same time, so that the battalion can fire a volley at the enemy.
Paper Cartridges also has done this, he got 4 shots per minute using something roughly like the proper way. The spit tap method was more like 2-3 rounds per minute. He started with an unloaded musket, but he was not bringing it to the shoulder and pausing before going to the firing position. He also goes into some depth about why the spit tap method is bad, and why the cartridges were constructed the way they were.
Yeah, our experiment was really focused on whether it can be done by sticking exactly to the drill manual. You can definitely manage more by cutting corners on the drill.
3 is easy, and a few things can go wrong before you get good enough for 4.
Excellent video Zack
Rapidly of fire wasn't everything. General Wolfe of Quebec fame was more concerned that his troops properly loaded their muskets rather than rapidly of fire. It was also common practice to have the first rank of a three rank line which was kneeling reserve their fire for emergencies while ranks two and three performed the platoon exercise (fired by platoons). I know British infantry in the Napoleon's wars normally formed in two ranks but fire in three ranks was commonly used in the earlier 18th century. There were those who say that Frederick the Great's Prussians could fire five times a minute but this was only on the parade ground using blank cartridges. One other thing to keep in mind is that the balls historically used were smaller in relation to the bore. British troops using the Land Pattern musket with a bore of about .753 were using balls of about .685. This is based on the archeological report at Fort Necessity in Pennsylvania
Have shot 4 in a minute with a Brown Bess. Started loaded and tap loaded in Light Infantry style at a show in Dumbarton
do it with a ram rod or your fooling your self. Use the correct technique and its not hard.
@@michaelwright4456Not at all. A 71st HLI private shot 5 in a minute using tap loading in the Penninsula. But that was in action, using live ammo, not pretending or fooling yourself at reenactment!
Yes, shooting in the Sharpe series was in a perfect TV/movie world. Can 4 rounds per minute be done, yes, if everything goes perfectly. Did it always go perfectly, no. But that doesn't mean it didn't all work almost perfectly most of the time. The men of Wellington's army had one thing over their enemies. The practiced and practiced and practiced. Mr. Telfer, I'm guessing, hasn't fired hundreds of rounds with a musket and needed to clear a musket with his life at risk if he doesn't. (I am not disparaging his military service, just putting into perspective.)
That musket is beautiful. Is it an original Brown Bess?
Oh Lord, no! We don't have the budget to buy, safety test and fire a real one! 😅
You could try four loadings in a minute, but I'd worry about Liam's and your sanity by the end of the day.
Even if Liam got lucky with minimal fouling and indestructible flints, I would be surprised if it could be done.
I'm quite happy to be proven wrong.
😊❤❤❤😊
The army wasn't worried about your sanity, though - you'd be practising for hours per day, every day, constantly berated for slowness and clumsiness. The whole point of drill is to make the whole process automatic.
Have little doubt that the best- drilled soldiers could fire 3 per minute, and maybe 4, if tap-loaded.
The quality of the lock is vital to good performance on a flintlock, as is a good quality of flint. Both English and French flints are usually excellent if properly knapped. I doubt that the locks of infantry were 'tuned' to the degree that they can be with a bit of work, or as well made as they can be, so the performance vis a vis good reliable ignition would have been at best variable.
Placement of the touch hole relative to the pan is critical, and helps when the pan is over primed (much more common than the reverse) which fouls up the flint and frizzen; I would posit that vents were pretty large on military muskets to help avoid blockages. Another factor was the very variable quality of the powder available.
I have no experience with smooth bores, having only owned flintlock rifles, which are slower to load... 2 rounds a minute (starting empty) is doing well, but then effective range is doubled... roundabouts and swings....
Love my flinter..... it is surprisingly accurate and can launch a .490" ball at around 2000 fps with a full charge, although for most purposes I run it at about 60%....
Excellent demonstration. Quite fascinating and I think a vindication.
Cheers David, glad you enjoyed it!
Giga Chad move if you can load and fire 4 in a minute. I absolutely could not, I don’t know if that’s possible but worth a go!
I think the misfires might have been managed by having more than one soldier firing at a time. Those guys seemed to fire in lines.
Sharpe starts the ‘minute’ already loaded,so it is,actually,only 3 loadings in 60 seconds,which is,actually,pretty easy if you don’t have to ram the bullet down.And yes,I have fired muskets.
Yeah, agree with all that, but part of the fun of the exercise was to see if you can do it while sticking to the manual like glue. 👍
What everybody said below, plus reality would be that men had a lot more time and practice there also may have been the element of hands on knowledge as to knowing how to say pick flits, the routine of plucking out the cartridges. If he practiced everyday for a month then did the test again with a French lancer charging him it would be a better test.
I have this to say to those who want to "just stick the ramrod in the ground"...
The drill manual was written for a reason, so that the troops would operate as consistently and effectively under the widest range of conditions.
The infantry had to be prepared to move instantly. To advance, retire, form square or - very often - to close up the ranks as men fell.
If you are groping around on the ground for your ramrod that fell over, was knocked over by a falling man, kicked over by moving men..... or because the ground was just too bloody hard , you weren't being effective and were disrupting the formation.
That great frog-sticker on the end wasn't there for decoration, either. It was the option for when tbere wasn't time to load, but like volley, it was most effective when reaching the enemy with a lot of others in tight formation.
Well put. I think some people have seen this as 'can you fire a musket quickly', rather than 'how fast can you really fire a musket if you do everything properly, as they would have had to do at the time'.
Instead of bringing the musket up to the left shoulder after loading. What if you imminently made ready and fired.. that would save a few seconds each time.
And then came the percussion cap.....I had a flintlock when I was a BP enthusiast..bought BP percussion Kentucky rifle then the fun began.
Shouldering the weapon after reloading may have been omitted in combat that would've saved maybe 10 seconds
You shoulder the weapon because you cannot fire until ordered to do it. These men fired volleys.
It seems like the shoulder arms step is superfluous in an actual combat situation. Seems like it takes at least a couple of seconds during each firing sequence that could be eliminated.
great video!
The British army did a study around this time and discovered that in any one volley, 15% of the muskets would not go off. Good job on following the manual and showing how it was supposed to be done.
I read somewhere that the standard for Washington's Continental Army was four rounds in 75 seconds. This seems doable with a simplified drill. Rate of fire is over emphasized nowadays. A battalion of muskets creates an instant smokescreen. Except at close range, rapid fire is wasting ammunition.
In many occasions the British army faced larger numbers of French troops. By being able to fire three times to the French two it evened the odds. Despite the smoke if you are getting twice as many shots away in the general direction of your enemy as they are getting in your direction then you are doing some good. The same principal applied to British ships who could fire faster than the French ships. This meant that during a battle the total amount of metal they shot was larger than the enemy even with smaller cannon and ships.
@@unclekevin5094 As I understand it, the French tended to fight in columns, which meant only the front and side of the column could fire. Several well directed volleys could disrupt the attack of the column. Another point that everyone seems to overlook is that the troops did not carry unlimited ammunition. Controlled volley fire was more effective. Yes at close range, when the enemy is closing, the ability to fire rapidly was crucial, but that wasn't sustainable for a long period of time.
I’ve seen arguments that the British tended to wait until the enemy was close before delivering the first volley. They would take some casualties from enemy fire, but the concentrated volley from thirty yards, from clean barrels and fresh flints - apparently was so much more effective that it was worthwhile.
The Real Myth about the four rounds was , that t just was not important or part of British practice. Sustained firefights at a distance simply waste ammunition and tie down soldiers in loading and firing ineffectively. British best practice was maintain fire discipline to NOT shoot until the enemy were very close (when fire would actually be effective) give 1 or 2 vollies and weather on attack or defense, loud hurrah bayonet charge (not necessarily charge very far on defense, but seeing the opposition off)
Exactly! And those manuals were written for a reason.......one or two super troopers blazing away is pointless when the firepower of a volley depends on everyone firing together. That's why the musket is shouldered so that the officer can see when every man is loaded. And rushing through the drill means mistakes get made which can cost you your life in battle.
Yes…. the bayonet attack pressed home before the enemy ranks could close up and re-form after the first volley(s)
I know with the first round loaded it can be done with a rifled cap and patched ball 54 cal Hawkens type rifle. at the time we were just playing at mountain men. on one hand we didn't return the ram rod to the rifle but we had to use a short starter because of the patched ball before the ram rod. I figure capping the nipple took as much time as priming a pan. and we didn't come to left shoulder, after caped we'd go to full cock shoulder the arm amie and fire. yes we had to hit a target too.
Would he left-shoulder the musket each time in a combat situation?
This is one of the big debates. Quite possibly not, but the accounts aren’t clear, so we decided to do everything by the drill manual, which we can at least use as a point of reference to say what the soldiers were taught to do. So we can now proceed that it was technically possible to get that many shots off doing the correct manoeuvres. 👍
With lots of practice the soldiers would have got, and doing it for real with adrenaline flowing, 4 rounds per minute is definitely achievable, even without taking shortcuts with the ramrod.
During the North American Colonial Insurrection Baron Von Steuben Taught the Colonial troops to "load in nine times" This reduced the loading drill for a flint lock musket to the minimum movements. Load in nine times would be the loading drill until the end of the muzzle loading era. The only change between flint locks and percussion lock muskets was Prime was step 2 for flint locks and step 8 in the percussion drill. Having reenacted both American Revolution and American civil war with both blanks and live ammunition I can attest that one can reliably fire three shots a minute. This was one of the reasons we could take on the British troops in the Revolution and beat them. Some of the older British loading drills were considerably more involved and considerably slower.
If you want to fire the musket as fast as possible, eliminate the unnecessary steps of securing the ramrod back in the stock and placing the musket back in the left shoulder arm position. Instead, after ramming the ball and powder down the barrel, keep the ramrod in the support hand and bring the musket directly to the firing position. This should cut five to six seconds off each reload time. I once commented on a site that I'd seen a video of a re-enactor using the Sharpe's tap method of seating the ball and he called me a liar. I sent him a link to the video and never heard back from him. I'm not advocating this method or defending it; I'm only reporting what I saw so please don't shoot the messenger. As for placing your face near the muzzle, whether to spit or blow on it, this was a major no-no when I was teaching black powder rifle to Boy Scouts. This rule applies equally well to any firearm.
Yeah, we all agree that you can definitely fire faster by cutting corners. To be honest we think even Zack could manage four rounds in a minute if we cut enough corners. The aim of the exercise though was to see if it was possible by sticking to the drill manual, so what you see in this video is Liam doing it in exactly the way soldiers were taught. 👍 It wouldn’t actually surprise us if Liam could do five rounds tap loaded 🤣 And thanks for reaffirming on gun safety - a really important thing for folks to realise.
@@thenapoleonicwars I was impressed he was able to do it as quickly as he did. Reinserting the ramrod in the stock seemed to be the most time consuming challenge. For this reason you'd think the opening in the stock would contain a large funnel to speed the process of securing it.
@@Paladin1873 I think you're dead right - there's an interesting question about design there, but I suppose there was a need to make sure the ramrod didn't risk falling out on the march? There must have been a work around, and in fairness, some muskets have a slightly flared ramrod slot, but its not easy for sure - its the thing that always slows Zack down the most when he tries it.
am curious, is he also shooting ball as well or just blanks, i have done 4 live rounds a minute tap loading with my 1766 Charliville during a compitition stake shoot.
Incredibly unsafe and foolish as it can cause a burst barrel. As a qualified NRA Range Officer I would not allow it.
As you can see the musket recoiling, the rounds fired were live
Hi there, producer here - I can confirm that these were blank rounds. For one thing this was shot in the UK where the laws on ammunition and gun control are very strict. This was not shot at a range where live ammunition might have been feasible. As others have said, there are major dangers associated with using live ammunition in reproduction muskets - they generally aren’t treated to withstand the increased pressures. And finally there is absolutely no way I’d expose my team to the associated risks of live firing. You’re right, there is a small recoil, but that’s just the reality of using black powder. The recoil would be much worse with live ammunition. Hope that helps. 👍
@@thenapoleonicwars I've used our club repro 'Bess with round ball and the recoil wasn't actually that bad - more of a surge than a shoulder breaker. I couldn't swear to using an historical full charge, but with my own .50 BP carbine the main effect of doubling the charge was an increase in the number of complaints about air pollution... 😁
15 shots in three minutes and forty five seconds was a standard. I watched Ted Spring the author of several books on the French and Indian war get 23 shots off in that time using a ranger musket with a 36 inch barrel
It seems to me (former Napoleonic reenactor, 14th cuirasier) that it might be the hardness of the frizzen ( the part that's hit by the flint) can be the issue. My former flintlock pistol never misfired... the sparks come from the steel fragments and ignited by the flint... too soft steel makes no sparks.
You'll see that Liam has comment on this on another commenter's query, but his hammer (frizzen - we just use the period-appropriate word) has been through the necessary treatment to ensure it was hard enough. He's since managed to get the musket into a better place, but as we say in the voice over, we had issues with both muskets.
If you have to start from an unloaded musket, you will not get 4 loadings/firing off, in a minute.
Do you want us to try though...
@@thenapoleonicwars Sure. For entertainment, Sport, "scientific" evaluation....Have at it.I will watch.
Since most line Infantry companies fired by volley rather than "at Will" the number of rounds per minute was really not an issue. They would also be firing by rank with the usual formation being 3 ranks, so that each rank had plenty of time to reload and maintain a continuous fire ! Pretty sure the"Spit -Tap" thing was artistic license !
Have tried this with both an original and a quality reproduction ( with a replaced mainspring, and properly hardened frizzen) with ball thd fouling soon slows things down and you need to force the load down, unlike what you show in the video.
Most historic records show as few as three volleys being fired before the Bayonet charge. The Bayonet being the primary killing weapon, not the shot.
Thanks Colin, so interesting perspectives here, and yes, adding a musket ball changes things dramatically, but this was not filmed at a range, and there are obvious safety factors with using live ammunition that had to be considered when planning this video. Quite right too regarding volley and charge, but our video was focusing more on 'is it technically feasible if you load a market according to drill'. Thanks for sharing your experiences. 👍
You can support our work by joining our buzzing patreon community, where you'll get bonus and behind the scenes material, and get to meet fellow Napoleonic enthusiasts (/nerds!). Find out more at: www.patreon.com/c/thenapoleonicwarspod
I’m curious as to why you call it the “hammer” rather than the “frizzen”?
Frizzen is a more modern term. At the time they would have called it the hammer, so we used the period correct terminology in the video. If you listen carefully to Zack when he gets his finger stuck, he uses frizzen, because that's how we refer to it today, but for the voice over we decided to use the older term.
Note:
The British army could do this as they were the only European army that actually practiced regularly with hugely expensive LIVE AMMUNITION!
The Sharpe TV series actually put me off reading the books. Every one seemed to feature a version of the Bump-Loading Masterclass. Which I later found referred to as "a Frenchified and unsoldierlike practice". It seemed to me the very opposite of what Riflemen were about. Which was careful shooting, requiring equally careful loading.
I felt the same way about the Sergeant running around with the Nock volley gun, a Naval boarding weapon to be fired once at the beginning of a close-range action, with little chance you'd have chance to re-load it. Apparently the actor did a lot of bellyaching about the weight of the thing. He was lucky he never had to fire ball out of it.
To be fair, Cornwall’s Sgt Harper was a huge man, the only man in the company who could handle the Nock Gun. Doesn’t make it realistic, for an NCO of light troops, tho.
Yup I would like to see it also 4 rounds a minute accurately
Muskets by their nature weren't accurate, since the ball came out in a random direction due to being smaller than the bore of the musket. That's why they were fired in a volley so that the musket balls flying around would have an bigger chance of actually hitting something.
@@AML2000 thanks
Yeah, test firings suggest that accuracy was about 33% at 100 meters. One general famously said that at distances beyond 100 meters nobody was ever killed by the person who aimed at him 🤣
@@thenapoleonicwars So true
That lock would appear not to have been tuned properly. One that has been set up so that the flint hits the frizzen, or lock, at the correct angle will experience very few misfires and there is surprisingly little time lag between trigger pull and shot. Each flint is slightly different so this is achieved with shims of leather or lead placed either above or below the flint in the dog, or hammer. This is, of course, assuming that the frizzen on a reproduction firearm is tempered correctly and that the flint has been knapped properly. I could not imagine that a musketeer would be re-locating the ramrod in the rifle after each shot either. It is much quicker to shove the ramrod into the ground rather than fiddling trying to line it up with ferrules while being shot at. Shouldering the musket would probably also have been dispensed with. I have military training as well as many years of black powder shooting to draw on in making this assessment. Even if ordered to do otherwise, I would do what made more sense to me in terms of efficiency and effectiveness.
I look forward to seeing your video where you demonstrate all this
@@thenapoleonicwars My comment was not a criticism of your video, which I enjoyed, nor of the re-enactor. It was offered with the hindsight of many years of experience in tuning and using flintlock rifles in competition and refining techniques for efficiency and effectiveness. Not looking for an argument, just offering insights which may have been missed and hoping that such suggestions may help achieve your goal in this presentation.
Tis probably not possible to load and fire 4 rounds with an unloaded musket. These are 'parade' ground conditions without the noise, confusion of battle, and a column of French shooting back. Liam performed exceptionally well and even he had misfires without the other 'mishaps' that could make reloading tougher.
3rnds/min was the standard. British musketry was considered among the best in Napoleonic times. The Sharpe series was largely crap, being very low budget.
The part that flips forward to prime the pan is called a "frizzen" not a hammer. The part that is called the "dog" is referring to the clamping jaws that hold the flint, but the original name was "co+k" after a rooster's head. The manual of arms Order was to "Co+k your firelock!" meaning: pull the part back to "full-co+k." It was also called a "hammer."
I suspect the difficulty in the many misfires was a soft frizzen face, a very common problem with replica flintlocks. Many are very beautiful representations but are lacking in the original refinements of the era, such as fuller hardening of the striking face. The result is that through repeated firings, the flint files off the top few molecules of hardened steel, revealing the softer under layer - which won't spark reliably, or at all. You can tell if a frizzen is getting worn soft by the color of the sparks, going from a nice bright orange/yellow, to a darker orange, then nothing. Every spark is actually a small fleck of metal being scraped off and made hot, so the frizzen is a wear part and must be maintained.
This requires a re-hardening by use of a torch and a powdered chemical for the job. Or, a piece of a file can be soldered onto the old face and then carefully ground to match the original shape. Care must be taken to never get any metal to turn rainbow/blue. If it does, you have softened it, so use water to keep the repair cool.
Frizzens were not originally hardened all the way through the part because of brittling. Such a part would be prone to eventual breaking off by the power of the hammer /main spring impact.
Not much is known about the actual repair of flintlocks, but one can imagine the local blacksmith had a steady business doing so.
It was three rounds a minute in any weather and the point of that scene is that Sharpe teaches the men to not follow the manual to go faster.
Agree on the quote, our bad, but bear in mind Sharpe shows off by firing four rounds implying that it could be done if you cut corners. We show that it can actually be done without cutting corners, but you need some luck on your side when it comes to misfires.
I bet this would be easier with the shorter Baker rifle as well.
the Baker was a rifled musket probably more difficult
No! More difficult with a rifle, much tighter tolerances. Rifle bullet much tighter in the bore. Much more difficult to ram home.
Not if you load just the ball (which was undersized) and no cloth/wadding.
@ToreDL87 Then you lose the seal and thus the full pressure of the blast driving the ball down the barrel. I believe the range and accuracy of the rifle would be lost.
I'm glad I stumbled across this. It's been quite interesting.
It was not Sharpe that coined the 4 rounds a minute story I remember reading it as a boy in the 70's from a 'non fiction' source.
Were private soldiers permitted to "mess" with their flints? I have a vague memory of reading that the necessary tools were only issued to sergeants. Could you enlighten me?
Beyond that, while I'm sure the demonstration is both generally interesting and very satisfying to all involved, it's worth bearing in mind that the practical limit to the rate of fire must have been one that most soldiers could be trained to - you can't get off a decent volley if half the men in the line are still loading 😁
Still 4 rounds in 1 min 8 seconds is good.
Sharpe asked for _three_ rounds, no "four."
That was three shots a minute, not four. You cannot count the first where the musket is loaded. The interval between shots was 20 seconds which is 3 per minute.
Does this Liam Telfer have his own RUclips Channel?
Sadly not, he recently joined this channel as part of the production team. You can hear more from him on the Napoleonic Wars podcast, and make sure you are subscribed to this channel to see more videos from him which will be coming in the future. 👍 In the meantime, if you have questions or comments, let us know and we’ll get back to you with an answer! 😊
A lot of motions could be removed. As in the book sharpe deviated the official process outlined in the regulations which you have conformed to in this video.
Yeah, part of the point of the exercise (which we didn't explain in the video because it would have made the narration tedious) is that we did everything in line with the drill manual, hence why we didn't cut corners. Tbh I think even I could have done 4 rounds if we did it Sharpe's way!
i want to see if thr dubbel tap works like sharp did
It would depend on how much fouling there was in the barrel, and whether the bullet was wrapped(in either the cartridge paper or a patch), or sent down the barrel "naked"
Fully agree with this Mike. Also its worth bearing in mind that these muskets are very expensive, and hammering the butt of a powder gun on the ground, while it is still very hot, has embers in it, and has live gunpowder in it is quite possibly asking for trouble! Aside from needing to buy Liam a new musket, no insurance company would cover us for something like that!
3 rounds a minute was a requirement,, some soldiers could do 4,, sir John Moore is recorded as firing 5 rounds a minute on more than one occasion as a subaltern,, in competition with his troops
But Sharp used a rifle.
Not for the four rounds demo. He used a smoothbore musket because he was training the soldiers of the South Essex's light company, who were all equipped with the musket.
During the Civil War, soldiers could fire up to 6 aimed shots a minute !
Different design to the weapon by that point though, so it’s not a like-for-like comparison sadly
So a newbie here but have a few Q
1/ The guy in civilian clothes stand terrible for moving and shooting, as former military we always used a wide stans, why this terrible one? They must have known it was bad for shooting and loading?
2/ Where is the bullet? In the paper cartridge?
3/ Was it really standard practice to put the musket to your shoulder before shooting, again, even those guys myst have known it took extra time? As for the ramrod, I know it takes extra time but you have to alwats know where it is because on the battlefield shit happens and suddenly you are without it. Its like we always did, go no where without, gun, helmet and gasmask, no matter where you are going or where you are
Hi Kent, thanks for the questions. 1) The guy in civies is me (show host and producer of the show Dr Zack White), and since I've never spent a day in the army as I'd never pass the medical, you're quite right to notice poor stance. 2) Where's the bullet? This is shot in the UK, where there are a few laws about slinging live ammunition around, so all these are shot with blanks, but the ball would be in the bottom of the paper cartridge. 3) The point of this exercise was to see whether you can actually fire four rounds in a minute while sticking to the drill manual. Saving time by cutting corners defeated the point of the exercise. Would they have saved time in battle? Quite possibly, but we don't have clear evidence on that one way or the other. The best we could be sure of was what the drill manual said, and so we decided to shoot this based on sticking to the manual.
@@thenapoleonicwars Follow questions
1/ I understand, but that doesnt answer my, maybe poorly framed question, is that how they were taught to stand or is that just you;)
2/ As I thought, just wanted to be sure
3/ I understand and you were correct in following the manual, my question is rather did they know that they lost time doing it tthis way or was there a purpose for their actions?
@@kentnilsson465 The purpose of shouldering the musket is to signify to the officer that you are ready for the next volley. Returning the ramrod ensures you know exactly where it is.
@@heneagedundas That makes sense, thanks. Follow up question though. They did the same on the ships, firing all cannons at the same time, however, after the first few volleys in a close encounter it was fire at will. Did they do that for an infantry firing line as well or was it only volley fire? Thereby taking away the shoulder thing
He also stated that the French fired at least 3 per minute. ?
He shouldered arms every time he loaded before presenting and firing, this wouldn't happen in battle, you would load, aim and fire as fast as possible, unless you were directed by your NCO's or officer. This ex military man, would know this, in those days you needed to get as many rounds down at the target as possible. The brits were good at that.
Might be if short cuts were done, not by proper regulation techniques.
Oh that was precisely the point of the exercise - Liam did everything by the drill manual, so we can now say that it is (just) possible to fire four rounds in a minute according to the way that troops were trained. 👍
Think Sharpe stated 5 could be achieved eventually !!!
What you are calling the hammer is actually the frizzen. The "dog head" is the forerunner of the hammer.
"Frizzen" is a fairly modern term. ""Hammer" is correct for the time period
@mikegrossberg8624 It makes no sense, since it's the object being struck, but I'm willing to stand corrected.
As with all technical terms that we use in the video, we use the terminology used at the time. Frizzen is more common parlance amongst fans of the period today (listen carefully when Zack gets his finger stuck, he refers to it as a frizzen), but the period-correct term is hammer. 👍
Quit wasting the seconds required to restow the ramrod under the barrel. Just either stick it in the ground in front of you our better yet, keep it in the left hand.
Yeah tbh we think even Zack would be able to manage four rounds in a minute without using the ramrod. Sticking it in the ground risks bending it, and really the point of the exercise was to see if you could do it while sticking to the training manual. If Liam cut corners we reckon he could do five or six.
Firing 4 rounds in a minute is not firing four rounds a minute sustained for all of the reasons you list in this video
he is losing a lot of time remiving and installing the ram rod and then going into position. In real life they would just load and shoot, the rod would be next to them
We did everything according to the drill manual, which ultimately is what the troops would have been trained to do until they could do it without thinking. There is limited evidence that they would have propped ramrods against hedges, walls, or in the ground (the last one risks bending your ramrod, after all). This was all about asking whether you can fire four rounds a minute by doing it properly, rather than whether you can fire four rounds a minute by cutting corners, as Sharpe does in the TV show. 👍
Why not just stick the ramrod into the ground beside you rather than waste seconds trying to put it back onto the rifle. The end that goes down the barrel would still be clear of the ground.
Yeah, part of the point of the exercise (which we didn't explain in the video because it would have made the narration tedious) is that we did everything in line with the drill manual, hence why we didn't cut corners. Tbh I think even I could have done 4 rounds with the ramrod in the ground.
What happens when the bloke next to you gets shot, and falls on your ramrod?
The drill is preparation for combat. Imagine where you would be if, having loaded and saved a few seconds by planting your ramrod, the enemy cavalry crash in and force everyone to take a step back. Parted from your ramrod, you'd become the guy trying to use a short spear at a gunfight...
3 rounds not 4.
it might be posible If you use a Napoleonic era time keeping device. but I don´t think it´s posible to fire 4 rounds a minut. If we are talking sustained fire. It´s not like I think It would be posible to fire 60 rounds in 15 min.
Yeah, nobody would have been able to do it for a sustained length of time - after all men were only issued with 60 rounds of ammunition!
I thought it was three rounds a minute?
Why is the musket stood on the left?
It's easier to perform the drill from there. Only sergeants carried theirs on the right
That’s the position from the drill manual known as “Cast about”
It’s not a “hammer” it’s a “frizen”!
Both terms were used during this period. Numerous manual of arms and sources use the terms interchangeably. If anything, "Frizzen" was the more dated term by the Napoleonic period and "Hammer" the more common one but it's a moot point. A soldier of the time would have understood what part of his musket you were referring to.
@@celston51 OK. I bow to your more detailed knowledge of the period. My knowledge is demonstrating the loading & firing of C17th matchlocks (no frizzen) .58 calibre Zouave rifles (percussion cap) or more modern sporting weapons, Flintlock shotguns. Although I do have an 1805 pattern Sea Service Pistol (flintlock) and modern weapons.
The myth isn't busted. Sharp didn't do it by the manual
Sure that's the point though - Sharpe doesn't do it by the manual, fires off four rounds, and everyone thinks that it was what was done. What Liam has done here is fire four rounds while sticking to the drill manual, which shows that it can actually be done properly.
Sharpe never claimed 4 rounds - only ever 3...
Get at least that fact straight.
and of course sharpe didn't teach them the correct way, but the 'grizzled war veteran' way
3 rounds sounds pretty doable if you practiced it enough - even in the correct way.
i've never fired a real musket, but that isn't necessary to practice those steps according to the way the one major from 'gods and generals' teaches his soldiers..
just do as he did and do it 100 times and you are there.
Sharpe then proceeds to demonstrate the point by firing four rounds. And then in the TV show Dobbs fires off four rounds before fainting. All while using the tap loading and spit the ball method, both of which are completely against the basics of gun safety. The point of the exercise was to see if you can manage to fire off four rounds doing it the right way by sticking to the drill manual. I look forward to seeing you doing a video showing us all how you get on with your practice.
its 3 rounds a minute
The other thing to your advantage is you are not loading ball. It’s easy to ram powder and paper down a fouled barrel. You wait until you try to ram a lead ball down there. That will slow you down. Probably 4 rounds a minute, not possible in battle.
My understanding is that with a rifle it took much longer to ram the ball down because it had to squeeze into the rifling in the barrel. With smooth bore muskets, the ball was smaller than the barrel and was much easier to ram down. On the other hand, with muskets the ball would come out in a random direction ofter bouncing loose down the barrel. That's why volley fire was essential as then the firing line acted like a massive shotgun, with at least some musket balls actually hitting the enemy.
My background is industrial Engineering, and I can telll you your demostrtion is full of wasted motion. People in those days were not stupid. The movements of you demonstration are nothing close to a practice movement. I'm certain anyone who has practice the actions could easily do much better. The fact that the re inactor was in the modern military is irrelevent. Suggesting there were issues with the musket firing has nothing to do with the practiced rate of fire by a trained soldier. Obviously the expected rate of fire does not include musket problems. You do not train a soldier to go slower in case there is an issue with the musket. You do train the soldier to clear the problem quickly. In fact you train the soldier until his movements are automatic without thinking. This because if you don't, the fear standing in line and getting shot at would make going through the motions reliably impossible. Whether the claim is true or not about spitting the ball, the small chance of it would be nothing in comparison to the fear of the enmy firing 100 m away or charging you with a bayonet. Thrre were issues that did slow firing such as it being a humid day. High humidity resulted in more fouling which resulted in slower loading down the barrel. Other issues were things like powder so British powder during the American war was not the best, but by the Napoleonic wars which this soldier is dressed for, it was the best in the world.
Respectfully, I think you might have missed the point of the exercise. Yes, we all can see that there are areas where corners could be cut in the drill. But troops were trained according to the drill manual. What you might perceive to be wasted motions today were not regarded as such during the time. Just as you say people were not stupid, neither were those writing the drill manuals. They regarded each movement as necessary, and troops would, as you say, be trained to carry out the full drill without thinking, so I'm afraid your argument falls down - they weren't trained to cut corners, they were trained to fire in the way that you see here. It's precisely this perspective on drill and discipline which makes having a highly experienced veteran complete the exercise so useful. What this video shows is that it was possible to fire four rounds in a minute while sticking to the methods which the soldiers were trained in during the period. I also don't think you've quite got our point with highlighting the misfires - nobody is suggesting that soldiers were trained to go slower in order to accommodate misfires. The point is that if you are trying to fire off four rounds in a minute, a misfire makes that impossible because you have to address it, ruining the attempt to complete the exercise within the prescribed time limit. Appreciate the comments though.
His technique is awkward and clumsy. His flint setting is poor nowonder they shatter.. Get good!
Literally none of what you have said here is true. Liam is a seasoned re-enactor, who trains living historians in doing things according to the drill manual. Try having a little respect.
actually what he says is somewhat true if not very diplomatic. For example the flint should be held in a piece of leather before it is screwed into the frizen. This will hold it firmly stopping it moving and causing misfires or shattering. According to the close ups that I can see Liam seems to have it screwed flint to metal which will cause it to move if not tight enough and shatter if too tight.
@@unclekevin5094 Nah, the flint was held in place with leather. See 8:13 in the video. Liam literally spends hundreds of hours a year working on musket drill, and making sure his practices are don according to the manual. The poster is just salty.
@@thenapoleonicwars Yes you are quite right. i have looked again and stopped the video and there is some leather. However when i was a child i went on a two day course organised by the army(with the school CCF) to fire flint lock, wheel lock and match lock muskets and I remember the leather patches used to hold the flint were much thicker and bigger than his. They covered the whole flint leaving just a small bit sticking out to strike the frizzen. As beginners we spent two days shooting and didnt get as many misfires as Liam seemed to although the muskets we used were not period but reproductions.
Why is he using the ramrod? Tap it down you save seconds that way.
"Tapping" the bullet down the barrel COULD result in the barrel BURSTING, if the bullet wasn't seated right on top of the powder charge! Any space left between them would turn the barrel into, essentially, a pipe bomb
The point of the exercise was to see if it could be done by sticking to the drill manual, rather than cutting the corners - part of the whole misconception from Sharpe is that the short cuts were needed to make four rounds possible.
If you'd got the quote right, i might have had more respect for this video. But sadly, the quote from the TV series is ALWAYS "3 rounds a minute," not 4. So, sadly, that calls your premise into question.
And 3 rounds a minute is doable, I've seen it done. And as a btw, I've done it myself some years ago, although admittedly using a matchlock musket.