"Three minute rule" for firing--why?

[10nycav]

Glad to see that artillery folks now have their own sub-forum! I started out in cavalry but this year have also been doing artillery driving. We have started with a team of 2 Canadian horses, and are in the process of training the second team so we can have a 4 up. The third team is probably another year down the road. My main focus/expertise has been in the horses and driving, so I have a lot to learn about the guns themselves.

Anyway, the two clubs I have driven for have different rules regarding rate of fire. In one club you must wait 3 minutes before firing the next shot. The other club has no such restriction. Can anyone comment on (safety) reasons why one would need to limit rate of fire to once every three minutes? Safety appears to be a concern, but I am not sure why it should be. What are potential issues to be aware of when firing very rapidly?

Another question--has anyone on this forum driven artillery horses with Joyce Henry when she used to be at Petersburg?

Thanks!
Ken Morris

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

Hallo Kamerad!

I cannot speak as to the thinking, intent, or desire of those that created and implemented the rule, but...
One view...
Having once competed in the live-fire artillery competitions of the N-SSA for a number of years- the lore was that the "wait" allowed a glowing ember a chance to burn itself out, and reduce risk to the "hands" at the muzzle. ;-)

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
Phoenix Iron Works 3 Inch Ordnance Rifle Mess

[K Bartsch]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

In one club you must wait 3 minutes before firing the next shot. The other club has no such restriction. Can anyone comment on (safety) reasons why one would need to limit rate of fire to once every three minutes? Safety appears to be a concern, but I am not sure why it should be. What are potential issues to be aware of when firing very rapidly?

You're correct. Waiting a set period of time between firing a blank round and introducing the next round to the muzzle is a safety consideration. The rationale is the interval will ensure any lingering embers/sparks from the previous shot will have been extinguished before introducing the next round. The USNPS requires an interval of 10 minutes, which is probably excessive. At any rate, if the gun detachment is properly trained, and conducts their service of the piece in accordance with the period manuals, there is no increased danger inherent in lesser intervals between shots. Important considerations 1) ensure the #3 man has the vent stopped properly during all actions up to and including the load -- and the entire gun detachment knows what an inadequately stopped vent's "hissing" sounds like and are prepared to call out "STOP VENT!" as a warning. 2) Ensure the #1 man sponges the tube properly after each shot (either immediately afterwards, or as part of the loading drill.) 3) Ensure the rammer end of the sponge rammer is properly made with a smooth face and therefore unlikely to prematurely pierce the cartridge as it is rammed home and finally, 4) ensure blank cartridges are intact and constructed properly and not prone to rupture as they are rammed to the gun's firing chamber/breech.

If you do all this, you should be fine -- but always remember, artillery is dangerous, period. You and everyone else must know what they're about and it's no place for kids, intoxicants or horseplay. Adding the horse-drawn element makes it simply the most dangerous aspect of reenacting since not only do you have a gun and relatively large quantities of blackpowder which can hurt folks, but now we have at least one two-ton vehicle only partially under human control. Good luck!

[Tom Ezell]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

Anyway, the two clubs I have driven for have different rules regarding rate of fire. In one club you must wait 3 minutes before firing the next shot. The other club has no such restriction. Can anyone comment on (safety) reasons why one would need to limit rate of fire to once every three minutes? Safety appears to be a concern, but I am not sure why it should be. What are potential issues to be aware of when firing very rapidly?

Ken:

The "three-minute rule" is a modern safety measure, and its enforcement varies from organization to organization. Some units ignore it; others conscientiously enforce it, with somebody standing by with a stopwatch, others are a little more stringent... When I was serving on an NPS crew a couple of years ago, we waited 10 minutes by the watch from firing one round until the next charge was introduced to the bore.

The idea behind the wait is to let any remaining sparks in the barrel die out before putting a new charge in the tube, hopefully avoiding a premature discharge.

In combat, artillery pieces have a maximum rate of fire (how many times per minute the gun can be served and fired in a combat emergency) and then a sustained rate of fire, which is how fast the piece can be served and fired without the risk of a misfire or other delay causing you to have a round loaded in a hot tube (which is really bad juju). "Hot tube" in this case meaning that the temperature of the tube is elevated enough from firing that the heat may cause the RDX or other explosive filler in the projo to start melting. Max rate of fire is reserved for self defense or when the gooks or hajjis are in the wire; otherwise missions are fired at the sustained rate (1 round per minute for 155mm; one round every two minutes for the old 8-inchers). Add one minute shift time when engaging a new target.

The key thing to avoid in rapid fire is taking any shortcuts whatsoever... Getting in too much of a hurry means somebody overlooks something, and when that happens out on the gun line, somebody always gets hurt.

[mladair]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

Don't forget, that as artilleryman, our job isn't to be the biggest powder burner in the field. To accurately portray artillery, we should be aiming shots, not wasting powder. Take the time to call for yardages, shot, adjust for elevations, windage, etc. You might be surprised at how it has a natural way of slowing the drill down.

Henry Hunt at Gettysburg gave orders that the artillery should fire no more than once every 5 minutes. He wanted his crews to make sure they took their time and saw the results of their previous shot and make the necessary adjustments so they weren't wasting ammunition. (Apparently some of the crews had the tendency to quicly fire off all their ammunition and then get out of harms way.)

[10nycav]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

Thanks for the info. I am curious: what intervals are you all using between firing? Do you ever decrease the interval and if so, to what and how many consecutive shots would you fire?

Also regarding sponging, are there any common mistakes you have seen?

Re: danger, just in my own area of experience (driving) I have seen some pretty spectacular runaways/wrecks and heard of others. One I saw not too long ago (at a driving competition) involved a pair of Fresians who bolted (driver had not yet mounted) and took down a hefty light pole as if it was styrofoam. Then they headed into a barn (luckily, not the one containing the show office and bunches of people.) At Fresno 2 or 3 years ago one of the swing horses got tangled up in the traces (how, I'm not sure) and went down. (I was riding cavalry at the time and sw it from a distance.) One of the fellows sat on the horse's head and they got him out of his harness. Not pretty, but thankfully, horses and drivers were all OK. It definitely drives home the point that this is serious business and that horses and drivers must be well trained.

Ken Morris

[marine05]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

I've read all the replies and agree that it is, again, another overzealous attempt to increase "safety". While I will wholeheartedly support safety, this consideration borders on the ridiculous. The most often touted justification is "to eliminate any burning embers" methinks that the wet sponge accomplishes that task and that stopping the vent reduces the amout of fresh O2 that may be introduced to the bore.

The USNPS 10 minutes is really way out there, but we adhere to that.

We have the option of setting our rate of fire, powder = money. If we only went to one or two events we'd blow off 1 lb charges and expend all remaining during those events, but we go with pretty much the standard limber load for a 10 lb parrot and as most of the scenarios are not much longer than an hour or so, that is plenty with out having to resupply from the "cassion."

Sometimes with safety, more is not better.

s/f

DJM

[1stMaine]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

Comrades,

Comrade Adair wrote:

"Henry Hunt at Gettysburg gave orders that the artillery should fire no more than once every 5 minutes. He wanted his crews to make sure they took their time and saw the results of their previous shot and make the necessary adjustments so they weren't wasting ammunition. (Apparently some of the crews had the tendency to quicly fire off all their ammunition and then get out of harms way.)"

One of the "problems" with artillery at our events is the apparent delay between rounds, which seems out of place to most observers. This is due to two things. the first, of course, is hollywood and the huge barrage effects they empl;oy. This is not always out of place, but is proportional to the number of guns employed, which brings us to point two:
Events tend to have only a few guns on either side, and these are scattered by piece or section about the field. Occasionally there will be one battery of four or 6 pieces, but that isn't always the case. Coupled with the 3-minute delay per gun, this means that a 6 gun battery will be firing one gun every 30 seconds. That, to the distant observer, seems slow and out of place. What is missing, of course, is the battery multiplier. We can field a six gun battery, whereas there were usually at least four batteries per corps in the AOP, and these could be augmented by the reserve artillery.
Five six-gun batteries would, in theory, be firing one gun every 6 seconds, if my calculations are correct. That is a considerable increase in the rate of fire. That is the problem for observers at our events.
In the same vein that large masses of infantry are required to adequately give the impression of brigades and divisions maneuvering, so to are numerous batteries required to give the "feel" of the volume of fire that actually took place. Either the rate of fire needs to be increased by reducing the interval between rounds (and thus increasing the negative safety quotient), or the number of guns present needs to be increased, wherein the safety interval can be maintained, whilst giving the illusion of an increase in the rate of fire.
I agree that safety needs to be priority one, but if the period drill manuals are adhered to and the crews well versed in them, and well-supervised by responsible nco's and officers, then the add-on safety regulations would seem to me to be superflous.
respects,

[Jimmayo]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

Been doing art. for a while with different gun crews and outside of the NPS wait time, havn't heard of the 3 min rule except for a failed primer. All the pieces I have served on do a wet sponge immediatly after worming out the foil and again after the load command. The vent is secured for the entire time. Thats two wet sponges between rounds. Should extinguish any live embers.

[Yellowhammer]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

Guys,

While there is some interesting information in this thread, several posts devolved into farby reenactor "powder-burnin'." I'll be monitoring this thread to insure it stays on track.

While I agree the NPS 10-minute wait is probably overly long, the timings can easily be worked into an effective demo. We typically open with a shot and cease fire while the interpreter discusses the role of artillery at the battle in question. This generally covers the 10 minute period easily. The second shot is followed by a discussion of the piece, types of ammunition, and the roles of the cannoneers and drivers. We then demonstrate "load by detail" and then the loading procedure at full speed to give an idea of how fast the gun could be loaded in cases of necessity. We then end the program with another shot, cease fire and invite the park visitors forward to inspect the gun and ask questions.

All that said, I'm not sure of the advantage of firing any faster during a living history presentation.

If you are interested in you should still wait 3-5 minutes between shots. Remember, it takes time to lay a piece back into battery, point it, load it and fire a well aimed shot. If you are firing at realistic ranges, that is completely authentic.

If the infantry is getting close enough for you to need to fire rapidly, you should probably rethink that decision. I would advocate limbering to the rear or ceasing fire.

All that said, I should also mention the effects of a blank charge on a #1 man who's crew was firing rapidly and not adhering to proper safety procedures. "What are potential issues to be aware of when firing very rapidly?" In this case, losing a right hand, three fingers on the left hand, blindness in the right eye and "wax paper" vision out of the left. Call me crazy, but I like all my fingers and both eyes too much to lose them!

[K Bartsch]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

John, et al,

I maintain that a firing interval of less than three minutes an be executed safely, if, as I've written it is done properly. Whether or not this constitutes "powder burnin'" is irrelevant. I agree that during public and/or educational demonstrations, a shorter interval than that is probably not indicated since, as you point out, the interpreter needs time to make his presentation. This fact notwithstanding, there are times at authentic events when a shorter firing interval is perfectly appropriate and true to history based on the "tactical" situation.

Cordially,

[JWolf]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

Another safety measure is for #1 and #2-- how they hold their implements (the worm and sponge/rammer).

When holding the implement both hands should be positioned on the bottom of the staff palms facing up to grasp the implement. Additionally the thumbs should _not_ go over the top of the staff (i.e. baseball bat grip)- but they should also stay on the bottom of the staff next to to palms. Basiclly you are grasping the implement without using your thumbs.

This is of particular importance to the #1 as he rams the charge to the breech of the cannon. The thinking behind holding the rammer like that is that if (hopefully never!) the charge ignites during ramming and ejects the rammer, it will "slide" over the gloved hands minimizing resistance as the implement leaves the battel and hopefully minimize injury.



Jim

[Yellowhammer]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

Actually Jim, that's not entirely correct.

As is spelled out in Load by Detail, during the last motion of Sponge, Number 1 actually has both hands on the rammer staff. (See below)



This is safe because it is only to start the round moving down the tube. On the command Ram, he passes his left arm to the rear ending up in position with his left hand over the left trunion.

It's funny, in looking for the actual passage, MANY online artillery manuals have been edited to either comply with NPS guidelines or a unit's guidelines without a notation of the edit.

Keith,

I agree that there are times that it is tactically correct to fire more often than every 10 minutes. I think 2-5 minutes is adequate. However, I do not think that a sustained rate of fire of two shots/minute is safe. I have seen that rate of fire numerous times at reenactments.

[K Bartsch]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

John

However, I do not think that a sustained rate of fire of two shots/minute is safe. I have seen that rate of fire numerous times at reenactments.

Agreed, a sustained rate of fire which results in a shot from an individual piece every 30 seconds is frankly, scary. In fact, if the limber is the proper distance from the piece and all details of the drill are followed closely (including aiming), it would be very difficult to do it safely -- particularly since there is an additional, modern requirement for #2 to introduce the worm and extract the expended cartridge foil "husk" after each shot. I don't think such a rate of fire could have been sustained during the period either unless firing canister at very close range -- and then, adrenalin would have helped, combined with the fact aiming would have been a snap, no fuse to cut, punch or install and no requirement for the gunner to "pass" the round. Unfortunately, by then, I also suspect the gun detachment would be employing the drill with diminished numbers which would somewhat mitigate the relative simplicity of loading canister.

Cordially,

[10nycav]

Re: "Three minute rule" for firing--why?

John wrote:
"All that said, I should also mention the effects of a blank charge on a #1 man who's crew was firing rapidly and not adhering to proper safety procedures. "What are potential issues to be aware of when firing very rapidly?" In this case, losing a right hand, three fingers on the left hand, blindness in the right eye and "wax paper" vision out of the left. Call me crazy, but I like all my fingers and both eyes too much to lose them!"

John,

I had this point driven home to me last year, when a young man who was a member of a Scout troop in my state lost his life due to a cannon mishap. (This was not at a living history event, nor did it involve a Civil War living history club, but it reiterated how very dangerous this hobby can be.)

What I was trying to get at (obviously I didn't explain it too well) was, in situations where tactically it would be appropriate and historically correct to increase rate of fire to more than once every 3-5 minutes, where specifically are the potential "danger points" where any deviation from correct drill will risk of premature ignition of the charge? We have some differences of opinion between the two clubs in my area; one says that you cannot fire more than one round every 3 minutes safely (and therefore some historically correct scenarios are simply too dangerous to be demonstrated); the other says that you can fire faster than this if correct drill is followed. If a faster rate of fire can never be made safe (knowing, of course, that there is ALWAYS inherent risk involved in the use of historical artillery), I would like to be able to point out exactly why this is the case, and get our club rules changed.

Thank you,
Ken Morris