Dry sponging?

[marine05]

Re: Dry sponging?

Gents,

Tom Holbrook at Gettysburg NPS does require the 10 minutes, but not the dry sponge. I agree with Mr. Bartsch that it adds little safety, but does add quite a bit of inauthenticity. Another thing that adds to the decrease in safety, barring horses (boy wish we had them) is units that do not have a full carraige/ammo box/limber. We nearly suffered personnel and equipment damage as another crew attempted to "help" us remove a piece from the field to save it from being over run. Because they did not have a limber, just the box set upon the ground, they had practiced virtually none of the limber/unlimber drill hence in their zeal to remove our piece they failed to understand the command for 'limber to the rear' thus causing a collision between the trail of the piece and the limber pole. The impact nearly broke the latter and injured personnel. The gun drill itself is one part of the whole for artillerists.

We have had more accidents loading our pieces onto the trailers due to slippery decks or footwear. We try to be safe, accurate, realistic and professional. The one incident that I can recall is during a LH at Gettysburg NPS where we had a 'guest' #4. The individual was a serving artilleryman, and we had drilled with him as th #4 howver when it came to the real event he fired when he heard the command, "prepare to fire". The good thing is that we were all in the proper firing positions and were just surprised at the sound of the report, no injuries. Needless to say we refrain from guests.

The moral to the story, is drill, drill, drill and when you are getting complacent drill more and toss in some immediate action or reduced crew drill.

The turret explosion on Iowa was due to an error in the drill, not some failed homosexual love affair.

I'm sure that the safety-nicks would absolutely geek if they really read how a round is supposed to be rammed.

s/f

DJM

[K Bartsch]

Re: Dry sponging?

Dan,

I'm intrigued.

The one incident that I can recall is during a LH at Gettysburg NPS where we had a 'guest' #4. The individual was a serving artilleryman, and we had drilled with him as th #4 howver when it came to the real event he fired when he heard the command, "prepare to fire".

"Prepare to fire?" Where's that?

Cordially,

[guiborssgt]

Re: Dry sponging?

I don't remember "prepare to fire"being in the pattons 1860 drill which is what most N. parks use. It's easy to see the mishap there.

[guiborssgt]

Re: Dry sponging?

At Pea Ridge and Wilson's Creek in our area dosen't reguire dry sponging and as far as I know with my research of Missouri Batteys during the war never make refrence of it also we use Pattons 1860 Drill at these parks as well a events and it dosn't include Dry sponging either.I will try to post the drill when I recieve my hard copy .

[marine05]

Re: Dry sponging?

Actually, according to the Field Artillery Tactics or Red Book the commands are "Ready" in which the #3 picks the charge and #4 inserts the primer, after which #3 places his hand over the primer holding it in the vent; #4 backs to assume his position with a slack lanyard. At that time all members take the proper positions for firing. The next command is "Fire". At that time #4 waits until #3 has cleared the piece and then pulls the lanyard.

I have heard and observed numerous units use "prepare to fire" or "prepare" in order to avoid the discharge of the weapon with #3 still within the wheels.
Then the command "fire" is given by the gunner/section Lt/BC and #4 pulls the lanyard. I'm sure if the safety-nicks saw a unit doing the actual drill they'd geek then too.

Personally I'd rather do the actual drill to include the way a charge was rammed with the #1 grabbing the shaft with his left hand (back of the hand up), back to the muzzle, begins the ramming motion as he grasps the rammer shaft with his right hand. (Ramming a 10lb projo takes a little more muscle/weight than flinging the rammer down the bore using the right hand with only a few ounces of powder.)

We have done the actual drill a few times and the looks we get from other units is amazing, they look at us as if we are not right in the head. So until the reenactor artillery community decides to become authentic I guess we'll have to conform to the 21st century drill patterns.

s/f

DJM

[K Bartsch]

Re: Dry sponging?

I have heard and observed numerous units use "prepare to fire" or "prepare" in order to avoid the discharge of the weapon with #3 still within the wheels.
Then the command "fire" is given by the gunner/section Lt/BC and #4 pulls the lanyard. I'm sure if the safety-nicks saw a unit doing the actual drill they'd geek then too.I have heard and observed numerous units use "prepare to fire" or "prepare" in order to avoid the discharge of the weapon with #3 still within the wheels.

Dan,

In my opinion, inserting an additional preparatory command is a very bad idea, precisely because as you recounted 1) it can easily be mistaken for the command "fire" and 2) it's inauthentic. I would even go so far as to say that if I were standing in with you at number four and heard the gunner, section commander, battery or battalion commander call "prepare to fire" after having heard and accomplished the actions required at "ready," my first instinct would be to pull the lanyard.

The preparatory command is "ready." Again, if the detachment knows what they're doing, and drill per the manuals, number four knows he must not lose eye contact with number three until he is clear of the wheel. Only when three is clear, will number four respond to the command "fire" by pulling the firing lanyard. Additionally, if the gunner, section or battery commander is squared-away and situationally aware, it is highly unlikely that he will give the command "fire" unless he too is convinced all cannoneers are where they should be after accomplishing the actions required by the preparatory "ready" command.

Cordially,

[Ringgold]

Re: Dry sponging?

Gents,

Tom Holbrook at Gettysburg NPS does require the 10 minutes, but not the dry sponge. I agree with Mr. Bartsch that it adds little safety, but does add quite a bit of inauthenticity. . . .

DJM

This is one of the things I have trouble with. First off, how does firing every ten minutes become unauthentic in an environment like a National Park? There is no immediacy that would necessitate a rapid fire. And, by rapid fire I mean anything faster than one well aimed and expended round every 3 minutes. I’m sure by now everyone here is familiar with the order given (early 1862, I believe) by General Henry Hunt that gave that rate of fire to be the most effective and efficient rate for batteries not pressed by the enemy. If a battery is placed upon a point of relative safety with a commanding field of fire, it would not erupt like a volcano and spew every round at its disposal in a relatively short time. It would carefully choose what targets were the most appropriate for the current conditions of the battlefield and fire in a “slow and deliberate manner” as specified by the good general. He mentioned that a rate of no more than one round every three minutes should be utilized unless circumstances called for greater rapidity. This was done because he was greatly displeased with a great many batteries being in the habit of going into action and firing off all of their rounds as quickly as possible in order for them to retire from the field and take a less dangerous position in the rear of the army to re-supply. He went so far as to state that any battery performing such an action would be required to keep their position on the field, even after they had expended all of their rounds, for the full amount of time that it normally should have taken them to fire their total number. He did this for several reasons, the greatest two being the high cost of artillery rounds and the fact that a battery is placed in a position for specific reasons and their presence there is expected by their commanding generals. The unit history for Durell's Battery, P.V. even mentions the appearance of General Hunt with watch in hand, riding behind the gun lines during the firing on the 16th of September, 1862. He was making sure that the batteries were adhering to his order. He was rumored to have done a little of the same the next day during the Antietam battle as well.

Secondly, too many reenactment units get into the habit of firing for effect (that being the oooh and ahhh factors rather than the generally accepted meaning of that term) and either never learn or soon forget the true duty of the artillery arm. It is supposed to work in concert with the other branches and enhance their effectiveness. It is not supposed to be the entire battle unto itself. Of course, at most events there is SO much artillery that it does tend to overwhelm the infantry and the few cavalry that cramps the already too small parcel of land they are given to recreate whatever it is that appears in the advertisement for the event. (I digress) While it may be tempting to look at the battery returns that exclaim “we expended 580 rounds during the action at So-And-So” and focus upon actions like Wauhatchie, where the cannoneers couldn’t fire the guns fast enough for their liking, most battles saw the artillery giving a deliberate fire until they were in danger of being overrun. It’s not as common to read about these actions in any of the popular magazines of today, so you have to do a little reading on your own hook to find these accounts. Even after looking, you might miss them due to the fact that soldiers rarely expounded upon the mundane and the ordinary. They preferred instead to record the extraordinary and the unusual. For example, Orderly Sergeant William P. Andrews of the Ringgold Battery, P.V. wrote about a remarkable feat he had read about a battery’s rapid fire during a battle and made comment upon it to his sister as follows: “By the Intelligencer's Richmond correspondence I see that the New York Battery tore up things generally, firing 24 rounds of spherical case per minute. This is a little sharper work than any artillery has ever before done. It will keep a battery busy to fire 6 rounds per minute --1 round to each gun -- of spherical case. Of canister, 24 rounds might be fired, as 2 canisters are frequently used to 1 cartridge. Probably the man who wrote the article is not very well acquainted with big rifles or smooth bores. A smooth bore can be worked with greater rapidity than a rifle gun.” Notice that his intent here is to inform his sister that even ONE ROUND A MINUTE would be considered “busy” for a rifle detachment! Remember they are ramming twice for every firing (cartridge, then projectile). In short, we need to spend more time portraying artillerymen of the Mid-Nineteenth Century and less time portraying reenactors of the Twentieth Century.

I will not touch upon the “prepare to fire” chestnut, as so many others already have.

Dan, please do not take this as being aimed at you. You did not create the problem, nor did the fellows who trained you. The cancer has been living happily for generations and is only now being pointed at and being exposed as the deep-seated villain that it is. Far too many people look at it as an old friend rather than an evil that can cause harm not only to the physical being, but to history itself.

[K Bartsch]

Re: Dry sponging?

Herr Pflumm,

While I'm sure Dan will speak for himself, I interpreted his remark in this way,

Tom Holbrook at Gettysburg NPS does require the 10 minutes, but not the dry sponge. I agree with Mr. Bartsch that it (the DRY SPONGE TECHNIQUE) adds little safety, but does add quite a bit of inauthenticity. . . .

Perhaps I'm wrong.

Nevertheless, I agree that firing using the park mandated ten minute interval is perfectly acceptable for demonstration purposes.

Cordially,

[Ringgold]

Re: Dry sponging?

KB,

In retrospect, I believe you are correct about the subject. I just cooked-off a little. I originally wrote that post last night around 0300, but couldn't post it due to computer problems w/ my PC. I get a little cranky when I'm tired. My apologies to all. :(

[marine05]

Re: Dry sponging?

The supposition was correct I was referring to the dry sponging, not the time. The 10 minutes allows for a good dog and pony show, to include narration, Q&A, load by detail, etc. It is not as if the crews are sitting around doing nothing and the crowd meandering away in the interim. In fact I like the time and we can usually get off about 3 shots plus allow any spectators to do a little touchy/feely after the range is cleared and cold.

In many cases I prefer LH to reenactments as in the former there are few if any big bugs fouling up the works and in the latter there are too many zeros that have little concept of combined arms and how artillery and/or cavalry is supposed to be used.

Also I feel the LHs on an actual battlefield are scrutinized a little more as you have all those boys watching. That's why I wear my St Barbara's medal so if I mess up I won't get hit by a lightening bolt hurled from some distraught past cannoneer.

s/f

DJM