Dry sponging?

[10nycav]

Hello again,

I am moving this from the three minute rule thread since it's really a separate topic. I am really curious as to what you all think about this.

Looking at the National artillery rules (referenced in the thread on the 3 minute rule) brings up another question. The National rules require dry sponging:

"After wet sponging, the same procedure is used with the dry sponge. The dry sponge is cleaned and dried off periodically with an absorbent towel-type rag. (The purpose of the dry sponge is to remove excess moisture from the bore; if water is left in the bore it may cause incomplete burning of the next powder charge, leaving dangerously glowing residue.)"

Do the NPS rules require dry sponging as well? I recall in my conversations with Joyce Henry that she felt that dry sponging was less safe as well as not being period correct. I'm no expert and would like to defer to the experts, but it seems that we have a major difference of opinion here. So I was wondering what everyone's opinions were on this subject.

Ken Morris

[James Brenner]

Re: Dry sponging?

The idea behind dry sponging is to ensure that no "pool" of water remains in the breech from wet sponging. The belief is that, if the next cartridge broke, loose powder would absorb the water and increase the possibility of embers in the bore.

[ktfrench]

Re: Dry sponging?

We have worked with Gettysburg, Sharpsburg and Harper's Ferry NPS and do the following, which has worked well for us. After firing, #2 pulls any tin foil with the worm and #1 wets the sponge and spins it to remove excess water and sponges the bore. After waiting the prescribed time, #1 again sponges on the Load command without re-wetting the sponge.

Kevin French
Hardaway's Battery

[K Bartsch]

Re: Dry sponging?

Utility of so-called "dry sponging?" Doubtful. Again, if performed properly, IMHO, a single use of the moistened ( but not sodden ) sponge end of the rammer incidental to the command "load" ( per the period manuals ) is quite sufficient, safe and a more accurate representation of Civil War practice.

Cordially,

[vamick]

Re: Dry sponging?

I agree with Bartch..if #1 man is trained properly and uses the sponge well..( we usually twist remove then sponge one more time) there is no reason to 'dry' sponge..to me this is just another weird NPS 'rule'... look for orange jump suits kevlar body armour and full face shields for cannoneers from this bunch in the future! *L

[10nycav]

Re: Dry sponging?

My understanding is that dry sponging is a National rule but not an NPS rule. But, I am still waiting on getting a copy of the NPS rules. Does anyone have an electronic copy they can send me? Or mail me a copy--I would gladly pay for copying and postage. I'd really appreciate it!

The idea I had seen posted here previously, that the modern rules be annotated to show where they depart from period practice, would be great.

Ken Morris

[Cpt Boone]

Re: Dry sponging?

This is not the rules, could not find them online yet, but it might help.

http://www.nps.gov/vick/interp/lhcannon.htm

This shows the sequence of loading at Vicksburg. Rick Martin is the Black Powder guy there.

In my experience firing at National Parks we have never dry sponged. NPS does not require it. We always use a damp sponge like we always do.

As to the "National rule" for dry sponging, if you roll your rounds properly in foil all the powder will burn up. You would not want a puddle in the breach as it might not let you seat the round to the breach face causing you to misfire, but that would have to be a lot of water. Now, if you were crazy enough to be completely authentic and use cloth bags like they did, you would have the chance of getting the powder wet. To my knowlege, foil does not absorb water especially when it is wrapped and sealed properly.

My 2 cents.

[Yellowhammer]

Re: Dry sponging?

Right. Dry sponging is not in the NPS rules.

I've done artillery for the NPS at Antietam, Harpers Ferry, Gettysburg, Monocacy, Petersburg, and Richmond and have seen many different interpretations of the NPS Blackpowder artillery manual. One park insists #1 keep his left arm behind his back while sponging while another park insists on "three clockwise turns of the spongue, back the sponge out six inches and reinsert and then execute three counter-clockwise turns of the sponge."

Bottom line, if they want you to dry sponge or whatever just do it. To me, it's an honor to get to fire artillery at those sites and if doing something makes a Ranger happy, just do it.

[Ringgold]

There, I said it . . .

Gentlemen,

I have been watching this thread, as well as the “3 minute rule” thread, with great interest but have neglected to add my worthless 2 cents to the fray until now. There have been many well-stated, thought-provoking discussions as to why such steps as 3 or 10 minutes between firings and dry sponging exist. Many good reasons have been forwarded as to why these particular steps are not needed, as well as touching upon why they may still, indeed, be needed. While a few of you have lightly tip-toed around the true reason, please allow me to stomp right through the cow pies and point out the singularly most important aspect of our hobby that demands that these rules be maintained and enforced. That reason, simply put my comrades, is the “idiot principle.”

We all know that if a piece is properly served by well-trained cannoneers who understand the reasons for the various steps in the drill and respect the severity of not taking their piece seriously, there will rarely be an injurous incident. However, if any one of the aforementioned requirements is absent there is a very high likelihood that we will be reading about it in the national news. That is why these rules were established so very long ago. There are far more idiots playing with cannon than there are cannoneers who fulfil the description given in the first sentence of this paragraph. That is unfortunate. These rules need to be adhered to if we are to be allowed to continue in our pursuit to study and portray artillerists. In the end, every reputable artillery unit must lead by example and follow the rules and regulations esablished to ensure the safety of every participant in the event they are attending. One of the mantras often heard coming from some of the less-than-safe outfits is that they can fire quicker because they are good enough to do it safely.

I ask you to think about how the average artillery reenactor perceives their own safety practices and drill familiarity to be. When was the last time you heard anybody say that they or their group wasn’t safe enough? I’ve heard boasts about safety coming from people who were using paint rollers for sponges as well as from a unit that didn’t even have their keys in their trunnion caps. Practically everyone who walks onto the field in a uniform honestly believes himself to be safer than the guy next to him. It’s human nature and it’s hard to kill by any means other than self-inflicted wounds or friendly fire.

The NPS safety drill is not unrecognizable when compared to the Field Artillery Tactics nor R. Snowden Andrews’ work on the subject. If done correctly, or with a few very slight modifications to suit the individual park’s interpretation of their manual (and there are many), we can still show the unwashed masses how a gun crew would have performed during the War of the Rebellion. We must all play from the same sheet of music, my friends, or the idiot with the triangle is going to screw us over and lose the gig for the entire orchestra.

[Amtmann]

Re: Dry sponging?

Has anyone ever put up a page that CORRECTLY shows all the positions at once during each step? One that shows where everyone is, their stance, their hand positions...etc. In other words, EVERYTHING that EVERYONE is doing at each step?

[K Bartsch]

Re: Dry sponging?

Couple of points. The "idiots, from whom we'd like to "idiot-proof" the hobby, probably aren't registered members of this, or any other forum dedicated to authentic and safe living history practices. Nevertheless, I concede its good to articulate why seemingly exaggerated, indeed sometimes even seemingly absurd modifications to authentic artillery drill, have evolved.

I would add this. It has been my experience that park personnel (state and fed) can usually be reasoned with, and once their trust is earned, they can and do permit minor modifications to their procedures which enhance authenticity without increasing risk. In fact, the only thing I've seen the NPS folks I've had the privilege to work with "hard-over" on is their ten-minute rule.

Finally, I've seen more folks hurt by the horses, and even one horrifying limber "wreck" (at an NPS site, which resulted in an ER run but blessedly did not result in serious injuries) than anything we do with gunpowder. I've said it before, and I'll repeat it now. Two-ton vehicles only partially under human control (i.e. horsedrawn gun/limbers and limber/caissons driven by accomplished, well-trained drivers) can kill, maim or seriously injure. As more horsedrawn units appear, which is a wonderful development, folks on foot working with and around these things need to remain alert and know what they're about. Whether working inside the wheels, driving, riding the boxes or marching at your post, folks must continuously think ahead. Situational awarenesss , just as I'm sure it was during the period, is absolutely critical to personal safety in horsedrawn artillery, particularly when on the march over rough terrain.

The kewl part is, TBG's just can't keep up! :wink_smil

Cordially

[Ringgold]

Re: Dry sponging?

Couple of points. The "idiots, from whom we'd like to "idiot-proof" the hobby, probably aren't registered members of this, or any other forum dedicated to authentic and safe living history practices. Nevertheless, I concede its good to articulate why seemingly exaggerated, indeed sometimes even seemingly absurd modifications to authentic artillery drill, have evolved.

I would add this. It has been my experience that park personnel (state and fed) can usually be reasoned with, and once their trust is earned, they can and do permit minor modifications to their procedures which enhance authenticity without increasing risk. In fact, the only thing I've seen the NPS folks I've had the privilege to work with "hard-over" on is their ten-minute rule.

Finally, I've seen more folks hurt by the horses, and even one horrifying limber "wreck" (at an NPS site, which resulted in an ER run but blessedly did not result in serious injuries) than anything we do with gunpowder. I've said it before, and I'll repeat it now. Two-ton vehicles only partially under human control (i.e. horsedrawn gun/limbers and limber/caissons driven by accomplished, well-trained drivers) can kill, maim or seriously injure. As more horsedrawn units appear, which is a wonderful development, folks on foot working with and around these things need to remain alert and know what they're about. Whether working inside the wheels, driving, riding the boxes or marching at your post, folks must continuously think ahead. Situational awarenesss , just as I'm sure it was during the period, is absolutely critical to personal safety in horsedrawn artillery, particularly when on the march over rough terrain.

The kewl part is, TBG's just can't keep up! :wink_smil

Cordially

Keith,

Unfortunately, you are correct about the types of people who are not frequenting these types of fora. The problem arises when these people attend "battle reenactments" and see other units cutting corners (like not waiting 3 minutes before introducing the next charge) because they feel confident in their own abilities to do so. This is often in violation of many event rules that specify certain rules for artillery. The "idiots" see other units firing every 1 - 2 minutes and assume that they should be able to do so as well. After all, they're just as good or even better than those guys. The next thing you know, the same yahoos are at their next event firing every 30 seconds, egging the crew next to them to do the same. After all, "They seen Battery So-and-so doing it at last weekend's Podunk reenactment." Very rarely do these people come out to watch the better units demonstrate the drill at places like parks and historic sites where safety issues can not be compromised for the sake of "coolness".

As for the NPS, I agree with you 100%. You will, however, run into the occassional Ranger who has their own particular spin on the rules and enforces it their individual way with extreme vigor. It still amazes me how so many employees of the same organization can have so many different takes on their own regulations. This is not always a bad thing. A few improvements have come about due to a particular person's personal understanding of an old rule. Somebody higher up sees the worth of the new style and implements the change. The NPS is a very pleasant boss for living historians to work for. The work environment is top-notch and the rewards are priceless.

I also will agree upon the seriousness of equines in the artillery equation. With the greater portrayal comes greater resposibility. You have a bit of "wiggle room" for error with a static piece and practically none once you attach hooves and harness to the splinter bar and limber pole. The unit I mentioned as not securing their trunnion keys were a mounted unit, which makes their error even more grievous. The fact that they ignored my warnings about it makes it irresponsible.

Not only does having to keep up with the teams weed out the TBGs, the amount of labor needed to maintain that much horseflesh reduces the number of "clothes tree reenactors" in the ranks as well! :tounge_sm

[K Bartsch]

Re: Dry sponging?

Mark,
Again, great points all. A couple more from me. First, with regards to setting the proper example at "podunk" reenactments. Not to sound elitist, although it will likely come across that way, the unit with which I'm affiliated only gets out a relatively few times each year and therefore generaly eschews the mainstream reenactments. That said, we'll be at "Franklin" hoping for the best.

As you know, its darned expensive to take a horsedrawn outfit out on the road. I've heard our founder repeatedly claim its costs about a thousand dollars to "do" each event after toting up all related expenses. I have no reason to doubt him, and indeed believe that figure is generally on the low side. Anyway, all that to point out we must carefully choose our events. We tend to opt for the battlefield LH or march whenever possible over a reenactment. I will say however, that while setting a good safety example for the gun detachment sited next to your piece is admirable, for the life of me Mark, I've just never seen it make any difference to the committed "yahoo" who just wants to "shoot the gun and have some fun.".

The only thing I've seen work is when folks in positions of responsibility on the reenactment field -- artillery staff and senior commanders, are A.) knowledgeable and B.) willing to insist on safe procedures after conducting a C.) comprehensive and rigorous inspection of all participants' ordnance and drill. Its tough, but it has to be that way for the reasons you have so ably articulated. Folks don't take too kindly to being asked to sit out a "battle" because their gun/implements/cartridges, etc didn't pass the safety inspection, therefore those in authority must be highly resolved to do the right (and safe ) thing. Aluding to another of your points, its particularly tough to stand a group down when they may well have sailed right through a safety inspection -- which was in reality little more than a formality, at an event the previous weekend. All that to say, setting the proper example should not be limited to those serving within gun detachments. It should also include event organizers and leaders.

Cordially,

[guiborssgt]

Re: Dry sponging?

I can come up with a copy of the NPS drill but it is hard copy if you want to send me your address I will send you a copy.

Guibor's sgt
themccrackens@centurytel.net

[10nycav]

Re: Dry sponging?

Thanks very much! I will do that.

Ken Morris