Question about a tubelock musket

[Michael Comer]

I was looking at the photo of an 1842 Austrian tubelock in EOG Union, pg 34-35 and am having a bit of difficulty understanding just how this thing worked having never really seen one.

The caption says a fulminate packed copper tube was dropped into a pan. A hood was closed on it and when the hammer struck the hood it ignited the musket. I understand that basic premise.

What I don't see is a 'pan'. With the hood raised there is an opening into the barrel which could possibly hold a tube but it doesn't really fit my idea of a pan. And if it is how did the hammer striking the cover work to set this thing off - I'm trying to figure out just how this tube was ignited. Plus, did it have to be removed by hand before the piece was reloaded and was there a special pouch to hold these copper tubes?

[Archie R. Lib]

Re: Question about a tubelock musket

Hey Mike. I actually saw one of these at a gun show a few years back and had a chance to handle it. They are ungainly but very interesting. The guy who came up with this piece was innovative, but complicated. It's like looking at the engine of a Saab.

Actually the "percussion tube" was very small, and what they are calling a "pan" is actually just a small opening under the hinged cover into which goes the small percussion tube. It is nothing like a flintlock pan, except it is in the same location, has a piece that is hinged, and opens up with a touch hole into the barrel. On top of the "pan's" hinged cover, you can see a small disc of metal (above the screw). This is the side view of the "striker" and firing pin. The striker is flat, and it extends into a firing pin which goes through the hinged cover and into the space where the tube is. When the hammer comes down, it impacts the flat striker, which forces the pin (connected to the striker) into the copper tube in the "pan", ingiting the fulminate of mercury, which vents through the touch hole into the breech.

I don't think there was much left of the FM tube once it exploded. According to the gunsmith that had this particular musket, it was thiner skinned than a cap and basically was just a glob of FM that blew all to hell when it was set off. I can imagine, though, that there were issues with the spent material getting into the touch hole and jamming up the works.

Also, once the round was expended and new shot/powder was rammed, the solder had to bring the hammer to half-cock and flip the works open with his right thumb or hand using that awkward metal appendage you see hanging off the back of the "pan cover".

I don't know if there was any special pouch for them. I kind of assumed that they were just kept in a standard issue cap pouch. That is a good question.

Hope this helps.

[Michael Comer]

Re: Question about a tubelock musket

Thanks Rich, that helps a lot. I understand the mechanics of it now.

[Archie R. Lib]

Re: Question about a tubelock musket

No problem.

Hope you guys have fun at Wilson's Creek! Sorry I'll miss it. Hope to meet you some other time though.

Rich

[fahnenschmied]

Re: Question about a tubelock musket

The primer for a tubelock musket fits into the end of the touch-hole. This ensures a pretty surefire ignition if your primer goes off. When I was shooting one owned by a friend years ago, we made tubes from thin hobby tubing, folded closed on the end and filled with the tops off strike anywhere matches. In our version, the tube was generally in place after firing but a flick of a finger usually got rid of it. Our tubes were probably much thicker than the originals though. So far as I know there was no cap pouch in the Austrian army; in the original cartridges, the primers were tied on with fine brass wires. About like horsehair! One stuck the primer in its place, closed the hood, and the brass wires would tear the cartridge open for you. We could never get ours to work well, but we didn't dare open the one cartridge the owner of the musket had to find out. We just went by what clues we saw from outside. All who shot it felt it was a little easier and quicker than trying to grab a four wing cap from a pouch. But the "pan" is just a groove for the tube to lay in....

[Don Dixon]

Re: Question about a tubelock musket

Here's how the System Augustin tubelock worked:

The tubes were made from a sheet of thin copper plate about 16 mm/0.63 inches long and about 4 mm/0.16 inches wide. The sheet was rolled into a small tube. Before filling the tube with the percussion mixture of fulminate of mercury and ordinary gunpowder, a thin brass wire approximately 5 cm/1.97 inches in length was pulled through the tube. The tube was sealed and essentially water proof. Attached to the end of the wire was a bore diameter cardboard disc, which was contained in the powder filled end of the paper cartridge. The tube and wire were tucked into the side of the paper cartridge. Since each cartridge was essentially self contained, there was consequently no need for a separate "cap" box.

To load, you put the tube in the tubelock pan. You closed the pan cover, locking the wire attached to the percussion tube. The pan had a movable firing pin in it's top. When you pulled the cartridge, the carboard disc tore the cartridge open for you (during the tubelock era, Austro-Hungarian Army soldiers didn't need to have a full set of front teeth to tear their cartridges). You placed the ball - or conical bullet in the case of Kamerbüchse rifles ("Garibaldis) - in the muzzle, thumbed the ball, tore off the paper remaining above the muzzle, and rammed. The strike of the hammer on the top of the pan cover moved the firing pin which fired the percussion tube. A well trained Austro-Hungarian soldier was reportedly capable of about five aimed shots per minute.

The system was a very inexpensive and effective means of converting flintlock arms to percussion. Much better than the cone in barrel system that was used to convert many flintlock muskets in the U.S. The tubes stayed together when fired, and the cardboard disc and wire gave you an effective means of pulling the remains from the pan. The Federal Army screwed up by not copying the Austrian cartridge design for use in the tubelocks that they imported.

[Michael Comer]

Re: Question about a tubelock musket

Interesting info Don. I appreciate it. Have you seen one of these cartridges with the primer attached or is there a photo somewhere available? I would be very interested in seeing how the full cartridge/primer looked.

[Don Dixon]

Re: Question about a tubelock musket

Mr. Comer,

Go to the Bulletin Board on the N-SSA web page. Then to the Civil War Small Arms section and the recent topic on Pedersoli Civil War Muzzleloaders. On page 6, you will find a web citation to the Hungarian shooting magazine Füstolgoe. In the October 2010 issue, starting on page 14, there is an article - in Hungarian - on ammunition for the Austro-Hungarian Kammerbüchse rifles ("Garibaldis" in American useage). I believe that with the exception of the later conical bullets, ammunition for the Kammerbüchse and the System Augustin smoothbores was made essentially the same way. The photographs are self explanatory. They should answer your questions.

Regards,
Don Dixon