admin | 
07 18th, 2009| 
They were very similar to their predecessors; except that the metal furniture was now brass instead of iron, and the musket had a new lock with some minor modifications meissen porcelain louis xiv . The Royal cypher, when used, was the ‘A R’ of the reigning sovereign porzellan clock spain . The barrel of the musket was forty-six inches, or slightly longer than the James II pattern computers internet blog .
With the issue of these arms slings were fitted to all muskets for the first time trestle table lyre base .
The universal use of flintlocks in the Army, as well as on private firearms, resulted in the flint industry becoming of prime importance british longcase makers . It was a very ancient industry directoire sofa . The art of chipping, or `knapping’, flints had been practised in neolithic, times, when arrowheads, spearheads, axes, tools, etc cast regency period candlestick ., had been manufactured from the flint deposits at such places as Brandon in Suffolk antique neoclassical furniture side cabinet . For many years, however, there had been little requirement for flint, except for the comparatively low standard stone used for ordinary ignition epergne art deco glass . The arrival of flintlock arms created a new and increasing demand for high-quality flint marc duplantier . Nevertheless the process available was tedious and inefficient, and yielded indifferent flints indian vernacular furniture . Gradually the art was re-learnt, and by the end of the eighteenth century English flints had become famous throughout Europe antique hot water plate warmer . In 1686 a Government factory was established important pieces art deco furniture .at Brandon, and all flints for the Army were made there during the whole remaining life of flintlock firearms drawing ornaments for furniture .
Until the early eighteenth century flints were generally made from the brown flintstone which was gathered from the fields antique tables small . This broke rather easily, for its irregularity in grain made it brittle empire gateleg table . The much superior black flint was subsequently discovered at depths of from 5o to zoo feet, and from about the middle of the eighteenth century all flint was quarried antique paper mache pedestal table .
Flints were divided into different sizes according to the type of weapon sheriton clock . As far as the Army was concerned, these consisted of the musket, the carbine and the pistol; and they were each again divided into ‘Best’, ‘Second’ and ‘Common’ according to their quality, which was assessed by the colour of the stone (the darker the better) and by the regularity of the shape antique kidney table lion ball legs . A good flint knapper could gauge the size of a flint by the naked eye to within a sixteenth of an inch and could trim it to a chisel edge 18th century trestle table .
`Best’ flints could be expected to give from forty to fifty shots, without fear of a misfire, whilst ‘Common’ flints would only give about half this number ornate italy shell spoon . Most musket flints were the cheap ‘Common’ variety redwood trinket box .
Flints were sold by the thousand and were packed in half casks, which held 2000 of t1w musket size, 3000 of the carbine and 4000 of the pistol antique spanish sideboard .
In the seventeenth century it was the practice of both officers and other ranks to wear their side arms when off duty identify antique paper mache trays . When the bayonet was added to the sword it appears that there must have been some temptation to use this handy little weapon in local brawls with the civil population century furniture chinoiserie dining table chair credenza . This is reflected in the following order which was promulgated in 1687:
`For the prevention of mischief that may happen by the carrying of bayonets We hereby strictly forbid all officers and soldiers of what quality soever within Our pay or entertainment to carry a dagger or bayonet at any other time than when such officer or soldier shall be upon duty or under their arms upon pain of being punished at Direction of a Court Martial and the officers and commanders in chief of Our several regiments, troops and companies and Governors of Our Garrisons are hereby required to cause these Our commands to be forthwith read and published at the head of each respective regiment, troop and company that all persons may give obedience thereunto meissen figures on bronze bases .
`Given at Our Court at Whitehall the 4th day of March,
1686/7
`By His Majesties Command antique meissen porcelain .’
It is quite likely that this order was drafted personally by King James II furniture design . It is very like the tone of some of his letters dealing with military organization and administration antique posset pots .
Grenadiers and Musketeers seem to have worn swords throughout Marlborough’s campaigns draw-leaf tables . The armament of a Grenadier was particularly impressive; for it comprised (according to the Exercise of hoot of 16go) firelock, bayonet, sword, hatchet and grenades antique french campaign chair .
There is an interesting hint of regimental insignia on swords in a notice of a deserter in the Post Man in 1703 care of antique oak chest woodworm rot . The man belonged to Lord Lucas’s Regiment (later the 34th Foot) and is described as wearing a sword with brass mounting and an ‘L’ on the shell norman bel geddes desks . How far this was a common practice is not known sarcophagus chests andre-charles boulle . The detail on a sword depended entirely on the taste of the Colonel, and the swords for a regiment were, in fact, purchased by the Colonel out of the money allowed him by the Government for the provision of all clothing, swords and necessaries of the other ranks under his command antique maple drop leaf dining table .
The Duke of Marlborough would allow no weapon other than the sword to be used by mounted troops jupe patent mechanism . The pistol he regarded as the enemy of effective cavalry action antique victorian writing table . Brigadier-General Richard Kane, in his Discipline of Horse of 1745, said:
`They should handle their swords well, which is the only Weapon our British Horse makes use of when they charge the enemy; more than this is superfluous empire revival benches . The Duke of Marlborough would allow the Horse but three Charges of Powder and Ball to each man for a Campaign, and that for guarding their Horses when at Grass, and not to be made use of in action roman tripod table .
`Dragoons should be well instructed in the use of arms, having often occasion to make use of them on foot; but when on horseback, they are to fight as the Horse do sheraton period cutlery urn .’
The type of swords supplied to the cavalry, however, does not seem to have been beyond criticism baroque paper mache plate . In 1691 Sir Albert Cunningham, Colonel of the 6th Dragoons, wrote to the Secretary at War, ‘We want good broad cutting swords with three-barred hilts’ how drop leaf table evolved . In 1706 Colonel J designs for dressing table glasses . Crofts of the Royal Dragoons said in a letter that, ‘It was impossible to get flaming (i antique pembroke tables .e antique dining table stored legs . curved) blades but I pitched upon the best sword for service I could find’ antique duncan phyfe mahogany coffee table with brass claw feet . A year later his successor, Colonel St barrel leg oak dining table .-Pierre, wrote “chest of drawers” +cherry +1840s . ‘The swords are good, but a handfull too short, there is no dealing with the French but with good swords, they have excellent ones antique wooden handle forks . We are resolved, whatever it cost, if we come to Baralina and can find German blades, to buy them and put them upon our handles, which are large enough clarice cliff aj wilkinson teardrop plate .’
It is apparent that there must have been considerable variety in the swords carried by the cavalry japanese tray table w/ folding legs . There is a tantalizing bill of 1689 for a steel horseman’s sword with a rich gilt handle, apparently belonging to the loth Horse secession style furniture .
Towards the end of the seventeenth century there was some improvement in the gunpowder antique wood trestle table with leaves . The proportions were altered to six parts of saltpetre to one each of charcoal and sulphur antique console table carved wood . But the most noteworthy advance was in the quality of the saltpetre goldscheider ceramic figurines+made in austria. 1920 . Previously it had been chiefly obtained by the laborious and probably uncongenial task of washing out earth collected from underneath long-established dung-hills drop leaf table stable base . It was now imported from foreign countries where it could be found in a free state 3 leg drum table with leather top .
BROWN BESS
At some period in the earlier part of the eighteenth century there appeared the most famous weapon that was ever placed in the hands of the British soldier 3 leg drum table with leather top . This was the musket which became popularly known as ‘Brown Bess’ “edwards & roberts” furniture satinwood . The actual date of its introduction is unknown edwardian satinwood combination wardrobe . It*is popularly supposed to have been designed in the reign of Queen Anne 19th century mechanical desks . Nevertheless there is an old tradition that the musket was chosen by the great Duke of Marlborough when he was Captain-General and Master-General of the Ordnance german art deco porcelain harlequin . The earliest one known to the author is in the Tower of London, and bears the date 1717 on the lock plate 1920’s walnut buffet, four drawers .
The origin of the name is as much a mystery as Brown Bess’s date of birth, and there have been many theories to account for it antique gateleg card table . However, the ‘brown’ probably referred to the colour of the weapon, or part of it; and this was most likely the stock, which was of walnut wood stained a reddish brown 17th century drop leaf table . The stocks of all the British Army’s previous firearms had been black sofas . It has been said, also, that the barrel was browned by pickling in an acid bath asian chest with fake drawers . It may have been issued in this condition, but during most of the years when this musket was in use the barrel appears to have been highly polished; in accordance with the British Army’s normal practice with any piece of metal, unless ordered to do otherwise 1800’s library table . Bess’ may have been a mere term of affection; on the other hand it may have been derived from ‘buss’,a German word for a gun and used in ‘arquebus’ and `blunderbuss’ antique english tea tables .
That such a gun should acquire a nickname was, however, almost inevitable french oak, “barley twist” chest of drawers . It was noteworthy in two respects antique card table brass feet folding . It had the beautiful lines of the private fowling-pieces of the day, and, for ease of handling and for performance, it was the finest smooth-bore firearm in any army for the whole of its active existence antique hexagon ladles . These qualities undoubtedly earned the affection of the soldiers who handled it, and if troops become fond of a piece of equipment, maintenance and cleanliness present few difficulties antique wooden pot cupboard .
Of Brown Bess Mr glass front marquetry cabinet . Scurfield in a notable article on ‘British Military Smoothbore Firearms’, which he contributed to the journal of the Society for drmy Historical Research, says: ‘I have seen and handled many muskets of the eighteenth century, and have no hesitation in saying that for workmanship, handiness and appearance (much more important in those days than in these) the Old English musket was, as the armament of the “common soldier”, unsurpassed 1940’s marble tables . Compared with her predecessors and contemporaries, such as the French Model 1717, which was not radically altered until 1754, Brown Bess has the grace of a fowling-piece, the lightest stock compatible with capacity to stand up to a campaign, well-shaped moulded brass furniture, and a lock which had a reputation for giving fewer missfires, “flashes in the pan”, than that of any other military firearm georgian serving tables . Wherein lay the superiority of the English lock is now quite beyond ascertainment; but modern amateurs of historic arms, such as the late Major H vincennes gilded porcelain asian design . R 19th century lion claw pedestal table . S expensive marble tables . Brown, Mr 19th century apostle spoon . Mark Dineley, and others, confirm that it is less unreliable in igniting the charge than any other military lock they have experimented with anitque side cabinet .’
The barrel length of the first model was about 451 or 46 inches malard furniture . The bore was 11, or a shade over •75 calibre 18th c, hot water plate . The bullets vere 131 or 14 to the pound, which would slip easily down a barrel of this diameter a & s smee finsbury . The mounts were brass throughout jean dunand pottery . These comprised the buttplate, small shield (or escutcheon), side plate (on the side opposite the lock plate to receive the latter’s screws), trigger guard and four ramrod pipes apartment for milliner suzanne 1929 . The ramrod was of wood with a brass tip muller freres primavera . The butt-plate was a heavy moulded piece, and, in conjunction with the light fore-end, served to keep the balance of the gun fairly well back in spite of the long barrel small square drop leaf table with 2 chairs . The lock was of an improved type with a steel bearing, or ‘bridle’, to support the tumbler and prevent it from pressing against the lock plate antique wine cooler and stand . The escutcheon, which was on the top of the small of the butt, was primarily intended to take the screw which passed right through the small from the rearward extension of the trigger guard art nouveau cupboard . It was also frequently engraved or stamped with the company letter and individual number antique canning jars with good luck on them . The lock plate, which was of iron, bore the crowned Royal cypher, and, in addition, either the word ‘Tower’ or the contractor’s name empire drum night table . This was to become the standard practice for many years cabriole legs . Previously the Royal cypher had been, as already mentioned, limited in its use king charles silver flatware . The contractor’s name had sometimes appeared, but often the plate was devoid of any inscription gilbert rhode . The word ‘Tower’ indicated that the arm bearing it had been assembled at the Tower of London from parts supplied by contractors 1940’s art deco black and gray lacquer bedroom set prices . At a later period arms were similarly assembled in Ireland at Dublin Castle, and the lock plates were marked ‘Dublin Castle’ century furniture drop leaf table . Those arms made and assembled by contractors sometimes had the date of manufacture after the name of the maker 17th century georgian sideboards .
The bayonet was of the same basic pattern, with triangular blade, as that adopted in the reign of Queen Anne; but it was much improved matthew boulton roast cover . The socket was four inches long; and the blade length was now seventeen inches, and remained so until about z 70 spanish revival italian walnut trestle library table . The scabbard was of leather, and carried suspended from a cross-belt over the right shoulder baroque style depression furniture with walnut and walnut veneers . Another cross-belt over the left shoulder supported a cartridge pouch and two brass pickers for cleaning the vent silver tray with top .
The cartridge used with the Brown Bess musket consisted of a tube of stout cartridge paper, sealed at both ends with pack thread antique scroll maker . It contained six to eight drams of powder and also a lead bullet saxony flowers 1700s . antique octagon table with twelve legs . This type of cartridge had been in use for some time by mounted troops derby porcelain figurines mark r 1762 . The soldier bit off the rear end of the cartridge, squeezed a small portion of the powder into the flash-pan and emptied the remainder down the barrel art deco glass vase . He then inserted the bullet and rammed it with the paper cartridge on top as wadding antique chinese chamber pot . With this method of loading the soldier could fire about two to three rounds per minute; but the loose-fitting bullet ‘limited the range of reasonably accurate fire to some fifty yards making pottery . Various unauthorized methods of loading to ease the soldier’s task and speed up the rate of fire had been adopted with the matchlock musket at least as early as the reign of Charles I wodden chair dining table leaf design . The powder was poured into the barrel and the bullet dropped on top of it without the use of wad or ramrod antique mahogony carved dressing table . The charge was then firmed home by banging the butt on the ground winthrop china cabinet . Range and penetration, of course, both suffered double scroll legs desk art deco .
The same procedure was adopted with the flintlock, but as the powder used was fine enough to be used for both primer and charge, the private soldier, ever a genius at finding laboursaving devices, managed to eliminate another of the normal loading tasks early soft paste teapots . Having shut the pan after firing, he discovered that banging the butt on the ground not only consolidated the charge but also sent sufficient powder through the touchhole into the pan to prime the musket haviland france deco cup . The rate of fire was increased to from four to five rounds a minute, but there was a considerable proportion of misfires owing to insufficient powder reaching the pan, and the fire was horribly inaccurate wood antique tripod table glass top 1950 .
In certain circuirfstances loading with a loose bullet withoui wadding was a recognized practice, and was known as loading with ‘running ball’ antique gateleg table new york . Sentries’ arms loaded with running ball, for instance, could be unloaded by holding the barrel downwards and letting the bullet run out myott son & co blue hanley est: 1880 . If the wadding was inserted the only way of unloading was to discharge the musket gate leg table oak antique round .
Even Brown Bess, the best of smooth-bore muskets, could not compare in accuracy or speed of fire with the old English long bow greek marble console table . Colonel Hanger, in his book To d11 Sportsmen of X 814, said: ‘A soldier’s musket, if not exceedingly ill-bored (as many are), will strike the figure of a man at 8o yards; it may be even at a hundred; but a soldier must be very unfortunate indeed who shall be wounded by a common musket at 150 yards, provided his antagonist aims at him; and as to firing at a man at 20o yards with a common musket, you may as well fire at the moon and have the same hopes of hitting your object a dutch walnut and burr-walnut longcase clock . I do maintain and will prove, whenever called on, that no man was ever killed at 20o yards, by a common soldier’s musket, by the person who aimed at him antique empire table .’
In about 1841 a special test was carried out by the Royal Engineers to find out what Brown Bess could really do primevera crackle glaze bird . The results were not impressive art noveau furniture . The range of the piece was-an), thing from ioo yards to 700, according to the elevation of the barrel antique dining room table rectangle +connected double pedestal . At every elevation tried, however, there was at least a hundred yards’ variation in the possible range, and at some elevations this exceeded 300 yards bronze chair french . At iSo yards a target about twice as high and twice as broad as a man was hit three times out of four art deco writing sets . At any greater range, even with the musket fixed in a rest, this same target was not hit at all regency card table value . At a range of 2 5o yards a target twice as wide again was fired at, but of ten shots none registered a hit and no one discovered where they went goldscheider figures women . This test certainly bore out Colonel Hanger’s contention, In addition to the inaccurate shooting of the flintlock, there were always some misfires; and in a lengthy test carried out in 1834 against a percussion musket these worked out at i in 6-1pL burr walnut art deco dresser bakelit .
Nevertheless, for the close-order fighting, short ranges and volley firing of its day Brown Bess was a great weapon; and few viewed its supersession without regret
It was not till 1794 that any new pattern musket was introduced, but as this event took place during the Napoleonic wars, when firearms were at a premium, there was no question of Brown Bess being withdrawn from service antique walnut tall boys . In fact, the old musket must have been in the hands of a large proportiop of the British infantry until the reduction of the Army after the battle of Waterloo 17 century dining tables .
The modifications which were effected during this long career were comparatively few ” american card table” . The most important was the reduction of the barrel length to forty-two inches somewhere about the middle of the century islamic arts ivory inlaid wood cabinet . However, there was no immediate replacement of the forty-six-inch barrel muskets, and some of these were undoubtedly still in service at the time of the American War of Independence antique music stand london . Mr rent baroque wood carving furniture . Scurfield, irx citing the evidence of American students of military affairs for this, mentions an interesting theory as to the use of the long muskets square walnut and burr elm coffee table . He says: ‘Several such amateurs have informed me that among arms left in the United States after the Revolution are a number of extra long firelocks which they describe as “British Grenadier Muskets” wedgwood forgeries . I see no reason to doubt the accuracy of this statement, except perhaps spanish revival italian walnut trestle library table . that part of it which links the long musket with Grenadiers; although my informants were knowledgeable collectors of arms, it may be a romantic embellishment 1940s enamel chronographs .
Artillery Guns of the WWII
Running parallel with this unfolding story of piercing projectiles was the development of the hollow-charge principle into a viable weapon. This illustrates the adaptation of a well-documented scientific phenomenon to a weapon of war: almost 200 years ago a Norwegian engineer had observed that hollowing out the face of an explosive charge made it cut deeper into rock when blasting. In the 1880s an American experimenter, Monroe, found that when firing guncotton slabs against armour plate, the initials ‘USN’ engraved in the guncotton reproduced themselves in mirror-like form in the face of the armour plate. From his observations and reports the phenomenon became known as the ‘Monroe Effect’ and was a scientific curiosity for many years. Just before the First World War one or two inventors toyed with the idea of employing this effect in mines and torpedoes, but since no one really understood why it did what it did, it was difficult to engineer the idea into a practical form.
Just before the Second World War broke out, a Swiss consortium approached the British government to offer a ‘new and powerful explosive’ for anti-tank use—at a high price. The inventors refused to divulge any information until cash was forthcoming, but were prepared to demonstrate their projectile being fired. An astute observer from the Research Department of Woolwich Arsenal went to Switzerland to watch the firing; being a well-read expert on ammunition development and history, he realised that what he was watching was not a new and powerful explosive so much as a practical application of the Monroe Effect. Upon his return to Woolwich he duly reported this, and, since it appeared that the Monroe Effect could be made to work, research immediately began into applying it to a light anti-tank grenade which the infantry soldier could fire from his rifle. Before the outbreak of war, this ‘68 Grenade’ had been perfected and was in production, and carries the distinction of being the first weapon ever to reach the hands of troops which relied on the Monroe Effect, or as it came to be known, the Hollow-Charge Principle.
What is this Hollow-Charge Principle? Put simply, it consists of forming the forward surface of the shell’s explosive charge into a cone or hemisphere and then lining this with a thin metal liner. The shell is then fitted with a suitably shaped nose, for ballistic effect and also to give the vital ’stand-off’ distance. This is the distance from the target—a matter of a few inches—at which the explosive must be detonated in order for the hollow charge to work effectively. On detonating the explosive at its rear end, the detonation wave exerts an immense pressure on the metal of the liner; the cone shape virtually’focusses’the explosive energy and causes the metal of the liner to be shaped into a jet of finely-divided metal and explosive gas, shooting toward the target at speeds of up to 20,000 feet per second. The stand-off distance is necessary in order to allow this jet to form and accelerate. When the jet strikes the target plate, the pressure exerted is so great as to blast a hole through the armour, blowing splinters of metal from the inside and permitting the white-hot jet to pass into the tank where it will set fire to fuel or ammunition, and, of course, kill or injure the crew.
The great virtue of the hollow-charge shell is that its performance is always the same, irrespective of the velocity at which it strikes. Even if the shell were standing still when detonated, the penetration would be the same. Because of this, it could be fired from guns too small to fire the large cartridges needed to give the necessary velocity to normal piercing projectiles. As soon as the 68 Grenade was seen to be successful, design began on other hollow-charge projectiles. A great deal of work went into producing one for the 25-pounder, though in the end it was never issued, since the AP shot issued for that gun was quite satisfactory and there was no real need for a hollow-charge shell. Then came a request from India to produce an anti-tank projectile for the 3.7-inch Pack Howitzer, the modern version of Kipling’s immortal ’screw-gun’. This gun, a small and portable weapon, could not be made to fire a piercing projectile at anything like the velocity needed to defeat even Japanese tanks, and a hollow-charge shell was designed and placed in production. The same shell was used in the 95-mm howitzer, an abortive infantry support gun which never saw service as a towed weapon, though it was employed as a self-propelled support weapon by the Royal Marines in Normandy and by the Armoured Corps.
By 1944, though, sufficient basic research had been done into this principle for it to be seen that a spinning shell was not the ideal method of employing hollow charges, since the spin tended to spread the jet out and give poor penetration. Finned projectiles were more effective, and consequently no more artillery shells were designed around the hollow charge; it was extensively employed, instead, for infantry weapons such as the PIAT, the Bazooka, and a variety of rifle grenades.
The Germans, and later the Russians, embraced the hollow-charge shell wholeheartedly. The Germans began issuing shell in late 1940 and eventually almost every German field and tank weapon had a hollow-charge shell, thus giving every gun or howitzer an anti-tank capability. Indeed, so short were the Germans of anti-tank guns after the Russian invasion got under way, that they hastily collected up all the French army’s 75-mm guns and assembled hundreds of them on to redundant anti-tank gun carriages of German design. A hollow-charge shell was produced and these makeshift weapons were deployed in Russia to stem the advancing Soviet tanks until 75-mm and 88-mm anti-tank guns were in sufficient supply. Judging from appearances, the Soviet hollow-charge shells were developed as virtual copies of German designs which had been captured.
In addition to artillery shell Germany also used the principle for infantry weapons such as the Panzerfaust, rifle grenades, and even a small shell which could be fired from a signal pistol. They also employed the principle in an ingenious attempt to prolong the life of the prewar 37-mm anti-tank gun, whose piercing projectile was, by 1942, no longer effective against current tanks. A large hollow-charge bomb was fitted with a hollow tail carrying fins; within this tail was a stick which fitted snugly into the barrel of the 37-mm gun, allowing the tail and fins to slide over the barrel. A blank cartridge completed the outfit, and this was used to fire the stick bomb to ranges of 300 to 400 yards. The bomb’s warhead was about 6 inches in diameter and carried about 8 pounds of explosive, giving a devastating effect at the target. In all fairness, it must be pointed out that Lieutenant-Colonel Blacker, inventor of the PIAT and the `Black Bombard’ of Home Guard fame, had proposed a similar 60-pound stick bomb in 1940, to be fired from the 25-pounder, but the idea was turned down on the grounds that it might lead to misemployment of the gun as a purely anti-tank weapon. (This misemployment theme was not confined to the British side: many German Flak commanders bewailed the loss of their valuable 88-mm Flak guns as they were whittled away to provide anti-tank defences.)
The third subject is the application of new principles to gun design. The first of these to be unveiled was the taper-bore antitank gun, which has already been touched upon. This was the child of a German engineer called Gerlich, who, advocating his principle of attaining high velocity without attracting any buyers, had been stumping the world for several years. He was briefly employed by both the US War Department and the British War Office at various times, but his ideas on improving shoulder arms were felt to be impractical. He eventually settled in Germany and saw his idea accepted as an anti-tank weapon. The 28/21-mm came first, then a 42/30-mm and finally a 75/50-mm. Unfortunately, the lack of tungsten carbide for the special projectiles spelled the demise of these weapons, but experiments continued with coned bores and coned muzzle-adapters for guns of various calibres up to as large as 280-mm, in order to boost velocity and range. These were intended to use high-explosive shells, which were more practical in the larger calibres, though the development of a shell which would stand up to being squeezed down the gun barrel was no easy task.
The second, and more widespread, new line of thought was the recoilless gun. Like most weapon ideas, there was nothing really new about it: Commander Davis of the US Navy had produced a recoilless (RCL for short) gun during the First World War which was adopted by Britain as an anti-Zeppelin aircraft weapon. The virtue of an RCL gun is that by having no recoil one needs no complicated hydraulic buffer system to absorb the firing shock: one need only make the gun-carriage strong enough to take the weight of the gun, instead of being strong enough to withstand being fired from—an ideal state of affairs for an aircraft weapon, particularly in the stick-and-string era. Davis’s idea is worth looking at, although outside our time scale, since it is the classic recoilless weapon. He simply provided the gun with two barrels, one pointing forward which fired a normal shell, and one pointing rearward which fired an identical weight of grease and buckshot. When the central cartridge was fired the shell and countershot departed at equal speed in opposite directions and cancelled each other’s recoil. From this it can be seen that if you make the countershot (say) one-fifth of the weight of the shell and fire it out at five times the speed, then the gun will still be in balance. Taking this idea to its logical conclusion one finishes up firing out of the back of the gun a fast, light stream of gas, still balancing the recoil since the weight times speed of the gas is the same as the (greater) weight times (slower) speed of the shell.
Cutting down the recoil
This was the principle which the Germans revealed in Crete when their troops appeared armed with a 75-mm RCL gun. The shell was the standard 75-mm shell, but the cartridge case had a frangible plastic base which held for long enough to allow pressure to build up and start the shell moving, then blew out through a hole in the breech-block, releasing the balancing stream of gas. The all-up weight of the gun, on its ex-machine gun tripod, was only 320 pounds, whereas the weight of the standard 75-mm field gun was about 11/2 tons—no mean saving for airborne carriage. A 105-mm version soon followed, weighing 855 pounds as opposed to the 105-mm 1E FH18’s 4,312 pounds, and many more developments began in this field to provide light weapons for mountain troops and infantry, particularly for anti-tank use. (It ought perhaps to be pointed out that the Panzerfaust was in fact a recoilless gun, and not, as generally supposed, a rocket launcher). Eventually RCL guns of up to 380-mm calibre were under development, including many for slinging beneath aircraft to carry artillery aloft for the battle against the Allied bombers, but none of these came to fruition.
n Britain, the RCL gun development during the war is a scarcely-known story of one man’s persistence. Sir Denis Burney, airship designer and prolific inventor-engineer, began to be interested in the recoilless principle early in the war. In order to prove his theories he converted a four-bore gun into a recoilless weapon and proceeded to fire it from the shoulder with ease; it must have been the world’s most comfortable duck gun. Having proved his point he proceeded to design a series of RCL guns ranging from 20-mm to 8-inch calibre. In addition to designing the guns, he expanded his theories and designed special ammunition to take advantage of the ballistic peculiarities of the weapon. He argued that since the rearward blast was taking place, the pressure within the gun would be less than with a conventional type, and the shell would be subjected to a more steady thrust. In which case it would be possible to make shells with thinner walls, which would carry greater charges of explosive than previously possible. He then went further, and reasoned that, since the shell walls were thin, if the shell were to be filled with the then new plastic explosive, it would spread on to the surface of the target like butter; a fuse fitted in the base of the shell would then detonate this plaster and blast in the target. His envisaged target was either the concrete emplacements of the European coast, or the palm-reinforced Japanese bunker, and he called his shell the Mal I buster’.
In 1944 his designs were accepted and a 3.45-inch (the same calibre as the 25-pounder) shoulder-fired gun, a 3.7-inch towed gun, a 95-mm towed howitzer, and a 7.2-inch towed howitzer were prepared for production. The 95-mm was also jeep-mounted—the first application of what has since become a standard method of carrying these guns. The 7.2-inch soon fell by the wayside, since it had been intended solely as a means of defeating the Atlantic Wall emplacements, but other weapons were found to do all that was needed. The 3.45-inch was intended as an infantry weapon in the jungle, enabling one man to carry what was virtually a 25-pounder punch on his shoulder. The 3.7-inch was proposed as the future infantry anti-tank weapon, and the 95-mm was contemplated as the airborne field gun to replace the US 75-mm howitzer and the 25-pounder. However, before the guns were produced in sufficient quantity for issue, the war came to an end; some 3.45-inch and 3.7-inch guns were issued to selected infantry units to obtain their reaction to RCL guns as a general thing, and the 95-mm was abandoned altogether.
The principal difference between the Burney guns and the German type was that the Burneys had much longer barrels, and used cartridge cases which, instead of the plastic blow-out base, used many perforations in the sidewall to release the gas into a surrounding chamber, from whence it was passed back to a number of vents around the breech.
Concurrently with Burney’s work in Britain, American designers began on similar weapons. A 105-mm howitzer T-9 was developed on similar lines to the German 105-mm, having a blow-out base to the cartridge. Another team developed 57-mm and 75-mm weapons which used perforated cases similar to the Burney pattern but having more and smaller holes, and also had the shell driving band pre-engraved in order to reduce the pressure inside the gun. Both these latter weapons were accepted for service early in 1945, saw service with the US Army in the Pacific theatre, and remained in service for many years. A third team, this time under the auspices of the National Research and Development Council, developed a 4.2-inch RCL mortar, an unlikely-sounding weapon which so as to be able to fire direct at the target at low angles, carried a small rocket on the nose of the shell to push it down the barrel’and fire the propelling cartridge in the usual mortar fashion. Due to the blast of the rearward jet, it could only be fired at low elevations; there was a certain amount of enthusiasm for this weapon but it never entered service.
Perhaps the best summing up of all wartime development on RCL weapons was made in a wartime report: ‘Undoubtedly a number of effective recoilless weapons have been developed, but they are being accepted with reserve, and will only be considered as supplementary to older and more orthodox weapons which have proved their accuracy and reliability in service.’
There is, unfortunately, no space here to delve into more recondite stories of research and development: the British 13.5-inch gun linered-down to 8-inch calibre which, fired from Dover, reached a range of over 100,000 yards; the British and American development of flying artillery, which culminated in the mounting of a 32-pounder anti-tank gun in a Mosquito; the German V-3 multiple-chamber gun which was intended to shell London; the American 36-inch mortar ‘Little David’, designed to batter Japanese strong-points; the German rocket-assisted and ramjet-assisted heavy artillery shells which promised vast increases in range; or the Anglo-American development of the electronic proximity fuse which proved the answer to both ‘Doodlebugs’ and kamikaze pilots. These and similar stories may only interest the specialist, but they, together with what has been written here, serve to illustrate the incredible range of inventions brought into play in the war waged between the designers and inventors of each side, each endeavouring to get one step ahead of the other, if only temporarily.
