:D

Legendary

A good meme, yet not changing and maintains its humour. Well done.

you are geh and so am i

Well, imagine of the guns were two feminists... they would start with harassment, sexual assault, sexism etc.

Religion and rum went a long way.

That, and endless training and drill that emphasised standing firm, going through the steps to recover, reload, and fire your weapon, and, above all, under no circumstances think for yourself. It's why people like Sir John Moore in Britain had such a hard time convincing their superiors to listen to their crazy ideas that common soldiers should - *gasp!* - use their initiative and act on their own, without an officer or Sergeant bawling orders for every little step in their ear. I recall reading a quote from someone at the time (I forget who) to the effect that, if soldiers were to start thinking for themselves, not a one would stay in the army.

@@neilkorchinski1006 Also sergeants who were more terrifying than the enemy.

@@brucetucker4847 - That's why they carried a pike. Not to fight the enemy with, or defend the flag, but to poke reluctant soldiers in the bum.

Woops, I skipped back a century. Should've read the rest of the thread before responding...

"aS aN eNgInEeR"

"SENTRY'S GOING UP!" oh wait not that engineer

The human body is an amazing machine.

Averages mean some win exceptional odds. Also it much depends on where and how you get shot, eg: if it avoids bone, lung or heart and you're slim, fit and young, and you didn't land in mud or go into shock as a result... And so on, the odds are at least not completely against you.

@@FeedMeMister - I know, but point blank in the back with a .58 Springfield... I'll leave that off my "to do today" list.

Next step will be longer range accuracy.

I hit an 8" gong at 100yd on my 1st outing with a East India Co percussion musket. 50yd groups (when I did my part) were a couple of inches. The gun definitely shoots better than I do, and I was surprised. Glad we have skilled shooters like capandball to show us what these old guns can REALLY do!

Nasty

That would be nice. I would also like to see someone put pork ribs or similar into the gelatine, to see what happens when the ball shatters or breake them. If the ball just makes a hole and continues, or if pieces of bone will spread around inside...

That would add confounding variables so that comparison between data sets would be impossible. It would be interesting from a historical perspective, but useless as a scientific exercise with which to draw conclusions.

@@FeedMeMister Yes, but to see what one bullet CAN do, is the point, not to have data sheets showing the average damage made by 100 bullets. Since the balls are made out of soft lead, I suspect hitting a rib would flatten it more and faster, creating a wider wound channel in the gelatine, than going through soft gelatine all the way. Just my thoughts...

Agreed, way better to see what's going to happen, at the distances they would have actually historically engaged.

@@ToreDL87 With the musket that was really a waste of powder... i fired at least 15 shots to get the two hits at the right spot. :)

Agreed a true comparison

@@capandball Not a waste at all, good data is forever good data.

@@capandball I would have used the hold point off of your first paper target to get a better chance on the gel.It was obviously printing low and to the right of center.You could have drifted the front sight in the direction you needed and held a bit higher(kentucky windage).I had scopes and rear sights get knocked off during hunting and still brought meat home when I seen where the bullets were actually going and compensated.

You are scope dependant. Grouping should be 1 inch with iron sights. No different then with a scope at 50 meters. I don't use a scope. And I've made kills at 300 meters often. Longest I've made a kill was 1800 meters. All without a scope. Longest kill I've made with a musket ( brown bess) was close to 300 meters. Which I've never group shot it.

They’re actually pretty common here in the states, or at least not rare. You can actually buy kits to assemble your own as well.

Anything can happen. :)

The powder charge was different, that makes them not very compareble. He was loading the musket on purpose to it's rated speed (which was higher), and the rifle to it's rated speed (which was lower), hence it did exactly as we'd expect when you load one hotter than the other.

yes, absolutely. at this distance for sure.

@@capandball well, though greatly appreciating this video - and generally your outstanding work - I must disagree with you on this point. The penetration of both bullets was tested against ballistic gelatine, which mimicks human flesh, i.e. naked bodies, but soldiers of the time did not fight naked! On the contrary, as you know well (I think you are a reenactor yourself), soldiers in the Napoleonic Wars donned multiple layers of heavy clothing. First a shirt of heavy hemp or linen (250g/sqm), then a waistcoat of heavy woollen cloth lined with raw thich linen or twill woolen serge, than at least a coat of heavy broadcloth, again lined with linen or wool serge. And in winter, an overcoat of very heavy thich cloth, lined with raw linen canvas. All of these layers of quite thick and heavy fabrics would slowe down and absorbe quite a bit of the impact and penetration power of any bullet, both at the front (entrance wound) and at the back (exit wound), so that even if the bullet did go through one man, it was unlikely to actually possess enough kinetic power to penetrate another man behind him in the same file, as this man was himself heavily clothed. Perhaps the bullet could have made a slight impact on him, but not enough to actually enter the body. Otherwise, volleys of musketry at close range would have utterly swiped out entire units, and we know for sure that this did not happen. The highest estimates from modern sources vary from 10 to 25% casualties from a single volley (at the very best!) at extremely short range - say 25-30 mts., which does not account for even the whole front rank of a three-rank formation to be totally put out of action. And these estimates are probably too high!

That's the theory behind many lead slug cartridges designed for shotguns. So the answer is yes.

Yes, line infantry armed with smoothbore muskets win the battles. Which is exactly why you also need light infantry, including those armed with these early rifles, to harass the enemy's line infantry, preventing them from setting up and deploying at their leisure for that first critical volley. You also need light infantry to harass the enemy light infantry to prevent them from harassing your line infantry. An army with a mix of light and line infantry has an advantage over one with only line, even if the numbers of light infantry are relatively small.

I know of one time where accuracy beat fire volume: During the Texan Revolution, the accuracy and tactics of the Texan riflemen broke a contingent of Santa Anna's army at the battle of Concepción. It was 98 Texans vs 300+ Mexicans and a few cannons. It did help that the Mexicans were issued poor quality powder, however. Anyway, just a tidbit of history I'd thought to share. I have always wondered how civil war era tactics and equipment would compare against armies of the older Napoleonic era.

@@MrFirmbottom Yes I am sure that it has happen and more that once in history. Indeed its one of goals of every military, "One shot One Kill." However, increased rate of fire has also been a major object of every Military, and the course of small arms weapons development. Also the 18i6 Flintlock was still issued out in the opening days of the Civil war.

When Lewis and Clark began their expedition, they took both, with the explanation that while the rifle was great for long range shooting, the smooth bore was just as efficient and perhaps better in the heavy wooded areas. It is similar to having both rifles and shotguns, since the smoothbore can handle buck and ball loads.

And yes I know that they took and air rifle as well.

According to our national laws each old firearm has to be checked before shooting in our CIP proof house. Cleaning the bore was not the primary question. The fouling of the lock, touch hole and the wearing edge of the flint were the main reasons if the gun would not go off. The bullets were so smaller than the bore (15,9 mm ball in a 17,5 mm bore) that even a heavily fouled barrel could be loaded.

:D That's the Wiener schnitzel :) Jäger schnitzel is different :D