Monday, March 22, 2021

Range Report 3/21/21 Snider Enfield

I took the Snider to the range and fired 40 rounds.  Most of it was shot to use up the old cartridges with Pyrodex powder in them that I made before I got the good stuff so I can reload them with Swiss powder now that it has arrived, but I did shoot ten rounds with the Swiss.  The Pyrodex cartridges were made with 63.7 grains of "P" (3F equivalent) powder, and the Swiss with 70 grains of 1.5F.

Honestly, I couldn't really tell any difference between the two powders.  I know there is a difference, but given the wind conditions, today's results weren't precise enough to tell me much.  One thing I did notice is that Swiss powder smells very different from Pyrodex--more like burnt wood.

Regardless of load, all of the cartridges were made in the same way, with .600 X-Ring Services bullets I cast myself in fire-formed brass cartridges from X-Ring.  The process I used can be found here.

I shot four tables of fire, but the Snider was popular with the other people at the range that day, so only two of the tables were just me--the others were mixed with other shooters trying the rifle, so I won't record them here.

The weather was clear and sunny.  Temperature: 53 degrees.  Wind: heavy from 12:00.  The range was 100 yards.  I used a 6:00 hold and a half-sight picture from a sitting unsupported firing position.

The wind was a serious factor.  Although it mostly blew from 12:00, there were gusts at various angles, and this certainly had an effect on these big, fat, slow bullets.  Worse, the wind was heavy enough that it caused my target stands to move about significantly, which probably had more effect on the results than the effect caused by the wind moving the bullets; if the target moves after you fire, the impact will be off no matter how perfect your aim.  Although the results below suggest that the Pyrodex cartridges were more accurate than the Swiss ones, the effect of the wind was such that I don't think any such comparison is fair.

I am also coming to believe that I need to re-crown my muzzle; there are some nicks in it, and I have been told this can severely affect accuracy.  I also need to do a much more careful examination of the bore to see if it really is as crisp as I think it is and whether a good gunsmith can improve it.

Regardless (and notwithstanding my excuses), I am pleased overall.  First, it's thrilling to fire a rifle that's more than 150 years old, however well it shoots.  Second, I only missed the target (which is 18x24 inches, or about the size of a man's torso) three times out of all the shots I made, and only once in the two tables of fire recorded here.  No, I wasn't getting minute-of-angle results (not even close), but then this is a military rather than a target rifle, and hitting the chest is good enough.  I will be reloading with some different loads to determine the most accurate load for this rifle, but ultimately I plan to shoot 70 grains most of the time since that was the military load, and replicating that is more important to me than target shooting.

Table One:  70 grs. Swiss 1.5F.
Figure of Merit:  6.07
Group Size:        25.65"

Table Four:  63.7 grs. Pyrodex "P"
Figure of Merit:    5.41
Group Size:          13.87"

For information about the Figure of Merit, its use in historical shooting, and how to calculate it, see here.

Table One

Table Four

Thursday, March 11, 2021

Using Sight Picture to Adjust Bullet Impact

It is not enough to simply align the sights of a rifle on the target and expect to get a hit, especially with black-powder ammunition, which was both slower than modern ammunition and more susceptible to the wind.  In this essay we will consider ways to use the sights of Nineteenth-century military rifles in order to ensure consistent, accurate shooting at various ranges and in varying wind conditions.

Elevation

Most British military rifles of the Nineteenth Century had rear sights which were adjustable in 100-yard increments from 100 to 900-plus yards and were zeroed to hit a target three feet above the ground at the set range.  Soldiers were taught to carefully estimate the range to the target and then to set their sights to be able to correctly engage targets at the estimated range.

This was crucially important because of the rainbow-like trajectory of black-powder ammunition.  For example, when firing the Snider-Enfield rifle at 300 yards using the 300-yard sight setting the bullet trajectory had a maximum height of seven feet above the ground; the bullet would hit a man-sized target in the head at 220 yards and the feet at 355 yards.  Thus, when aiming at a target's waist using the 300-yard setting on the rear sight, the "danger zone" in which an infantryman would be hit somewhere between the head and feet was only 135 yards in width, so the shooter had to estimate the distance to within 135 yards of the actual distance.  The farther the target, the smaller the danger zone, and at 600 yards, for example, the danger zone was only 30 yards wide and the maximum height of the bullet's trajectory would be 23 feet above the ground.  For more about the characteristics of the Snider rifle, see here.  For a comparison of the ballistics of the Snider-Enfield rifle to the Martini-Henry rifle, see here.

Each individual rifle was somewhat different, of course, and so a shooter had to know his own piece and whether it shot somewhat above or below that standard.  Moreover, if the estimated range fell between the round numbers for which the sights were set (at, for example, 225 yards, or 350 yards), it was helpful to be able to adjust one's point of aim in order to try to get in the middle of the danger zone in order to make for the highest likelihood of a hit.  Soldiers were taught to place the front sight post halfway between the bottom of the notch and the top edge of the rear sight during normal shooting; this was called "half-sight" (see the picture below).
Half-sight picture from the 1870 Musketry Instructions, p. 35.

In addition, the very tip of the front sight could be aligned with the bottom of the notch for "fine sight" or the front sight could be aligned with the top edge of the rear sight for "full sight."  Shooters today are all taught to use "full sight," however, as this shows, that was not the case in the Nineteenth Century.

The 1870 Musketry Manual tells us:  "As the two methods of aiming first named cause a slight difference in the angle of elevation, it is necessary the recruit should understand that the ordinary rules for aiming are intended to apply to the half-sight, and that as some of the rifle may carry high and others low, allowance must be made for such defects, by aiming with fine-sight when the rifle carries high, and with full-sight when it carries low." (id.).

In addition, the shooter can also select a slightly higher or lower point of aim to change the point of impact.  There are three choices here, a "six-o'clock hold," a "center hold," or a "twelve-o'clock hold," which represent respectively aiming below the center of the target, at the center of the target, or above the center of the target.  While this is often thought of as applying strictly to target shooting, it can apply in a military context, too.  Soldiers were taught to shoot at the belt line on opposing infantry, however, the shooter could hold at his target's knee line for a six o'clock hold or shoulder line for a twelve o'clock hold.

Thus, there are a total of nine different sight pictures which the soldier can take in order to adjust his aim to allow for "in between" ranges in a consistent, repeatable manner.  Those nine sight pictures are represented in the diagrams below.  Note that in these illustrations the half-sight is called "medium."  Unfortunately, these sight pictures are matters of estimation and will vary from rifle to rifle, so the shooter has to practice using them in order to be able to judge just how much effect each of the different sight pictures will produce with his particular rifle and ammunition.

Windage

With regard to windage, most of the musketry manuals are not very precise, and the sights on military rifles of the period did not have any mechanical means of adjusting for windage.  Retuning to the 1870 Musketry Manual, we are told:
"As no fixed rule can be laid down to guide the soldier he must acquire experience as to the amount of allowance he should make for wind, in carrying his rifle to the side from which it is blowing, or in giving his rifle a little more or less elevation, but always taking into consideration two things, the strength of the wind and the distance of the object at which he is firing, since on the latter will depend the length of time the wind will have to act. He should also watch the effect of his shot, and make more or less allowance as he finds necessary; and he should bear in mind, that the effect of a wind from the front or rear is much less than that of a side wind which acts on a larger surface of the bullet." (p. 37).

Other sources, however, address the question in more detail.  In The Rifle Shot's Manual of Target Shooting, the anonymous author ("A. Shooting Man") gives detailed information about how wind of varying strengths and blowing from different directions affects the path of a bullet (see pp. 83-85).  He then goes on to say that the slider on the rear sight assembly can be removed and replaced upside down so that the straight edge  of the bottom of the slider is used rather than the V notch in normal use, and suggests placing marks on this to align with the front sight post (which would make most of the sight picture choices above impossible) to allow for windage.
"In allowing for winds there is a marked advantage in using the flat bar of the slider of the backsight as a wind-gauge, as it must be evident to every one that better shooting can be secured when aiming dead on or near the bull's-eye, than when aiming quite away from it; but, in order to meet the views of those who prefer the V to the straight bar, the allowance will be quoted for both systems." (Anonymous, The Rifle Shot's Manual of Target Shooting. London:  William Clowes and Sons, 1876. p. 90).

The flat bar of the rear sight used to allow for windage.  The small point above the line is the front sight, the horizontal line is the edge of the slider, and the vertical line in the middle of the slider is a mark made by the shooter. This picture represents the sight picture for a "light" wind from the left. p. 93.

The author then goes on to say that the front sight post should be aligned with the target and the rifle moved so that the penciled center line was off from the front sight post, as in the picture above, by an amount which, in the shooter's estimation, would allow for the wind.  He says that for a light wind, the sight should be over a spot one-third of the way from the center line to the edge; for a medium wind it should be halfway between the center line and the edge, and for a heavy wind it should be two-thirds of the way from the center line.  Obviously, these are vey imprecise guides and would have to be determined by experimentation.

The 1879 Musketry Manual for the Martini-Henry Rifle has a supplementary section on "practice" shooting ("Part VI").  In it, this same idea of switching the slider on the rear sight leaf is described, although no specifics of its use are given:  "192. When firing with the leaf of the backsight raised the soldier may use either the notch or the level edge slide, which will be reversed by the armourer as necessary." (p. 250).  It says in an earlier paragraph that marks may be made on the sight if desired:  "188. Temporary marks on the slide with pencil or any substance that can be easily effaced may be permitted." (id.).  It is not clear, however, how often troops actually used this technique, either in practice or in battle.

The Rifle Shot's Manual also shows how to adjust for wind when using the V notch side of the sight.  He says to align the center of the front sight post with the right or left edge of the V notch (depending upon wind direction) with the shoulder of the front sigh post aligned with the center of the V notch, as in the figure below.  The shooter can then align the shoulder of the front sight post with the center, right, or left of his target to increase the windage even more; in the picture below, we see a six-o'clock hold (of the edge of the front sigh post, not the point) on the far left of the target.  To use this in combat, the shooter could align the shoulder of his sight on either side of his enemy's body rather than in the middle.  This seems a more practical approach to allowing for the wind since it does not require disassembly of the rear sight.  Obviously, this approach can be used with the nine sight pictures shown above.
Using the V notch of the rear sight to allow for wind.  Rifle Shot's Manual p. 40.

The rear sight of my Mark IV Martini Henry.  It is extremely hard to see, however, there are very light lines scored down the center of the slider as well as halfway to the edge on either side of the center.  It seems likely that these marks were used for windage sighting as discussed above.


Conclusion

It is becoming fashionable among modern authors to discount early black-powder rifles for the simple reason that soldiers in the American Civil War were incapable of using rifled muskets to their full potential, which led to battles in that war being fought at ranges similar to those seen in earlier wars fought with smooth-bore muskets.  In fact, however, when rifles were used by troops carefully and thoroughly trained in their use they were capable of stunning feats of long-range accuracy, as the 93rd Highlanders of the famous "thin red line" (actually, it was the "thin red smear tipped with steel") proved against the Russian cavalry at Balaclava.  Doing so, however, required soldiers to be well trained in both the principles of ballistics and the mechanical aspects of their weapons, and the School of Musketry at Hythe gave British soldiers training in both.  In this brief essay we have examined some of the techniques for using the sights of Nineteenth-century military rifles to achieve long-range accuracy.  This is not the whole of musketry, but only an analysis of how to us the sights for consistent and accurate shooting taking into account wind and elevation.

Monday, March 8, 2021

More About the Characteristics of the Martini-Henry Rifle


General Viscount Wolseley, writing about the Martini-Henry rifle, said: “All are armed with the M. H. rifle [Martini-Henry], which is issued of 2 sizes, “Long butts” and “Short butts,” 49 ½” and 49” in length respectively without bayonet; when bayonets or sword bayonets are fixed those lengths are 71 ½” and 71”. The wts. without bayonet are 8 lbs. 12 oz., 8 lbs. 10 ½ oz., and 8 lbs. 8 oz.; with bayonet or sword bayonet those wts. are 9 lbs. 11 ½ oz., 9 lbs. 10 oz., and 9 lbs. 7 ½ oz. Wt. of bayonet or sword bayonet 15 ½ oz. and the scabbard 7 ½ oz. The Henry barrel is 33” in length, the diameter of bore is 0.45”; it has 7 grooves. The powder charge is 85 grs. R.F.G.² powder; wt. of bullet 480 grs., and it is 1.27” long. The cartridge is 3.15” long; wt. of bundle of 10, 17 oz. [on page 109 he says 18 oz.]; 12 aimed or 25 un-aimed rds. can be fired from it per minute, and it may be assumed, taking our men all round, 8 rounds per minute is a fair average at fixed target; The rifle is sighted up to 1450 yards, but it shoots well up to over 300 yds. Its muzzle velocity is about 1353 [f.p.s]. The bullet has a penetration 12” or 13” into loose soil. The M. H. bullet goes 500 yds. in 1.46 seconds.” (Wolseley 1886 p. 26.)

Regarding the powder, Wolseley says: “[The powder] used for the M.H. rifle is known as R.F.G.²; its density is somewhat greater than that used for other rifled small arms, which is known as R.F.G. (Rifle Fine Grain)” (id. p. 107).  According to Brett Gibbons of Paper Cartridges dot com, R.F.G. powder was made from Dogwood charcoal and had a mesh of 16-20 squares/inch at first, then was changed to 12-20 mesh for the Martini Henry whereafter it was termed R.F.G.² (see: https://youtu.be/-yjepTZ-lH4?t=769).  For comparison, according to the company web site, Swiss brand 2F powder is 14-19 mesh, and the 1.5F is 14-26 mesh, so either granulation is a reasonable match, a fact confirmed by the muzzle velocities achieved during Captain Gibbons’ testing of his P-53 “Pritchett” cartridges using Swiss powder (see above video at 22:39).

For the ballistics of the Martini-Henry, see my previous blog post comparing it to the Snider-Enfield rifle here.

Source:  Wolseley, Garnet J. The Soldier’s Pocket Book for Field Service. London: MacMillan and Co. 1886.

Sunday, March 7, 2021

Comparing the Trajectories of the Snider-Enfield and Martini-Henry Rifles

Military shooting is quite different from target shooting in several ways.  Precise targeting is less important to the soldier than to the target shooter; any hit on an enemy soldier is likely to incapacitate the enemy, and that is usually good enough.  Moreover, the soldier rarely has as much time to aim carefully for a perfect shot.  Thus, musketry manuals of the Nineteenth Century were focused on teaching soldiers to hit somewhere on an enemy as quickly as possible.

In order to make such hits it was important to understand the trajectory of the bullet being fired so that a soldier could adjust his aim properly.  In this discussion, we will examine and compare the trajectories of the Snider-Enfield and Martini-Henry rifles based upon information taken from the 1870 and 1879 Musketry Manuals respectively.

The Snider-Enfield Rifle

Distance

Greatest height

First Catch

 

Margin for

 

First

 

of trajectory

Cavalry

Infantry

Cavalry

Infantry

graze

yards

feet

yards

yards

yards

yards

yards

100

4 '6"

Thro'

Thro'

Thro'

Thro'

180

200

5'

Thro'

Thro'

Thro'

Thro'

280

300

7'

Thro'

220

Thro'

135

355

400

11'

300

350

140

90

440

500

15'

420

465

100

55

520

600

23'

570

585

45

30

615

700

32'

670

685

40

25

710

800

44'

780

790

30

20

810

The Martini Henry Rifle

Distance

Greatest height

First Catch

Margin for

First

 

of trajectory

Cavalry

Infantry

Cavalry

Infantry

graze

yards

feet

yards

yards

yards

yards

yards

100

4'6"

Thro'

Thro'

Thro'

Thro'

205

200

5'

Thro'

Thro'

Thro'

Thro'

285

300

6'9"

Thro'

205

Thro'

155

360

400

8'9"

285

345

165

105

450

500

12'

410

455

130

85

540

600

16'6"

530

565

100

65

630

700

20'9"

645

670

80

55

725

800

26'9"

750

775

70

45

820

Remarks

The calculated height for cavalry forces is 8 1/2 feet, that for the infantry is 6 feet.

The rifle is 4 1/2 feet above the ground at distances to 300 yards; beyond that distance, 3 feet above the ground; the reason for this difference is that at ranges up to 300 yards the soldier was taught to fire from a standing position, while at longer ranges he was taught to fire from a kneeling position.  The object hit 3 feet above the ground at each distance.

N.B.: The first catch and first graze are given in divisions of 5 yards to assist the memory, hence are only approximations.                                                      

Definitions

Distance is the setting on the rifle's rear sight.

First Catch is the first distance at which a round will hit either a cavalry or infantry soldier in the head at that sight setting.

First Graze is the distance at which a round will hit a soldier's feet at that sight setting.

Margin is the distance between "First Catch" and "Graze" at that sight setting.

Point Blank is the point at which the bullet's trajectory crosses the line of sight for any given sight setting; also known as "far zero" today. 


Looking at the diagram above, the first soldier (far left) represents the “First Catch” range; the middle soldier represents the “Point Blank” for that sight setting, being three feet above the ground; and the third soldier (far right) represents the “First Graze.”  The Margin is the distance from the first soldier to the third.

Now we can compare the two weapons:  If we set the sights on our rifles to 300 yards, then in the picture above the First Catch for the Snider is at 220 yards and the First Graze is at 355 yards, with a Margin of 135 yards.  The maximum height of the bullet’s trajectory would be 7 feet.

For that same 300-yard sight setting on the Martini-Henry, the First Catch would be 205 yards, and the First Graze would be 360 yards, with a Margin of 155 yards (20 yards wider than the Snider). The maximum height of the bullet’s trajectory would be 6 feet 9 inches, showing a trajectory that is just slightly (3 inches) flatter than that of the Snider.

If we set the sights on our rifles to 600 yards, then in the picture above the First Catch for the Snider is at 585 yards and the First Graze is at 615 yards, with a Margin of only 30 yards.  The maximum height of the bullet’s trajectory would be 23 feet.

For that same 600-yard sight setting on the Martini-Henry, the First Catch would be 565 yards, and the First Graze would be 615 yards, with a Margin of 65 yards—more than double that of the Snider. The maximum height of the bullet’s trajectory would be 16 feet 6 inches, showing a trajectory that is significantly (6 feet 6 inches) flatter.

The Margin is particularly significant in these figures because it represents the width over which a shot fired at a man would hit an enemy soldier somewhere for each given sight setting.  The wider the Margin, the more likely a shot is to hit, and for the Martini-Henry, the Margin is slightly wider at every sight setting, reflecting the flatter trajectory of the round.

Neither manual specified which specific mark of ammunition was being referenced, and the ammunition for both rifles varied somewhat from mark to mark which could change these figures.

 

Range Report 04May2024: Comparing Colt and Remington New Model Army Revolvers

  Today's shooting conditions. Today’s range session was supposed to be dedicated to doing some ballistic testing of a handful of recrea...