Earliest possible developments of the Musket/Rifle??

[Orry]

Assuming Major Patrick Ferguson survives the Battle of Kings Mountain and the rest of the war what improvements might he have been able to make to his breech loading rifle design??


Minié ball - Does this have significant precursors or was it something that could have been developed easily at an earlier date??? It would speed up firing slightly - increase range and accuracy as the Minié ball expands to fill the barrel.


Mercury fulminate - developed in 1800 - used to fire muskets in 1820. More reliable than flint and powder and less effected by rain.


integrated cartridge - Around abut 1808.


Given optimum development how early could these inventions have all been made and brought together in a non ASB fashion? In time for the Peninsular?? for the 100 days??

Not to equip a whole army but for example to be used instead of the Baker Rifle - that sort of percentage distribution. )And yes - logistics would be an issue as nobody else uses anything similar)

ROF is likely to be 10 rounds a minute. Able to be loaded and fired from all positions including prone. Accurate and effective range likely to be something like the the Snider Pattern 1853 conversion.

 

[RodentRevolution]

The Ferguson Ordinance Rifle is a wonderful gun but its big issue was none of the above but the awkward fact that the area around the lock was considerably weakened by the introduction of the screw breach and thus had a tendency to break...a lot. Really Ferguson needs to copy someone else's early efforts at a metal receiver and a two piece wooden stock.

As you can see from the image there is a lot going on a that poor breach.

The Minié ball might do wonders for long range accuracy and equally likely boost stopping power but it won't do much for the rate of fire as when loading the Ferguson you put the bullet in and seat it first. Further but you might need a redesign of the weapon to cope with the much heavier ball. The original 0.615 carbine ball was some 350 grains while a Minié of similar calibre is going to be pushing past 500 grains and so there will likely be more pressure on the chamber and barrel. The Minié round was a development of the efforts of the efforts of John Norton who himself was inspired by the blow dart of all things so the inspiration is out there.

Mercury Fulminate requires an engineer more willing to share to beat Reverend Forsyth to realising the stuff could be a suitable ignition for firearms.

Integrated cartridge means the end of the Ferguson system which is a dead end in that regard. The issue would be the engineering practices required to produce a satisfactory bolt or falling block mechanism and that took a while. A trap door and metallic cartridge of brass or copper might work but will be expensive and again producing reliable metal cartridges was something of an engineering bottle neck and expensive.

Rate of Fire for a Ferguson type system is probably only about six rounds a minute as a reliable max but Ferguson himself was really interested in being able to get off three well aimed rounds a minute so did not mind much. The latter breech systems offered faster rates in part because power and ball were loaded in one motion (and later on cap too) thanks to the integrated cartridge.

The thing is that even if all he could was improve the weapon enough to get it adopted then Major Ferguson would make a dramatic impact to the efficiency of British rifle troops. One rather easy improvement might well be the adoption of Ezkiel Baker's slower turn rifling which might aid things by reducing the fouling of the bore.

If issued as per the intended practice to rifle troops then the effect on Army logistics would have been minimal (prior to the introduction of fancy ammunition) as it used the standard carbine ball. Ferguson needed to use refined powder that was not the norm (except of course for other rifle users) at the time of his service but over the twenty or so years between his death and the introduction of the Infantry Rifle (Baker) the ability to produce high quality powder steadily improved which would further ease logistic constraints.

 

[Orry]

Yes - the basic Ferguson needs a good deal of improvement - which is why I think you would need a POD where he survives. Given he was 36 at the time of his death in OTL as an Officer class he might be expected to have another 20-30 years of productive development before he dies say in 1812 leading a brigade/division in spain.

If this was to work there would have to be collaberation with others

Somebody needs to think of some sort of lever system for loading maybe????

If he lives longer could he work with Baker on this????

 

[yulzari]

The Ferguson was not soldier proof. The wood around the breech hole is so thin that they mostly cracked and broke. The robust Baker Infantry Rifle was a better service weapon even though muzzle loading. Strong and relatively free from fouling and accurate to 200 yards (300 in modern testing) with a tight patched ball and as fast as a musket to load with issue carbine cartridges. Certainly less accurate than a sporting rifle of the day but it would keep on giving you that lesser accuracy round after round, year after year in continuous active wet service with all the abuse that soldiers give (and continue to give) their weapons as walking sticks, hammers, levers.The main advantage in use of the Ferguson was the ease of loading prone. As a sporting gun or in careful use by a few specialist troops it worked but they languished in stores whilst strong German and British made copy German standard rifle were issued in quantity.

One key to the rifle musket was the percussion cap. The other, 'Minie' bullet, covers a lot of ground and is usually misnamed. The USA Union forces used the Burton ball which was a thin walled hollow base bullet with grease grooves which had to be removed from the cartridge paper and loaded separately. The British and Confederate forces used a plain small hollow plugged base that was greased outside on the paper and the bullet loaded inside the cartridge paper and misnamed Pritchett. Neat, fast and clean firing.

You can fire either type from a rifle flintlock if you wish but the telling point is the huge numbers of flintlocks converted to percussion in all government's services and they thought the money well spent. What the percussion cap brought was a reliability and ease of priming and within less than 50 years brought us to the integral breech loaded cartridge we use today.

This coincided with a perceived need. Rifles had been specialist weapons and by the end of the Ferguson's war the Loyalist armies probably were deploying more rifles than the rebel ones but it was the French who first decided that they had a specific need for a general issue of rifles. In Algeria they found themselves out ranges by local muskets and rifles employing heavier charges with more accuracy than the issue muskets so they had to drag around artillery to compete on the battlefield and this was hugely restricting the ground they could control. Hence French officers experimented with assorted ideas to allow a rifle to be loaded as easily as the musket. It was a whole series of steps that led to the classic rifle musket and it's one piece (less priming cap) ammunition. They all sought to allow a bullet (initially spherical) smaller than the bore to be dropped easily down the barrel but to expand into the rifling. Firstly by holding it on a ring or a post and banging it into the rifling by hitting it with the ram rod. Then assorted ways were found to let the pressure of firing expand the bullet. Much description is given of the gas expanding a hollow base but the real work is done by the softness of the lead with causes the bottom to begin to sharply move upon firing whilst the top has yet to accelerate so the bullet squashed itself into the rifling. M. Minie's contribution was an iron cap fitted in the base which ultimately proved unsuccessful.

What Ferguson did was to make a sporting rifle that could be breech loaded prone. There are other similar concepts that have been employed since shoulder guns were first made with a variety of levers and screws, even flintlock revolver rifles in the 16th century. What Ferguson did was to make some excellent subtle tweaks that made the system more workable but the rifle still was delicate. A better Ferguson rifle would be quite feasible but would not be a route to a rifle musket as we understand it. It was the development of the percussion cap and the self expanding bullets that were the real keys and there is no sign that Ferguson ever thought about such revolutionary advances.

If one can get the percussion cap invented in the latter 18th century then the Ferguson system is a dead end. I have an 1874 Westley Richards Monkey Tail carbine (whose design dates from the mid 1850's)which fires a breech loaded paper cartridge. There is nothing of it that is beyond the capacity of a good gun maker of Ferguson's day and the cartridge is made by hand from paper and felt with a flat based bullet. Popular with Boers and Portuguese Forces and able to be used also as a muzzle loader if necessary. One could skip the entire rifle musket stage and equip the entire army with breech loading rifles.

Except: in Fergusons day there were only a few gun makers able to rifle barrels properly and even the limited production Baker Infantry rifle needed to have the rifling task shared amongst the few who could do it. British and German makers simply did not have the skills and staff to make rifles in anything approaching the numbers of muskets they made IOTL and they even then struggled to make the muskets in sufficient quantity. Never mind the huge increase in cost of a carefully fitted rifled and sighted arm compared to the simple musket. It simply could not be done. It was not until more 50 years after Ferguson that industry had advanced enough to think of taking on such a task. In Fergusons day gun makers were craft workshops which needed highly skilled and experienced workers who were limited in number. By the rifle musket's heyday the tasks had been broken down and mechanised such that semi skilled staff could be employed with limited training. In addition there is the cost of training normal troops to use the sights and look after the beast. Some have argued that, in the major battles of the US Civil War, the troops might have been better off with simple fast firing muskets at the ranges used in combat since most soldiers were inexperienced and barely trained more than to load and fire their weapons.

So, to address the OP directly. Had Major Ferguson survived he might have altered his design into a 'soldier proof' weapon and brought such influence as he could to bear on raising the profile of rifles in service. However, the rifle as such was already being deployed more widely in British service at the same time as Colonel Washington was seeking to replace rifles with muskets. This Improved Ferguson rifle with strengthened stock would enhance the performance of users but it could only be bought, made and issued to a limited number of specialised troops however well it might be received. Simply due to the industrial capacity of the time.

I see no sign of him developing some sort of percussion cap or expanding undersized bullet though one could always AH him into a true genius and have him invent whatever one likes but the OTL man sought to make a better rifle of his time and got much of the way there before his early demise.

 

[Orry]

So, to address the OP directly. Had Major Ferguson survived he might have altered his design into a 'soldier proof' weapon and brought such influence as he could to bear on raising the profile of rifles in service. However, the rifle as such was already being deployed more widely in British service at the same time as Colonel Washington was seeking to replace rifles with muskets. This Improved Ferguson rifle with strengthened stock would enhance the performance of users but it could only be bought, made and issued to a limited number of specialised troops however well it might be received. Simply due to the industrial capacity of the time.

I see no sign of him developing some sort of percussion cap or expanding undersized bullet though one could always AH him into a true genius and have him invent whatever one likes but the OTL man sought to make a better rifle of his time and got much of the way there before his early demise.

I am looking for a non-ASB way to have a workable breech loader rifle in place of the Baker Rifle - so the shortage of gun smith is not a problem. If they can make X number of Baker Rifles a year they can make X number of Ferguson-Bakers a year. It does need to be soldier proof in the hands of experience men.

Baker was only 22 when Ferguson died - so there is the possibility of collaboration in a TL where he survives.

Yes the Ferguson is a bit of a blind alley in terms of weapons development but throw in another 15-20 years especially if collaborating with Baker and you might get something useful.

I am not thinking of one man doing it all - but one motivated man encountering and working with others. As the Second son and later Brother of a wealthy landed family it is likely that he would have had the funds to finance such work

According to Wiki

The discovery of fulminates was made by Edward Charles Howard (1774–1816) in 1800. The invention that made the percussion cap possible using the recently discovered fulminates was patented by the Rev. Alexander John Forsyth of Belhelvie, Aberdeenshire, Scotland in 1807

Unfortunately Howard was only 26 when he made his discovery in 1800 so it is a little hard to get him to do so much earlier - and Rev Forsyth needs that discovery as the basis for his patent.

Given Howard seems to have been a bit of a genius I am not sure how much earlier his discoveries could have been made without it being ASB - and if Howard is born much earlier he would be the first son and so probably not gone into that field....

His brother was born in 1765 - so if he had been born in 1767 then in the same timescale he could have made his discovery in 1793

Since it was duck hunting with a flintlock rifle that got him into thinking of the percussion cap concept it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that he might have heard of Ferguson even if he had not owned one of his rifles especially if Ferguson has continued his developments. Thus he might work with the Ferguson-Baker team getting one of the first weapons to try out....

By the time the 95th goes to the Peninsular in 1808 they might have a decent breech loading weapon using a paper and felt cartridge with a round that expands into the rifling and fired using a percussion system........

Is that totally ASB or would it just about pass for pre-1900???

 

[yulzari]

The Rifle Regiments could have breech loaders if all the stars line up ideally by 1808 but not the British Army generally. One advantage of a working breech loader with Westley Richards or similar type cartridges is that they do not need an expanding bullet. One just about or slightly over groove size will do the job and be slightly squeezed down. In fact my Monkey Tail bullets only enter the rifling with a narrow band at the rear of the bullet with the major part barely entering the rifling at all. Flat based modern 'bullet' shaped. They will now be able to engage at many hundreds of yards albeit with larger targets at the greater distances. French field artillery will be well within their range and enough use of the AH 'Ferguson Cartridge Breech Loader' will curtail the French practice of aggressive placement of field artillery well forward in the open. Cavalry will also have to be placed further back to escape the rifle fire.

I think that the arms industry/craft of the day would have been incapable of organising itself to achieve much more production than the Baker IOTL. Remeber that even with the war at it's height home based Yeomanry Regiments were continually complaining that they had insufficient carbines for their troopers and fudged togther brown Bess carbines to no fixed pattern were having to be cobbled together from parts to make some inroads into the demand.

What we would need is a decision to form a unitary state factory to supply the army with small arms using the concepts of Marc Brunel for Royal Navy block making and de skilling the task of making pattern small arms. It would not be beyond their wit to reduce patterns to one pistol, one musket, one carbine and one rifle. They had already reduced paper cartridges to one pistol size, one carbine/rifle size and one musket size. That would be in the first ten years of the 19th century. Perhaps trialled as a Royal Rifle Factory first of all?

These would still be hand fitted, but so were all virtually all the Enfield Rifle Muskets used by both sides in the US Civil War. I have a Snider made from 4 originally Pattern 53/58 guns and no parts match any other and all had to be hand fitted to make the whole Snider.

 

[Orry]

I am not looking to mass produce

Enough to replace the Baker Rifle which does not get made

Any slight over production to be given to Marines fighting from the rigging.

I want to avoid it being ruled ASB if I write something here


PS I just noticed that6 both Forysth and Furguson were from Aberdeanshire,

With the Ferguson's being landed gentry it is very likely that Forsyth would have been aware of them

 

[Dave Howery]

when you look at the development of firearms, a lot of the improvements seem to require the invention of certain other things first... better machine tools, better chemicals, etc. To me, it seems like there are only two things that could have been invented a lot earlier than they were... the flintlock and the minie ball. Especially the latter, that is one rather simple idea that just no one thought of for a long time..

 

[Orry]

when you look at the development of firearms, a lot of the improvements seem to require the invention of certain other things first... better machine tools, better chemicals, etc. To me, it seems like there are only two things that could have been invented a lot earlier than they were... the flintlock and the minie ball. Especially the latter, that is one rather simple idea that just no one thought of for a long time..

I am looking at having the guy who discovered Fulminates be born 7 years earlier..... not that ASB I think - born 2 years after his older brother rather than 9 years. After all his Sister was born around then - so a simple switch of the birth order?? The guy seems to have been a genius so I see no reason why he might not have still made his discovery at the same age (22)

Edward Charles Howard

Then the guy who's work led to the development of a fulminate firing system 7 years after that make contact with Ferguson (who survives the American Rebellion) and is a sion of a landed family from the same area he is from.

So instead of 1807 - you have the sent bottle lock around 1798 - Then get Manton involved to help develop it further as he did in OTL.


The survival of Ferguson being the driving force gathering the poeople and ideas together and having the political clout and money to make it happen.

 

[Saphroneth]

You can actually use a minie-type bullet with a smoothbore. It's called the spitzer, and the Russians had it in the Crimea.

 

[RodentRevolution]

You can actually use a minie-type bullet with a smoothbore. It's called the spitzer, and the Russians had it in the Crimea.

Don't you mean the "Nessler" ball?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nessler_ball
Sorry having to link to wikipedia as cannot find a good site (as opposed to a 'buy me' book via google at short notice).

 

[WillieB]

Why not look at developing the Girandoni Rifle?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...i_Air_Rifle.jpg/300px-Girandoni_Air_Rifle.jpg

Otoh if you really want to go the traditional black powder way I feel that the slightly later (compared to the La Chaumette/ Ferguson offerings) Hall Rifle offers a better starting position.

 

[Saphroneth]

Whoops, yes, the Nessler is the one! I keep making that mistake...

 

[yulzari]

I experimented with the Nessler. I found the spherical ball to be more accurate out to 200 metres then the Nessler held the advantage. I postulate that the Nessler is less accurate inherently but copes better with the transonic change. For the trajectory of the musket and the need for incredible amounts of holdover at long ranges the need for extra long rear sights and the vital need to have the range found very accurately I concluded that the British and US armies were wise to avoid it's use.

Given that the Whitworth rifling was a crib of the younger Brunels polygonal rifling maybe one could fit the elder Brunel into the mix?

Not my thread but the more I think about it the Westley Richards would be quite viable in Baker rifle quantities, albeit at twice the price, as the Baker Rifle successor or alternative. Perhaps a triumvirate of Patrick Ferguson as the man of influence and service experience, Ezekiel Baker as the mechanic (in the period sense) and Sir Marc Brunel as the innovator?

The younger Brunel had completed his education in 1822 so could be factored in later?

The unknown is metallurgy. William Greener's book 'The Gun 1834' gives an insight into gun making metallurgy at that time.

 

[Saphroneth]

For the trajectory of the musket and the need for incredible amounts of holdover at long ranges the need for extra long rear sights and the vital need to have the range found very accurately I concluded that the British and US armies were wise to avoid it's use.

Frankly I think the Russians needed it, during the battles they were using it OTL - they were facing British riflemen with Minie rifles and Enfields, able to get a high proportion of hits at 400 yards or so. The Nessler was vital to avoid their being essentially unable to reply.

 

[yulzari]

Frankly I think the Russians needed it, during the battles they were using it OTL - they were facing British riflemen with Minie rifles and Enfields, able to get a high proportion of hits at 400 yards or so. The Nessler was vital to avoid their being essentially unable to reply.

I have not seen anything in the period written by the Russians. Possibly due to my regrettably negligible knowledge of the language and script. What I have observed is that both the balls and Nesslers had trajectories that smacked more of a mortar than a shoulder arm. At 400 metres and beyond they were falling so steeply that their dangerous ground was such that it could hit a man in the middle of a column but leave all those before and after untouched. The Nessler could let them use muskets like the arrow shower of the Anglo-Normans-V- France wars and create a scattered and very wide beaten zone. The difference between the Nessler and the ball at over 400 metres is the difference between quite inaccurate and very inaccurate. A clever idea but a tactical dead end.

The modern equivalent is the Brenneke slug for smooth bore shotguns and is a variation on the Nessler but with the crucial difference of a cylindrical fibre or plastic extension to the rear to give it some drag stabilisation. It greatly improves the short range accuracy but is still pants at long ranges. Fixing a piece of string or ribbon to the rear of a spherical ball makes it equally accurate and extends accuracy in ideal conditions out to 300 metres. A quick improvement to the musket would be just to add the tail and reduce the windage and this was suggested in the period.

However. None of these are rifles nor give rifle quality accuracy so strays from the OP.

 

[Saphroneth]

The difference between the Nessler and the ball at over 400 metres is the difference between quite inaccurate and very inaccurate. A clever idea but a tactical dead end.

I wouldn't necessarily agree, in that Nessler ammunition being developed for smoothbores as a way of getting distant beaten zone fire (which would be useful for specific purposes, involving troops carrying two kinds of ammunition) is a way of getting the idea of the non-spherical bullet into the world ahead of the adoption of the Baker rifle or similar, and when the "specialized long range" ammunition is used in the "specialized long range" weapon you end up with what is essentially a rifle-musket in all but percussion cap.

 

[yulzari]

The role of well used and properly sighted Nesslers is to have standard infantry carry out the task that otherwise required artillery; to whit denying an area of ground by mass inaccurate fire beyond the range of accurate fire. The Parachute Regiment were still using Vickers MMGs in that role in the 1960's.

The role the OP seems to be looking at is accurate individual aimed fire at individual targets at a distance beyond that of ordinary infantry. Today the realm of the sniper. The Nessler had it's uses but they do not include the latter whatever their capabilities in the former. The answer chosen in all armies when the task was set was the rifled barrel which had been around since the early 16th century. What our period has the possibility to achieve is to combine this with the musket level ease of loading. In ordinary Rifleman hands the Baker Infantry Rifle can do this consistently out to 200 yards in all conditions in which a flintlock is reliable. The OTL successor, the Brunswick Rifle could manage the task to 300 yards. If we can find an AH way to get long conical bullets, either expanding rifle musket or flat base breech loading, then we can look to increase the typical Rifleman's useful range to 600+ yards and the best users to 900+ at the larger targets in aimed fire.

I can see that an introduction of Nessler bullets would be an easy task and break the military addiction to the spherical ball and, in an integrated waxed base cartridge like the OTL Enfield cartridge, would speed loading and reduce fouling thus allowing reduced windage with benefits to accuracy. The Lovell reduced bore 0,733" was more accurate than the infantry 0,753" bore with standard 0,685" ball musket cartridges and French and USA testing of reduced windages backs that up.. Still not to compare with the rifle. My experience with the musket is that, for the task of killing men not scoring on targets, the smooth bore is perfectly adequate at up to 100 metres but then the rifle then takes over.

 

[Saphroneth]

The Nessler had it's uses but they do not include the latter whatever their capabilities in the former. The answer chosen in all armies when the task was set was the rifled barrel which had been around since the early 16th century.

I know. But if the Nessler is in wide use, then given the look of the Nessler (to whit, it is a conical ball with a hollow base)
then

If we can find an AH way to get long conical bullets, either expanding rifle musket or flat base breech loading, then we can look to increase the typical Rifleman's useful range to 600+ yards and the best users to 900+ at the larger targets in aimed fire.

we can get this much more quickly because conical bullets would already be a "thing", and when used in combination with the rifle (it's a test which makes a great deal of sense if you're already using the Nessler) then you have what amounts to all the ingregients to a Minie ball.

 

[yulzari]

For those puzzled by the Belgian invented Nessler bullet here is a cross section of the Russian Nessler: