Author Topic: Wall gun  (Read 16731 times)

Offline Dennis Glazener

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19364
    • GillespieRifles
Wall gun
« on: September 04, 2010, 06:36:55 PM »
Recently I was able to see and handle an original flint wall gun. It was a smooth bore and shot a 1/4 lb ball. I have always wonder about the benefit of these guns. What was the advantage having them? Longer range? Was it the fright factor?

Seems to me that they would just waste powder/lead without any major benefit over a regular longrifle.

Now that I think of it maybe loaded with shot/nails/rocks etc it might make a great impact of charging Indians or Frenchmen.
Dennis
« Last Edit: September 04, 2010, 06:38:21 PM by Dennis Glazener »
"I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend" - Thomas Jefferson

Offline smallpatch

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4037
  • Dane Lund
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #1 on: September 04, 2010, 06:51:27 PM »
Dennis,

As I understand it, they were used to pick of artillerymen that would be pounding your enclosure (fort?) with cannon fire.  Basically a .50 BMG of colonial days.  I'd be looking for cover, even if it missed.  A four ounce ball could do a lot of damage, even to a cannon carriage @ a couple of hundred yards.  Say nothing about what it could do to the guys touching it off.
In His grip,

Dane

scooter

  • Guest
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #2 on: September 04, 2010, 08:53:13 PM »
I showed at least 1 signed wall gun in my 2nd MD book that I did w/ Dan Hartzler. Plans of pre-Rev War forts -- as early as King Wm's war-- were star-shaped [or similar coming to points] so that swivel wall guns could be mounted. They were probably useless except against a mass charge -- or as a terror weapon against superstitious native aborigine. They would cut a wide swath loaded with what was then called swan shot. They were a more powerful blunderbuss. I doubt any [wall guns or blunderbusses] were used except in some dire emergency with anything but large shot.
Interesting;y I found a long reference to wall guns, perhaps 50 or so, being retrofitted with smaller barrels [1" or more down to a tiny 3/4 inch, .75 caliber]. One point of discussion was about the much larger gunlocks. I once owned a British [?] c.1750 wall gun lock and it was just about 2 X the size of a Brown Bess lock.
Altho the MD wall gun noted above was Rev War piece in my considerable research in various extant state archives I cannot recall ever seeing a contract tendered for wall guns. But at least several forts had them, including Fort Washington, lost to British w/ considerable loss of men + materiel soon after the evacuation of NYC.

Offline Mike Brooks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13235
    • Mike Brooks Gunmaker
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #3 on: September 04, 2010, 09:08:07 PM »
Actually they shoot much farther and more accurately at distance than  the "normal" calibered rifle. They were used at forts to keep the enemy out of normal rifle range. And, as was mentioned above, a 1/4oz ball could do a tremendous amount of damage to artillery. All the same applies to those that were mounted on boats.
NEW WEBSITE! www.mikebrooksflintlocks.com
Say, any of you boys smithies? Or, if not smithies per se, were you otherwise trained in the metallurgic arts before straitened circumstances forced you into a life of aimless wanderin'?

Offline Dennis Glazener

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19364
    • GillespieRifles
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #4 on: September 04, 2010, 10:19:22 PM »
Thanks guys, interesting to hear. I like the analogy of the BMG of its day!
I can just see the swath that 4 bore would make through a group of men charging the gate of a fort!
Dennis
"I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend" - Thomas Jefferson

Offline Collector

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 988
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #5 on: September 04, 2010, 10:22:20 PM »
As I recall, Gen George Washington issued a written order for the Continental Armys' purchase of 3 or 4 (? - not precisely sure of the number) large bore 'wall guns' and that original hand-written order still exists, in U.S.A. military document archives   I'm pretty sure that one of Gen. George Washingtons' original wall guns resides in the firearms collection in the museum at the USMA at West Point.  I believe that they were effective out to ~800 yards.

Offline Acer Saccharum

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19311
    • Thomas  A Curran
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #6 on: September 04, 2010, 11:42:50 PM »
My friend Roger built a rifled wall gun for a customer. He shot a deer at 325 yds with it. This gun is a 1" bore, rifled, made by Ed Rayle. Kicks like a mule team, but frighteningly accurate.

Roger is now making another wall gun, based on the Springfield Armory piece.

Tom
Tom Curran's web site : http://monstermachineshop.net
Ramrod scrapers are all sold out.

Trkdriver99

  • Guest
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #7 on: September 05, 2010, 04:11:11 AM »
I would really like to have one of my own, but alas i have squandered my gun money on a cannon and an orignal English fowler. Oh well there is always next year. ;D :D.

Ronnie

J.D.

  • Guest
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #8 on: September 06, 2010, 12:24:29 AM »
As I recall, Gen George Washington issued a written order for the Continental Armys' purchase of 3 or 4 (? - not precisely sure of the number) large bore 'wall guns' and that original hand-written order still exists, in U.S.A. military document archives   I'm pretty sure that one of Gen. George Washingtons' original wall guns resides in the firearms collection in the museum at the USMA at West Point.  I believe that they were effective out to ~800 yards.

I seem to remember that Washington stipulated that those guns were to have enough accuracy to hit a sheet of writing paper at 600 yards. However, I don't know how large, or small, a sheet of writing paper of that time would be.

God bless

scooter

  • Guest
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #9 on: September 06, 2010, 05:31:05 AM »
I have seen such references; most turn out to exaggerations. I want you to see a 1 x 18 sheet of paper at more than 300 yards -- let alone hit it. It is very difficult to shoot what you cannot see. And of course no optics! either spotting scope or telescopic sight. Indeed I'd like to see Col Chandler, long time USMC sniper instructor + author of Death from Afar, hit at 600 yards a piece of writing paper with iron sights and a modern gun with high velocity ammo [such as 30-378].

Offline alex e.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #10 on: September 06, 2010, 05:39:44 AM »
This one fired a  1" ball,quite impressive :o

Uva uvam videndo varia fit

msmith

  • Guest
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #11 on: September 06, 2010, 06:21:22 AM »
alexsnr, You need to take a pic of your Giant Wall Gun along side one of those tiny Guns I seen at Lexington Show...."David & Goliath" Is it rifled? If not ..Fill that sister up with shot and take a whole flock of turkey home for the wife to clean. ;D Not that I would do sucha thing.Is there much difference between a Wall Gun and them big smooth bores the market hunters used on their boats to wipe out a flock of sitting duck.

J.D.

  • Guest
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #12 on: September 06, 2010, 06:27:06 PM »
Hmmmm, I don't think I wanna straddle one of those supports on the tripod then that thing goes off.  :o

God bless

Offline alex e.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #13 on: September 06, 2010, 06:50:27 PM »
That is not my gun,It is a repro that someone had at a private event.it was smooth bored.even on a swivel it was quite a beast.It was neat but I really have no desire to  shoot one like it.just finding a flint for  it could be a project.

Alex
Uva uvam videndo varia fit

Offline Collector

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 988
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #14 on: September 06, 2010, 07:56:49 PM »
I think you have to put the use of and the effectiveness of, these firearms, in the context of the military tactics of the colonial period, which were shoulder to shoulder and grouped, in ranks, wide and deep.  These weren't sniper weapons.  Just 'lobbing' one in,' so to speak, would/could prove effective, much like a medieval bowman that shoots for the range and not a specific target.  

I would not discount a rifled firearm equipped with open sights, a man intimately familiar with and practiced in their use and some luck.  During the American Civil War (War Between The States-War Of Northern Aggression) and open sighted weapons were still the norm, there was a Union General, on horseback (whose name I can't recall) that was positioned behind his men 1000+ yards from enemy lines.  His staff officers told him to dismount as they feared that he presented a target and he replied that the range was so great that he feared neither artillery nor rifle fire... his reply is noted in military records as being his last, as a .58 Enfield round hit him below the left eye, between the bridge of his nose and his eye socket, killing him instantly and knocking him off of his horse.

To reinforce that it's not all just about luck, modern/trained marksmen/riflemen using these same BP rifled weapons, shooting at 'farm-fresh watermelon targets' at ranges of 1000+ yards have shown that these type of shots are indeed not only repeatable, but can be accomplished with amazing frequency... with open sights.  

We've grown accustomed to the aides of and advances in technology, in shooting, such that we have become pre-conditioned that they are necessary to produce 'accuracy' at long range.  So, in closing, even if I knew I opposed an enemy, at distance, that only had open sights, I'd still try not to look important.   I kinda like the DNA in my watermelon, right where it is... ;D

    

john

  • Guest
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2010, 08:44:49 PM »
"Is there much difference between a Wall Gun and them big smooth bores the market hunters used on their boats to wipe out a flock of sitting duck."

I think what you are refering to is called a punt gun. Long ago, an old timer told me that these guns were mounted on a small boats (ibelieve called a punts) on the Mississippi River and used to bring down flocks of ducks and geese to be sold to the hotel restaurants in the St. Louis area.

Offline Feltwad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 885
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #16 on: September 06, 2010, 09:07:53 PM »
What you refere too as a Wall gun  here in the UK we call them Rampart guns  they came in all bore sizes the ones used on ship were also known as Swivel guns and mostly used when boarding and blasting out the rigging .The punt gun is a lot larger  this type of gun we still used today on the foreshore and is shot from a punt see image there was also a large gun of 2 bore size that is called a Bank gun which was shot from the sand dunes and also the sea wall at waders feeding along the  tide line of the incoming tide.
Feltwad
« Last Edit: September 06, 2010, 09:11:17 PM by Feltwad »

Offline TPH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 923
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #17 on: September 06, 2010, 09:22:21 PM »
...............just finding a flint for  it could be a project.

Alex

Alex, if you ever need them, I have about a dozen flints for that size lock.
:)
« Last Edit: September 06, 2010, 09:22:41 PM by TPH »
T.P. Hern

Offline Jim Filipski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
    • Jim W. Filipski  Flintlocks
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #18 on: September 06, 2010, 11:17:49 PM »
I think you have to put the use of and the effectiveness of, these firearms, in the context of the military tactics of the colonial period, which were shoulder to shoulder and grouped, in ranks, wide and deep.  These weren't sniper weapons.  Just 'lobbing' one in,' so to speak, would/could prove effective, much like a medieval bowman that shoots for the range and not a specific target.


I'm not sure if this is fitting here but:
Wilmington, North Carolina                                               
4 -10 July 1781
Colonel Thomas Bludworth wanted to retaliate for a massacre that happened at Rouse’s Tavern in March of 1781.  Bludworth’s friend, James Love, had been killed by soldiers of the 82nd Regiment there.  Bludworth did not have the force to take on the British troops stationed in Wilmington, but when he was on a fox chase one morning he discovered a tall cypress on Negro Head Point (present-day Point Peter), across the Cape Fear from Wilmington.  This cypress was seventy feet to the first limb and the base was seven feet in diameter.  The fox was inside the tree and when Colonel Bludworth entered with his dogs he found it hollow.  On that day he started planning how to avenge the death of James Love. 
The Bludworth’s happened to manufacture sword-blades, pikes, pistols and the best rifles in the area.  Colonel Bludworth made a rifle that could carry a two-ounce ball (.83 caliber) from the cypress tree on Negro Head Point to the British formation area on Market Dock in Wilmington.  He practiced shooting the long distance at a drawn figure of a man on his barn door.  All of these plans he kept secret. 
In early July he took his son, Tim, and his servant, Jim Paget, into Negro Head Point on the pretense of hunting fox or raccoon.  He told the boys to take along some food for it may be a long hunt.  They filled two wallets with provisions and he took an auger, a large jug of water, and “Old Bess” his huge rifle.  The trio canoed down the river until they arrived at the tree.  The Colonel then told the boys his plan, they would be living in the tree for two weeks or more. 
The three of them built a scaffold inside the tree, and , made an opening in the tree with the auger.  Other holes were bored in the tree higher up to admit light and air.  They also cleared away enough of the leaves and branches so as to have a clear shot at the Market Wharf.  The Colonel trusted in the wind, which goes uniformly down the river, to carry away the smoke and the report of the big rifle.
On the morning of the 4th of July the Colonel looked out through the hole and saw a group of British waiting in front of Nelson’s liquor store.  Colonel Bludworth took aim and fired, knocking down one of the men.  Four other British quickly carried the shot man into the store.
Bludworth fired a second time and knocked a second man down.  The trio in the tree could hear the beating of the drums as panic set in. 
A column of soldiers marched down to the wharf, and Jim Paget asked if he could try his hand at shooting.  The Colonel agreed and Jim took his place in the raised platform.  Jim aimed at the formation and fired.  The formation broke and ran for cover.  Boats rowed across the river looking for the source of the sniper, but none came to the tree.  The British thought it was impossible for a rifle shot to be made from there.  The snipers called it a day and ate their provisions.
The next morning Colonel Bludworth looked out the hole in the tree and saw no one on the wharf.  Jim Paget told the Colonel that around 10:00 the British would line up at the liquor store.  At 10:00 the soldiers quickly moved into the store, fearful of the hidden sniper, but when there was no shooting that morning they became more confident and waited in groups around the door of the shops.  The Colonel lined up his sights on one of the groups, and fired.  Bludworth saw another soldier being dragged into the shop.  A dragoon rode up to the dock, peering in the direction of the opposite shore when he too was knocked from his saddle and into the water. 
The snipers continued this sport for a week when a Tory told the British that he had seen Colonel Bludworth and two other men go to Negro Head Point with a large rifle of his own manufacture.  The Tory told them that he was probably concealed in Negro Head Point and they should cut down all the trees and underbrush that could hide the Rebels.
Colonel Bludworth saw boats coming toward his hiding place and he had Jim close up the hole they had been firing out of.  Twenty men landed on the Point and began to cut away the undergrowth with axes.  When they arrived at the hiding place of the snipers it was late in the evening.  The soldiers decided to cut down that tree in the morning.  Ten men were left on the Point, with three sentinels watching over them.  At first Bludworth thought of tomahawking the guard by their hidden canoe, but Jim had been discovered by the guard.  The sentinel cried “Who goes there?”, but Jim impersonated a wild hog.  The guard relaxed, and soon fell asleep.  The Colonel took a stick and coming behind the guard he wedged the stick in his mouth, then bound him hand and foot.  The three snipers then safely escaped.   
" Associate with men of good quality,  if you esteem your own reputation:
for it is better to be alone than in bad company. "      -   George Washington

"A brush of the hand
of Providence is behind what is done with good heart."

Offline Mike Brooks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13235
    • Mike Brooks Gunmaker
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #19 on: September 06, 2010, 11:57:03 PM »
Great story! I wonder how far they were shooting?
NEW WEBSITE! www.mikebrooksflintlocks.com
Say, any of you boys smithies? Or, if not smithies per se, were you otherwise trained in the metallurgic arts before straitened circumstances forced you into a life of aimless wanderin'?

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9751
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #20 on: September 07, 2010, 07:02:34 AM »
I have seen such references; most turn out to exaggerations. I want you to see a 1 x 18 sheet of paper at more than 300 yards -- let alone hit it. It is very difficult to shoot what you cannot see. And of course no optics! either spotting scope or telescopic sight. Indeed I'd like to see Col Chandler, long time USMC sniper instructor + author of Death from Afar, hit at 600 yards a piece of writing paper with iron sights and a modern gun with high velocity ammo [such as 30-378].


I think you need to research the sizes of paper sheets in the 18th century.
Then look into what can be done with iron sights.

Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Offline Chuck Burrows

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1218
    • Wild Rose Trading Company
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #21 on: September 07, 2010, 01:36:01 PM »
Indeed I'd like to see Col Chandler, long time USMC sniper instructor + author of Death from Afar, hit at 600 yards a piece of writing paper with iron sights and a modern gun with high velocity ammo [such as 30-378].
I don't think the Colonel would have a problem and he'd have no real need for the 30-378.
NRA Highpower competitors regularly shoot 4" or smaller groups with an iron sighted rifle in .308 at 600 yards from prone and 1,000 yard competitors in such matches as the Palma shoot sub 10" groups with iron sights again using  the .308
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

J.D.

  • Guest
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #22 on: September 08, 2010, 08:00:33 PM »
Most NRA competitors have now gone to the AR-15 platform for high power competition. Some of those old boys are shooting groups as good or better as those shot with the M-14 at 600 yards, prone slow fire.

I would have never believed that the puny .223 could be made to shoot that well, had I not seen it...and with iron, military style sights.

God bless

Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 896
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #23 on: September 08, 2010, 08:20:01 PM »
Is the quotation above supposed to be from the period? I ask because I don't think the word "sniper" was in use in the 18th century - at least according to the OED its first known use is in 1824 in an Anglo Indian military newspaper. Also, the syntax is modern and much more conversational than 18th century writing usually is.

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9751
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Wall gun
« Reply #24 on: September 08, 2010, 09:17:39 PM »
Is the quotation above supposed to be from the period? I ask because I don't think the word "sniper" was in use in the 18th century - at least according to the OED its first known use is in 1824 in an Anglo Indian military newspaper. Also, the syntax is modern and much more conversational than 18th century writing usually is.

Most things in history have been rewritten or were written at a later date from accounts by the people involved.
I don't see any particular reason to doubt it. The fact that they give a decimal bore size for the rifle indicates its modern. But lots of things you read about are rewritten.
PROVING its true or false would require detective work.
Its a good story and is feasible.
Dan

For more information see:
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:TRcLsyuysPYJ:www4.ncsu.edu/~jam3/1781-3.pdf+Revolutionary+War+Colonel+Bludworth&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjDYiu46C5crSF8Yye-JceXgX6rl6_3Qafc1SxjjvhvIoic33H6qx6LlGidCz72G9HTAsvTX7C5V9C79SIcbwi7CQCFqofCnTNmrmIzgjn4Yrrv2yI488IOv7DOC1ufXGUPAHXT&sig=AHIEtbQjxNOqY4v-EYLeTwCs6lNS6QQJIQ
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine