Wall gun

[Artificer]

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].

Here is the modern sizes of the scoring rings of 600 yard targets and these are round rings:

(a) MR-1 target -Enlarged aiming black for use in 600-yard matches only.
Aiming Black (inches)
X ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.00
10 ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.00
9 ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.00
8 ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.00

I personally witnessed an Army shooter fire a possible at 600 yards in 1974 at Range 4 at Quantico during I think it was a Regional Match and that means all his 20 shots for record were inside at least the 12 inch circle.  He was using a NM M14 with NM open sights.  (I was a Block Official at that match).

The same year I witnessed a NG shooter fire a 96- 4v at 1,000 yards with a standard issue M1 Garand and that was with standard sights, not NM sights.

Our requirements standard for THE Marine Corps Rifle Team in the mid 1980's was a ten shot group fired at 300 yards from our super expensive test rack and the group size had to be less than 2 1/2".   This was from our double lugged, McMillan stocked, Krieger barreled M14 rifles.   We had so many of them that went under a 2" group we almost made that our standard.  I've also built NM Garands in that time period that would almost hold that group size.  Now most of our shooters could not hold that tight of a group, but our rifles did.

I was a contemporary of and am still a friend of Norm Chandler.  I was a Gunnery Sergeant when he was the XO of WTBN at Quantico, though I had known him for years before that.

My highest requal score with a standard service rifle was 249 out of 250 and that was with a perfect score of 50 at the 500 yard range, prone for ten shots.  Though the target is a silhouette, you forget trying to make head shots and actually use the shoulders as an aiming point.  The target was 40" tall (including the head) and 20" wide.  My shots were all well within a 20" circle at that range and that was with a standard issue M16A2.  Further, I am NOT a NM shooter and have never fired a round in NM competition.

Before I came in the Marine Corps, I could not imagine hitting something at 200 yards standing, but in boot camp I ran 7 straight bullsyes until I fired on the target next to mine.  That was with a standard M14 rifle.  I had grown up using shotguns and .22's but had never fired a high power rifle.  So I realize how it would seem hard to believe until one see's it done.

Gus

[Artificer]

Back to the subject of wall/rampart guns.  Grin.

I very much like the analogy of them being the period ".50 BMG" round we used in Barrett .50 cal. BMG caliber rifles.   The main target for these rifles are portable radar units, jeep sized vehicles, unarmored trucks, etc. 

However, in the period and with those wall/rampart guns that were smooth bore, I would suggest their use would have been more like mobile artillery.  Someone else mentioned they would have been used against field artillery pieces and I believe that is dead on.  The most popular British field artillery piece was a 3 or 4 pound gun called a "grasshopper."  This name could have come from either the way the guns recoiled and hopped or it could have been a common Etymology from the official name "Galloper" for some light field artillery pieces.   (Perhaps not unlike the common term in the 18th century was "Flutterby" and got changed to "Butterfly.")  These were advanced and in the actual battle line with the infantry.   Exploding artillery shells were not commonly used with these guns even by the British and even if they were available for the smaller field pieces.   

So what do you do at forts where such "grasshopper" guns could be advanced outside the zone of fire of your small artillery, if you even had artillery at the fort?  The grasshopper guns were large enough to batter down the doors of most forts, if not the walls, so they were a real threat.  OK, on the wall of the fort, you set up swivel sockets so you can move a wall gun around to meet the threat at any point or angle you need to fire.  One or two wall guns at such forts could overcome the threat of more grasshopper guns than would usually be used against the fort.  After firing, you humped the gun back under the protection of the walls to load and move it.  Then pop up at another place the swivel sockets were set up.  That also meant the opposing grasshopper guns could never be aimed quickly against the rampart gun as was done against normal artillery gun ports in the fort's walls.

With Washington's disastrous experience at Fort Necessity. I could see him having a personal desire to have some wall/rampart guns to be used for future need. 

Gus

[msmith]

Cool picture of boat and guns..tortugatrading.com has a couple antique "Wall Guns" . They don't have a price listed, probably a lil salty..Every now and again I see a antique "Rampart Gun" for auction at one of those European Antique Guns & Armour auctions....Such as Herman Historica.

[Mike R]

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 don't know about a piece of writing paper, but on a clear day with young eyes it is possible to hit high contrast targets [ie, visible] at very long ranges with open sighted rifles. 300, 600 even 1000 yd matches were popular during the late MLing era. My own experience with the modern M1 [peep sight] suggests the possibilities are there as I could regularly hit the bull at 300 yds [prone]. I would not discount a good sniper's abilities to hit long range targets, although the modern sniper uses alot of high-tech gear.

[Artificer]

I have no original documentation on this earlier than the Civil War, but I found an original reference source in that time period for estimating how far a man was from a Sharpshooter by what parts of the body and certain common uniform items could be distinguished.  It has been well over two decades since I gave the reference to the Instructors at the Scout Sniper Instructor school at Quantico so I don't remember exactly where I found it.  It mentioned distances of how far you could distinguish parts of the body like fingers, the head, arms, legs, etc.  It also mentioned distinguishing some articles of clothing or equipment (like a canteen for example) then in current use.  They tried it on a whim at various ranges and found it was pretty accurate out to 600 yards, so they incorporated some of it into their then current syllabus as an additional method of range estimation.

The National Guard shooter I mentioned who fired the 96-4V at 1,000 yards with the issue M1 Garand in 1974 had only drawn that rifle from the Armory about a week and a half before he fired the match.  He did not know the "come ups" from the 600 yard line to the 1,000 as he had never fired at 1,000.  He asked me what the normal come up was, but I couldn't legally tell him as I was a Block Official.  So I went to a Marine Shooter and asked him to tell the Garand Shooter.  The Marine shooter at first didn't understand till I reminded him that as I Block Official, I couldn't tell the shooter.  Then the Marine shooter said, "Oh yeah, that's right." and he went over and told him.  The National Guard shooter only had two sighting shots before his shots for record, but that info got him on paper on his first shot.  That 96-4v was about the 4th highest score that day against the NRA bolt guns and all the NM rifles used by the Army and Marine Teams.  I am not sure the NG shooter fully realized how well he had shot until most of the shooters on the Army and Marine Teams went over to congratulate him and look as his Garand.  I do remember it was an HRA, but I don't remember which standard service rifle barrel was in it.

[Dphariss]

Back to the subject of wall/rampart guns.  Grin.

I very much like the analogy of them being the period ".50 BMG" round we used in Barrett .50 cal. BMG caliber rifles.   The main target for these rifles are portable radar units, jeep sized vehicles, unarmored trucks, etc. 

However, in the period and with those wall/rampart guns that were smooth bore, I would suggest their use would have been more like mobile artillery.  Someone else mentioned they would have been used against field artillery pieces and I believe that is dead on.  The most popular British field artillery piece was a 3 or 4 pound gun called a "grasshopper."  This name could have come from either the way the guns recoiled and hopped or it could have been a common Etymology from the official name "Galloper" for some light field artillery pieces.   (Perhaps not unlike the common term in the 18th century was "Flutterby" and got changed to "Butterfly.")  These were advanced and in the actual battle line with the infantry.   Exploding artillery shells were not commonly used with these guns even by the British and even if they were available for the smaller field pieces.   

So what do you do at forts where such "grasshopper" guns could be advanced outside the zone of fire of your small artillery, if you even had artillery at the fort?  The grasshopper guns were large enough to batter down the doors of most forts, if not the walls, so they were a real threat.  OK, on the wall of the fort, you set up swivel sockets so you can move a wall gun around to meet the threat at any point or angle you need to fire.  One or two wall guns at such forts could overcome the threat of more grasshopper guns than would usually be used against the fort.  After firing, you humped the gun back under the protection of the walls to load and move it.  Then pop up at another place the swivel sockets were set up.  That also meant the opposing grasshopper guns could never be aimed quickly against the rampart gun as was done against normal artillery gun ports in the fort's walls.

With Washington's disastrous experience at Fort Necessity. I could see him having a personal desire to have some wall/rampart guns to be used for future need. 

Gus

I would expect that the wall guns, 1" bore or so, were good to at least 500 yards with decent combat accuracy on man sized targets. If one or two on the gun got shot it would likely "spoil the aim" of the remaining crew. Not to mention damage to the gun carriage if the crew were missed and the carriage struck.
This would force small artillery back neat the their extreme effective range.
It would deny the enemy the use of a wider circle around the fortifications.

A common 50 caliber rifle will make things plenty hot for a gun crew to 300. 3-4 good riflemen could make it impossible to serve the guns at 300 unless protected by terrain while loading so a rifle shooting a 3/4 to 1 pound ball would be a fearsome weapon for siege defense. It would also discourage enemy riflemen from shooting over the walls from distant trees etc.
And they could be carried easily on a pack horse or in a small boat.

Someone needs to make a 60 pound wall gun with a 1" more and a 10 ft twist or so and test it.
Dan

[g.pennell]

Does anyone know who made the wall gun that was at Martin's Station this year for the Raid?  We looked it over (still mounted on the swivel, couldn't take it down for a close inspection) but didn't notice any maker's signature...seems it was a 1" bore. Very impressive looking, and sounded like a small cannon with the blank charges they used.  I'd hate to face one!

Greg