General discussion > Black Powder Shooting
Shooting accident!!
Jerry V Lape:
Last evening I learned of an accident involving a percussion rifle. The rifle was not well maintained and there were issues with the powder being used. The information I have is from the Range Officer who almost lost his life. At a very large youth event they were firing several percussion rifles. The gun involved was loaded, capped and fired (but nothing happened so the adult supposed to be supervising this had it reloaded). It was capped and fired again without a discharge and again fully loaded, capped and fired w/o discharge. Then the gun was carried to the range officer who endeavored to unload it with a CO2 ball discharger but couldn't. He then, (without soaking the barrel to kill the charges) attempted to pull the ball with a brass T handled rod. The screw stripped out of the 3d ball after moving about halfway out of the barrel. He tried again to get the screw to take a bite in the ball which forced the ball back down the bore.
At that point the gun fired discharging the 2d and 3d balls, and the brass rod. Some how the range officer, who was twisting the T handle at the time, escaped uninjured but thorougly shaken and somewhat blackened. The first charge was still in the barrel. To this point there had been quite a few mistakes made in handling misfires and lack of familiarity with safety procedures. The biggest ones being the selection of adult supervisors/range officers without proper training.
When I got to the discussion last evening they were debating what made the middle charge go off. Most were postulating dieseling as the third ball was rammed back down. Why this would effect the second charge didn't make sense to me. So I asked about what powders were involved. That answer was even more startling. The range officer said he didn't know (but he was the one who provided it) as it came from a donor in a 10lb cloth bag and was original black powder. But he didn't think it was any good as there were so many misfires with it and it was so very dirty.
My question is what powder might this have been. Possibly mining powder or military naval gun powder?
Second question is what do you suppose ignited the center charge? My only reasonable conclusion seems to be the physical shock of ramming the 3d charge back down onto the 2d ball. Is this possible? If it had been dieseling (a mostly discredited possiblity) it should have been the 3d charge not the second that fired. Of course the 3d could have ignited first and had enough fire get past the second ball and patch to ignite charge 2.
This event will reoccur later this spring. However, having learned of this accident, supervision will be vastly different. Several NRA and NMLRA range officers have become involved and two blackpowder clubs have a number of knowledgable NMLRA instructors who will be the supervisors on the line with the youngsters. There will not be any powder of unknown origin, and the well worn (abused) rifles will all be replaced with new ones. I was proud of all the guys who stepped forward to make this a first class (safe) event once they learned of the need.
Perhaps we should all make a positive effort to reach out to the organizations in our local areas which might be putting on similar events for youngsters such as the Scouts, 4H and others and let them know we stand ready to assist with properly certified supervision. I know some of these organizations already have standards for such programs, but there is obviously still a lack of sufficient qualified personnel to control the events and we might just be saving someone kid or grandkids from such a dangerous situtation.
Dphariss:
The guy that kept loading the gun needs to be clubbed for.
1.Being stupid.
2. Not PROPERLY SUPERVISING the shooting.
3. Being stupid.
It was not the range officers day to die.
It would have been difficult to kill the powder in all three when loaded in this manner, depending.
Would like to know what the powder was.
Dan
Mad Monk:
Forget the dieseling theory. That started making the rounds after someone misunderstood something I had written.
We know that it was not a slow ignition, or hangfire. That would have ignited the first charge, not the second charge.
The cloth bag powder was most likely old military powder. The cloth bags of black powder that had been used in large-caliber artillery loading ran around 1 pound in weight. But I have no idea as to how many pounds of bp went into the bags used as the intermediate primer in the 16-inch naval guns.
Some military contractors purchased black powder in cloth bags, not trusting plastic bags in cardboard boxes. These contractors have assembly lines where people scoop black powder out of the bags to be measured out for specific purposes. Bag charges used in salute cannons comes to mind.
The most logical explaination is that when the top charge was rammed down onto the other charges there was an impact shock ignition of the powder comprising the second charge in the bore.
Normally black powder is said to be only moderately sensitive to impact shock ignition that is based on a standardized laboratory test. This test is a fairly common one in the chemical industry used to quantify the impact shock ignition sensitivity to a variety of chemicals.
The standard test uses a holder with a 1/4" hole machined in it. A 1/4" diameter plunger goes into this hole. These two items have highly polished surfaces. The critical surfaces are the portion of the plunger that rests on the sample being tested and the bottom of the hole in the holder where the sample being tested rests. Any surface imperfections may act to give false readings. This would be readings at impact energy levels below those with highly polished surfaces.
This sample holder is affixed to a large heavy base to prevent rebounding that would cause multiple impacts with one "hammer" drop.
There are a pair of rails that extend vertically above the specimen holder. A 2 Kg weight rides on these guides. The guides are calibrated for height. When you run this test you have a specified weight of sample in the holder with the plunger resting on the sample. You raise the "hammer" to a specific height and release it. It free falls and strikes the plunger. If there are no ignitions in ten drops you move to a greater height and do 10 more drops. You note the greatest height at which 10 drops give no ignition and continue increasing the height until you have 10 ignitions for 10 drops. This data then goes onto a graph. Most of the time the data forms an "S" curve on the graph.
But the whole test is based on the fact that you have the plunger and the base with a specified amount of surface area that is highly polished.
In this test you have the kinetic energy of the falling weight (hammer) being converted to heat energy where the grains of powder would be in contact with the face of the plunger and the bottom of the hole. Any surface irregularities would concentrate the force in very small areas which would greatly increase the amount of heat generated on the contact points.
There have been several deaths and serious injuries with smokeless cartridge rifles where loaded cartridges were stuck in the chamber. The shooter would take a rod and run it down the bore until it touched the bullet. Then take a mallet and hit the rod to drive the cartridge out of the chamber. The fatal accidents involved full cases of powder where the base of the bullet rested directly onto the grains of smokeless powder. One or two blows was all it took to light the charge in the cartridge from heat generated where a few powder grains were in contact with the base of the bullet.
In the case of a round ball in the bore with heavy blows on a ramrod you have a very small area where this kinetic energy is being converted to heat. If the powder was old and the grains crumbling it would be easier to ignite in this manner compared to a good hard-grain powder.
In the fall hammer test the saving grace with black powder is that the blow from the falling "hammer" ususally crushes the grains which adsorbs, or dampens, the blow. If you were to rapidly drop the hammer several times you could easily get ignition of the powder since each blow would add a bit more heat to the powder in contact with the face of the plunger.
This is one explosive test that gives data not totally applicable to field use. It is used to compare various explosive compositions. The data obtained is at best relative and certainly far from absolute.
E. Ogre
Roger Fisher:
Well now, I for one thank you for that explaination and it makes sense. We can all assume that the fellow that pounded down that 3rd charge and ball was by then 'stronger' than usual due to being quite angry - excited - embarassed! :o
Every club should have the simple slotted steel L bracket mounted on the line to a post, tree or whatever to hook that rod knob on to to pull the ball. We for one no longer allow anyone to pull the ball by hanging on to the rod! The CO2 rig should be tried first then the L bracket!
Candle Snuffer:
--- Quote from: Roger Fisher on January 16, 2009, 03:56:00 AM ---Well now, I for one thank you for that explaination and it makes sense.
Every club should have the simple slotted steel L bracket mounted on the line to a post, tree or whatever to hook that rod knob on to to pull the ball. We for one no longer allow anyone to pull the ball by hanging on to the rod! The CO2 rig should be tried first then the L bracket!
--- End quote ---
I to thank you for the explanation.
I also agree with you as well Roger about having a CO2 rig, and the set up for pulling a ball.
Now for my personal opinion;
I also will add that I will not pull anyone's load if their firearm fails, period! If mine, or my son, or daughter's, or wife's, muzzle loader would fail to fire, and we've exhausted the powder under the nipple or digging out and working some powder through the vent of our flinters,,, and I don't have a CO2 rig available,,, I will pull the ball only after pouring water into the bore, drum, vent area, and waiting for awhile.
I simply will not pull anyother person's ball except those I've said above (if ever came to it) as for the exact reason given in the story that started this thread.
My opinion is simply my opinion, but I will not baby set idiots, though I will certainly point out idiotic moves to those I see performing them and who are endangering everyone else such as loading a loaded firearm over and over because the first charge didn't go off. How stupid is this? I think we all know the answer to that one.
Maybe I'm a hard'a$$ over this, but by god if you're going to own and shoot one of these smokepoles (or any firearm) read the instructions, ask questions, get someone to teach you, but by god learn how to use it and care for it.
Maybe it's my age, but I simply have no tolorance anylonger for idiotic people who seem to think they know it all and in reality know very @!*% little about what they're doing simply because they don't want to spend the time learning "a" proper way of doing things. This seems to be our society these days...
Sorry for going on so,,, but it's the idiots that give our sport/hobby a bad name when they bring their stupidity and know it all attitude to our house which just happens to be our shooting ranges and great outdoors. Their ignorance gives all of us a blackeye.
Take the time to learn how to do things the right way. It sure saves a lot of trouble and possible greif...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version