I am never endingly amazed at how little people on this site know about actually firing the weapons in use during the Civil War, the training standards supposedly in effect at the time, the actual training that took place [**** little], and the extremely limited capabilities of the soldiers. Mr. Aagaard is correct. For example:
The mythology of the Civil War asserts that Confederate troops were better shots their Federal opponents, but the available evidence does not necessarily support that conclusion. Responding to an order from LTG Hardee, MG Cleburne directed the testing of the .54 caliber Austrian rifle muskets being issued to the Army of Tennessee at 100, 150, 200, and 300 yards [91, 137, 182, and 274 meters] using two lots of ammunition; one manufactured in England and the other at the Atlanta Arsenal. Given the large percentage of Muster 1854, Type I, rifle muskets in MAJ Huse's purchases the Austrian rifles used in the tests were probably Type I weapons. On 19 June 1863 CPT Charles F. Vanderford, Cleburne' ordnance officer, reported on the resulting tests. He had been directed to use a company of
average soldiers from the 6
th, 10
th, and 15
th Texas Consolidated Infantry Regiment of Cleburne's Division.
Although the troops had been in service for a year and a half Vanderford discovered during the 100-yard phase of his test that three quarters of them had never been instructed on how to load, aim, and fire military shoulder arms. Contrary to the legend of Texican marksmanship in the American west the troops' accuracy of fire was extremely poor. The weather conditions during the 100-yard test on 18 June had been perfect; cloudy, dry, and windless. Each of the 20 men involved in the 100-yard test fired one shot using Atlanta Arsenal ammunition at a
10-foot high by six-foot wide target, achieving an aggregate 13 hits. None of the rounds hit the black painted six-inch [15.2 cm] bullseye at the center of the target. Prior to continuing testing Vanderford had to instruct the men in basic marksmanship.
After instructing the soldiers on how to load and take aim Vanderford continued his test with five selected soldiers. The weather conditions remained the same; cloudy, dry, and windless. Firing 20 rounds of English manufactured ammunition one the same target at 150 yards, the troops achieved 18 hits. All the hits were in a group considerably tighter than the hits from the Atlanta Arsenal ammunition used at 100 yards. It is not clear from the report if the improvement was due to the use of English ammunition or the marksmanship instruction given the selected troops.
Vanderford continued the tests on 19 June. At 200 yards he selected 10 soldiers of "average ability as marksmen." Firing 10 rounds of Atlanta Arsenal ammunition and 13 rounds of English ammunition they achieved 14 hits on the same target. Continuing with the 10 selected men at 300 yards they fired 27 rounds of Atlanta Arsenal ammunition and 16 rounds of English ammunition, achieving 12 hits on the same target. The weather conditions remained excellent, sunny with white clouds, dry, and with a light breeze from the front.
Vanderford clearly did not have a good understanding of the scientific method. Since the troops fired a mix of Atlanta Arsenal and English ammunition at 200 and 300 yards it is impossible to determine how well each of the lots of ammunition performed, although Vanderford observed that the "English cartridge gave much better results than the Atlanta [Arsenal cartridges]. The data obtained today and yesterday was, however, insufficient for any accurate comparison between the two." Nor did Vanderford have a good understanding of the sights on the Austrian rifles, noting that "In firing at 300 yards distance, it appears that neither the Atlanta nor the English cartridge gave proper results, the guns being sighted directly upon the center of the target. Three fourths of the 'misses' fall too low, nearly one half striking the butts below the lower line of the target. This is perhaps attributable principally to the considerable windage of the guns, the balls being too small for target practice. This by no means a fault, however, the difficulty being (usually) to load [the] guns after the 12
th or 15
th round."
Given the calibration of the Austrian rifle sights in
Schritt and the arched trajectory of the bullets, Vanderford achieved at 300 yards exactly the result one would expect from troops and an officer who did not understand the battle sights on their Austrian rifles. Absent an understanding of the sights of the weapon Vanderford's conclusion that the low shots were based upon a loss of velocity from there being too much windage between the cartridge and the bore of the rifle was not unreasonable. The possibility also exists that Vanderford did not understand that the bullets from the English cartridges were supposed to be loaded in the greased cartridge wrappers and that he instructed his test troops to remove the wrappers. Since the Texans' weapons were fouling by the 12
th to 15
th round there is also reason to question the soldiers' maintenance of their weapons. Vanderford or his superiors passed his report up the chain of command, because COL Mallet acknowledged receipt of a copy of the test results from BG Gorgas on 3 August 1863.
Given the demonstrated incompetence of Vanderford's Texicans - soldiers that had never been trained to shoot their weapons and an division ordnance officer who didn't understand the sights on his mens' weapons - I would have been delighted to have my regiment take them on at 100 yards with buck and ball. But, my people would have been trained in how to use their rifle muskets.
Much of the powder in the south was made by the Gaines Brothers. It was judged as a superior quality.
Who pray tell were the Gaines Brothers?
Regards,
Don Dixon
Forum Host
Bringing the