Blown Musket Barrel

Tin cup

Captain
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Location
Texas
This happened at the Prairie Grove reenactment last weekend.

blown musket.jpg


From what I got of the story, they were clearing weapons after the battle on Saturday. The Musket in question is reported to have been one of those Loyalist Arms semi-sort of 1842 repro's.
A posting on FB from a participant named Jeffery Stewart:
"I was standing next to the soldier whose barrel exploded. It is believed that the M1842 Springfield he was using was intended to be a display piece; not for firing (he said that he paid only $400 for it, these muskets usually cost closer to $700). When the barrel exploded we we clearing weapons by firing caps after the battle had ended. The blast blew the gun against the side of his face and knocked him to the ground. He might have had a mild concussion, but did not have any cuts and no shrapnel was produced by the explosion. During the battle I never noticed the soldier acting in an unsafe or reckless manner. Fourthly he was in the front rank, if he had been in the rear rank the blast would have injured or burned a few front rank soldiers."

Tjhe one picture shows dirt/mud/grass in the barrel, I wonder if the barrel got clogged while the man went down after taking a "hit" and no one thought to check...

Well, it pays to be careful!

Kevin Dally
blown musket.jpg
blown musket 3.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I heard the metal where it blew was very thin. Supposedly the mud in the photo was from dropping the gun after it blew up. I have also heard that it blew when firing caps only, so maybe there was a bit of powder left. Looks to me like obstruction damage, but I can't say for sure what was in the barrel.
 
I heard the metal where it blew was very thin. Supposedly the mud in the photo was from dropping the gun after it blew up. I have also heard that it blew when firing caps only, so maybe there was a bit of powder left. Looks to me like obstruction damage, but I can't say for sure what was in the barrel.
In cases like this, we may never get all of the whole story, but it's well worth taking note of safe handling practices!

Kevin Dally
 
I can tell you this, while lying "dead" on the field Sunday during the battle, a long line of Reb's marched up right in front of me. When they fired off their weapons, ( and I have been in the hobby more than a few years) I know some of em were double charging their guns, because the concussion coming from their muzzles was quite noticeable!

Kevin Dally
 
No way a cap alone could have caused that. There must have been some powder involved. Even with a blockage, a cap alone wouldn't have done that much damage. I'd guess the gun was likely defective in some way also. I'm glad nobody got hurt. Seems to me somebody in charge of the unit should have been able to assess the weapon's safety before this happened. In the end if you take a firearm to a public place you are responsible for making sure it's in a safe and operable condition. No different than checking if a firearm is loaded before you handle it. Somebody needs to do some serious review of safety procedures.
 
No way a cap alone could have caused that. There must have been some powder involved. Even with a blockage, a cap alone wouldn't have done that much damage. I'd guess the gun was likely defective in some way also. I'm glad nobody got hurt. Seems to me somebody in charge of the unit should have been able to assess the weapon's safety before this happened. In the end if you take a firearm to a public place you are responsible for making sure it's in a safe and operable condition. No different than checking if a firearm is loaded before you handle it. Somebody needs to do some serious review of safety procedures.
I'm speculating it's muzzle was plugged, no one thought to sight check that before capping and
"clearing" the firearm when in ranks, as is commonly done with a unit after the battle. I'm of the opinion that no one should have any Loyalist Arms weapon in the ranks, though many do, and will probably disagree with me.
Those guns are not "proofed" like our Italian repro's are, though the same type of muzzle obstruction could do the same thing with them. I have seen modern shotguns with blown barrels with muzzle obstructions as the cause.

Kevin Dally
 
Thanks for posting. I found this at a battlefield on private property a few years back and have suspected it might be a part of a blown musket barrel. It came out of the ground in in one piece but dangling together like a thread at the "blown" part. You can see it split in half as soon as I handled it. The reason for the discoloration of one is because I practiced a little electrolysis on it. The picture with the minie ball at the end of the supposed barrel is just placed there by me to show size and reference and that it might be sufficient enough for a .58 minie to fit. However, I suspect I'll never know for sure if it's a blown barrel from the battle.

Anyway, looking at the reenactment photo you posted, mine shows "some" similarities and thought I would post it up for curiosity's-sake and for any feed back.


H
barrel z.jpg
barrel 1-3.jpg
ere
 
1- I wouldn't think so.
2- Mud and grass in the barrel didn't help.
3- However my guess is he had a load of powder in the barrel. Just my opinion.
Well from experience there would be no way to create that blast from a cap. He definitely had a load in there. As for the mud, I find that argument baseless because first off just think how would the mud get in there if the battle had just ended, even if it was before I don't see any way other than manually putting mud in there for it to be there. There is a slight tint of dirt around the barrel, indicating it was placed in the mud after being discharged. I'm thinking after the incident happened, he placed it in the mud to prevent any further ignition in case of any more discharges from the barrel. It would be nice to get a personal report from the guy.
 
Is this one of those non-fireable muskets from India that I've read about? Should this have been caught by the battalion commander in the pre-battle inspection? Thank goodness nobody was seriously hurt!
 
Its GREAT news nobody was hurt. The look on the guys face looking at the barrel is priceless.
 
I was there as a Confederate. Heard the blast from across the field. He had load mutiple rounds on accident because the weapon didn't fire. This is why you watch to see if you fire. It sometimes takes 3-4 caps to finally ignite the powder, expecially in wet conditions like that weekend. He is very lucky it exploded near the end and not near his head.
 
Is this one of those non-fireable muskets from India that I've read about? Should this have been caught by the battalion commander in the pre-battle inspection? Thank goodness nobody was seriously hurt!
In inspection they check your powder, if your weapon is clean, and sees if your hammer lock works. Hopefully now they'll check to make sure you don't have a Pakistani rifle like that. My unit doesn't allow cheap rifles for this reason.
 
Wow, guy was lucky it didn't seriously injure him or anyone around him.

Another reason that if a weapon is not proofed, it should not be on the battlefield.


On that note, I also believe weapons not cleaned or maintained properly should not be on the field.

Seen too many neglected weapons at various reenactments where people can barely get the ramrod in the barrel for weapon checks due to rust and build-up.


These types of people are liabilities to everyone around them.
 
Back
Top