Burned his Thumb Off at No. 3 - Pvt. Judson Porter of the Troup Artillery

As I understand it, blocking the vent prevents air from being sucked into the barrel through the vent hole and accidentally reigniting hot embers from the previous shot.

I have heard it a slightly different way, but the same idea: stopping the vent as the sponge is withdrawn after firing creates a partial vacuum inside the barrel that helps extinguish any remaining smoldering embers.
 
I have heard it a slightly different way, but the same idea: stopping the vent as the sponge is withdrawn after firing creates a partial vacuum inside the barrel that helps extinguish any remaining smoldering embers.
Thanks Andy. That does make sense. I'm pretty good at finding interesting CW newspaper articles but I'm certainly not a cannon expert. :nah disagree: I appreciate you providing this more accurate information.
 
I have heard it a slightly different way, but the same idea: stopping the vent as the sponge is withdrawn after firing creates a partial vacuum inside the barrel that helps extinguish any remaining smoldering embers.

Yes for that post-fired swabbing stage it makes good sense to stop the vent. You don't want to force (blow out) any remaining embers to spout out of the vent to land on the carriage, or caught by wind to land on the limber chest (holding powder charges -- since at times the limber chests are far closer than proper spec.) So even though with a swab insertion there is a column of air being compressed and exciting any left-over live embers in the breech, the action of withdrawal makes that partial vacuum to then extinguish and remove any ashes.

That's why we play artillerists like to hear a "pop" from the tube as the sponge (wet or dry) is removed -- it's a matter of pride for #1 or #2 to produce a "pop" (some units assign wet or dry sponge to either #1 or #2, or just one of them).

Still, at load stage thumbing the vent is not as defensible, Its ramming down a column of compressed air onto any remaining embers and stirring them up past the charge. It's understood there should be no embers remaining by then (after swabbing), which is why it probably doesn't matter if its thumbed or not at load stage.
 
Last edited:
BE Thanks for this great information. Can you estimate please about how many shots before the barrel gets prohibitively hot - until it would burn your hand?

Brass is an especially good conductor of heat, meaning it picks up heat after a shot or two but also that it begins to cool a tiny bit between firings. So it's the rate of fire that determines how hot a barrel gets and stays, and if cooled a bit by wet-swabbing. In desperate real CW combat, the crews would push the rate to extremes, risking putting a charge down a very hot barrel, no wet-swabbing between shots. I'm seeing that as the case in the above story.
 
I believe the reason the number 3 man was trained to keep the vent hole covered during the entire operation, prior to loading and during the loading operation, was that in combat, the barrel would 'foul' over time with residue, making it nearly or completely impossible to run a dirty sponge down it. Any assumption that the thumb stall was only required during part of the loading process, automatically assumes that water was always available to artillery crews in sudden combat - ideal for sure, but a nearly impossible feat to accomplish.

I also question the theory that it was more important to keep the vent covered while cleaning out "cooling down" the barrel of a 'fired' gun, but not worrying about doing this, while pushing a bag of gunpowder and a live round down that same barrel. I suspect, as a number one man, I would be far more worried about that live round going off while I am pushing it down the barrel, than I would be if some residual powder ignited from the last round fired - blowing super hot air out the barrel. That is why the number one holds the sponge rammer in the fashion he does - in case some residual powder does ignite, it potentially won't take his arm off. On the other hand, if your hand is in front of the barrel when a round comes out - well it really doesn't matter how your held the rammer - everything is gone.

From the book Detailed Minutiae of Soldier Life
detailedminutiaeofsoldierlifeno1andno3nearlycometoblows1.jpg

detailedminutiaeofsoldierlifeno1andno3nearlycometoblows2.jpg


As to which position was the most 'dangerous', I would be interested in any statistics that have been published to say any one position was more dangerous than another. While it is true #1 and #2 would be 'closer' by a few feet to the enemy, #3 was stationary and in full frontal position to the enemy during the loading process, while the others were mobile or standing sideways to the front much of the time. A sniper would find the #3 man one of the "easier" targets, in my opinion, unless the sniper was located directly in front of the cannon, where the location of the #1 man, could offer #3 some cover.

As one of my ancestors was a #3 man in a Union 1st Missouri Artillery outfit, I read first hand accounts of artillery units during the war with special interest.

There was the manual way of firing, and there was the way crews actually did it in combat - under ideal conditions. Under less than ideal conditions, they adapted. Today we have the NPS way and the reenactor's way, both of which give us a general overview of how it was done, but both emphasis safety over the way it was taught during the war, and limit our ability to understand the 'short cuts' some crews would be forced to take under certain conditions and in certain battles. Read some of the books written by artillery men, from both sides, during the war and you will see these crews were men - not robots - and men will quickly learn that if a shortcut and a faster way of doing something is the safer way when someone is shooting at you - then a shortcut is born. Men in combat also quickly learn that patriotism may demand sacrifice, but does not always require suicide.

Thanks for posting the story Laura.
 
...There was the manual way of firing, and there was the way crews actually did it in combat - under ideal conditions. Under less than ideal conditions, they adapted. Today we have the NPS way and the reenactor's way, both of which give us a general overview of how it was done, but both emphasis safety over the way it was taught during the war...

Well put.
 
Thanks Andy. That does make sense. I'm pretty good at finding interesting CW newspaper articles but I'm certainly not a cannon expert. :nah disagree: I appreciate you providing this more accurate information.

I asked a friend of mine on Facebook who is a Civil War artillerist (recently recertified), who confirmed that purpose exactly.
 
I asked a friend of mine on Facebook who is a Civil War artillerist (recently recertified), who confirmed that purpose exactly.

Several of us have been certified at a least one position, at the West Point NY camp or others (camps have been conducted in other regions of the country). One certified crewman's experience with certification does not equip them to confirm cannon gas physics. There's no check-off box for that *


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
* Certification is a process of assessing crew and position performance in a standardized drill procedure, and is focused on rating proficiency and safety. The Association's standard drill itself has changed over time, and has differed from the NPS drill as well, so the "bottom line" on one aspect of the drill (serving the vent) may depend on what year and what location a crewman (or crew woman) was certified.
 
Last edited:
@OldReliable1862 in case you haven't seen this thread yet......and in response to your request for advice for getting started in artillery reenacting....here is my advice:
If you are assigned to No. 3, don't forget or lose your thumbstall. :bounce:
Thanks! When my predecessor at No. 3 first went to his post, he put his bare thumb over the hole. Immediately one of the other crewmen gave him his thumbstall! In the No. 1 and 2 positions, it's very important you palm your implement, not grasp it. If the charge accidentally goes off, it'll shoot off like a rocket, taking your thumbs with it.
 
I was just reading @Woods-walker 's thread on Individual Acts of Heroism. Although this man was a Confederate and not eligible for a Medal of Honor, I've always thought that self-sacrificing acts such as this one define true heroism - not to mention incredible fortitude and strength of character. It's been a couple of years since Pvt Judson Porter of the Troup Artillery was spotlighted, so thought it a good time to bump the thread.
 
Back
Top