Yep. That is ironic.
I may be mistaken, but I think the Swedish chemist Alfred Nobel had the same thought when he invented Dynamite.
( How did that work out ? )
And the real irony is that he has an international "peace prize" named after him.
I wonder what the odds of not getting shot by the opposing gunners; the flag bears or the gunners of the Gatling gun crew?There were some problems of course, the biggest being that before the age of smokeless gunpowder that rate of fire created an enormous cloud of smoke which not only blinded the gunners but also pinpointed them to the enemy.
Which led to the other big problem, So opposing gunners could simply spot the huge cloud of smoke and take free, safe pot shots at the Gatling emplacement with no worries about getting hit by it.
Yep, and in reality that wouldn't really work because one needs a blasting cap to set off the dynamite (i.e. the fuse sets off the cap which in turn sets off the dynamite). Not unlike those twenty-shot six guns that never had to be reloaded.There's many a western movie with someone throwing or using dynamite when it really wasn't that common or even invented yet. I guess Hollywood preferred it over powdersticks.
Very true.but then as now its only real use is civilian. It has no weapons utility.
Prior to Custer's disaster, his second in command, Maj. Reno, had lead a scouting expedition into the Powder river area looking for Indians. Reno took a couple of Gatling guns with him on his ride but found the terrain was too difficult on the guns and they frequently broke down, hindering the speed of his cavalry. So when Reno rejoined Custer's command, the decision was made to leave the guns behind as they impeded mobility in the rough terrain.I wonder what his reasons were?
The rate of fire can be very high, but remember that there are 6 barrels, so that reduces the barrel heating problem somewhat.That is true.
Technology really took off within the next 30 or 40 years.
But I can't help but think he would be happy that his "gatling gun" remains one the most feared weapons in the USAF ground attack squadrons today.
The A-10 "Warthog", AC-130 gunships and other aircraft use a modern version that can fire thousands of rounds per minute, although unfeasible ... as that rate of fire would easily overheat the weapon.
I think he would like the ship mounted Naval versions as well.
( Now I'm thinking about the Phalanx weapons system based on the M61 Vulcan "gattling" that can fire up to 6,000 rounds per minute).
So I think Dr. Gatling would be proud.