Sharpshooting...

[LtTevis]

Hey all,
Pretty new here so hope I'm posting in the right forum.
Got a few related questions that some here may have insight on.
Were the Berdan Sharpshooters and SC Palmetto Sharpshooters similar in combat performance?
What types of weaponry did these units primarily use, were they similarly effective?
Were they equally trained? What other Sharpshooting units were there?
Any insight is appreciated.
Thanks!

 

[Sheltowee]

No expert here, but just an observation.

Some local companies would attach the moniker "sharpshooters" to their name. I'm not convinced that these men had any specialized formal training- nor specialty arms. I believe it was just a tagline- same for "guards" and "rangers". Sounds more macho.

But I don't know the background of the two specifically mentioned. Perhaps they possessed some extra skills? Not sure.

 

[Lubliner]

Here is a good place to begin your search.

Regimental Histories

civilwartalk.com

Lubliner.

 

[Sowbelly and Hardtack]

Not all sharpshooter units were created equally. With that said Berdan Sharpshooters were unlike any other sharpshooter unit in either the Union or Confederate armies.

 

[Sowbelly and Hardtack]

Berdan’s US Sharpshooter bench rest rifle | Small Arms & Ammunition

I am lucky enough to live in a house built by my great great grandfather, Ira Lunt. He served in 2nd Regiment Company D US Sharpshooters out of Maine. Here is his target/bench Rifle he used. My question is if anyone knows anything about this specific weapon. One pic shows the stamp of where the...

civilwartalk.com

 

[Sowbelly and Hardtack]

 

[LibertyAndUnion]

To give a sense of the accuracy of members of the United States Sharpshooters I present an example from Company E, 1st USSS. Of the 100+ initial enrollees from NH, the WORST shot of the bunch missed the center of a bullseye by a combined 30 inches in 10 shots from a distance of 600 feet. So, the least accurate marksman in the company from 200 yards away missed the center of a modern dinner plate by 3 inches in a average shot. He was, relatively speaking, horribly inaccurate. These tryouts were done using a personally owned weapon in most cases. The single shot breechloading Sharps Rifles -- the preferred weapon in the USSS -- didn't arrive for all of the 18 companies until mid-1862.

 

[Lubliner]

On the two units picked, it would depend upon their battle conflicts, concerning statistics.
Lubliner.

 

[Specster]

Not all sharpshooter units were created equally. With that said Berdan Sharpshooters were unlike any other sharpshooter unit in either the Union or Confederate armies.

IIRC Berdans soldiers had to pass a qualifying test to become a Berdan...and it was not an easy target test to pass, and then they went into specialied training

 

[Saphroneth]

The training that Berdan's sharpshooters went through was AIUI pretty similar to the Hythe musketry method. A similar (though less intensive IIRC) version of the Hythe method training was given to the men of Cleburne's division.

The real key here is range estimation. Range estimation training was not very common in the ACW, certainly it wasn't very common to train in estimating range at a glance out to several hunded yards, and this is an essential precondition of sharpshooting at long range.

It's a skill that can be taught, but most people won't pick it up from experience. If you're taught though then the majority of people can shoot effectively at several hundred yards (though other aspects of Hythe included pressing the trigger rather than pulling it, avoiding a flinch at the snap of the percussion cap, compensating for wind and other ways to avoid fouling the shot).

If you don't have range estimation as a skill then sharpshooting at more than about 200 yards quickly becomes a matter of pure luck - but with Hythe training about one third of the British Army was able to hit unit-type targets more often than not at 700 yards.

 

[LibertyAndUnion]

You didn't need to be trained how to shoot well if you passed the USSS test. They weren't taught how to be sharpshooters after they enlisted as a U.S. Sharpshooter. They already had the advanced skill. Many of the enlistees came from states where you either shot really well or you didn't eat. There was a lot of practice shooting in camps, but no one had to teach them how to be very accurate shots. The 18 companies went through battalion and company drill similar to infantrymen. They also had skirmish training, undoubtedly more intense than the average infantry regiment/company. But even that wasn't so much about shooting per se.

 

[Saphroneth]

You didn't need to be trained how to shoot well if you passed the USSS test. They weren't taught how to be sharpshooters after they enlisted as a U.S. Sharpshooter. They already had the advanced skill.

Nosworthy, Bloody Crucible of Courage:




"The first and most notable of these attempts is provided by the First and Second Regiments of Sharpshooters. The soldiers accepted into these regiments spent months laboriously mastering the same system that had been taught at Hythe and Vincennes, learning to estimate the range in order to properly site their weapons, an essential precognition for accurate fire. The accomplishments of this corps the next year in front of Yorktown are some of the most impressive instances of highly accurate long-range fire." P269

Emphasis mine. This is the difference between "can hit a target accurately at a known range" and "can hit a target accurately at an unknown range."

 

[LibertyAndUnion]

Not that I'm Einstein, but I never saw a reference to Hythe or Vincennes in any primary source document I've ever seen on the USSS after spending a good chunk of the last two years studying the words of USSS members. Never in any letter or story about them did anyone say they "spent months laboriously mastering" whatever. This is the only reference I've ever seen to such a system of training. Most of them didn't get Sharps Rifles, the preferred weapon of the USSS, until well into 1862, long after their camp of instruction. They didn't have months to train on them. They didn't need that much time anyway. Range finding with a Sharps wasn't complicated. They didn't need months to master it. Can you find me a cite of a USSS member himself talking about how complicated it was? I haven't seen any.

There are a lot of myths about the USSS out there. I suggest Nosworthy is propagating another one here unless I see primary source info out there. What did he cite to promote the statement you provide?

 

[Saphroneth]

Range finding with a Sharps wasn't complicated. They didn't need months to master it.

But this isn't the issue at all. It's not "how do you set the sights to 830 yards" but "how do you work out that some guy you can see in a field over there is 830 yards away". This is range estimation and it is a skill that requires learning, especially if (as with British sharpshooters of the period) you are going to be doing it personally without anyone else giving you your range estimate. Conversely you don't need a gun to learn it at all!

Unless the men who were accepted into the US Sharpshooters made a habit of hunting deer from 600+ yards away (which seems rather excessively fair to the deer) then it's not a skill they'd have necessarily come into the army with. They would need to learn.

The qualification test would show that they could shoot at a known range, but an unknown range is a different beast.

 

[LibertyAndUnion]

What did Nosworthy cite to support his view, which has zero primary source support that I've seen? I reject his notion that USSS members spent months mastering the skill you describe. It's simply not supported in primary source documentation. Nothing in their schedules list range estimation training. I've never found a letter or diary that mentions such training. What primary source document can you cite that supports Nosworthy? My guess is he just made it up.

 

[Miles Krisman]

Hey all,
Pretty new here so hope I'm posting in the right forum.
Got a few related questions that some here may have insight on.
Were the Berdan Sharpshooters and SC Palmetto Sharpshooters similar in combat performance?
What types of weaponry did these units primarily use, were they similarly effective?
Were they equally trained? What other Sharpshooting units were there?
Any insight is appreciated.
Thanks!

"Shock Troops of the Confederacy" by Fred L. Ray will provide answers to many of your questions.

American Civil War Books :: Shock Troops of the Confederacy - The Sharpshooter Battalions of the Army of Northern Virgina

History of the sharpshooter battalions of the army of nothern Virginia in the American Civil War using recently discovered documents and diaries

www.cfspress.com

 

[LtTevis]

"Shock Troops of the Confederacy" by Fred L. Ray will provide answers to many of your questions.

American Civil War Books :: Shock Troops of the Confederacy - The Sharpshooter Battalions of the Army of Northern Virgina

History of the sharpshooter battalions of the army of nothern Virginia in the American Civil War using recently discovered documents and diaries

www.cfspress.com

Thanks, I just saw that on Amazon and I'm now ordering...

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

The Rifle Musket in Civil War Combat by Earl Hess spends a chapter on the subject of sharpshooter units. I imagine his book on Infantry Tactics also addresses the issue.

 

[7thWisconsin]

But this isn't the issue at all. It's not "how do you set the sights to 830 yards" but "how do you work out that some guy you can see in a field over there is 830 yards away". This is range estimation and it is a skill that requires learning, especially if (as with British sharpshooters of the period) you are going to be doing it personally without anyone else giving you your range estimate. Conversely you don't need a gun to learn it at all!

Unless the men who were accepted into the US Sharpshooters made a habit of hunting deer from 600+ yards away (which seems rather excessively fair to the deer) then it's not a skill they'd have necessarily come into the army with. They would need to learn.

The qualification test would show that they could shoot at a known range, but an unknown range is a different beast.

You use a stadia sight to calculate range. You can hang the device from a buttonhole (or hold it in your teeth). Extend your arm the length of the cord, put the target in the sight window and adjust the sliding bar until it frames the target. Then read the range off the markings on the stadia. They were fairly common and often given as prizes in shooting competitions.

 

[Saphroneth]

You use a stadia sight to calculate range. You can hang the device from a buttonhole (or hold it in your teeth). Extend your arm the length of the cord, put the target in the sight window and adjust the sliding bar until it frames the target. Then read the range off the markings on the stadia. They were fairly common and often given as prizes in shooting competitions.

I've seen those, and they're able to tell between 600 and 800 yards - but what made the range estimation so effective for the British is that it taught them to discern range without the need of an instrument and to within 30 yards at 900 (or about 20 yards at 500, for example). The reason I give those margins of error is that that's what it took to score a point - outside that range you scored nothing.

It also means that you're thinking about the whole process, which is useful for abnormal situations.