The Bursted Blakely Gun

Gettmore

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Jul 5, 2015
Location
Moncks Corner, SC
Blakey Gun.jpg
 
When these large Blakeley's were sent to Charleston, they evidently failed to provide the information that the loading of these guns was different than other guns; which resulted in the failure of this gun.
 
Enjoyed the read. Excuse my questions, Since when did editors and newspaper men become authorities on artillery? But this is John Daniel's paper and he could be outspoken. Does raising the muzzle 15 degrees really add that much strain to the metal? And what is a damson seed?
 
Enjoyed the read. Excuse my questions, Since when did editors and newspaper men become authorities on artillery? But this is John Daniel's paper and he could be outspoken. Does raising the muzzle 15 degrees really add that much strain to the metal? And what is a damson seed?
Damson is a type of plum. The pit/seed is shaped like a peach pit but much smaller.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, I'm no expert or authority on cannon. I did not realize the powder was in such big chunks.I always assumed it was in coarse granules not much bigger than "regular" gunpowder. Was bigger chunks normal for artillery?
Yes, the larger "chunks" burned slower which more desirable for artillery.
 
Gunpowder grain size chart.jpeg

A-1 is the grade used during cannon firing demonstrations using blanks.​
During one very memorable summer, Stones River N.B. received surplus naval torpedo warhead powder to use during demonstration firings of an original 12 pound Napoleon. During those happy days, both solid shot & air bursting rounds were routinely life fired at the park. The torpedo powder grains were, if memory serves, the sized of my thumbnail. Rationally, I figure it was the size of a pointer finger nail. The large grains of powder were formulated to produce a pressure wave, not as a propellent. As a result, the gun went off with a distinctive drawn out 'Ka-whoooooomph!' sound.

The size of the grain is directly in proportion to the speed at which it ignites & releases the expanding gas that propels the round. Using FFg, for example, in a cannon can cause a catastrophic over pressure.

Over pressures that resulted in the failure of CW cannon were not always due to a manufacturing flaw. The friction between the powder inside a rifled round rubbing against the rough interior of a shell or short fuze could cause a premature detonation. The resulting explosion caused on overpressure that turned the barrel into a giant pipe bomb. Overloading the gun could have the same effect. The unburnt powder ahead of the ignition can act as an obstruction.

Failures from overloads can happen even when firing blanks. My cannon safety lecture folder has a surprising number of cases where a misfire was followed by the loading of one or more additional blank rounds. Traumatic amputations were suffered by crewmen & bystanders when the overloaded guns went off.
 
Last edited:
The Press does not require 'facts' to achieve their desired impacts.
Journalists during the war were a rare breed, and the stories they told were to delight their audience that would never know the difference unless told otherwise. But they were sneaky too, and were able to gain admission to some exclusive content for publication. When they got too good at it, they were either censured or removed from the location.
Lubliner.
 
Does raising the muzzle 15 degrees really add that much strain to the metal?
That doesn't make sense to me. It seems to say the gun with that load could only be fired horizontally. I don't get that at all. The more horizontal the barrel is, then the Friction forces will increase. Friction is proportional to the Gravity Force perpendicular to the "Surface" or the inside wall of the barrel.
Also think of it this way. The "ball" spend only a fraction of a second in the barrel. So how could the weight of the ball add more weight forces to the barrel for that short period. I guess I am thinking of a small caliber Blakely gun but I don't see any difference.

Whereas, if he means it adds more stresses to the Carriage or Frame or Axle, then it could cause damage. As an example, if you have a standard field gun and mount the gun on the slope of a hill and fire it vertically, then the load of the recoil could overload and break the structure supporting the gun.

:cannon:
 
That doesn't make sense to me. It seems to say the gun with that load could only be fired horizontally. I don't get that at all. The more horizontal the barrel is, then the Friction forces will increase. Friction is proportional to the Gravity Force perpendicular to the "Surface" or the inside wall of the barrel.
Also think of it this way. The "ball" spend only a fraction of a second in the barrel. So how could the weight of the ball add more weight forces to the barrel for that short period. I guess I am thinking of a small caliber Blakely gun but I don't see any difference.

Whereas, if he means it adds more stresses to the Carriage or Frame or Axle, then it could cause damage. As an example, if you have a standard field gun and mount the gun on the slope of a hill and fire it vertically, then the load of the recoil could overload and break the structure supporting the gun.

:cannon:
I think the first paragraph tells the story. Trying to make a long shot longer to impress the Yankees, they filled the cylinder with too much powder. I think the journalist added to much description just to impress his audience.
Lubliner.
 

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top