Very basic question: What were they shooting at?

[LSBusch]

I know, I should know this, but I don't. I knew the soldiers used guns but didn't think much more about it. (In a quick search of my book, I found more "rifle pits" than rifles and more "musketry" than "muskets.") I recently read (or re-read) The Red Badge of Courage, and I noticed the soldiers were just loading or reloading and firing, not aiming. So was the idea to just shoot in the direction of the opposing line and hope you hit someone? In other words, hitting someone or being hit was a matter of luck? They weren't trained to hit targets? It's not like aiming at an animal when you're hunting?

 

[Trooper "D"]

In " The Rifled Musket" Fuller reproduced tests that were conducted by the Ordinance Department in 1860. A wide variety of long arms were shot at 6' X 6' paper targets. Trained infantrymen were the testers.

View attachment 524200
As can be seen, at 100 yards a smoothbore musket scattered balls randomly around the target.

View attachment 524202
The grouping of the rifled muskets is dramatically different. Even at 300 yards the rifle pattern is tighter than the smoothbore at 100 yards.

With buck & ball at 100 yards only a fraction of the buck & ball reached the target. Many of the buckshots that did bounced off the paper, unable to penetrate.

The finding was that beyond 50 yards Buck & ball was ineffective. A regiment armed with smoothbores firing buck & ball could not support artillery. At 200 yards only a fraction of the smoothbore rounds reached the target. Opposing infantry that achieved fire superiority at 300 yards was a suicidal undertaking. Even more so with buck & ball that didn't even travel 200 yards.

I believe that "The Rifled Musket" by Fuller is an essential reference everyone should have. It is out of print but is available used online for a few dollars.

Ordnance Depertment

 

[Trooper "D"]

I know, I should know this, but I don't. I knew the soldiers used guns but didn't think much more about it. (In a quick search of my book, I found more "rifle pits" than rifles and more "musketry" than "muskets.") I recently read (or re-read) The Red Badge of Courage, and I noticed the soldiers were just loading or reloading and firing, not aiming. So was the idea to just shoot in the direction of the opposing line and hope you hit someone? In other words, hitting someone or being hit was a matter of luck? They weren't trained to hit targets? It's not like aiming at an animal when you're hunting?

The tactics at the time relied on mass firing if lines of soldiers. A few volleys and so much smoke could hang in the air that vision was hampered. Most engagements were very close range and depending g on the circumstances could lead to almost the entire front line taking casualty or nobody being a casualty. One of the things I impress on my groups at my talks and demos is that they troops were not in the best of circumstances for accurate fire. Not eating for sometimes days. Not having sleep. Marching to the field off battle for many miles, sometimes it then quick step could throw of individual accuracy. Jostling in the ranks shoulder to shoulder could also throw things off. Often the order was too aim at the enemies belt plates to correct overhead firing. The kick of the round going off can affect accuracy and even the whole line firing can fool one into believing that they fired also even if they failed to prime their piece. I've had that happen at reenactments when my weapon failed to discharge while firing by flank.
Go without food for 24 hours and see how much your hand shakes when maneuvering and firing. Add to that a multi mile march to get there and anyone in such conditions would be lucky to hit anything accurately even without the terror of battle.
That's why the firing was so incurate with rifles at close range.

 

[Rhea Cole]

I know, I should know this, but I don't. I knew the soldiers used guns but didn't think much more about it. (In a quick search of my book, I found more "rifle pits" than rifles and more "musketry" than "muskets.") I recently read (or re-read) The Red Badge of Courage, and I noticed the soldiers were just loading or reloading and firing, not aiming. So was the idea to just shoot in the direction of the opposing line and hope you hit someone? In other words, hitting someone or being hit was a matter of luck? They weren't trained to hit targets? It's not like aiming at an animal when you're hunting?

It is a trope that Civil War infantry did not engage in target practice. In the early months of the war, just getting organized was a 24/7 challenge. The majority of the raw recruits had never fired a long gun in their lives. The militia had been moribund for decades. At Perryville entire regiments had a baptism of fire before many of the men had loaded their muskets & fired a shingle shot.

In 1863 when the Army of the Cumberland advanced across an 80 mile wide front. Every firefight was a lopsided victory for the Cumberlanders. Only six months earlier when the 14th Army Corps marched out of Nashville on Boxing Day, 40% of the infantry was armed with a random collection of smoothbore muskets.

With smoothbore muskets at 200 & 100 yards there was no point in even pretending to aim. Many of the balls didn't even hit the target at those ranges. For good reason, Napoleonic firefights occurred at less than 100 yards.

With rifled muskets at 200, 300 & 500 yards, compare the results with 100 yards with a smoothbore. With a rifle soldiers could engage a target at five times the range of a smoothbore. At Stones River 60% of Bragg's infantry was armed with smoothbores. Some of them were little more than rusted out junk. All the poor slubs in Florida regiments where the lucky ones carried the hammer in a pocket lost 80% without inflicting a single casualty on Hazen's men defending the Round Forrest. The rear ranks were armed with sticks…

At 100 yards the average U.S. soldier was deadly accurate. That did not happen by accident.

On the rain drenched false dawn of June 23, 1863 Wilder's mounted infantry overwhelmed Wheeler's cavalry guarding the entrance to the one lane Hoover's Gap. At both the Gap & at Shelbyville on the right flank, Wheeler's rain soaked troopers could only get 4 out of 10 of their muzzleloaders to fire. Wilder's men & the regiment armed with seven shot Spencer rifles had regularly shot their barrels in at the rifle range where the Stones River VC is now.

Unlike a muzzleloader, the Spencer allowed the soldier to hold his sight picture as he reloaded.

Copper cartridges were not subject to being reduced to sludge by a 500 year rain event.

Of course, the majority of soldiers were equipped with obsolete muzzle loading muskets right up until the end of the war. My point here is that at the end of a three year enlistment the necessity of basic marksmanship was obvious to the weakest of minds. Soldiers who veteranized for the rest of the war knew their trade. Whether it was firing a Spencer across the Tennessee River to drive Bragg's sharpshooters away or Army of the Tennessee or Army of the Potomac pickets who went forward with 50 rounds to fire during their trick on the line, the conceit that they couldn't hit the broad side of a barn withers.

On a cool humid morning with no wind, "aimed shots" is a bit of a euphemism. 60% of a black powder load is ejected as solid particulate matter… thus the Civil War assaults at Gettysburg & Franklin disappearing into a boiling, blinding roil of white smoke. We know each other well enough to understand me when I say that here on CWT there are a lot posts by people who have never smelled a hint of powder smoke in their lives. It isn't an insult, it is just a fact. You asked a good question. I do wish you would come form up with us.

My wife Anne loved being at arms length of the muzzle as cannoneer #2. So many questions you have never asked would be answered. Here's one…

In the drill, #'s 1 & 2 observe the muzzle blast. It is counter intuitive, but in battery it isn't obvious whether your gun has gone off or not. The same was true of infantry firing in line. Even in the benign atmosphere of a national park, misfires can be questionable. In the Adrenalin soaked otherworld of a black powder firefight, muscle memory, not the rational mind, took over. With nerves twanging like a banjo, ten or more rounds loaded one after another were not unusual & perfectly understandable.

I believe you deserve a thoughtful reply to your question… hope this helps.

RC

 

[Old Soldier]

The old smoothbore muskets were usually pointed in the general direction and fired at the line of enemy in front. There was little practice in hitting a target since it was company against company. Firing was by order, rarely independently. The rifle was for dedicated marksmen, who were often branded 'murderers' because they chose their targets - and not always so called by the enemy. The introduction of the rifle musket forced a complete change of tactics in favor of open formations. This was not always appreciated by older commanders who stuck to the 'tried and tested' tactics of the line.

The effective range of the smoothbore was about 100 yards but the rifle musket was capable of hitting a target at 600 yards - WITH TRAINING. Time and time again, we have discussed this on threads. The conclusion usually revolves around training and expectations rather than the weapon. Rate of fire was more important than accuracy, especially for the 'new soldiers'. Many of those training the new soldiers - and in charge of the training - were more familiar with the old way of doing things. Time for training was limited.

The Civil War battles did not often favor the rifle musket, being fought in close country - woods, thickets, etc where the rifle and smoothbore were quite equal, thus justifying the lack of change in some eyes. The trained soldier in European armies at this time were tested to shoot with reasonable accuracy out to 600 yards or equivalent and there was time, ammunition and facilities made to do this. (Exception being Prussia using the needle rifle which had a shorter range). Skirmishing formations were much more common as was a wider spacing for 'the line'. The line was still useful in colonial warfare, but less so against a European foe. This was still a time of change and lessons were learned from the Crimean War, Indian Mutiny, expansion wars (Prussia/ Denmark, Prussia/ Austria, France/Mexico, Italy) as well as the American Civil War. In 1860, the muzzleloading rifle was the norm, by 1870 it was the breech-loading rifle. Experience was the big factor for change.

*One of the reasons for the failure of the British Army in the two Boer Wars was the continued use of close formation tactics against mass native groups armed with close-range weapons verses the open formations of Boer marksmen armed with modern rifles. The commanders could not cope. The soldiers suffered.

 

[Championhilz]

I don't think you can understate the importance of black powder smoke when it comes to aiming and firing on a Civil War battlefield. Having been a reenactor for over a decade, and doing live shoots of Civil War artillery as well, you have to see it first-hand to truly appreciate how blinding the smoke is. After a few volleys, the enemy line is almost invisible behind a wall of smoke, and all you can see are flashes from the muskets from time to time. If anyone wants to experience this first-hand without becoming a reenactor, try the Civil War game War of Rights - I have been playing for several years, and the game does an excellent job of reproducing the chaos and sights and sounds of a Civil War battlefield.

 

[Rhea Cole]

You are spot on. The artillery at Fort Granger was sited on a commanding bluff across the Harpeth River from the earthworks. They had to cease fire because of the blinding smoke rising over the line.

I was involved in a ship to ship cannonade in the pool at Bath, England. The British gunners used historically correct cloth bags.

We were down wind. Not only were we smacked in the face by rapid fire concussions, which was new to me… Whisky Tango Foxtrot… leaping, swirling & dancing in the white smoke were glowing & flaming butterflies.

There is nothing more terrifying than open flame on a wooden sailing ship… even carefully made up foil rounds concentrated the mind. Slim Pickings, in the opening scene of 'Blazing Saddles' aptly described my ember stomping dance contribution to the exchange of fire.

My ears were ringing as the last smoke free m the parting shot cleared. Thousands of people cheered & began to sing as the pilot nosed the HMS Rose into the Avon River gorge.

Neither before nor since have I felt the smack of the concussion wave up close like that. Answers the universal question, "Why didn't they do…?"

When your ears are ringing, eyes stinging, surrounded by a white cloud & spitting out charred bits of cloth, there really isn't a whole lot else you can do.

 

[Championhilz]

You are spot on. The artillery at Fort Granger was sited on a commanding bluff across the Harpeth River from the earthworks. They had to cease fire because of the blinding smoke rising over the line.

I was involved in a ship to ship cannonade in the pool at Bath, England. The British gunners used historically correct cloth bags.

We were down wind. Not only were we smacked in the face by rapid fire concussions, which was new to me… Whisky Tango Foxtrot… leaping, swirling & dancing in the white smoke were glowing & flaming butterflies.

There is nothing more terrifying than open flame on a wooden sailing ship… even carefully made up foil rounds concentrated the mind. Slim Pickings, in the opening scene of 'Blazing Saddles' aptly described my ember stomping dance contribution to the exchange of fire.

My ears were ringing as the last smoke free m the parting shot cleared. Thousands of people cheered & began to sing as the pilot nosed the HMS Rose into the Avon River gorge.

Neither before nor since have I felt the smack of the concussion wave up close like that. Answers the universal question, "Why didn't they do…?"

When your ears are ringing, eyes stinging, surrounded by a white cloud & spitting out charred bits of cloth, there really isn't a whole lot else you can do.

The largest cannon I have personally fired with live rounds is a 30-Pounder Parrott Rifle, using the full service charge of 3 pounds of black powder per shot. Each time we fired the concussion wave felt like a hard slap to the face.

 

[PatW]

I read an account by a union soldier at the Battle of Shiloh. He was standing in the line of infantry and not firing. An officer came by and asked him why he was not shooting. By that time, the musketry of both sides had obscured everything in smoke. He said that he could not see anything and could not see anything to shoot at. The officer told him to just shoot.

In Civil War battles smoke often obscured so much as to make aiming at anything problematic.