drill with blank would be performed in a different manner to firing
ball, and that in action the soldier would forget to reverse his
cartridge, and put in the ball first. As we now always perform our
drill, and as our present blank cartridges require to be reversed or
will not ignite, this objection is removed. It also was said that mice,
rats, &c., &c., would eat off the lubricating mixture!!
It was proposed to give the Enfield, (1853,) a back sight to 900 yards,
when an outcry was raised against the monstrous proposition of giving to
every common soldier a delicately made back sight, whether he knew how
to use it or not!!! and those rifles first issued, were only sighted to
300 yards.
~The Enfield rifle.~
At the conclusion of the trials at Enfield, in August, 1852, two rifles
were made at the Royal Manufactory, in which were embodied the
improvements and alterations suggested by the experience obtained during
the course of the trials, and which was hoped would possess the
necessary requirements for a military weapon, and which proved superior
to the Minié, the Brunswick, and all those presented for trial by the
different manufacturers.
~Dimensions, &c., of Enfield.~
This beautiful rifle though 2¹⁄₂lbs. less than the old musket, is fully
as strong, and as capable of rough usage. Weight, including bayonet,
9lbs. 3 ozs., bore, ·577, length of barrel, 3 feet 3-in., weight of
barrel, 4lbs. 6 ozs., three grooves with spiral of one turn in 6 feet
6-in.; the barrel to be fastened to the stock by bands. The bayonet to
be fixed by means of a locking ring. The lock to have a swivel. The
bullet was of a pattern suggested by Mr. Pritchett. (Plate 20, fig. 9.)
~Attempts to improve the bullet.~
~Description of Pritchett.~
Lord Hardinge, desirous to improve the projectile, and if possible to
get rid of the cup, having requested the leading gun makers to lay any
suggestions before the small arms committee, none were submitted but one
by Mr. Wilkinson, which was not a compound. It was solid with two deep
cannelures, but it lost its accuracy when made up into a cartridge, and
made very wild practice beyond 300 yards. (Plate 20, fig. 10.)
Subsequently a bullet was proposed by Mr. Pritchett, being
cylindro-conoidal in form, with a small hollow at the base, which was
made more to throw the centre of gravity forward than to obtain
expansion thereby. This bullet weighed 520 grains, or 24 guage, and
excellent practice was made with it at Enfield, from 100, to 800 yards,
and it was accordingly introduced into the service, to the suppression
of the Minié, with iron cup; and for which Mr. Pritchett, received
£1,000.
~Lancaster smooth _bore_ rifles.~
Shortly after the establishment of the School of Musketry, in June,
1853, twenty Enfield rifles were sent down for trial in competition with
the Minié, and also with “Lancaster’s smooth bore eliptical rifle, with
increasing spiral and freed at the breech,” when the Enfield was found
to be superior to both. It is stated that Mr. Lancaster’s invention is
intended to overcome the inconvenience attendant on the wearing out the
rifle ridges, by the ramrod, &c.; these rifles are also easily cleaned,
the difference in width between the major and minor axis of the ellipse
was, ¹⁄₁₀₀ of an inch.
~Engineer Carbine.~
Carbines on this principle are now carried by the Royal Engineers, and
shoot well, and by some persons are thought to be superior to the
Enfield, 1853; they fire the same ammunition, and there is no question
but that their firing is much more accurate from using the improved
wooden plug bullet.
~Failure of the Pritchett.~
In May, 1855, the ammunition was found to be in a most unsatisfactory
state and unfit to be used, there being bullets of various diameters in
many of the packages of the cartridges. The correct size of the
Pritchett bullet viz., ·568, was found to produce accurate shooting, at
600 yards, while bullets of a smaller diameter fired very badly.
~Return to iron cup.~
To get out of this difficulty, Colonel Hay recommended the application
of the iron cup to the bullet, which was approved, when more uniform
expansion resulted and greater accuracy.
Thus by using an auxiliary to expansion there is a margin left to cover
any trifling inaccuracy in manufacture, in diameter of either bullet or
bore.
~Woolwich account for bad _ammunition_.~
The Woolwich authorities stated that they had seven dies at work making
bullets, and which were made small at first as they gradually wore
larger; when any one die became too large it was destroyed, and replaced
by a smaller one. To this cause they imputed the failure of our
Pritchett ammunition. It was afterwards suggested from the School of
Musketry, to procure expansion by using a wooden plug, and after most
extensive experiments, this was found to be superior to any description
of bullet yet tried at Hythe, and the wooden plug has accordingly been
established for the British army. (Plate 20, fig. 11.)
~On expansion.~
Uniform accuracy mainly results from the bullet continuing to receive a
sufficient and uniform expansion into the grooves, so that the
projectiles get such an amount of rotation as shall last until they have
reached the object fired at. The more perfect the expansion, the less
the accumulation of fouling and consequently accuracy is further
increased.
The Enfield has frequently been fired to 200 rounds and the loading
continued easy.
~Progressive grooving 1858.~
Early in 1858, the regulation rifle, (53), was changed from grooves of
uniform, ·014 in depth, to ·005 at muzzle, increasing in depth to ·015
at the breech; while new, these rifles shoot well, but they require
increased elevation at long ranges. How far these shallow grooves will
answer, or how long it will take to convert these aims into smooth bores
at the muzzle, by the continued friction of the ramrod, remains to be
seen.
~Origin of progressive grooving.~
~Advantages.~
Captain Panot, of the French service, states, “it is but a few years
since all our smooth bore barrels were reamed so that they would carry
the spherical ball of ·669, instead of ·641. It was afterwards
determined to convert these arms into rifles. To prevent weakening the
reamed up barrels, M. Tamisier proposed to vary the depth of the
grooves, making them deeper at the breech than at the muzzle.” Grooves
thus made, are said to have a greater accuracy of fire from keeping the
ball perfectly tight as it leaves the bore and destroying all windage at
the muzzle. This is called “progressive grooving.” Rifles upon this
principle require to be fired at an increased elevation, attributed to
the greater amount of friction experienced by the bullet while passing
down the barrel.
~Short Enfield.~
Rifle regiments and all serjeants of infantry have been furnished with a
weapon requiring the same ammunition as the regulation arm, but six
inches shorter, being mounted in steel, with a sword bayonet.
~Royal Navy rifle.~
A five “grooved progressive” carbine has recently been given to the
Royal Marine Artillery and the Royal Navy, with the same bore as the
Enfield.
RIFLED BREECH-LOADERS.
~Early guns loaded at the breech.~
It is worthy of notice that, while numerous attempts are now making to
perfect the breech-loader for sporting as well as military purposes, our
early cannon and first hand guns were loaded at the breech, and if all
mechanical difficulties could be overcome, the breech-loading principle
for portable fire-arms would deserve the preference. We can easily
understand why it did not continue in favour in early days, as this mode
includes a great deal of perfection in mechanical workmanship, and to
which the ancient gun maker was a stranger.
~Disadvantages of breech-loaders.~
The great argument against breech-loaders as military weapons is the
expense, their intricate construction, the escape of gas, and the
probable waste of ammunition, in the hands of an uneducated soldier. It
may be briefly answered.
~1st. As to expense.~
1st.--As to expense, the most destructive weapon, by preventing and
curtailing war, must in the long run be the cheapest.
~2nd. As to intricacy.~
2nd.--As to intricacy of construction, the soldier is the user, not the
maker of his gun; it matters not how delicate the mechanism of a watch
may be, the only question is, does it continue to go well!! And who dare
say that the brains of man shall never suggest a simple mode of
construction. Of course anything fragile would be totally unfit for
military purposes. The escape of gas has been entirely overcome.
~3rd. As to waste of ammunition.~
3rd.--As to waste of ammunition, is it absolutely necessary that a
soldier should remain uneducated? Are not soldiers men? And men can be
taught almost anything, or are they incapable of being taught? Does a
soldier fire how, when and where he chooses? Is it too high an
aspiration that the British army should carry the best arm that can be
made, to be placed in the hands of a taught and skilful soldier, acting
under the guidance and control of intelligent officers?
~Breech-loaders highly improved.~
~Ammunition the difficulty.~
As far as the arm only is concerned, breech-loaders have now (1860)
attained a high degree of perfection, as is proved by the deserved
celebrity of that made by Mr. Westley Richards. The only remaining
difficulty is one of ammunition. Loose powder cannot be employed in
loading with a breech as it can with a muzzle-loader. We are up to this
time under the necessity of introducing the whole of the cartridge, this
of course augments fouling and lessens accuracy; there is also increased
difficulty in producing ignition through the fold of the cartridge
paper.
~Capt. Brown’s compressed powder.~
Recently a most ingenious mode of compressing the grains of powder
contained in a charge into one mass, so that every description of rifle
may be rapidly loaded without any paper, has been invented by Captain
Brown, R. N., and I have every hope and confidence that the only
remaining breech-loading difficulty may now be considered overcome.
~Advantages of breech-loaders.~
~1st. Celerity.~
~2nd. Load lying down.~
~3rd. Easily cleaned.~
~4th. Solid ball.~
The advantages of breech-loaders, are, 1st.--Celerity of fire, about ten
rounds a minute have been attained. 2nd.--The soldier can load while
lying flat on the ground. 3rd.--The barrel can be easily cleaned and
examined as to its state. 4th.--A solid ball can be fired, and with less
windage.
~Self capping.~
Various modes of self capping have been brought forward, but that by
Maynard seems to merit the preference; time is further economized, and
the powers of the breech-loader thereby increased.
~Cavalry have breech-loaders.~
Our cavalry regiments in India, are partially armed with breech-loading
rifles, and all their pistols are rifled, and upon the tige principle.
~Rifles universal in English army.~
The whole of our Guards, regular Infantry, Royal Marines, Militia, and
Royal Engineers, are armed with rifles, and the Carabine used by the
Royal Artillery, is also rifled. All our Colonial corps are supplied
with rifled arms, with the exception of the Native corps, serving in the
East Indies and Ceylon.
~In larger numbers.~
~Taught to use.~
~Prizes.~
Thus rifles are introduced in larger numbers and of better quality in
the armies of England, in proportion to their numbers, than amongst any
other nation. While more care and expense is incurred in qualifying our
soldiers efficiently to use them. In illustration of which, it is only
needful to call attention to the simple fact that £20,000 per annum is
distributed as a stimulus to the marksmen of the British army, for which
boon all honour to our Royal Commander-in-Chief.
~Explosive shells.~
The idea has recently been revived to increase the destructive powers of
Infantry, by furnishing them with shells, with which they may explode
ammunition waggons, artillery limbers, &c., &c., to the distance of
1,000 yards. Captain Norton, Mr. Dyer, Colonel Jacobs, and Mr.
Whitworth, have directed their minds to this most important subject.
ON RIFLING.
It has been stated that amongst the different gun makers who assembled
at Woolwich, for the carrying on of experiments in 1851, no two agreed
upon any one thing; and in 1860, it may still be averred, with almost
equal truth, and that it yet remains an unsettled question as to the
form, width, depth, number or degree of spirality of the grooves, as
also the harmony which should subsist between the grooves, diameter of
bore, the form and weight of projectile, and the quality and quantity of
charge.
~Description of Rifles.~
~Advantages of a rifle.~
Robins, in 1742, says, “rifles though well known on the continent, being
but little used in England, it is necessary to give a short description
of their make. The rifle has its cylinder cut with a number of spiral
channels, so that it is in reality a female screw, varying from the
fabric of common screws, only in this, that its threads or rifles are
less deflected and approach more to a straight line.” The advantage of a
rifle (with a round bullet), is that the axis of rotation not being in
any accidental position, as in a smooth bore, but coincident with the
line of its flight, it follows that the resistance on the fore part of
the bullet is equally distributed round the centre of gravity, and acts
with an equal force on every side of the line of direction, and also
should the resistance be greater on one side of the bullet than the
other from irregularities on its surface, as this part continually
shifts its position round the line in which it is proceeding, the
deflections which this irregularity would occasion are neutralized. With
an elongated projectile rifling also prevents it from rotating round its
shorter axis.
~Rifling invented in Germany.~
~Rifles used 1498.~
~Straight grooves.~
It is to the artizans of Germany, that the rifle owes its origin, as at
the close of the fifteenth century barrels with straight grooves were
used by the citizens of Leipsic, at target practice, in 1498, and the
invention of grooving or rifling fire-arms is generally supposed to be
the result more of accident than theory. In Dean’s Manual of fire-arms,
it is stated that, “the idea of grooving arms in the direction of the
axis of the barrel to receive the residium of the powder, and thereby,
not only facilitate the loading, but increase both the bite or forcing
of the ball, by impressing upon it the grooves, and thus maintain it
during its passage through the barrel in a direction more in harmony
with the line of fire, was doubtless a conception based upon no previous
theory or practice now to be traced, but was formed in that
suggestiveness which in the individual founds for itself a theory based
upon the likelihood of possible result. Upon trial also of the straight
grooves a greater precision for short distances would have been
observed than with the smooth bore.” This must of itself therefore have
led to the establishment of a certain grade of theory which it was
endeavoured to amplify by various means, such as increasing the number
of grooves, then of changing the inclination of grooves from the
straight line to the spiral.
To deem that the practised crack “shots and armourers of a time when
target practice was the constant recreation of the citizen, and his
pride to excel in, were so brainless as to conceive no theory,
unelaborated though it may have been, and that all their even now
admired efforts in Germany, were the products of mere accident, is
therefore scarcely a rational supposition.”
~Spiral grooves, by Koster, of Nuremberg in 1522.~
It is stated that Koster, of Nuremburg, in 1522, first suggested giving
a spiral form to the grooves, and experience proved that much greater
accuracy of shooting was the result.
~Damer of Nuremberg, 1552.~
In 1552, Damer, of Nuremburg, made some great improvements in rifles,
but we are not aware of their precise nature.
~Koster of Nuremberg, 1620.~
Koster, of Nuremburg, who died 1630, by some authorities is said to have
discovered that straight grooves did not fulfil the intentions of their
inventor, and to have been the first who suggested spiral grooves in
1620.
~Robins first explained action of grooves.~
~Robins structure of rifles.~
~Modes of loading.~
The important stage next arrived at was the scientific explanation of
the true value of spiral grooves. The honor of this entirely belongs to
our countryman, Benjamin Robins, who in his Principles of Gunnery, gives
a complete and satisfactory explanation of the action of the grooves in
determining the flight of the bullet. Robins states that “the degree of
spirality, the number of threads, the depth the channel are cut down to,
are not regulated according to any invariable rule, but differ according
to the country where the work is performed, and the caprice of the
artificer. The most usual mode of charging rifles is by forcing the ball
with a strong rammer and mallet. But in some parts of Germany and
Switzerland, an improvement is made by cutting a piece of very thin
leather or fustian in a circular shape, somewhat larger than the bore,
which being greased on one side is laid upon the muzzle with its greasy
part downwards, and the bullet being placed upon it, is then forced down
the barrel with it. When this is practised the rifles are generally
shallow, and the bullet ought not to be too large.
~Early rifles, breech-loaders.~
As both these methods of charging rifles take up a good deal of time;
the rifled barrels which have been made in England, (for I remember not
to have seen it in any foreign piece,) are contrived to be charged at
the breech, where the piece is made larger, and the powder and bullet
are put in through an opening in the side of the barrel, which, when the
piece is loaded is fitted up with a screw. And perhaps somewhat of this
kind, though not in the manner now practised, would be of all others the
most perfect method for the construction of these sorts of barrels.”
ON THE NUMBER, FORM &c., &c., &c., OF THE GROOVES.
~Number of grooves.~
~Degree of spirality.~
Almost every description of twist, number, &c., &c., of grooves have
been tried, according to the individual tastes and theories of the
manufacturers. It is absolutely necessary to have two grooves, as a
single one would give a wrong direction. Rifles have been made with,
from two to one hundred and thirty three grooves, and in the majority of
cases, an odd seems to have been preferred to an even number. In Dean’s
Manual it is stated, that “in the numerous collections of arms that have
at various times come under our personal notice, some were rifled with
straight, but the majority with grooves in a spiral line, sometimes with
a half, sometimes a three quarter, and seldom more than a whole turn in
a length of two, two and a half and three feet; deviations based upon no
principle transmitted to us, but requiring nevertheless a decided
research for principles upon which to establish a theory; we have also
met with every one of those configurations of the spiral and form of
groove, &c., &c., which have been arrogated as modern conceits and
discoveries.”
~Spirality.~
Some rifles have sharp muzzle twist decreasing to the breech;--sharp
breech twist decreasing to the muzzle; an increase of twist in the
middle of the barrel decreasing at both extremities.
~Modification in France. 1740.~
In France a modification of the Carabine took place in 1740;--the
grooves were made to begin at eight inches from the muzzle, the unrifled
part being of the same calibre as the bottom of the grooves, so that the
bullet might pass easily; thus also facilitating the loading of the
weapon.
~Rifled only at muzzle.~
There is an old rifle in the United Service Institution, and also a
barrel brought from Lucknow, (in the Model Room of the School of
Musketry,) grooved only for about one foot from the muzzle, the
remainder of the barrels are smooth bored.
~Degree of spirality.~
The degree of spirality is found to vary from a whole turn in 1 foot
5-in., to a whole turn in 11 feet.
~Depth of spiral.~
The depth of grooves vary from ·005 of an inch, to about ·125; and some
rifles have been made with an alternate deep and shallow groove.
~Form of grooves.~
Grooves have been made round, circular, triangular, rectangular, and
indefinite, alternate round and angular, elliptical, polygonal; and some
cut deep only on one side.
~Proportion of groove to land.~
Some gun makers are of opinion that there should be a greater proportion
of groove or furrow than of land or plain surface, because they say the
ball is thus more firmly held, while others maintain that by diminishing
the number of the grooves, the accuracy and range would be increased,
and this has led to the opposite theory, that perhaps if anything, the
plain surface of the bore should predominate over the grooved.
~Form of early grooves straight.~
The earliest rifles had two straight deep creases opposite to each
other, the bullet being spherical, and furnished with small circular
knots of lead, large enough to fill the creases.
~Form &c., of ancient rifles.~
The greater number of ancient rifles have a whole turn, with an odd
number of deep and rounded grooves; hence we may infer these were
considered the best forms.
~Objects of rifling.~
As accuracy of direction is the result of a spiral motion round an axis
coincident with the flight of the bullet, communicated to it by the
grooves, it is clear that the depth, number, and form of the grooves
should be such as will hold the bullet firmly, and prevent all tendency
to strip.
~On the degree of spirality.~
~Sharp twist and large charge not cause stripping.~
The degree of spirality should be sufficient to retain the projectile
point foremost during the whole of its flight. It was at one time
supposed that if the spiral turn was great, and the charge strong, the
bullet would not conform, but strip, and that the same results would
occur even with grooves but little curved. Unquestionably this would
prove true if certain limits were to be exceeded. A false conclusion was
built upon this theory, viz., that the greater the spiral turn the less
the charge should be; and that therefore in rifles intended for war, the
greatest initial velocity being required to produce the greatest range,
the groove should have as little turn as possible; for extreme ranges
have been obtained with Jacob’s, Whitworth’s, and Lancaster’s rifles;
the first has a full turn in 24in. the second in 20in. These rifles
perform well with 90 grains of powder, and both Whitworth’s and
Lancaster’s might even fire better were the charge of powder increased
to 100 grains, the recoil might be objectionable while there would be no
symptoms of stripping.
~On depth of groove.~
Great depth of groove can only be hurtful, owing to the difficulty of
closing up all passage to the gas, which should not be allowed to escape
round the bullet, as this would cause deviation and shorten range. Deep
grooves become a receptacle for fouling, are difficult to clean; and
high projections must offer great resistance to the atmosphere, and
particularly to a side wind.
~Patches.~
When fustian or leather are used as patches, they receive and
communicate the spiral motion to the bullet, without the zone of the
projectile being at all indented, but in this case the spiral must be
diminished, otherwise the bullet would not turn with the grooves. If the
patches be made of a thick material, the grooves should be many, broad,
and not too shallow, in order to receive the folds of the patch.
~Shallow grooves best.~
From our present amount of experience it seems safe to conclude that the
shallower the grooves are the better, so that they perform their
intended functions.
~Proportion of groove to land.~
It is now generally recommended that the grooves be made broader than
the lands, _i.e._, that the rifling surface should predominate over the
unrifled part of the bore. Shallow grooves with rounded edges, have the
advantage of not leaving any angular traces on the surface of the
bullet, besides they afford a greater facility for cleaning.