Prussian Artillery 1866

[mollinary]

Hi Cam,

I have sent you a link to Hohenlohe-inglefingen's letters. Together with a summary of what Reilly says. I do not believe Reilly is duped by the Prussians, there is far too much detail contained, and his writings clearly indicate he is aware of the problems. To summarise my e mail for the board, Shrapnel is, as you would expect, available and used by the 12pdr Smoothbores.  The 4pdr rifled guns, the most numerous, and the guns with the highest number of rounds fired per gun, did not carry shrapnel.  The 6pdrs, did, but did not have a timed fuse for it, and 85-90% of the ammunition they expended was shell. It is possible they only resorted to the inefficient shrapnel when running short of shell in the limbers. According to Reilly, only 1,239 rounds of shrapnel were fired in total in the Bohemiam campaign, as opposed to some 28,980 rounds of shell and 173 rounds of canister/case. 

Mollinary

[holdfast]

I suggest that, when you get Volume 12, you remove pp 197-202 which is where the Reilly Memorandum is located as Appendix D, since it will clearly be upsetting to you. Perhaps we should have had a warning in the Introduction to the effect that this book contains descriptions which the faint-hearted may find distressing. We will consider this when we next venture into print.

[cameronian]

Thanks for the link, I already have PKZHI's 'Letters on Artillery'. I'm still a bit sceptical. Shrapnel isn't shrapnel if it doesn't burst in the air, your suggestion of a percussion fuze is original but how would you envisage it working? MR states (I'm presuming the quotation was from him) that the 12pdr smoothbores had shrapnel fuses 'fixed for the single range of 2,000 paces' but on page 60 Inglefingen says the 3rd Horse Artillery battery equipped with 12pdr SB engaged the Austrian guns with shrapnel at 1000 paces, one of them is wrong and I wouldn't put money on it being the Prince. The weight of evidence, indeed all the evidence bar Capt MR, seems pretty categorical, there was no schrapnel round for the steel breech loaders.

[mollinary]

You must, of course, come to your own conclusions. All I can say is that  Lt Col Reilly was at the time, late 1866, writing an official report for the British War Office, specifically on the technical issues.  He opens his remarks on the artillery with the sentence "The Prussian Field guns, ammunition, fuses, etc, are well known at Woolwich."  So he does not appear to be writing for an audience unaware of the technical complexities.  Beyond that, I am afraid  I do not personally possess the expertise to engage in a technical discussion on fuses of the 1860s. I am seeking advice from someone who may.

The Prince, a highly respected officer, was, I believe, writing a number of years later, for a less technically accomplished audience and, in the case of Schweinschadel, about an action he admits to not being present at. I imagine both of these distinguished officers would be bemused, and possibly also a little amused, at our attempts to make sense of things they would have regarded as self evident!

Mollinary