Prussian Artillery 1866

[mollinary]

Chad,

I am getting more and more puzzled as we whizz around the net. Firstly why does googling Prussian Horse Artillery 1866 get us photos of a Krupp gun taken from the Egyptians at Tel- El-Kebir?  In 1866 the Horse Batteries were equipped with the light 12pdr smoothbore shell guns!  The gun in the photos looks very much like a bronze C64 to me. 

Mollinary

[mollinary]

OK.  I think I have found an authoritative source, at least for 1866, which should put most of this to rest. Interestingly, I think it highlights the dangers of us trying to generalise from individual photos on the web, particularly when they deal with a period in which weapons were changing and being adapted year on year, and many variants existed.  My source is "Memorandum on The Prussian Army in Relation to the Campaign of 1866". By Lt Col Reilly CB, RA, published in 1867. He was sent by the British as an observer to the army, but arrived after the fighting. He spent his time gaining an intimate knowledge of how the Prussians fought, and finding out details of their equipment.  I started this research for other purposes, and much of that should come out in Holdfast's and my book on Koniggratz, due out next year, but on to the artillery:

I) each corps had "4 batteries horse artillery - 12-Pdrs. (Not rifled.)
                              4        ".       Field artillery - 6-Pdrs. (Rifled)
                              6.       ".       Field artillery - 4-Pdrs. (Rifled)
                              2.       ".       Field artillery - 12-Pdrs (not rifled)
"Such, at least , was the equipment during the late campaign, differing from that laid down in the Regulations."

6Pdr guns.  "The gun carriage is of wood.......... The axle tree is made of cast steel with horizontal arms.  There are two seats on it, and these are furnished with fixed foot rests, handles covered with leather, and a back of wire network."    So, they should have seats!  Now, should they also have supporting bars?  Well Reilly is silent on this matter, but does include a detailed drawing of the carriage of a 4pdr.  On it the bars are shown, and clearly labelled as "Rear stays of axle seats".    This might be taken to imply that similar stays existed on the 6pdr carriage, as it also has the seats.   

Hope this helps.

Mollinary

[Leman]

TBH not really, but I'm not going to get my knickers in a twist about it. And anyway my guns have been modelled for 1870, when horse artillery had converted to the 4pdr. At least I can tell the difference between a 6pdr and a 4pdr whern they are on the table.

[mollinary]

Now, can anyone help an aged amnesiac, and tell me where I picked up this idea that HA 4pdrs didn't have seats? I remember asking Leon for seatless carriages after I discovered it, but cannot for the life of me remember where I got it from!     

Mollinary

Leon, did I tell you?   

[Leon]

Now, can anyone help an aged amnesiac, and tell me where I picked up this idea that HA 4pdrs didn't have seats? I remember asking Leon for seatless carriages after I discovered it, but cannot for the life of me remember where I got it from!     

Leon, did I tell you?   

Possibly?  I've been looking through a lot of old emails trying to find the original conversations, but I'm sure you gave us info on them.

[cameronian]

Its all a bit confusing .... in the beginning was the C61 6pdr, it had the distinctive bulbous breech and the belling to the end of the barrel, the carriage did not have diagonal bracing, I believe it did have wire seats but I can't lay my hands on a source other than the one Mollers has produced (Reilly) which I think we must accept as accurate. The C61 6 pdr illustrated earlier stands in the square in Saarlouis, barrel original (minus breech) but the carriage (no seats) is a reconstruction and so must be suspect. The C61 6pdr was at Koniggratz.

The C61 6pdr was replaced by the C64 6pdr, for our purposes the barrel was the same but the carriage now had diagonal steel bracing struts due to some modification to the axel bushes (I think to reduce weight). If it had seats in 1866 I think it likely it still had them in 1870. The C64 6pdr was at Sedan.

There was no C61 4pdr.

The C64 4pdr had the square breech, the barrel was straight and without the belling (almost said bell end   ). I don't know if it had seats or not, ditto braces, sorry. The C64 4pdr was at Koniggratz.

The C64 4pdr was replaced by the C67 4pdr. The main difference was in the breech mechanism, the original(s) having been little more than prototype(s) and bedevilled with problems. The C67 4pdr barrel is pretty much identical to the C64 (for our purposes), the carriage did have seats and did have diagonal braces (below). The C67 was at Sedan.

As far as seated horse artillery is concerned, I just can't believe it. The gun flails and bounces even at a gentle canter, the gunners wouldn't stand a chance of staying on, and if it went over (which they do) ... nasty.

[FierceKitty]

*Does happy dance because he got something right*

Pictures, please.

[Chad]

Cam

I have seen that photo.

To my eyes (old as they are) that appears to be the gun carriage as modelled for PPW16 which is described as the C61 6pdr, which was my original query. I have previous had models from PPW15 which is described as the C64 but the carriage looks nothing like that.

Thanks for all the help, but I will just swop the barrels from the two packs and leave it at that.

Chad

[Leman]

"I have previous,"  -  you are a criminal

"I have previously,"  -  you had something earlier

English, eh? it's a bugger!

[Chad]

Have you got nothing better to do?

[Leman]

No - having to let stuff dry.

[Chad]

 

[mollinary]

Possibly?  I've been looking through a lot of old emails trying to find the original conversations, but I'm sure you gave us info on them.

Hi Leon,

Memory is a funny thing, but after not thinking about this issue for days, the answer suddenly popped into my mind.  I found this "fact" when sorting out my old copies of  WI before moving back to the UK. Rushing to those that I kept,  I found, in Issue No14 from October 1988, an article by Mike Tomczak on the equipment and organisation of Prussian Artillery 1870-71. Four pages of gold dust, its main source is W.Witte "Die gezogene feldgeschutze C/61, C/64 und C/64/67 1870/71 (Krefeld 1971). This was an expanded version of an 1867 publication which included material on 1870-71. The article includes a nicely detailed drawing of the 4pounder gun carriage C/64 taken from Witte. The caption includes the words "this picture shows the arrangement of the axsitze (axle seats), each seating one man, on which men rode into battle. Such seats were not present on the guns of the horse batteries." 

So, now at least I know I did not make it up!

Mollinary 

PS the article contains another gem, although I hesitate (a bit!) to reveal it.   "The 6pdr had the barrel of 1861 (C61) with the gun carriage and limber developed in 1864. A new 6 pounder barrel introduced in 1864 proved unsuitable and the barrels were finished as the C61, although they were slightly lighter".

M

[cameronian]

Was it the barrel or the breech mechanism that was unsuitable? I know the C61 6pdr started life with the Wahrendorff piston breech which they changed to the Wesener wedge for the early C64s, changing back to an improved version of the Wahrendorff design after the war of 1866. I infer from this that the wartime performance of some of the Prussian 6pdrs was sub par too. Ha, give me a good muzzle loading 8pdr every time.

[mollinary]

Hi Cam,

From another source, it was the breech mechanism that proved unsatisfactory. Hence the reversion to the original type. This has piqued my interest, so I am now in the process of getting a copy of the Witte book from Fortress books in the Netherlands.  As they say: "There's no bore like an old bore!"    

Mollinary