|
|
Post by spence on Jan 21, 2023 8:56:26 GMT -7
I thought it interesting that in the shipwreck Bess the buckshot were loaded under the ball.
Spence
|
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Jan 21, 2023 11:24:55 GMT -7
I may be mistaken, but I don't think that would happen. The ball and shot are at equal velocity when they leave the bore. Once they exit the muzzle, gravity would work on both to the same degree. The shot would spread because of angle of deflection and the effects of wind, but not because the ball hit them at higher speed. Hope this makes sense. Gus I would think that the ball, having much more mass, would lose velocity at a slower rate than the lighter buckshot and would at some point pass through the cluster, dispersing them. Whether this would happen in the short distances we are discussing, I don't know. However, it is hard to argue with success, and Spence's targets from the charges with the buckshot loaded underneath the ball, showed much better effect. A most interesting thread. Richard/Grumpa Hi Richard, Interesting thoughts. However, I think the smaller buckshot would already have deviated from the path of the ball by that time, due to their angle of deflection compared to the ball. Gus |
|
|
|
Post by bushfire on Jan 27, 2023 13:29:23 GMT -7
I've always assumed that was the standard way of loading them. Then there is this...A Bess from a period ship wreck:  Ball plus 3 buck plus 5 swan?....taking no chances. Spence Fascinating sir, Wold this load have been used by standard infantry? |
|
Keith
City-dweller
Bushfire close but safe now. Getting some good rain.
Posts: 990 
|
Post by Keith on Jan 27, 2023 21:04:02 GMT -7
I did lots of tests with shot patterns & using ball & shot, & I did not find any appreciable difference with ball & shot placement reversed.
Keith.
|
|
