Hot Coals...

[ThomasBlackthorne]

I just finished watching Captain Blood for the first time, and I was wondering about something.

Would firing hot coals in front of your ball even work?

Personally I think the coals would be destroyed from either the force of the blast or the ball itself. I don't think that they would prove to be a good accessory to your regular shot...

Anyone care to shed some light on this for me?

[Lily Alexander]

Are you seriously asking if you can pour hot coals down the barrel of a loaded fire arm?

[callenish gunner]

In theory it could be done at very close ranges of fire ...dry wadding then wet wadding would have been put down the barrel to keep the coals from igniting the linen bag that held the charge ...the bag pricked with the cannoneer's brass pick and fired almost immediately upon loading the coals ....like with hot shot on a wooden vessel it was extremely risky ....whether it was actually done or not is hard to prove, but it made good movie action 70 years ago!!!

Edited June 17, 2009 by callenish gunner

[ThomasBlackthorne]

Are you seriously asking if you can pour hot coals down the barrel of a loaded fire arm?

Well, not necessarily, just wondering if that was just Hollywood being Hollywood or if something like that was even possible.

[Cascabel]

In theory it could be done at very close ranges of fire ...dry wadding then wet wadding would have been put down the barrel to keep the coals from igniting the linen bag that held the charge ...the bag pricked with the cannoneer's brass pick and fired almost immediately upon loading the coals ....like with hot shot on a wooden vessel it was extremely risky ....whether it was actually done or not is hard to prove, but it made good movie action 70 years ago!!!

Hot coals are likely a screenwriter's fantasy, however the use of hot shot was an actual fact.

>>>> Cascabel

[ThomasBlackthorne]

Hot coals are likely a screenwriter's fantasy, however the use of hot shot was an actual fact.

>>>> Cascabel

Just as I figured, thanks sir!

[Captain Jim]

The hot shot that Cascabel speaks of are regular cannon balls heated red hot in a furnace. These were most often used against ships from shore batteries as it requires some time and quite a furnace to heat a solid cast iron ball to red hot. Still, if you could load those into a cannon I don't see why coal could not be used like flaming grapeshot at extremely close ranges. This of course would not be charcoal, which would turn to powder on discharge, but bituminous quarried variety coal, basically flaming rocks. I found it interesting that the moviemakers actually had a special tool to load the cannon. Now to find a reference...

Edited June 17, 2009 by Captain Jim

[Capt Thighbiter]

Likely it was a concious decision to use 'coals' in lieu of hot shot. Using hot shot was a known technique.

But live coals looks much better on camera!

[ThomasBlackthorne]

Likely it was a concious decision to use 'coals' in lieu of hot shot. Using hot shot was a known technique.

But live coals looks much better on camera!

I couldn't agree more.

[captjustinkase]

I agree that hot coals would not work (per the previous dust factor mentioned), but if they did a hot shot I do not see why they couldn't do a "raisin" shot (heated grape shot) as this would have been easier to heat than the Hot shot I would expect.

Did anyone see the Myth Busters' Pirate special in whch they tried different ammunition in the cannons?

[gunner Gordon]

I agree that hot coals would not work (per the previous dust factor mentioned), but if they did a hot shot I do not see why they couldn't do a "raisin" shot (heated grape shot) as this would have been easier to heat than the Hot shot I would expect.

Did anyone see the Myth Busters' Pirate special in whch they tried different ammunition in the cannons?

If it heats up fast, it cools down fast. Also the loading process is critical to your own ship. Mythbuster's treatment of the splinter effect of ships guns is deeply flawed and ,unfortunately , is one of their less thought out episodes. Land gunners don't always know what they are talking about when it comes to the tall ships.

[Hawkyns]

Exactly correct, gunner Gordon. The idea of large hot shot is so that even with a couple of buckets of water poured over it, the mass retains enough heat to still set planking on fire. If you look at hot shot furnaces (there's a nice one at Fort Niagara and another at Castillo San Marcos) they are made for 18 pounders. Small shot just would not have the same effect. As far as putting it in a pistol barrel, the barrel itself would trransfer heat, and having enough damp wadding to isolate the coals would probably dampen your powder to the point it would not fire. Either way, its a pointless excersize.

The Mythbusters show was indeed badly flawed. I've been to Fort Nelson and seen the actual ship's side they recreated to test the Mary Rose cannon. 3 foot splinters, 2-3 inches thick. If you can find a copy of the show they did on that, it is far more accurate. Also, considering that the splintering effect is written up in all the period gunnery manuals, do we really think they were joking about this?

Hawkyns

[Duncan McGuyver]

The Erie Maritime Museum also has a fantastic ACCURATE depiction of the damage shot does to a ship. They developed an authentic replica of the U.S. Brig Lawrence’s hull, and then using two of Niagara’s carronades, they fired fifty-three rounds of 12, 24 and 32 pound cannon balls as well as grape and canister shot.

You can read more about it here: Erei Maritime Museum

And pics of the museum and of the displayed shot hull: Photos

[captjustinkase]

I agree that hot coals would not work (per the previous dust factor mentioned), but if they did a hot shot I do not see why they couldn't do a "raisin" shot (heated grape shot) as this would have been easier to heat than the Hot shot I would expect.

Did anyone see the Myth Busters' Pirate special in whch they tried different ammunition in the cannons?

If it heats up fast, it cools down fast. Also the loading process is critical to your own ship. Mythbuster's treatment of the splinter effect of ships guns is deeply flawed and ,unfortunately , is one of their less thought out episodes. Land gunners don't always know what they are talking about when it comes to the tall ships.

I like the MythBusters and agree that sometimes their testing and research is not enough. The episode in which they tested a sword breaking and called it Busted was greatly inaccurate. I have been recreating Medieval times for 17 years and have seen my fair share of blades breaking on each other, shields, armor, etc.

I need to take a road trip to these maritime museums to see all this cool stuff I read about on these boards. I think I will try to hit the San Diego Maritime Musem within the year.

[Commodore Swab]

Watching Captain Blood I thought about that scene as well and have a different thought on it. The coals would provide almost no back pressure and would be next to impossible to ram due to the charge behind. However, have we been neglect in thinking that perhaps they were just put into the end of the muzzle of an already loaded cannon? With a ball between the charge and coals I doubt there would be nearly as much of a chance of an accidental discharge. Of course I believe there would be little to no effect.

[MarkG]

Watching Captain Blood I thought about that scene as well and have a different thought on it. The coals would provide almost no back pressure and would be next to impossible to ram due to the charge behind. However, have we been neglect in thinking that perhaps they were just put into the end of the muzzle of an already loaded cannon? With a ball between the charge and coals I doubt there would be nearly as much of a chance of an accidental discharge. Of course I believe there would be little to no effect.

You could get them to go out of the barrel but you would be hard-pressed to hit anything with them. The coals would scatter every which way. You might even set your own ship on fire.

[Commodore Swab]

although considering it would be a close range weapon, if all it did was scatter sparks on an enemy vessel at close range in the attempt to ignit powder it might of been effective.

[MarkG]

I agree that hot coals would not work (per the previous dust factor mentioned), but if they did a hot shot I do not see why they couldn't do a "raisin" shot (heated grape shot) as this would have been easier to heat than the Hot shot I would expect.

Did anyone see the Myth Busters' Pirate special in whch they tried different ammunition in the cannons?

If it heats up fast, it cools down fast. Also the loading process is critical to your own ship. Mythbuster's treatment of the splinter effect of ships guns is deeply flawed and ,unfortunately , is one of their less thought out episodes. Land gunners don't always know what they are talking about when it comes to the tall ships.

I like the MythBusters and agree that sometimes their testing and research is not enough. The episode in which they tested a sword breaking and called it Busted was greatly inaccurate. I have been recreating Medieval times for 17 years and have seen my fair share of blades breaking on each other, shields, armor, etc.

I need to take a road trip to these maritime museums to see all this cool stuff I read about on these boards. I think I will try to hit the San Diego Maritime Musem within the year.

The Mythbusters sword-breaking episode was one of their worst. They were using the strict definition that one sword had to cut another. Just breaking it wasn't enough. They also propagated the idea that you only parry with the flat of the blade. You have to go back to 15th century two-handed swords before you find anyone doing that. The later parries just don't work unless you use the edge.

[Jas. Hook]

Interesting, most fictional writing I've read on the RN from approximately 1750 through 1830 always had the galley fires doused at beat to quarters. I would guess that the writers had come up with that piece of information some where. Only certain lanterns and slow matches were lit.

Jas. Hook