Dry sponging?

[10nycav]

Hello again,

I am moving this from the three minute rule thread since it's really a separate topic. I am really curious as to what you all think about this.

Looking at the National artillery rules (referenced in the thread on the 3 minute rule) brings up another question. The National rules require dry sponging:

"After wet sponging, the same procedure is used with the dry sponge. The dry sponge is cleaned and dried off periodically with an absorbent towel-type rag. (The purpose of the dry sponge is to remove excess moisture from the bore; if water is left in the bore it may cause incomplete burning of the next powder charge, leaving dangerously glowing residue.)"

Do the NPS rules require dry sponging as well? I recall in my conversations with Joyce Henry that she felt that dry sponging was less safe as well as not being period correct. I'm no expert and would like to defer to the experts, but it seems that we have a major difference of opinion here. So I was wondering what everyone's opinions were on this subject.

Ken Morris

[James Brenner]

The idea behind dry sponging is to ensure that no "pool" of water remains in the breech from wet sponging. The belief is that, if the next cartridge broke, loose powder would absorb the water and increase the possibility of embers in the bore.

[ktfrench]

We have worked with Gettysburg, Sharpsburg and Harper's Ferry NPS and do the following, which has worked well for us. After firing, #2 pulls any tin foil with the worm and #1 wets the sponge and spins it to remove excess water and sponges the bore. After waiting the prescribed time, #1 again sponges on the Load command without re-wetting the sponge.

Kevin French
Hardaway's Battery

[K Bartsch]

Utility of so-called "dry sponging?" Doubtful. Again, if performed properly, IMHO, a single use of the moistened ( but not sodden ) sponge end of the rammer incidental to the command "load" ( per the period manuals ) is quite sufficient, safe and a more accurate representation of Civil War practice.

Cordially,

[vamick]

I agree with Bartch..if #1 man is trained properly and uses the sponge well..( we usually twist remove then sponge one more time) there is no reason to 'dry' sponge..to me this is just another weird NPS 'rule'... look for orange jump suits kevlar body armour and full face shields for cannoneers from this bunch in the future! *L

[10nycav]

My understanding is that dry sponging is a National rule but not an NPS rule. But, I am still waiting on getting a copy of the NPS rules. Does anyone have an electronic copy they can send me? Or mail me a copy--I would gladly pay for copying and postage. I'd really appreciate it!

The idea I had seen posted here previously, that the modern rules be annotated to show where they depart from period practice, would be great.

Ken Morris

[Cpt Boone]

This is not the rules, could not find them online yet, but it might help.

http://www.nps.gov/vick/interp/lhcannon.htm

This shows the sequence of loading at Vicksburg. Rick Martin is the Black Powder guy there.

In my experience firing at National Parks we have never dry sponged. NPS does not require it. We always use a damp sponge like we always do.

As to the "National rule" for dry sponging, if you roll your rounds properly in foil all the powder will burn up. You would not want a puddle in the breach as it might not let you seat the round to the breach face causing you to misfire, but that would have to be a lot of water. Now, if you were crazy enough to be completely authentic and use cloth bags like they did, you would have the chance of getting the powder wet. To my knowlege, foil does not absorb water especially when it is wrapped and sealed properly.

My 2 cents.

[Yellowhammer]

Right. Dry sponging is not in the NPS rules.

I've done artillery for the NPS at Antietam, Harpers Ferry, Gettysburg, Monocacy, Petersburg, and Richmond and have seen many different interpretations of the NPS Blackpowder artillery manual. One park insists #1 keep his left arm behind his back while sponging while another park insists on "three clockwise turns of the spongue, back the sponge out six inches and reinsert and then execute three counter-clockwise turns of the sponge."

Bottom line, if they want you to dry sponge or whatever just do it. To me, it's an honor to get to fire artillery at those sites and if doing something makes a Ranger happy, just do it.

[Ringgold]

Gentlemen,

I have been watching this thread, as well as the “3 minute rule” thread, with great interest but have neglected to add my worthless 2 cents to the fray until now. There have been many well-stated, thought-provoking discussions as to why such steps as 3 or 10 minutes between firings and dry sponging exist. Many good reasons have been forwarded as to why these particular steps are not needed, as well as touching upon why they may still, indeed, be needed. While a few of you have lightly tip-toed around the true reason, please allow me to stomp right through the cow pies and point out the singularly most important aspect of our hobby that demands that these rules be maintained and enforced. That reason, simply put my comrades, is the “idiot principle.”

We all know that if a piece is properly served by well-trained cannoneers who understand the reasons for the various steps in the drill and respect the severity of not taking their piece seriously, there will rarely be an injurous incident. However, if any one of the aforementioned requirements is absent there is a very high likelihood that we will be reading about it in the national news. That is why these rules were established so very long ago. There are far more idiots playing with cannon than there are cannoneers who fulfil the description given in the first sentence of this paragraph. That is unfortunate. These rules need to be adhered to if we are to be allowed to continue in our pursuit to study and portray artillerists. In the end, every reputable artillery unit must lead by example and follow the rules and regulations esablished to ensure the safety of every participant in the event they are attending. One of the mantras often heard coming from some of the less-than-safe outfits is that they can fire quicker because they are good enough to do it safely.

I ask you to think about how the average artillery reenactor perceives their own safety practices and drill familiarity to be. When was the last time you heard anybody say that they or their group wasn’t safe enough? I’ve heard boasts about safety coming from people who were using paint rollers for sponges as well as from a unit that didn’t even have their keys in their trunnion caps. Practically everyone who walks onto the field in a uniform honestly believes himself to be safer than the guy next to him. It’s human nature and it’s hard to kill by any means other than self-inflicted wounds or friendly fire.

The NPS safety drill is not unrecognizable when compared to the Field Artillery Tactics nor R. Snowden Andrews’ work on the subject. If done correctly, or with a few very slight modifications to suit the individual park’s interpretation of their manual (and there are many), we can still show the unwashed masses how a gun crew would have performed during the War of the Rebellion. We must all play from the same sheet of music, my friends, or the idiot with the triangle is going to screw us over and lose the gig for the entire orchestra.

[Amtmann]

Has anyone ever put up a page that CORRECTLY shows all the positions at once during each step? One that shows where everyone is, their stance, their hand positions...etc. In other words, EVERYTHING that EVERYONE is doing at each step?

[K Bartsch]

Couple of points. The "idiots, from whom we'd like to "idiot-proof" the hobby, probably aren't registered members of this, or any other forum dedicated to authentic and safe living history practices. Nevertheless, I concede its good to articulate why seemingly exaggerated, indeed sometimes even seemingly absurd modifications to authentic artillery drill, have evolved.

I would add this. It has been my experience that park personnel (state and fed) can usually be reasoned with, and once their trust is earned, they can and do permit minor modifications to their procedures which enhance authenticity without increasing risk. In fact, the only thing I've seen the NPS folks I've had the privilege to work with "hard-over" on is their ten-minute rule.

Finally, I've seen more folks hurt by the horses, and even one horrifying limber "wreck" (at an NPS site, which resulted in an ER run but blessedly did not result in serious injuries) than anything we do with gunpowder. I've said it before, and I'll repeat it now. Two-ton vehicles only partially under human control (i.e. horsedrawn gun/limbers and limber/caissons driven by accomplished, well-trained drivers) can kill, maim or seriously injure. As more horsedrawn units appear, which is a wonderful development, folks on foot working with and around these things need to remain alert and know what they're about. Whether working inside the wheels, driving, riding the boxes or marching at your post, folks must continuously think ahead. Situational awarenesss , just as I'm sure it was during the period, is absolutely critical to personal safety in horsedrawn artillery, particularly when on the march over rough terrain.

The kewl part is, TBG's just can't keep up! :wink_smil

Cordially

[Ringgold]

Couple of points. The "idiots, from whom we'd like to "idiot-proof" the hobby, probably aren't registered members of this, or any other forum dedicated to authentic and safe living history practices. Nevertheless, I concede its good to articulate why seemingly exaggerated, indeed sometimes even seemingly absurd modifications to authentic artillery drill, have evolved.

I would add this. It has been my experience that park personnel (state and fed) can usually be reasoned with, and once their trust is earned, they can and do permit minor modifications to their procedures which enhance authenticity without increasing risk. In fact, the only thing I've seen the NPS folks I've had the privilege to work with "hard-over" on is their ten-minute rule.

Finally, I've seen more folks hurt by the horses, and even one horrifying limber "wreck" (at an NPS site, which resulted in an ER run but blessedly did not result in serious injuries) than anything we do with gunpowder. I've said it before, and I'll repeat it now. Two-ton vehicles only partially under human control (i.e. horsedrawn gun/limbers and limber/caissons driven by accomplished, well-trained drivers) can kill, maim or seriously injure. As more horsedrawn units appear, which is a wonderful development, folks on foot working with and around these things need to remain alert and know what they're about. Whether working inside the wheels, driving, riding the boxes or marching at your post, folks must continuously think ahead. Situational awarenesss , just as I'm sure it was during the period, is absolutely critical to personal safety in horsedrawn artillery, particularly when on the march over rough terrain.

The kewl part is, TBG's just can't keep up! :wink_smil

Cordially


Keith,

Unfortunately, you are correct about the types of people who are not frequenting these types of fora. The problem arises when these people attend "battle reenactments" and see other units cutting corners (like not waiting 3 minutes before introducing the next charge) because they feel confident in their own abilities to do so. This is often in violation of many event rules that specify certain rules for artillery. The "idiots" see other units firing every 1 - 2 minutes and assume that they should be able to do so as well. After all, they're just as good or even better than those guys. The next thing you know, the same yahoos are at their next event firing every 30 seconds, egging the crew next to them to do the same. After all, "They seen Battery So-and-so doing it at last weekend's Podunk reenactment." Very rarely do these people come out to watch the better units demonstrate the drill at places like parks and historic sites where safety issues can not be compromised for the sake of "coolness".

As for the NPS, I agree with you 100%. You will, however, run into the occassional Ranger who has their own particular spin on the rules and enforces it their individual way with extreme vigor. It still amazes me how so many employees of the same organization can have so many different takes on their own regulations. This is not always a bad thing. A few improvements have come about due to a particular person's personal understanding of an old rule. Somebody higher up sees the worth of the new style and implements the change. The NPS is a very pleasant boss for living historians to work for. The work environment is top-notch and the rewards are priceless.

I also will agree upon the seriousness of equines in the artillery equation. With the greater portrayal comes greater resposibility. You have a bit of "wiggle room" for error with a static piece and practically none once you attach hooves and harness to the splinter bar and limber pole. The unit I mentioned as not securing their trunnion keys were a mounted unit, which makes their error even more grievous. The fact that they ignored my warnings about it makes it irresponsible.

Not only does having to keep up with the teams weed out the TBGs, the amount of labor needed to maintain that much horseflesh reduces the number of "clothes tree reenactors" in the ranks as well! :tounge_sm

[K Bartsch]

Mark,
Again, great points all. A couple more from me. First, with regards to setting the proper example at "podunk" reenactments. Not to sound elitist, although it will likely come across that way, the unit with which I'm affiliated only gets out a relatively few times each year and therefore generaly eschews the mainstream reenactments. That said, we'll be at "Franklin" hoping for the best.

As you know, its darned expensive to take a horsedrawn outfit out on the road. I've heard our founder repeatedly claim its costs about a thousand dollars to "do" each event after toting up all related expenses. I have no reason to doubt him, and indeed believe that figure is generally on the low side. Anyway, all that to point out we must carefully choose our events. We tend to opt for the battlefield LH or march whenever possible over a reenactment. I will say however, that while setting a good safety example for the gun detachment sited next to your piece is admirable, for the life of me Mark, I've just never seen it make any difference to the committed "yahoo" who just wants to "shoot the gun and have some fun.".

The only thing I've seen work is when folks in positions of responsibility on the reenactment field -- artillery staff and senior commanders, are A.) knowledgeable and B.) willing to insist on safe procedures after conducting a C.) comprehensive and rigorous inspection of all participants' ordnance and drill. Its tough, but it has to be that way for the reasons you have so ably articulated. Folks don't take too kindly to being asked to sit out a "battle" because their gun/implements/cartridges, etc didn't pass the safety inspection, therefore those in authority must be highly resolved to do the right (and safe ) thing. Aluding to another of your points, its particularly tough to stand a group down when they may well have sailed right through a safety inspection -- which was in reality little more than a formality, at an event the previous weekend. All that to say, setting the proper example should not be limited to those serving within gun detachments. It should also include event organizers and leaders.

Cordially,

[guiborssgt]

I can come up with a copy of the NPS drill but it is hard copy if you want to send me your address I will send you a copy.

Guibor's sgt
themccrackens@centurytel.net

[10nycav]

Thanks very much! I will do that.

Ken Morris

[marine05]

Gents,

Tom Holbrook at Gettysburg NPS does require the 10 minutes, but not the dry sponge. I agree with Mr. Bartsch that it adds little safety, but does add quite a bit of inauthenticity. Another thing that adds to the decrease in safety, barring horses (boy wish we had them) is units that do not have a full carraige/ammo box/limber. We nearly suffered personnel and equipment damage as another crew attempted to "help" us remove a piece from the field to save it from being over run. Because they did not have a limber, just the box set upon the ground, they had practiced virtually none of the limber/unlimber drill hence in their zeal to remove our piece they failed to understand the command for 'limber to the rear' thus causing a collision between the trail of the piece and the limber pole. The impact nearly broke the latter and injured personnel. The gun drill itself is one part of the whole for artillerists.

We have had more accidents loading our pieces onto the trailers due to slippery decks or footwear. We try to be safe, accurate, realistic and professional. The one incident that I can recall is during a LH at Gettysburg NPS where we had a 'guest' #4. The individual was a serving artilleryman, and we had drilled with him as th #4 howver when it came to the real event he fired when he heard the command, "prepare to fire". The good thing is that we were all in the proper firing positions and were just surprised at the sound of the report, no injuries. Needless to say we refrain from guests.

The moral to the story, is drill, drill, drill and when you are getting complacent drill more and toss in some immediate action or reduced crew drill.

The turret explosion on Iowa was due to an error in the drill, not some failed homosexual love affair.

I'm sure that the safety-nicks would absolutely geek if they really read how a round is supposed to be rammed.

s/f

DJM

[K Bartsch]

Dan,

I'm intrigued.

The one incident that I can recall is during a LH at Gettysburg NPS where we had a 'guest' #4. The individual was a serving artilleryman, and we had drilled with him as th #4 howver when it came to the real event he fired when he heard the command, "prepare to fire".

"Prepare to fire?" Where's that?

Cordially,

[guiborssgt]

I don't remember "prepare to fire"being in the pattons 1860 drill which is what most N. parks use. It's easy to see the mishap there.

[guiborssgt]

At Pea Ridge and Wilson's Creek in our area dosen't reguire dry sponging and as far as I know with my research of Missouri Batteys during the war never make refrence of it also we use Pattons 1860 Drill at these parks as well a events and it dosn't include Dry sponging either.I will try to post the drill when I recieve my hard copy .

[marine05]

Actually, according to the Field Artillery Tactics or Red Book the commands are "Ready" in which the #3 picks the charge and #4 inserts the primer, after which #3 places his hand over the primer holding it in the vent; #4 backs to assume his position with a slack lanyard. At that time all members take the proper positions for firing. The next command is "Fire". At that time #4 waits until #3 has cleared the piece and then pulls the lanyard.

I have heard and observed numerous units use "prepare to fire" or "prepare" in order to avoid the discharge of the weapon with #3 still within the wheels.
Then the command "fire" is given by the gunner/section Lt/BC and #4 pulls the lanyard. I'm sure if the safety-nicks saw a unit doing the actual drill they'd geek then too.

Personally I'd rather do the actual drill to include the way a charge was rammed with the #1 grabbing the shaft with his left hand (back of the hand up), back to the muzzle, begins the ramming motion as he grasps the rammer shaft with his right hand. (Ramming a 10lb projo takes a little more muscle/weight than flinging the rammer down the bore using the right hand with only a few ounces of powder.)

We have done the actual drill a few times and the looks we get from other units is amazing, they look at us as if we are not right in the head. So until the reenactor artillery community decides to become authentic I guess we'll have to conform to the 21st century drill patterns.

s/f

DJM

[K Bartsch]

I have heard and observed numerous units use "prepare to fire" or "prepare" in order to avoid the discharge of the weapon with #3 still within the wheels.
Then the command "fire" is given by the gunner/section Lt/BC and #4 pulls the lanyard. I'm sure if the safety-nicks saw a unit doing the actual drill they'd geek then too.I have heard and observed numerous units use "prepare to fire" or "prepare" in order to avoid the discharge of the weapon with #3 still within the wheels.

Dan,

In my opinion, inserting an additional preparatory command is a very bad idea, precisely because as you recounted 1) it can easily be mistaken for the command "fire" and 2) it's inauthentic. I would even go so far as to say that if I were standing in with you at number four and heard the gunner, section commander, battery or battalion commander call "prepare to fire" after having heard and accomplished the actions required at "ready," my first instinct would be to pull the lanyard.

The preparatory command is "ready." Again, if the detachment knows what they're doing, and drill per the manuals, number four knows he must not lose eye contact with number three until he is clear of the wheel. Only when three is clear, will number four respond to the command "fire" by pulling the firing lanyard. Additionally, if the gunner, section or battery commander is squared-away and situationally aware, it is highly unlikely that he will give the command "fire" unless he too is convinced all cannoneers are where they should be after accomplishing the actions required by the preparatory "ready" command.

Cordially,

[Ringgold]

Gents,

Tom Holbrook at Gettysburg NPS does require the 10 minutes, but not the dry sponge. I agree with Mr. Bartsch that it adds little safety, but does add quite a bit of inauthenticity. . . .

DJM

This is one of the things I have trouble with. First off, how does firing every ten minutes become unauthentic in an environment like a National Park? There is no immediacy that would necessitate a rapid fire. And, by rapid fire I mean anything faster than one well aimed and expended round every 3 minutes. I’m sure by now everyone here is familiar with the order given (early 1862, I believe) by General Henry Hunt that gave that rate of fire to be the most effective and efficient rate for batteries not pressed by the enemy. If a battery is placed upon a point of relative safety with a commanding field of fire, it would not erupt like a volcano and spew every round at its disposal in a relatively short time. It would carefully choose what targets were the most appropriate for the current conditions of the battlefield and fire in a “slow and deliberate manner” as specified by the good general. He mentioned that a rate of no more than one round every three minutes should be utilized unless circumstances called for greater rapidity. This was done because he was greatly displeased with a great many batteries being in the habit of going into action and firing off all of their rounds as quickly as possible in order for them to retire from the field and take a less dangerous position in the rear of the army to re-supply. He went so far as to state that any battery performing such an action would be required to keep their position on the field, even after they had expended all of their rounds, for the full amount of time that it normally should have taken them to fire their total number. He did this for several reasons, the greatest two being the high cost of artillery rounds and the fact that a battery is placed in a position for specific reasons and their presence there is expected by their commanding generals. The unit history for Durell's Battery, P.V. even mentions the appearance of General Hunt with watch in hand, riding behind the gun lines during the firing on the 16th of September, 1862. He was making sure that the batteries were adhering to his order. He was rumored to have done a little of the same the next day during the Antietam battle as well.

Secondly, too many reenactment units get into the habit of firing for effect (that being the oooh and ahhh factors rather than the generally accepted meaning of that term) and either never learn or soon forget the true duty of the artillery arm. It is supposed to work in concert with the other branches and enhance their effectiveness. It is not supposed to be the entire battle unto itself. Of course, at most events there is SO much artillery that it does tend to overwhelm the infantry and the few cavalry that cramps the already too small parcel of land they are given to recreate whatever it is that appears in the advertisement for the event. (I digress) While it may be tempting to look at the battery returns that exclaim “we expended 580 rounds during the action at So-And-So” and focus upon actions like Wauhatchie, where the cannoneers couldn’t fire the guns fast enough for their liking, most battles saw the artillery giving a deliberate fire until they were in danger of being overrun. It’s not as common to read about these actions in any of the popular magazines of today, so you have to do a little reading on your own hook to find these accounts. Even after looking, you might miss them due to the fact that soldiers rarely expounded upon the mundane and the ordinary. They preferred instead to record the extraordinary and the unusual. For example, Orderly Sergeant William P. Andrews of the Ringgold Battery, P.V. wrote about a remarkable feat he had read about a battery’s rapid fire during a battle and made comment upon it to his sister as follows: “By the Intelligencer's Richmond correspondence I see that the New York Battery tore up things generally, firing 24 rounds of spherical case per minute. This is a little sharper work than any artillery has ever before done. It will keep a battery busy to fire 6 rounds per minute --1 round to each gun -- of spherical case. Of canister, 24 rounds might be fired, as 2 canisters are frequently used to 1 cartridge. Probably the man who wrote the article is not very well acquainted with big rifles or smooth bores. A smooth bore can be worked with greater rapidity than a rifle gun.” Notice that his intent here is to inform his sister that even ONE ROUND A MINUTE would be considered “busy” for a rifle detachment! Remember they are ramming twice for every firing (cartridge, then projectile). In short, we need to spend more time portraying artillerymen of the Mid-Nineteenth Century and less time portraying reenactors of the Twentieth Century.

I will not touch upon the “prepare to fire” chestnut, as so many others already have.

Dan, please do not take this as being aimed at you. You did not create the problem, nor did the fellows who trained you. The cancer has been living happily for generations and is only now being pointed at and being exposed as the deep-seated villain that it is. Far too many people look at it as an old friend rather than an evil that can cause harm not only to the physical being, but to history itself.

[K Bartsch]

Herr Pflumm,

While I'm sure Dan will speak for himself, I interpreted his remark in this way,

Tom Holbrook at Gettysburg NPS does require the 10 minutes, but not the dry sponge. I agree with Mr. Bartsch that it (the DRY SPONGE TECHNIQUE) adds little safety, but does add quite a bit of inauthenticity. . . .

Perhaps I'm wrong.

Nevertheless, I agree that firing using the park mandated ten minute interval is perfectly acceptable for demonstration purposes.

Cordially,

[Ringgold]

KB,

In retrospect, I believe you are correct about the subject. I just cooked-off a little. I originally wrote that post last night around 0300, but couldn't post it due to computer problems w/ my PC. I get a little cranky when I'm tired. My apologies to all. :(

[marine05]

The supposition was correct I was referring to the dry sponging, not the time. The 10 minutes allows for a good dog and pony show, to include narration, Q&A, load by detail, etc. It is not as if the crews are sitting around doing nothing and the crowd meandering away in the interim. In fact I like the time and we can usually get off about 3 shots plus allow any spectators to do a little touchy/feely after the range is cleared and cold.

In many cases I prefer LH to reenactments as in the former there are few if any big bugs fouling up the works and in the latter there are too many zeros that have little concept of combined arms and how artillery and/or cavalry is supposed to be used.

Also I feel the LHs on an actual battlefield are scrutinized a little more as you have all those boys watching. That's why I wear my St Barbara's medal so if I mess up I won't get hit by a lightening bolt hurled from some distraught past cannoneer.

s/f

DJM