30 pdr Parrott

[Artilleryman]

A couple of images that might be of some interest.

[GGaskill]

Is that a cast iron barrel?  Seems like the two forward men are taking some risk if it is.

[Artilleryman]

It is an original barrel.  This gun belongs to the Paulson brothers. 

[GGaskill]

Is this one of those made using Rodman's cold chill process that lessens the likelihood of a barrel burst?  Are they firing greatly reduced loads?

[Artilleryman]

As far as I know Parrotts were only made as cast iron barrels with wrought iron breech bands.  The Paulsons use the standard service charge and generally only fire shells, which weigh around 20 lbs.  I talked about the possibility of a barrel bursting with the Paulsons, and as I remember it they said that that was sometimes a problem with the large siege and garrison guns, but was not a problem with the smaller guns.

I might note that the wrought iron band was heat and shrunk on by rotating the barrel with water running through the bore so that the band cooled evenly around the barrel.

[Soot]

The wrought iron band was heat and shrunk on by rotating the barrel with water running through the bore so that the band cooled evenly around the barrel.

Like this: Click here.

[GGaskill]

While I understand the desire to be period correct in the drill, the reputation for bursting would prevent me from standing forward of the band when firing any cast iron Parrott.

To each his own.

[Cat Whisperer]

While I understand the desire to be period correct in the drill, the reputation for bursting would prevent me from standing forward of the band when firing any cast iron Parrott.

To each his own.

Having seen a bronze cannon explode from 15 feet away, I am hesitant to stand anywhere except behind ALL cannons.

To each his own.   

[Cannoneer]

Thanks for posting the pics, Norm; That's one long gun, and it belched out one long plume of smoke.



Cat,
I know you've talked about that bronze cannon's failure before, and I remember that it blew into pieces (which is unusual for a bronze gun); but did you ever talk to the person firing it? Did anyone ever find out if there was any kind of gross negligence involved in loading the cannon?

[Artilleryman]

2. 1. 3. 1. 4.2-inch (30-pounder) Parrott rifle

The 4.2-inch (30-pounder) rifles were the most widely used of the Parrott siege guns. It was mounted on a conventional siege carriage. The early pattern guns had the elevating screw under the breech, while newer pattern gun had a long screw running through the cascabel. The long elevating screws of the newer models was subject to breaking (Abbot 1867, p. 90). The 4.2-inch Parrott rifles were preferred over the 4.5-inch siege rifles because of the superiority of Parrott shells over the various shells available for the 4.5-inch siege rifle. The 4.2-inch Parrott rifles did not have the same problems with bursting that were with found with the larger Parrott rifles. During the siege of Petersburg 44 4.2-inch Parrot rifles fired 12,209 rounds (Abbot 1867, pp. 160,170). Only one gun burst when a shell detonated before clearing the muzzle (Abbot 1867, p. 87). One 4.2-inch Parrott rifle also burst during the campaign against Charleston harbor, but only after it had fired 4,606 rounds (Abbot 1867, p. 87).

I may have misquoted the Paulsons about the strength of the smaller Parrott guns.  I think they were referring to the information above.  The smaller field guns had a reputation for failure, but I haven't come across any information on the number of failed tubes.

[Cat Whisperer]

Thanks for posting the pics, Norm; That's one long gun, and it belched out one long plume of smoke.
Cat,
I know you've talked about that bronze cannon's failure before, and I remember that it blew into pieces (which is unusual for a bronze gun); but did you ever talk to the person firing it? Did anyone ever find out if there was any kind of gross negligence involved in loading the cannon?

It's a little tough to go back to 1964 or so and ask. 

[Cannoneer]

Yeeeaaah, that probably would be slightly problematic Tim, at least outside the insulated world of the science fiction novel, but I was thinking more along the lines of you maybe moseying on over to the guy that fired the gun after pieces of it flew in all directions; and perhaps asking the fellow "what happened pardner" 'at the time that the mishap actually took place'.



Edit: Tim's strange response unsettled my brain to such a degree that I messed up my own sentence. Added, 'at the time the mishap actually took place'.

[Cat Whisperer]

Life is GOOD.

(Even having survived some 'memorable' events'.)   

[Victor3]

 Life IS good..... As long as you survive. As someone said, "that which does not kill me makes me stronger."

 So CW, surviving a blowed up cannon and now a blowed up rifle, how much stronger are you? 

 We should keep things in perspective; many, many more folks die from riding bicycles than from shooting guns.

 On the Parrott, I'm sure the shot count has been recorded over its life and is available to all those involved in firing it, is carefully and regularly inspected via modern NDT methods, and meets the one caliber rule.

 As we know, that would be the only way to half-way know that it's maybe somewhat relatively safe to fire today.

[Cat Whisperer]

... So CW, surviving a blowed up cannon and now a blowed up rifle, how much stronger are you?  

Yup, stonger daily.  I poured a cup of coffee with my right hand from a FULL pot.  Couldn't do that yesterday.
EVERY day different feelings, new strengths.  One strength one gains from such events is the ability to not overreact, but to take things in stride, think through and then make new mistakes.

 On the Parrott, I'm sure the shot count has been recorded over its life and is available to all those involved in firing it, is carefully and regularly inspected via modern NDT methods, and meets the one caliber rule.
...

When I as at Ft. Sill, each cannon had it's own log book to record EVERY round and at what charge for the life of the tube.