Found, Lincolnville Beach Cannon marked......FALKIRK

[thelionspaw]

O.K.  So it was done in some instances but was the effort worth it and how often was it put into practice when as it was just pointed out, that a canister could clear the top.  

Lug all that crappola aloft and it could be short lived because that is the cigar in a battle.  

On the other hand, this was an age when the officer class considered the rank and file expendable cannon fodder.  A mind-set that persisted through WWI.  I guess the shipboard order to go to the top with a cannon was no different from go "over the top" with a rifle from a trench.  

So, I accept that the program was in place.  Leadership's bravado is still with us today, to the detriment of the individual. Twas ever thus.

Desperate times call for desperate measures. "Damn the torpedoes. Full speed ahead".

Richard "The convinced"
  

[Cannoneer]

Gilkerson pp. 84:

Mr. Anderson in Exercising the top men in the use of loading, pointing down on a Ship's decks, etc. the Howitzers, will be very particular in explaining to the Midshipmen, and in fact every man, Stationed in the tops in time of Action, every particular relating to the use of those important instruments of War, which if well managed, have often cleared the decks of an enemy, in a Short time-the lighting of one match by another, must be explained for tho' topmen may be very usefull in time of Action, if they are not well initiated and made to understand in all respects what they are placed aloft for; they are of no Service Whatever, and I have seen several instances, as well as the reverse-

Mr. Morgan will be particularly attentive to this order as Master Gunner, and explain it to Mr. Anderson as his 1st Mate.

United States Ship Constellation
at Sea July 31st 1798
THOMAS TRUXTUN

   This passage seems almost conversational; does Gilkerson state where it comes from?

[Cannoneer]

Haven't done anything to them yet apart from dry them out. Both beds are missing, the axles are very corroded and have worn away the inside of the trucks. Can't get the remaining trucks off because the wedges are rusted in solid.

Squire,

   The white areas on the cheek and front transom made me think you were using wood filler. I remember that you said you would like to save as much original wood as possible. Hey, with all the work you had to put into the barrels refurbishing the carriage may seem like a walk in the park.

[seacoastartillery]

oops!

[seacoastartillery]

     Thanks John; that's the type of info we were looking for.  As for the "Carronade", does this battle scared veteran represent the clan well?
T&M

And from the radius gauges  you ALWAYS carry, what was the diameter of the ball that hit it?

     Tim,   Relying on 70 years of combined experience as journeyman inspectors working in the Aerospace, Aircraft and Computer industries and literally thousands of radii measured, we estimated that dent as having a radius between 2.60" and 2.90".  So what British cannonball size is between 5.2" dia. and 5.8" dia.?

     We must also remember that most of the damage to the US Brig Lawrence and the Brig Niagara was done by British commander Barclay's flagship, the HMS Detroit and that ship's armament came from the guns of British Fort Malden as the cannon destined to arm the HMS Detroit were captured in an American raid several months before the Battle of Lake Erie in 1813.  24 pdrs. were the most commonly available "heavy artillery" for the  British frontier forts during that era.

We are surprised at the lively discourse this thread has brought forth.  Thanks guys; we are learning a lot!

Mike and Tracy

[cannonmn]

does Gilkerson state where it comes from?

Chap. VIII, Note 56:  NDQW I, pages 263-264

[Cannoneer]

does Gilkerson state where it comes from?

Chap. VIII, Note 56:  NDQW I, pages 263-264

  Thanks - Do the notes describe what Capt. Truxtun was recording this in, log, journal, letter etc.? I'm not arguing the point anymore, it's evident that some U.S. war ships in this time period did have small howitzers mounted on their fighting tops (even though this still seems illogical to me); it's just to satisfy curiosity.

By the way, this still doesn't answer the question of the indentation on the barrel of the carronade. "I'm trying to imagine the geometry that led to that ball dent; the enemy round must have come from a large swivel mounted in one of the tops,". These howitzers would have been utilized like large bore scatter-guns.

[Cannoneer]

cannonmn,

   I forgot to put this in my previous post: Were these guns cast in bronze or iron and do you know if any of these 6 pdr howitzers survived or to be more precise do you know of any that are in museums or private collections?

[cannonmn]

Do the notes describe what Capt. Truxtun was recording this in, log, journal, letter etc.?

I'm sure the excerpt was a written order Truxtun issued aboard ship, to make sure it was perfectly clear.  The original or a letterbook copy of it survived and was included in the source cited.

[cannonmn]

Were these guns cast in bronze or iron and do you know if any of these 6 pdr howitzers survived or to be more precise do you know of any that are in museums or private collections?

The only 6-pounder swivel howitzer I was aware of in the US until yesterday is the one I posted pix of a few posts back, in my collection.  Then Deep posted another in this discussion that is close enough to 6-pdr. at 3.75 inches bore.  There's a Danish example in the Tower of London collection.  That's the world's population of swivel howitzers in that caliber range that I know of.  Mine has faint engraving on it that appears to be in the French language, and the jury is still out on what it says and the "real" date included in the engraving.  It looks most like 1738 to me, but who knows.  I'm not saying this is one of the three that was on the UNITED STATES but it is probably similar to those, since what I have is clearly a swivel howitzer.  I would suspect a 6-pounder swivel howitzer on the UNITED STATES would be bronze because you could make a bronze howitzer lighter than an iron one for the same caliber, and weight would be a consideration for something to be used in the tops.

[Cannoneer]

Do the notes describe what Capt. Truxtun was recording this in, log, journal, letter etc.?

I'm sure the excerpt was a written order Truxtun issued aboard ship, to make sure it was perfectly clear.  The original or a letterbook copy of it survived and was included in the source cited.

   This is very possible, but you'll notice that none of the individuals mentioned in the passage are the person being adressed, which makes me think this might be from a personal journal and Tuxtun was actually reminding himself of a task to be accomplished. This is no big deal, I was just curious; the important thing is that he definitely mentions howitzers on the fighting tops and that the gunners should be properly trained in their use.

Were these guns cast in bronze or iron and do you know if any of these 6 pdr howitzers survived or to be more precise do you know of any that are in museums or private collections?

The only 6-pounder swivel howitzer I was aware of in the US until yesterday is the one I posted pix of a few posts back, in my collection.  Then Deep posted another in this discussion that is close enough to 6-pdr. at 3.75 inches bore.  There's a Danish example in the Tower of London collection.  That's the world's population of swivel howitzers in that caliber range that I know of.  Mine has faint engraving on it that appears to be in the French language, and the jury is still out on what it says and the "real" date included in the engraving.  It looks most like 1738 to me, but who knows.  I'm not saying this is one of the three that was on the UNITED STATES but it is probably similar to those, since what I have is clearly a swivel howitzer.  I would suspect a 6-pounder swivel howitzer on the UNITED STATES would be bronze because you could make a bronze howitzer lighter than an iron one for the same caliber, and weight would be a consideration for something to be used in the tops.

   So Richard is right ("So it was done in some instances but was the effort worth it and how often was it put into practice...") in his conjecture that this wasn't any Dept. of the Navy directive and none of these small howitzers would have been supplied to U.S. war ships as was the case with their other ordnance, and this would also answer the question: Were any American foundries given contracts to manufacture these navy howitzers? All evidence (or lack of evidence) points towards the use of some small howitzers on U.S. Navy ships as being the individual choice of a few American commanders and this would also lead to the conclusion that these commanders had to beg, borrow or steal these howitzers from whatever source they could find. This would indeed, make it a possiblity that a D. King howitzer might have been mounted in a swivel on a U.S. ships fighting top and it would also suggest that it's probable these commanders utelized foreign made howitzers of a small enough caliber to be practical for their intended purpose.

[cannonmn]

When/if you get the books I mentioned, or find them in a library, you will see all the references that show the King howitzers were manufactured under US Gov't contract, for delivery to the Navy etc. , sorry I don't have time now to copy them here now.  Going from memory, the big names involved in the orders and taking delivery were Knox, Hopkins (?), and one Capt. Nicholson.  There were also many bronze 8" howitzers (to be used from regular gunports) ordered for the Navy and delivered involving as I recall the same folks.  There were 20 cast for the frigates, half by Revere and half by Byers.  The 8" are very well documented and I've seen the contracts, the small ones like the Kings are not as fully documented but enough letters have been found that there's no question it happened.

[RocklockI]

"Swivel Howie's" that makes me smile:) . As a former Marine , I can add with full confidence that anyone who "shoots a Marine ,shoots a Marine " but he also goes to hell right now ,no questions asked  . I learned this on Parris Island and I know they didn't lie......mostly .

The "idea" of Howies up high in the rigging makes me shiver . Do we know if they shot down in anti personal roles or were they shooting incenerary projectiles into the sails of their opponents ....?

It seems much easier ,and profitable to burn away "the engine room" than kill folks . Most of whom will be thrilled to death at the prospect of being ransomed .

Swivel Howitzer ...? I might have to write Dom! sounds like fun .

Shoot a Marine....yea right 

rocklock  ETA I forgot we are talking about a Federal ship.....so maybe the "ransom " thing was incorrect . still don't shoot a Marine

[seacoastartillery]

     

The "idea" of Howies up high in the rigging makes me shiver . Do we know if they shot down in anti personal roles or were they shooting incenerary projectiles into the sails of their opponents ....?

It seems much easier ,and profitable to burn away "the engine room" than kill folks . Most of whom will be thrilled to death at the prospect of being ransomed .

     Think about this for a moment; would small howitzers in the Tops really shoot solid shot or incendiary projectiles, both of which could sink or destroy the prize?  Logic tells us the answer is no as almost all ships have valuable cargo or paymaster strong boxes on board which won't do the capture crew much good if burned up or sent to "Davie Jones locker".  Canister could demoralize an enemy crew quicker than just about anything.  But that still does not explain the dent in the Carronade tube in our Fort Niagara photo.  As 24 Pdr. Carronades were commonly used for flank defense in fortifications during the War of 1812, a few could have been in the complement from British Fort Malden used for arming the HMS Detroit and could have fired the solid shot that dented the 32 Pdr Carronade onboard the US Brig Lawrence or the US Brig Niagara during the Battle of Lake Erie.  Carronade solid shot are relatively low velocity projectiles and have a resultant howitzer-like trajectory unless they are fired at very close range, so the angle necessary to hit the tube in that location above the centerline could have been achieved.

Regards,

Mike and Tracy

[Double D]

It would seem to me tactically the best use for a 6 PFR Howitzer in the fighting tops would be for anti personel use, clearing the decks.  But I think that it wouldn't be unusal to employ solid shot for over turning/smashing a specific gun position such as a carronade on the deck when joined at close quarters with an opposing warship.  Shooting downward at an angle, making a dent in the barrel of the carronade  might not be all tha effective when it come to destroying the gun.  But it might not make the crew feel real secure and a hit a few inches lower mugh damage the mount.

[thelionspaw]

Has anyone ever considered that it might be a factory second?

[intoodeep]

Could it have been caused by a secondary hit??  I guess well never really know.

[cannonmn]

A few other ideas, leading to yet more possibilities-I'm not saying any of these is more important than the foregoing, just throwing 'em in to show how hard it will be to tell exactly what happened to cause this little dent:

-The 5.5-inch howitzer was a popular weapon during the American Revolution and for some time after.  I think it would be hard to tell the difference between a 5.5 inch howitzer shell and a 24 pdr. shell impact mark.  The 5.5 H was normally a field weapon, but I recently examined some at the Washington Navy Yard, whose national origins and individual histories were unclear.  I have to think since they are in Navy custody, they may have seen naval use on one side or another.

-Remember the howitzers had spherical shells as one type of ammo they fired.  If I had a howitzers in the tops of my ships, I'd want some shells there too in case I could lob a shell down into an enemy ship with the chance of having it explode in one of the powder magazines.  If I were firing a howitzer from one of the tops, I don't think I'd use any shells when  the ships were very close together, for fear of being incinerated if the magazine did blow up.

-As far as the angle of the shot, ships on the open sea roll quite a bit, although on lakes this would only happen in bad weather.  The ship with the carronade that was struck could have been on the heeled over in a roll at the time it was struck. 

[Artilleryman]

I always thought that the navy used howitzers for landing operations. 

[cannonmn]

I always thought that the navy used howitzers for landing operations.

The US Navy used muzzle-loading howitzers for three different purposes that I've read about.  The earliest use was small howitzers in the fighting tops on swivel mounts. 

Then the US procurement officials wanted to copy the French and put 8-inch bronze howitzers in broadside positions like carronades.  Paul Revere was actually asked to go aboard a French warship, examine the bronze howitzers and their carriages, and make drawings so the US could manufacture them, which he did.  The howitzers were cast and delivered but due to some miscalculation the carriages would not clear the gunports, and these howitzers were probably never used aboard ship. 

During the mid-19th C. Dahlgren developed his boat howitzers in several sizes for different size boats.  The three sizes of 12-pounders could either be used in special sliding carriages in the bows of boats, or on field carriages.  The 24-pounder Dahlgren boat howitzer was only used from a shipboard mounting in broadside positions, no field carriage was provided.  This is understandable since tube and ship carriage weighed about a ton.  During the Civil War, on rare occasions, 12-pounders were hoisted up the mast and fired from the tops-if memory serves, the Battle of Mobile Bay was one of those occasions.

[Cannoneer]

Could it have been caused by a secondary hit??  I guess well never really know.

   It could have been caused by a second, third or fourth hit; when one ship in a battle had the 'weather gage' (held an upwind position) the commander could position that ship to fire a raking broadside down the length of the enemy ship, either down the bow or stern depending on the enemy ships position and the enemy ship could only return fire with its bow or stern chase guns. If a solid single shot or double shot went through the gunwale (the side of a ship above its top deck) or went over the rail as the ship were rolling, the shot could carom off surfaces all the way down the length of the deck. Even on land this was effective, one of Napoleon's favorite artillery tactics was firing his guns so the solid shot would hit the ground at an angle and bowl through troops, horses, carriages etc..
This book is titled 'The Mammoth Book of Eyewitness Naval Battles' by Richard Russell Lawrence and it contains some accounts of U.S. vs. Britain, War of 1812 naval battles. Start on page 251 and scroll down to 270; there is an account of the battle between the USS United States vs. the HMS Macedonian by a British ships boy named Samuel Leech that was serving on the Macedonian on October 25, 1812. His memoir was published in 1843 but it seems like he was remembering through the eyes of a lad, his words convey the horror and brutality of a sea battle in the age of sail. His account also describes how there were American sailors that were "impressed" into service on the British ship, which was one of the causes of this war. By the way, you'll notice that not one account mentions any howitzers on the fighting tops or any where else on the ships even though some describe muskets and grenades being used.

http://books.google.com/books?id=lYrnIvQHTQsC&pg=PA257&lpg=PA257&dq=USS+United+States+vs.+HMS+Macedonian&source=web&ots=eFajBnU6is&sig=Z4rB38Bqscga9GBrcLzU-iTqYEQ&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=9&ct=result#PPA257,M1

[seacoastartillery]

     AND, for those of us who like easily portable Carronades, there is this truly stunning gun made by Jim Bircher of Beaufort Naval Armorers in Morehead City, North Carolina.  BNA is on the GBO list of cannon makers on this board and this photo is from their Gallery section in this interesting website.  We have no idea if this beautiful gun is still available or not, but when we visited in 2005, Jim showed it to us in his office and, for once we went against tradition and truly loved a Carronade made from bronze rather than iron.  The piece is about 24" long. and about 3.5" diameter at the end of the breech.  We really enjoyed our visit to BNA and also to nearby Fort Macon.

Regards,

Tracy and Mike

[cannonmn]

OK M&T, if we're going to do small bronze carronades here, we gotta allow equal time for small bronze gunades too, right?  I'm still trying to find any information on this weapon:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MiISY9Agmo

[Cannoneer]

seacoastartillery,

   I've seen and admired this BNA signal gun many times on a couple different sites, I think on one of the sites it was stated that it was a custom order. It would appear to unscrew a short distance behind the middle reinforce and the breeching ring seems to be part of the firing mechanism: Did he show you how it was operated?

[seacoastartillery]

     John,   We started with a gunnade, I suppose we can continue with a bronze gunnade.  Looks like a nice piece; wish we knew something  about it.  I just recieved Where Iron Runs Like Water, A New History of Carron Iron Works 1759-1982 by Brian Watters, thanks to that tip by Bob Smith on this thread.  Looks like an interesting story, we will share some of it when we can.

     Boom J.   I wish we had total recall on the workings of this cannon, but we don't.  The line behind the middle reinforce looks to us like the edge of the under-trunnion ring which is held in place by a threaded reinforce band.  I believe this one is a muzzle-stuffer, but could be wrong on that.  This gun was for sale at $2,500.00 in the past on the BNA site, so it may be available yet, we really do not know. 

Regards,

Tracy and Mike

[Cannoneer]

Thanks T & M,

  No, it's a 10 gauge blank firing signal gun, I just thought he might have shown you the firing mechanism. I copied the description below from the site and pasted it here.

FOR SALE

1820 Breech Loading Carronade

Fires 10gauge Black Powder Blanks

(Very Loud)

$2500

[cannonmn]

How 'bout a 6-pounder bronze gunade on original carriage.  Sorry no powder can but barrel is 40 in. or so long, I'd guess.  It is part of a fantastic private collection that I'll post tidbits of from time to time.  And no, I'll never get any of it, I'm sure of that.

[Ex 49'er]

Thanks for sharing. The items all around the gunade are interesting as well. Sorry to hear that you'll not get any of it.

[seacoastartillery]

     We are reviving this older thread for two reasons.  We are wondering if anyone has plans to make a small Carronade in the future in steel or bronze.  Also, there seems to be quite a bit of interest in this type of cannon lately within the other thread on them currently and we thought it might be helpful to review what information had already been received on GBO Mortar & Cannon on them in the past.  This is just one type of artillery that Mike and I hope to make when we retire in a couple years.  We think that a one-half scale 12 pdr. would be just about right. 

Tracy and Mike

[dominick]

I built one a few years back.  I'm not sure who made the barrel.  I sleeved it and made the carriage.  No plans for one in the immediate future.